All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 7, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
14:54
"CBS News fires staffer who had access to leaked Amy Robach audio"
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, so fairly massive update to the story I reported on yesterday that came out of Project Veritas.
CBS News has now fired the staffer who had access to leaked Amy Roback audio.
It is, in fact, audio and video.
So it's just a wild thing when you look at it.
Look at this woman without the lighting that is so flattering in the studio, right?
It's pretty wild. So let's hear a little bit about what she had to say just to sort of refresh you.
I tried for three years to get it on to no avail and now it's all coming out and it's like these new revelations and I freaking had all of it.
I'm so pissed right now.
Every day I get more and more pissed because I'm just like, oh my god.
What we had was unreal.
All right, so let's just go back a little bit here and look at branding, right?
Look at how things are being branded.
Now, of course, you can see that the low bar has her hot mic rant was leaked.
By right-wing group Project Veritas.
Now, you know, I don't know if Project Veritas would call themselves right-wing, but it doesn't really matter because that's the perception.
So what does right-wing mean in this context?
Well, you have ABC News involved in covering up credible allegations of a hideously exploitive, pedophilic, child grooming, rape and destruction ring being run by some very, very powerful people, particularly, of course, men in this world.
So... Right-wing, of course, is meant to be pejorative, right?
So it's supposed to have you say, oh, right-wing is bad, and therefore Project Veritas is bad, and therefore I can just use this magic world selectively edited, like everything on this planet is not selectively edited, and just imagine that they didn't have anything important to say.
But what's happening, actually, is that given that the leak of this tape shows a cover-up of a powerful, important Morally essential story about potential pedophile rings in places of high power.
The fact that you are associating the term right-wing with people who are exposing the cover-up of an alleged pedophile ring means that the opposite of right-wing is left-wing, which now must mean pro-pedophile.
I mean, that's just the way it works, right?
So if you're going to say CBS News and ABC News— ABC News, of course, owned by Disney— if you're going to say it's right-wing to expose the cover-up of an alleged pedophile ring targeting children, of course— Then you're saying, by definition, that left-wing is pro-covering up these kinds of pedophilia crimes.
And that seems quite an important thing.
I'm not sure that they thought that through, or in a more terrifying universe, maybe they have.
Okay, so let's look at the actual text here.
It's very, very important to see how you're being programmed.
So the right-wing thing is kind of natural, but look at this.
Look at this. CBS News has fired a female staffer believed to have had access to the tape of Amy Robach raging against ABC News.
Page six understands.
All right. So the idea that a woman who's angry is just raging and hormonal or PMS or I don't know how old this woman is, Amy Roback, but boy, feminists would normally go completely insane and I'll get more about the whole feminist angle later on in this show, but the fact that they're using the term raging, no, she's angry.
She's angry, I think, primarily at having lost the scoop.
I'm sure that there's some element of the moral dimension that...
You know, she's five kids, as I'll talk about later, and they're safe, and these other kids weren't.
But so she's raging, right?
That's another way of programming you to think that she's irrational.
Now, they fired a female staffer, believed to have had access to the tape.
What on earth does that mean?
Is that proof that she leaked it?
No. The fact that she had access to the tape in no way proves that she was the leaker, in which case, why is she being fired?
It doesn't make any sense at all.
So, and the fact that, you see, the fact that this woman quit and went to CBS News, that is also quite important.
So, yeah, that's just really, really powerful stuff.
Amy Robux is raging. And we fired a woman who believed might have had access.
And look at how quickly they jumped on all of this.
Look at how quickly their crack reporters got to the bottom of this.
See, it takes three-plus years for ABC News to release something about the Jeffrey Epstein allegations.
Credible witness interviews their investigation.
They say, oh, next year we're going to put out a podcast and a documentary.
It's three-plus years for that.
But it's like one day.
To find this woman. And now you see what they're doing is they're punishing whistleblowers.
They're punishing leakers.
Of course, the mainstream media relies upon leakers.
And the Democrats rely upon leakers to jimmy up fake impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.
So leakers, you see, are really, really...
Bad when it happens to the media, but leakers to the media, absolutely wonderful.
I mean, do you remember it was, what was it, NBC? That somehow, from their many years ago vault, the conversation between Billy Bush and then Donald Trump, you know, the infamous pussy grabbing, where he said, you know, women will let you grab them by the pussy if you're rich and powerful and famous or whatever.
Well, that made its way out.
And there was not a big internal investigation about that.
Nobody, as far as I know, was ever sort of found and punished or fired for any of that.
So they love these kinds of leaks when it harms their enemies.
Of course, it's just so inevitable in this Janus-faced, two-faced nature of the media that, yeah, when they're profiting from leaks, so they get to use leaks against their political enemies.
Leaks are wonderful and great and bristleblowers must be protected.
But when the leak is against them...
Well, you've got to fire that person, even if she's at another.
And look at these. They're supposed to be competitors.
Supposed to be competitors. ABC News informs CBS News who fires this woman.
Just incredible. So Page Six says, we reported on Wednesday that ABC News chiefs discovered a former employee could be behind the leak of the damning footage of Robach slamming the network for shelving her interview with Jeffrey Epstein's sex slave, Virginia Roberts Giffray.
Sources told Page Six that a former staffer had access to the footage of Robach as she aired her frustrations over a hot mic and that employee was now believed to be working at...
CBS, a TV source, told us later on Wednesday that the woman was let go from CBS after ABC execs alerted the rival network.
So they're all working together.
ABC always be covering for the Clintons.
And this is just amazing.
The other thing, too, Amy Roback was not raging against ABC News.
