Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 27, 2024 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams

02:10:38

BBN, May 27, 2024 – Mike Adams announces historic lawsuit...

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Alright, welcome to this historic day.
	This is Bright Town Broadcast News for Monday, May 27th, 2024.
	I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger.
	building the infrastructure of human freedom with your help and today on this Memorial Day as we are reminded of all the efforts of our ancestors and our veterans and all the foundational principles for which they fought and how many of those principles are now under attack by a government gone rogue big tech fascism and other groups today we have an historic announcement Today,
	we are filing suit against Google, Facebook, Twitter, X, NewsGuard, Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and other NGOs, other groups, including NewsGuard, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, Global Disinformation Index, and other entities.
	Plus, we've named 10 John Does.
	Those are defendants that will be revealed during discovery.
	This is a very detailed in-depth lawsuit.
	You'll be able to read the full text once it goes live.
	It's being filed with the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, the Austin Division.
	And as the lawsuit asserts with astonishing conclusive evidence, the United States government has been helping identify, pay for, and facilitate private corporations' suppression of Americans' free speech.
	In other words, the United States government has been engaged in censorship laundering by offshoring the censorship requests through overseas NGOs, which then send marching orders to big tech platforms in the United States of who to censor, which then send marching orders to big tech platforms in the United States of who to censor, who to You know, we've been financially de-platformed and blacklisted as well.
	And all of this has been initiated unconstitutionally by the United States government.
	And we have been subject to these efforts for nearly 10 years.
	And today we are fighting back.
	And it's not just fighting back for our rights to speak freely without censorship and blacklisting and being smeared and defamed everywhere.
	We are fighting for your right to speak.
	We are taking a stand for all of us.
	We're standing up, filing this suit, which is nearly a year and a half in the making, which has just exhaustive evidence Some of which was only gleaned in the last six months coming out of the discovery phase of other lawsuits, by the way, such as Missouri v.
	Biden.
	But we have put together what we believe is the most comprehensive collection of evidence exposing what we call the censorship industrial complex.
	And this is a bombshell.
	It's smoking gun after smoking gun after smoking gun.
	And if we can get this before a fair court, which is always, of course, a roll of the dice, then it is conclusive.
	And we would, upon achieving victory in this lawsuit, we would set a legal precedent that the United States government cannot launder censorship requests through overseas NGOs and third party organizations in order to Effectively requested that big tech silence people and blacklist people just because the government doesn't like the content of their speech.
	So that's the big announcement today.
	Now, we have a naturalnews.com story on this, posting probably around the same time that this broadcast is going live.
	And you'll see the headline.
	It's pretty straightforward.
	It says, Brighteon Media sues Google, Facebook, Twitter, NewsGuard, Homeland Security, Department of Defense, and so on for government-funded censorship collusion.
	And there we have quotes from both our lead attorney as well as an expert consultant on this case, Jason Fick.
	And Jason Fick is the number one expert on Section 230.
	Which, of course, is the law that has shielded big tech from content-related lawsuits, but it has been perverted and exploited, twisted around by big tech to try to excuse their selective censorship of Americans' free speech.
	So Jason Fick is a consultant.
	The presence of this man on this case is no doubt going to send shockwaves across the legal departments of Google and even X and Facebook and so on, NewsGuard, all the parties that are named.
	And also today, then, we are featuring an interview with our lead attorney, Jeffrey Graber from Graber Law, as well as Jason Fick, the expert consultant, as I just mentioned.
	And we will be doing a large number of interviews over the next few weeks.
	If you are from alternative media...
	And you want to have us on for an interview, then you can email our attorney and request that.
	It's Jay Graeber.
	That's G-R-E-Y-B-E-R. Note the spelling there.
	There are no A's in that.
	G-R-E-Y-B-E-R. Jay Graeber at GraeberLaw.com.
	You can reach him with interview requests.
	And if you're from mainstream media, then of course you are operating in bad faith.
	By default, that's what you do.
	And so we will not be granting interviews to you.
	However, we will be happy to have our attorneys answer your questions via email.
	So you may submit your email questions to that email address that I just mentioned.
	But if you're from alternative media, we would be happy to join your show.
	In the coming days and weeks, come on and talk about the importance of this case, why it matters for the free speech of all Americans, and why this is, in our opinion, the most compelling and pivotal First Amendment case that's ever been filed in the history of our country.
	I know that's a big statement, but let me explain.
	In this case, we have discovered already blatant admissions by the government naming us, naming myself, naming Brighteon, Natural News, etc., naming us to be targeted for blacklisting.
	So it's going to be impossible for defendants to successfully argue, we believe, for dismissing this case, given that we are specifically named by the federal government, by various agencies.
	In their documents and in their communications, we have caught them with smoking gun evidence.
	We've caught them demanding the removal of our content and my voice in particular.
	And by the way, the situation is so egregious.
	It's so bad now in this country, the censorship, the weaponization of the government against the people, that when I'm a guest on somebody else's show that's on YouTube, they will get a strike just for having me on.
	They will get a strike just because they have me as a guest.
	And that way, YouTube makes sure that they never have me on a second time.
	And that is malicious.
	That is vindictive.
	And of course, this is one of the reasons why we are suing Google.
	And we are not suing them to engage in a financial settlement.
	We are suing to set a precedent to stop the censorship of the American people.
	And, by the way, with your support, and thank you for all your support so far, and we now need your support more than ever before in order to continue to fund this, this is going to be a multi-million dollar lawsuit.
	It's going to take several years to argue this through all the courts and all the motions and all the discovery, maybe even to the Supreme Court one day.
	It's not inexpensive to do this.
	It does take millions of dollars.
	And because you've been able to support us so much so far at healthrangerstore.com, we've been able to fund this already to this point.
	We have funds to pursue this, not enough to take it to the end.
	But if you can help support us, then no matter what the defendants throw at us in terms of discovery or motions or dirty tricks or whatever threats, whatever they do, we will be able to fund whatever is necessary to continue this fight for you we will be able to fund whatever is necessary to continue this fight for you and me and all of us to finally take big government censorship industrial complex.
	So if you want to help support us, it's very simple.
	Not asking you for donations.
	We don't have a legal defense fund set up for you to donate to because all we need is for you to support us by shopping at healthrangerstore.com.
	If you need backup food that's certified organic and laboratory tested, heavily scrutinized for glyphosate and heavy metals and aflatoxins and so much more, we're the best in the world in that.
	HealthRangerStore.com.
	We've got freeze-dried organic foods and number 10 cans.
	We've got Ranger buckets, Mega Buckets, Mini Buckets, all kinds of food supplies.
	We've got extremely popular nutritional supplements, Foreign Protein Cleanse.
	I think it's still out of stock, unfortunately.
	We've got Elk Antler Drops from Surthrival.
	We've got Quercetin in stock right now in our store.
	We've got fragrance-free laundry detergent, body soap, automatic dishwasher detergent using only the cleanest, most environmentally friendly ingredients that are highly rated by the Environmental Working Group.
	Meticulously researched.
	We don't use toxic chemicals and fragrances and dyes and garbage and artificial colors and any of that garbage.
	We don't do that.
	We have the cleanest, most pristine product line in the world for personal care, home care, nutrition, superfoods, you name it.
	And when you shop with us, you help us support the extensive legal bills that are already associated with this lawsuit.
	And I should mention, today being Memorial Day, we have a major sale event taking place at HealthRangerStore that ends tonight at midnight.
	If you go to HealthRangerStore.com slash Memorial Day, all one word, no spaces or anything, Memorial Day, we've got items on sale up to 55% off.
	And that sale does end tonight.
	So it's definitely worth checking out.
	Or even if you missed the sale, we've still got great deals.
	Just check out our website, healthrangerstore.com.
	Now, Jason Fick, our expert consultant on this case, he has a quote in our announcement.
	He says, if we don't stop this, you know, referring to the censorship industrial complex, America will fall.
	That's the reality we must now accept.
	And here's my official quote.
	This lawsuit exhaustively documents and exposes the globally coordinated censorship industrial complex that has been unconstitutionally deployed against the American people in direct violation of the First Amendment.
	It showcases the vast array of global players involved in censorship laundering, including complicit big tech platforms such as Google and Facebook, powerful government institutions such as the Department of Defense, and overseas NGOs which maliciously engaged in the selective and overseas NGOs which maliciously engaged in the selective silencing of the speech of Americans based entirely on the content of their speech.
	Now, you've probably seen headlines over the last week or so that the FBI and other government agencies are now ramping up collusion with big tech to try to silence speech before the election.
	Just as they colluded four years ago, where they said, what, 51 intelligence heads or agencies said that the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian disinformation hoax.
	Remember that?
	That was all a lie.
	That was deliberate government disinformation designed to alter the outcome of the election.
	The real sources of disinformation are the government, the corporations, the corporate media, big tech themselves.
	Google is in the business of silencing truth.
	Of censoring human knowledge, not connecting people with knowledge, but distancing or isolating people from knowledge.
	That's what Google is primarily doing today, and Facebook has a very similar goal.
	And they also function as back doors to the NSA and the CIA and other government agencies.
	In essence, virtually the entire federal government and virtually all players in big tech have been weaponized against the American people.
	And they are now silencing truthful speech of Americans and they are rigging elections and rigging public narratives and, in essence, indoctrinating the American people.
	With government propaganda, which smacks of fascism and tyranny, authoritarianism, an Orwellian society has been erected around us.
	And our aim is to dismantle that Orwellian society by compelling a jury...
	A court, a judge even with interim injunctions compelling them to halt this censorship industrial complex and to restore the right of speech to the American people.
	And that includes speech that some people may find offensive.
	It also includes speech that consists of opinions that not everybody may agree with.
	The First Amendment protects your right to speak freely even if your speech is unpopular.
	Quote, offensive, even inaccurate.
	It's your opinion.
	It's your speech.
	You have the right to speak it.
	And no government agency can be involved in an effort to silence your speech.
	So if we succeed, we will change history.
	And if you help us succeed, then we will change history together.
	And that's our aim.
	We have no illusions that this is going to be a long, drawn-out process.
	This is going to take years of effort, millions of dollars in funding.
	It's going to involve sleepless nights.
	It's going to involve probably being hit with all kinds of smear pieces and hit pieces from the corporate media, as the government did to Trump.
	They will do to us.
	They will do anything and everything to try to stop this lawsuit.
	They may threaten us physically.
	They'll probably order the IRS to audit us.
	They'll probably order who knows what kind of craziness they're going to resort to.
	Because as I've said before, the federal government of the United States of America under this current occupying force is a terrorist organization.
	And they use terrorism to threaten and coerce everybody, both domestically and internationally, to do what they demand.
	That's the point of economic sanctions.
	That was the point of the US government blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines, which by the way has gutted Germany's affordable energy and effectively gutted Germany's industrial output economy.
	I mean, think about it.
	The United States government went to war with infrastructure of Germany.
	There's nothing they won't do to stay in power and to silence those who expose their crimes and their collusion.
	You see, that's why this is so dangerous.
	And that's exactly why this must be stopped.
	Now, I've got some other news to cover here that's associated with this that just reinforces the importance of what we're talking about here.
	We've got the President of the European Commission...
	Ursula von der Crazy, as she's called by the Duran.
	I think that's the correct name for her, by the way, von der Crazy.
	She is saying that there needs to be mental vaccines, a, quote, democracy shield, to vaccinate people against disinformation.
