March 13, 2026 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
48:01
Tyler Robinson Lawyers Argue To Seal Evidence From Public Before Trial In Charlie Kirk Murder Case
Tyler Robinson's defense attorneys argued to seal evidence and restrict cameras in the Charlie Kirk murder trial, claiming it prevents jury bias. Host Jack Pisovic and guest Malcolm Flex debated this, with Flex insisting transparency is vital against conspiracy theories fueled by social media. Judge rulings denied most sealing motions, prioritizing public access over defendant closure while redacting private details. The broadcast also covered recent U.S. violence, Middle East tensions involving Iranian cyberattacks on medical devices, and cybersecurity advice from Skip Holst of Patriot Protect. Ultimately, the episode underscores the critical balance between trial integrity and public accountability in high-profile cases. [Automatically generated summary]
I wanted to let you know that we're starting a new push for subscriptions here on Human Events Daily.
So make sure that when you're listening to this podcast, you hit subscribe, you download it, and you share it with five of your friends.
Make sure they're all going and downloading as well because we need to get the signal out as much as possible.
Look, we've done so much over the past couple of years since this show started, and we're only going to do so much more.
Let's get it.
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 Pisovic.
Christ is king.
From the onset of the war in Iran, Michael, law enforcement officials have been expressing their concerns to us about violence here at home.
A frightening day in Oakland County after a man armed with a rifle slammed his truck into Temple Israel in West Bloomfield Township.
The driver, Ayman Ghazali, was a naturalized U.S. citizen from Lebanon.
He posted that relatives had been killed on the ongoing Israeli strikes in his native country.
He packed his truck with fireworks and an unidentified chemical agent that then ignited.
In Virginia, officials say a former National Guard soldier opened fire inside an ROTC class at Old Dominion University Thursday.
Police say he killed the instructor, Lieutenant Colonel Brandon Shah, and wounded two students before other cadets subdued him and killed him.
What we know now is there's one deceased victim and two at the hospital.
The shooter has been identified as Mohamed Baylor Jallow.
In 2016, Jallow was arrested and pled guilty for attempting to provide material support to ISIL, now known as ISIS.
Secretary Scott Besant says the U.S. Navy will escort ships through the Strait of Homuz with a possible international coalition, quote, as soon as it is militarily possible.
The only thing prohibiting transit in the straits right now is Iran shooting at shipping.
It is open for transit, should Iran not do that?
Breaking news from Western Iraq, where officials now say four of the six crew members aboard a U.S. military refueling plane were killed when their jet crashed on Thursday.
The aircraft was supporting U.S. airstrikes on Iran when it went down.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily.
Four Crew Members Killed00:03:43
We're here live on Real America's Voice.
Today is March 13th, 2026.
Anno Dominique, guys, we're watching right now the Tyler Robinson hearing continues down there in Provo, Utah, Orum, Utah, Utah County, where his lawyers are currently arguing new motions in front of the in front of the judge.
Now, I want to let you know that the footage we're showing right now is not footage from today because Tyler Robinson is now completely off of camera.
I haven't even seen a single camera shot of the defendant during the trial for today, or I should say for the hearing today.
The trial hasn't actually officially started yet.
And reason being is that all of these motions regarding the use of cameras and public access, that in fact is what today's hearing is all about.
And I want to go to SOT1 to give you a taste.
And we have this because what we have is some information regarding defense attorneys filing a motion to classify evidence to ensure what they say is a fair trial.
Do we have that SOC guys?
Oh, okay.
And so we'll work on getting you guys that information.
But what we're seeing now is that video.
But what we're seeing now is instances and insistence on Tyler Robinson's lawyers to try to prevent the public from having direct access and full access to evidence.
Now they claim that it is about biasing the jury and they say that they want there to be an unbiased jury.
And so that's certainly understandable.
But at the same time, at the same time, the public has a right to know.
The public has a right to know the evidence.
The public has a right to transparency.
And it was the last hearing, the very last hearing, when it was Tyler Robinson's lawyers who were the ones entering things into the public record when they were cross-examining the when they were cross-examining the investigator and entering information about DNA that's never been made public before.
So which is it?
They're inconsistent and they want to have it both ways.
Okay, we do have it.
Let's go back.
SOT1.
There seems to be an idea that flooding the public sphere with information or evidence from this courtroom will somehow dispel conspiracy theories or shift public narrative.
That in and of itself is concerning.