She was raging about not being able to report on a guy who'd been described as the most prolific pedophile America had ever seen.
And that's what she was angry about.
So, as we reported, it says that it's not known whether the woman leaked the tape, which was recorded in July, I've heard August, maybe it's July, to the website Project Veritas or may have shown it to others who passed it on.
Right? So, showing people tape that it's been recorded and saying, boy, this is terrible.
I mean, I don't see how that's particularly bad.
I mean, she has access to the tapes, and so did she show it to others who passed it on?
I really don't know.
Some of the footage looks like it was filmed from a monitor rather than the source, but, you know, I'm no expert on that kind of stuff.
We'll see. An ABC source had told us earlier Wednesday that the network was considering its options but added that it was more difficult because the person no longer works there, but if they did, the leak would be a fireable offense.
An ABC rep commented, we take violations of company policy very seriously and we're pursuing all avenues to determine the source of the leak.
They're on the case!
They can't protect children being preyed upon.
By pedophiles. They just can't air that, you see.
It's not up to their high reporting standards.
ABC's very high reporting standards.
ABC, not too long ago, published a story about how witches were gathering to put a hex or a curse on President Donald Trump.
So cry me a river about your very high freaking journalistic standards, ABC. In the leaked footage, Roebuck says, Giffray, who claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew by Epstein, told me everything, but that ABC quote would not put the interview on the air.
The network said the report didn't meet its standards.
And on Tuesday, a top ABC producer told NPR, we would never run away from that.
We would never kill a story about Prince Andrew.
That's what's ridiculous on its face.
That's a great story. So we could do that story.
So if we could do that story, we would have done it.
But they also say that they're going to release this stuff.
So if you can do it later, why couldn't you do it at the time?
So that is amazing stuff.
The branding. The branding of left-wing groups as pro-pedophile, the branding of right-wing groups as anti-pedophile is really astonishing.
And the fact that, well, there's a lot to talk about, all of the deep meanings and implications about this.
As always, let's get pretty freaking real about this.
I have two major points to make, which I really, really want to impress upon you very deeply.
First and foremost...
The ABC anchorwoman, Amy Roback, is herself the mother of five children.
Now, I'm quite sure that Amy Roback lives in a gated, protected, security guard-ringed community with walls all around it and alarms everywhere, and she's very safe and very secure, as are her five children.
Which brings me to an essential point.
I'm pretty sure that Amy Roback believed...
The victim of Jeffrey Epstein that she interviewed.
Which means that, given that this woman's lawyer described Jeffrey Epstein as perhaps the most prolific predator of children, the most prolific pedophile America had ever seen, that she knew that she was hoping to cover up and bury a story exposing this kind of man and the predations he may be committing against girls.
How do you do it? How do you not find some way to transfer and leak this information?
How do you not take this to another network?
Ronan Farrow was denied the chance to do what he wanted to do with Harvey Weinstein, so he went to the New Yorker instead, found a way to get it out that way.
Why, Amy, did you not get this information or go to another network?
The woman, who seems to be implicated somehow in the leak of this information, she went to another network.
She quit and went to another network.
Why didn't you quit and go to another network and say, I've got a story that ABC is not letting me print, but I can't sleep at night because of the implications it has for vulnerable girls out there in the world and how their lives are being destroyed for the sake of predatory lusts of very evil men.
Oh my gosh. What if...
What if the answer to that story is this?
What if Amy Robach knew deep down in her heart that there was no network she could go to that would air this story?
That all of them would ring in defense in burying these crimes against children?
What if there was no place that would get behind the broadcasting of this kind of information?
She's trapped in a ring of hell, with no honorable or decent people as far as the eye can see or the heart can feel.
Alternative media becoming more and more essential every single day.
Alright, final point.
Final point.
Feminists, where the hell are you?
You have for decades complained that there's a toxic masculine patriarchy and rape culture that preys upon women and girls for sadism, for sex, for lust, for power.
You don't see much evidence of this in daily life.
Only a few small percentage of men are ever involved in sexual crimes against women.
But in this particular instance, in this revelation, you have...
Clear evidence pointing towards an actual toxic masculine rape culture targeting girls for a long, long time and in the worst conceivable ways outside of sheer murder.
And it is being suppressed by By men, it would seem.
So where the hell are you?
Now that you have been handed this dark gift, so to speak, of evidence pointing towards the existence of this kind of exploitive, toxic, masculine, patriarchy, rape culture that you have complained about for so long, now you have some pretty strong facts pointing in the right direction of what your most fevered conspiracy theories have imagined.
Where are you? Why are you not protesting?
Why are you not out there ringing these organizations with circles of justified outrage?
Where are your silly hats?
Where are your big placards?
Where are your signs? Where are your brain-dead chants?
Where is your moral outrage?
For two things. One, the confirmation of what you have suspected for long periods of time.
And two, this woman at CBS. Who has been fired for breaking out news, possibly breaking out news, of this toxic patriarchal rape culture that you believed in for so long and still believe in.
This woman is being fired as a whistleblower.
Why are you not creating petitions?
Why are you not supporting her?
Why are you not organizing boycotts and marches and speeches?
To protect this woman who is outing a virulent, toxic, abusive...
Patriarchal rape culture.
Or at least putting significant evidence pointing towards its existence.
Why are you not out there protesting?
Why are you so silent?
I don't use this phrase very often.
In fact, I can't remember a time when I've used it, but I'm going to use it here.
Even though it's kind of hackneyed and cliched.
I can't think of a better way to end this.
Talk. Feminists.
The proof of your worst nightmares is being handed to you, or at least evidence thereof.
▲
Export Selection