Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Feb. 29, 2024 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec

49:01

EPISODE 682: SUPREME COURT DERAILS TRUMP J6 TRIAL

Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiecSave up to 65% on MyPillow products by going to https://www.MyPillow.com/POSO and use code POSOGo to https://www.patriotmobile.com/poso/ or call 878-PATRIOT to get free activation with offer code POSOSupport the Show.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo Daily Brief.
	It is completely free.
	It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
	You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world.
	We will have this delivered directly to you, totally for free.
	Go to humanevents.com slash Pozo.
	Sign up today.
	It's called the Pozo Daily Brief.
	Read what I read for show prep.
	You will not regret it.
	humanevents.com slash Pozo.
	Totally free.
	the Pozo Daily Brief.
	This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
	A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
	This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec.
	Deliver us from evil!
	French President Macron has come under fire for suggesting the West might deploy troops to Ukraine.
	They should eventually understand that we also have weapons, and they know it.
	I just said it now myself.
	Weapons that can hit targets on their territory.
	Everything that the West is coming up with now, what they threaten the world with, it can result in a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons.
	My administration is going to choose progress over politics, and communities across the country are safer as a result.
	There is no greater responsibility than to ensure the safety of families, children, communities, and our nation.
	The New York Appellate Court has denied an attempt by Donald Trump to delay payments of his $454 million civil fraud judgment.
	That means, for now, the former president is required to pay that bond in the coming weeks.
	A third state has now barred Trump from his presidential ballot.
	A state court judge in Illinois said Trump engaged in insurrection.
	She believes that disqualifies him from seeking the presidency again.
	Well, I'm very pessimistic.
	I do not have the view that they took this case because they're going to hand out a win to Donald Trump in the Colorado case, but here they're going to essentially give him a defeat by saying there is no presidential immunity in this case.
	Yes, of course, I think ultimately they will not grant immunity in this case, but they have given him the win because the D.C. case, let's just face it, is on life support now.
	People in the media, people at home and people sitting in the White House have to stop pretending that the Supreme Court is some kind of benign trying to do its best institution.
	The cravenness of the court is evident in what they are doing with the pacing here, right?
	Like, putting this off for seven weeks, sitting on it for two weeks for no reason, obviously pushing all of the cases that they can push, pushing them to the point where Trump will be standing for election before any of us have heard the verdicts in any of those cases.
	Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily, live from Washington, D.C.
	Today is February 29th, 2024.
	Anno Domini.
	You saw the mainstream media there.
	Absolute freakout.
	Being held from yesterday when it came down, the Supreme Court had what's called granted cert, the issue disorder granting cert, saying that they would take up the president's presidential immunity case.
	Now, of course, there was no question that the presidential immunity case in the Jan 6 trial would be brought up before the Supreme Court.
	This is a direct constitutional issue.
	It's a separation of powers issue.
	It speaks directly to the powers and the actions of the executive of the United States.
	And it covers not just, of course, not just President Trump, but it is a precedent that will be set for every executive going forward.
	And so it was unquestionable.
	There was no case.
	There was no scenario where this court would not take it up because this court is a serious court, one that's actually deeply concerned with the Constitution and how rulings, related to the Constitution and really reflected through the lens of the Constitution, affect the day-to-day governance and history related to the Constitution and really reflected through the lens of the Constitution, affect the day-to-day governance and history of our country, the future history of And so the reason you're seeing this absolute freak out from the media is they are upset
	that people will be allowed to vote for Donald Trump in November without any trial, knocking him off the ballot or making him ineligible in some way.
	This is what they wanted.
	So the same people that we just played for you in that clip that were all losing their minds over me and my CPAC speech last week are now this week.
	Remember, I was the end of democracy.
	I was the death of democracy.
	I was going to destroy democracy in America.
	They didn't actually listen to the rest of my speech.
	Just literally like the first opening words.
	And now they're spending this week losing their minds that the American people are going to be able to vote for a candidate of their choice.
	In an election, so it's anti-democracy to be able to vote for a candidate, but it's pro-democracy to use lawfare to knock him off of a ballot.
	Remember, Joy Reid was one of the chief, one of the absolute chief and There she is.
	You can see her.
	She's so focused on Donald Trump.
	She's taken to adopting his hairstyle for whatever reason.
	You'd really have to ask Joy.
	I certainly hope, by the way, that Joy is changing the batteries in her smoke detector because I want to make sure that she is practicing good fire prevention safety.
	Now, folks, we need to be serious here.
	They're doing everything they can to stop Trump from simply appearing on the ballot and allowing people to vote for him.
	That's why everyone in Washington, D.C.
	is pressing the panic button, because you know where the D.C.
	money is going?
	They know Trump's about to win.
	Stay tuned.
