Knowledge Fight #800 dissects Alex Jones’ April 24, 2023 show, where he pivots Tucker Carlson’s firing into a "globalist purge," falsely ties child trafficking to fentanyl attacks, and mocks legal retractions on Sandy Hook victims like Scarlett Lewis—omitting offensive claims while still implying deception. His promotion of convicted sex offender Scott Ritter as a conspiracy pawn reveals selective outrage, ignoring past associations with similarly discredited figures. The episode underscores Jones’ pattern of weaponizing crises for profit, deflecting accountability, and framing dissent as demonic, all while demanding financial support under false urgency. [Automatically generated summary]
I mean, I've been watching, I think I've watched every game he's pitched.
Sure.
Like, I have not been able to turn away from it because in the past few years, when he's only been the greatest baseball player that ever lived, right?
It was great to watch.
It was always great.
And now it's slightly more great.
I don't know if that's, I know that's not a bright spot to a lot of people, but if you're the greatest and you get slightly more great, that's also great.
I told populist Christians, conservatives, and people that just want to live a good, safe, decent life, that you better understand we're in a war and you better understand they're going for broke.
One of the biggest canaries in the coal mine was the number one news host in the world, Tucker Carlson.
Fired from Fox today.
I talked to Tucker quite frequently, but two days ago, my phone got wet and I hadn't backed it up and I haven't had time to go to the store.
So I've been without the phone.
It's kind of a great way.
It's getting fixed right now.
I'm unable to talk to Tucker.
I've got his number, but have not called him yet because I just learned this news about 25 minutes ago.
Now, I told you a couple weeks ago we could be taken off here at any time.
The globalists are making their move.
You saw him take James O'Keefe down.
Now, he's still fighting back.
But ladies and gentlemen, New World Order is making its moves right now.
And you need to not take this show for granted or take any of your freedoms for granted because the globalists are systematically cutting off the power, getting rid of the borders.
I just had a lengthy 45-minute discussion this morning with senior people in the federal government.
And they have been trying to get the story out, obviously, on Fox.
And they have the documents of Biden releasing over 20,000 known pedophiles.
I mean, hardcore child rapists.
I mean, people that have been convicted of being school bus drivers for disabled children and raping eight of them, nine of them.
And I'm just sitting there for 45 minutes that I had to go in this meeting hearing all this, the documents, and I'm sitting there talking to feds from different agencies.
I've already seen the reports there told me the rest of it.
All over the country, people are coming up to young 10, 11, 12-year-old girls in Walmart and Target parking lots, and a woman will walk over and go, hey, honey, but they're wearing a glove with fentanyl on them and putting it on her arm, and then the girl passes out.
The abuse of children is a prop that's meant to give power to the larger problem, which is Biden, who's supposedly releasing all of these hardened sex criminals.
He's not really cared about the end result problem as much as he is using that.
So there is an actual single case that came out that Alex is talking about where a 15-year-old girl was lured away from a Dallas Mavericks game on April 8th, 2022, and found being trafficked at a hotel in Oklahoma City 10 days later.
It's an unthinkable horror that girl went through, and the people responsible have been arrested and hopefully see the full extent of the law's punishments.
Alex is taking her actual experience and exploiting it by generalizing it into a narrative that's happening on this giant scale at Maverick's games.
And, you know, he's ballooning it out from a single example, which is what he does.
That's really inappropriate.
And it illustrates pretty clearly his disrespect for the victims in crimes like this.
Trafficking is real, but Alex's approach to this does nothing to solve the problem.
It's only designed to blame his chosen target for the existence of the problem and to direct the audience's negative emotions onto that chosen target.
The fentanyl thing is something that's popped up on social media memes over the past year or so in different forms, but there's no evidence that that's happening.
In September of last year, there was a viral post about claims that people were handing out roses laced with fentanyl to try to incapacitate people to be trafficked.
Most people just ignore his dumb publicity stunts, and he's essentially a political non-variable.
