Here's the thing about vamping today: I'm going to use this time instead to tell everybody that my niece, the second child of my brother, has finally smiled at me, and she even said a word to me.
She said hello.
She also screamed at me a couple of times, and she made eye contact.
This little girl has made eye contact with everybody else in my family.
Up until yesterday, it was me alone who had nothing, who had no relationship with her.
And so it was a bright, shining thing that happened to me.
While at the same time, also, she's three years old.
So I don't know if any of this is going to last.
Tomorrow could be, she's forgotten my name entirely, but I won one.
And so I'm going to take it as a victory and call it a day.
We're going to be talking about December 3rd, 2025 on Alex's show.
I think we are beginning something that will probably take up the next months of our lives.
There is a trajectory that Alex has set himself on that I think is in a large part a reaction to those moments, those big inflection moments that we've been talking about and Charlie Kirk's assassination.
I think that these things have set a course and now they're starting to come to fruition in Alex's destiny.
And we'll talk a little bit about this episode, but first, let's take a little moment to say hello to some new wonks.
317 days into the return of the Trump administration.
We are now at the moment of truth.
If they can take out Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for following Trump's legal and lawful orders, then they will obviously then launch impeachment against Trump for war crimes the UN will pile on.
We know where this is all going.
Obama blew up thousands and thousands of people on the seas and in their homes and at weddings and said that they had the executive power.
Now, you can argue those were war crimes, but what Trump is doing is light years more constitutional.
At the core, what Alex is expressing is that he doesn't really care about killing non-combatants.
He's neutral at best on whether or not the military should commit war crimes.
The only relevant variable is whether or not he likes the people doing the war crimes and if he feels personally connected to the power that those people hold.
If it's Obama doing it, Alex is able to grandstand about how wrong these kinds of attacks are.
If it's Trump and Hegseth doing it, the attacks are actually very constitutional.
Here is where this kind of argument lives or dies.
It's now Alex's responsibility to explain the difference between what Obama was doing and what Hegseth is doing.
What is the critical difference that makes one act of killing civilians you've determined are terrorists a war crime, whereas the other one is a legal constitutional act.
When someone advances contradictory positions and can't explain to you the reason why these situations are different and how the circumstances make their position not contradictory, you should feel a complete freedom to not take them seriously.
This isn't the behavior of someone who's actually interested in ideas.
It's the mark of someone who's trying to justify something they shouldn't.
It's a, I mean, after you can have the secret torture memo, you know, and it's like, why wouldn't you just do a secret memo for all the illegal and unconstitutional shit you want to do?
Get a constitutional lawyer to make some stuff up and then put it in a box and then tell nobody about it.
And you notice that this week, but tomorrow, they're going to release the Signal Gate stuff from the beginning of the administration.
Where he got set up with the CIA head and others trying to leak stuff out to make some of the strikes in the Middle East on the Houthis look badly done or that he's not following intelligence rules.
So that's all been set and now that's coming out in the next few days.
South Park produced it weeks ago, but has their special out about Hegseth this week.
And so here's the big news.
Let me just announce it.
There is a live deep state Pentagon coup going right now to remove Hegseth.
And if they're able to do that, they believe the path is clear.
The globalists will have control of the Pentagon with who they're trying to replace him with, and then they're going to make their move on Trump.
Alex is trying to paint the picture that the globalists are directing all of this attention against Hegseth because they're trying to oust him, when in reality, it really just feels like Hegseth is getting criticized for bad stuff that he's done.
The blowing up of boats shit is unacceptable.
His revealing of military actions in advance on Signal is sloppy and dangerous.
And Alex is exaggerating his importance to this season of South Park.
He's a bit player in the whole thing.
JD Vance and Peter Thiel are way more central characters, as is Satan.
For the people he's invested in supporting, any negative attention they get will be reported by Alex as a sign of their virtue.
And that's a double-edged sword.
On the one hand, it makes his job easier with hand-waving away horrible things that his guys do.
But on the other hand, it limits his ability to engage with reality, and it makes him seem really out of touch to anybody who isn't already a fan of his.
So they need to oust Heg Seth because he's loyal to Trump.
Right.
Anybody else, shaky, dubious loyalty at this, naturally.
