All Episodes
Previous Next
May 3, 2022 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
57:13
Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes urges Americans to prepare for TOTAL WAR
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
- All right, welcome to Brighton Conversations.
Mike Adams here, the founder of brighteon.com, the free speech alternative to YouTube, which is now censoring even more than ever.
You can't even post election fraud evidence on YouTube anymore without getting censored.
But they're also censoring patriots for just saying patriotic things.
And today we're joined by a great patriot, Stuart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers.
That's at OathKeepers.org.
And if you'd like to support that organization for all their great work in defending our Constitution, they have a nonprofit there.
Just go to OathKeepers.org and make a tax-deductible contribution.
Stuart Rhodes joins me to talk about what's happening with the Supreme Court.
The post-election chaos that may be coming, the military option that also may be coming, insurrection and so on.
We're going to explore all these scenarios with Stuart Rhodes.
Stuart, thank you for joining me today.
It's always an honor to have another fellow patriot on here on Brighteon.com.
Thanks for joining me.
Hey, Bench.
Thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
Yeah, it's great to have you on.
Let's start with kind of...
Can you give us an overview of where you think we stand right now in terms of the stance of patriots?
I think patriots have been very polite.
They've held their fire against all these insane attacks by leftists.
But where are the militias right now?
Are they just kind of watching and seeing what happens at the moment?
Well, all of us are.
I mean, we're looking...
We have a narrowing window.
President Trump has a very rapidly closing window to fix this through the system, or at least through a quasi-system fix, semi-peacefully.
And we're certainly fighting the court battle.
It's worth fighting.
We now have the states finally stepping up.
The attorney generals are finally doing their duty, at least petitioning the Supreme Court, to hear the equal protection claim that they are being deprived.
Like Texas, for example.
The AG there was the first one.
You know, props to Texas.
The argument there is that they're being denied their franchise by having other states not run clean elections, and that fraud deprives the people in the clean states of their franchise as well.
That's certainly worth fighting for, but I still hold that President Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act.
I don't think they're mutually exclusive.
I think he needs to realize we're in the middle of a civil war.
We're actually in the middle of a counterinsurgency effort on our part against an insurgency.
And it's a communist Chinese run insurgency with domestic enemies, foreign and domestic, with domestic proxies who are nothing but the puppets of the communist Chinese are mortal enemies.
Well, it seems to me that Trump is going to have to invoke the Insurrection Act, even if SCOTUS finds in favor of Texas and rules those swing states to be probably null and void in some way.
I mean, at that point, the left erupts into mass violence almost immediately anyway, and he's going to have to invoke the Insurrection Act.
Well, it's not just about that.
It's also about fighting the domestic enemies.
I mean, the Insurrection Act itself talks about whenever a state either fails to protect your civil rights or intentionally does not protect your civil rights, including your right to vote, that the President of the United States has full authority to To declare an insurrection to be in existence and to suppress it.
And using the militia, that's all of us in the National Guard, or the U.S. military, or any other means, it says.
So it gives him pretty wide carte blanche, because when you're facing an insurrection like that, you don't know what you're going to need to do.
So what he should do is, A, fire bar, and not just say he'll be gone at the end of the month, but kick him out now.
Put somebody in there who's going to be a firebrand attorney general, and We need to assign a special prosecutor to go after the deep staters.
At the same time, we need to invoke the Insurrection Act.
We need to send SOCOM out to go seize all the data and all the databases that are held by the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc.
And start having that special prosecutor go through all the evidence and identifying the traitors, those who've been in bed with Chinese spies, like Swalwell now is being disclosed.
It's obvious the Chinese do this across the country and across the world.
They put men, they entrap them, they put them in bed with women, they film them, they snare them, then they control them after that.
That's what they've been doing for decades now.
So yeah, I mean, communist China has infiltrated every level of our society, our institutions, schools, media, big tech, government, elections, all of that.
And I agree with you, Trump at some point is going to need to root all that out, and you can't do it through the civilian court system.
It's impossible because the court system's compromised.
You've got to invoke the military.
Exactly.
That's the problem is that they have infiltrated, and not only did the domestic communists do the long march through the institutions, but so did the communist Chinese.
And they're two peas in the same pod.
And so because of compromised judges at the state level and federal level, he absolutely has to go through and root them all out.
So he should be doing this all at the same time.
It's worth doing the fights in the state legislatures.
It is their absolute duty in the state legislatures to stand up and do the right thing, but a lot of them are compromised.
It's also the absolute duty of all the judges to stand up and do the right thing, but a lot of them are compromised.
And so he needs to do it all at the same time.
Put pressure on the state legislatures to do their job.
put pressures on the judges as well to do their job, but at the same time go and root them out by invoking the insurrection act, seizing the data, declassifying it, dumping it out for the American people to see, so they see who the crooks are, but then also going after them with a real DOJ.
And that's what blows my mind is you still get Q fanatics, for example, out there who are swearing that Barr is still somehow a good guy, a boy to get the bad guys to be in a false sense of security, and in the end they'll be all, you know, gotcha with some kind of surprise indictments that you know, gotcha with some kind of surprise indictments that are coming down.
There are indictments, there are sealed indictments that do exist, but Barr is sitting on them, and he's going to run the clock out.
That's the whole point of Barr being there.
It was his whole point from the very beginning.
As I said, when he was being sworn in, or even before then, during his confirmation hearings, I called him out as a deep state shill.
That's what he is.
Well, it turns out you were exactly right about that.
I was willing to give Barr a chance, but that ran out months ago, and it was clear he was playing a delay game.
But, you know, the other thing that you bring to the table in this discussion is that you are a constitutional legal scholar.
I mean, that's the area that you studied, and so...
I think you have a better understanding of how the 12th Amendment applies or even the 14th Amendment, for example, or maybe how SCOTUS might decide to rule on this multi-state action.