	Mike Benz joins us for the full hour after this.
	Ladies and gentlemen, one of the best ways that you can support us here at Human Events and the work that we do is subscribing to us on our Rumble channel.
	Make sure you're subscribed, you hit the notifications, so you'll never miss a clip, you'll never miss a new live episode, and we're putting them out every single day of the week.
	...in the hood, I rolled with Bloods, and them boys had a saying.
	You can't be listening to all that slappy whack, trim out his all, it's a bam ship, nippy-bam-bam.
	By Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
	Jack Posobiec back live, Human Events Daily.
	Folks, for 10 years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider.
	And when I say only, trust me, they are the only one.
	Glenn and his team have been great supporters of this show, which is why I'm proud to partner with them.
	Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all three major networks, which means you get the same coverage that you've been accustomed to without funding the left.
	When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending the message that you support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, and our military veterans and first responder heroes.
	Their 100% U.S.-based service team makes switching easy.
	So keep your number, keep your phone, or upgrade.
	Their team will help you find the best plan for your needs.
	Just go to patreon.com slash poso get free activation with promo code poso.
	Join me make the switch today patreon.com slash poso patreon.com slash poso.
	Folks, I'll tell you what's going on.
	You talk to any of the lobbying shops down here in D.C.
	today, even and I want to tell our next guest this.
	I'll have to tell him more offline about this.
	But let's just say that I've got a little birdie from one of the biggest tech firm lobbyists in all of Washington, D.C., that tells me these guys right now, the entire town, the entire Beltway, Including the tech firms are terrified, terrified that Donald J. Trump is about to return to office.
	And so everything that you see displayed out before us, whether it's today, whether it's in the New York Times, this incredible CIA bombshell that comes out there, we must look at it through the lens of the return of Trump.
	Obviously Mitch McConnell last night announcing he will be stepping down at the end of the year.
	To help us make sense of all of these things, Mike Benz from the Foundation for Freedom Online joins us.
	Mike, I got to tell you, I'll have to tell you more offline about that, but yes, yes, the tech lobbyists in D.C.
	right now are all of a sudden starting to make little, put out little feelers, say, maybe we should talk to some of these conservatives because next year they're going to be in a little bit of a position of power.
	I would love to hear more about that because, you know, there was a very funny Moment from the TGIF the thank God it's Friday Weekly Sunday Google meeting that came out on November 9th 2016 the day after the November 8 Election where Trump won and this was a big cry fest if you remember Breitbart broke this story And you had in the entire great Alan Bakari.
	Yes, that's right the entire c-suite up on the stage answering questions and you had Ruth Porat, the CFO, making $45 billion a year, crying on stage and telling everyone to hug the person next to them because Hillary Clinton lost.
	But there was really kind of an amazing moment from that, where one of the audience questions from a Google employee is, you know, well, how are we going to basically stop the Republicans now?
	What is Google going to do?
	And the response, I think it was from Sergey Brin on stage.
	Actually, it may have been Larry Page.
	Where he said, actually, we're going to double down and actually increase our lobbying efforts in Washington.
	We're going to not sort of distance ourselves and be strangers.
	We're actually going to increase our funding and be closer to Washington to make sure that our interests are represented.
	And that's exactly what happened.
	Google would go on to pour a tremendous amount of money into everything from CPAC into individual legislator coffers.
	And it even came out about a year after that that there was a deliberate strategy within Google to basically pry apart the Republican Party and by selectively funding those aspects of the Republicans by making themselves look like they are sort of fair and independent minded, but essentially picking winners and losers of the factions within Republicanism to put it back in the sort of what is now the but essentially picking winners and losers of the factions within Republicanism to put
	Well, and I guess that's my first question for you before we get into the CIA piece is that, you know, so Mitch McConnell comes out and says that he's done, you know, produces this huge weepy send off yesterday and And you've got his people, this sort of wing of the party talking about, oh, it was an incredible legacy.
	The judges, which of course weren't, um, were not nominated by him.
	They were nominated by President Trump.
	Um, so I guess my question is, is Nikki Haley the start of something new or the end of something old?
	She's sort of, I see her as sort of the middle continuation of a legacy lineage that has been going on for several generations in this country.
	I mean, I look at this from the reference point of what the Blob does abroad, because they brought this whole Department of Dirty Tricks playbook on domestic soil.
	And so, you know, what the State Department and the CIA and the Pentagon's sort of civil affairs Folks will do is they will create political parties abroad or they will build up political opposition.
	If an insurgent political party, the opposition party to a U.S.
	backed dictator or presidency is surging, they will selectively bribe or effectively take out and create factionalism within that opposition party until that party Has an opposition leader who is down with the program, so to speak, that way the insurgent forces can be contained and that often requires.
	you know, what a counterinsurgency strategy that, by the way, this is, this has been, and I'm just going to throw it out there since this, this beef has been public for a while now.
