All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 5, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
54:40
3884 Donna Brazile DNC Corruption Bombshells Shake Politics! | True News
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
So Donna Brazile is a longtime Democrat party operative.
She actually managed Al Gore's presidential campaign way back in the day, and she's coming out with a book called Hacks, which is illustrative on so many levels.
We'll get into some interesting details and some great illumination about what this means about the left and the Democrats in America.
So the whole book isn't out yet, but the first chapter is out.
And basically she reports that when she was invited to take over the DNC after Debbie Wasserman Schultz was kicked out, largely as a result of suspicion that the DNC was in the bag for Hillary and that the entire nominee process was rigged.
So Wasserman Schultz was out, Brazil was invited in, and she found the National Party in almost complete disarray.
In part, she says, because these three players, President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Wasserman Schultz, were, as she quotes, three titanic egos who had, quote, stripped the party to a shell for their own purposes.
Now... This is extraordinarily unusual.
The left never usually punches left.
And so why she's throwing Wasserman Schultz and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama under the bus at the moment, well, I have a few theories which we'll get into.
So she gets to be the head of the DNC. First few days on the job, she discovered that the DNC Was two million dollars in the hole.
Two million dollars in debt.
And that the payroll of the DNC was stacked with what she calls hangers-on and sycophants.
So Washerman Schultz kept two consulting firms, each on at a burn rate of $25,000 a month.
That was just for the retainer.
And one of Obama's pollsters was still pulling home $180,000 a year.
Of course, this is in the waning days of Obama's presidency, so...
What does that matter? What does that matter?
Well, why on earth would you poll like crazy?
It doesn't make any sense. Of course, the DNC is supposed to swell during an election cycle and then is supposed to diminish during the trough between election cycles.
I guess that's kind of like the Keynesian theory that the government spends during a recession but then somehow magically saves during a boom time.
And so she found that the burn rate was extraordinary.
The debt rate was enormous.
And these are of course the people who want to run your life, your finances, your children's finances, regulate everything you do, run your country.
They can't even run their own organization.
So, the big reveal in Brazil's book She talks about how Clinton basically took control of the DNC in August of 2015, before the primaries even began.
Well, how? How did she do it?
Well, there was a joint fundraising agreement between the party and Clinton's campaign.
Now, Brazil says that this deal gave Hillary Clinton effective control over the finances of the DNC. Over the strategy of the DNC and even over staffing decisions.
So if you're controlling the finances, the strategy, and the staffing of the DNC, I gotta think that gives you just a little bit of an edge over the other candidates, including Sanders.
Now, Brazil writes, she says, this was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party's integrity.
You don't say.
Now, this is interesting because, what was there, 17 nominees plus Trump for the Republicans and really very few for the Democrats.
So I do wonder if people like Elizabeth Warren didn't throw her hat into the ring.
I wonder if she knew about this backdoor deal to give Hillary control over the DNC, who, of course, is supposed to be an objective and neutral arbiter to reflect the wishes of the party's constituency over who will become the nominee.
I wonder if the paucity of competitors to Hillary had something to do with the knowledge floating around about how Hillary's campaign had got a lockjaw on the hearts, minds and balls.
Well, sorry, that's an insult to balls of the DNC.
A fascinating tidbit.
not reported on quite as much as perhaps it could be.
Now, Donna Brazile towed the party line regarding the murder of Setheridge.
Now, There are some theories floating around, which I don't actually believe are theories, but descriptions, which is that Seth Rich, who was a DNC staffer, took DNC information, put it on a USB drive, put it on a thumb drive, and handed it to WikiLeaks.
That's my particular opinion.
There's no absolute proof, but that's what I believe happened.
I think that WikiLeaks has...
Well, given some indications, although, to be fair to Julian Assange, he won't break confidence, which is entirely right, but it's not entirely outside the realm of some of their activities.
So, the fact that Seth Rich was murdered, they called it a robbery gone wrong, although his cell phone and wallet and money weren't taken.
So, Donna Brazeal...
Was towing the line, oh well, you know, it's just a murder gone wrong and nothing untoward.
However, in this book, she writes that, I mean, she's like this Dostoevsky character.
She's like haunted by the murder of Seth Rich, the DNC data staffer.
She was haunted by this unsolved murder and she says it caused her to be afraid for her own life.
Now this, of course, makes...
I mean, oh, God, how many clues do we need?
This makes absolutely no sense.
If it's a robbery gone wrong, just some sort of random event in the middle of the night, what would Donna Brazile have to fear?
What on earth would she have to fear, random robbery gone wrong?
So she says she's haunted by the murder of Seth Rich.
She fears that her own life is in danger.
She installs surveillance cameras in her home out of terror.