So once they get him out, they can start trying to impeach Trump and in the process launch the civil war where the military won't be under Hegseth, who will keep them loyal to Trump in the coming movie that Alex hasn't seen.
And we've got a lot of people in the Pentagon that are obviously giving us information.
I'll leave it at that.
And so I was already planning to come on air today and say they're launching their full coup against Hegseth and explaining it.
Then Laura Loomer, and you know, say what you want about Laura.
She's really smart, does a lot of great investigative reporting.
I get mad at her because she infights and loves drama queening and stuff, which she thinks she's targeting bad people.
I think it's overall destructive.
They may lose the house now because MTG's leaving.
But whatever.
She's still a good person and means well.
And when she says she has the sources, she does.
Because when I read this, it's all dead on.
And I'm talking to her right now.
She's trying to get to a place where she has a good internet so she can come on.
I may just get her on via phone.
I was just talking to her five minutes ago.
Exclusive Secretary of the Army's office plotting a coup at the Pentagon to remove Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and replace him with the Deep Staters.
It's a long post on X.
It's dead on.
I don't just believe her and her sources, and she's been proven to be dead on.
The Pentagon today has all these reporters with their chief accountant, our own Breonna Morello, is in three-hour meetings right now with the head accountant of the Pentagon with total transparency about where the tens of trillions missing is.
And Rumsfeld, two days before 9-11, gave a press conference about $2.2 trillion missing.
And then 9-11 happened.
Now it's over, what, $15 trillion or something?
Some numbers are $20 trillion.
I mean, our reporter is there right now, right now, in the Pentagon meeting on this.
It's interesting that Alex is saying this because just a week or two after this episode was recorded, news broke that the Pentagon had failed its eighth straight audit.
To explain what this means, I'll read to you from an article on military.com.
Quote, auditors examine whether systems accurately track spending, assets, liabilities, and inventory.
That includes everything from payroll to contracts to facilities, vehicles, aircraft, ships, and spare parts.
The process also evaluates whether internal controls are strong enough to prevent errors and ensure reliable reporting.
A clean audit opinion would signal that the Pentagon can consistently account for its resources and spending.
Failing the audit means auditors identified material weaknesses that prevent them from reaching that conclusion.
Alex is trying to present this image that Hegseth is running the Pentagon as some kind of fully transparent operation, but it's really as bad or worse than ever.
This is an administration that will happily associate with an Infowars reporter, though.
So that's going to affect the kind of coverage that Alex gives them.
Wasn't that one of the first big things that people talk about Sanders doing on the national level is working with some other Republican guy to actually audit the Pentagon or the military?
If it were possible for him to, even should he be like, I demand we pass this audit, if it were possible, it probably would have happened in the past 50 years, at least once.
So you may notice that Trump brought up something about a second strike, which isn't a detail of the story that Alex has talked about yet.
This is in reference to an attack on a boat that Hegseth carried out, which resulted in a capsized boat and two survivors trying to cling to that wreckage.
Our forces fired on them again, which killed the remaining people.
Even if you believe that these people were narco-terrorists who were captaining boats full of drugs to the United States in order to kill Americans, there doesn't seem to be a justification to kill the survivors of the first attack.
There's no reason they couldn't have just been apprehended at that point and made to stand trial for whatever offenses they were accused of.
So firing on them again really just feels like state murder, which Alex is notorious for pretending to be opposed to.
It's just, it doesn't, you really, you really struggle to see the point.
That is, that is the type of shit, like, it should be undeniable now.
It should be undeniable.
No one should be able to deny it.
Nobody should have a conversation about it.
Because in a movie like fucking, I don't know, Red Dawn or some shit, one of the most obvious ways that you make the bad guy appear the bad guy is they shoot defenseless people to death.
As you can imagine, at the Department of War, we got a lot of things to do.
So I didn't stick around for the hour and two hours, whatever, where all the sensitive site exploitation digitally occurs.
So I moved on to my next meeting.
A couple of hours later, I learned that that commander had made the, which he had the complete authority to do.
And by the way, Admiral Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat.
He sunk the boat, sunk the boat, and eliminated the threat.
And he was the right call.
We have his back, and the American people are safer because narco-terrorists know you can't bring drugs through the water and eventually on land if necessary to the American people.
