Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 20, 2023 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:09:40

Trump’s BOMBSHELL Colorado Ruling - Are We Heading To Civil War?! - Stay Free #271

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm going to go ahead and do that.
	In this video, you're going to see the future.
	We're getting some breaking news.
	We've got a live shot there.
	Hello there you awakening wonders, you glorious children of the light and the Lord, you fire walkers, you insurrectionists.
	Don't you do no insurrection now!
	You could be doing an insurrection at any moment.
	We are of course talking about the historic ruling in Colorado that prevents Donald Trump from running for president.
	It'll be Better if it was a little less meandering and I would say they were less sophistry.
	What I mean by that is, you know how it works?
	It's like they're saying, right, January the 6th was an insurrection.
	Wait a minute, I've got some questions.
	Donald Trump caused that insurrection.
	Wait a minute, I've got some questions.
	And he's been convicted of insurrection.
	Wait a minute, I've got some questions.
	And he's and this even the law actually in Colorado that's being utilized doesn't Actually extend to presidency.
	The presidencies.
	We'll be unpacking it in more detail over the course of the show.
	But, wow, in a world that requires insurrections, maybe insurrectionism oughtn't be a crime.
	We've got a lot more to talk to you about.
	It's clear now that this event has created fissures and fractures that reveal to you the true nature of American cultural life and maybe global political and cultural life.
	That we're no longer talking about Republicans versus Democrats.
	We're talking about authoritarianism versus the periphery.
	We're talking the center against decentralized but unified opposition.
	For example, RFK has come straight out and said, have we got that tweet?
	Let's have a look at RFK's tweet.
	RFK came straight out and said that all Americans, and maybe did he say all the world should be concerned?
	Yes, every American should be troubled by the Colorado Supreme Court's decision
	to remove President Trump from the ballot.
	Also, Vivek's been pretty outspoken about it.
	You like the jacket?
	Wake up for 83 says cool jacket.
	I'm talking to our friends in the.
	Hello, all of you.
	Those of you that are watching us on YouTube, we love you, you Awakened Wonders.
	You are vital to us.
	You are vital to this movement.
	We need you.
	We need every single one of you.
	But as you know, the WHO provides Community guidelines on that platform.
	As you know, the British government demanded that YouTube demonetize and censor our content some time ago.
	So, if possible, if it's within your means, we'd love you to join us over on Rumble.
	There's a link in the description.
	We're gonna be there.
	For about 15 minutes, you're going to see us talking about some important stuff.
	That's right.
	We're all soldiers for the Lord now.
	We're all insurrectionists now.
	We're all rising up together now.
	So if you're watching us on YouTube, we'll be there for a minute.
	And in the Awakened Wonder chat, Ignates Miles says, has Russell taken over a small Latin American country?
	It's so small.
	It's a sub molecular nation full of Latin Americans.
	And I am its commandant.
	So, let's have a look at some of this stuff around Trump and Colorado, as well as, later on, talking about the world versus Elon Musk.
	Again, another story that shows you that the true dynamic, the dynamic that matters now, you awakened wonders, is establishment versus the periphery.
	Now, I'm not claiming that Elon Musk, as one of the world's richest people, is a sort of a renegade, but when it comes to free speech absolutism, when it comes to challenging establishment power, Yeah, he's on the right side, you'd have to say, wouldn't you?
	You'd have to say.
	What we have now is a dynamic where the authoritarian establishment will use any means, any language required to shut down dissent.
	We showed you yesterday Barack Obama saying that you can't... Why is there a lightning bolt?
	That's the lightning bolt of the Lord!
	That's the sweet lightning of the truth raining down upon us, providing us the energy that we require, guys.
	Like how Barack Obama said that independent media must be censored because it muddies the waters, that people are losing trust in in the establishment.
	But of course we know there are complex reasons for people losing trust in the establishment.
	Is this a still that we've got here?
	Let's have a look.
	Good evening everyone, welcome to the readout.
	Sorry about that, guys.
	We've got the Legacy Media reporting on the Trump-Colorado matter.
	Can you bring the audio up in the studio for me a little bit, guys?
	I'm going to play that in again.
	Thanks.
	Good evening, everyone.
	Welcome to The Readout.
	And we begin tonight with major breaking news.
	A bombshell ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court in just the last hour states that Donald Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president.
	And from appearing on the Republican primary ballot in that state.
	In a more than 200-page ruling, the court found that Trump is ineligible for the White House under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
	Constitution.
	The court found that the district court was correct in its early ruling calling the January 6th attack on the Capitol an insurrection, and that Trump, quote, engaged in that insurrection through his personal actions.
	This, frankly, A lot of people saying there are DDOS attacks going on on Rumble right now, that the stream is freezing, but we're going to keep transmitting.
	We're going to keep streaming.
	If you're watching us on YouTube, we'll be there for another 10 minutes.
	You might want to consider becoming an Awakened Wonder.
	Join in the chat over there with the likes of Sensitive Hearts and Blessed Old Bird and Mama Brew.
	Or you might want to be, you might want to revel in the freedom of the Rumble chat.
	There's some incredible conversation going on right now.
	One of the things we want to draw your attention to with regard to the Trump-Colorado matter
	is Jonathan Turley, the legal scholar, who slams this decision saying,
	this court just handed partisans on both sides the ultimate tool to try to shortcut elections
	and it's very, very dangerous. I mean, this country is a powder keg
	and this court is just throwing matches at us.
	Turley's a professor of law.
	He added that he believes the ruling endangers American democracy.
	January 6th, he said, was many things.
	Most of it not good.
	He said it, but in my view, he said it was not an insurrection.
	It was a riot.
	So what was January the 6th?
	Let me know in the chat.
	Was it an insurrection or was it a riot?
	If you think it was an insurrection, put I. If you think it was a riot, put R. If you think it was a protest, put P. Let me know, guys, if you think that that has been accurately assessed.
	Of course, Trump has addressed this ruling himself, and it's going to be one of your favourite Trumps, I think, because it's Christmas Trump.
	Let's have a look at Christmas Trump and have a look at the... There are literally Trump baubles on the Christmas tree.
	It's no wonder crooked Joe Biden and the far-left lunatics are desperate to stop us by any means necessary.
	They are willing to violate the U.S.
	Constitution at levels never seen before in order to win this election.
	Joe Biden is a threat to democracy.
	It's a threat.
	I wonder where this is going to lead the United States of America.
	We've already spelt out that the division is no longer Republican-Democrat.
	That's why you've got support from RFK.
	You've got support from Vivec.
	But you know that Nikki Haley... Yeah, protest.
	Just protest.
	All of you.
	PPPPP.
	It's streams of PP in the chat.
	Just streams of PP.
	Nikki Haley, you can bet that she'll be happy about this decision, right?
	The establishment centre, the legacy media.
	They'll be happy about this decision.
	But listen to this.
	The 14th amendment that's been used to legitimise this decision doesn't actually define an insurrection or spell out what it means to engage in an insurrection.
	So again, this is another of those stories where the language isn't clear.
	Remember when we were talking about hate speech?
	The other day in Ireland and the new laws that enable the Garda, the police there, to raid Irish folks' homes, take their computers.
	If they're suspected of hate speech it doesn't define what hate speech is.
	Presumably to grant legitimacy to a wide range of decisions.