	This, this has been Robbie Soov and the guys over at Reason for the longest time, not all of them, but this has been your sort of corporatist wing directly tied in with the tech companies.
	Oh, we're libertarians.
	Oh, we're just against regulation for all businesses.
	And then they turn around and suddenly they're shilling for the biggest corporations and most powerful corporations in America, the tech industry. - Great.
	Yeah, I was one of the guys they used to shill to.
	You know what I mean?
	That's what the job was at the State Department and the Economic Bureau.
	I was at the desk that Google would call when they needed favors from the federal government.
	And, you know, at the same time, the people who voted for that federal government were being sandblasted off the Internet by Google.
	You know, I was looking at that from the perspective of how can you call these U.S.
	national champions?
	These people are literally suppressing the people who voted for the very government who did this.
	I mean, at least you could argue in the Rockefeller era, when the State Department, you know, fought everything from the banana wars to the Middle East wars on behalf of, you know, Exxon Mobil and Chevron, that That they were doing it, you know, for cheap gas prices.
	But imagine if, you know, if you voted for the wrong political candidate or you said something heterodox on Twitter, you couldn't pump gas in your car.
	I mean, would it make sense for the State Department, especially if that was the presidency that was running that State Department?
	The State Department was still waging foreign wars on behalf of, you know, Shell and Chevron and Exxon.
	If you were pumped, you know, if half the country couldn't pump their gas from those countries, it made no sense.
	I mean, it completely Violated the social contract that underpins our Department of Dirty Tricks that undermines our big government big tech Nexus and so you know that it's no surprise that this is that this is happening But you know Republicans face a very strong challenge here in terms of what their value proposition is You know, I have a purist philosophy when it when it comes to my principles but in the grand game of politics the issue is is that
	You know, the U.S.
	empire draws its strength from these very multinational corporations.
	And unless, you know, the Trump administration is effectively willing to play ball to some extent with the Chamber of Commerce, it's very hard to see how voting alone is going to allow them to engage in the kind of power politics that will be necessary to fend off the various forces that will surround them at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue unless they are doing favors for these
	Multinational corporations in the same way that the Biden administration.
	So here's my question.
	So here's my question.
	Where did those same people then find purchase if you have Mitch McConnell leaving office?
	So that factions take, you know, going away in a sense or at least, you know, on the surface level, Nikki Haley doesn't seem like she's actually getting traction anywhere.
	We're told that the MAGA wing is ascendant.
	So where do those people go?
	Or as you say, is this water just trying to find its path right now?
	I think it is the latter.
	Water trying to find its path is a very good description, I think.
	But right now, it's hard to clear the fog of war until we see what happens with this Ukraine bill.
	This is really the first serious test in our nation's history of a majority coalition within the House of Representatives that might tank a mission-critical Pump of money into the blob to win a highly sensitive, highly fragile, you know, trillion dollars on the line, dark arts operation with respect to the Eurasian energy play.
	The fact is, is there really is sort of a five alarm fire from the blob because if they don't get, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars over the next year, two years in order to, you know, arm Ukraine and arm all the different clandestine service operations spanning all across NATO, then there's basically no negotiating leverage at the table with Russia.
	And you have to remember, this money is not just going to fight this war directly in the immediate term.
	I think the play is to essentially stockpile funds so that when there is a signed standstill with Russia, so that Russia stops taking all the territory, that they are going to do what they did with the Minsk Accords.
	And the State Department and the UK Foreign Office will backstab Russia, will get them to stop basically taking territory.
	And then the CIA will take on a much bigger and much more long tooth, high fang intensity Snakebite attack over the course of years to run insurgent operations that violate that ceasefire, but in a deniable way.
	I think that's the play.
	So the reasons they're so focused on the CIA's role right now.
	And we've got a quick break coming up, but that's exactly where I want to take this afterwards, because we have this huge piece that comes out on Sunday talking about the CIA's shadow war that was being waged against Russia using Ukrainian assets and Ukrainian units for a full decade—in fact, eight years—before the invasion of Ukraine, which we were told all this time was unprovoked.
	Our guest is Mike Pence.
	and see, I'll be right back.
	You know, they talk about these are influences and t Jack, so like where's Jack he's got a great job.
	All right, here we are Jack Our guest, Mike Benz of the Foundation for Freedom Online.
	So, Mike, the last segment, we had just gotten up to this question.
	It's this indelible tie between, you know, the neocon, neolib faction of the U.S.
	government.
	Nikki Haley, of course, is an avatar of this.
	But then the CIA piece comes out with This incredible information, just information that you and I and others have said for over a decade now, Oliver Stone originally in his great documentary on Ukraine about the Maidan coup and really detailed information about this.