	Now, her democracy shield is really just censorship.
	This is another way that the EU plans to use AI, by the way, to automatically silence anyone who questions EU authorities or questions EU member nation governments.
	Or questions the establishment narratives on everything from the next pandemic to vaccines, big pharma, fiat currency, gold, crypto, the war with Russia and Ukraine, Middle East, anything.
	There will be one officially recognized government position on every topic, and you will only be allowed to repeat the government position.
	If you say anything opposed to the government position, you will be at first silenced.
	And then, as is already happening in some European countries like the UK, you can be arrested.
	You can be charged.
	It's also happening in Germany.
	You can be criminally charged.
	I think C.J. Hopkins is being criminally charged by the government of Germany for merely tweeting out an image of a face mask with a Nazi symbol on it, which actually is a pretty clever meme.
	You know, it's about the COVID fascism.
	Yeah, face mask with the Nazi logo, you know, it kind of gets the point across.
	So understand that if we don't stop these governments from weaponizing their power to censor all of us, they will keep grabbing more and more power.
	In fact, Biden is putting forth a proposal right now that's supposed to stop AI-generated porn images.
	But what it really does is it requires essentially a government-run scanning algorithm on all your mobile devices to look through all your photos to make sure that there's no AI porn.
	Right.
	So you're supposed to consent to having all your private photos looked at, which, of course, a copy will be made by the NSA to be weaponized against you.
	You will have zero privacy.
	And this will be on all the standard Android phones and the Apple phones, you know, if it's implemented.
	And you'll have you'll have no privacy whatsoever.
	Any photo you take can be weaponized against you and it won't end with photos.
	Then it will expand to, oh, your your text, your your phone text or your tweets, your social media tweets.
	Well, we've got to make sure that you don't tweet anything that might be considered, you know, quote, extremist.
	So then there'll be a government-approved algorithm on your phone to monitor everything you say before you're allowed to send it out.
	In other words, there'll be a government gatekeeper on your phone, an AI system, that will determine whether you're allowed to send that message.
	Whether you're trying to post something on Twitter or Telegram or whatever, or just sending a plain text, it's all going to be monitored if we don't stop this censorship industrial complex.
	And by the way, the main reason why Western governments, including EU, are But also, of course, Canada, the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and so on.
	The main reason they have to engage in such extreme censorship is because their core positions can't stand up to scrutiny or debate or criticism.
	I mean, think about the things that these governments advocate.
	Think about the claims they make, like men can get pregnant.
	Now, it's absurd.
	Men can't get pregnant.
	Of course they can't.
	But if you say that, you know, you're going to be censored in silence because the official position of these governments is that men can get pregnant.
	Oh, okay.
	So they're insane.
	Well, yes, they're insane, but they also have a plan to destroy the family.
	And this is one of the ways they do that, by pushing the LGBT agenda.
	And if you criticize any LGBT, then you're going to be silenced on your own devices.
	Did you see the story, too, about Microsoft is going to have a new upgrade to their Windows operating system that takes snapshots of your screen every few seconds and stores them, archives them?
	And this is supposed to be used by Microsoft to program its AI agents to help you do your work better?
	Right?
	So wait a second.
	You're using Windows...
	You're sending email, whatever, word processing, you're doing whatever you do, you're buying and selling crypto, you're entering passwords, whatever.
	Microsoft will be taking snapshots of your screen every few seconds and storing that.
	Now, my understanding is that's a proposed feature set for the AI training, but it's really just a backdoor to spy on you.
	I mean, obviously, of course they're going to spy on you.
	Just like the cell phone companies spy on you.
	Google spies on you.
	Facebook spies on you.
	Facebook just might as well be called, you know, spy book.
	All these tech giants spy on you.
	And soon that spying is going to expand to the operating system level and it won't be long before you're writing a private email to a friend of yours and you're saying something like, hey, did you know that pretty soon you might be writing an email to one of your friends or family members?
	That starts off, you start typing like, hey, did you know that Ashley Biden's diary turns out to be totally true?
	And then the operating system stops you.
	Bleep, bleep, bleep.
	Warning.
	Fact checkers say that this is not true.
	You're not allowed to send this email.
	Like, that's going to show up on your screen.
	You won't be allowed to send the email.
	Did you know that?
	Or let's say that you're selling some Bitcoin.
	So you bring up your Bitcoin wallet and you're selling some Bitcoin.
	You're swapping it for some other coin.
	And then Microsoft takes an image of your screen, you know?
	And finds out you're buying and selling crypto.
	What does Microsoft do?
	They send it to the IRS. And then you get an email from the IRS. We detected a taxable event.
	You know, and you're like, oh, tax due on $5,000 or whatever.
	It's like, what?
	How did they?
	Oh, Windows is spying on me again.
	Yes.
	That's exactly what's coming, folks.
	This is what we're trying to fight against.
	We're trying to reestablish basic civil rights.
	Many of which are supposed to be enumerated by the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.
	You have the right to speak, even if it's unpopular.
	You have the right to privacy, by the way.
	Fourth Amendment.
	You have the right to due process.
	You have the right to remain silent.
	States have rights.
	Tenth Amendment.
	On and on and on.
	You have the right to say no if the British try to quarter soldiers in your home.
	That's the Third Amendment.
	Not that that's a big risk at the moment.
	But at one time it was.
	Now this censorship of course spans both major political parties and it spans every topic imaginable.
	So in fact I want to play a short video for you here, just 15 seconds or so, of a spokesperson from the ADL, the Anti-Defamation League, who brags about how the ADL tells the tech platforms who to censor and what speech is allowed on their platforms.
	Check this out.
	We work with Google on using AI to try to interrupt cyber hate before it happens.
	We work with YouTube to get them to change their algorithms.
	We work with Facebook on trying to use a redirect method.
	So there you have it from the ADL saying that they collude with Google using AI to stop what they call cyber hate.
	Well, what is cyber hate in their opinion?
	Well, it's anybody who criticizes the actions of Israel right now, isn't it?
	It's anybody who supports the freedom of the Palestinian people, which tends to be more of a left-wing issue.
	So what I'm saying here is that this isn't about...
	Right-wing versus left-wing, conservatives versus liberals.
	This is a universal principle.
	Because if we don't have the freedom to speak, then your speech can be silenced for being a Christian and quoting scripture.
	Your speech can be silenced about criticizing transgenderism or the grooming of children.
	Your speech can be silenced for advocating for Donald J. Trump to win the election.
	Or you can be silenced for saying something like, You can be silenced for saying that Israel is engaged in genocidal bombing of women and children in Gaza.
	And according to the ADL, that's cyber hate.
	So you notice they can always come up with these terms, cyber hate, misinformation, disinformation, and other terms.
	They can always come up with excuses to censor us.
	But it doesn't matter what label they put on it.
	It's all still blatantly unconstitutional.
	It's wrong and it's dangerous.
	And we do not have a functioning constitutional republic if we don't have the right to speak freely without government interference, especially government big tech collusion interference, which is exactly what we are exposing and fighting to dismantle.
	Now, something else that's very disturbing is also happening in this case on X or Twitter.
	In order to get paid on X, you have to now have your identity processed through an Israeli company that's linked to Mossad intelligence.
	So, no, seriously.
	Every creator on X... Has to go through this verification program now.
	And the company is called AU10TIX. I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
	Gold10Tix?
	GoldenTix?
	Maybe?
	Is that what that is?
	GoldenTix?
	Just guessing.
	But anyway, it was founded by former members of the Israeli intelligence units called Shin Bet and another one called Unit 8200.
	That's who founded Gold 10 Ticks.
	Okay?
	And the CEO of this company, his father, was the treasury of the Likud party, which is the radical far-right extremist party that Netanyahu is part of.
	And this company has a long history of aiding the Israeli military with intelligence gathering and surveillance operations.
	And now you're going to be required to hand over your ID to these Mossad intelligence operators.
	And you can bet that this is going to be done.
	It'll be weaponized against you.
	Specifically, it'll be used to target and silence Pro-Palestine people or any voices that oppose Israel or the bombings of civilians being carried out by the IDF or whatever else crazy thing happens there in that scenario.
	So this is Elon Musk, understand, this is Elon Musk handing over all the earners on Twitter to Israeli intelligence, which is in my view a gross violation of your privacy.
	So you thought that Elon Musk was a champion of free speech?
	Well, why is he turning over your ID to the Mossad?
	You know, Mossad linked Israeli intelligence.
	Why does Elon Musk continue to have every link to Brighton.com banned in any Twitter post?
	You can't link.
	You can't even mention Brighton.com videos on Twitter without it failing.
	It won't go.
	it will say that it's unsafe or there's a problem with your post or something like that.
	Why is my account shadow banned?
	Why is David Icke shadow banned?
	Something like 99%.
	Elon Musk, when he bought Twitter, he said, we're going to bring everybody back.
	So he brings back Alex Jones.
	He brought back my account, brought back many others, but then we're all still shadow banned.
	So it's just a token of bringing us back.
	We still don't enjoy the organic reach that we should receive from the quality of our content.
	We believe in a meritocracy.
	We believe in a competition of ideas, a free market of ideas.
	We don't expect any extra bonus help.
	We just expect a level playing field.
	And that's not what we get.
	Not from Twitter, of course, not from Google, not from Facebook or anyone else.
	They silence the voices of truth.
	You notice that?
	They silence and censor the good people.
	people who have morals and ethics people who engage in reason people who understand history people who are pro-liberty and pro-humanity all those people are silenced But the accounts and the platforms and the publishers that are allowed to have great reach are,
	of course, those that are promoting LGBT, transhumanism, obedience, enslavement, government narratives, vaccinations during COVID, mandatory masking, lockdowns, you know, every insane thing, open borders policies.
	You name it.
	Anybody who opposes the freedoms that are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights gets extra distribution and reach across these big tech platforms, in other words.
	But those who are trying to defend human liberty are punished, selectively punished, named, and blacklisted by this censorship industrial complex.
	So I want to ask for your help in getting this story out.
	Number one, you can post naturalnews.com links on Twitter.
	So please go to naturalnews.com right now, find the feature story, it should be right on the top there, that announces this lawsuit, and share it on Twitter.
	You won't be able to share this podcast on brighttown.com, but we're also posting this on Rumble.
	And so what I will do is I will update the Natural News story with the Rumble link to this broadcast so you can share the Rumble link on Twitter and other platforms.
	Secondly, again, please consider supporting us through your purchases of products that you need and that you will use anyway.
	And given the truth about food inflation, the products and solutions that we offer right now at healthrangerstore.com, they're at the lowest prices you're probably ever going to see because our raw materials keep going up in price up.
	I mean, some just incredibly.
	One vendor recently told us 40% price increase from the last time we ordered, which was six months ago.
	40%.
	It's not unusual to hear that.
	It's getting more and more difficult for people to be able to afford food.
	So to the extent that you want to help support us and you can pre-purchase food and really high-end nutritional supplements from us.
	And also, by the way, we have survival and prepping items.
	Don't forget, we have a knife line that I co-designed with Dawson knives that are made with this incredible alloy steel called Magna Cut that's corrosion resistant.
	And yet it has high Rockwell hardness It also bends and flexes without shattering, yet it holds a sharp edge.
	I mean, it's almost like a miraculous bending of the laws of physics or something.
	These are available right now.
	Just search for knife at healthrangerstore.com or check out the prepping category that we have there.
	So those are some things that you can do.
	I will keep you posted about all of this, how it's going.