Of whoever murdered Seth Rich?
When she's in the office, she shuts the window blinds so that snipers can't see her?
I mean, either she's genuinely insane, or she has something to be scared of, something to be worried about.
She does touch on the issue that, you know, when WikiLeaks put out all of their emails, there was an email which has Brazil, who was of course a paid CNN contributor at the time, that she shared questions, potential topics for a town hall that CNN was hosting well ahead of time with the Clinton campaign.
Now, she says in the book, well, I don't really recall sending the email, and I can't find it in my own computer archives, but she did eventually publicly admit to sending it, and so there's that.
Now, another thing that came up that's interesting, and again, we will expect absolutely no circle back, heaven forbid, even apologies from the mainstream media, but Hillary's health issues show up in Donna Brazile's book.
There was great concern after she struggled with, I guess what they called pneumonia, and on the 9-11 New York City memorial gathering she passed out and was thrown like a sack of rotten potatoes into a van.
And Donna Brazile was haunted by this and was wracked with doubt about whether the party should go forward with this.
But of course, it was, what, two months before the election, so it seemed unlikely to be able to change it.
But she says, again and again, I thought about Joe Biden.
But she also adds, no matter my doubts and my fears about the election and Hillary as a candidate, I could not make good on that threat to replace her.
And then she seems to indicate that it's because Hillary, of course, was the female candidate, and therefore it was a step forward in the realm of identity politics, the first female president.
So the fact that they didn't replace Hillary, who knows what would have happened at the time, but the fact that they didn't had a lot to do with the addiction to identity politics that has characterized the left for so many generations now, really.
So here are some quotes from Brazil's book.
She says, My predecessor, Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had not been the most active chair in fundraising at a time when President Barack Obama's neglect had left the party in significant...
That's a very, very telling statement.
Of course, it's not just the DNC that Barack Obama left in significant debt.
It was, in fact, the entire country.
As you know, debt ballooned under Barack Obama from $10 trillion to $20 trillion.
$10 trillion, in other words, from the Republic's founding until Barack Obama.
It took that long for America to end up $10 trillion in debt, and then eight years later that had doubled.
Now, of course, some of that is not under his control.
It's mandated spending and so on, but some of it sure as hell was.
So, she goes on to write, as Hillary's campaign gained momentum, she resolved the party's debt and put it on a starvation diet.
It had become dependent on her campaign for survival, for which she expected to wield control of its operations.
And I love how when the party is ridiculously overspending and Hillary forces it to cut back, now it's a starvation diet.
You know how they say it's austerity when the government can't spend ridiculous amounts more than it's taking in taxes.
It's just starvation, you know?
Like if you're on a diet, you're on the sumo diet of like 8,000 calories a day, and then you go down to 7,000 calories a day and you're suddenly starving to death.
Brazil goes on to write, Debbie was not a good manager.
She hadn't been very interested in controlling the party.
She let Clinton's headquarters in Brooklyn do as it desired, so she didn't have to inform the party officers how bad the situation was.
How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was something that I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks.
The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary's campaign.
He wasted no words.
He told me the Democratic Party was broke and two million dollars in debt.
What? I screamed, I am an officer of the party and they've been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.
Again, this is astounding.
Absolutely astounding. Failing to inform the officers of the DNC how much it was in the hole, how much it was spending.
First of all, it's their job to find out and it's other people's job to tell them.
And again, these are the people who want to run the country, who think that they're competent to run.
A multi-trillion dollar economy when they can't even run a multi-million dollar local business.
So, yeah, so Brazil is saying, no, the officer, I'm an officer of the party, they've been telling us everything's fine, raising money with no problems, and...
The guy, right, the chief financial officer of Hillary's campaign, replies and says, that wasn't true, he said.
Officials, she goes on to say, right, officials from Hillary's campaign had taken a look at the DNC's books.
Obama left the party $24 million in debt.
$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign and had been paying that off very slowly.
Now, if you recall, quick rewind here, if you recall back in the day, one of the charges leveled against Donald Trump was that he didn't pay some vendors at some point.
The DNC owed over 8 million dollars to vendors after the 2012 campaign.
Again, whatever the left accuses you of, they are doing times a million.
So again, this is just part of the whole part and parcel.
She went on to write, Obama's campaign was not scheduled to pay it off.
Until 2016, Hillary for America, the campaign and the Hillary Victory Fund, its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC, had taken care of 80% of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.
You know, when you've got to go to the Clintons for fiscal austerity, you are not in a financially happy place.
And that's amazing. So this is before the first vote had been cast for the nominee.
And the Hillary campaign had basically more or less floated 10 million bucks to the agency that's supposed to be impartial.
I mean, come on. Come on.
