Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
The silent majority is no longer silent. | |
| This is The War Room with Owen Schroyer. | ||
| Please stand by for further details. | ||
| We return to your regularly scheduled program. | ||
| Well, ladies and gentlemen, the Democrats in California do things that just... | ||
| Totally defy all morals and logic. | ||
| And this latest one may be the most egregious example. | ||
| You'd think, you know, child sex trafficking. | ||
| I mean, if pedophilia is up for debate amongst the Democrats, you ask yourself, well, where do you draw the line? | ||
| How about child sex slavery and trafficking? | ||
| Do you draw the line there? No. | ||
| No. No, they're voting to protect child traffickers now in California. | ||
| So we have that. But first, the Republicans put out this powerful ad and it all ties in. | ||
| Maybe this is why the Democrats in California are voting to protect child sex traffickers. | ||
| Look at this latest ad from the GOP. President Biden does not care. | ||
|
unidentified
|
About the fate of 300,000-plus unaccompanied children that have been placed with sponsors in the United States since he became president. | |
| We're here today because the Biden administration has utterly failed. | ||
| It has failed to secure the border. | ||
| And it has encouraged parents to send their minor alien children on a dangerous trip to the United States unaccompanied. | ||
| And it's failed to protect these children after they were let into the United States. | ||
| There's been a 357% increase regarding unaccompanied minors at our border. | ||
| The policy choices of the Biden administration are creating an unending flow of children to this country. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's a conveyor belt of children. | |
| Being forced through the system. | ||
| And what's the priority of HHS? Just get them out as fast as we can. | ||
| They go to factories. They go to slave labor. | ||
| I've written to the FBI and asked the FBI, where are the 80,000 plus children this administration's lost? | ||
| They don't know. The New York Times illustrated that senior Biden administration officials like Secretary of Health and Human Services, Vassara, knew, knew about this and continued to move children out of Health and Human Services As fast as possible by loosening vetting requirements for sponsors. | ||
| I have not received a response from the secretary on what has happened to 85,000 children. | ||
| The point is Secretary Becerra needs to come. | ||
| Every single person crossing the border now, if they want a good chance of surviving, have to pay a toll to the transnational criminal organizations. | ||
| It was estimated that a year and a half ago, transnational criminal organizations were making $800 million a year in human trafficking. | ||
| You know, you can't help, as a mama, think about your own children. | ||
| And if we, as leaders of the greatest nation in the world, are not fighting to protect the most vulnerable, we are not doing our job. | ||
| And let me be clear, even one child in the custody of human traffickers is horrific and wrong. | ||
| But 127,000? | ||
| This administration, no wonder Secretary Becerra is too scared to sit there. | ||
| He should be embarrassed of that record. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is obviously a family crossing right here. | |
| Pretty sad situation to think that we have laws that would protect us from this that are not being enforced. | ||
| HHS is responsible for them and they can't find them. | ||
| They don't know if they're dead or alive or trafficked or being worked. | ||
| Why on earth? Would you not try and take the safest path to get here legally? | ||
| Why on earth wouldn't you stop at a safe third country and say, I have a difficult, dangerous situation in my country, I have documentation to prove it, and I'm applying for asylum? | ||
| What's wrong with that? We have incentivized the use of children in illegal immigration, and nothing will change until we change our policy. | ||
|
unidentified
|
How much more alarming does it have to get that we would have the White House administration standing up here with us announcing the policies to improve it and announcing that we have a closed border? | |
| The kids are in danger. | ||
| The kids are in slavery. | ||
| The kids are being exploited. | ||
| And it should not happen in the United States of America. | ||
| Why in the world we would allow drug cartels to become rich off of our most vulnerable is beyond me. | ||
| It's disgusting and it must stop. | ||
| We need to do better than this. | ||
| We must do better than this. | ||
| We must show that we care about the fate of these children by doing our job. | ||
| We must show that we care about the fate of these children by doing our job. | ||
| It's my life and my passion in front of me. | ||
| Can you draw in my heart just the soul of me? | ||
| You won't find ashes in me laid bare. | ||
| It's my desire in your heart. | ||
| Ladies and gentlemen, you want to talk about an InfoWars day? | ||
| Today is an InfoWars day. | ||
| Today, Wednesday, July 2nd, 2023 is an InfoWars day. | ||
| And I'm going to have to be extremely economical with my time, with our time today. | ||
| So I'm going to try to have this first segment as the only segment where I'm a little maybe frazzled and not structured. | ||
| But let me tell you what we got coming up. | ||
| First of all, This morning, we spent about five hours being gaslit by our FBI director and Democrat members of Congress with Christopher Wray testifying in front of the House Oversight Committee today. | ||
| And honestly, I will tell you, I don't know if I've ever been more nauseous watching a political event. | ||
| And that's saying a lot, because I've watched a lot of corrupt political events. | ||
| I mean, January 6th hearings, everything else. | ||
| What we witnessed today, it's like we sink to a new low every time. | ||
| What we witnessed today, and Christopher Wray wasn't even the worst of it. | ||
| In fact, the Democrats were so pathetic today, so disgusting today, that it made Chris Wray look good, if you can believe that. | ||
| But my goodness... | ||
| It's just amazing, isn't it, how the director of the FBI has no idea what goes on at the FBI? Yeah. | ||
| I guess he's like one of us. | ||
| We don't know either. Neither does he. | ||
| Nobody knows. Nobody knows. | ||
| He's just under oath, and he's the FBI director, and the Oversight Committee has questions, and they just don't know. | ||
| But they do know, and we know they know. | ||
| And it's even more frustrating when you actually know all the background information, and quite frankly, And this isn't a knock on the Republicans that are on the committee, but it's clear that even they don't have the full spectrum of knowledge. | ||
| And part of the reason I only have the full spectrum of knowledge on some of the issues is because, unfortunately, I'm going through the legal process with some of this stuff. | ||
| So I get a little insider information there. | ||
| But for Christopher Wray to say he doesn't know... | ||
| If there were any confidential human sources on the ground at the Capitol on January 6th is so ridiculous. | ||
| I mean, folks, again, I use the analogy every time, but it's because that's just how ridiculous it is. | ||
| I am not wearing a gray jacket right now. | ||
| I do not have a floral pocket square in a pocket of a gray jacket. | ||
| I am not wearing a watch with a black band and a gold face. | ||
| I don't have a gold t-shirt on. | ||
| With the Hensley buttons, that does not happen. | ||
| I do not have a beard. | ||
| I don't have a facial hair on my chinny-chin-chin. | ||
| I mean, that is how ludicrous it is for Christopher Wray to say they don't know if there were any human sources on the ground. | ||
| Or they don't know how many there were, or they can't answer the question. | ||
| And I'm sure when he says, we'll get back to you on that, we're all going to hear. | ||
| Because I hear that all the time. | ||
| Oh, we'll get back to you. Oh, we'll have to get the answers for you later. | ||
| We never get the answers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's funny, isn't it? And then you had the Democrats. | |
| They attacked Trump. | ||
| They used most of their time to attack Trump. | ||
| They used most of their time to attack Trump voters and Republicans and conservatives. | ||
| Make the issue about January 6th. | ||
| Make the issue about Mar-a-Lago. | ||
| That's not what we're doing here. | ||
| This is about the FBI and the information we've seen from whistleblowers recently. | ||
| So... Of the five hours or however long it was, we've got a ton of highlight clips that we're going to be playing. | ||
| So like I said, it's going to be very structured from here on out because you've got to see these clips. | ||
| So we've got that going on. | ||
| Then, so after I'm done, like, I'm in a haze. | ||
| I'm in a haze. | ||
| I just walked through a smog, a smokescreen of propaganda where I'm getting gaslit today by this hearing. | ||
| And then what happens? | ||
| Joe Biden steps up to speak to NATO. Oh my gosh, and if I was in a haze, then I got knocked on my ass. | ||
| Joe Biden speaking to NATO about how important the integrity of borders are. | ||
| My uterus almost fell out. | ||
| Joe Biden talking about how important the integrity of borders are. | ||
| But see, but then he let the cat out of the bag in a big, big way. | ||
| And even for myself that understands the issues and you that understands the issues, Joe Biden put it in a way at NATO today where... | ||
| Again, even folks, we know what's going on. | ||
| Even we sometimes miss the picture. | ||
| Even we sometimes forget to look at the forest through the trees. | ||
| It's like, I know I talk about it, but he presented it in such a way that it's just like, this is the issue. | ||
| This is what everybody needs to understand. | ||
| Folks, almost everything that they're doing right now is all about the global government. | ||
| The climate change, the pandemics, NATO, it's all about global government. | ||
| It's all about this idea that there are threats that the planet faces and that we can only deal with if there's a global government. | ||
| That's what it's all about. | ||
| The pandemic, the war in Ukraine, Climate change, it's all about convincing you that there are issues that are existential to you that can only be dealt with on a planetary scale. | ||
| That's what it all comes down to. | ||
| And how convenient. They convince Americans that you shouldn't be proud of your country and you shouldn't appreciate the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, the very things that keep us free from the global government tyranny. | ||
| So it all makes sense now. | ||
| It's like, I knew that. | ||
| Obviously, I knew that. You knew that. | ||
| But when you hear him say it, it just realigns. | ||
| It fixes your sights. | ||
| You know, sometimes if you've got a... | ||
| A rifle and a scope. Sometimes your sight is a little off. | ||
| You've got to readjust it. You've got to get it back on. | ||
| So that's kind of how it was. My sight was a little off on these issues. | ||
| Maybe just to the right. | ||
| Yeah, I'm kind of talking about the pandemic, about this, and NATO about that, and climate change about this. | ||
| But then it was like... And then he said it about the global... | ||
| And my sight just went... | ||
| Just like... Perfect sight. | ||
| It's all about the global government. | ||
| They've got all these little things that they arrange and run in the meantime. | ||
| It's all about the global government. | ||
| Then... I mean, they have done some whacked-out stuff in California, folks. | ||
| I got a whole stack of the whacked-out stuff they've done. | ||
| California Assembly blocks legislation that would have made child sex trafficking punishable by life in prison. | ||
| California Assembly Committee blocks bill to make child trafficking a serious felony. | ||
| Why? Why? | ||
| I mean, this is open and shut. | ||
| What is controversial here? | ||
| I'll be open-minded. | ||
| I will open my mind so that it's nothing but a blank chasm like a liberal. | ||
| Okay, you want to believe that there's minor attracted people. | ||
| So you want to protect pedophiles. | ||
| Like, okay, fine. | ||
| Again, just hear me out here. | ||
| Okay, maybe I can find.00001% of my logic that would listen to you argue that minor attracted people are a... | ||
| It's a serious thing, and we need to consider them, and we don't want to offend them, and we want to make sure that they're protected here, and we're considering them. | ||
| So, okay, where do you draw the line? | ||
| You'd think everybody's against child sex trafficking, surely. | ||
| Like, there's no controversy there. | ||
| The Democrats, the liberals, they don't have to think twice about that, right? | ||
| That's not like a pedophile where they might have to consider that pedophile's feelings. | ||
| Child sex trafficking, you'd think that's open and shut. | ||
| No, there's no controversy here, yeah. | ||
| Throw them in jail forever, serious felony. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nope. Nope! | |
| So what goes through a Democrat liberal's head when they say, nope, child sex traffickers shouldn't get life in jail, and nope, it shouldn't be a serious felony? | ||
| But that's not all they're doing in California. | ||
| So all of this is coming up today, and more other political news. | ||
| I'm telling you, it's the Infowars Day. | ||
| And I did an hour and a half on Eddie Bravo's podcast that I just finished. | ||
| I'm so grateful to have this crew with me for the ride and you in the audience as well. | ||
| And it's only made possible with your support at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| So we're going to be loaded today, folks. | ||
| So do me a favor. Go to InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| Shop at the store. Get yourself some toothpaste that's great. | ||
| You brush your teeth with toothpaste. | ||
| Get the best stuff at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| The supplements are great. I love them as well. | ||
| Still the sales. | ||
| Air filters, water filters, emergency foods. | ||
| 10% off right now at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| So I've got some mixed emotions. | ||
| I do wonder... Does everybody feel the same way I feel watching these hearings? | ||
| Genuinely, I'm getting nauseous. | ||
| It's like it's beyond frustration or anger. | ||
| It's straight nausea. | ||
| And almost a survival instinct like, bro, this country is dangerous now. | ||
| This is dangerous. | ||
| When you got people that think and act and talk like the Democrats do on the oversight committee, like, whoa. | ||
| If there was a 30-foot tall spider coming out with me, dripping with venom from his veins, I would be more comfortable in that situation than dealing with these Democrats in Congress. | ||
| I'm not even kidding you. | ||
| That's how I see this. | ||
| That's the real threat I feel when I watch these liars, crooks, and scumbags. | ||
| And then Christopher Wray, who the FBI director doesn't know anything that goes on at the FBI. And now, oh, FBI whistleblowers are supposed to be just discounted and not listened to. | ||
| So for me, it was truly nauseating, and it was like a flight response. | ||
| It wasn't a fight or flight. It was like, no, there's no, this is flight. | ||
| This is, you get out of here. | ||
| Now, don't read into that too deeply. | ||
| I'm just telling you that was what I was going through, listening to that for five hours, and then just the embarrassment of Biden. | ||
| Deep State on the Ropes, FBI Director Chris Wray destroyed in Congress. | ||
| So again, we're going to go through all these clips now. | ||
| The Democrats, I'm not going to play into the Democrats' time, but let me just tell you what goes on. | ||
| The Democrats spent 50% of their time talking about how bad Donald Trump is. | ||
| They spent another 45% of their time talking about how bad Donald Trump's supporters are. | ||
| And then 5% of their time, they might have asked a real question about the FISA abuse. | ||
| So that's your breakdown of the Democrat time. | ||
| You know how it goes. You don't need to hear it. | ||
| Now we've got some epic clips here from some of the Republicans' time that we're going to play for you as well. | ||
| But I want you to keep this in mind. | ||
| Because this is a detail from today that should not be forgotten. | ||
| The House Oversight Committee has sent multiple subpoenas to the FBI for documents. | ||
| They have not responded properly. | ||
| In a proper fashion. | ||
| They've turned over documents late that were completely redacted. | ||
| Some documents they never turned over at all. | ||
| And the timeline to turn them over has already passed. | ||
| Why is Christopher Wray not being held in contempt of Congress? | ||
| If you or I ignored subpoenas and didn't properly respond to subpoenas, we would end up in handcuffs. | ||
