All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 7, 2022 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
32:46
New Twitter Bombshell: 'Former' FBI Agent Caught Removing Files Before 'Twitter Papers

The "former" FBI Agent at the center of the bogus "Russiagate" operation was brought on by Twitter's previous management, where he played a key role in suppressing the Hunter Biden bombshell. Musk decided to release the internal communications of "old" Twitter around the censorship and that same "former" FBI agent was caught red-handed removing the evidence before it could be released!

|

Time Text
Musk's Controversial Files 00:14:57
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you today.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing well.
Doing well.
Good.
So, let's see.
What should we talk about?
Politics?
I don't want to talk about the election.
It was pretty boring.
Yeah, it was pretty boring.
But sad, too, you know.
What a mess.
So I don't think the world is going to get better or that much worse in the next 24 hours, but the trend isn't good for our country.
And we'll talk a little bit about the trend in our law enforcement agencies.
Now, there's something that we can sort of see and count what's going on.
And that has to do with the policemen, the FBI, the people who are supposed to protect us and be trustworthy, which they have been able to achieve over the years.
But right now, you know, it's a big controversy.
And that has to do with what's going on with Musk.
Musk now has this Twitter company, and he fired somebody last night over the weekend.
He said, look, you can't do that.
It's almost like you're going against us.
And that was getting rid of the FBI agent that came over and worked.
That's where they were recruited from, Twitter.
That's before Musk.
But he was participating.
But yesterday, he finally got Musk's attention.
And Musk, of course, he's a man of action.
He took action.
He fired the guy.
But, you know, to us, we might even define this as a heroic effort.
You know, bad guy, bad policy, FBI doing harm, and Musk invests his money and starting to clean this up.
So journalists would say, hey, this is the kind of journalism we need.
This is just wonderful that he doesn't.
Didn't happen.
You know, it didn't happen at all.
So we have to at least take a look at this and try to make a suggestion on what we can do to improve it.
But it is a real mess because the FBI has been not involved just recently, but all the way, especially 2016.
They became notorious in 2016.
And you know, one thing they don't talk about, because there was an election yesterday, and they said, see, Trump is destroyed forever.
Now, I have a very superficial type of opinion, thinking that this exposure that's going on, why should this hurt Trump?
Because he says there's corruption among the crowd.
But anyway, you're not going to hear it from the media.
And it's just an expression of chaos in our law enforcement agency.
So hopefully some good will come from it.
We certainly want to cheer Musk on.
But I still, if he were in this room, I'd ask him a couple questions.
Well, this is a massive scandal, Dr. Paul.
I mean, this is, it should be the headlines everywhere.
Let's put on the first clip just to get us started on this.
This is from Hedge, but it's been covered in a lot of places.
My jaw hit the floor.
Musk fires Twitter's FBI Russagate lawyer for vetting Debacle.
You can see the guy on the right, James Baker, who has been everywhere involved with RussiaGate from the beginning.
He finds his way in Twitter, pre-Musk Twitter.
where he's involved in the censorship program.
Matt Taibbi, as we discussed, you know, on Friday, they did the Twitter papers volume one with some bombshells, but something happened.
They were supposed to release the second batch, and something happened.
It didn't show up, didn't show up.
And then finally yesterday, Matt Taibbi told us why in the Twitter thread.
He says, on Friday, the first installment of the Twitter files was published here.
We expected to publish more over the weekend.
Many wondered why there was a delay.
We can now tell you part of the reason why.
On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel and former FBI general counsel, Jim Baker, was fired.
Among the reasons, vetting the first batch of Twitter files without knowledge of the new management.
And put on the next one, just a couple more points to make.
Over the weekend, while we both dealt, and this is Matt Taibbi talking about himself and Barry Weiss, who's a journalist who's been handed by Musk the papers as well.
Over the weekend, when we both dealt with obstacles to news searches, it was Barry Weiss who discovered that the person in charge of releasing the files was someone named Jim.
When she called to ask Jim's last name, the answer came back, Jim Baker.
My jaw hit the floor, says Weiss.