	Presumably to weaponise that piece of legislation Against whatever section of the population they want to criminalise that day.
	And this tendency to criminalise ordinary citizens, to criminalise the public, to criminalise language, to criminalise protest, to criminalise freedom, to criminalise free thought, is one of the techniques that the establishment is continually engaging as they unleash warfare Lawfare on all of their opponents.
	If they can't get you in war, they'll get you with the law.
	Going into this story in a little more detail, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment says, oath-breaking insurrectionists can't serve as senators, representatives, or presidential electors, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States or under any state, but it doesn't mention the presidency.
	In a sense, it seems like this is weaponization of legislation.
	Do you think that is this the law or is this weaponization of the law?
	Put a W for weaponization and if you think this is legitimate legality, let us know.
	Or is it a shimmering distraction like a Trump bauble on a Trump Christmas tree?
	They're weaponising law enforcement for high-level election interference because we're beating them so badly in the polls.
	Hmm, interesting stuff.
	Now, predictably, Rachel Maddow and the Legacy Media have a very particular position on this, but what I would like to draw your attention to is how...
	Is the United States of America ever going to be unified again?
	Doesn't it seem increasingly likely that we're moving to a place of dissolution?
	A place of even civil war?
	Is that kind of incendiary rhetoric?
	Is that unnecessary?
	Are we going too far?
	How can you ever have an election in your country again?
	Where post the election the other side isn't saying the election was stolen or there was Russian hacking or whatever it is.
	It's extraordinary isn't it?
	There's a seriously pronounced sense of division.
	No longer I would argue left and right but authoritarianism versus peripheral dissenting anti-establishment voices.
	Here is the message of the establishment who got nearly 16,000 of you Watching us on Rumble right now.
	We've got to hit that 30,000 if we're ever going to get the Brand Gino, Dan Bongino, Russell Brand mashup that we are working so hard to create.
	That's going to be happening in January, but we've got... I don't want to be coming to Dan Bongino with like, oh Dan, we've got 150 people tuning in.
	That's why I'm wearing this jacket, to give yourself some legitimacy.
	Let's have a look at Rachel Maddow.
	And yeah, let me know what you think about this.
	This is not a crazy thing for a democracy to do.
	This is something that was a hallmark of post-war Germany after World War II.
	This is something that happened at Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil quite recently.
	This is something that our own Congress did in 1868, after our own civil war, specifically to preclude anybody from holding office in this country who had engaged in insurrection against this country.
	And so it's not unheard of, but it would be an incredible wild card.
	Precipitous, perspicacious and potentially deadly to suggest that this might be the kind of events that precede civil war.
	One justice concluded that a candidate shouldn't be disqualified under the 14th amendment if they haven't been convicted of insurrection, which is a federal crime.
	Trump is facing other felony charges but not insurrection in his federal election subversion case.
	So okay, so insurrection isn't even one of the charges.
	So it doesn't define what insurrection is.
	It doesn't define what engaging is.
	He's not even charged with insurrection.
	Now, you know me.
	I believe in decentralization.
	I believe in radical institutional change.
	I believe that we have to end the donor culture.
	I think we have to end the practice of people in Congress Investing in stocks and shares that they are themselves involved in the regulation of.
	I think we need radical change, radical decentralisation, federalism, democracy and sovereignty as close to the individual and the community as possible.
	The ability to control, govern and rule our own lives.
	It simply isn't natural to have centralised forces, whether they are national, international, let alone global, controlling Your lives, because we've already seen the way that that's heading.
	In a sense, what we're witnessing now is true resistance to those forces of corporate globalism.
	Let me know where you guys stand on that.
	Again, we're seeing the weaponization of the law and the weaponization of language, it seems, in order to prevent an anti-establishment candidate from being able to challenge centralist authoritarian interests.
	Yes, Vivek has come out in favour, like RFK.
	These kind of independent media, emergent figures that are vocally anti-establishment are of course, well not necessarily supporting Trump, Vivek is explicitly supporting Trump, but RFK is saying that the decision is appalling.
	So can you see that there are new Discourse is taking place now that just would have been impossible in the old legacy media model.
	That stuff would have been shut right down.
	Sure you guys have seen Vivek.
	Let me know what kind of vehicle you think Vivek's in.
	Here's Vivek supporting Trump saying he himself won't go on the ballot and that Ron DeSantis shouldn't be on the ballot and Nikki Haley shouldn't be on the ballot.
	What kind of vehicle is Vivek in?
	Vivek's vehicle.
	They have just tried to bar President Trump from the Colorado ballot using an unconstitutional maneuver that is a bastardization of the 14th Amendment to our U.S.
	Constitution.
	This was a provision, Section 3, that was designed to bar Confederate members, people who switched to the Confederacy, from actually being able to serve.
	That's very different than what's at issue here, to say the least.
	Greg One Love in the chat says that Whitney Webb, friend of the show, great guest, she's coming on again soon, said that there will be a DDoS attack that will prevent the election taking place.
	Let's watch out, that's a great prediction if it comes true and we've got it on record now were it to be the case.
	A lot of people saying it's taking place on an RV.
	A lot of people saying it might be taking place on a private jet.
	In a minute you see it sort of wobble.
	I think it might be an RV.
	What's interesting is the strategic positioning of various political voices, allies and opponents.
	RFK coming out on side of anti-establishment.
	Coming out on the side of anti-authoritarianism, anti-establishmentism.
	Legacy Media and Rachel Maddow predictably, of course, endorsing this decision and saying that there's a precedent, but we know that they are interested in destabilizing and delegitimizing Trump's campaign.
	There's an ongoing media campaign to suggest that Trump's candidacy and eventual election would bring about old-school military dictatorship.
	Whereas what we are advancing is that we are already in a kind of technological dictatorship where people are just removed from ballots for rational reasons.
	Rationally and mobilizing the constitution, we simply have to remove this person from the ballot.
	In a sense, If you look at this, as it were, from 30,000 feet, like Vivec, if indeed he is on a jet, I still think RV.
	If you look at this from 30,000 feet, I suppose if you know what the brand is of that thing that's behind his head, you'd know.
	So it seems to say, is that Prius?
	I don't know, there's a T on the end of it.
	Like, if you look at this from 30,000 feet, do you think that what's happened is, oh my god, there's been an insurrection, we have to get the leader of the insurrection and shut him down?
	Or is it more like, how do we delegitimize, destabilize, and remove Donald Trump as a candidate?
	Right, well there's this 14th amendment thing that says that no insurrectionist should be able to take office.
	It seems, doesn't it, Like, like sophistry is the word that we use, a kind of sophisticated, a sophisticated manipulative argument where the objective is decided and then how do you get to the objective.
	I know a little bit about this because if you are a dissenting voice, what they generally determine, whether it's Elon Musk or Donald Trump or even me, and I'm certainly not including myself in the same stratosphere as those guys, but if they decide, aha, this is an anti-establishment voice, we've got to find a way to remove this voice, Um, okay, well, Elon Musk, I suppose what we could say is that X is not a legitimate platform.
	What we could say, like, because if you wait to our deep dive article a little later in this show, you'll love it.
	The way that the Biden administration is trying to shut Elon Musk down, they are throwing the kitchen sink at that guy.
	Remember when he arrived at Twitter, as it then was, X now, with a kitchen sink, they're throwing everything at him.
