All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 23, 2024 - Lionel Nation
57:07
Fani Willis: When Supreme and Unearned Arrogance Meets Unethical Treachery and Blatant Perjury
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
When uncertainty strikes, peace of mind is priceless.
Dirty Man Underground Safes protects what matters most.
Discreetly designed, these safes are where innovation meets reliability, keeping your valuables close yet secure.
Be ready for anything.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off today and take the first step towards safeguarding your future.
Dirty Man's Safe.
Because protecting your family starts with protecting what you treasure.
Disaster can strike when least expected.
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes.
They can instantly turn your world upside down.
Dirty Man Underground Safes is a safeguard against chaos.
Hidden below, your valuables remain protected no matter what.
Prepare for the unexpected.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off and secure peace of mind for you and your family.
Dirty Man Safe.
The storm is coming.
Markets are crashing.
Banks are closing.
When the economy collapses, how will you survive?
You need a plan.
Cash.
Gold.
Bitcoin.
Dirty Man safes keep your assets hidden underground at a secret location ready for any crisis.
Don't wait for disaster to strike.
Get your Dirty Man safe today.
Use promo code DIRTY10 for 10% off your order.
One of the more difficult tasks that I have is to try to explain yet again In terms of the legal machinations of what's happening, involving the Georgia case,
yeah, Fannie Willis, and also how we, those of us, myself, I hope excluded, keep reiterating this storyline about Donald Trump without explaining what it is that's happening.
I don't want to go into detail.
I don't want to name names.
But I promise you, I promise you, the part that is being missed is that which is not discussed.
The Fannie Willis case is not about some sexual liaison.
That's not it.
The underlying part of it is the crimes that were charged.
And the crimes involved, listen carefully.
Challenging alleged fraud involving our system.
But you don't hear that.
It's interesting to hear, to see perjury that is occurring before your eyes.
Normally perjury has occurred beforehand.
This is happening as they speak.
This is the most important part.
This is as they speak.
And there's also this idea, like, let's talk about the Trump case involving Letitia James, Judge Engeron.
Nobody has ever even talked about the statute.
Nobody's ever even concerned themselves with, well, what is it that charges?
They're just saying, well, he overvalues.
Of course people overvalue.
What's the big deal?
That's what it is.
Banks will always verify the amounts that were pledged.
The bank wasn't hurt.
The bank wasn't at all damaged.
The bank's not complaining.
How many times have you heard that?
And how many times have I, and a few others, said to you, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter at all.
What are you talking about?
What law are you talking about?
What world are you in?
Tell me.
Well, you know, he's a weird-looking guy.
That's it?
Well, Letitia James, she has a statute that has been in effect forever.
Might not have been used.
It might not have been used, it might not have been, nobody cared to use it before, but it was there.
On Twitter, I decided to gain, which I'm going to explain to you, just to explain, yet again, or X, I can't call it X. Regarding New York's Executive Law 63, Section 63, Paren 12. This is the one we're talking about.
It doesn't matter what you think.
It doesn't matter whether you think it's fair.
It doesn't matter whether you think it's political.
It doesn't matter!
It has nothing to do with it.
It doesn't mean anything.
It doesn't matter.
I don't know.
Let me see if I'm...
I find myself having to say things, not to you, mind you, but to many people, like I'm talking to children, and I've got to say, over.
And over and over.
It's like I keep trying to say this.
And nobody's following the critical issue here.
The gravamen.
What this is truly, actually about.
We're going to be talking about that.
I also want to explain to you how the notion of this devil down in Georgia, Fanny Willis, and the N-word, narcissism, really underscores what...
The folks we're charged with.
This is an attack on the franchise by not being able to determine, being able to state, being able to explain what it is that we're talking about.
Remember, the election is 258 days away.
And if we can't challenge it, we are doomed as a society.
So first things, my friends, sit back, subscribe to the channel if you haven't.
Make sure you like this.
Make sure you like this dissertation, this incredible classroom that I provide daily.
But first, listen very carefully to our sponsor.
Well, it is time yet again, my friends, to hail and salute our great friends at MyPillow.com.
And if you use promo code Lionel, you'll get a free gift.
No purchase necessary.
Yes, I know, a free gift.
It's a tautology, so sue me.
But first, please listen.
What are we talking about here?
Down comforters, flannel sheets, Giza dream bed sheets, MyPillow 2.0 sheets, slippers, percales, towels, quilts, bedspreads, mattresses, mattress covers, mattress toppers, linens, kitchen towels, bathrobes, name it!