| But not Christopher Wray. | ||
| Not a detail to be forgotten here. | ||
| FBI director defies Kevin McCarthy's warning on documents deadlines. | ||
| Well, yeah, why would he? He's been defying it for months now, and nothing ever happens, and he's not been held in contempt of court, so why would he start abiding now? | ||
| Kevin McCarthy has no teeth. | ||
| Kevin McCarthy says, I'm going to bite. | ||
| Christopher Reyes, I don't care, you don't have any teeth. | ||
| So let's start getting into the clips. | ||
| This is so ludicrous, it's unreal. | ||
| Clip two, Christopher Wray on if there were any FBI informants there on January 6th. | ||
|
unidentified
|
How many individuals were either FBI employees or people that the FBI had made contact with were in the January 6th entry of the Capitol and surrounding area? | |
| So I really need to be careful here talking about where we have or have not used confidential human sources. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Was there one or more individuals that would fit that description on January 6th that were in or around the Capitol? | |
| I believe there is a filing in one of the January 6th cases that can provide a little more information about this and I'm happy to see if we can follow back up with you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The answer, was there one or more? | |
| I mean, you would know if there was at least one individual who worked for the FBI who entered the Capitol on that day. | ||
| I can't, again, I just can't speak to that here, but I'm happy to get the court filing that... | ||
|
unidentified
|
Look, it's been two years, and you're now come before us. | |
| The gentleman asks these questions, makes all kinds of insinuations, and you nod your head yes, and then I ask you simply, was there one or more? | ||
| And you won't answer that. | ||
| So I'm going to make the assumption that there was more than one, more than five, more than ten, and that you're ducking the question because you don't want to answer for the fact that you had at least one and somehow missed understanding that some of the individuals were very dangerous and that there were others inciting individuals to enter the Capitol after others broke windows. | ||
| So I'm just going to move on. | ||
| Now, let me explain this, and Ray kind of hints at it himself. | ||
| So, I mean, look, again, I look at all the potentials, folks. | ||
| There's a potential that FBI Director Chris Ray is actually a good guy. | ||
| I know you might find that crazy. | ||
| But why would he mention that there's information about that already on the record in these other January 6 cases? | ||
| So let me tell you what he's actually talking about. | ||
| In the process of discovery and witness testimony and everything else that has gone down in some of the January 6 defendants' cases that go to court, they have called up witnesses and they have demanded for discovery. | ||
| And here's what happens when the issue of FBI informants or federal agents or confidential human sources comes up in the courtroom. | ||
| The answer, the bottom line answer, the most that has been able to be revealed has been that there are so many on the ground that day that they can't even possibly give you the information because it's so overwhelming. | ||
| Okay? Now, There's a reason why they don't have cameras in these courtrooms, and there's a reason why none of the mainstream media shows up to these cases to tell you what's going on. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because that's what's going on. | |
| So many potential federal agents or confidential human sources on the ground on January 6th that they can't even possibly provide the information because it's so overwhelming. | ||
| And then there's this other game that they play where it's the shell game technique. | ||
| And so they get to this person and they say, oh, I don't have that information. | ||
| You got to go to this person. So then they go to that person for discovery. | ||
| Oh, no, no, we don't have access to that information. | ||
| That's beyond our security clearance. | ||
| You got to go over here. And then they go over here and they say, oh, no, we actually don't handle that. | ||
| We just handle the payments. | ||
| If you want to know who the confidential human sources are, you got to go back over here. | ||
| So it's kind of like you ever been on hold? | ||
| Like, you know, you try to call your Internet or something. | ||
| And it's like they just jump you from operator to operator and group to group and it's like you're right back where you began and you're like, how did I, what? | ||
| That's basically what's happened in these January 6th defendants' cases every single time. | ||
| And Christopher Wray knows that. | ||
| Just like Christopher Wray knows there were informants on the ground and agents on the ground. | ||
| And if you listen today, you can tell he's being very, very careful the way he words things when he says agents, when he says informants, when he says human sources. | ||
| It's a big tell when you can see the constellation around this event. | ||
| But let's be perfectly clear. | ||
| Christopher Wray knows the answers to that question. | ||
| He knows if there were agents or confidential human sources on the ground. | ||
| He was the FBI director when it all happened. | ||
| He's been the FBI director as all these cases are getting litigated and all these questions are being asked. | ||
| And it's ludicrous, ludicrous that he sits up there and says that and doesn't have near the backlash from the media or even the Republicans there. | ||
| But we do have more of that coming up. | ||
| Do not go anywhere. The InfoWars War Room brought to you by InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| Rolls on. All right, let's pick it back up. | ||
| Christopher Wray on the hearing again. | ||
| He has no idea what happened on January 6th. | ||
| He was just the FBI director then, still is now with all the cases and everything going on, but he still has no idea here in clip three. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Things here. And please don't distract here because we're focusing on those who were there in an undercover capacity on January 6th. | |
| How many were there? Again, I'm not sure that I can give you that number as I sit here. | ||
| I'm not sure there were undercover agents on scene. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I find that kind of a remarkable statement, Director. | |
| At this point, you don't know whether there were undercover federal agents, FBI agents in the crowd or in the Capitol on January 6th. | ||
| I say that because I want to be very careful. | ||
| There have been a number of court filings related to some of these topics, and I want to make sure that I stick with them. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I understand that. | |
| But I thought I heard you say you didn't know whether there were FBI agents or informants or human sources in the Capitol or in the vicinity on January 6th. | ||
| Did I misunderstand you? | ||
| I thought that's what you said. Well, I referred very specifically to undercover agents. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. And so are you acknowledging then there were undercover agents? | |
| As I sit here right now, I do not believe there were undercover agents on scene. | ||
| Now, this got brought up a couple more times and it went similarly. | ||
| So I'm not going to continue with those types of clips. | ||
| But again, what does Chris Ray do? | ||
| He mentions ongoing litigation. | ||
| Where this information is being discovered and discussed. | ||
| Now, the question would be, why isn't he talking about it? | ||
| Is this to protect the January 6th narrative? | ||
| Is he genuinely thinking, I don't want to put any information out here on this hearing because it might affect these court cases? | ||
| Whether that's for good reasons or bad reasons, I don't know, but is that what he's thinking? | ||
| Because again, he's alluded to it multiple times. | ||
| The information is already out there, folks. | ||
| How many January 6th defendants are either in a court trial right now or have been in court? | ||
| You realize their lawyers have demanded this discovery. | ||
| Now, they're not really getting it. | ||
| They're getting the runaround. | ||
| They're getting the three-card money. | ||
| They're getting the shell game. | ||
| But enough has come out in some of these cases where, yes, they know there were confidential human sources at the very least there on the ground. | ||
| But it's the same old thing. It's, oh, well, we don't know, we have no way of knowing, and you'll have to go to this group to find out, or this group, and then this group will send you to this group, and then this will send you to this bureaucracy, this bureaucracy down here. | ||
| You go to the 9th floor, you go to the 10th floor, you go to the 11th floor, you go to the 3rd floor, you go to the 20th floor, and you still get no answers. | ||
| So you have to ask why. Why is Christopher Wray not answering these questions? | ||
| Why is he keeping this information but then alluding to the fact that this is all coming out in the court cases? | ||
| Is he genuinely saying, I don't want to say anything here that's going to affect these ongoing cases? | ||
| Is he trying to protect the narrative that the mainstream media wants to tell you and the Democrats want to tell you about January 6th? | ||
| They're up there again today saying it was an insurrection, saying that we're trying to overthrow the government and all this stuff with no proof. | ||
| But why? Why does Ray allude? | ||
| See, most people just don't know this information is out there, folks. | ||
| But that's what he's telling you. | ||
| He's telling you, he's like, hey, there's multiple ongoing cases. | ||
| You keep asking if they're a confidential human source on the ground. | ||
| That information is already out there in these cases. | ||
| So why do you keep asking me this? | ||
| So why won't he answer the questions? | ||
| Is he protecting the narrative? | ||
| Is he genuinely not trying to interfere in ongoing cases? | ||
| He knows the answer. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now let's move on. | |
| Here's Mike Johnson asking FBI Director Wray about the censorship online that the FBI was involved in. | ||
| The evidence shows you, your agency, the people that directly report to you, suppressed conservative-leaning free speech about topics like the laptop, the lab leak theory of COVID-19's origin, the effectiveness of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccines, speech about election integrity in the 2020 presidential election, security of voting by mail, even parody about the president himself, negative posts about the economy. | ||
| The FBI made the social media platforms pull that information off the Internet if it came from conservative sources. | ||
| They did this under the guise that it was disinformation. | ||
| Can you define what disinformation is? | ||
| What I can tell you is that our focus is not on disinformation broadly speaking. | ||
| Well, wait a minute. Yes, it is. Wait a minute. | ||
| Can I answer the question? You can in a minute. | ||
| Your star witness said in the litigation, Elvis Chan, who's in charge of this, said they do it on the basis of disinformation. | ||
| We need a definition of what that is. | ||
| Our focus is on malign foreign disinformation, that is, foreign hostile actors who engage in covert efforts to abuse our social media platforms, which is something that is not seriously in dispute. | ||
| I have to stop you for time. | ||
| That's not accurate. You need to read this court opinion because you're in charge of enforcing it. | ||
| The court has found that And Elvis Chan testified under oath in charge of this for you. | ||
| He said 50%. | ||
| He had a 50% success rate in having alleged election disinformation taken down or censored. | ||
| That wasn't just foreign adversaries, sir. | ||
| That was American citizens. | ||
| How do you answer for that? Well, first off, I'm not sure that's a correct characterization of his testimony. | ||
| But what I would say is the FBI is not in the business of moderating content or causing any social media company to suppress or censor. | ||
| That is not what the court has found. | ||
| What I would also say is, among the things that you listed off, I find ironic. | ||
| The idea that the FBI would somehow be involved in suppressing references to the lab leak theory is somewhat absurd when you consider the fact that the FBI was the only, the only agency in the entire intelligence community to reach the assessment that it was more likely than not That that was the explanation for the pandemic. | ||
| But your agents pulled it off the internet, sir. | ||
| That's what the evidence in the court has found. | ||
| So an interesting deflection, though sometimes deflection can be good, from Ray talking about the FBI saying, no, it was the lab leak. | ||
| But getting back to the issue at hand, so what is Rep. | ||
| Johnson talking about here? | ||
| That Ray obviously tells the big lie. | ||
| Ray says, well, they can't deny they engaged in online censorship. | ||
| They can't deny it. All the proof is out there. | ||
| The courts, the whistleblowers, the testimonies, the hearings, it's all out there. | ||
| They engaged in internet censorship, and we know how they did it. | ||
| Their out is, oh, we just made suggestions in a portal. | ||
| And then, like Johnson says, as he said, he said, well, that's at a 50% success rate. | ||
| So if the Democrats ask for 100 stories to be censored on Twitter, they got 50 of them censored. | ||
| The big one being Hunter Biden. | ||
| But so what does Ray say when asked the definition of disinformation that they're dealing with? | ||
| He says, oh, foreign, hostile foreign actors putting out false information with purposes on the Internet. | ||
| So why... | ||
| Do you then censor American citizens sharing a Hunter Biden laptop story from the New York Post? | ||
| Where are the elements of disinformation by Christopher Wray's definition, foreign nations putting that information out there? | ||
| How does that work? | ||
| Well, obviously it doesn't. | ||
| It's a lie. However, what did they say at the time? | ||
| What did 50-plus intelligence agents and the intel committees and the FBI say? | ||
| They said Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation. | ||
| So, that's how they do it then. | ||
| They know how to illegally censor you and then have all their legal outs. | ||
| They say, well, we didn't demand the censorship. | ||
| We just put information on a portal and what the big tech companies did with that is up to them. | ||
| Well, you had a majority success rate at what you wanted censored. | ||
| Well, we only censor information that comes from foreign hostile actors like Russia. | ||
| So what do they say? They want the Hunter Biden laptop story banned from the internet? | ||
| They say, Hunter Biden laptop story is Russian disinformation. | ||
| FBI says, that falls within our definition of disinformation. | ||
| It came from Russia. Didn't come from Russia. | ||
| Never came from Russia. | ||
| Was never disinformation. | ||
| The FBI made sure it was censored off the internet. | ||
| So you see how they play these games? | ||
| How much longer do we have to put up with this? | ||
| And why isn't Chris Wray being held in contempt of Congress? | ||
| We'll be right back. We got more on this, by the way. | ||
| All right, let me shut my trap here and let's just go back to the clips. | ||
| Let's go to Representative Barry Moore talking to Ray today about the fake Christopher Steele dossier that led to government abuses and they all knew it was fake. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why would the FBI... Do you have any idea why a law enforcement agency would be planning to elections? | |
| Well, you've raised a number of different issues there. | ||
| So first, as to the Steele dossier, that of course is a subject treated at great length in the Durham report, which we, and again, predates my time as director. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I understand that, but it was the same agency paying a million dollars to push one story out or try to collaborate one story and three million dollars to quiet another story for political opponents. | |
| I don't quite understand. And then I would, as to the second part related to Twitter, I would disagree with your characterization respectfully. | ||
| When there are payments to social media companies, that is by long-standing federal law going back, I think, about four decades, where we have to pay companies For their costs in responding to legal process. | ||
| And it's not just social media companies, it's other kinds of businesses as well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, when those stories get out, and you understand, and certainly the dossier story, and I know that wasn't under your watch, but also the Hunter Biden laptop story. | |