I mean, however ardent a Democrat you are, that is terrible.
That is an abominable compromise of any pretense of objectivity.
So Donna goes on to write,"'On the phone, Gary told me the DNC had needed a $2 million loan, which the campaign had arranged.'""'No, that can't be true,' I said.
"'The party cannot take out a loan without the unanimous agreement of all of the officers.'" Gary, how did they do this without me knowing?
I asked. I don't know how Debbie relates to the officers, Gary said.
He described the party as fully under the control of Hillary's campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp.
The campaign had the DNC on life support, giving it money every month to meet its basic expenses, while the campaign was using the party as a fundraising clearinghouse.
Under FEC law, she writes, an individual can contribute a maximum of $2,700 directly to a presidential campaign, but the limits are much higher for contributions to state parties and a party's national committee.
Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund.
That figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states parties who were part of the Victory Fund Agreement, $322,000, and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first and transferred to the DNC shortly after that.
Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.
Wait, I said, that victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee and the state party races.
You're telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?
Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.
That was the deal that Robbie struck with Debbie, he explained, referring to the campaign manager, Robbie Mook.
It was to sustain the DNC. We sent the party nearly $20 million from September until the convention and more to prepare for the election.
Now, can you imagine if the DNC had gone bankrupt during the presidential race?
I mean, even prior to the nomination, if the DNC had gone bankrupt, that's a brand-killing moment for anybody with half a brand.
Yes, we want to run your economy, we want to run your taxes, we want to run your spending, we want to run the spending of the entire government, but we can't even manage our own DNC. We've gone bankrupt.
So, of course, of course this had to happen, and of course it was Hillary's campaign that made it happen.
So, Donna Brazile goes on to write, What's the burn rate, Gary?
I asked. How much money do we need every month to fund the party?
The burn rate was $3.5 million to $4 million a month, he said.
I gasped.
I had a pretty good sense of the DNC's operations after having served as interim chair five years earlier.
Back then, the monthly expenses were half that.
What had happened?
The party chair usually shrinks the staff between presidential election campaigns, but Debbie had chosen not to do that.
She had stuck lots of consultants on the DNC payroll and Obama's consultants were being financed by the DNC too.
Just astounding.
And again, entirely predictable.
So, here's what happened.
Sanders and Clinton both signed these joint fundraising agreements with the DNC. This is way back in 2015.
And this created the mechanism by which proceeds were split between the campaigns and So, of course, when you're out there campaigning, saying, oh, you know, give me fundraising for me, or, you know, if you're Hillary or for Bernie or whatever, well, some of that money, a substantial amount of that money was flowing up to the DNC just to keep it propped up.
But, so they both signed these boilerplate to share the fundraising, but Clinton's campaign had a little side deal.
And that little side deal gave it this influence that we talked about before over staffing and other decisions made by the DNC during the primary.
Now, the sort of side deal that Hillary's campaign had with the DNC had also a stipulation that...
It only affects preparations for the general election.
Other candidates could strike a similar deal if they wanted or negotiated and so on.
Now, Clinton allies, in responding to what Donna Brazile have said, have said, oh, no, no, the same offer was available or made explicitly to all candidates.
But only the Clinton campaign decided to take advantage of it.
Now, can you imagine... Can you imagine?
I mean, this is so illogical, even for the left.
So can you imagine? You're a manager in the Sanders campaign, and they come to you with this offer, and you say no.
But you know that other candidates have this offer as well.
I mean, it would make no sense, right?
So two of the Sanders campaign's former top officials said, oh no, we weren't offered that deal, like Clinton's.
We didn't know anything about...
Hillary Clinton's side arrangement with the DNC. Now, some reporters have looked up the joint fundraising agreement that Sanders' team made with the DNC. That was in November 2015.
And it really has no indication of this supplemental side deal giving the campaign substantial control over the DNC. So, somebody's not telling the truth.
And I think I know who it is.
Now, if you remember, during the primary election cycle, Sanders and in particular Sanders supporters were really angry at the DNC because the DNC is supposed to be this like neutral blank arbiter or just, you know, count the votes and all that.
And Bernie and his supporters were alleging that The DNC was on Hillary's side, that it was tilting the playing field.
And of course, you know, it was denied.
There's no influence.
We are totally neutral.
We're just blank arbiters.
All we're going to do is judge.
We don't get involved.
We don't have anyone who's preferential to us or anything like that.
And this was actually used against Bernie Sanders, right?
So... It was considered to be, you're paranoid, you're crazy, you're losing and you're lashing out.
And so, yeah, I mean, oh, you're crazy for imagining that the DNC has any preference for Hillary Clinton.
They're totally neutral. You're disloyal.
You're a conspiracy theorist.