	And we'll just call it what it is, a high level insurgent group, this unit that was founded and funded by the CIA to conduct insurgent operations across the border in Russia, which then they, you know, as they claim, they just happened to kind of go rogue and started conducting assassinations they just happened to kind of go rogue and started conducting assassinations and
	And we're also told, by the way, that it was this same unit out of which derives this individual Kirillov Budenov, who is now the head of all of Ukraine's military intelligence.
	Someone that Zelensky at one point was talking about putting as the head of the entire military.
	Wrap my mind around why the New York Times would suddenly come out and cosign everything that we've been saying, and by the way, everything that Putin just said to Tucker.
	Yeah.
	Well, this is, I mean, this is actually such a shocking moment in American journalist, you know, history that, you know, I know this, this piece came out four days ago, but it really deserves like a true dissertation on its implications.
	These are highly, highly, highly classified operations.
	You know, 12, and by the way, those 12, you know, secret CIA military bases were just the ones on the buffer zone border.
	You know, that's not just, you know, 12, that's not all we have in Ukraine.
	It's my contention that when the dust settles on this, the Ukraine skirmish and the run-up to and in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan coup is going to ultimately be the largest operation in CIA history.
	You know, it was revealed that the most expensive CIA operation to date in the CIA's history was the Syrian operation under the Obama administration.
	And that is, I think that's going to be blown away in the end by the Ukraine story for many By the way, that Syria Operation Timber Sycamore, you know, it had that in the same way that this created a nationalist group of the Azov battalion, a sort of elite Azov unit that was conducting assassinations.
	There was another group that, you know, accidentally grew out of the Syria operation.
	I'm trying to remember.
	They had kind of a catchy name.
	It was an acronym.
	I don't know if you can recall what it was.
	They were in the news for a minute there, but they're not around anymore because somebody just made them disappear for some reason.
	Yeah, whatever happened to them.
	I think I know what you're talking about, but gee, you know, it's... It's ISIS, folks, by the way.
	It's ISIS.
	Right, and all about... For the Media Matters guys watching.
	Right.
	And, you know, the declaration from our national security state is MAGA is the new ISIS now.
	So they've just turned the same techniques and technology used to contain ISIS on on social media and in terms of the, you know, I mean, against just regular domestic folks.
	This is basically what I've said, though, Mike.
	Are you suggesting then that it sounds like this New York Times article is a classic example of a limited hangout?
	A limited hangout when an operation becomes so compromised or public knowledge or public interest becomes so obvious around something that what the agency does is, just like an onion, they peel back one layer, but they don't actually show you what's at the core.
	That's completely true.
	There are also so many other layers around it.
	I mean, so the limited hangout aspect of it is that the New York Times starts the story the day after the 2014 coup.
	As if the century because, you know, the chronology they tell is that it's amazing.
	I'm sorry.
	They pick up the phone and John Brennan lands in the unmarked plane as the coup is taking place.
	Right.
	But it was like, oh, he just happened to have the phone number of John Brennan in his cell phone.
	Come on.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	The CIA chief is like flying.
	You know, we're the State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy, the world's premier CIA cutout.
	gives $5 billion to the right sector mob under civil society, labeled funding, in the run-up to the coup.
	And the CIA's job is to take assets that are capacity built by the State Department and instrumentalize them.
	And while Victoria Nuland is handing out cookies and water bottles to the group that she's given $5 billion to, you know, We're supposed to believe that even though the CIA's job is to shepherd that money for the purpose of its instrumentalization, in this case, that was the rental riot overthrow of the Ukrainian government when Viktor Yanukovych rejected the IMF trade deal in favor of a Russian one.
	You know, they start the story the day after the coup It's very much how they started the 2022 story.
	in 2022 without reference to the 2014 events.
	But in this case, the guts of the New York story say, well, the head of Ukrainian intelligence the day after the coup had a secret meeting with the head of the station houses of the CIA and the MI6 in the area.
	And Mr. CIA and Mr. MI6 sit to the Ukrainian intel chief, sit down and say, hey, nice government We're actually going to set it up for you and we're going to basically, you know, run your intelligence operation.
	We're going to set it up for you.
	We're going to structure it.
	We're going to be your big daddy and you're going to learn from us, you know, how, uh, how intelligence work is done.
	Basically, you know, we are going to usurp the, the, the sovereign aspect of, you know, this new, uh, post coup government and, uh, we're, we're going to run the show and, You know, it sort of starts the story there, and that sort of poses this as the evolution of these 12 military bases.
	But remember, this was set up because eastern Ukraine broke away from, you know, the Luhansk and Donbat and Donetsk regions in Ukraine, as well as Crimea, broke away from the 2014 Kiev coup government and said, hey, we don't respect this coup. broke away from the 2014 Kiev coup government and said, We're not subject to you.