The first batch of files both reporters received was marked Spectra Baker emails.
And that's a long way of saying that this guy from the FBI, former, maybe former, maybe not, he's in there.
Speculation is that he's furiously deleting, bleaching over, whatever you do, any of those files that may incriminate who?
Him, the FBI, other government organizations, getting rid of those, deleting them with no one knowing it before they can come out.
It's a huge scandal.
Well, the first thought that came to my mind is this isn't the first day I heard the name Jim Baker and that there was a problem going on and that there was a connection to Twitter.
But all of a sudden, it seems like it was a secret.
And then, of course, when Musk found out what they were doing currently under his watch, it didn't take him long to do what he had to do.
But it just seems like there should be some weeding out.
But I imagine, you know, we might say the same thing in a week.
There might be about 25 more that needs weeding out.
Look how big the corporation is.
And they know everybody where their loyalties go.
That is a big problem.
So I'm a little bit surprised, but it's bureaucratic.
It's big.
There's a lot of people.
And there must have been a reason that he didn't get fired.
Maybe they wanted the real evidence.
And now Musk has the evidence.
So that to me is something, but we should be very pleased that this is happening because if one thing, you know, it makes me think that how can this hurt Trump?
But the media would handle that.
They'll make sure it hurts Trump.
But, you know, this more or less, you know, verifies some of the things that there's been dishonesty in elections.
And I think if they go back.
But the problem is the history of this, the real history, the true history, might take some investigators and they had trouble finding good journalists.
It might take them years to really pin it down and know exactly.
But there's a lot of evidence out there now and people that have just revealed what's happening here.
This is a great benefit.
But hopefully the American people will look at it and say, you know, what's going on?
The American people want to believe that the police are our friends.
You know, the FBI is supposed to take care of us and make us safe and secure.
And they don't want to think badly of them.
But right now, there should be no reason why you should ever trust them.
You know, what they do and their ability to charge people, help create crime, and then charge people and take them before the grand jury, and they all get indicted.
Yeah.
Well, the real question when we think of Baker in the back room hitting delete, what kinds of files, what kinds of evidence was he deleting?
Now, was it something pertaining to the company?
Or was there perhaps evidence of wrongdoing by certain people in the FBI?
Was there criminal activity that went on that he's trying to cover up?
In that case, this isn't just, well, look what this company's problems are, but the question is, you know, physician, heal thyself.
Here you have this guy whose career was upholding the law in here, but possibly we don't know because we don't know how much, if what anything was deleted.
Maybe he's covering up law breaking itself, in which case you need to have a real investigation, not just by Musk, but by the authorities.
So there's one thing about that that we don't know that should be thought about.
Put up this next clip because this is more about Baker.
Baker's a weird guy more than that.
He's an evil guy.
And here's what Taibbi says.
Baker's a controversial figure.
He's been something of a zealig of FBI controversies dating back to 2016 from the Steele dossier to the Alpha server mess.
He resigned in 2018 after an investigation into leaks to the press.
So this guy was involved in passing the bogus information from Hillary's campaign to the media suggesting that Trump had a secret channel of communication to a Russian bank.
That was all a lie.
The Steele dossier, which Baker pushed, was a huge lie.
And we also know that Baker was intimately involved in the persecution and prosecution of Michael Flynn.
So he's involved in all of these areas, and suddenly he finds himself a major gatekeeper at Twitter trying to keep these things he was involved in from coming out.
And it's very, very, very concerning.
I'm going to do one last thing about this, Dr. Paul, because this kind of sums it up.
This next Twitter is, this first one is from Leif Eng, who's also a journalist.
And this kind of puts it in context.
Twitter's former top attorney, James Baker, was formerly an FBI attorney who passed on fake dirt from Hillary's campaign operatives in 2016, alleging a secret online portal from Russia's alpha bank to Trump.
Now he attempted to shape the Twitter files.
And so Eric Weinstein mentions, I can't quite believe what I'm reading, so let's go slow.
