All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 19, 2016 - Steve Pieczenik
43:55
Steve Pieczenik LIVE with Alex Jones [8-18-16]
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The story is up on Infowars.com.
It's at StevePachinik.com as well.
He wrote it.
He says that Manafort is a good choice because Manafort will let Trump be Trump.
Or he's saying that Bannon will be a good choice because he will let Trump be Trump.
So many campaign managers are thinking about Corey Lewandowski.
But Dr.
Steve Pachenik joins us.
He's written an article that's at stevepachenik.com.
It's on infowars.com, dealing with the fact that Paul Manafort is out and Stephen Bannon in, the head of Breitbart News, also part of a major conservative organization that investigates corruption in the government.
It was a few months ago, I forget which interview, that Dr.
Dr. C. Pachinic talked about the fact that it'd be a good idea to basically take Paul Manafort out as the lead campaign individual.
And he didn't really elaborate on that other than saying that somebody else would let Trump be Trump.
Now, of course, Dr. C. Pachinic is a bestselling author, wrote a bunch of books with Tom Clancy.
And the reason he was the main advisor to Clancy was because he ran psychological warfare for the State Department, worked in different agencies and clandestine areas, was involved in propping up governments, overthrowing governments, you name it.
A lot of the conversations we end up having here on air caused Justice Department probes and subpoenas and court cases.
I mean, this is real stuff.
This is not child's play here on air.
So stevepachenik.com is the website.
I also want to talk to Dr.
Pachenik some today about Report, U.S. moving nukes closer to Ukraine, out of Turkey.
That surrounded military base that supposedly has the nukes there in Turkey.
The different geopolitical realignments that are taking place.
Putin coming out and openly saying that the gloves are off in Ukraine because of paramilitary forces killing Putin.
Killing Russian forces in the Crimea and up on the Russian border.
Kiev has turned to terrorism.
Putin unfoiled sabotage plot in Crimea.
And of course, we also have all the other news unfolding in campaign 2016.
Dr.
Pachinik, where should we start?
Let's start with, I appreciate coming on again.
A couple of months ago, many of your listeners asked me, how was I able to predict That Manafort wouldn't be the right person for Trump.
And I think it's important for your listeners to understand something you and I have known for a very long time.
Number one, I don't read tea leaves.
Number two, I have nothing personally against Manafort.
And number three, one of the things that I do in my particular business of understanding psychodynamics or dynamics Not all psychiatrists can understand it or predict it.
It's called anticipatory intelligence.
It's to anticipate what happens when you have a personality structure like Mr.
Trump.
The media, the left-wing media, says he's unstable, he's destabilized, all that nonsense.
From my point of view, and I think from Alex's point of view, and Roger Stone, and others, and Corey Landasky, this was the force that we needed To bring to the forefront in order to articulate our discontent.
Whether he knows the policies, whether he's been in bankruptcy, whether his businesses make millions or billions is totally irrelevant.
He's a figurehead for populism against globalism.
Correct.
He's not only a figurehead, he is the persona, literally, of our discontent over 14 years.
And that has been the paramount issue.
In that discontent, We kept on going forward, forward, and knocking out 16 Republicans.
What in fact happened is, thanks to Alex, thanks to the audience, thanks to Trump, we were able to eviscerate the Republican Party, or what we call the old rhinos.
Instead, we really have a new party.
I don't know what the name is.
I don't care if we have a name, but it really is a form of Trumpism.
As Bernie Sanders was for the left, And Sanderism still remains in the discontent in the Democratic Party.
Trumpism has a voice of its own.
Isn't Trumpism really the return of American nationalism and free market renaissance?
Yes.
It's also a very...
Yes.
Yes, Alex.
In fact, it's even a little bit more than that.
Trumpism is the articulation of the grievances and the corruption that we see.
And he was willing to go right up front and say, Hillary is corrupt.
Comey is corrupt.
And pick those who are also able to resonate and who are serious people.
So when I said that Manafort was not the right person, Manafort was known as the man of the party.
He received all kinds of millions in working with other...
No, no, you didn't like the choice from the beginning.
You were really concerned on air.
I said it was the wrong choice.
I said it's the wrong person.
It's a person who would repress and suppress Trump's dynamics.