| That, to me, looks political. | ||
| To the American people, it looks political. | ||
| And I'm just an everyday guy. I'm not an attorney, Mr. | ||
| Ray. Just an everyday guy. | ||
| But to me, it looks extremely political. | ||
| And that is why you're having trouble keeping the FBI's reputation afloat. | ||
| You know, it's funny. He says, well, we have to pay these companies for their time or whatever it is when we ask them for this document or what have you. | ||
| And I hear that, and I'm sure there's some sort of precedent there, and there's some proof of precedent, but there's no consistency. | ||
| There's no consistency there. | ||
| Do you think anybody that's been persecuted by the FBI because of their affiliations to Trump has ever got a check from the government for their time to go through and find discovery and anything else? | ||
| Of course, the answer is no. | ||
| No. But magically, the social media companies are making millions of dollars cooperating with the feds. | ||
| Boy, I didn't know that was a job. | ||
| Pays well, too. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But only for certain types. | |
| Now, this might be the best exchange of the day. | ||
| And that's... | ||
|
unidentified
|
Matt Gaetz. | |
| I was going to go to the Jim Jordan one. | ||
| Let's instead go to the Matt Gaetz one. | ||
| I think this is probably the best exchange of the day. | ||
| Here's the full first exchange with Matt Gaetz and Christopher Wray. | ||
| I mean, folks, Matt Gaetz is... | ||
| I mean, if this is like a golf tournament and we're following the leaderboard, with this grilling of Ray today, I think Matt Gaetz might be on top of the leaderboard. | ||
| Here it is. American people need to understand what just happened. | ||
| My Democrat colleague just asked the director of the FBI whether or not they are buying information about our fellow Americans. | ||
| And the answer is, well, we'll just have to get back to you on that. | ||
| It sounds really complicated. But I have other questions. | ||
| I'm sitting here with my father. | ||
| I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge, that you will regret not following my direction. | ||
| I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father. | ||
| Sounds like a shakedown, doesn't it, Director? | ||
| I'm not going to get into commenting on that. | ||
| You seem deeply uncurious about it, don't you? | ||
| Almost suspiciously uncurious. | ||
| Are you protecting the Bidens? | ||
| Absolutely not. | ||
| The FBI does not and has no interest in protecting anyone. | ||
| You won't answer the question about whether or not that's a shakedown, and everybody knows why you won't answer it. | ||
| Because to the millions of people who will see this, they know it is. | ||
| And your inability to acknowledge that is deeply revealing about you. | ||
| But let's go from the uncurious to the downright nosy. | ||
| How many illegal FISA queries have occurred under your leadership of the FBI? Well, there are reports that have come out with different numbers about compliance incidents. | ||
| More than a million illegal ones? | ||
| Because that's what the Inspector General said. | ||
| The Inspector General said that in the 3.4 million of these queries, more than a million were in error. | ||
| Do you have any basis to disagree with that assessment by the Inspector General? | ||
| I'm not sure, actually. | ||
| A correct characterization of the inspector general's findings on that? | ||
| Well, the internet will remind you of that in moments, but let's now go to what the court said. | ||
| The court said it was over 200,000 that have occurred on your watch. | ||
| Do you have any basis to disagree with that assessment? | ||
| Again, I don't have the numbers I sit here right now. | ||
| Seems like a number you should know. | ||
| How many times the FBI is breaking the law under your watch, especially if it's like over a million to not know that number. | ||
| And I'm worried about your veracity on the subject as well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Play the video. Letters for investigation of the Capitol. | |
| I don't believe FISA is remotely implicated in our investigation. | ||
| So there, Senator Lee's asking you whether or not FISA was in any way involved in your January 6th investigation, and you say no. | ||
| Was that truthful? | ||
| I said that I did not believe it was. | ||
| Okay, so now let's pull up what the court said, which is something a little different than what you said. | ||
| So, so here... Nope, that's not the right one. | ||
| Yeah, here we go. Right there, it says the government has reported additional significant violations of the querying standard, including several relating to the January 6, 2021 breach at the Capitol. | ||
| So I guess the question, Director A, is did you not know when you were answering these questions that the FBI was engaging in these illegal searches, or did you perjure yourself to Senator Lee? | ||
| I certainly didn't perjure myself. | ||
| At the time that I testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I didn't have that piece of information. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That was a court order. | |
| You didn't have that piece of information because the court hadn't yet rendered a judgment. | ||
| Did you not know when you gave the untruthful answer before Senator Lee that this was going on? | ||
| It was a truthful answer. | ||
| I did not believe FISA had been involved in a generous investigation. | ||
| But it was! The answer is, the FBI has broken so bad that people can go and engage in queries that when you come before the Congress to answer questions, you're blissfully ignorant. | ||
| You're blissfully ignorant as to the unlawful queries. | ||
| You're blissfully ignorant as to the Biden shakedown regime. | ||
| And it just seems like it gets into kind of a creepy place as well. | ||
| Go to our next... image on what the court said. | ||
| Just to the American people realize, the court has smacked you down, alleging, or ruling, FBI personnel apparently conducted queries for improper personal reasons. | ||
| People were looking themselves up. | ||
| They were looking their ex-lovers up. | ||
| Who has been held accountable or fired as a consequence of the FBI using the FISA process as their, like, creepy personal snoop machine? | ||
| There have been instances in which individuals have had disciplinary action and they were no longer with it. | ||
| I can't get into it here, but we can follow back up with you. | ||
| But don't you see that that's kind of the thing, Director Ray, that you preside over the FBI that has the lowest level of trust In the FBI's history, people trusted the FBI more when J. Edgar Hoover was running the place than when you are. | ||
| And the reason is because you don't give straight answers. | ||
| You give answers that later a court deems aren't true. | ||
| And then at the end of the day, you won't criticize an obvious shakedown when it's directly in front of us. | ||
| And it appears as though you're whitewashing the conduct Respectfully, Congressman, in your home state of Florida, the number of people applying to come work for us and devote their lives working for us is up over 100%. | ||
| We're deeply proud of them, and they deserve better than you. | ||
| Time of the Gentleman has expired. | ||
| Fried chicken. | ||
| That fried chicken. | ||
| Wow. All right. | ||
| Now, here's the thing. | ||
| These next clips are too long to fill. | ||
| In the remaining time I have here. | ||
| And there's actually more still coming in. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Just wow. Just wow. | |
| And I also have a guest coming up in the next hour too. | ||
| So we're going to have to pause this, guys. | ||
| We're going to have to pause this. We're going to be joined by Evelyn Ray coming up. | ||
| We'll play a couple more clips in the short segment coming up. | ||
| And then Evelyn Ray is going to be joining us on some big news out of Australia. | ||
| And then, you know what? I'm thinking about doing the unthinkable here. | ||
| You know that about 85%, 90%, some days 100% of this show is all politics, all news. | ||
| But there's some cultural stuff that I may get into with Evelyn Ray today. | ||
| She was already on the schedule and she's talking about it. | ||
| And so even though it's off the beaten track and not part of the big news cycle... | ||
| We may have to do that. We'll come back with more clips of this on the other side. | ||
| Folks, we still have the sale at Infowarsstore.com. | ||
| The July 4th sale has been extended. | ||
| We hope you will take advantage. | ||
| Remember, double Patriot points with every order that can be applied towards future purchases. | ||
| And when you've got the deal right now on emergency food supplies, air filters, and water filters, all 10% off, these are necessities, in my mind, for your home. | ||
| So it's the perfect time, 10% off those necessities, and since those are big purchases, | ||
| with the double Patriot points, you're gonna get a nice, a nice trove of Patriot points | ||
| put into your account that you can apply towards future purchases. | ||
| It's a total win-win. | ||
| You get a great product. | ||
| You get more credit to shop at Infowarsstore.com, and you support free speech in the process. | ||
| 360 win, as we say, at Infowarsstore.com. | ||
| All right, more from the Ray hearing when we come back. | ||
| I'm sitting here with my father. | ||
| I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge, that you will regret not following my direction. | ||
| I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father. | ||
| Sounds like a shakedown, doesn't it, director? | ||
| I'm not going to get into commenting on that. | ||
| You seem deeply uncurious about it, don't you? | ||
| Almost suspiciously uncurious. | ||
| Are you protecting the Bidens? | ||
| Absolutely not. The FBI does not and has no interest in protecting anyone politically. | ||
| You won't answer the question about whether or not that's a shakedown, and everybody knows why you won't answer it. | ||
| Because to the millions of people who will see this, they know it is. | ||
| And your inability to acknowledge that is deeply revealing about you. | ||
| So there it is. Are you protecting the Bidens? | ||
| Chris Wray vehemently denies it. | ||
| Now let's go to an exchange between Jim Jordan and Christopher Wray here in clip six. | ||
| Did the FBI ask financial institutions to turn over their customers? | ||
| You have the time to meet. Did the FBI ask financial institutions to turn over their customers' debit and credit card purchase history in the Washington, D.C. area for January 5th and 6th, 2021? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Uh... I don't know the answer to that as I sit here right now. | |
| Well, we do, because Bank of America gave us this email from the FBI to Bank of America. | ||
| Well, I am aware that Bank of America provided information to the FBI, but what communications occurred between the FBI and Bank of America about it? | ||
| Let's read it. To recap our morning call, we are prepared to action the following threshold. | ||
| Customers transacting debit card, credit card, Washington, D.C. purchases between 1-5-21, 1-6-21. | ||
| That's scary enough. | ||
| But then the next bullet point's even more scary. | ||
| Any, any historical, capital letters, all capitals, any historical purchase of a firearm. | ||
| You guys ask, financial, it's at least Bank of America, we think more. | ||
| Did you guys ask him? | ||
| Again, I don't have the full sequence of the back and forth. | ||
| It looks like you've got one email that I haven't seen before here. | ||
| So I don't know that I have the full exchange. | ||
| Does this email trouble you as much as it does members of the Judiciary Committee? | ||
| That the FBI is asking for every single... | ||
| I mean, we had members of Congress here that week The first time they're getting sworn in as a new member of Congress, their family in town, and they may happen to be a customer of Bank of America, and you're sweeping up every debit and credit card purchase of their family who were in town that week because their husband or their dad or their mom is getting sworn in as a new member of Congress? | ||
| And then you're also saying, overlaying that information with, did this person buy a firearm? | ||
| And the question is? | ||
| I'm just nervous about that. | ||
| Are you nervous about that? | ||
| As I think I've testified before, my understanding is that our engagement with Bank of America was fully lawful, but that we recalled the leads that were cut to field office. | ||
| Well, if it's lawful, that was my next point. | ||
| If it's lawful, why did you say we're not going to use these leads? | ||
| That's what Mr. Jensen testified to when we deposed him, the director of the terrorism unit at the FBI. That's what he testified to. | ||
| Why did you not use the leads if it was lawful to get the information? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Chairman, it's one minute and 18 seconds over time. | |
| Sir, there are plenty of times where there are things that we lawfully can do, but that we decide is better that we not do. | ||
| And I think that's what happened. The idea that Mr. | ||
| Massey said earlier that this is lawful, that you can ask this is scary. | ||
| This is something else we're going to have to change. | ||
| All right. Now, again, we've got a lot more coming from the hearing today. | ||
| More from Jim Jordan. | ||
| Troy Nels with a big moment. | ||
| As well. And then let's not forget we also have Joe Biden at NATO embarrassing us yet again and then saying what you're not supposed to say out loud. | ||
| So this is still all upcoming. | ||
| Not to mention we have Michael Cargill in studio. | ||
| The ATF He magically, coincidentally, inspects his gun store after he sues the ATF. And then they say, oh, we didn't know you sued us, and we showed up to investigate you the next day. | ||
| We had no idea. | ||
| Yes, and we don't know where the bag of cocaine in the White House came from either. | ||
| Come on, guys. You've got to believe me. | ||
| So that's all coming up. | ||
| Our next guest, though, in the next segment joining me, Evelyn Ray, who has some big news out of Australia on the free speech issue. | ||
| But I have to tell you, as I was going through Evelyn's Twitter, preparing for the interview, and I saw her commenting on some other cultural stuff that we may have to grind our gears on that, too. | ||
| So we'll see what happens coming up in 90 seconds with Evelyn Ray. | ||
| Don't go anywhere. Alright, don't be confused. | ||
| We don't have the leading actress from the new Barbie movie joining us now, Margot Robbie. | ||
| It's actually Evelyn Ray from Australia. | ||
| So you might be a little confused because you're seeing her all over. | ||
| No, this is not Barbie. | ||
| Though she probably could have maybe tried out for the role and made it. | ||
| So I'm joking here because I did see Evelyn commenting on some cultural stuff right now | ||
| that I kind of, I think I may want to delve into that with her too. | ||
| But normally I don't even go into those realms here on this show. | ||
| It's usually just politics and news. | ||
| But that is why she's joining us because there's a big story happening in Australia right now | ||
| when it comes to free speech. | ||
| Now Evelyn, explain to Americans listening how the Australian government right now is | ||
| trying to eradicate any forms of free press and make everything state run, much like what | ||
| you see in communist and totalitarian countries. | ||
| So what is going on right now in the free speech issue in Australia? | ||
| Well, thanks for having me on. | ||
| Like I always say, Australia is just... | ||
| One disaster after another. | ||
| But here we are. | ||
| We have an Australian government body called AMCA, which is a media sort of overreach agency. | ||
| And basically what their job is, is to prevent misinformation and disinformation. | ||
| from the Australian people. | ||
| And so what they're trying to do at the moment is introduce a new bill through Parliament, which would be legislated, which would be enacted law, written in our laws over here in Australia, and that would be to prevent average people from having any sort of objective discussion or debate or discourse online. | ||
| And the reason why this particular bill is incredibly scary is because of the high penalties that this is going to impose, including prison time, For wrong speak. | ||
| And not only that, what it's going to do is prevent all media if it hasn't been approved by the government in Australia. | ||
| So basically, this AMCA government organisation is going to be hammering down on our online speech So much so that they're going to be putting in these codes, which is what it's called in legislation, which prevents even our servers over here in Australia from distributing news. | ||
