Today, Dan and Jordan check in on Alex's announcement that he pled the fifth about 100 times with the Jan 6 Committee. In this installment, Alex says some very dubious things, and Matt Bracken recommends people storm the capitol on January 6. Citations
My bright spot today, I guess it's sort of a mixed bag bright spot, and that is that I'm seeing on Twitter, just as we're starting to record this episode, that apparently the Mighty Mighty Boss Tones have broken up.
Saga, it's a really, really great graphic novel by Brian K. Vaughn, who's a really good writer, but the artwork is done by Fiona Staples, and she is beyond great in this book.
It was going to be that, but then Tuesday night, the heat died.
At the beginning of this week, news broke that Alex had met virtually with the January 6th committee, and the buzz that was going around was that he had pled the 5th about 100 times.
When I first saw the news going around, my first question that I had was like, what information is being used to back up this reporting?
I looked around and I read some articles in the mainstream media about the story, and all of them just relied on comments that Alex made on his own show.
CNN said, quote, a source familiar with the investigation confirmed the meeting to CNN, but that really just means that the meeting happened, not that any of the ways that Alex characterized the meeting were accurate.
The CNN article in particular just seems like a partial transcription of Alex's show.
And all the other articles are the same.
They just rely on Alex's show and the claims that he made on it.
I guess there's not really any other information they could be going off of since I don't think that these interviews are public, particularly not while this whole...
Sure.
So here's the deal.
I'm gonna cover this episode, but I'm gonna do it with the largest grain of salt any human has ever imagined.
Alex is a flagrant liar, so I have no interest in just taking his word about everything he says concerning a meeting with the House Committee that he thinks is trying to overthrow the country.
Especially the day after we do deposition episodes, and we've done plenty of deposition episodes in the past, I think we know how Alex talks whenever the shit's real.
Now, that's a good point, but I also think that we do need to be careful because the depositions that we've seen are civil depositions about a case that he is clearly not concerned or have any respect for.
Here we are, my friends, on this Monday, January 24th, 2022 transmission.
I just had a very intense experience being interrogated by the January 6th committee lawyers.
They were polite, but they were dogged.
And I take the whole process very, very seriously because I know that Adam Schiff is a forger and has been caught faking emails and misquoting President Trump and claiming that, oh, here he is ordering the president of Ukraine.
Here's a transcript of him telling the president of Ukraine.
This is really dumb, but it does provide an excuse for why Alex, the very innocent person, should be afraid of testifying before the committee.
He's so innocent, but that doesn't matter because Schiff's just going to create fake documents like he did with Trump.
It's really fascinating that Alex constantly goes on about wanting his day in court, where he can be vindicated and the establishment will have to recognize that he's been right all along and power will tremble before him.
But every time he has the opportunity, there's some kind of an excuse for why he just whiffs and doesn't prove anything.
All of the Sandy Hook depositions would have been ideal times for him to stand behind his claims and at very least demonstrate that even though we know them to be wrong now, he had reason to believe that these claims were correct when he said them.
And every time, he just mumbles I don't know or tries to change the subject rambling about how he's a victim.
Now, here he is testifying in front of a congressional committee and well...
He could tell the big truths to power and stand up like a man in the arena like he always calls himself, but he has this fake story about Adam Schiff that's got him too worried to talk.
Everybody knows, because we've seen this throughout history in the past, you know, truth-tellers have gone up against kangaroo courts so many times, and because they're going up against kangaroo courts, all they really do is quit and give up, because what's the point of fighting back?
You know, there's nothing more noble than giving in to the powers that be.
I respect more who have principles would be like, well, I'm gonna go in there, I'm gonna speak my piece, I'm gonna tell the truth, and whatever consequences may come are, you know, the...
Unlike the stolen valor of wearing army medals and bullshit when you haven't earned them, it's the valor of somebody who's actually fighting power and they're not doing it.
Because I genuinely wanted to be with the people in the common populace.
And that's really my goal.
But that said, it's been my own process of learning how I've been wrong that has helped me grow up and really see what's wrong with the people that are going to be wrong.
I find it, like, in terms of my engagement with Alex and my understanding of him through various periods of his career, I think one of the more offensive things he can say in terms of, like, just blatant disregard for the truth is, I've learned things.