You're losing and lashing out.
Amazing. And again, not wildly unpredictable.
So, Brazil, I mean, it is an unloading.
You know, she's just blasting Obama for trashing the finances of the DNC. She is really throwing Wasserman Schultz's leadership under the bus.
And, yes, she is in print with intimate and deep and detailed knowledge of the matter today.
Confirming, once and for all, that absolutely, completely and totally, Hillary Clinton's campaign had the DNC entirely on the short leash, entirely in its pocket, long before Hillary Clinton even became the nominee.
Donald Trump kept talking to Bernie supporters.
He said, look, look, the Democratic establishment is kind of rigging the whole nominating process.
It's biased for Clinton and against...
Sanders. Now maybe he knew more than he was letting on, but it turns out that that characterization was even more accurate than he imagined.
So in at least what we've read of the book so far, Brazil reveals the scheme that Clinton's campaign used to Basically, you know, it's like the mafia.
You know, oh, are you in heavy debt?
Do you owe money on payroll in your sporting goods store?
Did you run up a substantial gambling debt?
Oh, don't worry. We'll lend you the money.
And then we're going to own your ass.
I mean, the DNC's finances, of course, are still a mess, but yeah, the DNC... Well, of course, and the funny thing is, of course, that Clinton needed the sustainability of the DNC in order to get the nomination, because if the DNC had gone bankrupt, then it's...
I don't even know what would happen.
I can't imagine what would happen. So she needed to prop up the DNC in order to have any possibility of the process moving forward, because...
Even to your average normie voter, the fact that the DNC might have gone bankrupt or completely run out of money in one form or another, that wouldn't have looked very good when it came to presidential electoral cycles.
It just would have looked... So she needed...
I mean, she needed that. And so it's like, well, if you've got to fund the place, at least ask for something in return.
That's... That's politics.
You know, you don't hand away 20% of America's uranium production for, you know, anything less than $145 million in the Clinton Foundation.
So, yeah. I mean, it's quid pro quo.
You know, scratchbacks, scratchbacks, and so on.
So, yeah.
Brazil reveals how Clinton's campaign, by extending a fiscal lifeline, took control of the party during the primary.
During the primary.
And how Brazil places all of this in the timeline is important.
So this Victory Fund Agreement basically put the DNC under Hillary Clinton's campaign's control months before even the very first primary vote was cast.
Hillary Clinton wrote a little book, which my book, let's mention it briefly, why not?
The Art of the Argument, outsold for a little while.
But yeah, theartoftheargument.com, it's a great book, you should check it out.
But Hillary Clinton wrote a whole book, What Happened?
Now, this extraordinary scheme where a fiscal lifeline was dropped to the DNC in order to help them avoid bankruptcy or some other godforsaken financial output in return for giving the Clinton campaign control over just about every time everyone went to the bathroom in the DNC, this extraordinary scheme, I don't think it quite made it into the pages of Hillary Clinton's book, What Happened?
Huh. I wonder if that might cause people to doubt anything else about that book.
Hard to imagine. Hard to perceive.
Now, there's a little thing as well that just is a little sidebar here.
So during, when she went out to visit the Clinton campaign, you know, she did travel a lot during this, and she went out to visit the Clinton campaign headquarters in various places, and she said, you know, it had a kind of funeral air.
It was kind of dismal. It was kind of boring.
It was kind of lackluster.
And when she was visiting one of these places, so there's this former Democratic congressman named Tony Colho, and he used to ask Brazil a question about a campaign, a political campaign, and he would ask her this question.
Are the kids having sex?
Are they having fun?
If not, let's create something to get that going, or otherwise we're not going to win.
Go, Corey Feldman.
But, that's an astonishing...
It's just weird to me. If you want to win, people better be banging on the copier.
I mean, that's just... Well, it's R Selected.
It's just crazy stuff.
Degenerate. So, Donna Brazile says, I didn't sense much fun or having sex in Brooklyn.
Now, of course, this...
This question of why they lost, we'll get to in a sec.
But I just wanted to mention something while I have your attention, at least I hope, this sort of Russian interference.
And I talked about this recently, but, you know, Ms.
Clinton's secret agent, Christopher Steele, was paying good money for this Russian disinformation campaign, this dossier, right, as Lionel said.
Nation points out the word dossier is brilliant, not just like printout or rumor or innuendo or paid disinformation.
Dossier. It sounds like it's vetted.
It sounds like it's solid.
It sounds like it's really rooted, in fact.
But as far as interference in the election goes, well, I got to think that Owning the DNC, even before the first ballot is cast in the primaries, owning the DNC could conceivably be called or have something to do with influencing the election outcome.
And of course, this retired British spy, Chris Steele, was handing out cash for...