Literally name it!
Items to help you luxuriate and relax.
And their monster sellers?
Slippers.
My slippers.
That's right, slip-ons, moccasins.
Think about it.
What do they do at MyPillow?
They make things real soft and plush and comfy.
How perfect.
But here's the link.
MyPillow.com promo code LINO or MyPillow.com slash solidus or vergual slash LINO or call 800-645-4965.
Watch how fast Mike answers the phone.
MyPillow.com promo code Lionel.
Promo code Lionel.
Simply and absolutely the best.
You know, when somebody comes along and notices something for the first time and they say, hey, that's not fair, and it's like, where the hell have you been?
Where have you been?
Well, you know, I just don't think that's fair.
Fair?
What does fair have to do with it?
What are you talking about?
Fair?
What is fair?
Well, you know, justice.
What is justice?
I don't want to keep asking these questions, but what are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
This is what I do.
I heard the other day, and again, I'm not going to mention names, but I kind of do a couple of samplings, you know, on my rotation.
And these two lawyers are talking about, well, you know, it's the deep state.
Well, the fix is in.
Well, the shadow government, this and that.
Okay, that's silly.
That's stupid talk.
I'm not saying there isn't.
I'm not saying, but that's not going to do you any good.
The shadow government cannot do anything.
The deep state cannot do anything.
The radical left cannot do anything if there are no laws that allow them to do it.
You could talk all day long about DEI and Claudine Gaye, but if she's not able to perform these particular acts of inequity, what are we talking about?
Let me start off with this.
This is important.
This is very critical.
I want to explain two things.
The law regarding two particular cases.
One is Letitia James, and one is, we'll get back to the latest regarding Fannie Wilson.
But I want you to hear this right.
And I put a link to my X, if you will, section or channel or whatever you want to call it.
And I want you to listen very, very carefully, very, very critically to what I'm saying, okay?
First, President Trump has, they're talking about basically a corporate homicide, corporate extinction by virtue of this case in New York where he has been Found guilty of inflating worth and that sort of thing.
It is designed not to provide for jury trial.
I think that it's kind of like an equity case.
It's a summary case.
It's like some forms of divorce.
You know, they're not juries.
The trier factor to judge.
But for the umpteenth time, Let me explain to you this.
New York's Executive Law 6312.
Section 63, paren 12. And Justice Engeron's ruling.
You can say whatever you want.
He's a Bolshevik.
He's a communist.
Whatever.
Go ahead.
Go ahead.
Doesn't matter whether you agree with him.
Doesn't matter whether you think it's constitutional or not.
Under the law, the burden of proving harm is not a prerequisite for legal action.
The prosecution is not required to demonstrate that the defendant had the intention to defraud, nor is it necessary to show that there was any actual fraud that occurred.
It's not mandatory for the state to prove that Any creditor or financial institution acted negatively, detrimentally upon the defendant, President Trump's false statements, nor that the representations were significant, or even that anyone was deceived.
The only requirement for the state is to establish that the defendant, President Trump, consistently And repeatedly made false claims in such a manner, listen to me carefully, in such a manner that at least two individuals were affected by them.
This is a term that distinctly does not equate to being harmed.
This subtle yet very significant legal nuance.
Underscores and emphasizes the fact that the act of making false claims rather than the outcome of those claims is the problem.
So just making them not whether anyone is harmed.
If somebody has to maybe find this to be unconstitutional, maybe someone can find Maybe some appellate court can overrule this.
I don't know.
But unless and until you change that rule.
Unless and until that is the law.
Period.
Period.
End of statement.
This is the law.
Now, we can talk about, again, the motivation.
We talked about this case involving Fannie Wilson.
Willis.
In the state of Georgia, as in many states, there is, I believe, a misdemeanor of adultery.
If somebody wanted, let's say there was a Republican prosecutor who wanted to charge Nathan Wade with adultery, you could say, this is politically motivated, this was done merely as a way of getting back at him for Whatever.
Yes, yes, yes.
That it was politically motivated?
Yes.
That it was wrong?
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Is it unconstitutional?
Well, the law might be, but it's still the law.
Is it illegal?
No.
Is it unfair?
Maybe.
But in that particular case, you don't like him, so you say, okay, fine.
There are people who are lauding this.
There are people who say, finally, justice against President Trump.
They hate him.
I don't care whether you agree with them or not.
This is the law.
You're going to change it or not.
If you're not going to change it, quit bitching about it.
That's the way it is.
Change it.
How many other laws?
Do the Republican prosecutors ever use it?