| So there's not really a backwards way around it. | ||
| There's codes that's going to be written into things online. | ||
| And as well as this, it's very broad legislation, the definitions. | ||
| So this particular legislation specifies that private messaging is exempt from these restrictive laws. | ||
| But then if you go into what they classify as private messaging, it's basically just encrypted emails, social media, WhatsApp, Signal. | ||
| Telegram, all of these things could technically not be exempt from this legislation. | ||
| So our private messages, if we're using any kind of internet platform, could potentially be tracked by the government. | ||
| It can be recorded and kept on record against us as a citizen by the Australian government. | ||
| And then we get dragged through the kangaroo courts over here in Australia. | ||
| Depending on what we've said and I think the scariest part is what they've defined as harm and they say any information that causes harm can this can happen to and the definition is the health of Australian people and racism against Australian people and all these sorts of things in the last few years in Australia should show that the government really doesn't understand the definition of harm because People like myself were ostracized by the government, by our country for so long. | ||
| And now I have been vindicated. | ||
| But three years ago, that likely would have seen me with a million dollar fine with these new legislations or put in prison. | ||
| So what is the fear then? | ||
| If you're in Australia, you're communicating via one of these apps or messaging services. | ||
| Is it, wow, it's now official. | ||
| The government's going to be reading this. | ||
| I better watch what I say. | ||
| That's right. And that's the whole point of it. | ||
| It's not like it's, you know, it's one thing to be punished for what you say. | ||
| But the scary part is it's going to prevent people from having conversations altogether based on fear. | ||
| Because the average Australian, like we have seen, much prefers their short-term comforts and their security over their long-term freedoms. | ||
| And so a lot of Australians will go, you know what, I can't be bothered To have to go through the Australian courts. | ||
| So I'm just not going to talk about it. | ||
| I'm just going to keep quiet and put my head down and get on with my life. | ||
| And that's the problem of our country. | ||
| That's where a lot of our problems stem from is because people over here just don't care. | ||
| Our larrikin, easygoing, she'll be right mate mentality has been a cute little fun thing. | ||
| But the last few years, it's been the thorn in our side. | ||
| And this is only going to harness in on those things that we really as a nation should be working on to be better at. | ||
| Now, I know most of the mainstream media in Australia is kind of just along for the ride of all this, but we have seen some new emergencies from alternative news in Australia. | ||
| Is there a large outcry? | ||
| Are people aware that this is going on? | ||
| Well, this is the interesting part, Owen. | ||
| Over here at the moment in Australia, we're battling something called the voice. | ||
| Now, the voice is something that all Australians are going to have to vote on towards the end of the year. | ||
| And this basically means that our Indigenous Australians are going to have a constitutional voice Of authority and power inside of our government. | ||
| And so it's a huge issue over here because basically the voice is going to lead to a treaty. | ||
| And this particular treaty that the Indigenous Australians have spoken about means that they are going to be their own sovereign citizens within our country. | ||
| So nations within nations. | ||
| So that's a huge deal. | ||
| So this legislation has slipped in Whilst we're debating the voice at the moment. | ||
| So not many people are aware of it. | ||
| And we only have until the 6th of August to submit to the government how we feel about this new legislation. | ||
| So I'm trying my best to scream it from the rooftops so that people understand what's happening. | ||
| It is getting a little bit of traction in alternative media, but not the mainstream media at all. | ||
| So what's the application of this? | ||
| Let's look at what went on with COVID and the pandemic and the lockdowns and everything there. | ||
| What's the fear? You're talking about maybe you don't like lockdowns. | ||
| You're talking about you don't want to get a vaccine. | ||
| You're telling your friends, your family, hey, don't get the vaccine. | ||
| It's deadly. They see this. | ||
| What? They come knock on your door? | ||
| They cling the handcuffs? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What is the fear here? Pretty much exactly what you said. | |
| So if we're going to look at it at a practical level, let's look at the last few years. | ||
| Someone like me who was unvaccinated and who was against the lockdowns and who was cautious about the mRNA technology being that there's no long-term testing, you know, hold on everyone, we should probably wait. | ||
| That would be deemed as harm by the Australian government because I'm harming the health of Australians because at that particular time, The health advice from our government was to get vaccinated, shut up, or you'll be locked up forever. | ||
| So the practicality of it is me, if I said something like that three years ago and these laws were there, I could get like a summons to attend court and I would have to attend this AMCA body government organisation where I would have to plead my case why I'm not harming Australians by what I said. | ||
| If I decide to not comply with what the government's directions are given to me in that, then I can be slapped with a certain amount of fines. | ||
| And then if that all fails, then I can go to prison as somebody who has failed to comply with the outcomes of that AMCA Australian body with misinformation, disinformation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Jail time? Yes. | |
| So this is basically the Orwellian nightmare that we're afraid of. | ||
| And of course, a lot of times they test these things in Australia, see how far they can push you guys before they bring it to Europe or the United States. | ||
| Yeah. Well, interestingly, Owen, they actually did recently try to pass similar legislation in America, which would do basically the same thing. | ||
| But your courts actually shut it down straight away. | ||
| So that's a little white pill. | ||
| That's a little bit of an encouragement for you guys over there. | ||
| But they'll try it again. | ||
| And they'll try and do it when you're distracted, possibly with the election. | ||
| You know, they're very good at that. | ||
| They distract you with something. | ||
| Go look at this shiny thing and then do stuff sneakily in the background like the cowards that they are. | ||
| Well, that's right. And the judge just stopped the Biden administration from censoring free speech on the Internet and said, well, wait a second, hold up. | ||
| They tried to appeal that so they could continue to do that ahead of the 2024 election. | ||
| But this this is paramount when it comes to free speech, folks, because they'll sit here and they say, oh, no, no, we're just this is for your protection. | ||
| This is for your safety or we're looking for criminals. | ||
| All roads to hell are built on good intentions, but let's be perfectly clear. | ||
| These roads are not being built on good intentions. | ||
| They're being built on tyranny and totalitarianism. | ||
| Evelyn Ray is with me. We'll be right back. | ||
| Well, my crew said green light. | ||
| I don't really do culture stuff here. | ||
| I do news and politics. | ||
| But I can't help myself because... | ||
| The same reason why I got into news and politics is now the same reason why I'm gravitating towards culture and I see a massive void in the commentary and I see that most the banter back and forth is operating in the fringe and missing the bigger picture and so I couldn't help myself when I saw Evelyn Ray delve into this Margot Robbie story that's going on right now I had to go there and so Let me just start it out by explaining, folks. So Margot Robbie, there's this viral thing on the internet where people are saying that Margot Robbie is mid, or in other words, not a beautiful woman. | ||
| And just to be clear, I would say Margot Robbie is universally beautiful. | ||
| Anywhere she goes on planet Earth, men would find her attractive. | ||
| There's no doubt about that. | ||
| But when I see people like Evelyn responding to this saying, how can you say that she's mid? | ||
| What is going on? You must be gay. | ||
| You don't know what beauty is. | ||
| No, I think you're missing the picture, Evelyn. | ||
| Here's the way I see it. | ||
| Men have had unrealistic standards put on them. | ||
| Unrealistic. And all the data shows when they ask women what they expect in men, the data shows that.65% of men are actually what women are looking for. | ||
| So men are sitting here like, well, if you're not 6'3 with a million dollars, then no woman is going to look at you. | ||
| So men are like, oh, really? | ||
| Okay, well, Margot Robbie is mid. | ||
| And then you see, oh my gosh, how can you do this? | ||
| So to me, I just see this as equal unrealistic beauty standards. | ||
| And by the way, women kind of did this to you too, with all the fake boobs and fake butts and face paint. | ||
| So I think that this isn't about Margot Robbie being mid or not. | ||
| This is about men pushing back culturally saying, you have unrealistic expectations for us. | ||
| How do you like unrealistic expectations? | ||
| Your thoughts. I think this is our first fight, and I'm ready. | ||
| I'm ready to spar with you, Owen, on this one. | ||
| I actually agree, surprisingly, with so much of what you say, but let me just say something. | ||
| We're better than that, right? | ||
| There are many idiots on the internet who say stupid things, okay? | ||
| And the difference is if we play into these stupid solutions to problems, We're only furthering the problem. | ||
| So my idea is to go, you know what? | ||
| Feminism is rot. | ||
| Not just third wave feminism. | ||
| I'm talking first and second wave feminism. | ||
| The whole thing is rot. | ||
| It literally tried to achieve more than equality. | ||
| It tried to achieve special privilege by stepping on the backs of men, which is disgusting, right? | ||
| Culturally speaking, men have a really, really, really hard time. | ||
| I fully acknowledge that. | ||
| But we don't, as a solution to that, then Swing the pendulum so far that our solution to these problems is to now hate women. | ||
| I think it's wrong. I think the better thing is to step off the merry-go-round and let the idiots keep going around on the same ride on the circus. | ||
| And we pack up the tent for ourselves and be more godly in how we respond to things. | ||
| So objectively, Margot Robbie is not a mid. | ||
| And if she's a mid, I'm a minus seven. | ||
| Like, let's be real here, okay? | ||
| And so it's just like, it's just silliness. | ||
| It's just silly internet speak. | ||
| And I'm like, It's one of those things I regretted. | ||
| I was like, I shouldn't have gotten involved in this, but I've invested in it now and I'm going to see it through. | ||
| And so while I agree objectively with the things that you're saying is that one, women have ridiculous standards of men and that should change. | ||
| Two, women have ruined themselves. | ||
| We are our own worst enemy. | ||
| Feminism hates women. | ||
| Like it really does. | ||
| I've never had Anything done to my face in terms of injections or anything like that. | ||
| And I'm going to let myself age gracefully and naturally. | ||
| And I'm very well aware of the fact that these women have made that difficult for me as I get older. | ||
| But I'm like, you know what? | ||
| My answer to that isn't going to be to not tell the truth or to be like tit for tat. | ||
| You know what? I'm going to bite back with This or that. | ||
| I'm just going to be truthful objectively, and I'm going to not be godless in my response, which I think a lot of these online sort of things are about, and I don't really like that. | ||
| But see, my thing is I think it's time to have the conversation, and it's time for people like us to have the conversation because most of the elements are coming from the fringe. | ||
| And so we're not really centering these cultural debates where they need to be. | ||
| And so let me throw this out there again. | ||
| Because I'm really just sitting here more as a neutral observer than anything else. | ||
| And so take the pearly things, Pearl Davis phenomenon for an example. | ||
| Why do women hate Pearl so much? | ||
| Why has she angered Women so much. | ||
| And by the way, like you said earlier, I don't think it should be a situation where men or women are hated. | ||
| We should both be iron sharpening iron because we all admit something has gone terribly wrong in our culture. | ||
| The institutions of marriage have failed us. | ||
| What is going on with this? | ||
| Let's figure it out. But so here's why I think women are getting so upset over Pearl and Tate as well. | ||
| And you can tell me if you disagree with this, but here's what I see happening. | ||
| I think this is an unwitting defense mechanism Women realize that they are losing all this ground that they've gained in culture and politics, if you will, when it comes to divorce, alimony, child support, affirmative action. Women are realizing that they're losing their ground in this culture war. | ||
| And if men aren't going to start playing by these rules anymore, then they're going to lose that ground. | ||
| I see that. | ||
| That's what I see in this response to Pearl Davis. | ||
| Do you agree or disagree? | ||
| Yeah, look, I think a lot of the... | ||
| I'm not too sure whether there are things that you said that I agree with, and there are things that I disagree. | ||
| But I think that a lot of people are having issue with Pearl, not because what she says isn't objectively true, but because she's very godless. | ||
| And she's very godless in her character of how she's conveying this truth. | ||
| Evelyn, I've got to stop you. | ||
| I'm going to have to ask you to do something here. | ||
| Do not attack Pearl Davis when you're talking about this. | ||
| By calling her godless, that is an attack on her. | ||
| I'm not talking about Pearl. | ||
| I'm talking about what she talks about and why women are so upset about it. | ||
| But you did ask a question why I personally think that, and I think that's why people have a problem with it. | ||
| So it's an issue with her. | ||
| No, I think that the issue is she's literally doing the exact same thing that she's criticizing and she's pitting the sexes against one another, which is why we got here. | ||
| Women pitted the whole world against men. | ||
| And now we're seeing this pendulum swing the other way where the solution is to pit the world against women now. | ||
| And we're going to end up in exactly the same spot, but possibly worse If we allow this rhetoric to keep going on. | ||
| So I actually don't have an issue with her at all, personally. | ||
| I don't really care. | ||
| I understand what she's doing and the purpose of why she's doing it. | ||
| But I think there's aspects where the people that she's criticizing tend to be the people who have done the right thing. | ||
| You know, like a lot of posts, there are a lot of older women who have got married, who have got kids, who have done all this. | ||
| And it's like she's It's very unspecific. | ||
| And so a lot of women are being upset because they feel like, well, I've done the right thing. | ||
| And her entire rhetoric online is going against the very solution to the problem, which is godly families. | ||
| And that's what I've done. | ||
| But again, I think her conversation is definitely necessary and I welcome it because it does actually trigger a conversation, like you said, that needs to happen. | ||
| I think that there just needs to be reasonable voices in the mix who are saying things like, okay, that's a fact and that's true and that's a problem, but the solution to that... | ||
| All right, well, I got to take the break. | ||
| Let's spend one more segment on this with Evelyn Ray and we'll decide on the other side. | ||
| All right, we may have to continue this conversation with Evelyn sometime off of this show because really we need an uninterrupted long-form conversation. | ||
| And actually, I'd like to line up like five women who all disagree with me to come at me with the knives out because that's perfectly fine. | ||
| And I think it would be better that way. | ||
| So let me just lay a couple more things out there and Evelyn, get your response. | ||
| I would say that the best system for men and women was the Western patriarchy, which is the men have the desire and ability—I'm going to try to put it simply—the men have the desire and ability to be the breadwinners and the leader of the family, and the women have the desire and the ability to be the caretakers and the nurturers of the family. | ||