However, the Project Veritas board didn't appreciate that he was spending ridiculous amounts of money on personal stuff like, quote, $14,000 on a charter flight to meet someone to fix his boat under the guise of meeting with a donor, or how he spent, quote, more than $150,000 on private cars in an 18-month span.
They directly called it misappropriation of their finances, and a lot of his stunts have the potential to leave Veritas open to legal exposure, as it did in 2022 when the organization was successfully sued for $120,000 for violating wiretapping laws in one of their stings.
James O'Keefe is a piece of shit, and his actions are a liability for the organization that he founded now that it's grown into something that involves more than publicity stunts to feed his ego.
Maybe this would be a good time for him to sit back and consider how the people he claims have the same political beliefs as him seem to all be people who are operating their businesses in super scammy ways that are often illegal.
Maybe he doesn't actually have a political community as much as he has a collection of conmen who are invested in protecting each other's scams because they're somewhat interdependent.
AOC didn't say the conservatives should not be allowed on TV.
She said that, quote, we have real issues with what's permissible on air.
And we saw that with January 6th, and we saw that in the lead up to January 6th, and how we navigate questions, not just freedom of speech, but also accountability for incitement of violence.
That's the role we have to explore through law as well.
She went on to say, quote, I believe that when it comes to broadcast television like Fox News, these are subject to federal law and regulation in terms of what's allowed on air and what isn't.
And when you look at what Tucker Carlson and some of these other folks on Fox do, it's very, very clearly incitement of violence, very clearly.
And that's the line that I think we have to be willing to contend with.
This was reported in right-wing media as AOC saying that they needed to make new laws and regulation to not let Tucker do the shit he does, but that's not accurate.
She was just saying those regulations already exist, and we just need to acknowledge reality for what it is and take this shit seriously, which, of course, would be a threat to most of them.
And when I saw a week and a half ago the two-part series, Levon Musk, I said, let me tell you something.
You say Elon Musk has been bad in the past.
I'm not saying he's our savior.
I'm saying you don't get up there and say AI is taking over and the globalists want to get rid of humans.
We need to have more children.
And the Democratic Party has weaponized and controls the AI system that Musk and others designed, that they're taking over and that they're a tyranny and that the government illegally was spying on people and their private DMs at Twitter.
You don't say that and be an operative of the globalist.
You say that if they brainwash one of his daughters to become a boy, and if two of his family members almost died from the shot, and you decide to go against the globalists now, now maybe he thinks he'll beat them.
He'll become not the king of Mars, but the king of Earth.
There was some crack in it, so it quit working Saturday.
I haven't had a phone, so I haven't been able to call Tucker.
Plus, I just learned this 30 minutes ago.
But they're fixing my phone right now at the ATT store.
So as soon as I get it, I'm going to call Tucker.
And Rob Dew has his number to put text in 2015 to call us, but I'm sure he's overwhelmed right now.
Tucker got offered by the Republican Party to sell out, and he would have been president of the United States in 2024.
They're like, you got the deal, work with us, you'll be president.
And Tucker said, I'm not going to be in New York or D.C., and I'm going to be in Florida or Maine, and I am never going to be in the power structure, and I hate you, and I'll never serve you.
But there's a good chance that he said, I'm going to put whatever the story is or fire me, and they said you're fired.
Because I know the inside baseball of some previous things that went on, but I'm not going to talk about it until I've talked to Tucker and see if it's okay with him.
We're talking a fraction of what they were offering to have freedom on a show.
And they've not been giving him that on places like having Alex Jones on or going on Alex Jones' show.
And I encouraged him to just continue to do whatever good he could there.
But I think when it comes out, we're going to learn, unless he had to sign a non-disclosure, that he said, no, I'm going to do whatever the interview was he wanted to do.
I think it would be smart for him to make his own thing, but I think he could also go on Rogan or something like that and get a lot of mileage out of it.
Because I've learned how the new world order operates because I've been on the receiving end of their operations.