We will eliminate that threat, and we're proud to do it.
This story is obviously a bunch of bullshit, but I want to ignore that for a second just to bring into really sharp focus that listening to this explanation is insane.
Pete Hegseth seems to be justifying the use of the military to kill people based solely on their involvement in drug trafficking.
Are we in a very literal international war on drugs now?
Like, this feels like an entirely unacceptable justification for what happened, even if you have a sincere desire to have less drugs enter the country.
I can't come up with a way to say this strongly enough.
It's pathetic for Alex to support this kind of shit now.
Like, we understood that the war on drugs was a pretext for... Fucking over non-white people.
My first response to both of these assholes is exactly what happens when we were listening to those fucking depositions and Rob Dew is like, I don't know about this.
And the ideal situation is that when there are problems in the lower areas of command, let's say, the higher area of command takes responsibility, but solves those problems.
Somebody's, I mean, at the end of the day, it used to be, it felt like everybody understood sometimes heads roll and that's what keeps the people quiet.
You know, you make some asshole resign for shit that's not his fault, but everybody goes, see, they did something.
You know?
It doesn't even feel like they bother with that shit anymore.
I've studied the military, never been in it, but I've studied it from the top to the bottom.
I share military very well.
But again, Hegseth didn't do what they said he did.
If he did it, it's legal and lawful.
Obviously, they're trying to tell how it works.
You keep bombing it until it's totally destroyed and everybody's dead.
That's the mission.
Kill people, break things.
But they know the public doesn't understand this in general, so they're playing these games like everything else they do over and over and over again to do what?
To say Hegset's illegitimate, Trump's illegitimate.
This position that Alex is putting forward cannot be reconciled with his political beliefs when Obama and Bush were in office.
His mentality is in direct opposition with his previous philosophy about war, and it's hard to put it any other way than to say that he's a boot-looking warmonger.
The Geneva Conventions are very clear about shipwrecked people, even people who were active combatants prior to being shipwrecked.
Once their ship is wrecked, you can't just shoot them as they tread water.
It doesn't seem to be even disputed by Hegseth nor by Alex that they made a decision to kill the survivors of the first attack, which is a crime under international law.
People aren't upset about this or pretending to be just so they can have a reason to think that Hegseth or Trump are bad.
They believe that Hegseth and Trump are bad because they do bad things, this being a prime example of them.
There have been a lot of these kind of very clear moments in the past year or so, but this is another one of those.
Alex has lost his soul points.
The person he's pretended to be in the 90s and 2000s never would have accepted the U.S. government acting like this, let alone would he have been an active cheerleader for their attacks.
It's crazy.
The fact that he's saying that he didn't do this, and if he did, it's nothing wrong.
Yeah, that's what a lot of the people who are discussing, you know, like people who write essays about the commentary about the second strike aspect of this.
And there's really, I mean, I'm not saying they should, obviously, but there's no reason that we would have a moral high ground if they did like a chemical attack or a terrorist attack of some sort.
Absolutely not like the international structures of agreements and things that we use to like say what is right and what is wrong are things that we are violating wantonly.
People can review this report on my ex account, and I broke a story the other day, the first day of the Pentagon Press Corps orientation about this coup against Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
And my sources, high-level sources here inside the Pentagon, have told me that the stories that are being planted against Secretary of War Headseth are coming from inside Secretary of Army Dan Driscoll's office.
unidentified
And, you know, people have been following my reporting over the last few months.
They know that I have called out the Army Secretary multiple times for some of his behavior since he has been the Army Secretary, including going jogging with Eugene Binman, one of the architects of the impeachments against President Trump.
He colluded with his brother, Alexander Binman, as you know, also to highlighting and platforming a Medal of Honor recipient who spoke while in his uniform at the DNC convention in 2016, bashing President Trump.
unidentified
And we know that's a violation.
You're not supposed to engage in artisan political behavior while you're in uniform.
They want to replace him because they want somebody who's not as conservative and pro-Trump as Pete Hegsep.
Because in order for them to be successful in their coup, not just against Hegseth, but against President Trump, they need to stop the militarization of the borders.
unidentified
They have to stop the deployment of the National Guard to deal with Romans.