The one I liked was Corey Landowski because he understood what Trump was about.
He said it very succinctly.
Let Trump be Trump.
And even Trump said it repeatedly.
But when a man like Trump gets cornered and he feels that he's being controlled, he will either make mistakes that he normally wouldn't make or he would begin to get very resentful.
And that's what I predicted would happen.
And he in turn became Realigned and resurrected, so to speak, and said, I've had enough.
I've got to get rid of all these people.
I don't want to pivot.
I don't need to pivot.
And whether he hears our station or not, people like myself, people like General Flynn, Mike Flynn, who I knew, and others, and Roger Ailes, whom I've worked with on the Bush campaign, Came in to make him become what he always was.
I was about to say, I think this tripling down to go, brass knuckles is the way to go, to supercharge the populism.
That's what brought him to where he is.
And we see hysterical fits now by the controlled press with their dwindling audiences.
They're putting out fake polls, you name it.
What does your gut, but also just your political gravitas, tell you about what we're facing, what dirty tricks they may pull?
Well, they're going to be pulling every dirty trick in the book.
Number one, they will create the third party with Dr.
Jill Stein to siphon off some of the discontent on the liberal side, but really come back in.
They'll create the party again of the libertarians to siphon it off.
So we have a Nader phenomenon in that whole Bush-Gore campaign.
Then they will hit Trump with the ads that you've seen that he's not stable.
He's not mentally capable of handling.
And then you see the old ads that he has to be responsible for the nuclear bomb, and then they juxtapose it.
That's not going to work.
That's old Hillary.
Sure, they're going to 1964 stuff, Barry Goldwater with a girl picking the daisy and the nuke going off.
Correct.
And the biggest mistake, and I had been a...
Actually, the legacy of it.
A 2000 psychiatrist called Barry Water crazy.
And in subsequent to that, I had I stated to the American Psychiatric Association publicly that Bush Sr.
had a medical problem.
He could not run again for the presidency because he was vomiting.
And in turn, I left the American Psychiatric.
You can see how the different establishment organizations, Council on Foreign Relations, American Psychiatric, American Medical, all come down to maintain a certain repressive code of conduct That's consistent with their policy.
Not consistent with the American character or nature, but that's what happens.
Well, Dr.
Pacinic, I agree with you, so let me ask you this question.
Yeah.
Who are the different power structures now?
The patriots, the free market folks, what's left of the military versus what?
It's interesting, Alex.
In a way, what's been happening, and I know you don't like it when I compliment you and your audience, but in effect, What I've been saying for years on the radio, as a result of 2014, as a result of the internet, as a result of your audience being able to cut into every narrative where it was nonsense, we have had a devolution of power.
In other words...
Back to the states, back to the people, the media's falling apart, all the real metrics.
I want to get into that, but let me ask this question then.
After that, then why is the power structure trying to prop up a corpse like Hillary?
Go ahead.
Well, you can't prop up the corpse.
That corpse, one way or the other, will not sustain itself.
If, in fact, she gets through the debate, she will not be able to physically or mentally serve the term in the presidency.
The Secret Service knows that.
Those physicians who've treated her, I know that.
And, in fact, what she has done is to appoint her surrogate, Tim Kaine, from Virginia, who's totally a Democratic operator or political hack.
Who's had ostensibly experience as a congressman, a governor, and a senator.
I have nothing against him, but I have nothing that would laud him.
And in turn, she appointed another senator, Salazar.
So what you have is a repetition of a state corrupt system through the Democratic Party.
So the fact that they would put her forward despite all this shows their arrogance or their disconnection or their dottiness?
It shows the fact that the system is so entrenched and it is so corrupt That if you were to unwind the Clinton Foundation, you would probably eliminate three-quarters of this administration.
Sure.
Do you have any intel or what's your view on what WikiLeaks says they have that will bring Hillary down?
Well, there are certain things that will bring it down.
I mean, James Comey, for example, was part of Hogan& Hartson, the director of the FBI. And Hogan& Hartson, which is a famous law firm, Sandy Berger was a lawyer, Loretta Lynch was a lawyer, and the chief of staff for Hillary was a lawyer, Cheryl Mills.
All of them conspired in subsequent cases, let me tell you this, and I think he may be leaking it.