The FBI's former attorney was hired by previous Twitter management and was the one vetting the files to be given to Barry Weiss and Matt Taibbi that might reveal the FBI collusion.
And the new owner, Elon Musk, wasn't told any of this, to which Elon responded, only discovered this on Sunday.
So he only found out all this stuff going on behind the scenes on Sunday.
Watch for the guy doing it, and then he's fired.
The final blow.
There is no way he could resist doing what he had to do.
Amazing.
You know, the question comes up, you know, when you're dealing with government and business and all the potential for evil and corruption.
If you're suspect, you're an honest law-abiding citizen and you suspect, you know, government's involved and there's some crooked people in the IRS or whatever, that you think, well, I'll call the FBI.
But who do you call now?
Well, we'll call the newspapers.
Oh, they'll report this and the people will be persuaded.
No, you have to just go on.
And this has been going on now.
It's breaking loose.
I think it's very, very important.
Not to say that this just happened a week ago.
This is all just real recent.
This is the only time they did it because they saw an opening and they're angry at Musk.
But they can go all the way back.
They kept stuff from even the former head of Twitter.
He didn't know what was going on either, other than I think he was more sympathetic to what was happening there.
So that puts a real handicap on people who would like to see a system where law and order, where you have some place to go and just say, investigate this.
I can't investigate this, but I think there's a lot of corruption in the ABC.
But now, how can you say, oh, that's just wonderful?
And the FBI said, well, you know, we are pretty busy.
Oh, okay.
We'll get you another $10 billion to do your more investigation.
And maybe we'll give a little more money to the IRS because they might be involved too.
There's always tax problems with these people, too.
So just spend more money, get more bureaucrats and more corruption.
So it looks like these problems breed more corruption.
Let's just hope this is a turning point.
You know, I would say the last 10, maybe even longer than that because the CIA corruption, I believe, went all the way back to 1963.
You know, and they're still involved in the coups around the world.
So it's a system that it takes waking up, waking the American people up when the obstacles will be the massive media and the power that governments have, you know, either punish, tax, regulate, or whatever they have to do to keep people from speaking out.
But the corruption has accelerated to such a degree, I think it's going to come to an end, but that will not necessarily be a shearing moment because it probably means that there's going to be total chaos worse than we have now.
Because the authoritarians, the people who control this system, will not go away quietly no matter how many times they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
That's not going to stop them.
This is what amazes me.
Baker's doing all this thing.
And there was enough evidence about him.
Here he is doing it for this new company.
Thank goodness it only took a day.
And he was gone when it was finally obviously evident of what's going to happen.
To me, it really feels like a peek behind the curtain at the deep state because this is how it works.
The tentacles are everywhere.
And it does make you wonder how many undercover CIA people are inside Twitter.
You know, we know we have the FBI guy, former FBI guy.
I would not be surprised in the slightest.
But the real issue at play here is not just what's happening in Twitter, but in the larger picture, it's the FBI's manipulation of the election in both 2020 and 2022, possibly 2016.
And this is a big deal.
And we've covered a little bit about this.
This is very, very related, in my opinion.
But this is the lawsuit filed by a couple of attorneys general.
FBI's Social Media Manipulation 00:07:56
And I mentioned the states.
I don't have it in front of me now.
But they interviewed this fellow, Elvis Chan, San Francisco FBI agent, who was very, very much involved in the FBI's actions inside social media.
A transcript of his interview for this case came out.
And let's put up this next thing.
My friend Julie Kelly, great reporter.
She put up a little bit of this transcript.
I'm just going to read this question.
He was asked, so, but anyway, okay, Mr. Chan or Agent Chan, Who do you recall on the social media platform side participating in these, in these working group meetings, have you been testifying out from 20 to 22?
And Agent Chan from the FBI says, the companies I remember attending the meetings are Facebook, Microsoft, Google, Twitter, Yahoo, Verizon Media, and what was the last one?
Wikimedia Foundation.
I can't see it through the camera.
So here is a weekly meetings that the FBI is having with all social media.
They're talking about the Hunter laptop.
They're talking about Russian disinfo.