It's fun whenever he describes, like, you know, I've learned and I've changed and I've grown and it's been my mistakes that have allowed me to realize what's wrong with the people in power, despite the fact that he's said the exact same thing about them since he was 11 years old and read his first John Birch Society book.
People who have learned things say, and so he's sort of parroting that.
He's mirroring that because it makes it seem like he's actually had the experiences that he wants the audience to feel like he's had, which he has not.
I thought his daughter wanted to go to an amusement park, but that trip got canceled because Alex's financial information was reported in the Huffington Post, so he wanted to make a couple million dollars out of spite.
Anyway, Alex has been out of the studio for the last couple days after this episode, and Owen's been hosting, which is a mess.
Just think about what Owen's got on his plate.
He's hosting Alex's show, then has to do his show afterwards, and that's like six hours of talking, with just one hour of a break in between, where in this episode, Gerald Salenti hosted the fourth hour.
And I just ended it a little less than an hour ago.
My testimony via...
Cisco Systems, I guess it wasn't Zoom or Skype, a connection, an interview, I guess testimony, deposition is the word, with the January 6th committee.
And it was extremely interesting, to say the least.
I wrote some notes here that I just want to get out of the way, because it is newsworthy and important, and then I'm going to move on to the other big news, and Owen Schroyer.
It's coming to take over because I, again, I'm taking my four-and-a-half-year-old daughter.
So we've discussed the Fifth Amendment in a recent episode where Alex is threatening to plead the Fifth.
So getting too far into it again would be a waste.
I don't want to do that.
But this is a very inaccurate interpretation of what that amendment allows.
The Fifth Amendment allows Alex to not answer questions that he has a reasonable belief that the answers would lead to providing evidence that could be used against him in another potential case.
For instance, if you were testifying about a murder you witnessed while you were in the...
of why you were there, where you were, when you witnessed this murder, but you could still answer questions about seeing the murder.
The entire thing is about protecting a person from being forced to be a witness against themselves.
If Alex's interpretation of the Fifth Amendment were applied across the board, the legal system in this country would collapse, and there just would never be any reason to call any witnesses who would be opposed to the goal of the investigation.
People who had information about deeply illegal things would never have any concern about subpoenas because they could just plead the fifth to everything instead of risking lying to Congress.
If the standard for being allowed to use the fifth was that you were vaguely concerned about someone misusing your words because of something as flimsy as a dumb misrepresentation of a years-old right-wing talking point, there would be no reason to have anybody testify ever again.
That's why they send those subpoenas out so the people who get subpoenaed will have to show up to say, I plead the fifth and not answer any of their questions.
This is a child's interpretation of the Fifth Amendment, and I do think that if anything, Alex's actions are more likely to cause him to be censured or referred for contempt charges, because it's just not reasonable to assume that he had a legitimate concern that answering any of those 100 questions would lead him to providing evidence against himself in a different potential prosecution.
An alternative is that Alex has an almost cartoonishly sprawling crime empire and answering any questions about how anything in his life and business work would lead to proof of a crime.
I would guess he'd rather that not be the impression that he's sending, but it's not a totally unfair reading of the actions that he's taking.
I would say that if I were Alex and I had close relationships with a lot of militia people, I would not want to go on my show and say, I told the Congressional Committee everything that I know.
If I knew a bunch of militia members, I wouldn't be surprised if giving away information to the Congressional Committee eventually wound up being a crime on my part of some sort.
So you can't walk in to something like that with people like that.
I don't know who these lawyers are running it.
I don't know if they're good people or bad people.
They came out as polite and nice.
So when you've got predators like Schiff back in the background like a moray eel in the rocks ready to come out and eat you, then there's no reason to even dignify it because it's not legitimate.
I'm the type that tries to answer things correctly, even though I don't know all the answers, and they can then kind of claim that that's perjury.
Because about half the questions I didn't know the answer to, and a bunch of them were emails I'd never seen, and planning things I'd never seen, at least from memory.
This dynamic he's describing with how he answers questions he doesn't actually know anything about, that rings true to me, based on his other deposition appearances we've heard.
It's not him trying to be helpful, though.
It's an attempt to spin a yarn that explains everything, even if that requires making things up.
It's what he does on his show, so it's not surprising that he would carry that over into legal settings as well.