One, Sandy Berger committed a felony when he stole the classified paper.
He came beneath, again, he came underneath The director of the FBI, Comey.
Comey led him off on a misdemeanor.
Petraeus, two felonies, came off on a misdemeanor.
Hogan and Hartson had created The company called MDX Logistics in Denver.
They did the patent.
Hold on.
I'm sure this is important.
Stay there.
We've got a breakdown.
Come back and explain the inside baseball and what's going on.
But undoubtedly the most epic time in American history, in world history.
We're getting into Russia.
What does all the military drills mean?
Putin threatening military action in Ukraine.
It's all coming up.
There's a reason InfoWars is getting exponentially more popular.
Hard to believe, but it's true.
28 million people one way or another every week.
Tune in or watch the broadcast.
And then you've got all the millions and millions that read the news articles just on our site.
Not to mention where they're copied everywhere or other talk show hosts read the information but don't give us credit.
But I love that.
I don't care.
I love changing the narrative back to basic common sense.
But I tell you, you look at mainstream media, they're a bunch of regurgitating puppets.
And written across all of this is major crisis.
But the good news is there are a lot of people that are awake.
So, Dr.
Presunich, you got cut off by the break.
You were getting us some really important information.
Please continue.
Well, the point is that, in effect, what happened, what we have in this new debate coming up, which will be quite interesting, you have three powerful forces coming in on Trump.
You have Brannon, you have Mike Flynn, and you have Trump himself, and Roger Ailes, who has, he and I have worked together on 41, his campaign.
And I can assure you that Roger understands strategy and tactics, both in media and in campaign.
In contrast to that, you have Hillary Clinton, who will perform Accordingly.
In other words, she sounds very bright, she sounds articulate, except a lot of the assumptions are wrong, a lot of the statements will be lies, and a lot of the accomplishments would have been non-existent.
And at the same time, she will have to ward off an amazing amount of physical and mental fatigue, which will put a major strain on her.
And that's one of the issues that the Democrats have to worry about her.
And that's one of the issues that Trump and Roger Ailes and Brandon have to look at and know how to utilize that in terms of a debate that will stretch over a few hours and a few weeks.
Because this is not going to be a knockout punch.
This is not something where you come in and, you know, I heard your former guest, and I thought that was a very clever idea, talking about Hillary and explaining, yes, she's sick, and not addressing it subsequently.
But usually what happens in these kind of debates is that each one will test the other out, almost like a boxing ring.
And you can see Trump very much, I consider him like a Cassius Clay.
moving around about you know throwing in a few jabs here and there and Hillary pretty much going on schedule and on form talking about the non-existent accomplishments that she made all of which he may or may not address She did nothing when she was Secretary of State.
She did go to war in Libya.
She had a Benghazi episode.
We know all that.
As a senator, she not only did nothing, accomplished absolutely nothing, but she lost 25% of jobs in New York State when, in fact, she promised that New York State would have 200,000 jobs.
So the factual parts would come out in different ways.
The most important part of what's coming out of this subsequent debate is really the emotional intensity and where the people will alive themselves.
Because there's several debates, a knockout in the first round is not always the most effective way to handle it.
And when I was involved in debates with Bush Senior and Bush Junior, you had to calculate that you really have to think about this as three or four rounds.
And you have to decide when in fact a counterpunch comes in strategically.
The fact that you have a consistent puncher here is that you have to hold back.
Sure, but the media is going to announce if she was TKO'd or knocked out completely, they're going to announce that as a victory for her.
So I think he really gets up there and just attacks the media, ignores her, and goes, here's the little sad puppet, the little fake foundation minion, the lady that claimed she was like Brian Williams.
I wouldn't be nice to her.
I'd go total.
You want to play the little lady thing.
You want to play the little game that you're the victim of the big mean man here.
You know, I'd vote for a woman for president in 10 seconds if she wasn't a traitor.
I'd hit her with pure brass knuckles and just bring up, you know, you said you were in Serbia or wherever under attack and there's video.
It's all a lie.
And I would just hit her with the foundation.
I'd hit her with everything.
I would just hit her and hit her and hit her and say, how dare you create ISIS? How dare you do all this?
Well, you could do that.