| Well, obviously, this has all gotten completely jacked up, and the system of Western patriarchy has, for the most part, been completely destroyed. | ||
| We don't need to—again, now, let's put this also out there. | ||
| This doesn't apply to everybody. | ||
| You might not fall into these statistics, so don't worry about this. | ||
| You're already being the change that you want to see in the world. | ||
| So, you know, let's all just relax here. | ||
| We're just talking about what's going on in culture. | ||
| So I see the system of Western patriarchy, which I think was the best for men and women, that's been completely dismantled by design. | ||
| And so what I see happening now is something that's kind of just been long overdue, whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, indifferent, I'm saying it's been long overdue, where men are just finally saying, you know what? | ||
| I know the system has been rigged against me, so I'm not going to take part in it anymore. | ||
| And so normally, the system would motivate the men to do the right thing, right? | ||
| Otherwise, X, Y, or Z is going to happen to you, and the men say, well, I'm going to do the right thing because... | ||
| I have certain advantages and leverages, so I'm going to be motivated to do the right thing. | ||
| Well, that's all been thrown out the window. | ||
| And now I think that men realize that there's really no cultural motivation to do the right thing, only if you have your own morals or if it's your religious beliefs. | ||
| That's the only thing motivating men to do the right thing. | ||
| And if you don't have that, culturally speaking, nothing is motivating men to do the right thing. | ||
| And in fact, it's motivating them to go the opposite way, and they might make certain decisions like they would in a business deal instead of a romantic partnership. | ||
| So would you agree with that breakdown? | ||
| And do you think the Western patriarchy was the best system? | ||
| Look, I think that God created the world as a patriarchy. | ||
| It literally happened in Genesis. | ||
| The world is patriarchy. | ||
| He revealed himself as our God, as a man. | ||
| And so I'm all for the patriarchy. | ||
| And I 100% agree that that is the system. | ||
| That works. And that is the one that bears good fruit. | ||
| And I think it's when we reject God and we reject his design that we end up in chaos. | ||
| It's Christ or chaos. | ||
| And we're seeing the chaos of that. | ||
| I think you and I agree on the problems here. | ||
| And I think I agree exactly with you that it was only a matter of time before men said, hang on a second, this isn't right. | ||
| I think where we disagree is perhaps our practical solutions How we get out of this mess. | ||
| Because I am 100% for the patriarchy. | ||
| I 100% want to be led by men in every aspect, not just the family, not just the church, but in the government. | ||
| I think that should be void of women's authority altogether. | ||
| That's where I stand on that matter. | ||
| I am certainly not a feminist. | ||
| But yeah, like I said, the things that are being said on the internet might be true, but they're disconnected from the gospel. | ||
| And when something's disconnected from the gospel, it leads to death. | ||
| And that's what I'm worried about, seeing the pendulum swing the other way. | ||
| You know, we've hated men for so long, the world has rejected them. | ||
| Now, what's the solution? | ||
| We're going to hate women and we're going to reject it. | ||
| So I think perhaps you and I are probably very much on the same page. | ||
| And it would be a really good conversation to perhaps go into what the solutions should be, because I am a Christian, so my solutions I don't want them to lead to death. | ||
| And that's my biggest concern with this rhetoric online. | ||
| And so, yeah, I agree with you pretty much on 95% of the things, just maybe slight differences in how we're going to get out of it. | ||
| Yeah, and you might be right on with that because when I see these debates happening and it... | ||
| I understand where you're going because ultimately having good morals and values and having that consistent in culture is going to be what ultimately saves it or builds it up, if you will. | ||
| However, I'm also a, I'm very pragmatic and I'm a realist. | ||
| And it's just true. | ||
| If you want to have the cultural discussion, you kind of have to leave the morals out of it. | ||
| It's just a fact. | ||
| Most people don't have the same morals as you. | ||
| They don't have the same values as you. | ||
| And it's almost irrelevant now when it comes to culture, which is part of the problem. | ||
| But I think that we're not looking at the realistic solutions to this. | ||
| Like, what would a solution be? | ||
| So what would a solution be, do you think, to, let's say... | ||
| Men not wanting to get married. | ||
| Well, I would say that the solution to men not wanting to get married is finding out why. | ||
| And we obviously know why because We know the divorce rates. | ||
| Over 70% of women are instigating divorce. | ||
| We understand that most homes are fatherless, not because men don't want to be in the home, but because women kick them out. | ||
| Statistically and objectively, we understand the reasons why. | ||
| But I think it really begins in the church, to be honest. | ||
| And I think at the moment our church is under judgment. | ||
| John Calvin said if God wants to judge a nation, he's going to give them bad leaders. | ||
| We're seeing that in every sphere of authority in the entire world. | ||
| And I think it's going to take a generation of really strong men who go, you know what? | ||
| I'm going to pick up my cross and I'm going to follow him because that's the right thing to do. | ||
| And I might be persecuted. | ||
| It might suck. | ||
| I might lose out. | ||
| But that's what it takes. | ||
| It's iron sharpens iron, like you said. | ||
| And godly men need to bring back the patriarchy. | ||
| And there are decent women out there who will get behind the patriarchy. | ||
| It's going to be a generational thing. | ||
| But I think if we begin in the home, we begin with raising our kids in the patriarchy and normalizing that and that extending into our church, that will then extend from that into the communities. | ||
| It's a long game, though. | ||
| And you mentioned a comment before saying that The system doesn't motivate you anymore. | ||
| Well, let me encourage you men. | ||
| Let God motivate you because he led the perfect life and the perfect example and he was all for the patriarchy and that's the only thing that should be motivating us because that's the only thing that's going to defeat the spiritual warfare that we have going on right now is the power of Christ. | ||
| It's Christ or chaos. That's how we get out of here. | ||
| And I'm not disagreeing with you, but you have to understand that 50% of men are going to ignore completely what you just said because they're atheists and they don't believe in God. | ||
| So how do you deal with that element? | ||
| That's just a very real element. | ||
| We just have to be honest. That's a very real element that I don't want to completely discount. | ||
| And, you know, I think, too, that, I mean, there's obviously a lot of things that we can discuss. | ||
| But look at Tate, for example. | ||
| Look at Andrew Tate. Now, I don't know your thoughts and opinions on Andrew Tate. | ||
| I won't assume. But we see that women don't like the things that Tate is saying. | ||
| And forget about what he's being accused of or any of that. | ||
| Because here's what I see. | ||
| I see men that follow Andrew Tate and have improved their lives. | ||
| I see men that publish their own messages and basically say, Andrew Tate saved my life. | ||
| I was going to be suicidal. | ||
| And here's why I see that's happening. | ||
| So many natural instincts of men we have been taught to ignore or we get punished for. | ||
| And so all Tate is saying is, hey men, your natural instincts are right on. | ||
| The world hates you for your natural instincts. | ||
| It's time to reclaim what is naturally inside of you. | ||
| That's what I see going on. | ||
| So again, forget about whatever you think about Tate or anything. | ||
| That's the message I think that men are resonating with and finally feeling empowered again. | ||
| Yeah, and the man has said a lot of good things. | ||
| There's absolutely no denying it, and he has done good for the manosphere in some ways, without doubt. | ||
| That's objectively true, like you said. | ||
| I think the thing is, nature hates a void, right? | ||
| Nature hates a void, so when there's a void, naturally you try to fill it. | ||
| And what he's doing, right, is It's going on man's nature, like you said. | ||
| And, you know, we have inherited natures within us, within men and within women, and they are different. | ||
| But God has given that to us, whether we like it or not. | ||
| We have we're born with those inherited natures. | ||
| And he hones in on the things perhaps that are good in men, and that should be celebrated in men, | ||
| and that do empower men. | ||
| So that's great. | ||
| I have the understanding that God uses whatever means to his end. | ||
| And if he's gonna use Tate to do that, happy days. | ||
| But all glory to God through him, not glory to Tate. | ||
| That's where I find these things in issue with is we pin up men and we pin up women as saviors. | ||
| And we're always going to fall short because we are not God. | ||
| We are not Christ. We are imperfect beings, right? | ||
| And so when we pin up man as savior, it's only going to let us down. | ||
| So I have a really healthy relationship, excuse me, with these people online where I don't recognize... | ||
| Evelyn, I'm out of time. | ||
| This is a great conversation. | ||
| You're a good spirit about it. | ||
| So we should probably do this again. | ||
| But we're out of time for today. | ||
| Now, folks, remember... | ||
| It's okay to have these debates and discussions without getting offended and upset. | ||
| In fact, it's healthy. | ||
| It's a good thing. | ||
| So that's good. | ||
| Now, we've got to move on. | ||
| By the way, this is breaking right now. | ||
| InfoWars, tomorrow's news today. | ||
| Me and Jim Hoff literally said this yesterday, and now here it is in the news today. | ||
| Pro-Trump protester Ray Epps files defamation suit against Fox News. | ||
| Wow. So the New York Times says, hey, nudges Ray Epps, hey, you might want to sue Fox News. | ||
| Look at what happened with the Dominion lawsuit. | ||
| You could make millions. | ||
| And then Ray Epps, I guess, says, hmm, maybe the New York Times is on to something. | ||
| Of course, the New York Times and the American left and the Democrats and the liberals are thinking, we need to shut Fox News down. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We need to get Fox News and Tucker Carlson like we did Infowars and Alex Jones. | |
| And the first lawsuit didn't completely destroy Fox News, so now they're going to bring Ray Epps after him. | ||
| Folks, I'm telling you, that's how this stuff operates. | ||
| I don't want to go too much further, but, I mean, you know that that's what happens. | ||
| Liberals, Democrats, they call these people and they say, hey, you know, we got some lawyers that will represent you if you want to sue here, and then what do you know they sue? | ||
| You think that's a coincidence? | ||
| The New York Times publishes a story, Ray Epps sues the next day? | ||
| Like, they're showing you how they operate. | ||
| The American left, liberals, Democrats, they have legal groups, they have influence groups, | ||
| and they get in touch with these people and they say, we will fund your lawsuit, you can | ||
| make millions of dollars, all you gotta do is sign your name on the dotted line and bingo. | ||
| And they, oh, yeah, the crew points out too, the added propaganda, how they keep calling | ||
| EPS pro-Trump protester. | ||
| Like, oh, it's even better now. | ||
| It's like, oh, it's pro-Trump. | ||
| Oh, it's like this game they were playing today. | ||
| Like, all these people were appointed by Trump, like Bill Barr and the others. | ||
| It's like, yeah, they're corrupt, too. | ||
| So, there you go. | ||
| We told you that would happen yesterday, and there it is. | ||
| But we just know that because we experience it, you know? | ||
| That old thing? It's like, folks, you know, we're working on getting stuff ready for the Reawaken America tour here, and I'm talking to Clay Clark the other day, and he doesn't even want to make a big story of this, but, you know, he's been sued, too. You know, he's had to pay out almost $10 million in lawsuits, too. | ||
| And he's basically paying for the entire Reawaken America tour right out of his pocketbook. | ||
| And he doesn't even want to make a big story of it, but it's just... | ||
| They're really doing this stuff, man. | ||
| They're really doing this stuff. All right, I want to play more of these clips here from the hearing today. | ||
| Let's go to a full exchange here between Jim Jordan and Christopher Wray in clip seven. | ||
| Director. Without objection. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Director, what's the difference between a traditional Catholic and a radical traditional Catholic? | |
| I'm not an expert on the Catholic orders. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, your FBI wrote a memo talking about radical traditional Catholics. | |
| I'm just wondering if you could define it for us. | ||
| Well, what I can tell you is you're referring to the Richmond product, which was a single product by a single field office, which as soon as I found out about it, I was aghast and ordered it withdrawn and removed from FBI systems. | ||
| You were aghast. Then why won't you let us talk to the people who put it together? | ||
| We are working on finishing an internal review into what happened here. | ||
| We have to wait. We, the Congress, and the American people have to wait until you do an internal review. | ||
| It's not a criminal investigation going on here. | ||
| An internal review before we can talk to the people who wrote this? | ||
| When we finish our internal review, which will be very soon, we will come back before the committee and provide a briefing on what we found. | ||
| Pause this real quick here, because this moment actually really upset me. | ||
| And I understand Jim and the rest of the Republicans, they have an idea of where they want these talks to go, and that's all good. | ||
| But see, this part is ridiculous right here. | ||
| Oh, we're engaging in an ongoing internal investigation. | ||
| Folks, I could do this investigation in two minutes. | ||
| Two minutes. You send out an email. | ||
| Everyone who was involved in that memo to go after Catholics, you sit them down in a room and you say, Hi, how's everybody doing? | ||
| Whose idea was this? | ||
| And how did it make its way into printed materials? | ||
| How long did that take? | ||
| Was that 35 seconds? | ||
| But Christopher Wray, apparently it takes him years to do that? | ||
| It makes no sense. | ||
| That's ludicrous. Continue. | ||
| Sir, in America, Director? | ||
| No, sir. There's a lot. | ||
| Over 60 million. What percentage of those are radical traditional Catholics according to the Richmond Field Office of the FBI? Again, that product is not something that I will defend or excuse. | ||
| It's something that I thought was appalling and removed it. | ||
| Let's read from that product. | ||
| Page four of that product. | ||
| By the way, the copy you gave us, when can we get a copy that doesn't have all these redactions on it? | ||
| So we can actually see what the American taxpayers were paying for to see their rights, their First Amendment religious liberty rights attacked. | ||
| Let me just read from page four. | ||
| Provide new opportunities to mitigate extremist threat through outreach to traditional Catholic | ||
| parishes. | ||
| For the second time I'm going to pull us out of this because I got to cover these other | ||
| We've got a guest coming up and more news. | ||
| But, I mean, I haven't gotten to the California Democrats protecting child sex traffickers. | ||
| That makes you ask a thousand questions. | ||
| But why? Because, see, it's... | ||
| Again, we tend to miss the larger issue here. | ||
| Why is the FBI really concerned about a Catholic church? | ||
| Folks, you have to understand, we're dealing with leftists totalitarians. | ||
| And they know that a unified group of people, like a church group, are their biggest threat to their totalitarian government. | ||
| So that's why they target these people. | ||
| Same reason why they target Muslims in the Middle East. | ||
| Because they're not going to go around and be a part of the LGBT, globo, homo world order. | ||
| So that's what this really is. | ||
| They identify and target groups that they know will be a threat to their totalitarian government. | ||