They're doing a purge at Fox, a purge at CNN, not a purge at MSNBC of what they call extreme left and extreme right to make us all a friendly, nice nation where you're not allowed to question election fraud.
We're not allowed to question open borders, but you also can't be mean and say bad things about conservatives.
Do you see AOC saying we've got to lower the temperature and call for there not to be violence like Tucker Carlson's doing?
Yeah, and I got to say, no endurance in impressions.
He was unable to keep that character constant.
I find that sad.
For someone who was in the running for world's greatest voiceover actor before Obama came along and ruined his career, I feel like he can't stay in character.
I guess AOC has magical powers where her stray words and interviews become the policy of multi-million dollar corporations.
Seems like a waste to use that power this way, but here we are.
Also, fun for Alex to accidentally admit that Tucker is an extreme right-wing figure.
This need for everything to be connected is a very interesting dynamic because if you really pay attention, it's a selective game.
For example, James Gordon's show went away on Monday, too.
So is Alex going to feel the need to connect that to his larger conspiracy narrative that he's constructing?
Probably not, because it's inconvenient and it's too hard to make that fit and make sense.
That's just a random thing that happened.
But Don Lemon's termination, that's related.
For what it's worth, there's been speculation that Lemon's termination has to do with some sexist comments and behavior, including recently saying on air that Nikki Haley was, quote, not in her prime.
Variety covered what appears to be a bit of a pattern behind the scenes in an article they published on April 5th, which could go a long way toward explaining what feels kind of like an abrupt termination, but maybe isn't.
Yeah, you know, I keep thinking, you know, after Alex mockingly read his statement, there is a part of me that's like, I have seen the best journalists get laid off en masse for the past six months in every newsroom.
BuzzFeed News is now completely gone.
All those people, all their jobs just completely gone away.
And yet somehow Don Lemon is still out here being like, well, I thought they would have the decency to come to my, like, fucking, what are we doing here?
unidentified
Well, it's because, you know, like, it's because he thinks he's, it's because he thinks he's better than everybody.
You know, like, and that's that's um, what we were talking about before we started recording even was like about there's this weirdness of this relationship that you have with news readers as characters kind of, and it seems it seems messed up, and I think that that's the reason that Alex is covering these and not talking about like, the journalists that are being fired in newsrooms and stuff, because they're not characters.
No, it's not drama to Alex that has any real juice there.
You know these people are.
It's it's like gossipy yeah, pop culture stuff, more than it is anything to do with news.
Totally like I mean, if you were going to put a conspiracy together, you would start with BuzzFeed NEWS going completely away, followed by okay, so now we've got a, now we've got an entire publication going down all of a sudden.
Now we're getting famous anchors going down all of a sudden.
What's gonna happen next?
You know like they're coming for all news for saying something or other.
You know like it's there, it's there, but it's just too lazy, you know.
And uh jar uh-huh, working with Edward R. Burrowed out of the ground.
He's alive.
I was waiting I knew you were going with Burrow and I was waiting to see where you were gonna land that plane and sir smooth landing that was that was a sullen burger if anything so I'm gonna skip this next clip because it's Alex just saying again that like oh they had to get rid of lemon to get rid of Tucker yeah so anyway we're screwed and by we I mean Alex and his buddies Gotcha.
Why does psychotics like to kidnap women and children and torture them in dungeons?
You're like, why the hell would you want to do that?
You're not a psychotic killer because, you see, when you watch Disney and Anheuser-Busch and Nike commit financial suicide by promoting pedophilia and mutilation of children, you say, why are they doing that?
Because these are just weapons systems owned by the big banks.
You know, it's one of those things that he talks about, he throws out there all the time, you know?
But it is like, they don't want you to have a nice house with a nice pool and all that stuff.
And it's like, I mean, honestly, I kind of don't.
You know, like, you're wasting a lot of water.
What you're talking about with psychotics going and attacking you, you have to realize by consuming so fucking much, you are passively doing to any number of people.
I tried to start a political party based entirely around the idea of covering the Earth's surface with shipping containers and all of us living in an underground thing.