All we should be worried about is protecting what happens in this courtroom.
We believe that preemptively releasing evidence that we needed to provide to this court in order for this court to make an informed decision is just one of those actions, is one of those things that will negatively impact our ability to have a fair proceeding for our client.
So we are asking that the motion and the evidence be classified as private, that this court consider our clients' unqualified right to a fair trial and a reliable penalty phase should overcome the qualified right of access at this point.
We understand things may change, but at this preliminary stage, we believe this is the appropriate course to take to protect the proceedings and our clients' rights.
Defense Seeks Evidence Suppression00:13:01
All right, so there you go, folks.
And they're once again seeking to suppress evidence from the public record.
And specifically, this is very interesting because they wouldn't talk about what the evidence was, but they said that it's evidence that is currently being tested.
Evidence that's currently being tested, evidence that is being processed.
So we're six months out from Charlie's murder, and yet we are told, according to the defense here, that there is evidence that is still being processed.
Could that be new evidence, or could this be testing of old evidence, perhaps testing that was held up because of these disagreements?
That remains to be seen.
The judge is about to make his ruling, and we're going to bring that to you as soon as we possibly can.
A lot of news today, so let's lock in.
Human Events Daily Realmarket's Voice continues.
Stand in our way, and our golden age has just begun.
This is Human Events with Jack Pisovic.
Now it's time for everyone to understand what America First truly means.
Welcome to the second American Revolution.
All right, folks, Jack Pisobic live.
Hear Real America's voice.
Ladies and gentlemen, America is entering its 250th year, and the direction of this country is being decided right now in our culture and our economy.
And who we choose to support matters more than ever.
Most wireless companies don't care who you are or what you believe.
Just want your money.
Well, Patriot Mobile, they're different.
For more than 12 years, they've stood with Americans who believe freedom is worth defending.
Funding the Christian conservative movement when others stayed silent.
Here's the deal: you don't have to give up quality or service when you switch to Patriot Mobile.
They deliver premium priority access on all three major U.S. networks.
So you'll get the same or even better coverage than you have today.
You think switching is a hassle?
It's not.
Keep your number, keep your phone, or upgrade.
Their 100% U.S.-based customer support team can activate you in minutes.
Still paying off a device.
Well, Patriot Mobile will even offer you a contract buyout.
Think about it.
This is a defining year.
You have to work together to save our country.
So all patriots, you got to go to patriotmobile.com slash posto or give them a call, 972Patriot.
Use our promo code POSO.
You get a free month of service, a free month of service.
Patriotmobile.com/slash posto 972Patriot and switch today.
Hey, make the patriotic choice.
So folks, when we're talking about, you know, this case, and of course, the ruling is going to come out soon in the hearing there regarding some of these motions.
And so we'll bring that to you directly, but I want to just take it back a second to explain what's going on.
This hearing is about public access, the sealing of evidence, filings, and proceedings, what stays public, what comes out.
And this is important.
This is very important because think about it.
This is not the trial.
It's a fight over who controls the information environment before the trial.
Now, the defense is trying to narrow public visibility into the case.
They want to seal filing, seal evidence, limit what can be aired in open court.
And of course, all along has been pushing to restrict cameras and microphones.
The battle is over transparency before a jury is even seated.
And the defense is trying to close off how much of this case the public can see.
Now, what changed is that back February 24th, a couple weeks ago, the judge, of course, rejected the defense's desperate and really just long shot argument to try to remove Utah County prosecutors.
So if so, the defense now is pivoting.
If they can't knock out the prosecution, they can still try to tighten access and control exposure.
So the immediate fight right now isn't about guilt or innocence.
It's about whether this case proceeds in full public view or behind a curtain of sealed filings and restricted media access.
This is what we're going to watch for.
We also want to keep an eye out if there's a ruling on this, if the court locks in or adjusts the April 17th, May 18th, 19th, 21st schedule for arraignments.
We're going to be digging in on all of it.
But to comment on all this and more, I wanted to bring back a fan favorite, someone who hasn't been on in a hot minute, but that's okay.
It's Malcolm Flex, the founder of Flex's Warrior Way, and he joins us on Human Events today.
Flex, what's going on, man?
How are you?
How are you?
I live.
I am here.
He had proof of life has been confirmed.
Proof of life has been found.
Although you could be AI.
So, you know, I don't know if there's a way deterring test yourself into proving that you do exist.
We'll have to take your word for it.
Yeah, that's it.