	We are breaking away from you.
	And Crimea formally joined Russia through an annexation vote.
	And so the CIA was helping Ukraine, I shouldn't even say helping Ukraine, was forcing the Kiev regime to militarily reconquer the eastern portion of Ukraine, which happens to be where all of the shale reserves are in the region.
	That Chevron and Halliburton and Exxon and Shell all had $10 billion contracts with NAFTA gas for the mining rights to, you know, this gets to this big hydrocarbon story and the whole plan to build up Ukraine's endogenous natural gas market in order to capture this gets to this big hydrocarbon story and the whole plan to build up Ukraine's endogenous natural gas market in order to 30-year long-term gas deals and kick Gazprom off.
	If they don't control the soil underneath that, then they don't get any of those trillion dollars.
	And so they needed the Ukrainian military to go back and retake the area, which is what the CIA was doing between 2014 and 2022.
	You know, this is what this was set up to, as a military operation to try to win back these basically secession territories, because we were not anticipating This, uh, this counter coup to the 2014 coup.
	So, but you know, there's much deeper layers to this as well.
	So first of all, the New York Times didn't, this isn't a scoop from the New York Times.
	By the way, I'll just, I'll, I'll throw in on that, that, and we do have to keep saying this, this color revolution was not done in a vacuum.
	This was right after the Arab Spring.
	This is right chronologically, as you correctly mentioned, uh, right after Operation Timber Sycamore.
	So these same individuals, John Brennan,
	Hillary Clinton originally in the Arab Spring, so many others, they had done it in Libya, they had done it in Syria, and now the gang and Vicky Nuland were moving up to Ukraine, and so they thought that they would have the same sort of free hand that they had had in these other areas and this success, but it turned out that, well, in the same way that Russia got involved in Syria, that Russia also got involved in Ukraine, because Ukraine was, it wasn't just in their backyard the way Syria is, this is literally next door.
	That's exactly right.
	We were riding high and riding dirty.
	I mean, that's what this was.
	We thought we were unstoppable and we could just coup anyone we wanted.
	There'd never be any repercussions and no one would ever stand up for themselves.
	And Russia would never actually backstop it.
	And this was a very serious miscalculation that anticipated that our Department of Dirty Tricks could operate this way in perpetuity.
	It can't.
	And, you know, this moment took the foreign policy establishment completely by surprise.
	And when it turned out that their own population didn't support these dirty tricks either, in the form of the rise of a populist presidential candidate like Donald Trump, who is running on putting America first and domestic priorities over foreign policy, then all hell broke loose.
	They basically started to treat domestic politics Uh, with the same counterinsurgency toolkit that they would suppress ISIS or the Taliban with.
	But, you know, this is, again, this New York Times story is not a New York Times story, okay?
	The New York Times cannot sneak onto a secret CIA military base, okay?
	They have to be invited in.
	They have to be cleared.
	They have to go through multiple layers of security checks.
	They have to, I mean, what it takes to enter a above top secret You know, secured CIA military base in Ukraine as a staff writer for the New York Times is an unbelievable process.
	They don't have their own private CIA to sneak into that.
	The CIA pitched them on the story.
	This is very important because there's a paragraph that I'm going to read here, which basically, you know, breaks open what's really happening here.
	This is about midway through the article.
	It says, now these intelligence networks are more important than ever.
	As Russia is on the offense and Ukraine is more dependent on sabotage and long-range missile strikes that require spies far behind enemy lines.
	And they are increasingly at risk, these CIA bases.
	If Republicans in Congress end military funding to Kiev, the CIA may have to scale back.
	So understand what this paragraph is saying.
	They're saying, the CIA came to us.
	And gave us, invited us onto, because they said they conducted more than 200 interviews, many of which were done at this, in the physical building of one of these 12 CIA bases.
	They're saying they're more important than ever.
	And if Republicans right now, as Mike Johnson is literally having White House Oval Office negotiations with Joe Biden on this bill, they're saying basic, they're making the valid claim argument.
	They're saying if Mike Johnson vetoes this bill, Where is Jack?
	Where is Jack?
	Where is he?
	They're making it, they're forcing it. - And Benz, a quick, quick break here.
	I'll also throw that they're also saying that if you don't go for this bill, then you're making an enemy of the Central Intelligence Agency.
	Right back, Mike Benz with Mark.
	- Where is Jack?
	Where is Jack?
	Where is he?
	Jack, I want to see you.
	Great job, Jack.
	Thank you.
	What a job you do.
	You know, we have an incredible thing.
	We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys, and these are the guys should be getting policies.
	All right, Jack Posobiec here.