In effect, what that might do for the audience is turn them off, not because it's correct or it's factually on target, because it's just too much emotionally to absorb.
And even though it looks good and it sounds good...
No, I get it.
They want to see a long, like a movie with a cord hearing where you only find out who's bad at the end.
Now you got it, Alex.
The audience wants to be entertained in the beginning.
They want to be let down a little bit.
And then for the denouement, for the end of the film, they want to knock out.
But see, and I get what you're saying, and I can do that.
I can be Machiavellian.
But it seems inherently deceptive.
Why not just throw the whole thing aside and say, I'm removing the curtain.
You're a little nothing puppet.
You're a piece of filth.
You'd have to walk off the stage.
You'd have to walk off the stage, yeah.
You have to walk.
That's what you did, Alex, with that British guy.
Yeah.
Yeah, I mean, I just say the whole thing's faking.
I got some foreign agent trying to disarm me.
Screw you.
You're an agent.
But listen, you're probably right.
We should do the whole nuance deal.
I just, the media will spin that.
We'll be back with Steve Pacinic.
We are 81 days out from the general election.
Everybody can feel the tension in the air.
You can cut it with a knife.
I really try to figure out how stuff works.
I really do try to talk to all the different experts, nice people I agree with, and study history and study different elites and try to figure out where we're going.
And I see a lot of delusion by the technocrats and people.
They're too busy thinking about some new Elysium, Mount Olympus, they're going to live forever.
And I'm not the one saying that.
That's the really rich people are just kind of like, manage the scum for us while we fly around on our jumbo jets.
And, you know, the head of Google makes his girlfriends wear hoods over their heads so no one can see them because he wants privacy.
But then he says, you shouldn't expect...
Privacy.
And it's just they don't have fundamental decency, these elites, that what they do to us ends up coming back on them.
The first presidential debate is September 26th, so those are close in.
Hillary wants them limited.
She only wants three.
She wants them in low ratings periods.
How does Donald Trump, the words transcend, get around, circumnavigate, that the media is going to, he gives great speeches, they just ignore it and play little side clips for him taking questions.
How does he get around, though, even if he does have knockouts in these debates?
They'll be watched by 20, 30, 40 million people, maybe.
Maybe 50 million.
But still, they're just going to turn it all into some fake controversy.
That's why I think the big devastating blow, especially in the first debate, is then he can try to save it if it doesn't work with second and third, is the way to go.
But maybe I'm wrong.
It's just at a certain point, Calling it all as a fraud, and I think really going after her and saying, we're not going to play this card of you're a woman when you're off bragging about wars and how you're good at killing people and how you're this hero like Brian Williams.
I mean, I think savaging her is the way to go.
The media is going to say that, oh, it's a big failure.
I think he says it ahead of time.
Oh, they're going to say that I'm a big failure doing this.
No, this is the time for reality to reemerge.
I think if he sits there and deathly plays it with her and everything, I think he loses.
Now, if he somehow could do it where he gets good punches in every time and slowly roast her, that'd probably be the safest route.
I'm not a veteran of campaigns or debates like Steve Pechenik.
But what do you think, knowing Roger Ailes, what do you think Roger Ailes, who's been obviously a coup at Fox to kick him out so that Fox won't try to expose a rigged election, what do you think he's advising Trump to do?
I don't know what Roger's going to advise him because I don't want to speak on behalf of Roger.
I've only known him over a limited period of time.
Sure, but what's your gut knowing Roger?
Well, he's a very practical, no-nonsense man who understands when you attack and when you don't.
And he understands the power of that single blow.
For example, when we were talking about Bush Senior and we were, he was 20 points or 15 points behind Dukakis, if one could even imagine that.
We had to get Bush Senior out in front and we had to keep Dukakis in literally physically in Massachusetts.
So the issue of, and I think he brought it up or one of the others, and James Baker was there, And you had very rational men, and we talked about the fact that we needed a product that would force the candidate, in this case Dukakis, to remain in Massachusetts while we literally physically swung out Bush Senior, 41.
And that case was the Willie Horton case.
And that came out, and it created exactly what we thought.
You know, in every debate, I've always gotten a call from the opposition asking me just to meet me.
I think they wanted to know what exactly I said, and that was similarly the case.