No.
Are they ever as aggressive?
No.
The Democrats are.
Completely.
So, you can talk about this all day long.
Can we talk about Letitia James?
I just did.
What do you want to talk about?
She said before she ran that she was going to find Donald Trump.
Okay.
Is that wrong?
Is that wrong?
Is it?
Is it?
Is it illegal?
Should a politician not be able to say, this is the biggest case of them all.
This is it.
Donald Trump.
In a city, or in a state, because New York City is really New York State, where everybody hates him.
Do you want to tell her, you can't run on that?
Why not?
That's the First Amendment right.
Who cares about your First Amendment right?
I do.
So, what I'm trying to say...
Perhaps futilely, perhaps futilely, I'm trying to say this, understand that if you want to sit around and say, this isn't fair, it bores me.
No kidding!
It's not fair, okay?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Let's move along.
Let's talk about what else has to be done.
Even...
Listen to this.
Even claims made ostensibly by his chief financial officer, this fellow, this poor guy, Weizen, whatever his name is, they were making statements to Forbes.
Forbes!
So that Trump could enjoy the status of being on, you know, the top, belly, and the work.
This wasn't even, this was just for a magazine.
It's just for a magazine.
It doesn't say anything about where you say this.
And I think there's a lot of reasons, a lot of constitutional reasons.
My God!
Isn't this just puffery?
Puffery is this wonderful notion in contract law where somebody says, basically, they say these things that are, in essence...
Like, for example, if you've ever seen this case, you've tried the rest, now try the best.
We have the best pizza.
This is the best?
The best pizza.
The best?
Is that a lie?
No, it's kind of puffery.
It's like, oh, you're kind of exaggerated.
You're not going to hold Angelo's Pizza.
Liable for some type of misrepresentation for embellishing.
E.D. Crowley says, Mr. L., this accepted practice of land slash property owners inflating value of land or property.
Does it hail from archaic laws?
Why is it acceptable?
Might makes right.
Well, inflating the value, E.D., is a very good question, and thank you, by the way.
First, Let me explain something to you.
Embellishment, lying, bullshit, extensive extrapolation of ability to think and bragging.
I mean, it is a human trait, if you will.
Look at people who are involved in Car sales?
Look at...
I mean, I don't know how to say this.
Look at anything where you embellish.
It's a little bit different, though.
If you're...
There was an issue of whether the square footage of Trump's home...
Let me say this again, and let me repeat this again.
We look at the law.
If there's no such law, it doesn't matter.
The only requirement for the state for Letitia James is to establish that President Trump and his agents and family consistently and repeatedly made false claims in such a manner that at least two individuals were affected.
What does that mean?
A term that distinctly does not equate to being harmed.
I mean, I don't know what to tell you.
This is the issue.
Do you want to continue talking about what a bad person...
Letitia James couldn't do what she wanted to do unless she had the statute, unless it was available to her.
Now let me explain to you another thing.
This is really scary.
This is what, and I want you also, you have to, if you're going to delve into the law, understand what the statute is that we're talking about.
If there's a Supreme Court case, read it.
I can't tell you how many times I hear all the time, well, they never read me my rights.
What does that mean?
I don't know.
I just...
Do they have to read your rights?
Well, I don't know if they have to read them.
Why do you keep saying it?
Well, I don't know.
People say it all the time.
Did you read Miranda?
No.
Well, why do you say that?
I don't know.
Again, in my YouTube rotation, there's this fellow who's this, you know, he's a nutritionist, and they say, look at this.
Look at this stuff.
Don't eat this way.
It says soy.
Soy protein.
Look at this.
Don't eat this.
It has soy protein in there.
What's wrong with soy?
He never tells you.
He just says, don't eat.
That has soy in there.
What's wrong with soy?
This is natural flavors.
What's wrong with natural?
What does that mean?
I don't know.
It's just soy.
You want to go to China?
Look around you.
You know how much soy they consume on a day basis?
Soybeans, tofu, you name it.
They're not walking around gynecomastic, soy boy.
I don't know what you're talking.
They just say things, and because you are inclined to believe this, you kind of go with it.
Let me give you what you should be worried about.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I think, is one of the best, one of the best versions regarding this case because of the law part of it.
People are so weird.
Isn't it funny how everybody, we love Navalny, but Julian Assange, eh, Gonzalo Lira, eh.
We're just weird that way.
Let me tell you what they're currently charging President Trump with in Georgia.
This is why it's so critical.
Number one, violation of the Georgia-RICO Act.
Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer.