It's not even a possibility that Alex can consider that maybe Pete Hegseth did something wrong.
There are negative stories about Hegseth and the media, and the only possible reason for that is that someone is trying to take him out so they can more easily take out Trump.
Once again, the InfoWar has mostly become a gossip show by palace intrigue and people speculating on the fantasy coup plots that are going on behind every closed door.
This happens when there's no credible villain for propagandists to deflect anger toward, and they refuse to accept that their side has all the power.
Nick Fuentes doesn't have to do gossip shit.
He can actually criticize the actions of the members of the Trump administration based on the things that they've done.
And a major part of that is his willingness to accept that his side has all the power.
Alex cannot do that because once he accepts that, his show means nothing.
He's not in a political struggle.
He's in a war against the devil.
So if his side has all the power and they don't vanquish the devil, it's pretty obvious that they aren't in that same war with the devil.
In a political struggle, you can acknowledge that you have control of all three branches of the government and still have a reason not to force your agenda through.
You could think that it could be seen as tyrannical or it might backfire or whatever.
If you're in a war against the devil, you kill the devil if you have the chance because it's the devil.
Subconsciously, this is the struggle that whatever audience Alex has left is going through.
They're suffering from horrible cognitive dissonance about why the guy they elected to kill the devil seems to be working with the devil all the time, even though he has all the power.
It doesn't make any sense why Trump hasn't arrested or killed Bill Gates or Fauci.
Obviously, the Constitution and law would stop him, but law is a human invention, and they're working for the devil.
The devil doesn't have due process rights like the fucking people on those boats.
As the audience has to deal with seeing Trump not defeat the devil and as they watch Alex support him as he works with the devil, it requires them to come up with new explanations for why this shit is happening.
Alex is hoping that he can redirect people's attention with the Palace Intrigue and by replaying the hits of the deep state days, but he has much stronger competition in the bullshit media space now.
This shit is just not going to fly.
This is probably the worst way that Alex could play the situation because Trump space is pissed right now and they're asking questions.
The only audience that the Palace Intrigue stuff appeals to are entirely passive folks who are ready to accept any explanation someone gives them.
To any person listening critically, Alex's angle on this raises more questions than it answers.
But if you do that, you're able to get around the visceral feelings you have about like, well, maybe we should change things so you can't just murder people on boats.
You know, like when there are mass shootings, they get around whatever human feelings you have about it by being like, you only feel bad because the gun rights people are trying to attack the Second Amendment.
We just have a right to expose what they're up to, what they're engaged in, and how they're trying to undermine and act like Trump's a dictator when he's not.
It's the Democrats that want to sell this country out.
The Republicans, you know, have got their own problems.
They've been a horrible party until recently.
But we have formed a beachhead in the country, in the government, of real reform.
And that's what's exciting.
So, again, there's this paradox of people that have woken up who aren't realists that don't have any depth or context.
The appointees, by and large, of Trump have been excellent and are dismantling the globalist system.
Trump's made major mistakes.
His DOJ is a disaster.
We're critical of that.
And are you?
I'm talking about put this out.
I see Comments on X like, oh, he's defending himself for being, you know, sucking Trump's weenie or whatever.
It's not about that.
I don't say that to convince you that my position's right.
I know my position's right.
I'm asking you to be a realist and say, would you rather have Kamala Harris in right now?
The answer that InfoWars should have to the question, would you rather Harris be president, is probably yes.
Absolutely.
From Alex's perspective, it would be way easier for him to make money if there was a credible opposition he was pretending to fight.
But the real reason I say this is because of the philosophy that this show is built on.
Electoral politics is not supposed to matter.
The left-right paradigm is an illusion that the globalists weaponize to control the public.
Politicians are stage actors and they're all controlled except Ron Paul and anyone who gets canceled for saying something really racist.
What matters for the InfoWar is you, the listener, the individual is the most important thing.
You're capable of making the changes that need to be made to save the world.
And all the government can do is either get in your way or stay out of it.
In terms of furthering the goals of waking up the public and uniting the team, I think that Alex's audience would be way better off if Harris had won.
When Biden won, they all got together and stormed the Capitol.
In 2024, when Trump won, there wasn't that kind of unity.