| Yeah, they obviously have political bias against conservatives and Christians and everything else, but really it's just what is the biggest threat to our totalitarian control? | ||
| That's what this is really about. | ||
| Now, let's look at Quickly, as we move on to NATO now, this is an interesting theory from Matt Gaetz on a podcast here that I hadn't heard before but really actually makes sense. | ||
| What would make more sense strategically? | ||
| To make Russia a part of NATO or to make Ukraine a part of NATO? Here's Matt Gaetz. | ||
| By the way, why would you pick Ukraine? | ||
| Why not extend NATO to Russia and make it an anti-China alliance? | ||
| Like, are we really thinking that we're more afraid of the broke-down tanks from Russia than the fact that China is building a secret military base on the island of Cuba 90 miles away from the United States? | ||
| Like, if we had to pick Russia or Ukraine for NATO, one could reasonably make the argument that Russia probably provides more benefit long-term? | ||
| No question. No question. | ||
| How about we keep moving? Now he's 100% right. | ||
| So the question is then, why is it Ukraine and not Russia? | ||
| Because, folks, this isn't about strategy. | ||
| This isn't about geopolitics. | ||
| This is about bureaucrats and politicians bathing in the engorged | ||
| mammary of governments and taxpayer money. That's all this is. They just want | ||
| to sit there and take your money all day long. That's all NATO is. NATO is a failed | ||
| institution. What's happened in Ukraine is the proof. | ||
| NATO did nothing to stop the invasion. | ||
| And by the way, they shouldn't have to. | ||
| NATO's defunct already anyway, so NATO really should just be completely disbanded. | ||
| But what is the truth? | ||
| You pay hundreds of millions of dollars to NATO, and you pay hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars to Ukraine. | ||
| That's them just raking in the cash. | ||
| So it's not a strategic thing to protect European nations or any of this other crap. | ||
| It's all a strategic thing to make sure they can still have unlimited access to hundreds of billions of dollars. | ||
| All right, then there's Joe Biden. | ||
| He's embarrassing the country again. | ||
| He slips up and he says this in clip 11. | ||
| One country cannot be allowed to seize its neighbor's territory by force. | ||
| Russia could end this war tomorrow by withdrawing its forces from Ukraine, wrecking its international borders, and ceasing its inhumane attacks on Russia, by Russia, on Ukraine. | ||
| Yeah, he doesn't know what's going on. | ||
| And then as he fumbled through that, he fumbled through the whole speech, and he really struggled here in clip 12. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Soon NATO will be the 32nd. | |
| Freestanding, have free, 33, 32 freestanding members standing together to defend our people and our territory. | ||
| Okay. And then, of course, B-Roll Me Clip 17, Joe Biden gets lost again on a NATO stage and Zelensky has to guide him to where he's supposed to be. | ||
| You know, Oh, and then also in clip 18, Joe Biden had to have a cheat sheet. | ||
| You know he has the cheat sheet with the media? | ||
| He had to have a cheat sheet with all the other NATO leaders because he doesn't remember their names or who they are. | ||
| And this whole Zelensky thing, he walks around in the war fatigues and stuff. | ||
| Do you think Zelensky realizes he's been played yet? | ||
| I mean, I'm no fan of Zelensky, but I call it like it is. | ||
| Does Zelensky realize he's been played yet? | ||
| Kind of like, I don't know, one Osama Bin Laden. | ||
| I don't know if Zelensky realizes. | ||
| All right. Troy Nels brings up the Ray Epps issue during the hearing today. | ||
| Now Ray Epps is suing Fox News right after the New York Times pokes and prods him to do it, but I'm sure that's just a coincidence. | ||
| Here's Troy Nels earlier today with Christopher Ray. | ||
| I want to turn my attention now to this fella, this character, Mr. | ||
| Ray Epps. We've all heard of him. | ||
| We've heard of Mr. Ray Epps. | ||
| He was number 16 on your FBI Most Wanted list. | ||
| He was encouraging people the night prior and the day of to go into the Capitol. | ||
| And Mr. Ray Epps can be seen at the first breach of Capitol grounds at approximately 1250 p.m. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Play the clip, please. We need to go into the Capitol. | |
| Into the Capitol. Into the Capitol. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We are going to the Capitol, where our problems are. | |
| It's that direction. | ||
| We spread the word. | ||
| All right, no Dave, but one more thing. | ||
| Can we go up there? No? | ||
|
unidentified
|
When we go in. Are we gonna get arrested when we go up there? | |
| You don't need to get shot. | ||
| There he is, breaching the line, going in at the first breach into the Capitol grounds, | ||
| Mr. Ray, you have arrested hundreds of people related to January 6th. | ||
| And there have been people arrested for breaching Capitol grounds. | ||
| Cooey Griffin is an example. | ||
| Rachel Genko is an example. | ||
| And then we go to Mr. Brandon Stretka. | ||
| Brandon was arrested for disorderly and destructive conduct, which included yelling, I quote, go, go, go, as rioters tried to empty the Capitol. | ||
| These three never went into the Capitol. | ||
| They never assaulted anyone. | ||
| So let's be honest with each other. | ||
| There is very little difference between the actions of Ray Epps and Brandon Stricka that day, but yet Stricka was arrested and Epps wasn't. | ||
| Epps also testified to the January 6th committee. | ||
| He was back at his hotel when video evidence showed that he wasn't. | ||
| He lied. He was on the Capitol grounds just as Brandon Stricker was. | ||
| Epps even texted his nephew at 2.12 p.m. | ||
| and said, I quote, I was in the front with a few others. | ||
| It was on the video. | ||
| I also orchestrated it. | ||
| Now look into the camera, sir, when you answer my next question. | ||
| Are you going to arrest Mr. | ||
| Epps, yes or no? | ||
| I'm not going to engage here in a discussion about individual people who are or are not going to be prosecuted. | ||
| Okay, here we go. Can I get a commitment? You just watched the video. | ||
| I'm an old law dog. I understand a little bit about probable cause. | ||
| He did very little. | ||
| There was very little difference what he did, and Mr. | ||
| Strecker, you can see him. | ||
| He's encouraging. I almost think he's inciting a riot. | ||
| He's encouraging people the night prior to go into the Capitol. | ||
| The day of, go into the Capitol. | ||
| And he was at the first breach. | ||
| And he breached the restricted area. | ||
| Everybody, a lot of people getting arrested for not going into the Capitol, but they're in the restricted area. | ||
| But yet, ramps, who many people feel, fed, fed, fed, right? | ||
| And there's a lot of clout over this. | ||
| So my point is this. | ||
| You arrested a lot of folks for unlawful activity. | ||
| You just saw the video, and I will tell you, Mr. | ||
| A, if you don't arrest Mr. | ||
| A, there's a reason behind it. | ||
| I believe you know what it is, and it appears to me you are protecting this guy. | ||
| I strongly recommend you get your house back in order. | ||
| With that, I you bet. Now, I really don't like talking January 6th stuff at all anymore. | ||
| And really don't intend to, but it was all over the news today, and so here we are just covering the news. | ||
| But let me just say this quickly, because I'm amazed that there's one individual who does not get brought up in these hearings, which is also an egregious case, and that is one Jonathan Sullivan. | ||
| So... I'm just going to leave it at that, okay? | ||
| But the Ray Epps story is obviously one of great interest. | ||
| But it's amazing how the John Sullivan story kind of just disappears. | ||
| But you do know he's now a war correspondent in Ukraine, right? | ||
| We all knew that, right? | ||
| Tell me how that flies. | ||
| Michael Cargill in studio coming up. | ||
| Big news. So yesterday we had Jim Hoft on with one of the biggest free speech cases going on right now in the United States of America. | ||
| Now we have Michael Cargill in studio. | ||
| Who may be involved in the most important Second Amendment litigation that's going on right now. | ||
| And so Michael's been on the show with us before discussing this. | ||
| And I know you have some updates as far as the legal battle to preserve our Second Amendment. | ||
| But something incredible has happened here, Michael. | ||
| You are involved in litigation with the ATF to try to protect our Second Amendment rights. | ||
| They decide they're going to come have a special surprise inspection of your storefront. | ||
| And then they try to tell you that they have no idea who you are. | ||
| They had no idea you were involved in the litigation. | ||
| Obviously, Michael, they're being perfectly honest. | ||
| Yeah, they don't think we're stupid. | ||
| They know we're stupid, I guess. | ||
| They didn't know who you were. | ||
| They didn't know you were involved in litigation against them when they showed up. | ||
| It's amazing. We have two cases, two major cases against the federal government. | ||
| We have the bump stock lawsuit that I think is one of the most important Second Amendment cases of our lifetime, where we're saying the ATF cannot create a right law. | ||
| And that case, we won in the Fifth Circuit. | ||
| The federal government decided that on the very last day, the very last hour, they were going to appeal this case to the U.S. Supreme Court. | ||
| So now this case is now sitting in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Satori. | ||
| We're waiting to see if the Supreme Court is going to take it up. | ||
| We're going to find that out on September 26th. | ||
| And so now I also have another lawsuit, and that's the lawsuit of Michael Cargill versus the ATF, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, where we're trying to protect mom-and-pop gun stores. | ||
| We're saying, hey, you know what? | ||
| The ATF is just arbitrarily walking into gun stores and conducting inspections and shutting down mom-and-pop gun stores for just small little paperwork errors. | ||
| And they've done this to the point that they've increased their revocations by 500%. | ||
| Because they've done this under the Biden administration. | ||
| And so I decided to file a lawsuit against the ATF. And I said, hey, this is crazy because some of the things that they've shut down gun stores around the country, some of those things, I've done some of those things in my past inspections. | ||
| So what stops the ATF from walking to my doors and actually conducting an inspection and shutting me down? | ||
| And it could be anybody, by the way. | ||
| That's right. This is normal stuff. | ||
| And they're now saying, oh, you can't do that. | ||
| Yeah, the whole purpose behind the ATF and going to gun stores, they're supposed to assist us and say, hey, these are some of the things that you may have been doing wrong. | ||
| We're going to guide you to make sure you're not making mistakes because the gun store is supposed to be the database for the ATF in case a gun is stolen, using a crime. | ||
| They can trace a firearm back. | ||
| And obviously you guys have your own. | ||
| It's not like they're forcing you to retain data here. | ||
| You want to retain that for yourself already. | ||
| Absolutely. And we have to, and we want to. | ||
| So we want to keep that information. | ||
| Because what if your gun is stolen? | ||
| What if your gun is used in a crime or something like that? | ||
| You want to make sure that it gets back to you. | ||
| And that's what the gun store is for. | ||
| So they're just arbitrarily walking to gun stores right now and saying, hey, on that paperwork that people fill out, the 4473, if you make a mistake on there, such as some of the things that our customers have done is spelled Austin incorrectly, Some of the customers have put their social security number in the wrong box. | ||
| Little small things like that, they're shutting down mom and pop gun stores. | ||
| But if Hunter Biden did that, it'd be okay, right? | ||
| Right. So just say all of your clients are Hunter Biden and then they can fill out paperwork wrong and they'll be fine. | ||
| That's right. So, you know, and so what we did is we filed this lawsuit and everyone knows that, you know, I have several lawsuits against the federal government. | ||
| Everyone knows this is not a surprise. | ||
| Every agent I've talked to that that's come to the gun store for, you know, I've seen on the street, whatever. | ||
| Oh, yeah. How's that bump stock case going? | ||
| Everyone in town knows this. | ||
| You know, this is not a secret. | ||
| So they know we in litigation with the federal government. | ||
| So they're supposed to contact my attorney to let me know. | ||
| You know, my attorney know that they're going to be coming to the gun store to conduct an inspection. | ||
| I'm not supposed to just arbitrarily walk in the door there because you're discussing the case. | ||
| You're discussing the facts of the case because I'm suing you because of inspections. | ||
| And by doing that, you've, you know, executed, so to speak, like a warrant. | ||
| Well, it would be an illegal. | ||
| Or a disposition. A deposition. | ||
| It'd be like an illegal execution of a warrant. | ||
| Right. Or without a warrant. | ||
| Right. Or just a deposition without my attorney present. | ||
| And that's not supposed to happen. | ||
| And they admitted it. | ||
| We actually filed paperwork with the court. | ||
| They responded to that paperwork that we filed, and they said, oopsie, our bad. | ||
| Going forward, we're going to make sure that we notify your attorney that we're going to be discussing anything with you or agents going to be inside the building. | ||
| We'll let your attorney know. | ||
| Well, let's try to make an analogy here so people can get a better idea of what you're talking about with these gun shops, the mom-and-pop shops, or yourself even. | ||
| This would be like if... | ||
| I don't know. What is the bureaucracy that goes and does quality checks at restaurants? | ||
| I don't know. Maybe it's... | ||
| I don't know who that is. | ||
| But this is like if a restaurant inspector wanted to shut down your restaurant. | ||
| But not just the restaurant inspector. | ||
| His boss wanted to shut down your restaurant. | ||
| The whole system wanted to shut down your restaurant. | ||
| The health department. Health department. | ||
| So let's say the health department wants to shut down your restaurant or shut down restaurants in general. | ||
| Well, they're now going to restaurants and they see, oh, oh, you haven't properly cleaned your fryers. | ||
| You haven't properly mopped your things. | ||
| Oh, I found a hair in the bathroom. | ||
| It's like and then it's just like, oh, wow, you're shutting down all these restaurants. | ||
| That's basically what they're doing to these stores. | ||
| Right, right. It's really, it's crazy. | ||
| It's insane because, you know, here we are, we're trying to do the right thing. | ||
| We're not trying to transfer a gun to someone who's not supposed to take possession of the firearm. | ||
| We're supposed, you know, we're trying to do the background check. | ||
| We're trying to keep our records straight, you know, and it's a lot of work. | ||
| You know, we've gone through 2020, you know, COVID, the country shutting down. | ||
| It was complete chaos and we managed to keep perfect, you know, great records. | ||
| I've had 13,000 transactions in over a year that the ATF is trying to inspect and go through those 13,000 transactions. | ||
| Well, out of those 13,000 transactions, they may have found like five little small little mistakes. | ||
| Again, a smudge of ink. | ||
| Somebody puts the name in the wrong box. | ||
| Little minor things like that. | ||
| And so, you know, it's to walk in and, you know, do something like this, you know, not give us notice, you know, like they're supposed to because knowing that we have a case or to try to sneak in and try to find something, you know. | ||
| And I don't fault the local agents that are here locally. | ||
| They're nice people. | ||
| They're doing what they're supposed to do. | ||
| They're being guided by the people in Washington, D.C. So I fault the people in D.C. So what does this feel like for you? | ||
| Or has there been maybe like a change of attitude where, like you said, your whole motivation here is, hey, I want to protect the Second Amendment. | ||
| This is what the Second Amendment means to me. | ||
| And I believe this is what it means to everybody. | ||
| We're going to challenge this at the Supreme Court level to now the ATF showing up at your business doing a surprise inspection without even telling your lawyer. | ||