Now, can you give us any sense of the arguments or even the remedies that SCOTUS might turn to if they decide in favor of Texas?
From your point of view, please.
Well, I would go right back to Article 4, Section 4, where it says the United States includes all the branches of the federal government shall guarantee to each state a Republican form of government.
Intrinsic in a Republican form of government is electing your representatives.
We're in a representative republic.
So if you don't have the ability to actually vote for and elect someone that you want and it's stolen from you because you're being disenfranchised through fraud, you no longer have a Republican form of government.
So you don't even need the 14th Amendment and due process and equal protection to come in.
You can just look right there at Article 4, Section 4.
But so the court, but certainly there's an equal protection argument, and that's right there in the Insurrection Act, where it talks about equal protection of law, where if equal protection of law is being violated, that's one of the reasons why the president can step in.
So it's all lined up right there.
I encourage everyone to go read the Insurrection Act.
It's got multiple provisions.
They just got done suppressing an insurrection, right?
That was the argument that the South was an insurrection against the Constitution.
There are arguments on both sides of that, obviously.
But the point is, is this Insurrection Act was put in place just for this purpose.
So you do have states, you have entire states who've been thumbing their nose at federal law for years, and then now obviously engaged in open election fraud and a coup.
And so they fit this Insurrection Act to a T. So what the court can do right now in the short term, though, aside from the Insurrection Act, is they can say, as was asked by the states that are in the claims to the Supreme Court currently, Is to tell the state legislature that this election is so corrupted that you cannot just go with the supposed results of a fraudulent election.
It falls on you because those election procedures did not follow state law, did not follow clear state election law.
They stepped outside of that, with COVID being the big excuse.
That's what COVID's for, was to give them the rationality to step outside the law.
Because they did that, though, Now it's incumbent upon the legislature of each state to select the electors.
They must sit down and they must decide who they want to have as president of the United States.
And what I would say further to the court is that in light of the theft, which was done on behalf of one particular candidate, Then what the court should do is tell the – they can't order the states to do this, but they can certainly say that in the situation you're in, if you want to restore any kind of confidence to the electoral system, you should go with the results prior to the massive shutdowns and last-minute, you know, finding of extra ballots across the country, and they should give it to Trump.
And that's the argument we have to put on the representatives of the new state legislature.
So one of my concerns is even right now in Georgia, there are, I think, John Fredericks on his show, he was talking to one of the state lawmakers there who said they're terrified to call a special session because they're afraid that Antifa and Black Lives Matter will dox all of their state legislators and they will terrorize them and attack their homes and bomb their homes and so on.
So that's terrorism suppressing our Well, wouldn't the same thing happen in that scenario that you just outlined if the Supreme Court says, okay, we're kicking it back to all these swing states?
And then the state legislators have to decide, well, immediately, doesn't Antifa just erupt and begin attacking the GOP members in those states and trying to threaten them?
And aren't we in, essentially, an insurrection just almost immediately at that point?
Even right now, you just said they're already doing it.
They are, yeah.
They're already pressuring these same state legislators to, if they do have a special session, let's say the court orders them to go in and do this, then the left will try to pressure through terrorism that you must rubber stamp the fraudulent election that we held, that we already stole.
You must rubber stamp that, or we're going to burn the city to the ground.
So my answer to that is do not negotiate with terrorists.
Yes.
And, hey, we already have a standing offer out there that will protect any whistleblower.
We already are doing that.
Any legislator that stands up, anyone that does their duty and stands up to the terrorists, we will protect them.
And what President Trump should do, though, is he should deploy the National Guard, common to federal service, and deployment on the streets of Atlanta to make sure that everyone's protected and safe.
Well, that's a very important point, but what you were saying is then the state legislators in a place like Michigan or Pennsylvania could call upon the militia to say we need armed guards to guard the private home of every lawmaker until this vote is taken, correct?
Absolutely, and we've done it before, but we're doing it right now.
We're protecting some whistleblowers, and there are other groups out there, I'm not sure they want to mention, but they are also protecting whistleblowers across the country.
That's what's so frustrating, is we're already in the middle of an insurrection.
Right.
Three years ago, we protected the Multnomah County GOP chair because he wanted to go speak at a Patriot Prayer rally, and he was afraid to go without protection.
I put retired police officers on him.
To escort him into a downtown Portland event so he could speak and escort him back out.
That was three years ago.
We've been in this environment for a long time.
That's why I've been beating the drum that President Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act over the summer.
He's long overdue to do this.
It's like it's in front of your face right there.
You're dealing with an insurrection.
I wouldn't even call it a civil war, although it has characteristics of a civil war because you have elected representatives helping.
But I think insurrection is a better term for it.
It's a communist insurrection.
Yes, I think you're right about that.
And we even saw a Michigan state lawmaker now apparently threatening Trump supporters, putting out that thinly veiled threat to say, oh, soldiers should, you know, essentially hunt them down and shoot them.
I mean, she didn't use those exact words, but that's apparently what she meant.
This brings up the question of how does the militia plan to coexist with military troops on the streets if Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, or even with National Guard troops?
How does your group work with those groups and maintain order and peace at the same time?
Well, the same way we've done in the past.
We've worked right alongside the National Guard.
In fact, in Texas, when the Louisiana National Guard was brought into Texas for Hurricane Harvey, they were not allowed to carry guns.
Well, Oath Keepers wound up guarding the National Guard while they slept.
Is that right?
We were unarmed.
So we've worked with National Guard in the past all across the country during disaster relief, for example, and during rioting and along with police.
And we were in Louisville, for example, there were National Guardsmen on the street.
We had no problem with them whatsoever.
We were guarding, you know, three different businesses, a gas station and two pawn shops.
They knew we were there.
We knew they were there.
There was no conflict whatsoever.
So it's not a it's not a problem at all.
Now, the other thing to remember, though, is that the National Guard is part of the militia, but so are the rest of us.