Hey, aren't we all just AI at this point?
I'm pretty sure that's right.
No, I am 100% a Russian bot.
There's no question.
But Flex, let's hit that real quick because, you know, even without getting into all of the controversy around Tyler Robinson, we want to talk and, of course, waiting to hear whether or not this ruling comes down from the judge and what exactly he's going to say.
I think he's probably going to try to find a midpoint here to say that, you know, we don't want to bias a jury, but we do have to have some evidence that comes in because you can't just be blocking everything.
What does it say, though, about the control of the information environment and how important that is to our judicial system when you got a case like this?
When there's a case that's as high profile as what's going on with Tyler Robinson, it should be a given that at some point you're going to have a certain level of, let's just say, prejudice that's going to be introduced into it based on people's preconceived notions.
And I mean, honestly, the way everything is went, I'm not sure what the defense, you know, what the defensive play here is in trying to control the information so strongly.
Because I mean, at this point, you know, we're, we're just doing this for transparency.
I mean, honestly, it helps no one if now you're trying to block evidence, you're trying to control, basically cut off that arterial line of information that we necessarily need in order to get context because this whole murder, like everything about this is hazy.
And it honestly just makes Tyler Robinson look worse if you say he's ideologically motivated and there's no other information that comes out of this.
So you need something greater.
And, you know, honestly, you're just fueling more conspiracies, more theories, everything else that you technically don't want going on about your client that would honestly, you know, if I'm, if I'm going to be honest, it would honestly help Tyler Robinson more if the conspiracies went wild rather than saying, okay, no, no, we're not going to introduce this.
And we're just going to let you believe that this guy just did this on his own as a lone wolf.
That's from my defensive play.
So there's, there's a bigger almost, you know, like a meta story here, a meta narrative where we have these laws on the books and we have these, you know, these questions about transparency, but they were all written before the social media age.
They were, they were all written before we had direct live streaming and people are on the YouTube chats and people are able to share everything directly to these little pieces of glass in our pockets that we hold on our hands.
So it's just, we have a situation where the laws and the way it's been dealt with, I think, are just a little bit, you know, just a little bit written for a different era.
And that when you have the introduction in 2007 of the iPhone, something that Charlie talked about a lot, it just fundamentally changed the way that we interact with the world.
Exactly that.
And so, I mean, any cases being made public, anything that happened that's got four shocks and ramifications that extend beyond, let's just say, like a county, you're going to automatically have a certain level of prejudice.
And I don't care what you do to be insular with it.
You're not going to necessarily be able to prevent that from leaking out.
So it's in your best interest, honestly, to introduce transparency as the defense because anything else, you allow the prosecution to shape the story.
You allow them to create the narrative, unless there's a bigger narrative that you're trying to hide.
And that's the problem that we've got right now.
You know, cell phones, social media, and just the general obfuscation of what actually happened to Charlie Kirk and what Tyler Robinson was up to when he ascended that staircase with that backpack.
All of that has just fed into a massive snafu and it's just spiraling out of control.
Right.
And certainly, you know, you'd have, you know, there's no question, obviously, there's going to always been speculation in murder trials.
There's been, you know, going back to, you know, the OJ case 20, 30 years ago was on TV every day.
So this, the idea that a public trial would provide public scrutiny, that isn't necessarily new.
I mean, we used to have public public trials and public executions in, you know, 100 years ago, 500 years ago.
And so that isn't new.
I suppose what's new is the ability of people through social media to lock into these things and for different sources of information to be able to be spread.
Now, in some cases, you know, like when you saw 2016, the rise of the Patriot, the rise of the populists, that was good because we lived in a censorship environment.
But also, there are times where, you know, as you say, the restriction of information can lead to these greater issues.
And I just feel like the presumption of publicity kind of needs to be, it just kind of needs to be the default now that there's always going to be publicity in one of these cases, whether, you know, obviously in, you know, in this case, it's extremely high profile, but even perhaps lesser cases are going to get scrutiny because of, you know, because they could catch the public attention, they could catch the public eye.
Look at the Nancy Guthrie case just a couple of weeks ago, which of course is still, you know, kind of ongoing.
She hasn't been found, but it's absolutely just dominated the news cycle.
And I would argue it's able to do so because of live streaming and because of social media.
And honestly, that exists because there are gaps in the media coverage of these events.
And I think things like this only fuel that wildfire that I think most mass media types want to stamp out and get rid of.