And so all the middle class and all the nouveau rich and all the wealthy people that aren't globalists don't get organized and don't dedicate their time and energy to fighting tyranny.
Or they try to hide and keep themselves safe.
And that's why you're going to lose everything.
Keeping safe with a criminal takeover ensures you get destroyed.
Yeah, maybe you get eaten a little bit later.
Where are your instincts?
But it is the common people that are the ones that donate and give and care and spread the word.
But it's all the folks that live in the country clubs that think they're safe and that think that they're isolated from everything else who are going to wish to your dying minute you'd have done more when you had a damn chance.
Get me the Alexander Schultz and Eatson quote printed for the next hour of oh, how we burned in the camps.
And how we burned in the camps later, thinking, what would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family, or if during periods of mass arrest, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people have not simply sat there in their lairs, palling with terror at every bang on the downstairs door,
at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, and whatever else they had in hand because they didn't have guns.
The organs would have very quickly suffered a shortage of officers and transport.
And notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt if we didn't love freedom enough.
And even more, we had no awareness of the real situation.
We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.
They're going to murder you and your family.
They're going to rip your children's teeth out while they rape them with pliers right in front of you.
I mean, that's what they do.
I mean, this is it.
This is the end of America.
This is the takeover.
This is the New World Order.
It's already lawless.
It's already gone to hell.
This is a takeover.
And you can sit there and play games all day long.
Stalin just wanted totally obedient slaves for his Industrial Revolution for global domination.
Please go get this report about the UN legalizing pedophilia or trying to in Washington State say they're going to take children from parents and forcibly sterilize them.
Going along with this is a freaking nihilistic death wish.
This is survival you're seeing.
This is resistance you're seeing.
This is not some heroic exercise.
It's confirmed in the last two years in the Texas sector alone.
They've given hundreds of thousands of children over to sex traffickers and traffickers, and they've let loose at least 20,000 hardcore convicted pedophiles.
So all you that work for the system that don't stand up against this and a lot of the system standing up, just remember, you're just as guilty as the criminals.
So that's all.
I need your support.
You need my support.
We're in this together.
And I'd like to see an indicator of your support.
Support us at InfoWarStore.com.
But regardless, share the articles, share the videos.
Yeah, it is funny that he is talking to a mirror, but because a mirror is so abhorrent, he talks to what he believes is the mirror, and that is fiction.
Well, the great Owen Schroyer took a well-deserved week off, and he was back today.
And here's what was going on behind the scenes.
I have so much business stuff to take care of to keep this show on air.
I'm not complaining.
It's just I came to the producers about 45 minutes for airtime and I said, call Owen and tell him, come host the show today, because I've literally got to go around and deal with stuff running this place or we won't be here.
And then I called Owen 20 minutes before and he goes, hey, I'm actually here.
So we walked over and talked to her.
I said, he's part of Tucker.
He said, yeah, I just learned about it.
I said, well, why don't you co-host with me in the second hour and the third hour today?
And so he is here with us now to give his insight.
And they sue you with a kept judge, and the judge in the Dominion Fox case didn't call it a default, but ruled two months before Fox News purposely lied, which they never even did that.
And Fox News is liable.
And Fox News, this is the key.
Fox News lied.
Fox News.
Oh, and there was no election fraud, and these machines are unhackable.
So the judge is already going to tell the jury you're guilty.
That's why they settled for that amount.
And so they've already got another judge, another group ready.
It'll probably be in D.C., ready to go against Newscore.
And so this lawfare is now holding Newscore hostage.
Well, that's why it's so important for people to understand how radical and dangerous the American left has become because they're the ones that control this entire court system now and they know it.
You take LeBron James and you sit him down next to some high school freshman benchwarmer and that benchwarmer says, I'm better.
I'm going to beat LeBron James.
Well, yeah, he could say, well, okay, I'll go play you.
But if he knows every bucket he makes is worth negative two points and every bucket the other guy makes is worth 100 points.
Well, that's a rigged game.