He has no respect for any case where he's possibly accused of wrongdoing, and he thinks he's above the law.
So why would he give a shit about answering questions accurately?
Accuracy is not important.
Utility is.
And making up stories that, I guess...
Kind of explain what people are asking about, and it's high utility.
I have some questions about whether or not Alex had seen the emails he's referencing here.
Without knowing what the emails are, it's hard to tell if they're things that he could have missed, but I get the sense that Alex claiming to not use email personally is a strategic decision, so he can always claim ignorance if he's ever asked about anything.
I've got their questions here that I obviously couldn't answer under oath because then they could, if I said something even halfway wrong, put me in prison.
If you define things like this, I can't imagine a court proceeding that Alex couldn't claim was too risky for him to answer questions in.
If it wasn't a fake concern about Schiff, it would be another congressperson who has some kind of conspiracy about them.
It's not a real concern.
It's a cookie-cutter, fill-in-the-blank excuse for why Alex isn't standing up and taking on the system.
Even though he insists he's totally innocent, he's being set up, and he has all the truth on his side.
This is kind of like how children rationalize situations that would be threatening to their egos.
It feels like a kid who thinks that they're really good at basketball, explaining that they didn't even try out for the team because the coach doesn't like their dad.
It's an excuse to not have to confront the reality that, metaphorically, Alex isn't good at basketball, and trying out would reveal that publicly, and that would hurt his feelings.
But they did have some questions that were important.
Again, they have everything that's already on my phones and things, because I saw my text messages to Caroline Wren and Cindy Shafian and some of the event organizers.
Right there.
So they already have everything.
And they already know I didn't do anything.
I wasn't planning any violence.
I was even talking about everybody should be peaceful.
Yeah, I think that it would be tough for me to believe that there aren't at least a couple of weird messages between him and, like, Ali Alexander or Stuart, you know.
Obviously, I wouldn't know what's in that tranche of texts and emails, but...
I would really assume, and again, we've talked too much about Alex's legal proceedings, but I would really assume that they are keeping things away from Alex's knowledge in the early going.
I mean, I feel like if I was those lawyers, I'd just flatter the shit out of Alex and just be like, man...
If you had full power over all of these people, I'm sure you would have directed them to stop, and none of this would have ever happened.
Since you didn't have full power over them, which you should have, because you're just so fucking great, but since you didn't, just let me know what you did do, you know, because I'm telling you, it was all good.
I'm sure it was all good, because you're the best, and the smartest, and a true hero.
Anyways, tell me what you were doing and what Stuart Rhodes was doing.
So there's something up with Matt Bracken, and I can't quite figure out what it is.
So Matt Bracken's been a long-time, consistent fourth-hour host on Alex's show, and he's been a guest on Alex's show since at least 2016, and he was on with David Knight even before that.
He's not dead, which I can assume based on his consistent posting on Gab up until even today.
So that got me thinking.
What happened?
Here's a guy who has an accomplished resume, and Alex clearly trusted enough to close out the last show of 2020, and he just disappeared.
I don't want to get too conspiratorial with this, but it does come to mind that the January 6th committee was formed on July 1st, 2021, and that the resolution to form it was introduced in the House on June 28th, 2021.
Which doesn't prove anything, but it looks weird.
And if I were on the committee, I might ask about that timeline.
Hey, here's a guy who's been on your show for years and years.
He said, hey, everyone should storm the Capitol on December 31st show.
So I thought that since Alex was going camping, why not flesh out this episode a little by checking in on what Matt Bracken actually said on that December 31st, 2020 episode of Alex's show.
He's hosting the fourth hour, and I honestly think it's a fairly standard Matt Bracken appearance.
It's a lot of blustery talk about revolution surrounding whatever is the hot topic in extreme right-wing circles at the time.
That's kind of his thing and what he always does on Infowars.
If the main issue is something about racial injustice, he'll insist that a race war is right around the corner.
If it's gun paranoia narratives that are on top, he'll insist that they're about to take your guns and you need to be ready to kill people to stop them.
If it's an election conspiracy that's getting the most traffic, he'll do a video, as he did in 2021, where he says it's either the ballot box or the bullet box.