The body of the people trained to arms, that is the militia.
And all of us who are prior service military, the President could call us up until age 65 because of our prior training.
He could just call us up and federalize us, call us in the national service as well, and assign us into units.
We can be merged right into the National Guard.
There shouldn't be any separation between the people as the militia and the National Guard.
What about the fact that many of these swing states have Democrat governors, and the governor may assert control over the National Guard in their state?
Can't do it.
If the president calls a National Guard into federal service, that trumps the otherwise, the baseline of the guard being under the command of the governor.
So when they're called into federal service, they're now under his direct command.
They go into federal service and they're longer in state command.
That's how it's set up.
Now, a lot of my sources are telling me, and I've reported on this publicly, that there appears to be a lot of movement of equipment, staging of military assets, and even setting up forward operations bases with medical facilities and local military intelligence units and so on across the country.
Is this something that you're hearing that's happening as well through some of your contacts?
Could you talk about that?
Yeah, I think it's safe to say this.
I think the Insurrection Act is on the table.
I mean, I can't tell you directly that that's the case, but I think that the indicators are.
And I think him putting a Special Forces veteran, Miller, As the Secretary of Defense, definitely was a good sign as well.
I think that of all the military units and structures he has right now, SOCOM is his most trusted, I think for a very good reason.
I think that's what he used in Germany to try to seize the databases there.
It was SOCOM. These are indicators of what's already happening.
There's a civil war inside the U.S. government for sure, but it's part of, like I said, I would characterize it as insurrection against the Constitution.
But I think you should trust SOCOM the most.
Of course, the other elite units, whether it's U.S. Army Special Forces, whether it's Rangers, whether it's Navy SEALs, which are all part of SOCOM, and going down the line from there to your line infantry units, they're mostly made up of traditional Americans.
Now, the higher up you get in the ranks, the brass, the less trustworthy they are.
You wind up with Petraeus or McChrystal, things like that.
But I would say for the most part, your infantry units, your combat units, the more hardcore, the more elite they are, the more loyal they are to the Constitution.
So I think if Trump presents the case to them that, hey, here's why we're in an insurrection, that's why I think it's great to see what's going on with Swalwell starting to come out, that's the tip of the iceberg.
So I think the military is paying attention to this.
So I think that the pieces are falling into place so that Trump has this option, and I think he's becoming more aware of it and more...
Predisposed, not to say predisposed, but more open to possibly using it.
And I think he has to.
I think it's too late to do anything else.
Well, along those lines, what, in your view, is the significance of these things?
The pardoning of General Flynn, and then also, you mentioned Chris Miller in place as Secretary of Defense.
Trump has also changed a lot of the people in the DOD, in the Defense Intelligence Agency, as well as the civilian I forgot what it's called, a civilian board that provides analysis to the DOD. He fired Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright and then put people like Corey Lewandowski on that board.
So there's a lot of personnel changes there.
It seems to me that there's no reason to do that unless he planned to maybe need to use the DOD, right?
Yeah, I think you're right.
I think that he's at least doing that correctly.
I wish we'd do the exact same thing in the DOJ and the FBI. It's amazing that Ray is still there.
It's amazing that Barr is still there.
But yes, I think he's at least lining pieces up properly in the Department of Defense.
But I want to make one thing very clear.
I know there was a Tea Party group put a big...
You know, full-page ad in one of the Washington, D.C. papers saying that President Trump should invoke some kind of limited martial law or a temporary suspension of the Constitution.
And I think that's incredibly dangerous and also erroneous.
There is no such thing as martial law in the Constitution.
He has no authority to set aside the Constitution, even to save it.
He has no authority to impose martial law.
He doesn't need to.
Everything he needs is in the Insurrection Act and in Article 1, Section 8, where it gives the authority to call forth a militia for three purposes, to suppress insurrections, execute the laws of the Union, and to repel foreign invasions.
And Congress fleshed all that out and delegated all that authority to the President in the Insurrection Act.
It's all he needs.
And then Article 4, Section 4, the duty to provide and to secure to each state a Republican form of government.
That's all he needs.
So it's really...
It's unfortunate for maybe like people with goodwill who are patriots to go around and throw out the terms martial law or talking about setting aside the Constitution to save it.
That does not help us.
That only helps our enemies because they can point to that and say, see, they're doing something outside the Constitution.
What we're going to do is absolutely inside the Constitution.
It's within our duty.
Yeah, I'm really glad you brought that up.
I actually refer to that point quite a bit in my own podcast when I mention the term martial law.
There's a general usage of that term that is not very technical.
In other words, people equate that term to just troops on the streets.
But that's not martial law, as you have explained to me and our viewers before.
Can you give us a more strict definition?
What does actual martial law look like?
Well, martial law means the will of the commander on the battlefield.
So, for example, what Eisenhower used over occupied Japan, I mean, occupied Germany, or what McCarthy used over occupied Japan.
That's martial law.
Now, the Supreme Court has carved out this exception to the Constitution where it says when the courts are not open, Not available that the military can rule a jurisdiction.
That's nowhere in the Constitution.
I disagree with that entirely.
But that's what the courts have laid out.
We can show that the courts have been closed by combat, then you can detain somebody and put them under military jurisdiction.
I think that's wrong, but that's what the court has carved out.
So even under the current system of screwed up court precedents, Any talk of invoking martial law while the courts are still open would be wrong, okay?
And would be struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States.
That's why it's a red herring, and it's a mistake to even talk about that kind of stuff.
Just focus on the Insurrection Act.
And in the States, you've got a situation where you can argue that the courts, possibly also in the federal courts, are not closed, but they are actually enemies.
They are participating in the Insurrection Act.
Right.
That was my next question.
Yeah, it made very clear.
That if the state, any level of the state, any branch of the state is either failing to or refusing to protect your rights, the president can step in under the Insurrection Act.