This Russian disinformation dossier, and that seems quite a lot of Russian interference in the election.
And, oh, by the way, just in case people are wondering about this, it is actually a crime to pay foreigners for opposition research for a wide variety of reasons.
And so there's that.
So I just wanted to sort of point this out.
And how many people knew about the scheme?
I wonder how many people in the DNC knew about it, how many people in the various political campaigns knew about it, and how many reporters might have known about it.
So Brazil goes on a little further to say, when the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate's team starts to exercise more control over the party.
If the party has an incumbent candidate, as was the case with Clinton in 1996, that's Bill of course, or Obama in 2012, this kind of arrangement is seamless because the party already is under the control of the president.
When you have an open contest without an incumbent and competitive primaries, the party comes under the candidate's control only after the nominee is certain.
So, of course that makes sense, right?
Now, Brazil starts off by saying she had to make the call to Bernie after she found this joint fundraising agreement between Hillary and the DNC, this sort of smoking gun of corruption and collusion, in my view.
And it's funny, it's just funny to me, it's interesting and funny how she talks about it.
She says, you know, I had to make this call to Bernie.
I knew it was going to be difficult and it was going to be emotional.
So I lit candles and put on some gospel music.
I got a difficult call to make.
I better light some candles.
It's a male-female thing, I guess.
I can't imagine, I don't know, Trump or me or anyone saying, I got a difficult call to make.
Better put on some incense.
I just thought it was kind of an interesting detail.
So she writes, Bernie, she said, took this stoically.
He did not yell or express outrage.
Ha ha ha. I think you misspelled cuckily.
I mean, this is the guy who, you know, some BLM protester grabs the microphone.
He's like, okay, here you go.
Well, and of course he's going to take it stoically.
I mean, he kind of has to.
Why? Because he's a socialist.
You know, and here was the DNC, in true socialist fashion, taking the votes that Bernie Sanders had earned and handing it to someone else.
Just like socialists do with everyone's money.
Just like the left wants to do with everyone's money.
So, yeah, good. He got a nice taste of socialism.
I guess there really wasn't much for him to get upset about.
So she goes on to write. Instead, he asked me what I thought Hillary's chances were.
The polls were unanimous in her winning.
But what he wanted to know was my own assessment.
Ah, yes, well...
So Scott Adams, in his new book, Wynn Bigley, writes about this, so that he, Mike Cernovich, myself, and a bunch of other people, we will, and Ann Coulter, of course, were way early in predicting a Trump victory.
And I myself was even, I mean, you can't prove this, I'm just telling you, I was more certain even than I said publicly because I didn't want overconfidence to be the weakness.
So... This is way back in the day.
Summer of 2015, I first predicted it and stayed true to it, even through all of the ups and downs and pussygate and so on.
And so it's interesting to me when the polls, and most of the mainstream media gave Hillary, even the night of the election, a 98% chance of winning.
And... It was not the case, as we well know.
So when Bernie asks Donna, well, what did you think?
What do you think Hillary's chances are?
I don't know if she publicly said, I don't think she's got as good a chance as everyone thinks, but now, of course, in hindsight, with all the information, she says, I had to be frank with him.
I did not trust the polls, I said.
I told him I had visited states around the country and I found a lack of enthusiasm for her everywhere.
I was concerned about the Obama coalition and about millennials.
I urge to Bernie to work as hard as he could to bring his supporters into the fold with Hillary and to campaign with all the heart and hope he could muster.
Now that's, again, an amazing confession to me.
She has just found out how rigged and corrupt the entire process was driven by Hillary Clinton's campaigns propping up of the DNC financially and with this side deal sidebar which...
I don't think it was available to anyone else, at least that's what they say.
So she's just found out exactly how corrupt the whole process is, and she's still urging Bernie Sanders to do everything he can to make sure this corrupt witch gains control as leader of the free world.
Now that's a team player, to put it as nicely as humanly possible.
And now Bernie Sanders has been told just how corrupt the entire process was.
And now he's being urged to find it in his heart to make sure that this entirely corrupt politician ends up with control over nuclear codes.
Amazing.
So she goes on to write, he might find some of her positions too centrist and her coziness with the financial elites distasteful, but he knew, and I knew, that the alternative was a person who would put the very future of the country in peril.
I knew he heard me.
I knew he agreed with me, but I never in my life had felt so tiny and powerless as I did making that call.
And you see, this is what has to happen psychologically with people, with half of America or more, half of the world or more, is that the worse and worse Hillary appears, the worse you have to paint Donald Trump.
Of course, right? I mean, he has to be Hitler.