But, you know, you're only making it worse when you block information.
You, you feel curiosity.
And so it's like, pick your poison as a judge.
I, you know, I'm doing what you, what you say, which is I'm assuming a certain level of presumption of publicity in the situation.
I'm saying, hey, this is for the public good.
We're into making sure justice is served.
Any information that can give us a full picture of things is going to be on display for everyone else because that's really what this case is about.
It's not about whether or not Tyler Robinson did it.
It's about why.
Why did he do it?
And are all parties being held accountable?
Was there somebody else aiding him?
Is this just a lone wolf incident?
Something of that nature.
If it's a lone wolf incident, it's against the defense's best interest to represent Tyler Robinson in the best light if you just let that narrative exist.
So who are they really defending?
I think that's going to be a question that we're going to ask as this trial progresses.
And I mean, that's something that I have questions about as well when we have this information that his boyfriend, this trans boyfriend, knew, seemed like knew quite a bit before he went out there.
And then you had all these accounts up on X saying something's going to happen to Charlie when he comes to campus on Wednesday.
Something big is going to happen.
So I can't wait for it to happen.
And all of those directly tie back to certain groups that really just raises a lot of those questions.
And so something where I know I'm certainly going to be looking at, again, what level of evidence or what we would say, I remember when I was in the Intel community, we would always use this phrase.
We would say, what else, what other, right?
What else?
What other?
Always be asking that question.
What else?
What other is out there?
And in this case, when we are told that evidence has been sealed, evidence hasn't been released, that we still want to know.
And so I've always stood for transparency in this and every case that I've covered.
Ladies and gentlemen, right back, Human Events Daily, Jack Sobic, Malcolm Franks.
You talk about influencers.
These are influencers.
And they're friends of mine.
Jack Sovik, where's Jack?
Jack.
He's got a breakdown.
Motion to Exclude Arguments00:07:06
Defendant's request to classify the motion filed on January 9th, 2026 is respectfully denied.
As it relates to the motion to classify motion to exclude docket 310.
Defendant seeks to classify his motion to exclude cameras from the courtroom because the motion compiles a litany of unfairly prejudicial and oftentimes inaccurate electronic media interviews, comments, and photographs.
Furthermore, the motion references court filings that are classified as private and references the publication of private information of individuals involved in this case, allegedly in violation of law.
Defendant does not provide any citations to the underlying motion to aid the court in identifying the potentially private information.
The court is sensitive to the amount of pretrial publicity generated by this case, including an extensive amount of public commentary and inaccurate or conspiratorial descriptions of alleged evidence supporting or negating defendant's guilt.
A substantial amount of this pretrial publicity is organized and memorialized into defendant's motion.
Because the references to pretrial publicity are, by their very nature, already contained in the public arena, interests favoring closure are greatly diminished.
And this citing to State v. Algier.
The public already has access to the majority of the information contained in the motion.
Upon balancing the interests at play, the court determines that defendant has not shown that the interests favoring closure outweigh the interests favoring access to the record, with the exception of the potentially private information referenced in the motion to classify.
The court orders defendant to file a version of his motion to exclude cameras referencing docket 305 that redacts private information referenced but not specifically cited in his motion to classify.
The redacted versions of the motion to exclude cameras must be filed with the court by the end of business on March 30th, 2026.
If no redacted motion is filed by that time, the court will reclassify docket 305 as public.
If a redacted motion is filed, the court will maintain the private classification on docket 305.
Accordingly, defendant's motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Finally, turning to the defendant's motion to classify reply, Docket 400.
Defendant seeks to classify as private his reply memorandum in support of his motion to exclude cameras from the courtroom.
Defendant argues that his reply memorandum should be private because it references portions of the motion to exclude cameras, which he has also moved to classify as discussed in the ruling on docket 310.
Defendant does not cite any part of the reply memorandum that references potentially prejudicial information in the motion to exclude.
Based on the record before it, the court concludes that defendant has not provided a sufficient basis for the court to find the interests favoring closure outweigh interests favoring access to the reply memorandum.
As such, defendant's motion is respectfully denied.
I will go ahead and sign this order and it will go into the record.
With this in mind, counsel, how would we like to proceed?
What I want to turn to next is this upcoming April 17th hearing, how it will be conducted, and so we all have a good idea of what to expect and to prepare for.
And so first I'll hear from defense in regards to your expectations on moving forward given the ruling of this court.