	And, of course, this is a multi-year process.
	So we're in it for the long haul.
	And every day that we fight with this censorship industrial complex, we are fighting for your right to speak.
	Not just our own right, but for your right as well.
	Now, moving on to some other news before we get to the interview about this big announcement.
	There's a story over the weekend.
	A British Prime Minister promises to bring back conscription.
	So Rishi Sunak says that there should be compulsory national service.
	Yeah.
	I don't know if you heard my podcast, I think it aired over the weekend, about how Western Europe is gearing up for war with Russia.
	We saw lawmakers in Italy recently propose mandatory conscription there.
	Now we're seeing it in the UK. This is incredible.
	If enacted, all 18-year-olds would be required to join the military full-time or to volunteer one weekend a month with community organizations such as the police.
	No doubt their job would be to run around and arrest people who violate speech crime laws or something like that.
	Can you imagine?
	You have to either join the military...
	Or you have to volunteer for the police to join the weaponization of government power against your fellow citizens?
	This is insane.
	And by the way, I mean, think about the irony here.
	The same British Empire that once occupied and controlled India is now ruled by an ethnic Indian who is compelling young British men to join the military and fight for him.
	I mean, that's irony there, folks.
	That's a wild twist of history.
	And so listen to this.
	Listen to this.
	Rishi Sunak says, quote, I will bring in a new model of national service to create a shared sense of purpose among our young people and a renewed sense of pride in our country.
	Wait a second.
	I thought being a nationalist was a bad thing.
	That was a slur that was used against Trump and Trump supporters.
	Remember the slur?
	If you're white and you love America, what do they call you?
	A white nationalist.
	Remember that?
	Actually, some of that's still going on.
	You're a white nationalist.
	As if there's something wrong with having pride in America.
	And here's Rishi Sunak saying, well, we have to have pride in the United Kingdom now.
	So suddenly, white nationalism is all good.
	As long as there's an Indian in charge, right?
	By the way, I don't have anything against people from India or any ethnicity.
	I'm just pointing out the hilarious irony of it.
	And I guess one of the lessons of history, by the way, as kind of a tangential comment here, is that colonizing and occupying a nation and oppressing its people never works long term.
	Didn't work when the British occupied India, did it?
	Nope.
	The Indian people eventually, you know, they fought back.
	They overthrew their oppressors.
	Didn't work in South Africa either, did it?
	Apartheid tried that, got all nasty and cruel, tried to oppress the people, kill a bunch of people.
	Eventually, apartheid fell.
	Guess what's happening in the Middle East?
	Yeah.
	Israel, the colonizers, the oppressors, trying to oppress the Palestinian people, trying to imprison them in the open-air prison of Gaza.
	And now Israel is losing the war.
	Why?
	Because, again, people don't want to be oppressed.
	This colonization model of history, it's broken, it's obsolete, it doesn't work.
	That's just my side comment.
	But now, if you're in the UK, if you turn 18, guess what?
	You're going to join the military now.
	Which probably means Rishi Sunak is going to send you to the front lines in Ukraine to die, to be killed by highly competent Russian soldiers with highly effective Russian artillery and highly ingenious Russian drones.
	You know, I mean...
	I mean, this sounds more like a way for Rishi Sunak to exterminate young British men, actually, is what it sounds like to me.
	But that's just my opinion.
	Anyway, various ministers and lawmakers in the UK, they're saying this is such a great idea because the British military has become pathetic and weak.
	One Labour Party spokesperson said, it's only needed because the Tories hollowed out the armed forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.
	That's hilarious.
	Richard Ford, a Liberal Democrat defense spokesperson, said, quote, Our armed forces were once the envy of the world.
	This conservative government has cut troop numbers and is planning more cuts to the size of the army.
	Yeah, I mean, let's be honest, the British military has become a joke.
	You notice how they, what do they have?
	They claim to have two aircraft carriers.
	Neither one of them works.
	They have propeller problems, apparently.
	Yeah, I know, propeller problems.
	Turns out that the woke British engineers, they built the propellers on top of the aircraft carriers instead of in the water.
	Yeah.
	You know, because they're all woke and everything.
	They thought it's supposed to be like a seaborne helicopter carrier platform, like it was going to fly.
	So they put the propellers on the deck.
	No, I'm kidding.
	But I wouldn't be surprised.
	No, they put them in the water, but they don't turn.
	So what's the point?
	You realize that for the British aircraft carriers to be deployed at sea, they would have to be pulled by tugboats.
	Yeah, that's how funny things really are.
	Anyway, it's going to be an interesting chapter in history, just talking about the rise and fall, and then the end of the British Empire, and frankly, the end of a lot of Western Europe as well, the end of German industry, for example.
	That's happening right now, in real time.
	And the end of the U.S. empire as well after the collapse of the dollar and then the breaking up of Washington, D.C. and the rise of the secessionary states or whatever happens, alternative currencies, new regional nation states.
	I don't know exactly what's going to happen, but we're living in interesting times.
	Let's put it that way.
	History is unfolding in real time right in front of us.
	Now there's a story on naturalnews.com here.
	It says, UK government calls on Britons to be ready for disasters to stock up on food and water.
	This is a recent story, just in the last few days.
	And so at the same time the British government is calling for mandatory conscription, they're telling everybody to have extra stockpiles of food and water, develop a, quote, household emergency plan to meet all kinds of disasters.
	So the UK government's launched a new webpage called Prepare, and it's been presented by Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden, and it says that resilience begins at home.
	I mean, I've been saying that for 20 years, and I was labeled a conspiracy theorist for teaching preparedness.
	You know, how funny is this, that suddenly the UK government is all in favor of white nationalism and prepping?
	You know, all in the same week.
	I think they owe me an apology, huh?
	I've been teaching this for, again, 20 plus years.
	Anyway, they say resilience begins at home.
	We are working ahead of time, they say, to equip the whole of society to prepare for and even prevent the next shock.
	While delivering a clear and robust plan that is so vital to all national defenses.
	I just slipped into the mocking accent there.
	That's according to Dowden.
	That really does sound like a British quote.
	It's like...
	You could have said it in six words, but you just went blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Probably had to get approvals from like six government departments to sign off on that.
	What am I kidding?
	25 departments at least.
	Probably had to make a triplicate copy on a typewriter, sign off on it, stamp it, get a tax stamp from the taxing authorities to approve of the statement, and then they could issue the statement.
	That's probably what had to happen.
	It's the UK after all.
	And this advice page now from the UK government, even it advocates learning basic first aid skills.
	Huh?
	No kidding.
	Basic first aid skills.
	And they also say you should know the, quote, best escape route from your home.
	What?
	Wow!
	The best escape route from your home?
	What are they going to need to escape, Dowden?
	Mr.
	Dowden, what are they escaping from?
	You?
	I mean, are they escaping Rishi Sunak?
	He's coming for your teenagers.
	They have to have mandatory military service.
	You need an escape route from your home.
	Also good to know basic first aid skills.
	Well, I think number one would be how to stop bleeding.
	See, that's a good first aid skill.
	Stop the bleed.
	How do you stop the bleed?
	I bet you they're not teaching a blood stop course, though.
	I bet you they're teaching...
	Like, you know, use a thermometer, take your temperature, like what to do if you have diarrhea, how to use a band-aid, you know, useless things that everybody should already know.
	They're not going to teach probably real hardcore survival skills, no.
	I doubt it.
	Based on a poll carried out by the London Defense Conference, apparently only 15% of the people in the UK have any kind of emergency kits at their home.
	And over 40% do not have any more than three days' worth of food and water supplies.
	Wow!
	Wow!
	That's crazy, given the situation with Russia and the fact that I mean, do I even need to say it?
	The UK government giving Ukraine permission to use Storm Shadow cruise missiles, which are built in the UK, to attack targets deep within Russia, even though Medvedev, or Medvedev, I think that's how you say his name, he says that if you do that, then we reserve the right to launch missiles at UK military targets wherever they are, even in London.
	And the people in the UK, only 15% have emergency kits?
	When the top defense minister of Russia basically says we might nuke you?
	My God, what are the 85% of people in the UK who don't have emergency kits, what are they thinking?
	Well, I guess the answer is they're not.
	Or they just have this gullible belief that we'll all be okay, the government's going to take care of us.
	No, they're not.
	But my goodness.
	Don't have more than three days' worth of food and water.
	I hope all of you listening have way more than three days' worth of food and water.
	You probably, I mean, I hope you have six months, a year, or more of emergency food.
	If you don't, you know where to get it, healthrangerstore.com.
	If you bought kind of low-grade, on-sale, crappy, non-organic storable food before, by the way, rotate that stuff out with the good stuff, the organic lab-tested stuff that we sell.
	Or you could put that other low-grade stuff in a special place to give it away, donate it away to people who didn't buy anything while you're eating the good stuff, the clean stuff.
	But anyway, that's your personal decision.
	I say prepare with what you can and help as many people as you can.
	But what if in the U.S.? Do you think 85% of the people in the U.S. also have not prepared?
	That's probably right.
	I mean, think about it.
	How many people do you know in your social circle who are actual preppers?
	Is it more than 1 or 2 out of 10?
	That would be unusual.
	And again, water supplies.
	Do you have a water filter?
	Water filters are becoming hard to get.
	The Big Berkeys have been out of stock for months.
	I think we may have the AquaPail water filters on our website, healthrangerstore.com.
	But that only ships to the 48 states, by the way.
	Just in terms of preparedness, it's astonishing how many people are really not prepared.
	I'm blown away by that.
	So it's a good idea.
	Just ask yourself all the basic questions.
	Do you have emergency backup comms?
	Do you have seed kits?
	We've got seed kits at our online store, by the way.
	Do you have self-defense means?
	You know, just make sure you have more than what governments usually recommend.
	Like, you have a flashlight and some batteries and get yourself some extra toilet paper.
	What are you going to do with all your toilet paper and your flashlight?
	While you're starving to death and you have no fresh water, yeah.
	Anyway, hey, I guess it's a positive thing that the UK government is at least telling its people to get ready, even if it's only for three days.
	You can bet that the government itself has, you know, three years of underground storage, bunkers, you know, continuity of government missile silos, stockpiled with everything, food, ammo, gold, emergency medicine, iodine, you name it.
	In the U.S., it's like a 10-year continuity of government plan.
	Underground cities, tunnels, all kinds of things.
	But they also tell the public, yeah, just be good for like three days.
	Just three days worth of supplies.
	You know, you'll be fine.
	Not really.
	Probably not.
	Hey, I had a guy at a farmer's market recently who sells peaches.
	Because he grows peaches on his...
	He's got a couple of peach trees.
	And he said that somebody stole hundreds of peaches off of one of his trees.
	Like, are you serious?
	Like, somebody just came in and, like, took your peaches?
	Yep.
	In central Texas, somebody stole his peaches.
	Like, man...
	Number one, that tells you food inflation is bad, but also that you have super delicious peaches.
	And people are crazy putting their lives at risk stealing food.
	I mean, how many peaches does a thief have to steal before it's a felony?
	And you know, in Texas, you can shoot somebody to stop a felony from taking place, by the way.
	I'm not suggesting that you do that.
	If somebody were stealing peaches from one of my trees, I would feel sorry for them.
	You know, I wouldn't shoot them.
	But I'm just saying that other people might.
	They might shoot them.
	Especially, what if times get more desperate?
	What if it's a starvation issue?