So the courts can be wide open, which they are, but refusing to protect your rights or actively participating in the coup, and he can still use the Insurrection Act.
Well, and that's, I mean, it seems obvious to us that the courts are totally corrupt, completely infiltrated, refusing to follow the Constitution, and so on.
And I guess we're going to find out whether the Supreme Court is in that category or not.
But the state courts, even the state Supreme Courts in Pennsylvania and so on, are utterly corrupt, run by criminals, I would argue.
Yeah.
And then rubber stamping what is an obvious fraud.
And, of course, the entire time it's massive gaslighting.
Oh, this is not happening.
What's going on right in front of your eyes is not really there.
It's all a smokescreen.
It's all bull.
Even though you have irrefutable proof, you've got eyewitnesses, you've got smoking gun video of fraud happening, and yet they still deny it even exists.
Okay.
Let me ask you then about military commissions, military tribunals, because there's a lot of talk about military tribunals.
And there's also talk that, you know, of course, the NDAA allows the...
I see you, but the NDAA argues that the president can declare American civilians to be enemy combatants and so on.
Now, we were not happy when Obama signed that into law.
It was unconstitutional when he signed it, but it is on the books right now.
What are your thoughts on all that?
It's still unconstitutional.
You can't use something that has no validity from the very beginning.
So Article 3, Section 3, the Treason Clause, makes it very clear that if you accuse an American of making war against its own country, they have a right to trial for treason.
So that's what you should do with them.
You put them on trial for treason.
That's why you need a special prosecutor.
That's why you need a real attorney general.
And put them on trial for treason.
You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
You don't violate the Constitution in order to supposedly save it.
So I think it'd be a tragic mistake for patriots.
It's already a tragic mistake for patriots to run around and saying that, you know, we oppose the NDA of 2012 because it was an obvious violation of the Constitution, but now we want to use it.
So we want to go ahead and start, you know, using military tribunals.
That's one of the reasons why I know Q In large part is a psyop.
They're trying to get patriots to sit on their butts, which they did for four years, and wait for this magical happening.
But they're also advocating something grossly unconstitutional.
So now you've got a bunch of polluted minds that think it's okay to hold military tribunals for American citizens.
It's not.
I don't care who it is.
They didn't serve a trial.
Put Hillary Clinton on trial, and then execute her when she's finally convicted.
But she gets her trial for treason in front of a jury of her peers.
Well, I mean, look, I might even debate with you on this particular point, because when the DOJ is completely corrupt and they refuse to bring charges against the obvious criminals, such as...
What's wrong with that?
Clinton Trump hasn't fired Barr and put in a real attorney general.
Well, I suppose part of the answer is, look at the pool of people that he could pull from.
Aren't they 99% compromised deep-staters?
Didn't he put Giuliani in there as attorney general?
Yeah.
I think he should put Sidney Powell in there as Attorney General personally, but she's kind of tied up at the moment.
Here's the thing.
I've sworn out to support and defend the Constitution, and I will not advocate for its violation no matter what scenario you lay in front of me.
I just can't do it.
So everything I'm talking about is constitutional.
The things that I'm saying are unconstitutional, you can't put on the table.
He has zero authority to sit outside the Constitution, and same with us.
We have no authority to do that.
So, okay.
Well, I certainly respect your integrity on that greatly, and I respect your knowledge of the Constitution.
But what about Abraham Lincoln, then, in the Civil War, when he essentially invented his own war powers?
That was really unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the Ex Parte Milligan case.
But then, didn't Congress then retroactively try to excuse those actions by Lincoln?
No.
No, that came actually in the NDA of 2012.
That's when Congress finally ratified this notion that the President of the United States, any president, can declare any American citizen an enemy combatant.
And it's not just a power to hold you in military detention or try you by military tribunal.
If you're declared an enemy combatant, they can just kill you with a drone strike.
You have zero rights.
This is why I'm so dead set against that.
When you open that door, you just open the door to perpetual military dictatorship.
And don't be surprised if the powers that be, the globalist powers that be, would love for you to make that false choice and leap into the arms of a military dictatorship to stop the communists.
Then they win either way.
Well, yeah, you make a good point.
If the precedent is set, then we don't always know who's going to be in power, obviously.
Trump's not going to live forever, no matter what.
So, yeah, that precedent can be dangerous.
Now, he fought against the NDAA. He said he was going to refuse to sign it, try to get Congress to strip Section 230 protections from big tech.
And that got me looking at the NDAA, and I gotta say, Stuart, that the NDAA is more about, looks like it's a bunch of multi-billion dollar handouts to, you know, swamp creatures, you know what I mean?
I mean, it's just a bunch of money.
That's what it is.
It's the National Defense Appropriations Act that they do every two years.
That's exactly why the detention provisions were put in there.
McCain tried to get those same detention provisions put in as a standalone bill, and they failed.
NDAA every two years because they know that no one wants to vote against appropriations for the military.
You put it in.
So that's what McCain did.
So when we talk about the NDAA of 2012, for example, that's a big one everyone talks about.
It's only because that's where they stuck these detention provisions.
Don't get sidetracked.
It's all about hiding the horrible stuff in something that patriotic Americans will be mad at you if you vote against appropriations for the military.
Yeah, I've seen some of that I was reading the Federal News Network even recently, and they were saying, oh, watch out.
If Trump vetoes this, then troops aren't going to get their holiday pay bonuses.
You know, it was that kind of argument.
Like, really?
That sounds like a distraction.
Oh, it's an absolute distraction.
This is why two worst things you can ever hear coming out of any congressman's mouth is, one, bipartisan.
It's, you know, you're getting screwed big time.
Or, two, it's for the troops.
You know, that's what they get you.
Either way, you're in trouble.
We have got to toe the line and say we will not violate the Constitution.
We have the Constitution remedies.
The founders were not stupid.