You're not going to win that game.
So you could say, well, yeah, I'm going to go to court and I'm going to take my chances and I'm going to get discovery and I'm going to argue my cases.
Doesn't matter.
It's a ringed case.
You cannot win it.
And so that's what I think people are starting to learn here.
But if Alex and Owen exist in this circumstance and they're completely innocent, they could play good defense during their trial and end up coming out with a not billion dollar loss.
So Fox didn't have a default judgment or anything like that.
Text messages were found in Discovery that very clearly indicated that the people who were making fraudulent claims about Dominion knew that what they were reporting on was false when they reported it, which means that the case for actual malice would be very simple for Dominion to make.
Fox hadn't lost the case at that point officially, but everyone, including Fox, knew that if it went to trial, they had no chance, which is why they settled.
Alex had every opportunity to engage with Discovery in his own case, and he chose not to because he also knew that he would lose if the case went to trial.
He tried to lowball the Sandy Hook families with settlement offers, which they declined, so he was not given the offer amp that Fox was able to take.
Instead, he was forced to drag his heels and try every trick he could to come up with to stall the proceedings and hope to force the families to settle.
They did not, and ultimately, Alex's shitty behavior earned him a lot of fines in the form of sanctions, and ultimately, when other attempts to get him to participate failed, he was defaulted.
He did it all to himself.
He has no one else to blame.
And interestingly, during the damages hearing, Alex went on air and made claims about the plaintiffs in the case.
When the Texas case was ongoing, Alex talked quite a bit about Scarlett Lewis and Neil Hesslin, which was really, really disrespectful.
One of the claims he made about Miss Lewis was that she realized that Alex was actually right and that her attorneys had lied to him, lied to her about him, which we can hear in this clip here.
The families come over and shook my hand and hugged me and really woke up to the fact that they'd been manipulated and their own lawyers went like they were dogs.
You may notice in this version of the story, she came up to him crying the next day, whereas the previous telling of it was an hour later after she'd gone and watched Alex's show to find the alleged truth.
Yeah, there's a discrepancy here because Alex is just making this story up.
One possible reason is because, you know, without some kind of face-saving story like this, Alex seems like the piece of shit that he actually is in the case of the trial.
He traumatized these grieving parents and then continued to do so while the trial was happening because it was profitable for him.
Sincerely, another possibility is that Alex really is just that delusional.
Like reality may not be a fixed construct for him, and events exist merely to satisfy story beats that he needs to exist to be there so he can tell his heroic narrative.
I don't think that's the case, but it's a possibility.
Whatever the case, after Alex was on Piers' show, Scarlett sent him a warning letter saying that he needed to retract and correct this clear lie about her.
You may notice that this never happened on his show and we haven't heard about it.
And that's because it's buried in a video he put out on banned.video and almost nobody has seen.
But since I was curious, and because I'll take any excuse not to listen to Owen co-hosting, I decided now might be a good time for us to listen to that retraction video as a distraction.
It requires a complicated answer if you want to both retract the statement and also at the same time, try and convince the person who you made that statement about that actually you are correct.
The following is a clarification correction issued by myself, Alex Jones, here on Infowars.
As many know, I was sued by Miss Scarlett Lewis concerning certain remarks I had made about the shooting and death of her son at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
In early August of 2022, we were in trial in Austin, Texas on Miss Lewis' claims of defamation she filed against me.
During that trial, Miss Lewis and her ex-husband approached me to talk, which we did.
And after a brief conversation, we shook hands.
Later, I appeared on Piers Morgan's television show talking about the trial and recounted the brief conversation I had with Miss Lewis.
Recently, I received a letter from Mark Bankston, one of the lawyers for Miss Scarlett Lewis in the Texas Sandy Hook trial, in which Miss Lewis' lawyer demanded from me a correction, clarification, or retraction of those few statements I had made in January of 2023 on the Piers Morgan show about the courtroom conversation with Miss Lewis, and I'm happy to oblige.