	And those peaches on your tree, that's what's going to mean the difference between life and death for your family and your kids.
	Would you then shoot somebody stealing your peaches if they're basically stealing your lives?
	Probably the answer for a lot of people in a collapsed scenario is yes.
	I'm just shocked to hear that this is already happening.
	But it does beg the question, how prepared are you to defend your food supplies?
	Or your property?
	Or to participate with, let's say, local law enforcement to defend your community?
	Against not just peach thieves, but raiders.
	Maybe foreign invaders.
	Who knows what's going down?
	Maybe domestic terrorists.
	There's been a lot.
	I mean, millions of people have crossed the border illegally.
	According to experts like Michael Yan, it's pretty clear that perhaps half a million or more of those people are enemy combatants that are just sort of occupying America and awaiting orders.
	What are you going to do if that situation goes hot, huh?
	There's a good question.
	Now, I've got a video to play for you.
	We're going back to Britain here for a moment.
	I've got a really great video to play for you of a British lawmaker.
	He's a member of Parliament.
	What is it?
	Andrew Bridgen, I think is his name.
	He was on with Doc Malik, a show called Honest Health, and he had some shocking things to say.
	This is like maybe a four-minute clip.
	He says that we, the UK, were actually already at war with Russia, but that the people aren't going to be told until July or August, something like that.
	Whoa, I mean, that kind of explains the, you know, mandatory draft that Sunak is pushing, right?
	Kind of explains the be ready with three days of food, have an escape route out of your home for some mysterious reason.
	You know, listen to this member of British Parliament because he explains it all.
	Check it out.
	Rishi wants out.
	We are actually at war with Russia now.
	We've got...
	They just haven't told you.
	Haven't told you.
	So say that again?
	We're actually at war with Russia now.
	I met with Andre Kellen, the Russian ambassador in London, a couple of months ago, and he said that we know that your people are firing those storm shadow missiles at us out of Ukraine because you couldn't train the Ukrainians to do it.
	We know you're doing it.
	And, I mean, everybody knows that there are lots of US... UK, French.
	The French are in there.
	I thought it was the Brits were down on the ground and special advisors.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Training sessions and teaching them and showing them.
	Isn't that how...
	But they were apparently...
	That's how we started with the Vietnam War.
	Vietnam War, yeah.
	Dude, what the frack are we doing poking the bear?
	That's really stupid.
	They're determined to get us into a war with Russia, and thank God we've got someone in Putin who at least has got some brains.
	Now you sound like a Putin lover.
	Well, I'm not.
	I'm not convinced any of them are any good, but at the end of the day, if you look at the facts, since 1991...
	We've moved NATO 1,000 miles nearer to Moscow.
	They haven't moved nearer to us.
	No, they haven't.
	And if you think about what we were trying to do, the EU wanted to bring in Ukraine, for whatever reason, and NATO wanted it, and they'd have put missiles on the border of Russia.
	Well, I mean, what did America do when the old Soviet Union tried to put missiles in Cuba 90 miles off the Florida coast?
	Yeah, exactly.
	They weren't having it, were they?
	No.
	And if you look back, the Russians have told us for long enough...
	Ukraine's got to remain neutral.
	You know, we're not going to let it get...
	They've told us this for a very long time.
	So hold on a second.
	You said Rishi wants out...
	Rishi doesn't want to be a...
	Rishi's told the generals he doesn't want to be a wartime prime minister.
	Really?
	So who's calling the shots?
	Is it the generals or the prime minister or someone else?
	Because...
	Oh, it's someone above Rishi.
	I mean...
	This is the thing.
	You don't really think that Rishi and Stalin...
	I mean, the whole thing's a pantomime in Parliament.
	So I keep saying...
	It's a pantomime.
	So I keep saying...
	Oh, no, it's not.
	Oh, yes, it is.
	I keep saying that our political system, we have this illusion of democracy, it's BS, it's a uni-party system, and they're puppets, and they're people pulling their strings.
	Is that what's happening?
	That's what's happening.
	And the next general election, I now realise, and I've been, I was beguiled by it for years, I mean, I've stood, I've won at four elections as a Conservative.
	The next election is not, none of them, they haven't been, it's not a race between the blue and the red team to see who crosses the finishing line.
	This is a baton handover.
	On all the big issues, net zero, COVID response, the WHO, the trans agenda.
	Who's pushing it then?
	Who's pushing it?
	Who's pulling the levers?
	It's Agenda 2030.
	It's the World Economic Forum, the 0.1 of a percent of the richest people in the world.
	The globalists?
	The globalists, yeah.
	The people who make...
	Listen, to make money, all you need is...
	All we need is next week's newspapers today, wouldn't we?
	Well, if you own next week's newspapers, you know what's going to happen and what's going to be reported, regardless of what the facts are.
	And that's the position these...
	So we're heading for more.
	And also, and also...
	Is that what you're saying?
	Yes.
	Well, we're actually already in it.
	They're not going to tell the people probably till July or August.
	Maybe a bit later.
	And I think Rishi wants out.
	But hold on one second.
	I mean, if we go to war with Russia, we're talking about potentially nuclear war.
	I know.
	Do they understand what they're playing with here?
	Well, we have a nuclear...
	We're not playing with fire.
	I know, I know, and it goes against all our defence thinking.
	We have nuclear weapons, so no one would do that to us.
	So why would we do it to someone who's got 20 times more nuclear, 30 times more nuclear weapons than we've got?
	And not just that, their air defence capability, the S500, I mean, it's a million times better than what we've got.
	We've got nothing compared to that.
	We've got nothing that can stop any of their...
	What is it?
	We've got Arrow or something?
	I mean, that can't do jack shit with their hypersonic missiles.
	I've seen a report that we just do not have any defense for the UK against the Russian arsenal.
	Because you know they've got hypersonic missiles.
	Yeah.
	We've got nothing against that.
	Nothing against that.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	There we go.
	Man, we've got to get this guy on the show.
	We've got to reach out to this guy.
	I'm going to have my producer do that to see if we can get him on.
	Um...
	How shocking is this situation, huh?
	I mean, here we have one of the very few members of the British Parliament who's actually willing to tell the truth about what's going on.
	And he knows that the UK really has no effective anti-air defenses against Russian missiles.
	He knows the UK is woefully behind on its military capabilities and military recruitment, personnel, you name it.
	I mean, it's not even a contest at this point.
	Russia's got over one and a half million active duty soldiers and now, what, over two years of frontline combat experience?
	The best artillery, the best drones, the best anti-air defense systems, the best hypersonic missiles in the world, the best ICBMs and the most ICBMs, the most nuclear warheads in the world is what Russia has.
	Britain wouldn't last an hour.
	In an all-out war with Russia.
	Nor would France, nor would Germany.
	And the U.S. might last a little bit longer, but it wouldn't be good either.
	And for lots of reasons that we've talked about in other podcasts.
	So maybe try not to provoke nuclear war with Russia.
	How about that?
	That's kind of the wisdom of the day.
	But think about all that.
	Think about your own preparedness plans, and where do you need to shore up some of your own supplies?
	How's your readiness looking?
	And we're about to jump into the interview with our lead attorney on this historic lawsuit, as well as Jason Fick, the expert consultant on this case.
	And just before we jump into that, one last appeal.
	If you've got any shoring up of your suppliers to do, shop with us.
	You'll help us with our lawsuit funding, our substantial legal fees.
	We're not asking for donations.
	We're not asking you to give us money.
	Just asking you to support us.
	And with your help, we can we can fund this for years to come.
	Whatever it takes to take it all the way to the Supreme Court.
	And this may be the beginning of an extraordinary victory for the American people.
	And I don't know what the outcome is going to be.
	Maybe maybe the case gets just dismissed.
	I don't know.
	Maybe the Supreme Court knocks the whole thing out of the air and or refuse to hear it.
	Maybe it never even gets that far.
	I don't know.
	I can't promise any particular outcome.
	All I can promise you is that we are willing to put resources, revenues, time and attention into this project.
	The outcome is in God's hands.
	Well, maybe not.
	It's more in the hands of the courts, some of which appear to be operating way outside of God's hands, but I'll put my faith in God, and if you'll help us, we'll take this as far as we can, whatever that is, even all the way to the Supreme Court.
	This could be history in the making.
	So we thank you for your support.
	Thank you for understanding the difficulty of what we're embarking on here today, and for What's his crime?
	Oh, he put this number in the wrong column on the spreadsheet.
	Really?
	So what's the crime exactly?
	If his name was Biden, there'd be no crime, right?
	But since it's not Biden, everything's a crime.
	Okay, anyway, enjoy the interview here, and I'll be back with you tomorrow, and thank you for all your support.
	God bless you all.
	God bless America.
	Enjoy the interview.
	Welcome to today's interview on Brighteon.com.
	Actually, this is big breaking news plus an interview with our lead attorney and also an expert consultant because we are about to make history today thanks to your support.
	And by the way, happy Memorial Day.
	We greatly appreciate all the veterans who fought for the freedoms that America is supposed to enjoy.
	And our lawsuit today is quite appropriate that we're filing it today because the federal government is attacking the freedoms that our ancestors, our brothers and sisters and fathers and sons and mothers and daughters fought for.
	And one of those is the freedom to speak without government interference.
	And yet, here we are today, in a time when our federal government literally conspires with foreign entities to censor, to deplatform, and defame American citizens, such as myself, and American companies, such as Brighteon and Webseed.
	And so today we are filing an historic lawsuit, and you can show my screen here.
	This is Webseed and Brighteon Media Inc.
	We are suing the Department of State, as you can see here, the Global Engagement Center, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, NewsGuard Technologies, Institute for Strategic Dialogue, and so on, including Google, as well as suing Facebook and Twitter, For their involvement in this grand global conspiracy to censor the freedom of speech of the American people.
	And joining me to help navigate and explain this extensive, truly historic lawsuit is our lead attorney, Jeff Graber, and our expert consultant, Jason Fike.
	Welcome, gentlemen, to the show today.
	Thank you for joining me.
	Thank you for having us.
	Thanks, Mike.
	Let's start with some introductions, because this may be the first time our audience has seen either one of you, although, Jason, I've interviewed you previously.
	But let's start with Jeff.
	Could you just give us a little bit of your background and your involvement in this historic lawsuit?
	Sure, Mike.
	I am situated in Florida, but practice all throughout the country.
	Very broadly speaking, in the civil litigation arena, that's very broad, but takes out things like criminal and whatnot.
	I've been practicing for 17 years.
	About six, seven, eight years ago at this point, I met Jason Fick, and Jason and I started to get into This social media ordeal.
	Now, as we're going to discuss, Mike, the Brighteon and Webseed situation involves more than big tech, social media, your Facebooks, your Googles and whatnot, and we'll get into that.
	But what you're seeing now Publicized a fair bit.
	Was buried back in 2016, 2015 when I first came to know Jason.
	And it was Big Tech's first run with censorship, which involves suppression of free speech, deprivation of due process, what have you, in relation to the 2016 election cycle.
	And no one made a big deal of it.
	In fact, I think a lot of people figured Jason and I were crazy, and Jason might elaborate on what his personal circumstances were that even got us into this social media realm.
	But yeah, Mike, we've been fighting social media, the big tech giants, for six, eight years now.
	It's involved a couple trips to the United States Supreme Court, all over the country, California, And it's become really, really, really, really bad.
	Social media's efforts to suppress free speech.
	You're talking about ideologies, philosophies, politics.