	Like, they're saying, oh, like, you know, the aerospace division, tax division, labor divisions, everything.
	They're really, really Utilising bureaucracy to shut down dissent and opposition.
	And this is what I think dictatorship looks like these days.
	Although I might be dressed like an old school dictator.
	And someone in the chat says that this lightning bolt is a sign of Satanism.
	And let me tell you, I do not worship Satan.
	I'll tell you that.
	The type of dictatorship we have to fear now is a kind of technological bureaucratic dictatorship that will use administration and bureaucracy to shut down dissent or dissenting voices.
	The Elon Musk story we've got later really demonstrates that.
	You've got the EU with arch-bureaucrats like Thierry Breton saying we're gonna shut down fine and rack it out of town, Elon Musk and his free speech platform and their crew.
	and the Biden administration. Again, all these people that are advocating for liberty and
	protecting the vulnerable, shutting down dissent wherever possible, using rational language.
	Okay, so I think we're pretty convinced that our man Vivek is in a pre-Frost RV. Let's have a look
	at the end of his statement while I placate my dog. I'm making a pledge today that I will withdraw,
	I pledge to withdraw from the Colorado GOP primary ballot unless and until Trump's name is restored.
	for the rest of the year.
	And I demand that Ron DeSantis and Chris Christie and Nikki Haley do the same thing or else these Republicans are simply complicit in this unconstitutional attack on the way we conduct our constitutional republic.
	You know what, that's a good move, innit?
	I suppose with this, with Vivek, Either Trump runs and Vivek is seen as a natural ally, lay down you, lay down, lay down, or Trump doesn't run and Vivek is seen as the natural, what do I want to say, the inheritor of Trump's mantle.
	What do you think Ron Hassanis and Nikki Haley are going to do?
	Do you think they will withdraw or do you think they'll stay on the ballot?
	for withdraw, S for stay on the ballot. Just let me know in the chat, I'm really interested
	in what you guys think. And also, this is our perspective though. The problem is, is
	that systemic centralised democracy is in so much trouble because it is occupied by
	careerist politicians that are out of touch with ordinary people, that don't speak the
	language that ordinary people speak, that don't understand the interests and concerns
	or even the spirit of democracy.
	Of ordinary people.
	Because of this, we're all open to different types of language, different types of alternatives.
	Have a listen to Kamala Harris now saying that 2024 is going to be the most election of our lifetime.
	There's no adjective there.
	None.
	Just the most election.
	The electioneist election?
	The insurrectioneist election?
	What does Kamala Harris mean today?
	You know, every election cycle we talk about this is the most election of our lifetime.
	Lawrence, this one is.
	This one is.
	We are literally talking about.
	People who are attempting to divide our country in the most crude, frankly, and profound way.
	We are talking about... A lot of people are saying that both Nikki Haley will stay on the ballot.
	And this is the point I'm making.
	Crosses party lines.
	There are people in the, obviously, in the Democrat establishment party that will say that this is a legitimate means to remove Trump from the ballot.
	There'll be people within the Republican party that say it's a legitimate method to remove Trump from the ballot.
	And then there will be people peripherally saying this is an exploitation and manipulation of the Constitution.
	I.e.
	left and right don't exist anymore.
	Republican and Democrat doesn't exist anymore.
	Of course those words and those categories are still present in the discourse.
	There are still legacy media outlets and even independent media outlets that are making appeals to a base that are typically affiliated with one of those movements.
	But in actuality, what is trying to emerge, do you agree with me here, is something that is decentralized.
	A world where you can accommodate other cultures, other belief systems, other systems of government, as long as you are left alone.
	Your personal sovereignty, your community's sovereignty, your ability to control your own food, your ability to communicate, your ability to run your own life.
	What do we care how other people live as long as we're allowed to live how I want to live?
	It's basically what I'm saying to you.
	Let's see where Kamala's going now.
	How about those?
	Who are intent and purposeful to attack fundamental freedoms.
	Be it the freedom to make a decision about your own body.
	The freedom to love who you love openly and with pride.
	The freedom to be free from fear of violence and hate.
	The freedom to just be.
	The freedom to just be.
	Okay, it doesn't make a great deal of sense.
	Extraordinary.
	What I would say is, is that the Democrat Party created these conditions where politicians had to be orators and entertainers and media savvy and articulate on camera and able to communicate on demand and then populated their leadership with extraordinary figures like Kamala Harris and Joe Biden that are appalling communicators.
	Check out this lot of language.
	I've been fortunate and blessed to, during the course of being vice president, have many situations where... This doesn't even make sense.
	And by the way, when they're talking about freedom, how about the freedom to vote for Donald Trump?
	How about the freedom to have debates within the Democrat party?
	How about the freedom to have, in Florida, a primary, a presidential primary?
	All of these anti-democratic measures are just sort of lost in this extraordinary language.
	And we're talking of extraordinary language.
	Czech, It becomes clear to me that there are, you know, people of every age and gender, by the way, who see something about being the first that lets them know they don't need to be limited by other people's limited understanding of who can do what.
	I don't know what that means anymore.
	Back to Vivek and where was Vivek?
	Yes, Provost Motor Coach.
	There's an image of one there.
	Can we put that in the stream?
	There's a sort of an image so people can see.
	Hans Fischer asking me, is that a revolutionary outfit you're wearing?
	I've got to tell you, whatever I'm wearing is a revolutionary outfit these days.
	And I'm in the Lord's army, says Eternally Free.
	Now, what I am concerned about, and I want to know if you're concerned about this, is does this sense of division and escalate in tension mean that there is a genuine risk of Armed confrontation?
	Is that realistic?
	Do you think that's a possibility in your nation?
	Is America becoming increasingly divided?
	Can there ever be free and fair elections again?
	Is it possible that after the next election, the side that is victorious will say, well done, well done winning that election.
	Now let's govern America for everyone.
	Or have they exacerbated and amplified the polemicism to such a degree that there's almost no way back?
	Certainly there's that film out now that posits that, you know, a civil war in America could be a real thing.
	Let's have a little look at the trailer for that thing.
	It's made by the people that made 28 Days Later.
	Let's check it out.
	Nineteen states have seceded.
	The United States Army ramps up activity.
	The White House issued warnings to the Western forces as well as the Florida Alliance.
	The three-term president assures the uprising will be dealt with swiftly.
	Let me know if you want to try anything.
	I'm just aware there's like a pretty huge civil war going on all across America.
	We just try to stay.
	The cyber war is taking place even now. I'm seeing on both the locals chat and in the rumble chat
	that there's a lot of buffering happening. Stay with us guys. This movie is apparently out in 2024
	and is a sort of like a supposed dystopic prediction of what may happen.
	With what we see on the news seems like it's for the best.
	Citizens of America, the so-called western forces of Texas and California
	have suffered a very great defeat at the hands of the United States military.
	Mr. President, do you regret the use of airstrikes against American citizens?
	They're moving to D.C.
	today.
	We need to go down there.
	They shoot journalists on sight in the capital.
	Every instinct in me says this is death.
	Every time I survived the war zone, I thought I was sending a warning.
	Depressing.
	Pretty.
	Depressing.
	Pretty.
	Brutal.
	Gosh.
	I hope that's, uh, I hope that's not the direction that we're heading in.