False statements and writings, two counts.
Solicitation of violation of an oath by a public official, three counts.
Filing false documents.
Conspiracy to commit false statements and writings.
Conspiracy to commit filing false documents.
And conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree, two counts.
Thank you.
This is where he basically talked to Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, and said, I want you to find 11,780 votes.
The amount needed to defeat Biden.
He was alleged in discussions when appointing a slate of GOP electors in swing states, and he pushed numerous false conspiracy theories.
Trump is arguing on the state and federal level that he is immune to prosecution.
See what's going on right now?
This statute exists.
Now, is this racketeering?
I don't believe so.
But there is a racketeering statute.
Look at Rudy.
This is interesting.
Rudy used multiple appearances before the Georgia legislature in late 2020 to spread conspiracy theories and falsehoods about the election.
This is what they allege.
The mayor, ex-mayor and former prosecutor, showed lawmakers edited surveillance video of election workers tabulating ballots at Atlanta State Farm Arena Now,
think about this.
Conspiracy theories.
Follow through with a conspiracy theory.
The word conspiracy theory alone has taken on so much heft and weight that now it has become a violation of the law to quote, repeat, continue, whatever, a conspiracy theory.
How about John Eastman?
This is the Well, what's wrong with that?
What do you mean pressure?
They're using, Trump and others were using, a A provision as well.
What's wrong with that?
Now, whether you like this or not, whether you like Trump, don't like Trump, doesn't really matter.
I despise Fannie Willis.
But I'm telling you, there may be no evidence whatsoever that she...
Committed an actual violation of the ethics of the conflict law because she never sought to benefit whether they convicted him or not.
She had no stake in this.
They're trying to make the argument.
Now listen to this.
This is really, this is tough.
And what I want you to understand is I'm always going to tell you the truth.
If it works, if I'm telling you something, it doesn't mean I like what I'm saying.
I would love to see Fannie in the calaboose.
I'd love to see her frog marched off in cuffs, in bracelets, because I think she's violated the laws on so many respects.
But you've got to prove it.
And even though you and I might say, wow, this is crummy and he lied and this, I don't even know whether she has to be, remember, disqualified.
Do you disqualify her?
Now let me give you an example of a case.
This is very interesting.
Follow this one.
There was a case involving State Senator Burt Jones.
He was running for lieutenant governor and now is a lieutenant governor, Republican.
And a Fulton County judge, Robert McBurney, ruled, disqualified Fannie Willis' office in a case.
Why?
Because at the time that she was Targeting him and investigating him.
She, Fannie Willis, was hosting a party for his opponent, Charlie Burns.
The judge said, oh no, no, no.
That's clearly a violation.
Now, does she have a stake in this?
Well, if you are promoting Charlie Burns to run for office and you're in essence indicting his opponent, You might have a better time explaining that, yes, she has a stake in this.
Yes.
If you...
Let's assume she is running for re-election.
She's running for re-election and she indicts her opponent.
Do you think there's a problem there?
Oh, I do.
Oh, I do.
Absolutely.
Do you see this?
That would clearly be, clearly be a reason to disqualify her and her office.
But the problem we're having right now is to try to explain that even though this is tawdry, this may benefit her prosecution.
This may certainly benefit Joycelyn Wade, who is Nathan's Well, not even ex-wife, current wife.
This may help in any kind of perjury case against Nathan and perhaps Fannie.
But that has nothing to do with this issue.
I want you to be able to compartmentalize issues.
And all of a sudden there's this new story where CNN reports that lo and behold there was somebody from Either Napa Valley, who worked for a wine company, who said, you know, I remember, I remember Fannie Willis pulling out like 400 bucks in cash and paying for wine or wine tasting.
I remember that, and I thought, wow, that's a...
Normally people put it on their credit card, but...
Remember something.
I think you know this.
If you put it on your credit card...
You can clear that out, zero it out the next day by transferring funds into your credit card.
So it's not like you don't want to load up your card.
As long as you pay it off prior to the closing date of the billing cycle, you know how this is.
It's done all the time.
Haven't you done this?
I'll pay it off.
I don't want to have this.
I don't want to bring cash.
I want to have a record of it.
I want to do whatever.
I mean, whatever.
But what I'm trying to do is trying to explain that the real interest, the real thing, the real fascinating thing as an American citizen and as a lover of the Constitution, a lover of liberty, and a lover of the franchise, is that what we're doing here is we're doing everything in our power through lawfare and other mechanisms to destroy.
Not only President Trump, but people who dare to run against the system.