	Mike Bend, when we left, you were just kind of walking through how essentially the CIA is, and I'll just say it, it almost feels like a veiled threat, a veiled threat to Mike Johnson, a veiled threat to the senators, a veiled threat to the congressmen that are set, like J.D.
	Vance, who, by the way, has been named by President Zelensky in his increasingly deranged rants, saying that if you do not do this, the CIA will be coming after you.
	That's exactly right.
	I mean, and it's putting its hand directly on the scale of domestic politics, which is like rule numero uno of what the CIA is forbidden from doing.
	The CIA is not allowed to operate on domestic soil.
	It's not allowed to interfere in domestic politics.
	It's not allowed to target U.S.
	citizens.
	All three of those are massively, massively violated in the CIA disclosing highly, highly classified intelligence.
	To handpick journalists at the New York Times for the express purpose of tilting an in-process legislative bill.
	The CIA is supposed to answer to us.
	The chips fall where they may.
	We, the people, decide how much money the CIA gets for operations.
	If the CIA can play games with classifying and declassifying intelligence or selectively leaking it to favorable journalists in order to manipulate U.S.
	public opinion, on an in-process government activity, that's what they do abroad.
	That's why they have a plausible deniability doctrine.
	That's why they are the Department of Dirty Tricks, because they are paid to do that to foreign countries, to manipulate their public opinions, to get their public legislatures to pass or kill bills affecting U.S. national interests.
	It's our national interest, not the CIA's.
	So that's one.
	The other is, this was not a general all-open access media invitation to a highly classified military base on the outer banks of Ukraine.
	They handpicked the New York Times.
	Do you think for one second they would have given this story to Tucker Carlson?
	Non-stop!
	All we heard a month ago was how Putin picked Tucker Carlson, and he didn't pick CNN, even though they asked for interviews.
	They didn't pick the New York Times or the Washington Post, even though they asked for interviews.
	An authoritarian government, only an authoritarian government, would handpick to a favorable source somebody that they might interview.
	Our own secret police organization just did this right here, but it wasn't to interview a foreign dictator.
	It was for how our own taxpayer dollars are being spent.
	We can't get that level of transparency that we're demanding from Putin out of our own taxpayer-funded Intelligence services.
	So, you know, it puts the lie to everything we heard about the Tucker Putin when our own government is doing it 10 times worse.
	And not only that, they pick winners and losers in the media market there.
	Yeah, so this is an interesting sense that I always have because, so when I was in the intelligence community, we were always told to view us and from foreign countries with a level of skepticism.
	And they would say, well, something's in the China Daily or, you know, everybody knows Pravda and Izvestia from Russia.
	They say, oh, well, that's the US there.
	That's the government line.
	That's the regime line.
	But then I would turn around to other people in the IC and say, hey, do you ever think of applying any of that to the United States media, to CNN that you guys all have on, or increasingly MSNBC that you all have on in the spaces or in the skiffs?
	And they would say, well, no, that's not possible.
	This is American media, and it would never be like that.
	I'm like, are you kidding me?
	That's exactly what's going on.
	Yeah, I mean, it's New Yavta, you know, it's the New York Times prop.
	I mean, this is exactly what it is.
	It's everything that we've heard about for an entire century worth of scandals of the CIA and the press.
	But, you know, another aspect of this that I think is important to touch on is the emphasis of the CIA's role here is very interesting because the Pentagon is currently losing this toe-to-toe Overt war of NATO militaries against Russian militaries is working out very badly for the NATO side.
	Territory continues to fall as Russia has basically totally evaded every sanctions attempt in the book.
	We thought when we kicked them off of the European energy market, Russia would go bankrupt and there'd be no.
	Very interesting that.
	that when this happened, sorry, I think we lost your mic there for a second.
	I think it was on our end.
	That, you know, what Russia did was they brought their supply chains back home.
	They started building up their domestic manufacturing and they realized that if you do that, then sanctions won't hurt you.
	I seem to remember someone saying that building up natural domestic manufacturing capacity was a national security issue.
	I can't remember what his name was, though.
	I heard it pretty recently, too.
	You know, it's, yeah.
	No, that's exactly right.
	But, you know, Russia being able to resupply immediately to China instead from the European market has allowed their war machine to continue completely uninterrupted.
	And in that sustained war, where they are right on the edge of the Ukrainian border, as opposed to the U.S., who's a million miles away, or London, or any of the NATO states in Central Europe basically have no militaries at all.
	And so, you know, this is a losing war toe-to-toe.
	So the only way for there to be basically an ultimate quasi-military victory in the end is going to be through duplicity and subterfuge, which means at some point the NATO side is going to have to come to the bargaining table with Russia and do what they did with the Minsk Accords, which was effectively the declaration of a ceasefire.