First, I want the viewing audience to understand what I said and what Mr. Bankson has demanded of me so that my remarks today will clarify my retraction I'm going to make.
It's important to keep in mind that during the trial, I continued to produce my live talk radio show.
On the morning of August 2nd, 2022, I made certain comments about the tragic nature of the Sandy Hook shooting, where I confirmed that Miss Lewis was real and the shooting was real and the death of her son was real.
Miss Lewis, however, was incorrectly told that I had attacked her as an actor in my broadcast and she so testified, not having actually heard my on-air statements from that morning's broadcast.
I was called to testify immediately after Miss Lewis and I immediately corrected her misperception.
Later that afternoon at a break, Miss Lewis and her ex-husband walked over to me in the courtroom.
Miss Lewis handed me a bottle of water and as I recall a cough drop.
We shook hands and we exchanged cordial words.
Attorney Mark Bankston now wants me to retract what I remembered she said to me in that exchange.
And Miss Lewis is disturbed that this lie was broadcast to millions of people, exposing her to contempt and ridicule.
Finally, Attorney Bankston's demand letter concludes with criticism of my recollection of my conversation with Miss Lewis, writing to me as follows.
And I quote, Mr. Jones has now decided months later to lie about Miss Lewis again by manufacturing a fantasy conversation and spreading it to an audience of millions to a reputational and emotional detriment.
Attorney Bankston now demands that I retract my recollection of Miss Lewis's response to me, which I am going to do.
But first, let me say that I truly feel sorry for Miss Lewis and her ex-husband.
And then the other thing, too, is I guess, like, up till this point, he has also mischaracterized a number of things in terms of the course of events.
But, you know, I think at this four-minute point, you can get away with like just being like, I retract, and then it's as good as you're going to get with Alex.
But the, but first, that's where there's problems.
They did suffer the death of their child, and I've repeatedly said this.
So my comments upset them.
This was the last thing I wanted to do.
Now, as to Attorney Bankston's demand that I retract my statement he quotes regarding Miss Lewis's response to me on August 2nd, I have gone back and reviewed the video available of that day's event, and I want to show five relevant clips from these videos.
These clips come from August 2nd, 2022.
Number one shows Miss Lewis trial testimony.
The second video, my response in trial testimony.
Third video, my actual morning on-air statements.
Four, the end-of-day brief courtroom conversation and handshake I had with Miss Lewis.
And finally, number five, my August 3rd, the following morning, my court testimony about Miss Lewis shaking my hand and how much I appreciated that handshake.
The first is that Alex absolutely did not care if what he was saying hurt Scarlett Lewis or Neil Heslin.
His primary operating principle is to use people like them as a means to an end, not an end in and of themselves.
There was a video of him shaking their hands, so he knew he could make up a story about that interaction that would be believable enough to his audience based on the fact that the video exists.
That's all he cared about.
And if he never got a demand for a retraction that his lawyers insisted he takes seriously, Alex would never have even considered how much his words could affect Miss Lewis.
They don't exist as actual people with actual feelings to Alex unless he needs to act like they do in order to avoid the consequences of his actions.
The second major problem is that he seems to be trying to mount a defense for his claims rather than retract or clarify them.
By playing a series of clips, Alex seems to be suggesting that maybe Scarlett is the one lying about their exchange, which really seems like the last thing he should be doing in a retraction.
The section he plays is a little bit longer, but this is the main point, that she said that he'd implied that she was an actor or deep state on his show on that day or thereabouts.
Then Alex plays a clip of himself on the stand saying that she needed to watch the whole thing.
Then he plays what I guess he's presenting as the whole clip from his show, which allegedly Scarlett is responding to.
Just in that clip, you can see how Alex has edited out the part where he's saying that Miss Lewis and Mr. Heslin are being manipulated by evil people, dark forces.
He says that Hesslin is slow, but Lewis is not, which kind of implies that she wouldn't be as easy to manipulate.
Reading the obvious subtext, you might come to the conclusion that she's in on it.