	This is, yeah, there's some people in the chat asking whether or not, like, you know, what my religious perspective is.
	What I believe in, let me tell you this, is sovereignty.
	Individual freedom.
	Your individual freedom to worship how you want to worship.
	Your individual freedom to run your community how you want to run your community without intervention from the state and without corporatist globalism, providing parameters on every side, providing restrictions from every direction.
	I believe in all of our collective freedom to become who we are.
	Without the assent of corporate globalists providing regulation in all manner of insidious backdoor ways, whether it's the WHO with their new treaty, the WEF, constantly campaigning for measures that ultimately lead to less individual freedom.
	Yeah, that's what I believe in.
	And I feel like now more than ever, when what we're facing is a kind of a deep polarisation that we have to be willing to afford other people the ability to live their lives how they want to, In exchange for the same from them.
	This is what I believe in.
	Decentralized communities.
	That's what I'm exploring.
	That's what I'm interested in.
	And I don't see how we'll get there without individual personal awakening.
	People that made that movie did a kind of Civil War map.
	Shall we have a look at that map?
	Look at that.
	That's the way they envisaged the world dividing up.
	I saw a brilliant book on the history of the United States of America prior to your revolution there.
	And it showed how sort of like the regions were regarded differently then, like that Appalachia was a region and there were sort of different sets of political alliances.
	Can't imagine a world where the Republic of California and the Second Republic of Texas team up.
	There seem to be some ideological fissures there that might be difficult to overcome.
	Now we've got a brilliant I mean, we've got a conversation now.
	Oxford University, one of the key academic establishments in our nation, perhaps in the world, they are platforming Albert Baller as he talks about his new moonshot.
	Albert Baller, of course, the CEO of Pfizer, who you'll remember in the last three years
	has not faced a single difficult question. You've seen that guy all over legacy media
	being gushed all over. Oh, is it 98% effective? And as more and more information was revealed,
	Still, no complex questions came to the forefront.
	Albert Baller, you can put the timer on actually guys, Albert Baller has been at Oxford University talking about his new moonshot.
	Now it's extraordinary what he's talking about.
	And what's also extraordinary is that at Oxford University, one of their universities had statues of Rhodes, who was a colonial figure in the UK.
	They took down those statues because they didn't want to be affiliated with a colonialist like Cecil Rhodes.
	But when it comes to Pfizer money, they'll take it.
	Join us over on Rumble.
	If you're watching us on YouTube, click the link in the description to see this, as well as the Epstein list.
	Join us!
	Okay guys, let's have a little look at this conversation between Albert Baller and someone at Oxford University.
	You won't believe what they're talking about here as the new moonshot.
	Lastly, what is Pfizer's next moonshot and how do you expect to get there?
	First of all, you never know because you may think that you will be successful in one direction and you can fail there and be successful in another. But where we put
	all our efforts, because again, based on the discussion of effort strategy, we think we
	have the capabilities to make a difference and there is a huge need from the world to see a difference,
	is cancer. It's all about oncology.
	Do you know where we're going to make a lot of money?
	Cancer!
	Oh man, couldn't you just tell from the tombra tone of this conversation that when they're talking about cancer and oncology and who among us hasn't been affected by that disease at some point in our lives, whether personally or someone that we love, To hear it spoken of in purely economic terms like that shows you, doesn't it, that that's why there is a requirement for fundamental change.
	That's why I consider it to be in part spiritual change.
	That's why I consider it important for us to scrutinise and examine the already existing technocratic, technological dictatorship that uses bureaucracy and administration to ensure centralised power and a total lack of freedom.
	Because how can it be normal To talk about cancer, a disease that's likely caused by the stressful, near-zoological conditions that we live within.
	And when I say zoological, I don't mean... I mean that we live in a kind of zoo.
	How can that be normal?
	How can it be normal?
	Particularly if you think of, you know, what was the impact of the pandemic on cancer patients?
	You know, people couldn't get their radiotherapy, people couldn't attend regular appointments.
	Extraordinary.
	Proportionally we are investing capital over there and disproportionately we are organising the whole organisation to make sure that this area is well, well equipped to be successful.
	Cancer.
	Less than humans.
	Cancer!
	We're all gonna be rich!
	Sign me up!
	Extraordinary, really.
	Now, it's odd for me to see Oxford University, academia, affiliated so closely with Pfizer, and of course, the cultural establishment is aligned with Pfizer, whether it's media... No, go back, go back.
	Go back to where you were on the teleprompter, please, thanks.
	To see the media establishment openly funded by Pfizer.
	Astonishing.
	Absolutely astonishing to see how various institutions are willing to work together in order to create narratives and a public sphere that's impenetrable and impervious to dissent.
	Now, we talked to you yesterday about the 170 names on Epstein's list.
	We're going to get Whitney Webb on this show as soon as we can because there's no one else who's done more work, as far as I can recall or understand, to help us frame the significance of the Epstein story.
	The legacy media now are reporting on the Epstein names.
	Is it still or is it a video?
	Let's have a look at that.
	And you guys in the chat can do some guesses.
	Who are we going to see?
	Who are we going to see on the Epstein names?
	And how are the legacy media framing this story?
	Well, in just over 10 days, 10 days, the names of dozens of people associated with disgraced financial tycoon Jeffrey Epstein will be released.
	A judge ruling on that on Tuesday that many of these names are already public for others named in court documents.
	The judge says they're not salacious and should not be kept sealed.
	Our Dre Clark is live in New York City this morning with more on this ruling.
	Dre.
	Yeah, good morning.
	We're here outside the federal courthouse here in Lower Manhattan, and this is where Judge Loretta Preska has ordered that January 1st release date of more than 170 names associated with a civil lawsuit that was settled some time ago here, but many of those names that will be released.
	A lot of people saying it's gonna be redacted, Ravenite in particular.
	A lot of you, yeah, are going with the BCs and the BGs, right?
	What we're interested in, I suppose, is powerful people, right?
	That's who we're interested in.
	Like, people with influence and power, because there's, presumably, there's people on that list that had enough power to, I mean, I don't know, unless Jeffrey Epstein put that necktie on himself, Some pretty powerful people were involved in this.
	We'll pick up on this.
	Whitney Webb, by the way, she's coming on the show on January the 19th.
	So get your questions ready for that.
	We've got some brilliant, brilliant shows coming out over the festival season to ensure that you remain informed and entertained as best as we can manage in constant symbiosis and mutual awakening with you.
	We'll come back to this Epstein story after we tell you a little more about how Things are shaping up now.
	Remember, this is one of the narratives that we want to explore with you.
	We don't believe it's left and right anymore.
	We don't believe that the global cultures need to be at war with one another.
	Even the culture war itself, I believe, is part of the problem, part of the way that people are kept divided.
	Let me demonstrate to you what I mean by that.
	The EU, they're the governing body of Europe, they are taking legal action against X, Right?
	And it's gangster, the way they're talking.
	We will shut you down.
	I know it's French.
	We will shut you down.
	This guy that looks like a grandma or Colonel Sanders talking like Alphonse Capone.
	Remember him?
	The nice guy, scar on his face.
	Talking like that.
	And the Biden administration is using every piece of bureaucratic power it can to shut down Elon Musk.
	Why is this?
	Why has Elon Musk suddenly become persona non grata?