	We're hearing that even the FBI just announced that they're going to step up now more collusion or complicity with big tech in the run up to the election later this year in order to suppress more voices that they don't want to hear.
	So we'll get back to that in a moment, Jeff.
	And thank you for your introduction.
	Let's introduce Jason.
	Jason, you've been involved in a lot of litigation here for a number of years, including in some of your own businesses that were destroyed and censored.
	So Jason, give us your introduction if you would please.
	What brought you to this point and your role as an expert consultant in this lawsuit?
	Well, thank you for having me, Mike.
	Yeah, I've spent a number of years, as Jeff was saying, that I had met Jeff years ago, and he worked as my counsel.
	We sued Facebook, now Meta.
	We've taken it to the Supreme Court twice.
	And the issues that we've been mostly fighting is the Section 230 issue.
	The courts applied it wrong in my case, and we have been predominantly stonewalled.
	They don't want to fix this.
	But because of the years of in and out of court after court after court after court, I became effectively probably the most proficient in Section 230 in the world.
	There's a lot of people that think they understand this law, but we can generally pull it apart.
	And, of course, what that did is that led me sort of to a public figure sort of situation.
	And, of course, then you and I cross paths because everybody – I mean it's almost universal now.
	If you haven't been suppressed by Google X, formerly Twitter, or Meta, then you haven't been saying anything of any value yet.
	Because the reality of the world is that they are suppressing speech.
	And although my case was much more business-oriented, they realized that those same tools that they were using for suppressing businesses were turned more towards free speech.
	And anybody that dissents with the government now – they will come after you.
	So, of course, what that did is that led me into a position where I was an expert in this situation, and that led us here, where Jeff Graber, myself, and you, and Webseed, and Brideon really looked into this, and it turned out that there was some nefarious stuff going on.
	Well, I think of you two as a formidable tag team in this lawsuit effort, and that's why I've described this as historic.
	Now, I have to say that both of you have been researching this and building this case and authoring this complaint.
	For, what, 18 months or something like that now.
	It's been an extended period of time.
	And during that process, a lot has been discovered that was not known before.
	For example, when you, with your cases with Section 230, you did not have access to a lot of the information.
	Some of it has come out in FOIA requests.
	Some of it has come out in discovery of other lawsuits, such as Missouri v.
	Biden, I believe, is one of them.
	But I'd like to ask, first Jeff, and then you, Jason, but Jeff, Talk to us about what is unique, uniquely relevant or pivotal in this complaint that has not been featured in previous attempts to directly sue big tech for deplatforming and censorship.
	Sure.
	What we believe, Mike, sets this case aside from others is, you know, whereas in the past you've seen the Jason Fick-type lawsuit, Go after the social media giants themselves for, in his case, crushing his livelihood.
	In his case, Facebook.
	Whereas you've seen that, okay, across the country for some time now.
	And whereas fairly recently, you also saw Ken Paxton, Texas AG, along with The Daily Wire and The Federalist, Commence a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas Federal Court.
	And they are focused primarily on government's involvement with third-party censorship companies, third-party censorship tools.
	And we'll get into what those companies are and what they mean in a moment, but you're talking about like NewsGuard, Information Strategic Dialogue, ISD, the GDI, Global Disinformation Index, two out of three of which are abroad, foreign entities suppressing domestic speech as if it wasn't scary enough.
	Ken Paxton, Attorney General Paxton's lawsuit, comes at this censorship scheme From that angle.
	And then as another example, you see a type of lawsuit like Missouri versus Biden, right?
	Which originally started in the Louisiana federal court system, made its way up to circuit courts and whatnot.
	There you're seeing allegations concerning government leaning on heavily, heavily coercing the big tech giants, your Facebooks and whatnot into censorship.
	our case and you know it evolved and it evolved and it evolved for yeah mike probably a year year and a half we've been at this you've been right there with us um we have put together we believe first of its kind we believe everything the entire industry sensor complex the entire problem which You know,
	the 10,000-foot overview of our lawsuit, and then I'll kick it to Jason or back to Mike, it goes like this.
	Government doesn't like a viewpoint, doesn't like an opinion, doesn't like Brighteon and Webseed, for example, talking about non-vax methods of Treating COVID, for example.
	They don't like that.
	So what does government do when they don't like a voice and they may not like a Republican voice?
	They may not like a Catholic voice.
	Whatever.
	They then, as we've discovered and we've alleged, and we'll know more as this censorship scheme is unraveled, government enlists the services of censorship companies, Like NewsGuard out of New York City.
	I'm showing a chart, interlocking these.
	Yeah, go ahead.
	NewsGuard out of New York City, ISD out of England, GDI out of England.
	The government, Mike, funds these companies.
	You're talking upwards of a million dollar grants here and there from the DOD, the DOS, to your companies like ISD and whatnot.
	I may have that flipped.
	It's all outlined in our case, who funded who and when.
	Okay, so what happens is government, when there's a disfavored viewpoint out there, a disfavored voice out there, they enlist the services and they, in fact, fund your newsguards, your ISDs, your GDIs.
	Again, ISD and GDI being out of England, okay?
	These companies then generate what's called blacklists or whitelists or nutrition labels of media outlets such as Brighteon.
	Webseed, subset, natural news, etc., etc.
	These blacklists will label you, Mike.
	They will label your company untrustworthy, unreliable, risky, etc., etc., etc.
	That is the tool in our lawsuit.
	We call that the censorship tool.
	Government then takes to the censorship instruments.
	Big tech.
	Leans on big tech heavily.
	Facebook, Google, Twitter.
	Says, you know what?
	You deleted.
	You shadow banned.
	You ghosted.
	You eliminated these people.
	Let's take it the distance.
	Let's get them completely censored.
	And here's your substantiation.
	Here's your purported justification for the censorship.
	The news guard blacklist.
	The ISD nutrition label.
	Our case is unique in that it ties it all together.
	It is the entire industry censorship complex wrapped into one.
	So just to be clear, part of what's going on is that the United States federal government is using essentially taxpayer funds to fund, in some cases, overseas organizations to engage in In other words,
	it sounds like the United States government is laundering censorship through proxy organizations overseas.
	Is that an accurate description?
	Nailed it.
	Alright, so let's bring in Jason on this.
	You heard what Jeff just said.
	I mean, obviously, Jason, you're very familiar with this case because of your expert consultation on all of this.
	What would you add to that description that is highly relevant, pivotal, and even, I would say, historic?
	Because there's more that has been brought into this complaint than anything I've seen in any other lawsuit.
	So go ahead and continue with that thought, Jason.
	Thank you, Mike.
	I think that the biggest thing is that people need to understand this is happening.
	The United States is targeting free speech in America on the Internet.
	This was not an accidental thing.
	This was pre-planned.
	And what I mean by that is that some people may have at some point watched an interview between Mike Benz and Tucker Carlson.
	And he talked about some very complex things and a lot of abbreviated agencies and organizations and so forth.
	And it gets very, very complicated, right?
	Because, as you know, as a consultant on this, I did a lot of the research on this.
	And I had to fully understand the inner workings of what happened, how it happened, why it happened, and who it happened to.
	So...
	If we're going to simplify this, and I'm going to simplify this for your audience so that they understand exactly the magnitude of what we have here.
	It was in Obama's day.
	They signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, and that created what was called the Global Engagement Center, the GEC. Now, the GEC, its purpose and goal was to combat foreign disinformation.
	Now, let me say that again, foreign disinformation, not domestic disinformation, foreign.
	Now, that was its job and its charter, and that was what the funds were supposed to go for.
	Now, what happened was is that the GEC then turned it inward.
	And what they did was they, at first, and this is just one aspect of the case, they ran competitions, grant competitions, and they were looking for technologies to sensor better, faster, and more easily.
	Now, what they did was that these companies, NewsGuard and DisInfoCloud and many others, they created technologies to censor speech.
	Now, these are the tools.
	This is what Jeff Graber was talking about, the tools that the United States funded.
	They gave grants to these companies, like NewsGuard.
	And these companies then took those tools, which were supposed to be for.gov and.mil sites, and they opened them up to domestic...
	Social media companies.
	So now, these social media companies have the tools and technologies that the United States funded to censor at the hands of big tech.
	And they did.
	Not only as if that was not already bad enough, probably the most egregious thing that I can even imagine is that the United States is not only...
	Funding domestic NGOs, non-government organizations like NewsGuard and so forth, they're funding foreign agencies like the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, the ISD, or the GDI, the Global Disinformation Index.
	I mean, think about it.
	Global Disinformation Index.
	I mean, it may as well just call it the blacklist.
	Well, yeah, yeah, exactly.
	But as you're saying this, it strikes me that this is exactly the way that the intelligence communities in the deep state attacked Trump.
	They funded foreign groups to fabricate a Trump dossier, which was used to smear Trump and even to impeach Trump.
	By the way, the reason I'm even mentioning Trump is because part of the reason that we were targeted for deplatforming, I believe, is because of our support of Donald J. Trump in the 2016 and 2020 elections.
	But one thing I want you to answer, and then we'll turn it back over to Jeff, is that it's important that Correct.
	the United States government.
	This isn't just some nebulous thing.
	We were caught in some big thing.
	They specifically named us and in one way or another said, take these people down, us.
	And Big Tech complied, correct?
	That is correct.
	Natural News, Brighteon, your companies were specifically named by these companies.
	In fact, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue did two massive government-funded reports.
	The United States funded that, and they did massive hit-piece reports about how your disinformation – That's right.
	Exactly.
	Let's go to Jeff on this.
	Talk about the legal standing issue here, since we are specifically named in various ways, various documents, and so on.
	In your Do you think that it's going to be more difficult for big tech entities and government entities to try to dismiss this case than otherwise it would be?
	Because a lot of groups that filed lawsuits were not specifically named.
	We have been specifically named.
	Is that really pivotal here, Jeff?
	I mean, Mike, God willing, we stay away from a corrupt judge, a corrupt bench.
	I'm not joking, regrettably.
	God willing, we stay away from a corrupt judicial situation.
	I feel really, really, really good about your case.
	The harm is point blank because of what you said there, Mike.
	I mean, this is not a situation where I'm not talking down on these efforts, but this is not like a...
	Ken Paxton situation where he's joining a lawsuit to protect the sovereignty of Texas and Texas statutes involving social media and stuff.
	This is not a situation where people are just trying to go preserve constitutional rights.
	It is all of that.
	But you were specifically harmed.
	I mean, these reports are cited right in our complaint.
	They meant to destroy you.
	Your name was specifically listed.
	I believe Jason's more of the factual guru.
	I believe the listings spiraled out of the Twitter discoveries in Missouri v.
	Biden.
	That's right.
	I think.
	I think that's at least where it started.
	So, yeah, I mean, we learned of this under a year ago, right?
	And as Jason said, you are specifically listed.
	I feel really, really good about the lawsuit sticking around.
	Now, of course, I'll be real quick because this might bore the viewer.
	Of course, all the defendants will take a shot at dismissal.
	And it's going to be slow at the start because we got to serve some of the foreign entities in England.
	But yeah, Mike, get through that dismissal stage.
	And this would be a very scary proposition, I would think.
	For all of the defendants to air the dirty laundry and discovery.
	See, I'm glad you brought that up, Jeff, because this is absolutely critical.
	I want our audience to understand our commitment to this process.
	And I have to thank our audience and our supporters because without their financial support of us over all these years, we would not have been able to even fund your efforts to put this together and to file this.