And if it's a big Patriot-themed protest that he wants to amplify, it's not a surprise that he would be using extremely irresponsible and inflammatory language.
uses to InfoWars, and Alex knows that.
It's just that the shit he's fear-mongered about in the past hasn't come true.
And unfortunately, this time, he straight up looks like a prophet, but the wrong kind of prophet for InfoWars.
The kind that makes it look like they were really excited about and promoting the idea that if things didn't go their way on January 6th, the right wing would need to take over the Capitol.
Anyway, let's dive in here with the man himself, Matt Bracken.
And actually, at the beginning of this report, he explains why he's wearing an Infowars shirt.
I would just find it so funny if there was somebody who was just completely unaware of what was going to take place on the 5th and 6th, doing a regular-ass broadcast, saying this exact shit, having no idea what's going to happen, and then watching it on TV just being like, oh, no.
Well, I mean, like, hey, you're already suggesting things like we could put a blockade around D.C. If they don't let us near the Capitol, we're going to try other things.
And part of that, I mean, obviously has to do with the fact that the audience and the people who were there had been whipped into such a frenzy with these consistent arguments that the election had been stolen and it's proven and all that.
And so...
Bracken brings some of that up and he has an interesting source that I'm not sure I've heard Alex use.
There's no question that tens of thousands of ballots in these states were counterfeit.
They were mass produced ahead of time.
When you look at some of these guys, like this witness on the screen right now, Jovan Pulitzer, he's got 200 patents involved with the human-machine interface.
QR codes.
He's an expert on this, and he says all he needs to see is the paper ballots.
He came up with a handheld barcode scanner called QCAT back in the year 2000.
So the way it worked was that people would put barcodes in the newspaper, like in advertisements, and then this handheld device would scan that barcode and take people to their website.
Naturally, because of how tech worked at the time, that meant you had to have this QCAT plugged into your computer, and it just wasn't convenient.
People did not care for it.
In 2006, PC World put out a list of the 25 worst tech products of all time, and QCAT was number 20. Part of the reason for that was that it sucked, but the other part was that because there was a huge security vulnerability that ended up being exploited and 140,000 users had their personal information stolen.
So yeah, after that, Pulitzer went on to run a bunch of other scams like selling crystals and being featured in a History Channel show as a treasure hunter.
The 2020 election was the flame that attracted all the grift moths, so Pulitzer showed up and now he's a forensic ballot expert.
And because these dum-dums like Bracken don't care who's saying something if they like what's being said, he was accepted as an expert to the point where his name is being evoked in this episode where Bracken is about to advocate storming the Capitol because the election was stolen.
You know, like, if what he's saying is true, and this is what he thinks is the correct response to that, then they did it.
Which is a different thing from so many other people who are like, here's the biggest problem, and this is what we should do about it, and I'm gonna tweet.
Sure.
There's a difference there that I recognize and I don't necessarily think is good, but you know?
I think what you're talking about is a fairly abstract point, and I want to bring it back down to the ground a tiny bit, because the evidence that is provided for why they think the election is stolen is so flimsy as to very clearly indicate that there isn't a conviction that this is...
It's a conviction that they didn't get the outcome they wanted, and so any explanation for why it is stolen is enough for them to be like, well, I can look at that and say, look at this.
That's why it was stolen.
I mean, like, imagining the alternative scenario where, like, let's imagine, I'm not saying this did happen, but let's imagine that there were evidence that Trump stole the election, right?
You know, sometimes I think part of why they get so amped up is because they would much rather have an enemy that actually seems to be fighting back, you know?
Like, the Democrats were masturbating at the thought of getting kicked out in two years.
Well, there's an interesting dynamic that Bracken also brings up.
I didn't cut a clip of this, but he talks about the Republicans in office as being The Washington generals who are like happy to just lose all the time to the Harlem Globetrotters that are the Democrats.
So I think that we have a whole lot here in terms of establishing a call to action, specific things like blockading Washington, storming the Capitol as being the things that you need to do if you don't get your way in terms of blocking the certification of the election.
You're talking about these ideas, and I don't know if you'd want to call them plans, but certainly, like, seems like you've thought about this a little bit.
So that was all some pretty blustery stuff, and honestly, based on what Bracken is saying, the sixth went down exactly how he would have wanted it to.
Everything he was saying needed to be done was done, and the only problem is that the coup wasn't successful.