	What has Elon Musk done that has made him fall from favour?
	A billionaire, an innovator that used to be highly valued because of the power of Starlink, because of the electric vehicles.
	Now it seems like the Biden administration and the EU, indeed all of the globalists, are turning on Elon Musk.
	What's it about?
	Is it about freedom of speech?
	Is it about dissent?
	Is it about the possibility of a financially resourceful and powerful individual opposing globalist narratives?
	Let's have a look at the forces that are against Elon Musk right now, and right after we'll go back to the Epstein story, plus we've got some other stuff.
	We'll have a look at Vivek doing some push-ups.
	We'll have a look at some... We've got a whole host of interesting anti-globalist information for you.
	But for now, let's have a look at the establishment versus Elon Musk.
	Here's the news... No.
	Here's the effing news.
	Here's the fucking news!
	Wait a minute.
	The EU is attacking Elon Musk and Joe Biden is attacking Elon Musk and even inviting journalists to start attacking Elon Musk.
	So Elon Musk must be really bad, right?
	Or could there be something else going on?
	In the public space now, you have confident dissenting voices, and perhaps the most powerful one, you could say Tucker, you could say Joe Rogan, you could say Elon Musk, but certainly Elon Musk is taking his turn in the barrel.
	The EU are coming for X because of, well I'll get into teary breath on, the gangster assassin of the EU's verdict, oh transparency, illicit material, you probably stuff you could find on Any number of social media sites and yet Musk is being targeted and Biden wants to withdraw subsidies.
	So is Elon Musk finally facing an attack from the establishment?
	And when you first hear that, let me know about this in the chat in the comments.
	Do you think that Elon Musk guy, he must be against my individual freedom?
	Or do you think, ah, the establishment are clearly trying to destroy this person?
	Let me know in the chat.
	Let me know in the comments.
	Let's get into this story.
	Elon Musk is taking his turn in the barrel.
	Whose side are you going to be on?
	The EU is investigating Elon Musk's ex, formerly known as Twitter, while the bloc's regulator is probing the social media platform for its suspected failure to counter illicit content and disinformation, a lack of advertising transparency, and what it calls a suspected deceptive design of the user interface.
	We suspect it's deceptive.
	Now, Thierry Breton is an EU bureaucrat.
	He may look like a cross between your grandma and Colonel Sanders, but let me tell you, he talks like a gangster.
	We are coming for Elon Musk.
	We will shut him down.
	We will destroy him.
	Simple as that.
	They will respect the law or they will not be able to continue to operate in Europe.
	The EU's not meant to be like the mafia.
	They're meant to be just like, we're here to help facilitate stuff and to organize things.
	That's not how they talk.
	Have you noticed that the government talk about you like you're an idiot or a child?
	For example, they want to control the information you get access to because you're too stupid to be able to determine truth from fiction yourself.
	And notice that they use increasingly aggressive language.
	We'll get into this a little further.
	It's the first move in the EU's landmark Digital Services Act.
	So what the EU is going to do is they're going to do an investigation.
	This man may look like a Botox Captain Kirk, but he's giving us the truth.
	I mean, they're going to find something.
	You bet they'll find something.
	Sometimes when people turn against you, they will keep investigating and investigating until they find something, even if it means almost traveling through all of time.
	That seems pretty, pretty certain.
	And then the question is, what happens after that?
	The objective is to shut down dissenting voices.
	You can't just come out and go, hey, we don't like that dissenting voice.
	Well, what would legitimize shutting down that dissenting voice?
	Well, if they did something that we all agree was bad.
	Yeah, but they haven't done that.
	Let's start looking.
	We'll find something.
	They can fine the company, um, and their, the losses, they can fine it for up to 6% of its annual revenue.
	Uh, given that X seems to be in pretty bad shape right now, that would be sizable, so...
	Now, we've seen Elon Musk say, -"F the advertisers." -$&% yourself.
	He's come out swinging, right?
	This guy is taking a position and taking a stance.
	This is a time where you have to look at who your friends are and who your allies are.
	You can't go, oh, this person seems like they might be too conservative or a bit too right-wing or too social justice.
	It doesn't matter anymore.
	There's this powerful establishment that's trying to centralise all control, create a
	censorship industrial complex so that information can be controlled, so dissenter movements
	and opposition movements can't get any grassroots growth and can't organise because we've seen
	it happen and get shut down in the last ten years from the Arab Spring, Podemos, Syriza,
	even something like Napster shows you that the online space creates dynamics that were
	impossible a little while ago.
	Now what we're seeing is a machine gathering momentum to shut that stuff down.
	I've even told you about how groups like Google are starting to purchase actual real estate
	and actual space.
	You're seeing how a tech billionaire like Bill Gates is involved in medicines and agriculture.
	Do you see what this is?
	This is the centralisation of resources and the centralisation of resources about the
	control of power.
	Now Elon Musk is of course a billionaire himself but he seems to be on a different track, doesn't
	he?
	I mean he's saying some pretty unusual stuff, he's housing free speech voices, he's willing
	to put himself on the line sticking up for people, he came out in defence of me when
	I was under attack, but that's not what's relevant here.
	What's relevant here is that the establishment are trying to destroy him.
	When the establishment try to destroy someone, you have a decision to make.
	Are the establishment trying to destroy that person because they're trying to protect me, or are they trying to protect themselves from me?
	This is the Thierry Breton tweet from the EU.
	Remember, this guy's just a bureaucrat.
	Today we open formal infringement proceedings against at X. Ooh, you're hard.
	Ooh, you're hard.
	Showing off.
	Suspected breach of obligations to counter illegal content.
	And they've had to use that little emoji, by the way, to do that.
	Hashtag disinformation.
	What are you, 12?
	Suspected breach of hashtag transparency obligations.
	Suspected deceptive design of user interface.
	If you, like, agree with Thierry Breton, what you're essentially saying is, I don't want to decide what's true for myself, I'd like you to decide what's true for me.
	And I can see why people might choose that.
	Say if you are of a liberal, or sort of leftist is the word people used to use, persuasion, you might think, oh, at the moment, this machine seems to be in support of my cultural views.
	But guess what?
	It won't be one day, it won't be one day, and then it'll be too late.
	When they came for the communists, when they came for the Jews, when they came for... We remember that, right?
	Do we remember that?
	The best thing is use X and Twitter because it's obviously a threat to them.
	They wouldn't want to shut it down or go after Elon if it wasn't working.
	The greatest hope we have in 2024 is we have a sliver of the public square back that we didn't have in 20.
	And that's why they're going to try to either indict Elon or they're just going to try to crash Twitter through a DDoS attack or some sort of foreign threat.
	They're going to try to take Twitter down by the summer.
	You might see that and think, well that's a right-wing group, it's turning point, it's America first, it's sort of libertarian, it's conservative right-wing, you might have all sorts of impressions about that space.
	But this is what values and principles are.
	Values and principles are you You believe in an idea and then you don't care really what your personal position is.
	You just care about the principle.
	Hold on, do I believe in free speech?
	Yes, I do.
	Yes, I do.
	Oh, but that means people might use free speech against me.
	It's okay.
	I'll make that deal.
	I'll make that deal because free speech has to be enshrined.
	Now, you're going to find yourself in new situations with new alliances and new perspectives, or you're going to find yourself Utterly controlled by globalist bureaucracies.