They put in there, in Article 2, the powers of the commander-in-chief, his duty responsibilities to defend the Constitution and see the laws are faithfully executed.
That's all he's got to do.
Okay.
All right.
Fair enough.
Now, if we fail at this, And if Biden gets sworn in, it's clear that, of course, the Democrats will violate the Constitution.
They do routinely.
They will shred the Constitution.
They'll turn us into an authoritarian communist regime down the path of Venezuela.
So if that happens, what is legit to deploy in order to prevent that from happening?
Well, that's why Trump needs to use the powers he has in his hands as commander in chief now to stop them.
His absolute power to declassify, for example.
Uncheckable.
Unstoppable.
No one can do anything to him for doing that.
That's why he can't wait.
This is what's so frustrating, is any notion of him waiting and then running again in 2024 is ridiculous.
Yeah, that's nonsense.
Yeah.
We won't have America in 2024.
No, you won't.
So what we will do, what's going to happen, is if he fails in his duty, and if he does that, It will be an absolute failure in his duty.
And I don't want to hear any excuses about why he did it.
I don't care what it would be.
This is the problem of Trump supporters, is they are so loyal to him that they'll turn a blind eye to his failure to do his duty.
If he does not do it now, then he will replace us in a situation.
We'll have to fight a bloody, horrible civil war, and most of us will be dead.
I don't expect to survive that, and neither do most of the guys in Earth Keepers, because we know we'll be at the front.
So he has to do it now.
He must.
Because otherwise, what's going to have to happen is much like in the past, much like the founders went through, where everything was stacked against them, all you can do is nullify, all you can do is smuggle and go around the edicts, whether it's COVID-19 or gun laws or whatever.
We'll all be criminals, we'll all be supposed felons, and we'll just start resisting en masse.
And then it's going to come into a fight.
That's what's going to happen.
So, okay, you bring up a number of points there.
Number one, when Trump orders a declassification of documents, he still has to rely on personnel beneath him to do...
I mean, it's not Trump himself going into that room and getting the documents.
That's why he can't...
It's like when you're going to arrest a pedophile.
You don't go to the pedophile and go, Mr.
pedophile we'd like to get your your your computer information please you know please turn over all your all your social media accounts please turn over your hard drives you just go to use the data right before you arrest the pedophile same thing here if the FBI is doing which they are CIA etc you don't trust them to declassify their stuff that's why you Okay.
You go do this.
What he should do is, in a perfect world, this is what happened.
He'd jump up on television to do a press briefing or announcement.
He would say, at this moment, Special Operations Forces across the country and across the world are seizing the data The evidence of the corrupt insurrection against our Constitution.
I'm invoking the Insurrection Act.
I'm declaring this to be an insurrection.
Here's my proclamation declaring the insurrection.
Here's what we're doing right now.
I've assigned my new Attorney General.
There's this person here.
Whoever that is going to be a hardcore...
And here's the friggin' hardcore...
You know, a special prosecutor is going to go and prosecute this.
And I know one here in Texas, Kelly Sorrell, the whistleblower lawyer from Texas.
She's all about that.
She used to be a prosecutor down on the border.
I'd make her a special prosecutor.
But assemble a team, and they're going to go through all the documents, all the data seized by SOCOM. They're going to go through it all.
We're going to declassify all of it.
Anything that will not put a current military operative in danger around the world Anything that's not like that will be disclosed to the American people, and at the same time, we're going to begin prosecutions.
But I would throw it off during the court of public opinion, because at that point, you'll know who the dirty judges are.
Some dirty judge tries to issue a...
An injunction against the president doing whatever he's doing, they can say, well, he's one of the dirty judges, and they just go pull him out of office and arrest him.
So that's what they have to do.
Now, in that, when you're suppressing an insurrection, you certainly can detain people.
The military is going to go use force, and they could detain someone for short term.
And bring them in and put them, you know, under custody.
But you can't try them by military tribunal.
You can't hold them indefinitely.
That's the gray area that's kind of sticky because Congress is not going to spin abis corpus.
This is where, this is what Lincoln did that I can kind of see a little bit of sympathy for, is that he did not know if he could rely on Congress.
He actually had to go arrest some congressmen.
So he just said, hey, I'm spending habeas corpus on my own.
And he went in and just did that.
So there is that gray area in there.
What do you do if you're trying to remove from power, corrupt judges and corrupt congressmen?
That's where I would have a little bit more sympathy that, hey, under these circumstances, I have no choice because Congress is implicit.
So that's a sticky area.
I'll admit that.
But the saving grace for that is you can go look at the U.S. Constitution and it doesn't give it clearly in the hands of Congress.
That seems to be where it lays, but it doesn't give it clearly only to Congress to suspend the habeas corpus.
So that would be the only sticky point I'd be willing to concede.
Okay, alright.
I like the scenario that you've outlined here, and I think Special Operations Forces are certainly very capable of doing this quite easily.
So here's a question.
Roughly, and I've been trying to find the answer to this, how many...
Special operations guys are available domestically for these kinds of operations.
I mean, roughly.
Any idea what that number might be?
I know there are lots all overseas, of course, but how many are here?
I'm not sure, but hey, all the ones overseas are only a flight away.
And don't forget, there's a lot of military contractors out there that are prior special warfare.
They could be tapped into as well.
They work for triple canopy.
They work for whatever the latest iteration of Blackwater is.
Okay.
So some of our guys are right now on the list of some of these contractors.
But I can tell you, once again, if you were to call up the militia, if you were to say, SOCOM is now on the ground doing these things, I call on all prior service special warfare veterans to come forward.
Within about two hours, you'd have guys standing on tarmac all across the country.
Just go to your nearest Air Force base and report for duty.
They would show up.
I know they would.
Yeah.
Well, no, and what a lot of people don't realize is that there was already a firefight on U.S. soil at the consulate in Frankfurt, Germany.