And what they do is they will get, if you think for a moment that, if you think that Fannie Willis on her own came up with this, you're out of your mind.
You're out of your mind.
If you think that Letitia James on her own knows this special law, no.
But she'll tell her people.
Anybody know this?
Of course they do.
They know in and out.
That's why people take the fifth when they're subpoenaed.
Because you don't know what you're going to say.
You don't know how they're going to spin something.
You don't know how this thing is going to.
And there are laws.
And I'm telling you, there are laws.
I mentioned this to you the other day.
There was a law that we used to have about cohabitation.
What does that mean?
According to the statute, And it may still be on the books.
I don't know.
Roommates!
You can't have a roommate.
What they meant to do is they didn't want unmarried people shacking up.
Boyfriend, girlfriend, or girlfriend, girl, whatever it was.
And by the way, a lesbian or gay couple could shack up because they can't get married.
It was the most archaic thing anybody's ever seen.
But it was a statue.
It was stupid.
We used to have a statue that said prohibited tattooing unless you're a physician.
This was years ago.
A physician or a dentist.
This was a state of Florida statue.
I'll never forget this.
I said, what does this have to do?
Obviously, there was some, I guess, maybe the dentist.
Who goes to a dentist for a tattoo?
I don't even understand.
Nobody ever...
I used to love just reading weird statues about defacing tombstones.
What does it even mean?
I mean, look, it's one of these.
Let me give you another example.
I told you this.
Years ago, there was a statue.
There was a problem where hookers, I'll never forget this, they were hanging out.
In front of this, it was like a checker, you know, when you drive into this.
And I remember I used to drive by all the way, all the time, and I would see them.
Because it was on the way downtown, and there they were.
They didn't have a sign that said Hooker.
They wore kind of Daisy Duke shorts, and they stood there, and they waved at people.
They waved at people.
So you've got a woman who looks like a tart, standing on a corner, waving at male drivers.
So they, Charge them with soliciting for loitering and prowling for the purposes of inducing fellatio-cundlingus, sodomy, intercourse, whatever it was.
And we read it, we said, what does this mean?
First of all, what is a loiter?
What is loitering?
Hey, you want to hang out?
Versus hang around.
Are you hanging around?
What is he doing?
He's been outside all day.
Is he hurting anybody?
No, but he's loitering.
He's loitering.
What does that mean?
I don't even know what that means.
What does that mean?
I still don't know what loiter means.
I still don't understand.
There's no law against hanging around.
Then prowling?
Forget it.
I don't even know what the hell that means.
I don't know what.
Prowl?
What is this?
Prowl?
You're at night, you have the mask.
Remember they were wearing the mask?
You have that kind of English driving cap.
These laws, they're still around.
We still use these terms.
Loitering, prowling, hanging around.
What does that mean?
Disturbing the peace.
In New York?
What's the peace?
What does that mean?
What are you doing over and above the piece?
Read statutes.
Sometimes you're very, very clear.
We have one that a lot of times people have a statute that says I'm driving under the influence.
Well, what does that mean?
Are you under the influence to the extent your normal faculties are impaired?
Well, how much?
Are you impaired a little bit?
A little bit?
If you have a sip of wine, are you a little bit impaired?
A little bit?
Do you have to notice it?
We have been slaves to this.
Some things are really great.
You can't drive over 55 miles per hour.
That is it.
I like that.
That's a good one.
Murder.
Well, it can be tough sometimes, whether you intend to do it, but he's dead.
Okay, that's a good one.
Robbery.
Pretty interesting.
That's larceny plus assault.
You stole something, but you threatened somebody.
You scared them.
Give it over.
That's robbery.
Can't rob a house.
You rob a person.
So these things, these kind of make sense.
But people, I always ask people, did you read the statue?
No.
You've got Google.
I'm charged with, what is this statue?
Did you look it up?
No.
Go online.
Read it.
Something happened where people don't read.
They don't understand.
They don't, I don't understand.
I don't get this.
I don't understand.
And we go back to the issue about Fannie Willis.
And I'm telling people, I'm arguing the law.
I don't care whether it benefits her or doesn't benefit her.
That's what we do on TV.
You go and you want to hear somebody screaming and yelling.
Well, like Judge Jeanine, she's going to bend the law to make it fit.
She'll never do devil's advocate because nobody wants that.
But what difference does it make?
Let's assume that during the course of this, Fannie Willis gets a DUI.
She's charged with drunk driving.
She's got to what?
Step down?
Why?
What does it have to do with it?
Why is there a conflict?