| Does it feel like for you maybe, hey, I thought I was just in here to defend the Second Amendment. | ||
| Now all of a sudden there's a whole new battle on my hand. | ||
| Right. It's nothing more than just a trick to try to gather information or to get things, you know, to fight us in court over. | ||
| You know, maybe to shut my case down, maybe to get my case thrown out or dismissed by the judge. | ||
| Little tricks like that. | ||
| The whole purpose for me doing this, you know, finding these different lawsuits, going against the city of Austin, you know, fighting the Department of Justice, fighting the alcohol, tobacco and firearms. | ||
| The whole purpose of all this stuff is so that, you know, what if Joe Smoll down the road is driving in their vehicle and they have a brace, you know, an AR-15 pistol brace. | ||
| And they didn't know that the brace was banned. | ||
| And this is the new ruling that just came down. | ||
| Correct. This is the new rule that went down on January 31st. | ||
| Well, your AR-15 brace is actually illegal. | ||
| So little things like that. | ||
| Not everyone is up to date on the news and what's going on around the country, around the globe. | ||
| Some people totally disconnect themselves from the news. | ||
| And so they get stopped by police. | ||
| The police find this rifle or pistol, SBR, depending on who you're talking to. | ||
| They find this firearm, and then this person's in possession of a felony. | ||
| And that's now how our country was founded. | ||
| You're talking about the federal government taking something that is in common use. | ||
| And they've banned it and turned anywhere from 10 to 40 million Americans into felons overnight. | ||
| And that's not what our forefathers, that's not how they designed our Constitution. | ||
| That's not how this country was formed. | ||
| And so I'm trying to protect the smaller guy, that person that doesn't know what's going on. | ||
| I'm trying to protect the small mom and pop gun stores because we are the backbone of this country. | ||
| We're the ones that are there when everything, you know, the country shuts down, COVID happens, the mom-and-pop gun stores are open, the big-box stores, they shut down. | ||
| They defund the police, make your neighbors criminal. | ||
| Yeah, when there's a shooting that takes place, you know, I don't pull my AR-15s off the wall. | ||
| You know, we continue to sell them to law-abiding citizens like we're supposed to, not because I'm, you know, Walmart or some big-box store decide that I'm not going to sell that particular item. | ||
| Now, I want to get back into the surprise inspection because, folks, we need to understand how dangerous this is for anybody when the government can be weaponized against you. | ||
| We're not talking about justice. | ||
| We're talking about weaponized government. | ||
| There's a big difference there. | ||
| I'm having a good lap, you know. | ||
| I forget who it was I was talking to about that. | ||
| I'm driving down the road here the other day, and I'm minding my P's and Q's. | ||
| You know, I'm a safe driver. Very safe. | ||
| And I'm making a left turn, and here comes, I see this white van barreling down the road. | ||
| I don't know, maybe you were trying to catch a light or something. | ||
| But it comes barely down the road, so I'm hugging this turn. | ||
| I'm like, holy, this van is going gangbusters here. | ||
| So I'm up there, and then it's like, it's like everything, it's like, you know, sometimes things just go slow motion, and all of a sudden, when you drove past me, everything went slow motion, and I just see Michael Cargill at the front of the, at the wheel, just like, yeah! | ||
| It was like slow motion. | ||
| I was like, that's Cargill over there! | ||
| Oh! I don't think I ever talked about that on air. | ||
| I was talking about somebody you work with that I saw you on the road the other day. | ||
| Anyway, we're having a laugh here. Michael Cargill. | ||
| Allegedly. That's true. | ||
| They didn't hear any of this. | ||
| I don't know who it was, actually. | ||
| It was a lookalike. They just looked like you. | ||
| But we're getting back to the issues at hand here. | ||
| So let me just make this statement because people need to understand. | ||
| And you're in ongoing litigation, so you can talk about what you can. | ||
| But When you have a situation where if you're involved in a lawsuit, whether it involves the government or not, it really shouldn't matter, and then the government works with the person you're suing and says, hey, we'll send somebody in there to make sure they've got something illegal going on. | ||
| So it's like, oh, let's go see, oh, look, you didn't have the right records here on one form out of 13,000. | ||
| Sorry, now your lawsuit is illegitimate and got to be tossed out. | ||
| Folks, that is weaponization of government. | ||
| So dangerous. And obviously the ATF is denying that's what they've done to you, so of course we would believe them there. | ||
| But nonetheless, that concept is extremely frightening. | ||
| And then when we talk about, you know, just like, hey, they could shut down all these restaurants if they wanted to, well, they can shut down these gun shops if they wanted to. | ||
| So, I mean, just generally speaking, that... | ||
| It's such a dangerous concept that we would hope, no matter your political affiliations, you would stand up against it. | ||
| Yeah, and they're following me on social media. | ||
| They're reading the comments and all that kind of stuff. | ||
| Because I did a post on Twitter yesterday, and I immediately got a call from an ATF agent today saying, oops, you know, I'm sorry. | ||
| I got a call from D.C., and I'm supposed to, you know, talk to your attorney to discuss with your attorney on dates that we can come back to meet with you. | ||
| So they're following everything. | ||
| They know what's going on. They know who I am. | ||
| There's no surprise. And you're talking about this is the local ATF. Right. | ||
| They got a call from D.C. and saying, hey, we're supposed to actually talk to your attorney to schedule something with you, not talk to you directly or just show up. | ||
| So they know. And they're following. | ||
| Like I said, they're following the posting on social media. | ||
| And you know... Because we both got to be careful. | ||
| We're both involved in litigation here, so it's like you got to be careful what you say. | ||
| But I mean, I've kind of found something similar where most of the time, the agents that you'll end up interacting with, say the boots on the ground or the field agents, usually... | ||
| Like you said, they're just taking orders. | ||
| That's right. And a lot of the times they actually know the background information, but they still have to take the orders for their job. | ||
| Correct. I mean, I've got some stories I could talk about. | ||
| I'm not going to today, but I mean, it's like... | ||
| Yeah, I mean, this would be like if the ATF agent showed up and said, hey, Michael, I know this is 100% political being done to you, and it got called out of D.C., but I just got to do it anyway. | ||
| Exactly. You know, like I said, the ones that are here locally, I can't speak for every area, every other state. | ||
| I can only speak for the ones that I deal with here locally, are super nice people. | ||
| They're doing their job. You know, they're not—it's D.C. that's the problem. | ||
| It's going to be the Biden administration, the Department of Justice, the ones that are in Washington, D.C. that are causing all these problems that we're having. | ||
| So you would, I mean, it's not surprising that they would follow you on social media, but what is that about? | ||
| Don't know. So it reminds me that I do need to watch what I post and what I say. | ||
| So it reminds me of that. | ||
| I need to remember that I do have a case going forward and all that stuff. | ||
| And it's not about me. | ||
| It's about the end goal. | ||
| It's about the last piece that moves on the chessboard. | ||
| It's about everybody. | ||
| And I have to keep everyone in mind that I'm doing this for the American people, not just for myself. | ||
| Well, and let's talk about another phenomenon here, too, because I was mentioning how this applies to the First Amendment, where they have certain protections for so-called journalists. | ||
| In one of my cases, I think it was a magistrate judge came out and said, well, wait a second. | ||
| Owen Schroer is a journalist. | ||
| We have laws that say journalists have protected First Amendment speeches, which I might say, hey, yeah, this should protect me legally. | ||
| But that's not even my response. | ||
| My response is that, no, I shouldn't have special privileges to the First Amendment. | ||
| Every American should have the same First Amendment privileges that I have, whether I'm in the media or not. | ||
| Well, the same thing is happening now with the Second Amendment and some of these recent laws that they've struck down certain braces and attachments to the guns. | ||
| Right. You're seeing them come after triggers. | ||
| You're seeing them come after companies that actually make triggers. | ||
| A lot of different things. And this is why we're fighting these cases. | ||
| You have Gunners of America, FPC, the AG here in Texas, you know, filed lawsuits against the federal government because we've got to rein this government in. | ||
| We got to rein in these small agencies within our federal government that think that they can, you know, do whatever they want to do. | ||
| And they're showing that they actually can. | ||
| They've been weaponized. | ||
| And so we need to bring them back in and say, you know what, enough is enough. | ||
| This has got to stop. And I'm very grateful and thankful of this Supreme Court that we have right now. | ||
| Ruth Bader, RBG, died when she should not have. | ||
| You know, she should have actually retired when a Democrat was in office. | ||
| And the fact that she didn't know when to quit, the fact that she actually did die under a Republican president... | ||
| Ended up being... One of the greatest things actually to happen. | ||
| And it turned out that that's going to be her legacy. | ||
| She made the biggest, hugest mistake, and it's going to play in our part. | ||
| Right now we're seeing a lot of things being dismantled, and we're going to see the Second Amendment being upheld, and we're going to win a lot, I figure, in the next coming years, you know, thanks to this Supreme Court that we actually have right now. | ||
| Yeah, and in fact, you've got your big case coming up in September. | ||
| Are there any other big Second Amendment I think we're good to go. | ||
| The Fifth Circuit looked at this case initially and decided against Mr. | ||
| Rahimi. And then once the Heller decision came out, they changed their mind, re-heard the case, took a second look at it, and decided to rule in his favor and sentence to the Supreme Court. | ||
| So the Supreme Court is going to take up this case and take a look at it. | ||
| This is about domestic violence. | ||
| Can someone who's been convicted—not convicted, actually— Have a restraining order for domestic violence. | ||
| Can they own a firearm? They haven't been convicted of a crime, but they have a restraining order. | ||
| Do they lose their gun rights? | ||
| Do they lose their gun rights forever? | ||
| Do they lose their gun rights temporarily? | ||
| And so the Supreme Court is going to take a look at this. | ||
| And this guy was not the best citizen out there. | ||
| He was not a good husband, not a good boyfriend or anything, but he has rights. | ||
| Do you lose your rights forever? | ||
| And that's the point. Well, that is so key, too. | ||
| And even if this is a bad example, because this guy may have been a scumbag, still, there's a situation where somebody else could want to put you on a restraining order list for nefarious reasons or illegitimate reasons, and then what? | ||
| So you lose your rights then, too? | ||
| I don't like that at all. | ||
| And I hope someone brings a case about felons. | ||
| Should felons lose their rights forever? | ||
| It does say shall not be infringed, right? | ||
| Yes, it does. I believe it says shall not be infringed. | ||
| And if you're convicted of a felony, once you've paid your debts to society, once you've gone to jail, done whatever that the society thinks you should do to pay that debt, then you should get your gun rights back. | ||
| You should get all your rights back. It's infringed every day. | ||
| Michael Cargill, Central Texas Gunworks. | ||
| Folks, if you're here in the area, it's the best place to get training, ammo, and firearms. | ||
| Michael, thank you. Well, I knew it was going to be a loaded transmission, and no doubt it has been. | ||
| And we've all been all over the map of relevance. | ||
| Oh yes, whose line is it anyway? | ||
| Big news now, again, from the hearing. | ||
| We're going to have this clip for you coming up here shortly. | ||
| Folks, I'm telling you, I just look at all the angles, and I try to be neutral and fair, and not let my own bias Dictate what I bring to you here on the air. | ||
| I'm telling you, man, there is a chance that Chris Wray is not the bad guy here. | ||
| I know it's hard to believe, but there is a chance, and something that just got said in the hearing makes you wonder. | ||
| And so we're going to have that coming up here shortly as well. | ||
| But ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling you, truly, Truly, I am blessed to have this great crew behind me, and I am grateful to have this platform to voice my news coverage every day, because otherwise I'd be totally banned. | ||
| And that's fine, because I'd rather be here with you anyway. | ||
| But it's all thanks to your support at Infowarsstore.com. | ||
| And man, oh man, I have been riled up today. | ||
| And I have energy to go all night, thanks to TurboForcePlus at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| Not sure what time I drank my TurboForce today. | ||
| I did a podcast with Eddie Bravo. | ||
| That was at 1, so it was about 12.30 probably. | ||
| It's now 5.30, and I'm still juiced. | ||
| I'm still juiced from TurboForcePlus. | ||
| So when we say 10 hours of clean energy, folks, that is not an exaggeration. | ||
| The Independence Day Super Sale has been extended, and so that means Turbo Force Plus is still 25% off right now at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| So find out what it's all about. The great taste and the 10 hours of clean energy. | ||
| Turbo Force Plus, 25% off at InfoWarsStore.com. | ||
| And this thing is going to power me through the night, and then when it's bedtime, it'll be a nice, easy, nice, easy time to de-energize and fall asleep. | ||
| And then I'll take one of the sleep aids from Infowarsstore.com as well and have a nice sleep. | ||
| So that's how it goes. All right. | ||
| I'm going to dedicate the final segment today to the headline news story, which is so typical, right? | ||
| But that's how it goes. And I'll be honest, really, the reason why I've not wanted to touch this thing is beyond just covering the hearing. | ||
| Folks, the news out of California today, it's just, it's so disgusting. | ||
| I just... | ||
| I don't even want to look at it. | ||
| I don't even want to cover it. But I'll dedicate the last segment to looking at what they're doing today. | ||
| And you just ask yourself, why do Democrats want to protect pedophiles and sex traffickers? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why? Simple question. | |
| Proof is in the pudding. That's what they're doing. | ||
| So we'll have that coming up. | ||
| Let me hit some of these other headlines first. | ||
| And then show you the latest clip that is seriously interesting here from the hearing. | ||
| RFK Jr., this is big. | ||
| Now there's a problem on the other side of this, but RFK Jr. | ||
| was on Jesse Waters' prime time last night, and he promised to prosecute Fauci. | ||
| Now, he's smart, so he says, yes, if Fauci committed crimes, we'll prosecute Fauci. | ||
| He caused a lot of injury. But I do think the best chance we have of prosecuting Fauci would probably be RFK Jr. | ||
| I'm not a single-issue voter, and that wouldn't even be my single issue, but he says the right thing. | ||
| Here's the crazy part. | ||
| Kennedy, I mean, let's do some deep political analysis. | ||
| Kennedy is going to be polling at about 33% by the end of the summer, which means that's when the debates would be going on, would be the end of the summer. | ||
| Now, the Democrats have canceled all debates. | ||
| Think about how wild that is. | ||
| The Democrats have canceled all debates. | ||
| Kennedy is going to be polling at over 30% by the end of the summer, which would mean he's right there neck and neck as the Democrat nominee. | ||
| So, the Democrats aren't going to have debates. | ||
| But not only... | ||
| Not only... | ||
| Honestly, this is wild, and it's just a sign of how corrupt things are. | ||
| You're probably going to have a situation at this rate. | ||