That firefight, which it's been said that that was carried out by U.S. Army, I think, Delta units.
I'm not 100% certain that's who it was, but that firefight over the acquisition of those servers there from the CIA farm.
And technically, that's U.S. soil, you see, because it's a U.S. consulate there.
Imagine, then, special forces units from various branches of the military engaging, actually, with perhaps U.S. Marshals who are being told to guard the FBI building or something.
I mean, we could see a lot of domestic firefights taking place, right?
Well, these are all under command.
The president, as president, he is the top law enforcement officer.
So those same U.S. Marshals are under his command as well.
Right, right.
But they may not be loyal to him.
They may be loyal to their commander who's a deep stater.
Like the CIA guys were, right?
The CIA characters.
So, yeah.
I mean, that's what a Civil War looks like, right?
You get military forces splitting in half.
You get, you know, civilian law enforcement agencies splitting in half, of course.
But it's going to be worse, exponentially worse, if Biden slides his Chi-Com puppet rear end Well,
because it's clear that if Biden obtains that position, if he's sworn in, Pretty quickly, he would probably invoke the Insurrection Act, and then he would try to deploy the military against units like yours, for example, or other civilians who are...
I mean, then we don't want to fight the military, because most of the military guys are patriots.
Right.
Which goes back to Trump's duty.
It's not about him.
It's about the entire country.
And it's about saving lives.
If he does not do that, there'll be more loss of life.
That's just the bottom line.
Okay.
So we're going to have loss of life either way, but you're going to have exponentially worse loss of life and possibly the destruction of our country.
Because China and other foreign enemies are just waiting for us to rip each other apart and be so weak that they can just walk around and mop us up.
So what better way to do that than to have a horrific civil war in the United States?
Let us all kill each other first.
Do you think Trump has the courage to pull the trigger on this before January 20th?
You know, I don't know.
I really don't know.
But look at it like this.
I think he's got it in him, but I think that he needs to look at his place in history And stand up.
Yeah, I think he does.
I think he's got it.
If I didn't believe he had the potential, I wouldn't waste my breath.
But I think he's got the potential to do it.
But I think he's been surrounded by people, including his own daughter, Ivanka, and his son-in-law, who are telling him not to do these things.
And all they're doing is they're just, you know, running the clock out on him.
And he's got a bar telling him he can't do it.
He probably has pens, I'm sure, in his ear.
Same thing.
But he needs to understand his place in history.
Well, and he's been seen saying in a few cases that he's going to run again in 2024 if he doesn't win this, but he can't possibly believe that that's even possible because they would put him in prison by, you know, within six months for sure.
I think he needs to understand that his own personal best interest is in line with the country's best interest.
That if he does not do this, then yes, he'll be put in prison.
He'll probably be Epstein in prison and he'll be killed.
And possibly tortured and raped before that happens.
So he needs to picture in his head the worst case scenario.
But surely Trump understands more than anyone the viciousness and the maliciousness of these leftists, and they don't respect any rule of law.
They are evil.
They are pure evil, the way these leftists operate, you know, the communists and so on.
I think he might be experiencing a little bit of normalcy bias, though, right?
I mean, in his life, he's come from a privileged position, and he might be thinking that if I... You know, don't go all the way here.
I can slide out and I'll be allowed to return to that or make some kind of deal.
But yeah, I think he needs to be clued in on the reality.
And the reality is that this is his responsibility.
So forget about him for a minute.
What's going to happen to our country if he doesn't do this?
Like I said, ripped apart.
We're not going to submit to a communist dictatorship in this country.
We're not going to accept Biden as president and we're going to fight.
And I think we all understand that.
And I know all over the country talking to people, that's their mindset.
They refuse to recognize him.
Yeah, I hear that too.
But the question is, what would that look like?
Because I can imagine, and you know, for the FBI people watching this, I'm not advocating this, but I can imagine from an observer's perspective, domestic units, you know, Patriot units, attempting to do things like arrest local mayors or governors, for example, citizens arrest or arresting judges.
What do you think it might look like if that were to go down?
Like the American Revolution, but in a situation where the bad guys have much greater tech and military power.
But in the end, there's still the hearts and minds of the soldiers.
They've been in the military.
I'm not talking about the generals, talking about the guys, the NCOs that actually run the military.
So in the end, it'll come down to a fracture in a fight.
But I think it'll track along the lines of the American Revolution.
You'll see people who will be nullifying, who will be refusing to comply with mass noncompliance across the board with whatever comes out of Biden's mouth.
I don't care what it is.
A so-called law he signs, which we won't recognize as law.
Some edict about COVID-19.
I mean, COVID-19 was nothing but a TICOM-orchestrated strategy to take down the West, to do the Great Reset, We know that now, yes.
Yes, absolutely.
It's absolutely clear.
It was a collusion between the domestic enemies and the TICOMs.
All of this was worldwide against the entire...
Because there was an uprising around the world of nationalism, right?
An uprising around the world of the people saying, "We're not going to let you destroy our countries, let you destroy our traditional way of life." Whatever country it was, England, the United States, Australia.
And so COVID-19 has been nothing but a massive 9-11-style false flag to get us all to buy into this.
And, of course, the big enchilada was the U.S. elections create a situation of chaos that can cover for their massive steal.
But that's what's happening.
So it'll be mass noncompliance throughout the fight.
And so I think Americans should go back and read what happened in the American Revolution.
That's how it's going to happen again.
When you say mass noncompliance, though, I think it's important to note that all of the levers of government will be compliant with what Biden says, because even at the state level, usually at the county level, Most bureaucrats are all in with communism and socialism.
For some reason, they're willing to sacrifice America now because they think they're going to be offered a position in the Chinese regime or something when China takes over, or maybe they haven't even thought about that.
But it seems like the entire bureaucracy is organized against America.
Yeah, great.