Well, so if she lied about when she had sex, and even if she committed perjury, even before this court, Jury's not going to know this.
What difference does it make?
How does it affect the conflict?
How do the people of Fulton County, why must they lose the ability through their elected official to prosecute somebody that they believe violated the law here?
That's the issue you have to do.
People think that prosecution is, you know, some, I don't know what it is.
It's the people versus him.
And you can think it's ridiculous.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Let me tell you something.
We have to understand something here.
My deal every single day is fighting ignorance.
I talked to a friend of mine who is a very smart guy and he sent me this thing on Navalny.
I said, do you know who he is?
He's a CIA MI6 asset sorta.
Not a nice guy.
Russian nationalist.
Homophobe.
Do you know anything about him?
No.
You don't know anything about him?
I said, what about Assange?
What about him?
Well, wait a minute.
Nothing about Assange?
Nothing?
We had a big rally yesterday in New York.
Assange is a journalist.
He's a journalist.
He is the New York Times or Washington Post compared to Ellsberg.
Do you understand how this thing works?
Sparky joins us.
Sparky says tattooing was one of the primary ways syphilis was spread because there weren't any disposable needles in the old days.
A tattoo artist didn't have the equipment to sterilize their tattoo needles.
It's very interesting about this.
You know, I never thought about this, Sparky, and thank you for this, but normally syphilis.
This is very interesting.
It's normally the symptoms are located around the genital area.
And...
Let me see...
Syphilis can be spread by sexual contact, blood contact, or vertical transmission.
Sexual partners may also need treatment.
Syphilis, an infection caused by a bacteria, most often it spreads through sexual contact.
Let me see.
Syphilis spread through needles.
By the way, you notice a lot of great AI stuff.
Syphilis can occasionally be spread by blood contamination via needle, stick, injury, or sharing injecting equipment.
The risk of getting syphilis through a blood transfusion is very low due to the screening of donors, it says here.
It's a different story.
Syphilis can be spread through needle stick injuries, blood contamination, or sharing injecting equipment.
However, the risk of getting syphilis is low now due to screening, but your point is not taken.
Syphilis is not spread through casual contacts, such as sharing drinks, coffee, sneezing.
The main ways to get syphilis barking is from having vaginal sex and anal sex.
Syphilis is also spread from person to person through direct contact with a syphilis sore or something chancroid in nature.
Now, you hear that?
See, that's a very interesting question.
I never would have thought about that.
And I would want to pursue this.
By the way, syphilis is still around.
People think, well, is it done?
No, we still have syphilis.
We still have pubic lice and crabs.
Does it seem compared to AIDS?
AIDS has not necessarily decreased, but its treatment is better.
You would know this, Sparky.
You would know this.
Do we have pubic lice?
Crabs?
Tinium?
No, what is it?
Let me see.
Crabs.
Pubic lice.
There's a better name for it then.
I like the actual pubic lice.
Can you imagine somebody tuning in just now?
The crab louse.
I love this.
The louse.
The crab louse.
Sucking louse.
Lice.
Cymex lectularius.
That's the bed bug.
I love any kind of parasite.
By the way, you know what's interesting as well?
And I think I had this.
Not classic, but there's parasitosis where you almost have like a psychotic belief that you've been contaminated with lice and lice.
Very, very, very interesting.
Very interesting.
See this?
Now, going back to what's next.
In addition to the arguments being...
Let's go back.
Fannie Willis is wonderful because she is so vile.
She is contemptible.
She is consumacious.
She's over her head.
She's absolutely arrogant, entitled.
She is just a complete and total nasty, nasty bad joke with that idiot, idiot, that fool, that fool.
This lunatic, Mr. Wade, who, by the way, couldn't even answer questions about building.
I mean, nothing.
He is without any ability, and he got involved in this unwittingly.
Stand by for one second.
My friends, there is a discussion, as you know, of truckers threatening New York, either New York State, Or New York City.
And as far as New York City goes, the majority of our trucking is dual-axle, not 18-wheelers.
We don't really see them, but it's a wonderful gesture to show some type of contempt deserved against the states for doing what they're doing to President Trump.
But there's this idea that In the event that something interrupts the flow of food, the flow, or if there's unrest, or if there's any kind of inclement weather, or if there's another supply chain.
Remember that time a while back we had problems at gasoline stations because of either ransomware or something?
Anything can go wrong.
Remember the supply chains that were out in L.A. and others?
We just never heard about this.
Remember the yellow vests in France?
You hear about them and they just go away.