They're basically saying, wink, wink, wink, you social media companies, here's what you need to suppress.
And so how much did they do with COVID?
How much did they do with Trump?
It's a really big, really deep corruption that's going on.
And I think these two threads are sort of coming together now.
Mentioning all those companies, that's a powerful force, isn't it?
You know, when we talk about mainstream media and how corrupt they have been and historin the facts.
But, you know, they now are probably minor because less people are watching and getting all their news off the television.
They go to these sources and social media.
I mean, there's a little bit of attention given on what kind of problems they give.
And I think what's happening now with Twitter, there's more evidence.
But they are powerful, powerful people.
But we can't interfere and we can't regulate them because they're private companies.
We let them do whatever they want.
That's where the discrepancy comes from because they're no more private than the man on the moon.
They are the strong secret arm of the U.S. government because what we're talking about is exactly it.
The collusion between the FBI and political campaigns, presidential races, the whole works.
And the evidence is very, very clear.
But it seems like a real struggle to get the information out.
Yeah, because the media doesn't want to touch it.
But what the media does want to touch the mainstream is anyone who helps expose this.
And this leads us to our second story.
And our good friend Jonathan Turnley has a good piece that came out a couple of days ago about this.
We can put on that next clip.
A cautionary tale for everyone.
The media mob turns on Taibbi.
And he makes the point, generally speaking, that for Taibbi to get a scoop like this, he and Barry Weiss to get a scoop like this, normally you would praise a journalist.
Wow, this is amazing.
He's got a grace group.
He's dropping it.
But that's not exactly what happened, Dr. Paul.
He's been ruthlessly, ruthlessly attacked by his fellow journalists.
You know, this is part of the abuse and control of the First Amendment.
Because, you know, if you happen to have been on the internet and Twitter and you said the wrong thing, you could be taken off and punished and canceled and that we've talked about a whole lot.
So that's essentially what they're doing here.
They're canceling people, the reporters.
The reporters turn on their own.
But that is the same thing.
That's how menacing this is.
Because the physicians, Excuse me.
The physicians organizations all turned on the doctors who were telling the truth and reporting scientific evidence about what was going on with COVID.
And they get punished and thrown out.
And it's still going on.
And they lose their jobs.
And here, Taibbi, I imagine he's such a talented person that he's going to find a place because everything is not dead and gone.
I mean, maybe let's try to look for the positive.
More people will know his name today than they knew yesterday and say, oh, he's on our side of this.
And maybe he will have another outlet that will be better than anything he's had before.
Well, actually, he does because, you know, that's one of the reasons why the mainstream media hates him, because he's not beholden to any of the big companies.
He has his own sub-stack, and that's where you write.
And people who like it subscribe, and they give you like five bucks a month.
His sub-stack is way, way, way bigger than any of their readership.
And he makes tons more money than they do because he actually has people that want to pay for what he does.
So that's the other thing that they hate about Taibbi.
That's what they hate about Greenwald and others, too, is they don't have to come begging.
They just have to produce good work.
Well, here's a clip from Turley's piece.
And it points out, and this is just one example.
He said, the New York Times contributor Mahat Ali also attacked Taibbi.
And this is this New York Times journalist.
Matt Taibbi, what a sad, disgraceful downfall.
I swear, kids, he did good work back in the day.
Should be a cautionary tale for everyone.
Selling your soul for the richest white nationalist on earth.
Well, he'll eat well for the rest of his life, I guess, but is it worth it?
And this is the attitude hundreds and hundreds of journalists attacked Taibbi for reporting this.
But here's, I'll just leave it up for a second.
Here's Jonathan Turley's take, and it's the correct tape.
So Taibbi's reported downfall as a writer is due to his role in disclosing a massive censorship system operated at the direction or behest of one political party and one political family.
He's disgraceful because he's suggesting that the media and social media companies should not have censored a story on a multi-million dollar influence peddling scheme run by the Biden family.
And he's incredulous about this, you know.
So this is his big fault.
He uncovered this massive scandal.
That makes him a horrible person.