	That's my prediction, but we're going to need new allies.
	Our great ally is Glenn Greenwald, co-host over on Rumble.
	Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who broke the Snowden story.
	Perhaps one of the most important stories in the last 20, 30 years.
	Probably one of the great changes in journalism.
	Probably the moment when the left went, Uh oh!
	Fuck those guys!
	He's been censored on TikTok himself.
	So, like us, he got skin in the game.
	So talking about Breton, he says, this is how his censorship industrial regime works.
	They seize on every alleged crisis to justify new censorship.
	Russiagate, COVID, Jan 6, war in Ukraine.
	We all know that, don't we? We know that now.
	Ever since October the 7th, they've been accusing X of allowing disinformation about Israel to attract right-wing
	support.
	This is how Europe is attacking X and Musk and trying to shut down a free speech space.
	But how is the United States of America handling it?
	How the Biden administration attacking Musk?
	Because then we'll see this is a global conspiracy.
	Let's get into this story and look at how Biden is attacking Musk.
	Mr. President, do you think Elon Musk is a threat to U.S.
	national security?
	And should the U.S., and with the tools you have, investigate his joint acquisition of Twitter with foreign governments, which include the Saudis?
	I mean, how can you even ask Joe Biden a question about the Saudis and then not look at his obvious and evident hypocrisy around exactly that subject?
	The extent to which Saudi Arabia In that question is enough to show you what misinformation really looks like, to show you what corruption really looks like, to show you that they're not actually interested in.
	You know what?
	Biden explicitly said on the campaign trial that Trump doing the deals that he did with
	Saudi Arabia was disgusting, he then did bigger deals with Saudi Arabia.
	In that question is enough to show you what misinformation really looks like, to show
	you what corruption really looks like, to show you that they're not actually interested
	in.
	Do you know what, Elon Musk could tell people stuff that would confuse them.
	We better shut that down.
	No.
	might tell people stuff that will awaken them.
	But do you see now, that's the problem.
	If someone is being attacked by the establishment, it's not because they're bad, it's because they're a threat.
	I think that Elon Musk's...
	Oh, come on, Harry, I'll get on with it for fuck's sake.
	Cooperation and or...
	technical relationships.
	I slightly bore you today. I'll be...
	I actually can't remember what we're talking about.
	I'm so bored.
	Yeah, that's how he won the election, isn't it?
	This guy's so boring that we'll be able to galvanise against Trump and people won't even know what Joe Biden is.
	He's just sort of like a fog or a ghost or a fart in a jar.
	No one really knows.
	You can't fight that.
	I'm not suggesting that.
	I'm suggesting that it's worth being looked at.
	Also, by the way, you know that he utilized the CIA to create misinformation around the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to that story breaking.
	So the legacy media were primed to report on that like it was misinformation and disinformation, which it bloody well wasn't, we all now know.
	But that's all I'll say.
	How?
	Someone just say how.
	There's a lot of ways.
	Remember the last time you saw Biden in that weird, boring, menacing mood was when he was talking about the Nord Stream Pipeline.
	How would you get rid of the Nord Stream Pipeline?
	We've got ways.
	All of a sudden, Nord Stream Pipeline mysteriously blew up.
	How will you do that?
	I promise you we'll be able to do it.
	So here are some of the ways that the Biden administration and the United States of America can shut down and control Elon Musk, which you've got to assume is part of the plan now.
	Even as President Biden accuses Donald Trump of threatening our democracy, he's employing agencies of the federal government to harass and punish Elon Musk, whom he seems to consider a political opponent.
	Why?
	Because the mercurial entrepreneur has the temerity to criticise Biden and champion free speech.
	In addition, Musk released the infamous Twitter files which showed the White House conspiring to censor communications on platforms like Facebook, And Twitter.
	Now, thank God Julian Assange has a hearing coming up, and I pray that that will be a success.
	But Julian Assange is in prison awaiting extradition under the Espionage Act.
	The Espionage Act is like, you know, Barack Obama deployed it more than anybody else, but it essentially means you're a threat to American security.
	But are you really a threat to American security if you reveal the malpractice in foreign affairs?
	Or are you a threat to the establishment?
	And is Elon Musk really a threat to, like, people and, like, you and me and everyone?
	Or is he a threat to the interests of the powerful?
	Let me know in the chat.
	Let me know what you think they care about, you or themselves.
	And then have a look at where they spend their money and what they're invested in in Congress
	and who they accept money from.
	And then get back to me and say, they care about themselves.
	It's obvious.
	A judge last summer described the administration's efforts to control information about COVID-19 vaccines
	on social media as an almost dystopian scenario.
	He further said, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized
	by widespread doubt and uncertainty, The United States government seems to have assumed a role
	similar to an Orwellian Ministry The White House was not pleased and is getting even by attacking Musk's business empire.
	So does that seem to you to be the way things go down?
	Say if you're part of the donor class, where Joe Biden when campaigning went, nothing will change fundamentally.
	He said that to all of the financial district donors.
	You know, if you donate money, you're cool.
	If you start affecting their ability to control public opinion, you're not cool.
	Do you think they would engage in a vendetta?
	Let me know in the chat.
	Biden is throwing everything it can find at Musk, hoping that the endless barrage of regulatory, reputational, and legal attacks will cause the world's wealthiest man to kneel before its authority.
	The viciousness of the investigations being conducted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the U.S.
	Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and the U.S.
	Fish and Wildlife Service against a successful American business leader is unprecedented.
	The fish and wildlife, what's he done to them?
	All the others you can sort of track, oh yeah that's because he does them rockets, oh yeah
	he's got computers and all that, what's he doing to fish?
	Also you bastard, the stuff you've done to those trout and salmon is unforgivable.
	Now you see when Elon Musk is like an entrepreneur and he's just making stuff and I'm working
	on a rocket ship, I'm doing electric cars, there's a moment where he's like, oh he's
	a real life Iron Man.
	We like him.
	Similarly, when I was like, oh, I'm a celebrity.
	Hi.
	Oh, this guy's fun.
	But if you start mouthing off, and obviously, Elon Musk's capacity to impact the world is beyond anybody else's, I would say, you will be attacked, not only by the National Labor Relations Board, but when the old Fish and Wildlife Services have to get involved to think, is this a conspiracy?
	That salmon was given so much misinformation that it tried to swim upstream.
	Well, apparently they do do that.
	That's actually misinformation!
	They've got to U2!
	Send the fisheries after him!
	It says much more about the vindictive nature of Joe Biden than it does about the founder of Tesla, SpaceX, and the Boring Company.
	Especially considering that Musk has been an asset to Biden's presidency.
	He made electric vehicles the cornerstone of Biden's green dream, cornerstone of Biden's green dream in reality, and provided Ukraine, the White House's wartime dependent, with internet capabilities critical to staving off a Russian victory.
	And SpaceX is almost single-handedly keeping the US in the space race.
	Notwithstanding Musk's contributions, the White House appears determined to drag down Tesla and SpaceX.
	Just recently, Tesla announced it would recall 2 million cars because the government has alleged that its autopilot system is unsafe.
	Your autopilot system's not safe.
	You'd better call back all those cars.
	The claim stems from investigations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration into accidents purportedly caused by Tesla's automatic features and covers nearly all cars sold in the U.S.