Also, not for nothing, Alex wasn't around these people for very long.
He barely showed up to the court.
Most of the time that he was around, he was yelling out in front of the courthouse trying to get media attention.
Alex played that clip in his retraction video and cut out the part that was actually offensive to Hesslin and Lewis because he doesn't want his audience to have that context in case they stumble onto this retraction video.
He's trying to provide a retraction video that he thinks is just barely a retraction, just enough to make it work, while simultaneously it's supposed to serve to reassure the audience that Alex is actually right.
And if the conclusion is that Alex is right and doesn't really need to have made a retraction, then the audience would reach the very obvious next conclusion, which is that Scarlett is lying about their exchange.
Alex's continuing terrorizing of these people is recontextualized for the audience as a continuing attack on Alex himself because he is a malicious, abusive cult leader.
Yeah, the only way that this really, I guess, gets any better is, you know, having a situation where there isn't a community of enablers that support Alex in some way.
Yeah.
Because he is just malicious and will never stop doing the things that he wants to do that are profitable or that satisfy some kind of an emotional need that he has until there's no one left to play along.
I mean, my point is just like the rules and all of this stuff, like you cannot go to the judge and just be like, listen, this doesn't happen.
We have 800 fucking episodes of this.
When I tell you that you cannot punish Alex this way, I am saying this not from the point of view of somebody who wants punishment or putting aside my desires.
And if anything, unless done carefully, unless some of these things are done fairly carefully, you run the risk of creating circumstances that Alex can exploit to reinforce his martyr status with his audience, which ensures that they will never go away.
These clips show that after my testimony that day in the courtroom, I had a conversation that was initiated by Miss Lewis that ended with Miss Lewis and me shaking hands and her ex-husband and I shaking hands.
Unfortunately, the audio I have of the exchange is poor and you cannot hear much of what we're saying.
But it seems clear that while we were shaking hands, we were talking.
And while they are not all recorded as the one I just showed, I had several courthouse conversations with Miss Lewis and all of them were polite and civil.
And what I said on Pierce Morton was a composite of those discussions.
It is the precise words that Miss Lewis and I exchanged before and after our handshake that Terny Bankson now objects to and wants me to retract, which I am glad to do.
Yeah, because his argument essentially, like, he's really bad at communicating this, but his argument essentially is, oh, yeah, you know, there was that part where I said that, you know, Neil Hesslin was slow and they're being manipulated by evil people and all this.
Yeah, they said that, but she didn't see the part where I said she was real.
I do not wish to harm or damage Miss Lewis in any way.
And if she does not agree with my recollection of her response to me, I will defer to Miss Lewis' recollection of her statements and withdraw and disclaim my recollections of what she said in our conversation.
While I am sure of what I told Miss Lewis, I defer entirely to her recollection of what she said in response.
And if she disagrees, then I will withdraw and retract my recollection of her comments.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize that I have no ill will, ill feelings, or any malice towards Miss Lewis or her ex-husband.
I know and understand they have suffered a tragedy with the murder of their son, and I do not wish to cause them any further grief, harm, or embarrassment.
I once again would like to invite them to come on my show.
You mother and to talk about their son's life if they so choose.
I am also trying to reach an agreement for another appearance on Piers Morgan's show to let his audience hear this clarification and correction.
So this isn't a matter of just misremembering something.
This is a case of fabricating a claim about someone for a specific reason.
Alex didn't just get a little thing she said wrong.
He repeatedly said on air that she'd seen his full video.
She realized that he was right and that her lawyers had been lying to her.
Clearly against her will, Alex was turning Scarlett into a character in his fantasy world, specifically a character that acts in ways that are directly against the wishes of Scarlett, the real person.
This is a malicious act on Alex's part, and he knows it.
But his lawyers have scripted up this way for him to claim that it was just a matter of misremembering something that was said, and he thinks this is good enough.
But the problem with Alex and the problem with cult leaders in general, whenever you have them read a lawyer statement, is that everybody in the cult is like, oh, the lawyer made you read that statement.