	And it came out, you know, just basically a year, year and a half ago.
	that all along the State Department's plan was never to observe those peacefires and to simply work behind the scenes through our intelligence services to wage a clandestine military operation town by town to recapture them.
	And that is, I believe, where the puck is skating.
	And this is why that- Or Mike, by the way, this is something I actually outlined earlier on the show a couple of weeks ago.
	I said, or, would be even worse, a type of Operation Gladio 2.0, whereby in these groups, these units use their clandestine... And remember, what did they say they were studying?
	Specifically in the New York Times article, it said they were studying how to pass as Russians.
	Which obviously would not be very hard.
	So, what would a group like that do?
	Well, what was Operation Gladio 1.0?
	Was to conduct false flag attacks and provocations across Europe and to blame it on the Russians.
	And they used this to gin up support for operations against the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
	Well, guess what, boys and girls?
	Do you really know who did what in what town of Ukraine that's on the front line, that's on the border in these places like Mariupol?
	I mean, you're looking at an absolute, I think you said purgatory zone the other day about this.
	That's exactly what we're looking at here in Ukraine.
	I've only got you for a couple of minutes left, but I want to totally switch gears because there's something that you and I were involved in that recently got turned... Oh, sorry, last point, last point.
	Just super quick.
	The Gladio example is totally perfect because it wasn't just about the Russians.
	One of the most important aspects of the Gladio operation during the Cold War is that it was about picking the winners and losers in the domestic politics of all the NATO member states.
	So it wasn't, you know, they used this cover of being sort of, you know, countering Russian influence, but it meant they picked whether the Green Party or whether the Christian Social Democrats were going to win in Germany or in, you know, in Sweden or in Italy or in France.
	These were whole-of-society networks that were built up and essentially puppeteered by our intelligence services and our State Department and Pentagon intermediaries to be able to control the domestic politics of countries.
	It's not, you know, so it was done under this, oh, we need to stop Soviet influence, but if any party rose to power that was against the interests of the blob, they would be obliterated by these stay-behind networks.
	And so the political politics were controlled by the national security state.
	But sorry, what were you going to say?
	So, you and I were blamed for this whole Taylor Swift thing, President Biden's out talking about it, and yet what I noticed is so incredible is the minute the Kansas City shooting happened, the whole story immediately gets turned off.
	It's like the switch went off.
	How do you disappear?
	The biggest Super Bowl in history, you flip the switch, you turn it off, you say, we're not going to talk about it anymore.
	And to me, that more than anything shows the power of the media, their story selection bias and their ability to simply turn something off with the flick of a switch.
	No, that's true, although I'm very curious to see what happens just two months from now.
	Because in May, Taylor will be starting her European tour, and there was a direct plea by the head of the European Union to Taylor Swift.
	She thought her tour was over.
	They extended it.
	It's now going to Europe, and now the EU is asking Taylor to do a get-out-the-vote drive for pro-EU parties.
	Mike, we've got a break coming up.
	Can you hang for a minute?
	Do you have a minute?
	Yeah, hang on.
	We're gonna hang him.
	Benz is hanging, folks.
	He's gonna hang.
	We're gonna let him finish everything because I want to be able to do that.
	I'm gonna let you finish.
	I'm gonna let you finish.
	We are back with Mike Benz.
	I said we could hang.
	I wasn't sure if we were gonna get him for the end of the show.
	We said he could hang.
	He said he's gonna hang.
	He's here.
	I'm gonna let him finish.
	Mike Benz.
	Yeah, so we were talking about this funny situation, just returning to this Taylor Swift thing, which is just funny.
	Again, it's not nearly as significant as these things around the CIA in Ukraine, but it's very instructive because it gets to the question of sort of blob politics, foreign policy establishment, engineering Domestic politics by instrumentalizing things that really shouldn't be instrumentalized.
	So you have the strange situation where Taylor Swift had already concluded her heiress tour, which was already the biggest tour in world history for touring musician.
	And then, you know, she had she basically extended the heiress tour to include all these different European countries.
	Which all happen to coincide with EU parliamentary votes.
	One of the things that the censorship industry is extremely concerned about right now is that there's actually more elections this year around the world in 2024 than any year previously in civilizational history.
	There's something like, I think, 65 or 85 elections around the world in only 180 some countries.
	And so the EU parliamentary elections are all over You know, from Western Europe into Central and Eastern Europe.
	The country this summer, and this happens to be when Taylor Swift is doing her tour.
	And that's really interesting because we've had Nigel Farage on recently.
	He's been talking about this.
	We know that in Poland, the Law and Justice Party is looking to make some comebacks there.
	A lot of these parties, by the way, AFD in Germany, so many others, are looking to use these elections as sort of a springboard before their national elections coming up.