	Tesla maintains its devices make cars safer, an assertion that even Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg allowed could be true.
	So even the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have turned on him now.
	The whole bureaucracy can turn against you.
	Do you see how government is maybe like a facilitator of ease, but if they unperson you, if you step out against them, all of it just sort of mutates into a hideous monster of destruction.
	Even stuff that's just meant to regulate fish.
	Hey, put a mask on you little bastard!
	It appears many of the collisions that the NHTSA has investigated involve drivers not paying attention.
	One was searching the floor of his car for his phone.
	That's Elon's fault!
	Or not heeding the system's warnings.
	In the first such lawsuit to be brought, a California jury two months ago determined that the autopilot feature was not to blame for a car crash that killed a Tesla driver who had alcohol in his system.
	That guy's drunk!
	Elon's fault!
	The win for the automaker was a relief, but other lawsuits will doubtless follow, armed with the government's accusations of flaws in the Tesla system.
	A term I've heard recently is lawfare, where you get tied up in lawsuits that cost a load of money, take up loads of time, dishonor you, and disgrace you, and just an exhausting method that they now use to un-person, discredit, and destroy people.
	And Elon Musk is the biggest threat on the contemporary landscape, I suppose.
	The software fix to Tesla's autopilot system can reportedly be accomplished remotely and will not be expensive, but that's not the point.
	The win for the Biden White House shows up in the New York Times' write-up, which begins, Tesla's reputation for making technologically advanced cars suffered a blow on Tuesday when the company, under pressure from regulators, recalled more than two million vehicles.
	What?
	The legacy media towing the line, spouting government propaganda to bring someone down?
	I won't hear of that.
	As new competitors launch rival models and seek to dethrone America's number one electric vehicle producer, doubts about Tesla's engineering could prove expensive.
	The Times glides effortlessly from referencing officials' claims that Tesla has not done enough to ensure that drivers remain attentive to recent public statements by Elon Musk have been widely interpreted as anti-Semitic.
	Interpreted.
	That's an interesting word, isn't it?
	Because you can interpret things sort of however you want to.
	Elsewhere, the government has just announced that Starlink, Musk's satellite internet provider, is ineligible for $885 million in subsidies designated to help expand rural broadband coverage to 643,000 homes and businesses in 35 states.
	The Federal Communications Commission, another one, All these bureaucracies, they can just all be weaponised in an instant.
	He explained his decision by saying that Starlink failed to demonstrate that it could deliver the promised service.
	Wow.
	It becomes subjective.
	You think of all these things, all these badges, FBI, CIA, the fisheries one, as somehow legitimate because there's a badge.
	But in a way, all of the legislation around them are like magical spells that have just gone piff-paff-poof.
	This is a reality now.
	And of course there is great legitimacy in institutions like Harvard and Stanford and I'm sure the heritage of the government, the constitution itself, all originated in ingenuity passed through the consciousness of individual humans with a dream, with a vision.
	But it's certainly quite malleable, isn't it?
	If you turn against the government or if you speak out against their interests, suddenly the whole thing can be instantly metastasized into a weapon of destruction.
	Onyx, darling, claims it is available on all seven continents, in over 60 countries and many more markets, connecting 2 million plus active customers and count in with high-speed internet.
	The firm provides high-speed service in Guam and the northern Mariana Islands, in Benin, in Costa Rica, in the Maldives and, crucially, in Ukraine.
	Do we seriously believe the company would not be able to provide service to underserved rural communities in the US?
	Of course we don't believe that.
	What we're witnessing is gangster government.
	You don't do what we tell you, we will crush you.
	This is, I suppose, as I've said to you before, the way that the Godfather movies operate.
	You see that on one level it's criminality and then it sort of melts into government and you're not really sure where the line is.
	You give people a badge, you give people a suit, you give people a rubber stamp and the authority of an office and they're suddenly allowed to enact violence.
	They're allowed to shut down your business interests.
	Just look at what happened to ordinary people in the pandemic period.
	We were just locked down.
	If that That was done by an illegitimate government.
	That would just be pure terrorism.
	Everyone shut down.
	You're not going to funerals.
	You're not going to football.
	Take this medicine.
	What is that but tyranny?
	What we have to learn, I believe, is to reframe the way we regard reality and just sort of step back to 30,000 feet for a moment and go, what relationship do you want to have with the government?
	Oh, I don't know, really.
	Not much of one.
	I don't like the sound of that idea.
	Let me know in the chat what happens when you start talking about those things online.
	The FCC's decision reeks of political favoritism and is consistent with other attacks on Elon Musk by the Biden White House.
	At a press conference last year, asked if he thought Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter, backed by some foreign governments, was a threat to national security, President Biden told reporters that Elon Musk is worth being looked at.
	His government, quite obviously, took him at his word.
	So who's the threat to democracy and what is the function of democracy?
	What is the function of government?
	Of course, purportedly, what government does is serves the people and allows the people to express themselves democratically.
	But in experience, what the government does is services the interests of very powerful elites using deep state mechanisms that are inaccessible and hidden from the conduits available to us through democracy.
	And they'll use Here's Barack Obama, who to look at and to listen to you would just think is the very vision, the epitome of a modern statesman.
	Listen to what he's saying, he makes some points that sound good, until you recognize he's only representing one side of the argument.
	He doesn't talk about government corruption.
	He doesn't talk about legacy media bias.
	He doesn't talk about the censoring of true information.
	Of course he doesn't, because he's advocating for more centralised power.
	But you need to be tuned in to spot that.
	What they're trying to do is bring down Elon Musk, any other dissent in voice, even much smaller ones like me, by utilising the power of the state and the media, and if necessary, the Fish Commission.
	Understand, it's not necessary for people to believe this information.
	In order to weaken democratic institutions.
	That's an interesting point because you know you sometimes say, well why can't we decipher ourselves if we believe something's true?
	What Obama's planting there is the idea, even if you don't believe it, somehow it's having an effect because it muddies the waters.
	Like it muddies the waters and stops you trusting anyone.
	But is there another reason that you don't trust the government?
	Is there another reason that you don't trust legacy media?
	Is there another reason why you don't trust big corporations and the state?
	Yeah, in every single one of those examples, the media lie to us, the state exploit us, none of them are very honest, they're all profiteering, they're all connected to one another.
	Address that.
	Address that.
	You just have to flood a country's public square.
	Any information that the state don't agree with is shit, according to Barack Obama.
	That's what he's saying.
	It's shit.
	It's not even treated shit.
	Now, I would say that amidst what he is dismissing as fecal matter have been some extremely legitimate points of inquiry.
	He stands there at a pulpit at Stanford.
	It's indeed a Stanford professor, Jay Bhattacharya, who proposed the Barrington Declaration that raised serious questions at the height of the pandemic about how it should be handled.
	Those people were discredited and attacked by the very forces that Barack Obama is now advocating for.
	Jay Bhattacharya is in that pool of raw sewage, drowning and trying to tell you the truth.
	You just have to raise enough questions, spread enough dirt, plant enough conspiracy theorizing, That citizens no longer know what to believe.
	Once they lose trust in their leaders, in mainstream media, in political institutions, in each other, in the possibility of truth, The game's won.