Because if Hillary is as bad as is revealed, as was revealed, I mean, all the way back to when she got fired from investigating Nixon, all the way back to Whitewater, all the way back to, I mean, everything that went on with her husband and the incredible allegations of rape and settling of sexual harassment claims and all of the corruption.
That occurred with the Uranium One scandal and with Benghazi and with this sort of pay-for-play that was detailed in the Clinton Cash book.
I mean, all of this stuff.
The worse that Hillary appears, the more corrupt that she is revealed to be, The worse you have to paint Donald Trump in order to get her into power.
You have to say, okay, well, better the devil you know, or half devil, but he's total devil, right?
I mean, so this is what she says.
She says, well, I still want to get her into power.
And this is, of course, what the media has to do as more and more stuff is coming out about Hillary Clinton.
They have to paint Donald Trump as even worse because otherwise the alternative is that everyone who supported Hillary Clinton was entirely wrong and in the back with a corrupt politician versus the people who supported Trump were not.
So that's just so you understand why he has to be painted with such darkness, with so many dark brushstrokes.
So she goes on to say, when I hung up the call to Bernie, I started to cry, not out of guilt, but out of anger.
We would go forward.
We had to. No, you didn't.
No, you didn't. Now, call me conspiratorial.
Call me crazy. Call me a cap.
But I don't genuinely believe or generally believe that this stuff kind of happens by accident.
Now, of course, she wrote the book a while ago.
There's galleys. There's proofs and all this kind of stuff.
Recorded the audiobook. But I don't believe this stuff entirely comes out of nowhere.
Now, my question is... Of course, she's, you know, marketing is genius because now she's going to sell the book to the Trump supporters.
She's going to sell the book to the right, whereas it will cost her some sales on the left, but she'll make up for it enormously by people on the right who'll read the book.
But it's really quite remarkable because it is rare for this kind of criticism to occur among leftists.
So the fact that Brazil is throwing Obama and Hillary under the bus at the moment is quite remarkable.
Remarkable. And it makes me wonder if she knows anything that may be coming down the pipe that she may be implicated in.
I mean, there's a lot of stuff going on around Hillary at the moment, around the Podestas at the moment.
And I wonder if she has some...
Insight or knowledge about what might be coming down the pipeline regarding the Clintons.
Is Obama going to get scooped up in the Uranium One investigation should such occur?
Maybe she knows something.
Maybe she's trying to distance herself.
Maybe... I don't know.
I don't know. But there are some very interesting lessons in this.
It always was kind of confusing to me, and to a lot of people, why Hillary was so inattentive and pretty much lazy when it came to campaigning.
I mean, she went forever without doing press conferences.
She didn't travel that much.
She just didn't seem to be that motivated.
And to some degree now we know why.
Of course, she wasn't in much danger from Crazy Bernie, right?
Because it seems like she had the entire situation under control.
So it doesn't look like she was under much stress from Bernie or others.
And then, of course, everyone was telling her that she was going to win.
All the mainstream media, all the polls, you know, they did...
They polled during the day when people who vote Democrat are more likely to be home rather than out at a job.
They did highly Democrat.
They polled single moms.
They polled minority communities and so on.
And I think they kind of tried to make it true by portraying it as true, that her victory was going to happen because they just kept saying she's got it in the back.
They were hoping to demoralize the Trump supporters.
But of course, this sort of come from behind approach, this comeback, second wind approach, I mean, it only made them stronger.
It only made them more committed and more determined.
You know, there are some people, when you say, no way, they say, okay.
And there are some people, when you say, no way, they're like, oh yeah?
Let's find out about that.
So it's heart and dear resolved, and it made the leftist lazy.
And of course, the significant bump in votes that comes from the mainstream media, again.
She had Hollywood, she had academia, she had the mainstream media, she had the reporters, she had, I mean, everyone.
Everyone was on her side.
She had the the v-card she had I mean just about everything and of course she and she did you know overlook the white male she overlooked the frustrated the economically crippled those who couldn't get jobs because of the hyper-regulatory state under Obama and so she pretty much thought she had it in the bag and you know if there's one thing that cheating does is it makes you lazy Makes you lazy.
And leftists have been cheating for a long time.
Right when they took control of the education faculties and they started programming teachers to program kids on leftists.
Right to the point where now half of millennials want to live So they programmed kids.
They programmed young adults in universities by taking leftist control of faculties.
They imported tens of millions of third world voters who overwhelmingly vote for the left.
They destroyed border controls in order to allow a flood of illegal immigrants into America, for which there is significant evidence that millions of them voted for the left.
Uh, under, uh, uh, the last presidential election.
And, of course, they took a lot of foreign money, uh, and they concocted, in general, this very concept of post-modernism, so that if you found rational arguments against the left, they could say, the reason!
Who cares about the reason?