It says everything you need to know about the media, I think.
Boy, that's for sure.
And the more we can help expose this, that's the best we can do.
And, you know, you do follow what we do here.
And I sort of catch up on the number of people that we reach and staff and others say, Bron, you guys are doing pretty good.
Your numbers are doing pretty good.
So yes, we're not massive.
And we concentrate on getting a message out.
And we put this high on the list of importance.
Both articles are worth looking up and reading.
Yeah, well, you know, Dr. Paul, there's lots of bad news out there.
We cover it every day, and it's easy to get down.
And people do ask us a lot of time, well, what can we do about this?
The world seems to be falling apart.
What can we do about it?
Well, one of the things you can do is take care of your family and take care of your food supply.
And thanks to our sponsor here at the Ron Paul Livery Report, 4Patriots.com, you can get that food supply for yourself and your family at a reasonable cost, delicious food, breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
The number 4patriots.com provides not only food, not only three-month supply, six-month supply.
It's food that lasts for 25 years.
It's easy to store, easy to stow away, easy to have.
And it's not just for a nuclear disaster.
You know, there are plenty of weather problems that we have, and you can just whip out some of this food, boil it up, simmer it, serve it, and your family is taken care of.
Americans Concerned About Ukraine Aid 00:07:34
enter the code RON for a 10% discount at 4patriots.com.
You will get free shipping for every order of $97 or more.
And of course, their famous money-back guarantee, delicious food, a sense of peace of mind in a time of turmoil.
4patriots.com.
Give them a shot.
Wonderful.
Want to go on to another subject?
Yes, let's move ahead.
Okay, this one has to do with a senator that if you look and listen to him superficially, you say, well, he's a good Republican and he's good at conservative and votes against some things.
He actually even voted against some of the spending going into Ukraine.
Yeah, yeah.
Boy, this is an interesting person.
But here he comes up.
The most important thing is the only reason why he's bringing this now is he doesn't want people to send so much money to Ukraine because we might come up short.
We have to send it to Taiwan.
They need more weapons.
So he's a real, real, somebody said he's the biggest superhawk in the Congress, you know, against China.
So that's what his big goal is, is to get more people sending more money over to Taiwan.
And I keep thinking, you know, we've already stirred up a mess in Ukraine and the Russians, that could get worse, you know, any day if we keep seeing bombs occurring in the Russian territory.
So what could happen there?
And they say, well, it wasn't us.
That's what the Americans say.
Well, it was our money.
And if we're involved, we go a long way to look for a fight.
Well, no, we want to split it up.
We want to send some of the people in the other direction.
We just want to send them to Taiwan and send them weapons and stir up more activity.
I think that it makes no sense whatsoever.
You know, China right now, they just distort things so much.
Yes, they violate civil liberties of some of their people.
And I can't imagine that happening.
So they're doing that.
So yes, they have their problems, but they have economic problems too.
You know, this idea that they're king of the hill, it's not true.
And because they were involved in inflation, they have to have a correction too.
But nevertheless, we're over there stirring up trouble.
And the people who do that have a guy like Hawley thinks that it's endless.
In this little blip that he put out here, I don't think he talked about there's limits, you know, we can't print money forever.
But right now, he's pushing for sending big-time weapons over there.
And the Chinese have already reacted by saying that will, instead of them saying that will restrain us, that it's going to incentivize us because we're going to be very annoyed if you put those kind of weapons on Tehran.
Yeah, it's, you know, an empire on its last legs picks fights with everyone and anyone and everyone.
And that's what seems to be happening.
You know, I mean, Hawley, as you say, he's an impressive guy.
He's a good questioner.
We were talking before the show.
He's a pretty good interrogator when it comes to the bad guys.
But in a way, he represents everything that's wrong and bad with the Republican Party.
Oh, we should stop arming Ukraine.
We should stop spending all this money in Ukraine because we need to send it to make China mad.
We need a war with China, not Russia.
You know, so it's really everything that's bad with the Republican Party.
The future, if the Republican Party is to have any future, this is my only my personal view, Dr. Paul.