And then I'll turn to the state as well.
All right.
Mr. Burt.
So, Your Honor, we anticipate calling several witnesses.
One witness would be in the nature of a foundational witness who would summarize for the court the nature and extent of the publicity.
We'd be testifying that certain things like publication, scope, number of times certain articles have been referenced.
We would be playing for the court the various clips that are referenced in the motion as well as others not referenced to provide the court with an overview of what we think the court needs to look at in terms of the nature and extent of the publicity.
Then we would also be producing an expert witness who's okay.
So a flurry of motions right there.
We're working to get you all the details of exactly what happened.
Looks like a variety of these were denied.
There was some partial granting of the seal, but a lot of this, a lot of this was denied.
And then the Judge Graff is also asking for a new redacted motion on the removal of cameras.
The defendant wants that motion classified.
So that'll be, and now they're talking about the next hearing coming up here regarding the, you know, April 17th, which is also going to be on cameras.
You see some people rising there.
There's different arguments being made about the next case.
So Natalie Waddis from local CBS is saying the judge presiding has decided not to classify the documents that the defense asked for, has decided to allow cameras in the courtroom at the next hearing on April 17th.
However, the judge said the defense may file an updated motion to argue for removing cameras on April 17th.
They could do that on March 30th.
And that's what they're going to be pushing for since.
And just want to bring Malcolm Flex back in here.
So Flex, this was big, actually, because the judge actually, I think, in as many words, said exactly what you said, that the defense in most of these motions,
with the exception of this camera bid for the next piece, was saying that the defendant has not met the burden, right, the bar to saying that his rights to have a fair trial come into conflict with the right of the public to have access to this case because it is a public trial.
And as the judge is working, he has to weigh those back and forth and says, look, this evidence, this is a public trial.
High Bar for Fair Trial00:02:55
We don't do these trials behind the scenes.
We have to do this in public.
That's the American way.
And he's saying right there that you have not met the burden to say that this is going to be prejudicial.
So your motion is denied.
Beautiful.
Beautiful.
I think that's exactly what we expected.
Any judge Werfield Salt would make that.
You know, that's just a logical conclusion here.
Like we said, they're working against their own defendants' interests if they're trying to shield information or anything because there's so little information to go off of.
Well, looking forward to it.
Looking forward to seeing how this goes.
Jack, where's Jack?
Where's 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 published.
All right, folks, we're back here.
Human Events Daily, Jack Besobic, Real America's Voice Folks.
Let me tell you something straight up.
Got to tell you, and it's just the truth.
All right.
I'm always going to be straight with you.
I'm a picky man, and I'm very picky about when it comes to what I put in my body and what companies that I support.
We have a high bar here on Human Events Daily.
Blackout Coffee has always met that bar.
They are a family-run American company which roasts fresh coffee right here in the USA, built by people who believe in hard work, freedom, and the United States.
Now, 2026 is a huge year.
This year marks the 250th anniversary of the United States of America, and Blackout Coffee is celebrating it all year long with new roasts, limited editions, and some very exciting releases coming.
I drink blackout coffee every single day.
Morning shows, late nights, travel days, all of it.
It's smooth, it's strong, and it's always fresh.
When you switch, there's no going back.
They've got something for everyone.
Morning Reaper, their best-selling medium roast that's smooth and never bitter.
Brutal Awakening, a bold dark roast that actually wakes you up.
For 2026, if you have to try the 1776 Dark Roast, rich and unapologetic, made to honor America's founding, and the 2A medium roast, smooth, balanced, and proudly named after the Second Amendment.
Your coffee will show up fresh on schedule and they never ever run out.
They also have instant coffee, which is a total game changer.
We're not talking about some weak gas station powder.
No, we're talking about the real blackout coffee, the stuff that is not in a machine.
There's no mess.
Add water, stir, and you're ready to roll.
Perfect for work, travel, or keeping it in your desk or your go bag.
Go to blackoutcoffee.com slash posto and use promo code posto for 20% off your first order.
That's blackoutcoffee.com slash pozo.
Support American jobs.
So I want to come back in with, by the way, I'm just seeing in the chat.
Foreign Threat and Terrorist Lists00:15:26
What I was about to bring, get Malcolm Flex here in a second, but was just told that Human Events was just referenced in the trial.
So we are, we are going to pull that clip as soon as we can.
If you guys remember that Human Events was one of the first media outlets to weigh in on this case and on the question of trials, or excuse me, of cameras in the trial.