So I think what you'll see is you'll see, much like in the Patriots' Day, Where, like in the original colonies, you had the royal governors who were in the pocket of the king and parliament, of course, but then you had the patriots create their own parallel government, their provisional governments, the rebel governments.
It would be the same thing here.
You'll see it's already happening in Texas.
It's already a chatter in Texas about Texas independence and also about not recognizing Abbott as the legitimate governor of Texas.
That happened even before the election because of all the COVID-19 nonsense he's done.
So there are Texans talking about setting up their own provisional government where they refuse to recognize Abbott, and then they'll just raise militias to protect them.
And there'll be an internal fight inside of Texas.
But don't be surprised to see Abbott turn to Biden and ask for outside help.
Wow, that's a scenario I hadn't thought about, but you're right.
That could absolutely happen.
And even look at California.
You know, how much tyranny do the people of California put up with, with Newsom crushing their businesses and destroying their economic productivity and making people sick and even mentally ill with these weaponized lockdowns?
I mean, at some point, you have to fight back.
I mean, otherwise you're just surrendering to a suicide agenda.
Well, as you're seeing it now, there is mass compliance, or mass non-compliance happening in some places, even in California.
You've got a restaurant owner saying, you know what, we're going to open up anyway.
And thankfully, they had one judge who started to side with them, which is good.
But you're right, the...
The trend and the overwhelming momentum is on the side of compliance when it comes to the bureaucrats.
There's the bureaucrats right down to the county level.
I see it here in Texas.
I've been in Texas for six months now.
I see it in Texas where the people are hardcore, but there are elected officials across the board, the county commissioners, the commissioner's court are not, and neither are other judges.
And so there's going to be a purge that's going to happen at the county level.
And whether it's peaceful or violent, that's what's going to happen.
You're just taking over their own local governments again.
Same thing happened with Founders Day.
They took over their town and county.
They tarred and feathered people.
They ran them out of town on a rail.
They ransacked the governor's mansion.
They did all those things.
That's what's going to happen.
Well, it seems like there would have to be a psychological tipping point, as there was in the Revolutionary War.
That psychological tipping point could be, I would imagine, SCOTUS saying that the Constitution is null and void.
I mean, at that point, don't the American people wake up and say, well, guess what?
There's no rule of law anymore, so I guess we're writing our own law from here forward, and we're going to create our own new government, I suppose, as you're talking about.
Well, when we look at it is that when, like Declaration of Independence says, of course, it's like government is to among men to secure these rights.
Whenever any form of government becomes abusive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.
It would be falling back on a state of nature, back on Declaration of Independence-type territory, of saying that, okay, even this Constitution we created, or our founders created, that has failed us.
We now devolve back to sovereign states again.
This is why I think Texas is kind of interesting, because a lot of Texans are like, hey, if you guys screw this up so bad that you no longer secure our rights, we're going to say we're independent Texans again.
Problem is, is inside Texas they have a problem.
Look at their governor.
He's sold out to the globalist agenda as well.
So there'll be a lot of infighting and combat inside Texas for this heart and soul of Texas.
Something's going to happen.
And it's the same thing you saw on the Founders Day.
Depending upon where you were, either the Tories were dominant or the Patriots were dominant.
In each area, that's how it went.
It would tip one way or the other, depending upon who was in the majority.
Except, of course, today in modern Texas, there is way more firepower than there was in any previous kinetic conflict.
I mean, you know, bullets are going to fly like history has never seen before.
Yeah.
And then, of course, then the Fed will step in.
You know, if Biden follows through on this absurd idea of a national buyback, and especially does it by executive fiat, that's actually a gift for us, frankly.
A gun buyback program.
Yeah, so you go ahead and do gun confiscation or try to make all firearms Title II, or what's it called?
Is it Title II? Yeah, it's Title II, right?
Where you have to go and register them as obstructive devices and short-wheel robbery?
Oh, yeah, Form IV with ATF. Yeah, right.
Right.
Hey, come for the guns.
That's the best thing you can do for us, is come for our guns.
Yeah, that's right.
Well, yeah, that's not going to fly in most of America, frankly.
No, and only better than that would be to put UN troops or Chinese troops on U.S. soil.
That would also be a great gift for us, frankly.
Well, did you see that breaking news that Canada, it's been found out they were training or planning training Chinese troops for wintertime warfare, and that's come out in documents admitted by the government.
That's being reported also by Breitbart.com.
I mean, we may be facing threats from the north and the south, not only internal.
Right.
And that's why it's so important for those who are currently in military service, especially those who are manning our nuclear arsenal, to make sure that they maintain control and they defend us against outside interference.
If we do have an internal fight, you know, this is a family feud.
Everyone else has to stay out of it.
What about the fact that the Navy ships are now coalescing on the West Coast and the East Coast?
I mean, we have more carrier units right now off the coast of America than we've seen in years.
It seems to be something shaping up even on the international scale.
Yeah, I'm not sure which way that cuts.
You know, that's a good question.
Who are they loyal to?
Are they loyal to the President of the United States or are they loyal to the globalist agenda?
So I think we'll look at each one of those admirals and see who's in charge.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Wow.
Well, we've never been in such dire straits right now, but also on the verge of potential victory.
I mean, one decision from the Supreme Court gives us everything that we need to assert the authority of President Trump's second term and go after the deep state traitors.
Then he has to do it.
He still has to, I mean, he still has to have a DOJ that functions, an FBI that functions, and I still think you should invoke the insurrect and act either way.
I agree.
It's like a cancer that spreads through your body.
Now you need invasive surgery and chemotherapy all at the same time.
Well, yeah.
Don't forget, chemo kills the patient just as much as it kills the cancer.
You know, throw the Constitution out and go into martial law, it'd be full-blown chemo.
Right, I see.
Let's look at invasive surgery then.
How about that?
Yeah, alright.