	Wouldn't this be a wonderful opportunity for Barack Obama to say, one of the other things that potentially creates mistrust in institutions is when there's a financial crash like there is in 2008, and you've been elected on a tidal wave of optimism and hope and unity, and when that crash happens, instead of protecting ordinary people and their homes, you bail out the banks, you create new legislation, quantity of eating, that maybe stops people trusting the government.
	When you drone more innocent civilians than George W. Bush, who preceded you in office, who was characterized as a warmonger, and you presented yourself as the new face of a united America, the new face of progressivism, that decreases trust in the administration.
	What they continually do is avoid any culpability for the creation of conditions, and then use those conditions to create moral authority regulation and legislation.
	That is why you can never trust them.
	I think it's true that there is stupid stuff on the internet.
	It's true that we've said things that we've later had to go, But what this is fundamentally about is your individual liberty and your freedom, your consciousness being a free space, my ability to communicate with you.
	And critically, do you think that when they attack and try to destroy someone, it's because they're trying to protect you and help you, or because they're trying to protect and help themselves?
	And all you have to do is have a little look at their bank balances, have a look at their trading history, look at where they get donations from, and that's it.
	That's where you don't need any rhetorical voice, or any advocate, or any demagogue, or populist, or online orator.
	You just need the facts.
	Who's paying for all this?
	Whose interests do you really represent?
	What money do you take from Big Pharma?
	How is Big Pharma regulated?
	Does anyone in Congress own stocks and shares in Big Pharma?
	What about Big Tech?
	What about Military Industrial Complex?
	There it is.
	We're out.
	So there you go.
	Elon Musk is being attacked.
	Is Elon Musk being attacked because Elon Musk is a threat to you?
	Or is Elon Musk being attacked because he's a threat to them?
	Do you trust them?
	Or would you rather make these decisions for yourself?
	I would rather be free and decide for myself what's true.
	But that's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think in the chat.
	See you in a second!
	Welcome back you glorious and awakened wonders you!
	Alibi4D says, Russell, can you talk about mental health a bit more?
	We've got to find some optimism.
	Yes, you're right.
	We must work together to create an atmosphere of love, inclusion and acceptance while continuing to talk about difficult subjects that appear sometimes to suggest there's no way back to freedom for any of us.
	I remain optimistic.
	I remain connected.
	I remain certain that between one another, connected to one another, we can create a better, more elevated, and more connected world.
	Let's have a look at some of your comments that I asked for.
	You delivered.
	Missy1719992000, they don't like where Elon has helped empower people.
	Leah chasing rabbits.
	Establishment attacks someone.
	I know I need to hear their message.
	Well done, son, said Elon.
	Don't give a shit.
	Krista1974.
	Elon ain't bowing to shit.
	Elon doesn't want to commit suicide.
	Worth mentioning right now.
	Janice Patrice Hart.
	Elon is upset in the apple cart with his free speech views.
	Liquor giant.
	Elon has somehow awakened to what Alex Jones was saying decades ago.
	Do you have acid reflux, Russell, says Hataya.
	Sometimes, yeah, sometimes.
	So, in a sense, I suppose that Elon Musk is a powerful global voice who you are unlikely to continually agree with, but if you agree with the principle of free speech, you have to ask do you think his position is legitimate and that he's using his platform In order to facilitate that, I feel like he is.
	Let me know what you guys, continue to let me know what you think.
	Should we watch the rest of this Epstein story?
	We talked about that yesterday and I think the legacy media are getting closer towards the names and I suppose really what we're really interested in is any illegal, nefarious activity And whether or not the interests of the powerful are being protected, because presumably the mysterious circumstances around Epstein's death is an indication that he had some pretty important information.
	Many of you, I suppose, might have heard that it's a kind of a method of control.
	Have you heard those kind of stories that when people are in the ascendancy and moving into positions of political power, they're given these access to Potentially incendiary opportunities that if it gets out, it makes them vulnerable.
	You guys have heard that.
	Simply press play and let's have a look at the rest of this legacy media reporting on the Epstein list.
	are Jeffrey Epstein's close friends, associates, and some of his victims. Now the judge is also
	allowing those individuals who would like to keep their names concealed or redacted to file an
	appeal to make their case before the release. All right, so they will let some get redacted, okay.
	Of those names in less than two weeks. Now many of those names that will come out certainly are known
	and notable, including former presidents, but they are all part of a now settled civil lawsuit
	against Ghislaine Maxwell brought by Virginia Giuffre. Now Giuffre accused Maxwell of helping
	Epstein abuse her by arranging travel plans along with setting up
	Meeting times and places around the world to facilitate her sexual abuse.
	Maxwell is now serving 20 years in a federal prison after she was convicted in 2021 for her role in a scheme to sexually exploit and abuse multiple teenage girls with Epstein over a 10-year period.
	Now, Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan federal jail Okay.
	In 2019, while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.
	The judge also noting in her order that some of the names that will be released have already
	been revealed because some of those individuals have spoken publicly about their relationship
	with Jeffrey Epstein.
	Meanwhile, at least 11 names will not be released, including eight people who have been identified
	as minor victims of sexual abuse.
	Last night on Banfield, criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Josh Schiffer talked about why some people are desperately fighting to have their names redacted.
	So there's a lot of reasons someone wouldn't want... This guy's pretty upbeat about it all.
	Shall we?
	Why don't we cheer ourselves up with a little look at Vivek Ramaswamy's physical fitness to have some decency and health and optimism on the show.
	You know, like, you know, RFK and I are going to do that pull-up competition.
	Tell you the truth, I'm glad that got postponed.
	RFK is coming on the show next year and I'm looking forward to that.
	Here's Vivek.
	He's moving to the upper echelons of personal fitness.
	Have a look at him doing these push-ups.
	He gets the 30.
	Have a look at the mid-body from the 20 onward point.
	But nevertheless, it's a real achievement, I would say.
	Let's go, brother.
	30.
	Let's go brother, 30.
	Four, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,
	19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30.
	The simple wholesome story of a man doing push-ups there.
	Just get away from Epstein Island and the constant, constant misery and malfeasance of it all.
	Now listen, we've got a fantastic week coming up.
	We've got Jonathan Pajot coming on for our Exma special, talking about the revelations of the pandemic period, how it showed how Power systems converge and generate control.
	We also talk about a kind of bereft and corrupted Hollywood, as well as analyzing the depth and mythology behind some extraordinary folktales.
	You'll love it.
	So for those of you that enjoy some of the more mythic, psychological, Jungian stuff, you're going to go on an interesting journey with me and Jonathan Pageau.
	If you want to be a member of our Awakened Wonder community, press the red button and you can join some of these conversations live and ask questions to our guests today.
	For example, I spoke to Vandana Shiva.
	We've still got Tucker Carlson in the camp.
	Can't release it till I get over there and go on Tucker's new show.
	But we do extraordinary interviews regularly and we discuss the advance of this movement together.
	Join us.
	You can get an annual subscription for someone as a gift for Christmas or maybe one of these delightful mugs.
	There's a link in the description telling you how to do that and I'd love to welcome some of our new members like Depunia, N8marine, Pepe1, Georgieboy and Being Difficult.
	Thanks for joining us.
	We have a fantastic show tomorrow.
	Join us, be there on time and I will try my level best to be there on time with you.
	Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same but for more of the different.
	Until then, if you can, stay free.

▲