Tons of people showed up hoping to intimidate Congress into stopping the certification, and when that didn't work, people stormed the Capitol as Bracken clearly identified as one of the necessary steps that you could escalate to.
I'm sure that on January 6th, if you had footage of Bracken, he would have been more excited than Harrison Smith, saying that the Capitol had fallen to the Patriots.
But after the fact...
This doesn't look good.
When your coup fails and you're left in a position where you publicly advocated for all the things that went into the failed coup, you probably need to pivot a little bit.
And unsurprisingly, that's exactly what he did in his next appearance after this, after the 6th.
You can't bear to acknowledge that the exact things he was publicly advocating were the things that led to Ashley Babbitt to be in the position she was in, taking the action she was taking when she was killed.
And because admitting that is too difficult for him, Bracken's just created a fantasy story about it.
With no proof other than his imagination, he's decided that Antifa had seen Babbitt outside and thought she was so patriotic and she'd make a perfect patsy, so they lured her to the doors where I guess they somehow forced her to try to break through them.
This is so pathetic.
It's one thing to be a fairweather fan of a sports team, but to be a fairweather revolutionary who indicates such a lack of spine and conviction, it's just unacceptable.
Matt wanted people to storm the Capitol.
He said it was a good thing to do, and now the people did, and the predictable result happened.
This is a very precise example of the strategy that Alex uses, but Alex does it on a grander scale, in terms of stochastic terrorism.
He engages in intense and emotionally manipulative displays of incitement, and then when someone does what he obviously is saying they should do, that becomes an example of someone trying to false flag the patriots to make them look bad.
Alex is usually just smart enough to not actually, say, storm the Capitol in the part where he's trying to incite people, because that's how the business continues.
The thing to understand is that this strategy has two big payoffs.
The first is the obvious one, that it allows Alex and folks like Bracken to evade having to take responsibility for the consequences of their rhetoric when it actually comes down to it.
The second is that they're able to pretend that their underlying cause was so justified and so important that the globalists needed to use a false flag to try to invalidate it.
In this case, the election was so clearly stolen that the only way to divert attention from that was to have this false flag, which they could then blame on the people who are saying the election was stolen, which is because their claims were so legitimate.
The entirety of the Republican Party has been so fucked with in terms of their heads.
But, like, man, if I really was convinced by all of these dum-dums that the election had been stolen and that it was important to do what happened on the 6th, then to hear them do this...
I don't think so, because I think the traditional way of the grift goes, the right wing does this shit, and then whenever the left wing does the fighting...
Then the media and everybody goes, hey, this is wrong, and you guys have to stop, and everybody polices the left instead of...
In D.C. And so he invited us since we did the event.
They asked me if we were with Proud Boys or if we were with Oath Keepers.
And I do remember being at a Hooters that was by our hotel eating and having, you know, there was some Proud Boys in there that sat down and we drank a beer and ate cheeseburgers again.
So yeah, there's your answer there.
Yeah, there's Vernon Jones with his arm around my shoulder.
So, yeah, I had 12 or 14 security people for all those big events, because when you're out in the middle of hundreds of thousands of people, you need that just to be able to get places.
And so I hired D.C. and Maryland police, and I hired a well-known private security company here in Austin that is bonded and works for, I'm not going to name names, but the people that work for me have worked for, you know, the richest people in the world, the biggest government people, all of it.
They've guarded Hillary Clinton.
They've guarded Joe Biden.
They've guarded Michael Bloomberg.
Hell, I'll just say the names.
And so I go and try to get professional people.
And, of course, there's no way I had D.C. police and Maryland police off-duty with us trying to do an insurrection.
By the way, the company we hired was all black guys.
And I was just about to leave with my wife who was freezing to go back to the hotel and drink coffee and take a hot shower and not even be part of the Capitol thing.
Because I found it hard to believe from our...
When I say White House source, campaign has to run events, but it's liaison within the White House, Caroline Wren.
And I'm like, yeah, let's just get out of here.
And I was talking to Enloe, who was with me.
I took one security guy in to the Ellipse as our other security was outside.
And because that's a contained area with the Secret Service stuff where Trump was speaking, with this 900,000 or whatever people around it.
And I'm like, you know, maybe we just won't do this.