All the attention economy scammers went into overdrive, trying to carve out their own piece of the pie, and a giant civil war has broken out in their media, largely surrounding Israel and the Charlie Kirk murder.
Right now, the only way Alex can use his time is trying to patch up holes in Trump's sinking ship.
You know, explaining that Eggseth's illegal actions are totally legal, trying to spin fun threads about palace intrigue.
It's all rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Conversely, if Harris had won, all of these right-wing influencers would understand the importance of them working together and not trying to cannibalize each other for the sake of slightly increasing their own audience.
Their coalition is made up of people who fundamentally do not like each other.
So ironically, their best case scenario is to be chasing power, but never actually having it.
Once there is actual power, it makes no sense to let these other folks you hate have a chance at grabbing that power so the attacks ultimately turn inward.
Candace Owens hates Laura Lumert.
Nick Fuentes momentarily hated Tucker until he got on his show and humiliated him.
The list goes on and on with these feuds, and the result of their fighting is a boost in negative headlines towards Trump world figures that each of these people sees as unaligned with themselves.
Mix that up with actual journalists reporting on horrible things that Trump administration figures are doing, and you have a lot of holes that Alex has left running around to patch up, which leaves his content seeming really stupid.
Some of these right-wing media figures have been able to position themselves so that Trump winning is better for them, but most of them are people who are not connected personally to Trump and are free to attack him.
That's the people who benefit the most from Trump winning.
I would say that there are only people who should actually be glad that Harris didn't win are those folks.
Everyone else, including the right-wing movement in this country, would be way better off if the presumed greater of two evils had won and maintained a status quo that wasn't inwardly destructive.
And trying to put a patchwork together of groups that all essentially define themselves by exclusion means that once there's a power that is attainable, they will want to use it to exclude the people that they want to exclude.
And sometimes that's contradictory to what another group wants to exclude.
And that's really where their coalition just can't work.
The CIA removed him because they wanted to be in charge.
But we really, after Kennedy got killed and Nixon got removed, the deep state was in charge.
And so the Republican leadership at the top would just share power.
They all intermarry together.
It was all staged.
Uniparty.
That's why I said the left-right paradigm's false.
I coined that term, the false left-right paradigm.
Look it up, I coined it like 29 years ago.
It's picked up at University of Tex now, you name it.
People go, well, wait a minute.
Now you're saying we're Republicans.
Now you're saying we're right-wing.
Back then, it was totally controlled.
And all these terms mean nothing.
Thomas Jefferson was a liberal.
He'd be an ultra-right-winger today.
Terms change.
Liberal used to mean less taxes and more guns and more property and more freedom.
Liberal now means communism and cutting your son's wiener off.
Means transhumanism.
But there really wasn't two parties to speak of until Ron Paul and the Tea Party and everything you and I did together to try to reform the Democrat and Republican parties.
And it turned out we were able to reform because it was Christians and others.
The Republican Party party and perfect, but it's day and night to pair the Democrats now.
And they're just digging in, getting more communist, more satanic, more globalist every day.
In either 1963 or 1974, the deep state took over the country, and then there was a uniparty.
This uniparty was a Cold War-era communist fantasy of the Democratic Party where the Dems were steering the ship and the Republicans had entered into a power-sharing agreement with them.
The Republican Party was essentially controlled opposition, obscuring the fact that the commies had all the power.
This was the state of affairs until Ron Paul came along, but it wasn't Ron Paul that changed the world.
It was Alex and his dumb radio show.
In Alex's telling of the story, his support of Ron Paul created the Tea Party, which took over the Republican Party and has now morphed into the Trump movement.
In effect, he was able to wake up the masses to the existence of the Uniparty by attacking the fraud of the left-right paradigm, which let the Tea Party create a new political party that wasn't based on the GOP of old.
By creating this new entity and using it to power the right wing of the Uniparty in the United States, they were able to take control of the party apparatus.
So now they are truly a separate party.
There finally are two parties in the United States government thanks to Alex.
Anyway, I was reflecting on how trapped Alex feels in the present day and how the show just feels like a guy spinning his wheels and trying to rationalize becoming the thing he's supposed to hate.
And I think I came up with as good a theory as I can with the information that's available.
I think that Alex is trapped simply because his debts aren't dischargeable through bankruptcy.