Well, any final thoughts, Stuart?
We're just about out of time.
We've covered a lot of territory.
I think people are getting the sense of the severity of what you're talking about here, but what did we fail to cover?
My final thoughts are, we'll be in D.C. this weekend, hoping to protect people that are going there.
It's incredibly important for every patriotic American to stand up now.
You should be in D.C. this weekend if you can get there.
If you can't, you need to be in your state capitol standing up, especially the swing states, putting pressure on them to do their duty, but also pledging your support and your protection if they will do their duty.
That's why I call on all of you that are military veterans, any of you that are skilled martial artists or otherwise have good training.
If you're willing to step up, volunteer.
You can go to volunteers.oathkeepers.org and volunteer to help us.
In fact, you can go to D.C. volunteers for the D.C. office weekend if you have time.
But if not, go to volunteers.oathkeepers.org.
Across the country, we'll need people to guard whistleblowers, to guard patriotic legislators.
We're going to need you.
And if a fight comes, we're going to need you also.
And you've got to be out there organizing with your neighborhoods, your towns, and your counties to get prepared.
In the end, you need to be forming militias in your towns and counties right now standing up to defend each other.
And you need to do that publicly so that you are able to protect each other.
A secret cell of resistance fighters cannot protect you in the middle of the night when your house is being raided by the bad guys because they don't even know you exist, and you don't know they exist.
So that doesn't work.
You've got to have both...
Both the Sons of Liberty, which were their secret freedom fighters, and they had the very public militias.
Think in terms of both of those as being synergistic.
Okay, final thought for you here.
Recently, there were riots in Portland, and they've set up now their autonomous zone.
And some of the video footage showed them really attacking local law enforcement who obviously had rules of engagement that they couldn't shoot them, sadly.
And so the police were retreating and they were being assaulted.
Their cars were being attacked, tires slashed and so on.
It seems like the posture of the Antifa, Black Lives Matter, left wing terrorists has become so aggressive that no one has ever told them no before.
They've never heard the word no.
And they think.
Well, except Kyle.
Yeah, he said no three times, basically.
And, you know, where no equals 5.56, basically.
But aside from that, the police have never said no.
No one is standing their ground that's commanded by a bureaucrat.
So how effective would those forces actually be if this Revolutionary War type of scenario goes hot?
We have gone up against Antifa many times across the country in the streets, and it never engages, in large part because they know that Oath Keepers contains a lot of law enforcement officers who are retired cops who are still carrying a gun and are not under orders for some polluted chief to just stand down, and so they're afraid of us.
We've always been very defensive, and we deter them by our mere presence.
If it goes kinetic, they're going to get wiped out.
That's the bottom line.
Now, of course, the leftist is going to quote me as saying that we should wipe out Antifa.
The point is, if they engage us in combat, they're going to lose.
They're going to lose badly.
So that's why we don't really worry about Antifa so much.
Our concern is letting a puppet of Tchaikoms gain the levers of power and the supposed authority to command the military.
That's what's dangerous for us in this country.
Yeah.
That's what I worry about more than anything else.
Okay.
There's got to drop the hammer now.
I agree.
Trump has to act, but how long would SCOTUS need on this Texas case to rule?
I mean, any idea?
That's a good question.
I mean, they could rule pretty quickly.
So, you know, it could be done.
The law is pretty clear.
It's pretty clear that the state law was not followed in all of these cases.
And so they could hold, you know, do briefing and hold oral arguments within a matter of weeks.
It could be done.
A matter of weeks.
That still sounds like a long time right now.
Right, but they can also give an extension for the certification in the Congress.
That's potentially on the table as well.
Well, okay, fine, but Trump's term ends on January 20th no matter what.
Right.
Well, that's why they've got to act fast.
They've got to do this quickly.
Yeah.
That's why Trump can't wait for that.
It's a mistake to run the clock out on yourself.
I mean, I argued over the summer that he needs to invoke the Insurrection Act before the election, because if he does it after the election, they'll accuse him of doing so only to stay in power.
And here's where we're at.
But now he has no choice.
He has to do it.
And the longer he waits, the less time he has.
So he needs to do it now.
Okay.
All right.
Well, I think you're right on with your analysis, and everything is on the line right now.
I want to encourage our viewers to visit your website, OathKeepers.org, and also join the rally in D.C. this Saturday.
That's on the 12th, correct?
Or any other Patriot stand-up.
I mean, this is going to be an ongoing fight.
You need to be in the streets.
Absolutely right.
Okay, you heard it, folks.
So do your part now to defend your republic, or we won't have a republic very soon if we don't defend this one.
Either you sweat now or you bleed later.
That's the bottom line.
That's well put, actually, yes.
Indeed.
Okay, Stuart.
Well, thanks for everything.
God bless you.
Be safe.
I know you're working hard.
And folks, please support Oath Keepers in whatever way you can.
Donations are accepted.
It helps provide food and hotel rooms and transportation, all these things that are necessary to help defend this nation against those who are trying to destroy it.
So thank you, Stuart.
Always an honor to be able to speak with you.
You too, brother.
God bless you.
Thank you for all your work.
Thank you.
Take care.
Survival Nutrition is our new free audiobook that you can download right now from survivalnutrition.com.
In this nearly eight-hour audiobook, you will learn life-saving secrets of how to use food, nutrients, plant molecules, trace minerals, and chemical compounds to save your life, even in a total collapse scenario.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, and I'm the author of Survival Nutrition.
I founded and run a multi-million dollar food science laboratory, and I'm the author of the best-selling science book, Food Forensics.
I'm also a prepper, a patriot, and a survivalist.
I can teach you how to survive what's coming by growing your own food, medicine, and antibiotics that can help keep you healthy and alive even during the worst of times.
At survivalnutrition.com, you'll be able to instantly download the full free audiobook as MP3 files.
▲
Export Selection