	This is not an inexpensive operation in order to pursue this.
	The ongoing litigation costs can be quite substantial.
	Just as we benefited from the Missouri v.
	Biden case.
	So we have to thank, I believe it's A.G. Schmidt in Missouri who filed that case.
	I believe that's who he is.
	But the parties behind that case were able to provide us with evidence that helps strengthen our case.
	In the same way, our case contains strategies and especially through discovery, as we get to discovery and we compel discovery, and correct me if I'm wrong because you're the attorney here, but as we compel discovery from these named parties, but as we compel discovery from these named parties, we will no doubt uncover an extraordinary amount of additional information that can be used by other people who were harmed and blacklisted and had their reputation smeared by this censorship.
	industrial complex.
	Is that accurate, Jeff?
	Spot on.
	It takes a village, Mike.
	It takes a village.
	You know, Jason and I, not tooting horns, we were the pioneers.
	We were the trailblazers, unquestionably, in this arena six to seven years ago.
	And you talk about, like, Generations, right?
	It's not a generation, but one generation benefiting from preceding generations and so on and so forth.
	I mean, you look at some of the big cases, like the Henderson case out of the Fourth Circuit, citing to a Professor Dan Doob treatise, verbatim.
	And Dan Doob, his treatise, his law review is straight out of our Jason Fick filings.
	And it's just amazing, you know, You have to be bold.
	Someone has to take a step.
	And if you don't...
	This is...
	I put this up there as one of the probably top three problems facing this country, facing this world.
	You're talking about bedrocks of the United States Constitution on the line here, our children.
	It is scary, scary stuff.
	And it takes brave people, Mike, like you, like Jason Fick, to make the first steps.
	And you know what?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, Jason and I have had a very long, expensive, tough go at things, but others have benefited from us.
	Just as Mike, you were saying, we've benefited in part from the Missouri v.
	Biden case.
	So everybody out there has to stand up.
	Stand up.
	Absolutely.
	And I want to bring Jason in because, Jason, you have endured for many years a court system.
	This is my opinion, a court system that did not understand what the language of Section 230 even said.
	And by the way, our case goes way beyond just 230.
	This is not simply a 230 Section 230 case.
	It's way beyond that.
	However, you said earlier that you believe you are probably one of the people who's the most informed, if not the most informed, about what 230 actually says, what it means, and how it is properly interpreted.
	But do you feel like, with this case, Jason, that this is the breakthrough, or could be the breakthrough that you've been waiting for, for the courts to finally see the light of this runaway censorship complex?
	Well, Mike, you've got a good point there.
	It depends on how you consider the breakthrough.
	I knew that when I was fighting my case and fighting over Section 230, the issue is that the courts have not applied as written, as intended by Congress, or even constitutionally.
	We've been fighting to fix that.
	But the problem is much, much larger.
	Obviously, as many of you know, I'm also the founder of the Social Media Freedom Foundation.
	And the point is that our foundation is...
	Our purpose is essentially to ensure that these freedoms exist even on the internet.
	Our constitutional rights don't stop at the keyboard.
	That's just not how it works.
	So this problem that we have with social media, I knew for years, I've known it was deeper than just big tech.
	But one of the things, and I would think that this ties in with why this case is so different than every other case.
	We're bringing up your website, Social Media Freedom Foundation there.
	Thank you, Mike.
	Okay.
	So essentially, if you sue Facebook and you say that they're violating your constitutional rights because they're restraining your liberties and your property, right?
	Right.
	They say, well, they're not violating your First Amendment rights because they're not a government organization.
	They point this way.
	And then if you sue the government and you say, well, you guys in the government are telling big tech what to do, and they say, well, big tech's a private entity, and they point this way.
	Now they're pointing at each other.
	The problem is that if you sue big tech, they blame the government, and the government blames big tech.
	They can't do that here because they're all involved.
	We have the money.
	That's all we did.
	We followed the money here.
	So although we're prepared for a Section 230 case, we'd welcome that.
	Go ahead, Facebook, Google X, because we're prepared for that.
	We've been dealing with that one for six years.
	We know exactly what it protects and what it doesn't protect.
	And by the way, although my case has yet to actually make it through because we have yet to have a court actually do their job, the reality is if you look at Dan Gard versus Instagram, we've been right all along, and the courts are finally coming around to it.
	So we don't see this being a Section 230 case.
	What this really is – This is your first amendment on the internet on the line.
	That is what this case represents.
	If we can beat this, we can stop it.
	This is critical.
	We are fighting for everybody's right to speak freely.
	This is what I want to get across to the audience here.
	The reason we are doing this, and Jason and Jeff, we've all had private discussions about whether we should even proceed with this case.
	Back and forth, looking at the evidence, looking at the cost, looking at even just the energy cost.
	The reason we are pursuing this is to fight for your right to speak, to fight for your freedoms, to set a precedent that the government cannot launder censorship through these third-party companies to influence big tech, to collude with big tech, to blacklist people just because they don't like what they're saying.
	And this new language that we've heard in the last couple of years of, oh, disinformation and misinformation, these are just code words for blacklists.
	That's all it is.
	And how many times have we found out that what one government said was misinformation, such as, oh, Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russia collusion hoax.
	Well, then, you know, a few years later, oh, guess what?
	It's all confirmed.
	It was all real the whole time.
	But we were just, you know, deceiving you.
	So that's what this is about, folks.
	We are fighting to take this all the way to the final decision to set a precedent to defend the liberty of freedom of speech for all Americans.
	That is exactly it.
	There's two elements to this.
	There's a financial element with the private companies because they've damaged you, but there is also a declaratory element, which is to stop the government, to declare this unconstitutional, because when the United States is facilitating Censorship with these private companies, I mean, think about this.
	And this is one of those, just think about this in concept.
	They're saying they're paying companies to essentially influence the restraint of our liberties and then also offering them protection when they do so.
	So not only is the government paying for it, influencing it, they're also protecting them from guess who?
	Us.
	That's pretty convenient, isn't it?
	Yeah, exactly right.
	And they're using our own taxpayer money weaponized against us.
	Now, I want to bring Jeff back here to answer this question.
	In our lawsuit, in our complaint, we are naming Twitter.
	Now, X.
	A lot of people mistakenly believe that Elon Musk is a champion of free speech.
	Well, we have on numerous occasions requested through Twitter's legal team to stop censoring us, to stop censoring URLs to brighteon.com, which they have been blacklisting for years, and also to stop shadow banning.
	which is HealthRanger on X and Twitter.
	Now, Elon Musk, to his credit, he did, or someone under him, did reinstate on a limited basis the Health Ranger account, but it is shadow banned, I'm estimating 99% shadow banned.
	So it's really just, they sort of throw you a bone, oh, you're back, but no one can really see you.
	And as the Twitter, I forgot the position there, Twitter principal said, well, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of reach.
	We can make sure no one can reach you.
	So, Jeff, what do you say about Twitter and why Twitter is named in this complaint?
	Well, we always sensed over the past year or so where we've been prepping, and you're right, Mike, when we were trying to correspond with these social media giants and either getting poo-pooed off or ignored entirely.
	I mean, we always suspected that Twitter – It was no different, right?
	But, you know, we kind of, our team I'm talking about, you know, we had that in the back of our head.
	We kind of took our pedal off of the metal a little bit there because it did seem like Mr.
	Musk was taking some steps in the right direction.
	You're right, Mike.
	In a public forum, I'm not going to get into too much what Twitter has done in whole or in part so far by way of resolution, but There's a little bit of resolution, albeit token resolution, a sham, basically.
	But Jason and I, during one of our late nights, either him at his house churning away or me at my house churning away, we started to discover much more explicit data out there.
	I'm crying out for the naming of Twitter as it concerns the overarching censorship scheme.
	For example, Jason, you know, hats off to Jason and his late night research.
	He found, I don't want to call it buried, maybe he can speak a little more to this, but he found a video or at least the audio segment of a video clip, an interview of Mr.
	Musk.
	And Mr.
	Musk is point blank admitting that To the censorship.
	And going so far as to saying that the most nefarious of them all, at least in his view, was GEC, which is a sub-agency of the State Department.
	And Mr.
	Musk is admitting in this audio clip that the government Was strong-arming Twitter into eradicating a quarter million accounts just like that.
	No real reason, just we're the government, we say so.
	And Mr.
	Musk goes on to say that they obliged.
	And the timing of what Mr.
	Musk was speaking of was really aligning with us and the overall industry censorship scheme.
	So we felt compelled, we felt obliged.
	To bring Twitter in.
	There was another avenue whereby we may have let a little discovery unfold and bring Twitter in vis-a-vis amendment, but the pre-suit evidence just became too glaring.
	And Twitter's lack of desire to do right by you just continued to Yeah, yeah.
	Absolutely.
	Twitter's a defendant.
	And it's not like Elon Musk doesn't know who we are.
	His new building in Austin is not far from where I am right now in this studio, by the way.
	I mean, Elon Musk is very much aware of who we are and the influence, the organic influence that we should have had has been stifled and suffocated deliberately by the actions of these companies.
	And one more question, Jeff, before we go back to Jason, can you enumerate what remedies are we demanding in this complaint?
	I mean, obviously there's a financial harm that's being enumerated, but what are we asking for?
	We're asking for the censorship plaguing America to stop.
	Vis-a-vis declaratory efforts.
	And we're asking for Brighteon and Webseed to be made whole based on the economic harm sustained as a result of the censorship scheme, as very broadly put.
	The two bodies of relief are broken out into 10 or 12 causes of action.
	We've got constitutional-based causes of action concerning the First Amendment, namely.
	We've got statutory causes of action derived from Texas Code concerning social media company conduct, what's right, what's wrong.
	We have equitable causes of action.
	We have court Causes of action, such as tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, business relations, and not only did big tech's crushing of you and your companies might harm you in the past, it's harming your relationships and your business opportunities moving forward.
	So yeah, two pools of relief.
	Declaratory action, stop.
	The Constitution means something, and it better stop quick.
	And make Mike and his companies right for the damages they've sustained.
	Broken across maybe 12 causes of action of every type of equitable, legal, statutory, constitutional.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Thank you for that answer.
	And again, this complaint will be public, obviously, as it's filed.
	And anybody can read this.
	And we even hope that this complaint can in many ways serve as a template for other legal teams.
	If they have similar causes of action and similar circumstances, then they may be able to benefit from this.
	And I want to go back to Jason.
	Jason...
	So you have your own lawsuit has been going on against Facebook for many years, but things have changed dramatically since the very first day that you filed that original lawsuit in the sense that, and I know you'll remember this, but when you filed that, most people believed that censorship was not happening.
	Just the idea of censorship was a, quote, conspiracy theory.
	Can you speak to how much that has changed now to where it's common knowledge that the government is engaged in suppressing voices that it does not like and what you think that means in terms of, for example, the general knowledge of prospective jurors or judges or even opposing legal teams in this process?
	What are your thoughts on that, Jason?
	We were crazy, Jason.
	We were crazy!
	We were.
	We were definitely crazy.
	So, Let me give you a little bit of background so that people understand exactly how far back I go.
	I got into Facebook back in 2010, and by 2012, the censorship issue was coming.
	Now, back then, it didn't have to do with ideology or politics.
	It really had to do with business, right?
	Which is the general theme of this entire lawsuit.
	It's an anti-competitive animus, right?
	Meaning a motive or intent.