It's the same way that so many of Alex's audience members are like, I know you're talking about the Jews, but you just aren't saying it because you can't.
So there's been incredible dirty tricks, incredible disinfo, incredible lies against anybody.
Trump's not perfect, but he was against World War III.
They got him.
Now they're going after Tucker.
They've gone after me.
Scott Ritter, famous case, all sorts of made-up attacks and lies.
None of it was true.
This is what happens when intelligence agencies come after you.
Scott Ritter is a former Marine intelligence officer who served the former Soviet Union implementing arms control agreements on the staff of General Norman Schwarzkopf during the Gulf War, where he played a critical role in the hunt for Iraq's gun missiles.
From 91 to 98, Mr. Ritter served as Chief Inspector of the United Nations in Iraq, leading the search for Iraq's prescribed weapons of mass destruction.
Mr. Ritter was a vocal critic.
The American decision to go to war in Iraq.
It was totally vindicated.
Millions of dead Iraqis.
His new book, Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, Arms Control, the End of the Soviet Union, is his ninth.
I wonder what kind of dirty tricks were pulled against Scott Ritter.
Maybe I should Google this real fast.
Clickety-clickety, clickety-clickety.
Scott Ritter was arrested in 2009 after he was caught in a child sexual predator sting operation.
He solicited nude videos from a person online that he thought was 15 years old.
At trial, prosecutors claimed that this was the third time that Ritter had been caught in an underage online sex solicitation sting, which is not surprising.
Ritter had sent graphic video to this person that he believed was 15, including him naked and masturbating.
In April 2001, Ritter was caught in a sting where he thought he was talking to a minor online who he made plans to meet at a McDonald's.
He arrived at the McDonald's where the police were waiting, but he didn't end up getting any jail time for that or anything.
I believe the charges were dropped.
Former UN weapons inspectors get a warning on these kinds of things, I guess.
Then, in June 2001, a couple months later, he got caught again, this time trying to meet up with a minor at a Burger King.
Again, the police were there, and again, he didn't get in any serious trouble.
Ritter was convicted in the 2009 case and sentenced to five and a half years in prison.
He was paroled early and has been out of jail since 2014, but he is very clearly a habitual predator who has a history of seeking out minors online for sexual exploitation.
I mentioned Ritter in one of our 2004 episodes in the context that he'd been a figure saying that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and I failed to bring up this aspect of his character.
It slipped my mind to get into because I wasn't talking about Ritter specifically at the time.
It was in the context of narratives about David Kelly, and Ritter was a tertiary figure.
I apologize that I didn't bring that up when his name came up.
Now that we have him here on Alex's show, all of this is very relevant.
And this is what Alex is trying to present: are dirty tricks that were played against Ritter.
These weren't dirty tricks, they are multiple instances of Ritter attempting to abuse children.
Alex pretends that he's a champion and crusader out to protect the children, but here he has a convicted sex offender on his show, and all he can do is whitewash his past and his crimes.
And why?
Because Ritter is a staunch opponent of Ukraine in the context of the war against Russia.
That's his value to Alex, and he's an anti-Ukraine voice with a resume, including a UN weapons inspector.
Anytime you hear Alex scream about how all his enemies are pedophiles and how he wants to ban trans people from any public existence in order to save the children, he's happy to pall around with and defend any child abuser who agrees with him because he's not sincere about this issue.
In the recent past, Ritter has been welcomed a little bit into communities that like to brand themselves as like isolationist, but are really kind of about something else.
I think that it would have been entirely possible for Alex to just have Scott Rader on and not say that there were a bunch of dirty tricks played against him.
I mean, you go back in the history in the 2004 stuff and you see so many of these other, like, these people who are, whether it's a, you know, a child abuser, a murderer, somebody who's deputized themselves to harass immigrants, Nazis, be they celebrities, fathers or not.
You have all these people that Alex is carrying water for and covering for.
It's no different, really.
It's just his show is so much about calling everybody else child predators.