And look, you know, this is something that we firmly support.
Erica has also come out and said that she supports full camera access in the trial.
And I'll just say this from my perspective, it's really simple.
Charlie did not have a say into whether or not his death would be public.
Only the killer had a say in that.
And as such, the trial itself should also be public and fully on camera.
It's as simple as that.
I do want to bring in Malcolm Flex because we have so much other stuff to talk about.
We've got the Iran war, which is of course heating up.
We've also got this blowback that is occurring in the United States, multiple terrorist-related attacks, which took place just yesterday on American soil.
And of course, unfortunately, more to come.
Flex, wanted to get you in here now and kind of talk to your high-level analysis of the situation, both at home and abroad, because in my mind, there's no question these are both indelibly linked.
Yeah.
Well, you can say both of the situations are linked, as well as the whole Charlie Kirk situation, I think, when it comes to just sort of the policy and how we're even getting here.
But, you know, as always, before we talk about terrorism, yeah, it's man, honestly.
Anytime we talk about acts of terror or warfare, you know, first off, want to, you know, my condolences go out to the families of those that have lost service members, as well as, you know, just the service members who have been involved and who continue to be involved.
But yeah, blowback is a real thing.
I don't think a lot of people consider when they look at their phones, these little glass screens, and they see, oh, we just blew up this building, this building, and this building.
They don't understand that again.
In every conflict, the enemy gets a vote and not just the enemy, but sympathizers to the enemy.
I think we've misreferenced and misunderstood how many people are sympathetic to what is going on in Iran on the Iranian side.
And I think that we also misrepresent the pool of the Shiite faction of Islam.
You know, we cannot say it enough.
This is more than just one nation.
You have a lot of people who are Shiites instead of Sunnis.
And so when you attack Iran, who is, you know, they've got the Ayatollah.
You just killed the Ayatollah.
That's like going in and killing the Pope at some point.
You know, you're going to have a lot of people over here in other areas like Bahrain and other areas of the Middle East that are going to feel some kind of way.
And guess what?
When things get bad enough and we're seeing a destabilization of the economy, we're seeing everything go a little bit haywire here.
People lose faith in the system.
They lose faith in the system that allowed this to happen, the system that perpetrates it, as well as the system that is supposed to protect them from something of this nature.
And that also happens in Iran.
So you get upheaval, you get clashes, and clashes cause a lot of people to act in ways that they normally wouldn't.
So like I said, again, you've got the Lebanese terrorist, the guy that, you know, again, came from a family of Lebanese people who claimed were killed by the actions of a certain nation state.
So, I mean, is it any surprise that this was going to happen?
And, you know, Iran understands this.
I think that a lot of people over here don't understand that, yeah, you can do bombing campaigns, you can blow up things, but when you blow up a desalination plant, when you blow up what is a school, it doesn't matter if the intel was bad.
What you just did was you destabilize a whole area of people who arguably now are losing the will to go back to the status quo.
And therefore, Iran is playing by a different set of rules.
They understand they're not going to inflict casualties on the United States in the same way the United States is going to inflict casualties.
Our win condition is to essentially destroy their ability to fight.
Their win condition is to destroy the ability of the American people to support this.
So they're looking at it in a cost to destruction equation.
That cost to destruction equation means every $10,000 drone that destroys a million dollar to $100 million piece of equipment that we have deployed or staged over there is a win.
Doesn't matter how many people they lose.
They've got people to make this happen.
And we're creating more and more people for them.
Political willpower, energy, galvanization.
That's what they're banking on.
And by doing this, you're creating a cohesive force and a cohesive group of people that now realize, okay, we're united against a group that does not care about us, regardless of what you say, oh, they're going to rise up and whatnot.
No, you're actually creating a rally around the flag effect.
And that's what you're saying that.
And just to just to pop in, so that could potentially be one of the factors in why we haven't seen these these protests, these opposition groups getting involved, because what do we see?
We see the, you know, the martyrdom.
They view the Ayatollah as a martyr.
We're playing some clips of that earlier.
They're carrying his pictures.
There was a huge pro-Palestinian march today in Tehran.
It's actually Kud's Day, which is a day where they traditionally rally for the Palestinian people.
So this isn't anything new for them, but it's greatly added to and exacerbated because they feel that they're under attack and under assault by a foreign force, namely the U.S. and Israel.