Remember the trucker strikes here?
Just went away.
We never heard about them anymore.
Well, that can happen again.
Especially right around the time of elections and the like.
So it's very, very important, very, very critical for you to realize that you can never be caught off guard.
And right now...
My Patriot Supply, preparewithlionel.com, has the best deal for a starter kit, if you will.
Listen carefully.
Let's talk about a very serious subject, emergency food.
That's right, emergency food.
I know, I know.
At first blush, it's difficult for most people to think about something that they just take for granted, ever-reaching emergency status.
We're used to stores always being open, deliveries always made, no supply chain disasters, no ransomware catastrophes, none of that stuff.
Nothing shutting down our gas stations, right?
No trucking strikes, no war, no protests from farmers.
Nothing catastrophic in terms of weather.
Nope, that can't happen to us.
Uh-uh.
And I understand it's a defense mechanism that we have because the idea of ever not being able to eat or locate food is seemingly incomprehensible.
Well, it's not.
That's why it's time for you to go to my site, preparewithlionel.com.
Preparewithlionel.com has the deal of deals for you.
Take it as a starter set.
You've been putting off emergency food for too long.
Some people still have a thing about prepping as though preparing for emergency is foolish.
Right now, you can save $60 on a four-week emergency supply kit.
This is unbelievable.
16 varieties with a 25-year shelf life, 2,000 calories a day in two beautifully modular buckets that weigh 38 pounds total.
These are waterproof and they're perfectly stackable.
Four weeks.
A month.
Now, be honest.
Could you go a week without any trips to any store?
I'm not talking about having stuff in your cabinet.
I'm not talking about banana chips and jerky.
I mean food.
Real food.
So go right now to preparewithlionel.com.
Right now.
Right this moment.
Preparewithlionel.com.
Preparewithlionel.com.
You'll thank me.
Trust me.
Indeed, my friend, sparky ways in.
Most people in Russia never heard of Navalny.
He was no threat to Putin.
He was always sickly, but may have been knocked off by the West to offset goodwill from Tucker interview.
Could?
Could?
I don't think that the Tucker interview was as critical.
I mean, put it this way.
It was big.
I don't think it was as big as people say it was.
I don't think it was that important, but remember this, and I want you to go and read about this, speaking about him.
You must recognize this story.
This is, let me see, this is, oh, here we go.
He is believed to be a CIA and MI6 asset.
He was also a criminal that scanned people out of millions for his bogus anti-corruption group.
People suggest he was a terrible racist, xenophobe, homophobe, who called Muslims insects and worse.
Not a nice guy.
He went to the CIA boot camp, the Greenberg program at Yale, where they teach about color revolutions.
Now, to most people who know a little bit about this, it was obvious who he was.
And understand something.
In the United States, Barkey, as you know, anybody that we suspect is in any way even remotely involved, even remotely involved in insurrections and the like, we know and we believe are absolutely crushed, crushed by long prison terms and the like.
We even had a citizen shot, Ashley Babbitt, killed.
There's never been any discussion of that.
Never been any lawsuits, anything you heard, prosecutions, that sort of thing.
So we're very selective in this.
If Navalny was our, somebody on, put it this way, if there was a Navalny here, He would be considered an insurrectionist.
There's a case I want to talk about with Julian Assange.
This is the most important thing.
Julian Assange.
In 2001, there was a case called Bartnicki against Vopper.
V-O-P-P-E-R.
I want you to know this.
There was a case where an unidentified person They intercepted and recorded a cell phone conversation between a chief union negotiator and the union president.
This was about labor goings on, teacher strikes and the like.
And the tape was later played for some members of the school board and delivered to Vopper.
And what happened was they...
Played it.
They had this.
And it was a media defendant who broadcast a taped conversation between...
Okay.
In a 6-3 decision under Judge Stevens, John Paul Stevens, the court held that the First Amendment protects the disclosure of illegally grabbed, intercepted, garnered, collected communications by parties.
Who did not participate in the illegal interception.
So again, the First Amendment protects the disclosure of illegally intercepted communications by parties who did not participate.
And specifically, this is 2001, specifically when it involves, as you know, journalism and the like.
This is what the New York Times was responsible for Ellsberg.
See, they liked Ellsberg.
By the way, Ellsberg was a limited hangout.
There are people who are saying that everything that Ellsberg ever said was leaked or said before, but nobody knew about it, but it seemed like it was tumultuous.
I'm not going to read it.
When it comes to America, we know nothing about the Constitution.
We get into personalities.