	And unfortunately, what has occurred over time is that...
	Now, we're talking about this is 2012, 2013.
	I realized there was a real big problem.
	And I pioneered.
	I mean, sometimes my friends joke I'm like the OG of memes, right?
	We used to do, you know, when people talk about their 10, you know, or 15,000, you know, likes.
	I mean, I've got posts with 68 million back in the day.
	We had full reach.
	And actually, even to your point...
	As you were saying, freedom of speech is not freedom of reach.
	Well, let me explain that and unpack that a little bit because that's just a talking point.
	Let me explain exactly how that actually works and how the courts are now catching up.
	The point is this.
	The reach is distribution.
	Distribution, right, is deciding whether to make something available or less available, right?
	Well, that's what's called content development.
	It's deciding what gets pushed forward.
	Well, the courts have recently started to understand that that is not what Section 230C1 protects anymore, right?
	And that's what they thought it did in my, you know, six years ago.
	We're coming into this and we're saying, I was never treating Facebook as the publisher or speaker of my content.
	It's kind of absurd, right?
	Because I'm not holding them accountable for my content, but the courts believe that all publication decisions were protected.
	All of them.
	Meaning you simply couldn't treat them as a publisher.
	Well, the courts, and this actually just happened, May 8th, a decision, it's deep, D-E-I-P versus, I believe it's Apple, just came out, and the Ninth Circuit Court has finally come around, and they've realized that, in fact, if there's a breach of legal duty, Section 230C1 does not apply.
	Well, that was what my case was about, anti-competitive animus.
	Now, it was business-related, it was financial-related, But if you take that and you evolve that from 2013 on, that's what you're talking about here is that just got turned into ideological and political censorship.
	And because the government, of course, is protecting them, they also got involved.
	Now the government is not only protecting them, they're coercing them.
	They're paying for this.
	And because of that, well, you know, even how we started this entire interview, you said, well, they're They're ramping up their censorship.
	Yeah, and that's...
	In fact, I'm sorry to interrupt, but two points here, and just a note to Jeff, also keep this in mind, we want to talk about where this all goes.
	As you just said, Jason, how bad does this get if we don't win?
	If we don't stop this, where does this go?
	But, Jason, to your point, what you're describing is the fact that the courts are evolving their understanding of what's going on, but it's a multi-year delay, is what it sounds like.
	So the government...
	They innovate some dark censorship method and they say, let's just do it because we can get away with it.
	The courts won't even understand what we're doing for five years.
	And that's been true.
	But eventually the courts begin to catch up.
	And as you just mentioned that decision on May 8th, it seems like we are now arriving at this tipping point where the courts are beginning to understand exactly the depth and the breadth, you could say, of the censorship scheme that the government's carrying out.
	Go ahead, Jason.
	Well, think about this.
	Let's put this in the perspective of immigration.
	They're here.
	There's no one doing that right now, right?
	They're already here.
	If they've already done the censorship It's already done.
	Now, if the courts are going to take five to six years to catch up, which is where we're at, where we're just trying to get them to understand a very basic principle, which is 230C1 does not protect any conduct at all.
	Six years to get that basic premise out there.
	And we have congressional members saying it.
	We have a Supreme Court justice saying essentially the same thing.
	But the courts are not making this concrete law.
	Well, think about that.
	If they know that this is coming, that ultimately this is going to get repaired, they're racing for the finish line.
	They need to essentially stop Donald Trump.
	They need to break the country.
	They need to get such a grip on the country that there is no fixing it.
	That's what they're racing for.
	It's the same thing as the globalist agenda as opposed to a nationalist agenda.
	We're concerned about our constitutional rights.
	The globalists aren't.
	The globalists don't want freedoms.
	You know, they don't have a constitution globally.
	So essentially, the grip that they have on the online, you know, on the internet is, I mean, they're trying to outrun us.
	And the reality is, is that if we do not stop them here, I mean, what's going to be going into the Western District of Texas?
	This case is so monumental.
	Because it will be a situation where this court could stop it, or it could allow it.
	And if it allows it, our constitution is done.
	And if we lose freedom of speech, when considering that 80% of communications occur on the internet now, and they can be filtered through like four companies...
	There's no solving any other problems in the world.
	That's right.
	I mean, you can't have a democracy, I would argue, without freedom of speech because you can't have debates.
	You can't hear both sides of any issue.
	And Jason, your knowledge in this area is really impressive, and I'm so thankful that you're dedicated to the long-term fight here because this process could still take many years, and yet it's a fight that is worth it.
	Now, I want to bring Jeff back in and ask you, Jeff, Two questions.
	Number one, your opinion of what happens, where our society is headed if the censorship complex is not stopped.
	And then secondly, just a technical question, is it possible for a judge in this case to issue an injunction against big tech to even temporarily stop censorship during the time that this lawsuit is proceeding?
	No.
	Oh, absolutely, Mike.
	It'll be one of our first moves, most likely, in fact.
	um to go for the uh preliminary or temporary injunction sooner rather than later because yeah mike you're you're spot on there in recognizing that we don't have to necessarily wait a year or two or three uh for the end of the case for permanent enjoinder to occur uh you're darn right we're going to come out of the gates At least on our end, moving as quickly as we can.
	And part of that would involve an effort to secure a temporary or preliminary injunction, injunctive relief.
	Now, that kind of segues into the first question.
	Where's this all going?
	What's this country looking at?
	I mean, I'm scared.
	I'm scared.
	I'm scared.
	And I would be absolutely terrified If it weren't for us, Mike Adams, Jason Fick, Jeff Graber, others out there trying to stop this because this is serious, fundamental stuff at effort.
	I'm most scared.
	I'm most scared for my three young kids.
	I'm most scared for my three young kids and what this looks like.
	But I don't think people, you know, for six or seven or eight years now, In my conversations with folks and whatnot, it's just like I don't think they understand how deep this goes.
	I don't think they understand that the issues on the plate in Jason's case and in your case, Mike, are absolutely, you know, fundamental to religion, politics, free speech.
	Economics, livelihood.
	It touches everything in life.
	Social media is the modern public square.
	So I am very scared to answer your question about where this country is going if this does not stop right now.
	Jason's right.
	It's a sprinting match to the extent, Mike, where the people behind this are going to be quite pleased with what already has been accomplished.
	Elections lost.
	Businesses such as yours out of the way and crushed forever.
	So there will be a ringing of the bell.
	Once you ring the bell, you can't unring it.
	You can take the bell down, but it still rang.
	I would add, Jeff, to what you're saying that part of the dark future that's coming if we don't turn this around is that the only voices that will be allowed to have distribution on social media or mainstream tech sites will be those that are completely controlled by and aligned with government narratives which I would argue are almost always rooted in deceptions lies and trying to convince people to take actions that are counter to their own self-interest and
	I would add that over all the years that I've done podcasts and interviews and Our platform is Brighteon and Natural News.
	We have always consistently acted in good faith to help fellow human beings be more healthy, more informed, safer, more free, more self-reliant, self-sustaining.
	We are good faith operators in this space.
	It doesn't mean that I haven't done satire and some profanity from time to time, but I operate in good faith.
	I want to live in a world where everybody is better off, and yet the governments that are suppressing our voices are, in my opinion, entities that actually want to harm this world.
	They want to reduce liberty.
	They want to have people be less healthy, less free.
	And thus, we would end up, if we don't defeat this, this is my point, we would end up in a world where the only allowable voices are the voices that are trying to harm the people.
	And those who are trying to help the people are completely silenced, because that's what we're seeing in this case.
	Your comments, Jeff, and then we'll go back to Jason.
	It is that critical.
	You did not elaborate.
	You did not embellish, nor did I. It is that critical.
	Our world...
	Our world is hanging on this.
	We're not trying to toot our lawsuit's horn.
	We're not trying to make anything more out of this than what it deserves.
	It is scary, scary stuff.
	But thank God for the likes of a Mike Adams and a Jason Fick.
	We will fight, America.
	We will continue to fight.
	This group will continue to fight.
	And more of you need to join in.
	Thank you.
	And we have tremendous support from our customer base, by the way, to allow us to continue in this fight.
	So, Jason, your comments on what I just said there and about the potential dark future that we all face if we don't stop this government-sponsored censorship complex.
	What are your thoughts on, and also, what this means to the world, the benefits of winning this case?
	What would it mean to have freedom of speech actually restored in America, Jason?
	Well, I was thinking something along the same lines as what Jeff just said, which is there are not that many people that are willing to stand in the gap.
	It's difficult.
	The rocks are slung at you first.
	We're the first ones to get hit.
	And the reason that your sites are under attack by the government is because you stood in the gap, right?
	And that is a very difficult thing to do.
	And to your credit, You're not here doing this for clout.
	I can say that personally because of what I've known for the past year and working with you.
	You put your money where your mouth is.
	You stood in the gap.
	This is the real fight for America.
	If we don't do this, we are going to lose it.
	And the reason being is because every single problem that can be solved starts with a conversation.
	It starts with communication.
	And if we cannot communicate freely, We can't resolve the problem.
	And it's an odd time because people talk about the Revolutionary War, and that only took a 2% tax to strike it off.
	And nowadays, people aren't standing up.
	They're not saying no, that this is not okay.
	This is not okay what the government's doing.
	I mean, you step back, and your audience should think about it.
	Think about this.
	The government is taking your tax money to shut you up.
	To dupe you, to deceive you, to keep information from you, and the only way to solve problems is if you know the information.
	So the magnitude is unbelievable.
	I also wanted to make one other point that is a little concerning, and this is something where you start thinking, because I think prospectively, right?
	What's going to happen down the road?
	How are they doing what they're doing?
	Because they're five years in advance.
	The stuff that's happening now was already pre-planned.
	So what's coming next?
	Well, think about this for a moment.
	The TikTok ban.
	That got rammed through in a funding bill, and it was because it had too much opposition.
	But everybody says, well, it's foreign adversaries they're worried about.
	Well, the GEC was supposed to be working on foreign disinformation.
	Exactly.
	They're going to turn that inward in no time and start saying that sites like mine, well, they're going to accuse us of whatever, that, oh, you must be working for Putin or some nonsense like that.
	Well, think of it this way.
	Our government is now the foreign entity.
	Americans are essentially foreign to our own government now because then we become the foreign adversaries because our government really isn't working for America anymore.
	And unfortunately, I honestly think that that's really the case, that the government is now working for foreign entities.
	It's clearly paying other countries to censor American speech.
	I suspect that our government is corrupted with foreign entities.
	And then the people that are, you know, the white nationalists No, we're just patriots.
	We're the people that care about this country.
	That's legitimately all we are, but then we become the foreign adversary all of a sudden.
	So if you have a website that is giving out good information, I mean, think about it.
	Alex Jones with Infowars.
	When is he going to become the foreign adversary?
	When is his social media site or something like that going to be shut down by the president?
	Because...
	He poses a threat.
	But that's what's going to happen with the TikTok ban.
	And clearly, you know, the U.S. supports Ukraine.
	The U.S. is funding the entire Ukrainian government.
	And Zelensky, whose term has expired as of, you know, last week, Zelensky is no longer technically the president of Ukraine.
	And yet he canceled all free press in Ukraine and canceled elections.
	He is now a de facto military dictator in a country that the U.S. says is a democracy.
	So if they apply that same logic to Ukraine, they can apply it domestically.
	They can cancel all freedom of press.
	They can cancel all elections.