And so a lot of these are the same types of factors that we saw in Iraq and Afghanistan, where you have the local populace say, hey, maybe the Taliban aren't, you know, they're certainly not the nicest guys on the block, but you know what?
We're up against a foreign threat.
And so we have to turn to the people who are going to be brutal on our behalf.
Does that make sense?
Yes, yes.
It's the same principle of to fight monsters, you must become monsters.
And honestly, the United States are probably some of the scariest monsters to some of these people that they've seen since the Soviet Union.
And they have the playbook.
Let's be honest.
The playbook is to draw it out, be asymmetrical, force them out the long way and the hard way.
The United States may have money, but right now, again, money is finite and our supply of money is in flux.
And so all you have to do is make this as painful as possible.
It's a lot easier in an asymmetrical war to survive, especially when you've had 20 plus years to prepare for it.
Let's not forget that.
So it's a lot easier for them to execute their objectives than it is for us to continually stage more and more of our men, equipment, as well as our plans, which are getting siphoned off by the Chinese when we're already suffering from a lack of what we need, which is political willpower to even engage in such.
And we're seeing also, and I know there's just a minute left, and we'll have to get you back on to dig more into this.
And realize we're going to have so much breaking with the Tyler case, but that the USS Triple E, a full Marine expeditionary unit and the amphibious assault ship have been, we're told, reportedly ordered to the Middle East.
So you're talking about 2,200 Marines, F-35s, and potential for more if they get in.
Malcolm Flex, where can people go to follow you and get access to your musings?
All right.
Just find me on X. Not if you're politically motivated, if you're like literally in the bag of one side and you're swilling propaganda, then you might not want to follow me.
But other than that, follow me on X and also check me out on Instagram.
Again, I also fight.
I'm an MMA fighter.
I do a lot of stuff.
Just prepare, stay strong, and stay healthy, people.
All right.
Check them out, folks.
Malcolm Flex, Flex's Warrior Way.
Thank you, my friend.
We'll be right back.
Human Events Daily.
You know, they talk about influencers.
These are influencers.
And they're friends of mine.
Jack, where's Jack?
He's got a great guy.
Concerns this relates to the broader concern.
Sure.
The second issue, Your Honor, I came across when I was preparing for the hearing today: a letter brief that is online, dated October 28th, 2025, from a group called Human Events.
And it's addressed to Your Honor.
And it's in the nature of a brief on the closure issues we've been discussing today.
It indicates at the bottom that it was CC'd to the parties, but discussing with the prosecution neither one from a group called Human Events.
So Tyler Robinson's lawyers there very upset that Human Events is calling for full transparency.
This is an open letter, okay?
That means you can read it with your eyes and with your ability to understand the English language.
What do you mean, oh, it wasn't provided to us?
Well, you can just go to humanevents.com and read it.
It's called an open letter.
That's what it's for.
And these people are so desperate.
Now Tyler Robinson lawyers are attacking human events directly in the trial, simply for calling for transparency.
Okay.
All right.
I see how it is.
I see how it is.
We'll have more on that at a later date.
I want to go in because we have a new guest today that I'd be remiss if we didn't get on because, you know, we've been talking so much lately about these issues with privacy.
We've been talking about, of course, recently these questions about the uptick in, I hate to say it, but these terrorist-inspired incidents here in the United States.
And one of the real reasons that a lot of people have, especially if you're a conservative, especially if you're a patriot, if you're a Trump supporter, and if you're a Christian, that you potentially could be targeted.
And there's, of course, lots of reasons to want to protect your privacy.
So I wanted to bring on Skip Holst, who is the co-founder of our partners over at Patriot Protect.
Skip, how are you?
Jack, good to be here.
Good to be here.
I mean, you know, if you see me coming, you always got to be concerned because all we do all day is thinking about, you know, the attack surface that everyday Americans have of just existing and having an internet-controlled and internet-connected world.
So we've been busy of late, to say the least, between everything that we normally do and then the upticks of everything that's been happening because of the, you know, just the sheer scale of cyber attacks coming out of Iran.
Well, so walk us through these cyber attacks.
Is this like phishing?
Are they going after specific individuals who are associated with supporting President Trump to try to build target lists, that sort of thing?
I wish it were that simple.
Honestly, there's a whole history of it, which I'd love to give a little primer of.
But we had just this week the largest, one of the largest breaches that we've seen that has hit the Stryker medical device company that happened just literally this week that was done by pro-Iran hackers.