It is just a fantasy, eh?
Sorry, gonna have your gatoire when you, when you say that kind of stuff.
So the left has been cheating for a long time, and of course when you cheat, you get lazy, of course.
You don't train as hard if you know you're going to win the race.
I mean, that's just the way it works.
And the other thing too is that when you know you're going to win, you get lazy, and what that means is hardworking people don't want to be around you.
Because, I don't know, like I worked once for the government when I was a temp in my late teens.
And, I mean, I was a hard-working and focused person, liked to get things done.
It drove me crazy. It's like, you know, you want to win a running race and you have to run through...
Wet jello or run underwater.
I mean, when you want to get things done, these delays drive me crazy.
And so what happens is when you get lazy, it rots the entire culture and it acts as a magnet for other lazy people and it drives out hardworking, competent people, perhaps even into the arms of another candidate.
Who knows? I also wanted to drop in because an example of this laziness is this blaming the Russian thing, right?
Rather than figuring out what you did wrong, you blame the Russians.
You... You blame whites.
Like, whatever, right? Anything other than yourself.
And so... Congressional pressure was put on Facebook, right?
At a time when Facebook is facing potential antitrust examinations of the kind which completely decimated and crippled IBM for 13 years, I think it was, that they were being ground down by antitrust investigations and potential blowback and drove...
Smart people through the Pareto principle, you know, that the square root of workers produces half the value.
So 100 people out of 10,000 are producing half the value.
And who wants to spend their entire life as a high-functioning professional dealing with antitrust investigations?
So you leave the company and you go to other companies, which is one of the main reasons why Microsoft ended up vaulting over IBM with the PC. And so Facebook is facing just this kind of soul-draining crisis.
Potential company destroying or undermining kind of investigations for antitrust.
And so there's a lot of pressure from the government being put on Facebook.
And eventually, you know, they said, no, there's no Russian interference.
And finally, they, you know, they got billions of monthly users and they went through with a fine tooth comb.
And they finally found, well, 470 potentially suspect accounts that spent $100,000 on ads.
About $100,000 on ads.
470 out of billions and $100,000 out of Facebook's annual revenue of $27 billion.
Ooh! Catastrophic Russian influence.
And the Times described these findings thus.
Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads, pushing to have divisive issues during and after the American election campaign.
Believed. Created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin.
They believe. I don't know.
And how on earth would Facebook, which does not to my knowledge have spies in Russia, how on earth would Facebook know that Russian companies are linked to the Kremlin or not?
How do they even know they're Russian companies?
How do they know they're Russian users?
Ooh, there's Cyrillic in the username.
Ooh, there's an IP that originates in Russia.
You know that all of the malware that got loose from the CIA... That you can spoof and fake anything you want.
Saying it comes from this place and it has...
I mean, this is ridiculous.
I mean, come on.
Come on. I mean, oh, it seems to come from a Russian area.
It might have a Russian name.
And therefore, somehow, even if it is someone in Russia, 144 million Russians, all of them are linked to the Kremlin in some manner.
Ugh. So, Zuckerberg, again, remember, facing potential antitrust investigation, Zuckerberg says he's expanding this investigation to include, and I quote, additional Russian groups and other former Soviet states.
Hmm. Now, remember, of course...
That the entire narrative goes something like this.
That Russia wanted Trump to win, therefore.
But as it turns out, these Facebook ads were...
Some of them praised BLM. Some of them attacked it.
It was very... There was no particular consistent pattern of pro-Trump and anti-Hillary.
So, I mean, it's just...
I mean, it literally is like taking stock advice from the guy screaming into the phone with no connection on the street corner.
I mean, it has become completely deranged.
And these are just people who are striving to wave away or to ward off the extreme discomfort of cognitive dissonance by just making up any imaginary threat that they can.
It comes to foreign influence, foreign influence on the U.S. election.
I don't know, two countries pop into mind.
Saudi Arabia gave a lot of money to the left and has to some degree influenced America getting involved in some of the local wars, Yemen in particular.
Saudi Arabia, quite a lot of influence.
Ah, yes. The elephant in the room.
Israel. Big influence on American politics and American elections.
You know, if you compare this to these piddly $100,000 worth of ads that there's absolutely no evidence That they were part of any kind of coordinated Russian campaign.
There's no evidence even specifically that they were Russian-bought.
This is just what people say.
Crazy. I mean, you've got 3,000 ads costing about $100,000 spread over two years.
This is going to somehow decisively affect a U.S. election when they have contrary positions.
No particular consistent position.
I mean, you got $100,000 spent on these Facebook ads over two years, but in a U.S. presidential election, more than $2 billion is spent on advertising.
$2 billion! $100,000 over two years.