Sparky says, Navalny was about to be swapped for a Russian held by the West, but apparently was more valuable as a fake martyr as he's outlived his usefulness.
As a CIA puppet.
Could be.
Now, Sparky, that, if I were to provide that if somebody, let's assume that were proved or whatever, that would be an absolutely valid motivation.
Absolutely.
But you do know, and I'm not saying this for any particular reason, we can't prove that.
But it sounds good.
It sounds good.
And the idea that he is the opposition, the opposition to Putin?
Opposition, do you know how many people at any given time or date are antagonistic to Putin?
He has what, an election, what is it, in March?
Let me see, when?
Yeah.
Let me ask you, Sparky.
Yep.
March 15th through the 17th.
Friday through a Sunday.
I like that.
Let me see.
Elections.
Candidates.
The candidates are...
Who is running for president of Russia?
It is...
You have...
Well, look at these people.
You have...
Vladimir Putin?
You have Leonid Slutsky?
You have...
Let me see...
By the way, do you know that in order to be considered, you have to be at least 35 to be president of Russia, be resident in Russia for at least 25 years, previously 10 years?
And not have foreign citizenship or residence permit in a foreign country.
So you've got, let me see, the candidates, you've got Davinkov, he's 39, he's with the new people.
You've got Putin, he's an independent.
You've got Slutsky, he's a liberal democratic party.
You've got Nikolai Keretanov, a communist.
Okay, communist party.
Let me ask you the question.
Very, very simple.
Those are oppositions.
Do you mean to tell me that Navalny poses a threat?
And Putin, right before, let me explain this, right before an election that he is going to absolutely win, as everybody knows, for a variety of reasons other than the fact that they like him.
That's number one.
Number two, after the Tucker interview, there you go with that, And the next thing to understand is, before the world is dealing with other issues that he's involved with, with the cessation, especially during Ukraine, because remember, even Ainsley Earhart made the suggestion that money should go to Russia.
No, money should go to Ukraine because they killed Navalny.
Now, if that makes any sense to you, you let me know.
John McGuire couldn't get hired.
He says, I think Lyndon LaRouche is running as well.
Very good.
By the way, Lyndon LaRouche has said, and especially when he used to work with Webster Tarpley, some of the most incredibly brilliant presentations on oligarchy and the British perfidy, if you will.
So, going back to what Sparky said, if you advise Putin, you say, Now you want to kill him?
This opposition person?
Fine.
Arrest him.
Do whatever you want.
We have people that we have, and they might still be, we don't even know, under the jails in Washington, some kind of a gulag.
I have no idea.
How dare we suggest that there are people who, by virtue of this, that other people can't put people there.
Look, I don't know anything about this.
I don't know anything about regarding the criminal activities.
We just assume that everybody that Putin puts into prison or jail is unfairly.
I don't know.
We never talk about ours.
I still don't understand how we ever put those many people in prison.
So let's leave it at that, my friends.
So I hope you have a better understanding of what's happening.
I hope you understand.
I hope you grasp the notion.
Aside from the Fannie Willis case being what it is, the characters themselves are so fascinating.
No other case.
Letitia James doesn't have this.
None of this.
You don't see Ricky Lake meets Jerry Springer meets whatever.
It is incredible.
Now, my friends, let me ask you, oh, Sparky says Putin is so popular in Russia that he would need to have Nixon-level paranoia to kill his rivals, real or fake.
One would certainly think.
One, indeed, would certainly think.
So, my dear friends, I say to you, and I thank you for this.
Thank you for being a part of this.
Please follow Mrs. L. Go to her incredible YouTube channel at Lin's Warriors.
Great, great, great stuff.
Read about this fentanyl, not fentanyl.
Fentanyl documentary by a young man, a new filmmaker, and others as well, regarding female, excuse me, child predation and the like, and human trafficking that nobody is really addressing.
All right, dear friends, have a great and a glorious day.
We will see you this eve at 7 p.m.
Don't ever change and mean that sincerely.
Thank you so much for your kindness.
Sparky, thank you for your genius and your brilliance.
Edie Crowley, thank you as well.
And John McGuire, couldn't get higher.
Thank you.
And thank you for listening.
Thank you for being focused.
Thank you for making this worthwhile.
Remember what I told you today.
If it's about a law, read the law.
Before you react, before you say whatever it is, read the law.
That's all.
That's all.
Because remember, from an ontological point of view, how do you know What you think you know.
All right, your friend.
See you tonight at 7. And don't forget, the monkey's dead.
The show's over.
Sue you.
▲
Export Selection