There's been a whole history of state-aligned hacking coming out of Iran, going back from what started it all, which was the Suxnet worm that was done to disable the nuclear enrichment centrifuges at Natan's in Iran.
But Stryker was it, this has been a huge breach that we've been tracking.
These, just so you know, I mean, Stryker is a company that, you know, they provide everything from ambulance cots to defibrillation information and services to hospitals and emergency medical services.
And so this happened in, this was breached this week.
Maryland's Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems said that the emergency medical services told hospitals in the state, this was on Wednesday, that it received multiple reports of Stryker's LifeNet echocardiogram transmission system was, quote, non-functional in most parts of the state of Maryland.
And what this was, was this was a Iranian state-aligned group that claimed that claimed this attack.
So this was such that no people, none of these emergency services could transmit information over to the hospitals of the patients that they were working on.
I mean, this is an unprecedented attack that is affecting actual people that are getting actual care here stateside.
And so when you're talking about this, they're building together these lists of individuals.
What could people do to potentially protect themselves if they view that Iran might be trying to gather up this information, that they might be using open source databases?
What can people do to protect themselves, their family, and their loved ones in times like these?
Listen, I mean, I take no pleasure in saying this, but the reality is if you're an American taxpayer over the age of 18, you have your information published by hundreds of data brokers all over the internet.
If you, and I invite everybody to do this, go to Google, type in your name and address, and press enter, and you will see pages and pages and pages of information about you as an individual, your age, your name, your email addresses, your phone numbers, your relatives' names, your physical addresses, and your past addresses.
This is just, this has nothing to do with Iran.
This is just what the reality that we live in today of an internet connected world.
And, you know, the question you have to ask yourself is, do you want to have all this information there about you out there about you?
You know, we have so many scams that are coming at us all day.
You probably get them.
The USPS scams, those normal phishing attacks that say like, hey, you know, did you apply for this job?
Those text messages.
And then they rope you in.
They ask you to transfer over to WhatsApp.
There's a huge amount of ways that they can get to you.
And the reason that this, when this information is published about you, why it's so dangerous is that they can make you believable.
They can target your relatives and say, hey, it's your grandson.
Protecting Against Scammers00:03:02
You know, I'm in a jam.
I just got arrested.
I need you to send money over to me.
And then they can spoof a different account and get your grandmother to send money over.
We say this all the time about how scammers have been doing this, about, you know, we think about scammers of just sending information out there and just phishing and seeing what they can do.
But with AI, you know, we say that, you know, we think that scammers are using bows and arrows when the reality is that they moved on to gunpowder.
And so what can you do as an individual to make sure that you have a cybersecurity company that's on your side is to use a service like ours, to use Patriot Protect.
You know, again, we don't want to have to be doing this.
This is a call to action for us as privacy interested individuals.
People thought that we were being alarmist when we said back in 2012, 2013, when the IRGC launched Operation Ababil and they DDOS attacked 46 major financial institutions.
I'm talking Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, New York Stock Exchange, Capital One.
And this was a period of a cumulative period of 250 hours where you could not log in to your personal banking account.
Imagine if you were at the cashier with a cart full of groceries.
You go to swipe your credit card and it doesn't work because there was this Iranian-linked breach of the systems that you rely on every day.
That happened over 15 years ago.
So with the capacity that they have now to disrupt everyday life that we saw just this week with the stryker attack, that was just a drop in the bucket compared to what their capacity is now.
And so what we do, what Patriot Protect does for you is make you a much higher cost target so that when they're, you know, these cyber criminals, the hackers, the scammers, they're a business, an illegal one, but they're a business just like any other.
And they want to make sure that they're getting an ROI on their information.
You know, one of the things that we provide is our blackout service to show you what's leaked on the dark net about the dark web about you.
We look back to 2008.
People get, you know, we show the hacks that was done on ATT.
You know, we show you what has been put out there about you and what you can do about it.
Because the reality is these leaks happen every single day.
And I got to tell you, boy, are we busy these days.
So, you know, we've got, and we've, we've got up, and I use this myself, by the way.
Our family uses it.
It's Patriot-Protect slash POSO.
And of course, we've got promo code POSO up.
Just in the last couple seconds left, I want to remind everybody that for the next 72 hours, there's going to be 50% off for subscription plans if you use promo code POSO.
So that's Patriot-Protect slash POSO, promo code POSO for 50% off new subscriptions for the next 72 hours.
Ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have my permission to lay ashore.