	They can declare themselves to be the dictators in charge and then use force and coercion in these schemes that are covered in this complaint in order to continue to enforce that dictatorial authoritarian control.
	That's my concern.
	I don't even think it's a can.
	I think it's a will.
	I think they're going to.
	I think they're going to do things that are so nefarious, so bad.
	And the question is, how far are they going to have to push before somebody pops off?
	Before something happens?
	Well, let me throw one more question out there, shifting a little bit, but I agree with the basis of what you just said there.
	Understand, and Jeff might want to comment on this too, but understand that the censorship weaponization It's a double harm for all those targeted because by censoring and deplatforming your company, they also deprive you of revenues that you would otherwise need in order to fund legal efforts to defend your civil rights and constitutional rights.
	So this is absolutely key.
	Our companies, Brighteon and Webseed and Natural News, we have been incredibly fortunate and very rare.
	It's very rare to be in a situation where you can survive all that blacklisting and still have enough revenues in order to achieve a legal defense of your rights to exist.
	But I can't tell you how many other publishers in this space are bankrupt at this point because of the censorship.
	Jeff, did you have a comment on that?
	Not necessarily, but I can, which is to support that notion.
	Jason and I have been approached by many folks, and they've been bled to death.
	Death by a thousand paper cuts.
	They've been choked out revenue-wise, such that they can't afford to protect their rights.
	And big tech absolutely knows it.
	Big tech absolutely knows the war of attrition suits them.
	Choke people out financially, and then they just can't go to court.
	Right, right.
	And also when they censor you, you can't defend against the smears and lies.
	You can't defend your reputation.
	So we found this, so many false accusations, blatantly fiction out of nowhere, like it was written by some AI role-playing game or something, accusations against myself and our companies that have no basis in fact whatsoever, but since you're censored, you can't defend against that.
	You can't call out the lies, and they know that too.
	It's all part of the strategy.
	It's a vicious cycle.
	It is.
	So we're about to wrap this up.
	Number one, I just want to say again, thank you to both of you gentlemen for, number one, you've both endured so much over these years, especially Jason with your lawsuit.
	And they destroyed your business, Jason.
	Absolutely destroyed it.
	And you, organically, you should have actually been extremely financially wealthy at this point based on the business ideas that you built.
	In a meritocracy, you would be a very wealthy individual right now.
	If they had not breached their legal duty, Where I was aimed in life, I mean, we were doing $300,000 a month in 2013.
	Imagine what that would be today.
	It's in the billions.
	And they took it all.
	Jason was bigger than BuzzFeed.
	BuzzFeed had 9.6 million.
	I had 12.7 million fans on Facebook.
	And they didn't restrict the reach, and that is exactly it.
	They've duped the courts into believing that they're allowed to control that reach.
	They're not.
	That's manipulation.
	That's content development.
	That's the entire premise of how they became the giants that they are today because the courts never stopped them.
	And what they're doing is illegal.
	And it has to stop, or we have no chance.
	We have no chance because they're going to run everybody into the ground financially, as they did to me, or they're going to run your voice into the ground and they'll simply silence you across the board.
	I mean, can you believe in your lifetime that you would hear a term called depersoning?
	Right.
	You're just shut off on the internet.
	Now, we talk about that in the lawsuit.
	It's a matter of coordination.
	Somebody had to coordinate that.
	And who do you think did it?
	Well, we think we know exactly who did it.
	The government.
	Because there is a coordination where they attack certain individuals and they take them out everywhere across all platforms.
	And the only way that happens is if you have somebody in the league coordinating the whole thing.
	Mm-hmm.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So, again, just to summarize, and we're going to wrap this up, to summarize for our viewers, this is, in my view, and also the views of our attorneys and expert consultant here, this is an historic lawsuit.
	We believe that this may be the most important free speech case in the history of the United States of America.
	And because of victory in this case, would re-establish and reaffirm the freedom of speech that was enumerated in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which was itself an amendment to the Constitution because the framers were so concerned about government abuse, they came back a few years after the Constitution and wrote out the First Amendment, Second Amendment, and so on, right?
	We are living in a time when that is all being crushed, but this court case can reaffirm it, it can reestablish America, it can bring us back to our constitutional republic where the concepts of democracy once again function because we can all participate in conversations and debates and criticism of our own governments or other governments around the world.
	And that, all those principles are critical pillars To the proper functioning, even the existence of a constitutional republic.
	So, last comments.
	Let's go to Jeff first.
	Is there anything else that you need to add today or comments on what I just said, just to wrap this up?
	I would just say this in closing.
	The United States Constitution is forever indispensable.
	We witnessed What this looks like.
	We witnessed this playbook, at least in the history books, emanating out of Germany in the 1930s.
	Truly, truly.
	Eradicate voice.
	Label people as disfavored.
	Get them out.
	And we see where that took us in the 1940s.
	Scary stuff.
	Our Constitution means something.
	It's what makes us incredible.
	We must protect it.
	And again, thank you, Mike.
	And thank you, Jason.
	It takes brave souls, fellas.
	Let's keep up the fight.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Thank you, Jeff.
	Jason, your final thoughts for today's interview.
	I want to thank you, Mike, and everybody involved in this.
	It does take brave people to stand up.
	And I know it's a scary proposition to go up against forces this big.
	And all I can hope for at this point is that we have brave judges and brave courts because this is a monumental fight.
	Arguably, I would say that it's probably the most important case in America, period.
	Because if we don't have free speech on the internet, we're not going to be able to resolve anything else.
	And at that point, you know, everybody wants to avoid any kind of, you know, Any fighting.
	We don't want to do that.
	We want to use our words.
	But when our words are no longer usable, you have to result in other things.
	We don't want that.
	We need the government to back off.
	Stop messing with big tech.
	Big tech needs to stop suppressing speech.
	And even like we talked about with Elon and X, we're amenable to a discussion.
	Let's get this resolved.
	I mean, We don't foresee the others, Google and Facebook, backing off, but we're amenable to a discussion.
	Let's back this down a bit.
	Let's stop suppressing people.
	You shouldn't be ramping up into an election to suppress more information.
	Everybody should be able to have a voice, no matter what it is.
	That's just the way that we are in this country, is we should have our voice.
	So again, I want to thank you and everybody there, and I want to just employ your audience.
	Go out, buy their products, help them out, because they've got a big fight ahead of them.
	They've got good counsel, and my help, I'm in there.
	We're in there fully.
	We're going to fight this through, and we're going to do the best job we possibly can.
	But like you said, it is an expensive fight.
	It is difficult.
	I mean, the amount of work that's already gone into it has been monumentous.
	So keep up the fight.
	And thank you, Mike.
	Thank you for having us involved in this.
	And we hope to someday be celebrating and saying, you know, we stopped this from happening.
	History in the making here, folks.
	This is what it looks like, and these are the gentlemen who are going to help us achieve that.
	So thank you both for joining me today.
	It's been a pleasure, and I really appreciate you joining me in this time.
	And for all of you watching, of course, we continue to ask for your support.
	At healthrangerstore.com.
	As you support us financially, we are able to continue to fight for your freedom.
	And we're also simultaneously building the infrastructure of human freedom with our various projects, such as brighteon.io, which is the free speech decentralized online platform that has no central servers and therefore cannot be seized and cannot be taken down.
	And it's blockchain driven.
	And we also have an AI project called brighteon.ai, which is free, non-commercial, Freely downloadable, and we are building the world's biggest and best trained AI large language model that's trained on reality-based information, which includes hundreds of thousands of articles from naturalnews.com and other.
	You wouldn't believe the donations we have coming in to us from groups around the world that are donating, in some cases, thousands of PDFs and thousands of hours, in one case, over 10,000 hours of audio to be used as training for these models.
	So we're doing what big tech refuses to do.
	We're actually putting out free tools that you can use without surveillance and without censorship.
	And we're also fighting big tech's existing censorship.
	But we need your help in all of this.
	So continue to support us at healthrangerstore.com and also share this interview everywhere.
	And for all of you watching who are maybe new to this channel, Understand that we have both the funding, the revenue streams, and the determination to see this through all the way to the Supreme Court.
	That's what it takes, as long as it takes.
	We will see this through because we are here to fight through the rule of law, not violently, but through the rule of law, through the court system, to fight for the free speech rights of all Americans.
	And that's something worth fighting for.
	So God bless you all.
	God bless America.
	I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, the founder of brighttown.com, naturalnews.com, and other projects.
	Take care.
	I've got some great news.
	We have some exciting new products at healthrangerstore.com and some old favorites that are back in stock.
	Let me show you what we have.
	If you'll go to the camera here on the desk, we've got quercetin that is now available, plant-based quercetin.
	Which is extremely popular right now.
	Check it out, healthrangerstore.com.
	We've got pine needle nasal spray, which is made from the loblolly pine that is very high naturally in shikimic acid.
	And I actually harvested those pine needles myself, by the way.
	So that's a really exciting project.
	I won't travel without it, by the way.
	Even public speaking, I always use that to rinse my nasal passages before going out in public.
	We've also got back in stock now laundry detergent powder.
	And remember that we don't use any toxic fragrance chemicals of any kind.
	We don't use any harmful ingredients that harm aquatic species or the environment or the waterways or anything like that.
	If you want laundry detergent that's clean for you and clean for the environment, then you can get that at healthrangerstore.com.
	Blueberry vanilla pancake mix powder that is a fan favorite.
	We keep running out of that.
	We've got that back in stock.
	We have a seven-seed snack mix now that has this combination of really high-nutrition seeds.
	This is going to be a very popular product.
	You can add it to cereals.
	You can add it to mixes.
	You can eat it as a snack all by itself.
	I know people are going to love that one.
	We've also got Chaga mushroom powder back in stock there as well, and a few other products.
	Check out our website, healthrangerstore.com, and there you'll see the specials that we have.
	You'll see right there is Memorial Day specials that we have.
	We've got lots of things back in stock.
	We're able to offer discounts from time to time, and new products are coming in regularly.
	And, of course, every purchase that you make at healthrangerstore.com helps support our infrastructure, what we're building for you, the platforms for freedom of speech like brighteon.io, the free downloadable AI language model tools at brighteon.ai the free downloadable AI language model tools at brighteon.ai helps fund this platform, the free speech video platform, brighteon.com, as well as naturalnews.com, and other efforts that we're undertaking.
	Everything that we do is designed to support the infrastructure of human freedom.
	We want you to be healthy.
	We want you to be well off.
	We want you to live with abundance and inspiration, and with a sense of optimism about the future, which I know is difficult these days, given all the insanity in the world, but one of the things that helps you the most is staying healthy.
	And that's why we do laboratory testing, extensive testing, for all the products that we sell at our store.
	And that's why we choose clean, organic, certified organic, raw materials, ingredients, for all of our products.
	So, again, shop at healthrangerstore.com.
	You'll be doing yourself, your health, a favor while also financially supporting us so that we can continue to build the infrastructure of human freedom that benefits you and everyone around you.
	And thank you so much for your support.
	I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon and the Health Ranger Store.
	And God bless you all.
	Have a wonderful day.
	Take care.
	A global reset is coming.
	And that's why I've recorded a new nine-hour audiobook.
	It's called The Global Reset Survival Guide.
	You can download it for free by subscribing to the naturalnews.com email newsletter, which is also free.
	I'll describe how the monetary system fails.
	I also cover emergency medicine and first aid and what to buy to help you avoid infections.
	So download this guide.
	It's free.

▲