Because they're like, and then all of a sudden, she's back there with all the Secret Service and people.
She comes and opens the gate.
They come over.
They get me.
They lead us through.
Whatever it was, it was uniformed people.
She said Secret Service.
We go back, and we get let out.
And then I'm given the Mission Impossible job with a bullhorn.
But to finish up my statements to the January 6th committee, because I can't say it under oath, because if I said that the background behind me is purple, they would say, well, actually, there's some black in it, so it's not really purple.
I really wonder if there's an ability, because Alex is saying this, that he's making this statement, On his show, for them to then use his show as his statements.
I mean, he wasn't sworn in, and you can't say that they are true, but if you do know any information, you can say, well, we know this, and this is how he presented it.
And also, guess what?
We recorded these fucking depositions or whatever.
I do like the notion that, like, I heard some background noise on conservative shows about the Civil War and how we need to start using guns on people.
Why in this war that's all about information does Alex seem to be piling around with a lot of people who seem to be involved in physical war, like Tommy Robinson or Gavin McGinnis or Stuart Rhodes or...
I had my own security, but obviously everywhere we went, people followed us around of every different type and every different group.
And Stewart Rhodes, I later learned from news articles, would assign someone to us because he was kind of doing the whole playing the general type thing.
And I saw it all as LARPing.
I mean, I didn't see those people.
But I saw a lot of it as playing soldier in the backyard.
And they do go out to burning cities and try to help businesses.
And that's not LARPing.
That's real.
You know, their mission was something I really agreed with for most of its operations.
But if the indictment's true that they thought that they could foment and kickstart...
And detonate a rebellion at the Capitol that would then lead to a larger war, that is not something I knew about or something I support or something I want.
So again, you're really getting my unofficial testimony here to the committee.
And man, if what Alex is saying is the case, that kind of makes Alex the stupidest fucking asshole in the world.
This dude has been a guest on his show for 13 years, and he was working to try and kick off a civil war.
And then, when it didn't work out, Alex had him on the show repeatedly to run cover for him and create the narrative that he didn't actually do anything wrong, and it was all set up by the left.
You kind of have to assume that either Alex is the most incompetent, most gullible, most idiotic person in broadcasting, or he's feigning this ignorance on the show because he knows he can't say any of this shit under oath without looking like a big-ass liar.
Well, no, because we have to actually parse this out a little bit.
Alex is saying on the 6th he was LARPing and playing Soldier in the Sandbox, right?
But apparently he wasn't LARPing and playing Soldier in the Sandbox whenever they would go and try and intimidate people at social justice rallies and protests.
So we've got one more clip here, and I think this is really revealing about the inner conversations that were happening about the Sixth within Infowars.
Alex's crew accepted that their right-wing extremist buddies had done the storming, but Alex was furiously rejecting that idea.
But it wasn't because he actually knew that they hadn't.
It was because he was afraid of the consequences of accepting that they had.
Alex's opposition to the notion that the Patriots stormed the Capitol wasn't based on fact or evidence.
It was rooted only in Alex's fear that if everyone realized that they had done it, it would lead to negative consequences for people associated with that community of right-wing extremists.
That's key to understand.
Alex needed to make up a story to evade responsibility and try to provide cover for right-wing extremism, and that's his goal in the information war.
I think that really excavating the stuff about the connections between the Oath Keepers who are hanging out with everybody, now that you have that indictment in place, the security that they were providing for people and how that interacts with the planning of the Stop the Steal folks, I think you got...
You got something where people have something to be worried about more than I thought.
And this episode I take not seriously at all, except for the ways in which...
Alex is revealing how he operates.
I don't think that I know for sure whether he pled the fifth.
I don't know whether he sang like a canary.
I don't know any of that stuff.
And we'll learn more as more information comes out.
But it's still relevant to recognize the way he covers things up, the way he makes excuses for himself, and pretends, if I didn't answer any questions, it's totally justified because this is an illegitimate committee run by a forger.
Yeah, that's so fucked up to me because it's like, I almost want to be like, with right-wing people, I want to be like, hey, before we even talk about being right-wing, whatever you believe, fucking, you're entitled to it, but this guy's a giant coward.
Just don't follow him.
You know?
Like, follow another piece of shit if you want to believe shit.