Crazy. I mean, they weren't pro-Trump.
They weren't pro-Clinton.
They weren't anti-Trump. They weren't anti-Clinton, consistently or not.
So, I mean, it's crazy.
It's completely mad.
So... I hate to say that something might happen to Hillary Clinton legally because, I mean, she's like this superhero.
She's like Neo in the Matrix.
She just like, she blurs.
She blurs. Hair stays the same, but she blurs.
You know, is the FBI doing something about the Clinton Foundation and some of the significant legal problems involved in that?
We'll see. Is something coming down about Uranium One?
Is there going to be an investigation?
Have the emails, are they going to surface?
I mean, who knows? Who knows?
So, maybe this has something to do with this.
Now, here is one of the big challenges as well.
The mainstream media is really not going to talk about this Brazil story.
And one of the reasons that they don't...
Obviously, there's, you know, partisan loyalties and so on.
One of the reasons they don't want to tell you about...
This Clinton corruption of the DNC and the DNC corruption in itself is because they want to keep this information as far away from their viewership as humanly possible so that if Hillary Clinton ends up being indicted then there will be such a shock to the system of the mainstream media viewers that they will likely react hysterically and potentially violently.
Well, most likely violently. And, you know, like I was traveling yesterday.
That's coming back from working on Mike Cernovich's upcoming film called Hoaxed, which you should definitely check out.
Not just my part, but I hear it's going to be great.
So thanks for including me, Mike.
It's a great honor. But I was traveling.
It was November 4th, 2017.
It was supposed to be this big day of Antifa riots.
And Antifa as a brand is dead.
They've been too violent, too weird.
And they've been rebranded as violent losers, which you can't survive.
I mean, because of alternative media, social media, they have been rebranded in a way that, you know, in Germany, Antifa is very dangerous because there's so much control over social media that they can't get rebranded as what they are, which is basement dwelling and violent dysfunctional losers.
And so... This violence that they want, you know, that the more information is withheld from you, then if, well, it was Russia who hacked the election and if Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which I guess she did if you discount the illegals voting or other corruptions, but of course...
That's like saying, I won the tennis game because I swung more.
It's like, that's not how you win the tennis game, winning the popular vote.
Donald Trump wasn't trying to win the popular vote.
He was trying to win the electoral college vote because he's got a very high IQ and that's how you win.
I won the chess game because I moved my pawns more.
No, that's not how you win the chess game.
So they want to withhold all of this corruption from their...
Listeners, from their watchers, so that if something happens, if there's a legal move on Hillary, everyone can be shocked and appalled, they can gin up the masses, and they can help promote violence.
You know, conscious plan, I doubt it, but that's, to me, how the dominoes are going to fall.
Let me just look at Rand Paul. Rand Paul survived the crazy leftist shooting up the congressional baseball practice.
And now Rand Paul has been attacked in his home by a deranged Democrat.
Again, ginning up the violence, ginning up the violence.
So what they're hoping to do, I think, since everyone is aware of this, if Hillary is indicted, then the MSM is going to help promote riots, and they hope that their role in promoting riots will prevent Hillary from being indicted.
It's not that complicated.
The fear of social unrest drives a lot of So, yeah, they're creating a phalanx of violent people, reactionary people, hysterical people, in the hope of protecting Hillary from any indictment, because that might be dominoes that fall pretty far away.
So I'm just going to leave you with this thought, because something else happened while I was away that was kind of interesting.
So in Saudi Arabia, and there was a lot of arrests, but we'll just talk about this one.
So Prince Al-Walid, he sparred back and forth with Trump on Twitter in the past, and he's very much anti-Trump.
He was a huge Clinton donor and supporter.
So Prince Al-Walid in Saudi Arabia was jailed during a corruption sweep in Saudi Arabia.
Jailed. So there's a powerful rich person in Saudi Arabia who's accused of corruption, arrested and thrown in jail.
I'm not saying I agree with the process as a whole.
I have no idea.
But if this guy is corrupt and he was a huge Clinton donor and supporter...
It turns out that Saudi Arabia can deal with their corrupt oligarchs, no matter how rich and powerful they are.
There may be more justice for high-level corruption in Saudi Arabia than the American Republic.
The amount of frustration at watching people get away with crimes, if you wish To get away with a big crime in America, be a powerful person.
That's the message a lot of people are getting and it's incredibly frustrating and it's humiliating.
And it breeds sympathy for those who are indicted and it breeds anger at those who are perceived to be continually getting away with everything.
Saudi Arabia can deal with its corrupt oligarchs.
If the republic cannot deal with its corrupt oligarchs, the republic will be replaced.
Something else will come.
I'm not kidding. I'm not kidding, America.
▲
Export Selection