Infowars and free speech systems can go out of business, but he'll have that debt hanging over him no matter what.
So no business he tries to run in the future is going to be free from that.
He's gotten around this by setting up the Alex Jones store with Bigley and putting Chase Geyser's name on the filing for the Alex Jones Network.
So in effect, he's owned.
If Bigley says you have to support Trump no matter what, what else can Alex do?
He's unemployable at any legitimate business in the media.
He can't start his own thing without it being subject to his debts.
So there's nowhere he can go.
As much as Bigley stuff has been the escape parachute that'll allow him to be rich for the rest of his life, it's also a cage.
And in Alex's field, these kinds of optics are a really big problem, whether they reflect reality or not.
It could very well be the case that Bigley doesn't give a shit what he says on air, but the fact that he's their employee affects how an audience sees what he does.
It starts to give them more reasons to question the sincerity of the positions he puts out because quite literally, he's no longer independent.
I think that Alex is inspiring a lot of these kinds of questions in his listener's head, which is he's seeing it expressed directly back at him on social media.
They're seeing his behavior as being exactly what he would have called being a sellout earlier in his career.
So Alex knows that he has to explain why what he's doing now is totally cool.
Electoral politics used to be bullshit and all the politicians are actors, but Alex fixed that all.
So it's important that you vote straight ticket for Republicans in the midterm or else the devil might get you.
It just feels very defensive of the, like, I don't know if his bosses now are telling him, our brand is Big Lee.
I don't know if that's the case, but the fact that Alex is behaving in exactly the way you would if your bosses told you you have to continue this, I think it's causing concern in the audience's minds.
And he's now in a position where nothing can be felt as truly free.
Nothing can be truly sincere.
And the downside of this, I think, is obviously there's one explanation that is Roger knows some shit that Alex doesn't want out.
I wanted to get his take on Laura Loomer, whose intel I've matched with mine, on a Secretary of Army deep state coup, trying to drive Hegseth out, and that will implicate Trump claiming it's a war crime, blowing up these boats.
I like to imagine that there were some people sitting at home listening to Alex and Loomer talk, and they were on the fence on the credibility of what they were saying.
But then Ivan Rakeland's going to come push them over the hump.
Having him on is pretty funny, particularly about there being a deep state coup against the Secretary of War, because Ivan was supposed to be the Secretary of Retribution when Trump got back in office.
He made a big deal out of offering globalists amnesty if they confessed by a certain date.
And now a year into Trump's second term, he's doing a call-in from his car on Alex's show to talk about dumb shit Laura Loomer tweeted.
Reminding people that Ivan Rakeland exists is embarrassing.
Yeah, and I think that when you have all branches of government and you can create something like a doge and you can get away with these things, there's no excuse for a deep state existing because you can just stop them.
So Alex asks Ivan about this, the takeover here that's going on at the Coup, and what have you and uh, I I think Ivan's petty they can get control of the Pentagon.
Not only are they stopping at not trying to block accountability for all the transgressions of the Austin years, like you're saying uh, they're going above and beyond and at the end of the day, I mean what stops them from doing it?
So far, the first Trump administration, there was no accountability.
So far, almost a year into it, there's been no accountability.
So at this point in time, if I was talking to president Trump, he's got to look himself you know himself In the mirror and decide for himself, is he going to be a wartime, a domestically wartime president?
Because we are at the, I'd say, the apex of the 1770s meets 1860s, meets 1960s, and they're trying to escalate that on steroids.
The fastest and quickest way to do that is you have to bring in people that have already proven up and rejected the tyranny of the last four years, bring them into senior-level positions so that they are ready, willing, and able to destroy this communist takeover.
Right, and he needs to be flanked by those members of the administration that are not playing ball if he's going to keep them in place.
I mean, I know one thing he's like, oh, Kash Patel's doing great.
Pam Bondi's doing great over on Fox News.
Well, if you're going to keep them, Mr. President, why don't you have them flank you and address exactly what their responsibilities and roles are to the American people in order to support the mandate that we're doing?
So here's what we need to do: we need to get everybody in the country to get in a room, and then Trump's going to bring a goat in there and say it's a deer.
And whoever doesn't say it's a deer gets shot in the fucking head, and then we move on with our lives.