	Of course, France, by the way, this is a place where Le Pen is trying to get her party into position where she can run for the presidency again looks like potentially a rematch with macron or she'd run against some other you know quasi-globalist technocrat sort of thing and so yes
	of course they're obviously worried about the european parliament and again intrinsically linked intrinsically linked to nato and to the operations in ukraine and mark my words the state department and the cia are putting their thumb on the press of every one of those elections in france in italy in spain in germany in sweden in finland every
	Every single one of these elections is going to be this same issue around the sort of pro-NATO establishment parties versus populist insurgent groups.
	And the nightmare situation for NATO and the blob is that there will be a a sufficient block in the parliaments of these EU countries that they will hold up war funding, or they will hold up war support for the situation in Ukraine, just like what's happening right now in the US with this new populist block in the House,
	because the House has control over the purse strings, that because the House has control over the purse strings, that is appropriations, and that they can potentially also veto this Senate bill, that they want to make sure that all of the EU member states are avoiding this Mike Johnson problem that right now is the reason that the CIA just interfered with domestic political affairs here in the US.
	They want to make sure that the German that the parliaments in Germany and Italy and France and Spain don't go through the same thing and that they don't elect leaders or have significant parliamentary blocks who are hostile.
	And so they are using every instrument at their disposal.
	Now, I ran into this in the censorship industry.
	Because as soon as you start looking into how censorship works in Germany, how censorship works in Spain, how censorship works in Italy and every NATO member state, what you find is National Endowment for Democracy funding.
	That's the CIA's top preferred cutout and has been for 50, 40 years now.
	You find National Endowment for Democracy funding for these censorship groups, which means the CIA is intermediating that.
	And you find USAID funding for these groups, which means the State Department is intermediating that.
	And you find direct State Department grants.
	So this is all, you know, they're already instrumentalizing things around censorship of the Internet.
	We know that they're doing that through these cultural groups such as the NGOs and the State Department-funded university centers, as well as through their donor-drafter friends like the Soros networks, as well as the Omidyar and others.
	So they're going to put their thumb on the press to do that in every way conceivable.
	And what I thought was so interesting about the Taylor Swift tour coinciding with these EU parliamentary votes in country after country is that you had a direct plea from the head of the European Union to Taylor Swift publicly calling for a direct liaison with her media relations team in order to get her to do get out the vote drive votes, to get young people to vote who vote disproportionately for pro-EU candidates as young people disproportionately vote Democrat here in the U.S.
	And by the way, this this is you can see this in Politico EU.
	You can see that in Time magazine.
	You're here.
	You go.
	Euronews.com.
	Could Taylor Swift stop the rise of the far right in Europe?
	Europe, Politico EU.
	Just just a couple of days ago.
	Europe's desperate and unfulfilled longing for Taylor Swift.
	Thank gosh.
	It's like they're listening to these.
	It's no, but no, you and I are just making it all up.
	We're pulling it out of our hat.
	You know, it's totally crazy.
	Tim foil stuff.
	It's definitely not like the head of the EU is trying to get Taylor Swift on board with all of this.
	I guess the biggest, the biggest thing that I will say, and I guess you and I both have to say is that it seems as though she hasn't, hasn't done anything to get involved at least as of yet.
	Yes.
	I don't think that she even necessarily wants to.
	I think, you know, this is one of these things where there will be pressure on her ability to have distribution.
	You know, this is something that's been done for a long time in the music industry is, you know, if you are, you know, if you are good to the program, you know, if you're a Bono type or a Sting and you're willing to do, you know, the, you know, you're willing to put on these big mega concerts and do these slogans to, you know, for, I mean, look at, you know, the, the, I don't think Bono has done a concert in the past 20 years that has not been for the geopolitical goal of the blob.
	And so, you know, I think that there's certain go-along-to-get-along things.
	And while the Taylor Swift sort of surge has subsided since the Super Bowl ended, I believe that she will be rolled out as the election season approaches in Europe.
	And then we'll probably go quiet for two months after that, and then we'll return.
	Shortly ahead of November, assuming that there even is a November vote in this country.
	Oh my gosh, with the last minute, he drops the bombshell.
	That's the cliffhanger, folks.
	That's the cliffhanger, if there even is.
	You know, and I think we're all kind of wondering what will be the next shoe that drops, as though it seems, seems though President Trump has done incredibly well, preacher naturally well, in all of these cases with everything that's thrown at him.
	He just keeps going.
	I don't know, folks.
	What can I say?
	It's not an inside straight.
	It's the mandate of heaven.
	Mike Benz, where can people go to follow you?
	So find me on X at MikeBenCyber.
	I do a stream and an AMA for subscribers every week, and FoundationForFreedomOnline.com.
	Thanks, Jack.
	This is the last.
	See you there.
	See you on video spaces soon, man.

▲