| Biden and Trump get the nomination, and neither one of them ever had a political debate. | ||
| Because Trump's not going to do any debates. | ||
| They've already got three or four Republican debates scheduled. | ||
| Trump is not on any of them. That's his own decision. | ||
| And he'll still get the nomination. | ||
| And sadly, Ron DeSantis' political career will be destroyed in the process, which is really a shame. | ||
| And then there's Biden, and they're not going to have debates. | ||
| So the two nominees are not even going to have to debate. | ||
| And now everybody's expecting Biden is out. | ||
| So Biden is not going to debate, assume to get the nominee, and then what are they going to do? | ||
| Replace him with Newsom, or how is this going to work? | ||
| Biden cannot be president the next four years. | ||
| And so unless they want to do the biggest steel job in the history of politics, bigger than 2020, to get Biden in and then do the switcheroo, I don't know how this is going to look coming down the stretch. | ||
| Because the Republican nominee, Trump, isn't going to debate. | ||
| Biden's not going to debate and get the nominee and then probably be replaced. | ||
| And what happens then to RFK Jr.? | ||
| We'd love to see him be Trump's vice president, but I don't know if that's a realistic expectation. | ||
| Now, here is the latest... | ||
| This just came from the Wray hearing today. | ||
| Now, I'm not telling you to get all excited about this, but maybe there's reason to believe. | ||
| Talking about an investigation into the Biden crime family here, Christopher Wray in clip 23. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Did Joe Biden take payments from Burisma or any other foreign companies as vice president, president, or private citizen Biden? | |
| As you may know, there is an ongoing investigation being led by the U.S. Attorney in Delaware, Mr. | ||
| Weiss, appointed by President Trump in the last administration. | ||
| That our Baltimore field office is working with. | ||
| And I would refer you to him as to what, if anything, can be shared. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So the president is under investigation. | |
| I'm not going to confirm or speak to who is or isn't under investigation for what. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm simply going to tell you. So he's not under investigation? | |
| I didn't say that either. | ||
| He is. By longstanding department policy and practice. | ||
| I'm not going to be confirming or denying who is or isn't under investigation. | ||
| So, Joe Biden is under criminal investigation, and Christopher Wray's FBI informant is being protected because he's afraid he'll be killed if he's revealed. | ||
| So, I'm not telling you to have any faith or hope in Chris Wray. | ||
| I'm just looking at all the options here, and... | ||
| I mean, it's all going to be determined as to whether or not anything happens to Joe Biden, as far as the criminal investigations are concerned, obviously, but... | ||
| No, there is obviously a serious investigation in the Biden crime family. | ||
| The Republicans in the House have seen the bank records that show Joe Biden and Hunter Biden making tens of millions of dollars overseas, as well as three other Bidens. | ||
| We haven't had their names, but we know it's Joe and Hunter. | ||
| And then the FBI informant that's been following the Hunter Biden investigation, they fear for his life. | ||
| Now, Gal Luft, this is another interesting situation. | ||
| Remember, the media asked, how come Hunter Biden isn't being arrested when Gal Luft did the exact same thing that Hunter Biden did, but he's now been arrested? | ||
| Folks, don't forget that people do cooperate and flip. | ||
| So, again, I'm not saying that's what happened with Gal Luft, but maybe it is. | ||
| Maybe it is. | ||
| So I'm not telling you to have any hope here. | ||
| I'm just looking at all the angles, and it is totally confirmed that Joe Biden is under criminal investigation. | ||
| Will anything come of it? | ||
| I don't know, but we have enough evidence to know that there's serious stuff going on. | ||
| Now, in the meantime, here's his vice president. | ||
| Truly a genius. | ||
| It's hard to even keep up with the intellectual prowess of a Kamala Harris here in clip 13. | ||
| And I think the first part of this issue that should be articulated is AI is kind of a fancy thing. | ||
| First of all, it's two letters. | ||
| It means artificial intelligence. | ||
| But ultimately what it is, is it's about machine learning. | ||
| And so the machine is taught. | ||
| And part of the issue here is what information is going into the machine that will then determine, and we can predict then if we think about what information is going in, what then will be produced in terms of decisions and opinions that may be made through that process. | ||
| Why does she talk to us like we're first graders? | ||
| Is that her projecting? | ||
| Or does she really just not know how to communicate like an adult? | ||
| What an embarrassment. Alright, we're going to get into the disgusting news on the other side. | ||
| I can't believe it, but it's here. | ||
| Alright, usually the last segment here is a little more loose and fun, but I've saved the worst for last, unfortunately, today. | ||
| There's really no commentary needed, though. | ||
| You just look at what they're doing in California, the Democrats, that is, the liberals, and what further commentary is necessary? | ||
| If you don't understand it, then, I mean, what convincing is there that I can possibly have here? | ||
| California Assembly blocks legislation that would have made child trafficking punishable by life in prison. | ||
| California Assembly blocks bill to make child trafficking a serious felony. | ||
| And the California Assembly, this is on public safety, squashed a bill that would have increased the charges for human trafficking, despite it passing through the state Senate with bipartisan support. | ||
| So it just shows you how radicalized the California Assembly Committee is on public safety. | ||
| Now, of course, California, one of the least safe states in the nation, so I guess go figure. | ||
| California's Committee on Public Safety hasn't done a very good job Unless you want pedophiles protected and sex traffickers protected and criminals protected, then the public safety of the California Assembly Committee has done quite well in that regard. | ||
| But it's all over the place. | ||
| California Assembly Democrats block Bill to fight sex trafficking of minors. | ||
| They love it. That's why Hollywood is out there. | ||
| It's probably why Adam Schiff is out there and Ed Buck. | ||
| They don't want it to be a serious felony. | ||
| This is always crazy. I'm sorry. | ||
| I always get crazy when I see Ashley Zavala's name. | ||
| She covers news in California. We both went to school together. | ||
| It's always just funny when I see that. | ||
| California Assembly Committee blocks bill that could have sent human traffickers of kids to prison for life. | ||
| Well, I guess the Democrats don't want to go to jail for life if they get caught, huh? | ||
| Remember this one? California lowers penalty for knowingly exposing your partners to sexually transmitted diseases. | ||
| Yeah. Yeah, not a crime to intentionally give somebody AIDS, huh? | ||
| Not a crime in California to intentionally give somebody AIDS. And now... | ||
| The Public Safety Committee is trying to protect you if you get caught trafficking children. | ||
| Again, folks, I could have with.0001% of my intellect an open mind towards somebody trying to tell me that a minor attracted person is some sort of mental disorder that needs to be treated as such and not a criminal that needs to be, let's say, eradicated from society. | ||
| But there is not any space in my intellectual capacity to hear out somebody that doesn't think somebody that traffics children needs to go to jail for life and shouldn't be considered a serious felon. | ||
| I won't even know. | ||
| But the California Democrats in the Public Safety Committee, oh, they like that. | ||
| And they love trans kids, too. | ||
| Another thing, the safety committee out there in California, if your 8-year-old boy says, I want to be a girl, I want breast implants now, well, the California Democrats say, you must affirm that. | ||
| You must take your kid to the plastic surgeon, 8-year-old boy, and give him breast implants. | ||
| It's just crazy. | ||
| Governor Gavin Newsom signs Bill reducing penalties for sodomy with minors. | ||
| So they want to protect child rapists. | ||
| The Democrats in California want to protect child rapists, and they want to protect child sex traffickers. | ||
| I mean, that tells you everything, and that tells you why they want Gavin Newsom to be their next president. | ||
| That tells you why they want Katenji Brown Jackson on the Supreme Court. | ||
| It's a pedophile army, folks. | ||
| It's a pedophile army, and they are at the doors. | ||
| So there you go in California. | ||
| Knowingly give someone AIDS, perfectly legal. | ||
| Rape a child, they'll be lenient with you. | ||
| Sex traffic a child, you won't spend life in prison. | ||
| So I guess California is the new haven for pedophiles. | ||
| And it's, you know, it's sad because California, arguably the most beautiful state in the union, and so we just have to basically sacrifice that to the liberals, huh? | ||
| And I'm disgusted now because, look, I was debating even showing you this stuff, but we just accidentally put it on the camera anyway, so... | ||
| I can't even look at it. | ||
| But... We've had this activist on before, Sarah Fields. | ||
| She's a concerned parent here in Texas, and she's an activist as well, protecting children in schools. | ||
| And she came across a new book. | ||
| She came across a new book that they have for kids at the Fort Worth ISD, and it's for five-year-olds, and it's a book of genitalia, literally. | ||
| And it's a trace and sketchbook for you to learn how to draw a penis and a vagina at five years old. | ||
| So, okay. | ||
| Do you like seeing that? Because I sure don't. | ||
| I'm a grown adult, and I don't even want to see that. | ||
| And they're showing it to your five-year-olds. | ||
| Okay? So there you go. | ||
| It used to be you'd pick up one of these sketch and trace books and it's like, oh, you're drawing a dragon or a unicorn or a bear or the forest or a rainbow. | ||
| And now it's just porn. | ||
| And let's be clear, folks. | ||
| This isn't human anatomy class. | ||
| This isn't biology text. | ||
| This is straight-up softcore porn for kids. | ||
| Call it what it is. | ||
| That's what they're doing here. | ||
| All right. Get it off the screen. | ||
| I can't see anymore. | ||
| But we had to cover it. | ||
| And then it's laughable. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bye. | |
| What does Kamala Harris find unacceptable? | ||
| The former Attorney General of California. | ||
| Does she find it unacceptable that you can knowingly give somebody AIDS? No. | ||
| Does she find it unacceptable that child sex traffickers are being protected by California Democrats? | ||
| No. Does she find it unacceptable that child rapists are being protected by California Democrats? | ||
| No. No. | ||
| What does she find unacceptable here today? | ||
| The majority of domestic flights do not have accessible restrooms. | ||
| This is absolutely unacceptable. | ||
| Our administration will soon announce a solution to help end this inequity. | ||
| What is she even talking about? | ||
| Does somebody know what she's talking about? | ||
| I mean... The crew says fat people. | ||
| I mean, I'm assuming she's talking about handicapped people, but I don't even know. | ||
| That can't even be legal. | ||
| What is she talking about? | ||
| She doesn't even tell you. So you're just left to interpret. | ||
| I don't know what she means, but it's unacceptable. | ||
| Oh my gosh. I mean, the outrage. | ||
| I hear it everywhere I go, folks. | ||
| The outrage. Every talk radio station, it's all over. | ||
| The outrage that we don't have accessible restrooms on airplanes. | ||
| Boy, wait till she finds out that there's no bathrooms on buses. | ||
| Oh my gosh. | ||
| Those school buses she's obsessed with don't have bathrooms in them. | ||
| That's unacceptable. The clown administration. | ||
| The clown administration is what it is, folks. | ||
| Oh my gosh. | ||
| So yet another day goes by where I can't even cover all the news. | ||
| We don't even have enough time. So let's do this. | ||
| Guys, roll clip 20 for me quickly. | ||
| This is outside a Sound of Freedom showing at a movie theater. | ||
| Guys, just roll me clip 20 real quick. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So I've been seeing all over TikTok that people are going to watch the movie The Sound of Freedom. | |
| And these weird things are happening like random emergency evacuations, the air conditioning not working and having to leave the theater. | ||
| And I thought, no, that's probably just something that's happening in other theaters and other places. | ||
| So it took me and my daughters to go watch The Sound of Freedom today, and about an hour and 20 minutes into the movie, we get a random emergency evacuation. | ||
| None of the staff knows what's going on. | ||
| The mall wasn't being evacuated, just the theater. | ||
| All they did was refund us our money with no explanation. | ||
| But I guess you can call me a conspiracy theorist. | ||
| Okay, so it was actually last week I saw this story on the internet, a couple sources, a couple videos, and it talked about how theaters are being emptied out and the sound of freedom and fire alarms and everything going off. | ||
| And I kind of discounted it because it does happen. | ||
| I mean, it's rare, but it does happen. I mean, I've probably seen 300 movies in movie theaters, maybe even more. | ||
| Probably actually like 500 actually. | ||
| Because for two years I was actually doing professional movie reviews. | ||
| I had a pass. I can go see any movie, pre-screenings, everything. | ||
| So I was going to one, two movies a week, easy. | ||
| And I would say of the 500 times I've gone to a movie theater, it's been evacuated maybe twice. | ||
| For either technical problems or a fire alarm or something. | ||
| And I used to just think, oh, this is just one or two times people are filming it because of the movie. | ||
| This is like four or five times just with this movie. | ||
| So I think somebody's trying to sabotage you from seeing this movie. | ||
| It's pretty clear at this point. | ||
| And we know who it is. | ||
| The same people in California that are protecting pedophiles. | ||
| Ladies and gentlemen, you know InfoWars is not going to give up or give in. | ||
| And your support over the years is the only reason why we're still on air. | ||
| And quite frankly, it's a miracle. | ||
| I think in the New World Order timeline, they really did not expect us to still be on air. | ||
| And that's why they're pulling out all the stops right now to try to destroy us. | ||
| You see about 25% probably of the attacks against us. | ||
| Maybe now that some of it's getting more public, it's closer to 50. | ||
| But still, just the tip of the iceberg. | ||
| But you in the audience keeping us on air has been a miracle. | ||
| Infowarsstore.com, huge discounts on top rated, top selling supplements. | ||
| In case you don't know about it, here's what we have. | ||
| Brain Force Plus, Ultimate Krill Oil, Knockout Sleep Support, the Down and Out Liquid Sleep | ||
| Support, Super Male and Super Female Vitality, DNA Force Plus Bodies, Ultimate Turmeric, | ||
| Turbo Force, Vitamin Mineral Fusion. | ||
| I am really starting to love the new Super Coral Whitening Toothpaste. | ||
| I just recently made the switch about a week ago, and I'm really starting to love it. | ||
| Definitely my new favorite toothpaste now, after just about one week of use, the Super Coral Whitening Toothpaste. | ||
| What a great way to fund the Infowar. | ||
| A tube of toothpaste. Everybody uses toothpaste. | ||
| Everybody brushes their teeth, I'm assuming. | ||
| Why not get toothpaste from the good guys? | ||
| Super Coral Whitening Toothpaste on sale right now at InfowarStore.com. | ||
| Iodine is naturally acquired through the soil, which is at the foundation of our entire food supply. | ||
| Modern farming techniques have stripped the soil of this essential trace element, which has caused an iodine deficiency in about half the population. | ||
| And there are two things we need to do about it. | ||
| We need to practice more regenerative farming. | ||
| There are plenty of proven technologies in permaculture and biodynamics that will naturally keep the soil rich with iodine. | ||
| And we need to ensure that we get the sufficient amount of iodine every day. | ||
| Derived from ancient sea salts found thousands of feet below the Earth's surface, our InfoWars Life Survival Shield X3 is hands down the best. | ||
| Pure nascent iodine, stabilized in an activated tri-iodine form. |
Export Selection