It is to become a party of anti-war, of the blue collar, as Trump tried to do.
That's the future of the party, not these old retreads.
But it does make you worried.
His view is not prevailing.
We're going to send more money to Russia.
As you point out, it's escalating.
We reported earlier this week on that strike deep within Russia, and apparently it was an old Soviet surveillance drone made in the 70s.
But somebody, I don't know who, wink wink, somebody very, very significantly modified it, put in a whole, I'm not an expert on technical things, but a whole new motherboard, a whole new computer system inside of it, and modified it from being a surveillance drone to being a long-range missile.
Somebody did that.
Maybe it was Zelensky in his basement.
He is the person of the year, as we know in Time and the Financial Times.
Maybe he was down there soldering and fixing this thing up.
Maybe it was someone else.
Maybe it was someone in Langley.
Nevertheless, there is a huge, huge danger.
People like Hawley, they may be tactical allies on Ukraine, but they really are part of the problem.
You know, I want to make a point about this because there's another recent poll.
If we follow some of these polls, it shows that over the last year, the support for spending all this money in Ukraine goes down and down.
And again, this current step is less Americans supporting the war.
At the same time, excuse me, the America.
Yeah.
Excuse me a minute.
Go ahead.
Yeah, there is, well, you're referring to something we saw recently on anti-war, which is a new poll that came out showing that Americans are increasingly concerned about the money sent to Ukraine, and the support for sending money is going down, down, down.
And the disconnect is that the people are getting, you know, much more reluctant to spending all this money.
At the same time, Washington's almost like a different place.
You know, the people are saying this.
At the same time, you have a guy like this that has a record of being a good Republican conservative, fiscal conservative, and wanting to spend more money and aggravate more things overseas.
So there is a disconnect there.
And once again, maybe it has something to do with media.
Who knows?
Do you think the military-industrial complex has any influence in the media?
I just wonder about that.
But they're happy with this now.
So we need to get the polling here is good.
It means the American people are disgusted.
Maybe they're not going to wait 10 or 20 years and thousands of Americans dying.
But it's time we've overspent already.
It's a big deal.
And we don't need to be saying, oh, well, the compromise on this is let's spend $10 billion less in Ukraine and send $20 billion to Taiwan and say we can handle this because the Chinese are about ready to invade the United States.
So that's it.
But I think that the answer is, Daniel, that I believe we're on to something.
And it's not complicated.
It conforms with the Constitution.
And that is, and the founders talked about it, and that is a non-interventionist foreign policy.
Don't have standing armies and don't go around the world.
And the last restraint for all this is you can't go to war and you can't drop bombs on people unless the Congress gives approval and the people who know about it.
And look, how many people have died at our hands?
Both the innocent as well as our military people since World War II.
It's never been, as far as I'm concerned, actually a constitutional war or a moral war.
Constitutional Restraints 00:01:35
Nobody became more free after we dropped all the bombs.
It's always an excuse to do that.
So I would say that it's available to people if they would just pay attention.
And this is the reason why we support so strongly non-intervention.
Well, I just want to close really quick, Dr. Paul.
We need to shut it down.
But I just want to do a shout out to our friend James Cabral.
You see, he sent in $40, $40 big dollars, James.
Thank you on our chat, Rumble Chat.
He says, Ron Paul best said on multiple occasions that government and private business shouldn't be together.
It becomes too corrupted.
Then he says, keep up the good work.
Thank you very much, James, and thanks to all of our viewers and listeners to the show.
Please don't forget to click like and thumbs up and plus and subscribe and all those other good things to help us get the message out.
Very good.
Now, we had some news today which was positive and we're encouraging that.
It's not all good news because we also warn that if we don't change our ways on the principles, whether it's the monetary policy, the economic policy, the foreign policy, we'll end up in worse shape.
We're going to end up bankrupt.
So I do think that it's important to look at the positive things, but it's also very important to describe what it would be like if we actually had a moral system, a constitutional system, because I am convinced that there would be a much greater chance for peace and prosperity if we would do that.
Export Selection