I won't identify who called me, but it was a friend of Roger Ailes, and she worked for Dukakis, and she's a lovely lawyer and lady from the West Coast, and she wanted to know Why this strategy was developed.
In the same way, another strategy that was developed with 43, who, in terms of his dynamic, Bush Jr., in terms of Al Gore, Gore was a far more intellectual individual than Bush Jr.
And it wasn't that he was smart or stupid.
It was simply that Gore liked to articulate and talk a lot.
And so what we did was to take...
Bush's weakness make it into a strength, which was his paucity of response.
And he didn't say very much, and he didn't have to retort very much.
He just talked about God, country, and whatever.
And instead, we had Al Gore, his strength, we turned it into a weakness.
And that weakness was his inability to control his verbosity.
Literally, he kept talking and talking.
That basic strategy worked.
And when it was over, one of the board's campaign managers wanted to have lunch with me.
But I really understood what they were looking for.
In a similar way, Roger will understand how to transform Trump's weakness into a strength and Hillary's strength into a weakness.
Okay, so if you were advising Trump, Steve Pacinic, former head of psychological warfare of the State Department, a guy that's overthrown governments and installed governments, so you know what you're talking about, what would you advise Trump to do in these debates?
I mean, I know it's just stalled, I know we get all technical, you'd have to think it all out, but what are the basics?
Well, number one, the basics is this is not a one-round match.
I mean, you and I differ on that, and that's fine.
No, no, no.
I'm not saying my plan is one big death blow.
Let's talk about it.
Number two, a lot of this will not often be decided in a debate.
You have two very valuable allies there.
Three, you have, I don't know Brannon, but I have a pretty good sense of Flynn.
I've met him.
And you have Roger Ailes, and if you flanked him out, Well, I think it's important that if you get into the news media far faster than the Clinton team does, and you're able to basically create a narrative, then you're setting up a situation where it's going to be very hard for Hillary not to be blocked.
In fact, you have to block her emotionally, intellectually, and in terms of timing.
And that gets into specifics.
Hillary is a plotter.
She is literally, she'll continue to just spout out what she needs to say.
She's like a robot.
She's like a robot, so use that against her.
That's correct.
Maybe Trump makes a joke when she does something particularly robotic and goes, thank you for that info.
That was good.
Danger, Will Robinson.
With all due respect, I always have to respect my adversaries.
And in this case, I would be, I have a lot of respect How to handle her, because she will be prepared for these eruptions of statements, and I'm sure that she has some good strategies or tacticians.
I'm not sure, but I assume so.
But the reality is Hillary has to worry about Bill Clinton, she has to worry about her team, and then she has to worry about the fact that her whole life, psychologically, she's carrying a lot more of a burden And Trump is.
Trump made a decision about a year ago, and it was a spontaneous decision saying, I want to give up part of my life to serve the country.
For Hillary, this was inbred, and this has been part of her gestalt in genetics and emotions since the time that she was a kid.
And so will there be subconscious self-sabotage going on?
Yeah, you got it.
There's a lot of elements here where she can be highly self-destructive, where she was.
She was self-destructive in the email.
She was self-destructive in Haiti.
She was self-destructive on a trip.
And that's why we don't want her as president.
Why is she so damn reckless?
Well, that's a good question, Alex.
The reason she's reckless is in part not because she's stupid, but because she's so eager to do what she thinks is right and has a coterie of actually sycophants.
Yes, ma'am.
In all fairness to her, Trump got rid of that.
What Trump wanted was a reality tester on every level, and not only a reality tester, but people who could literally argue against each other.
With Hillary, it's been a history of the lowest and poorest quality...
Well, what about this psychology?
And I don't want to get too deep in this because I don't give the media fodder that the way it's kind of a positive thing.
What does it say for Trump's bona fides?
And I know for a fact...
He has picked up on my warnings, my info, word for word.
Well, yeah, yeah.
He has.
But Trump will be Trump.
In other words, he wrote the book of the art of the deal.
And understanding that, he understands that there's a beginning...
Sure, but what does it say about his psychology that he listens to somebody like me?
Oh, because...
Well, it's the same reason my psychology.
You resonate...
Emotionally and in a narrative.
That's what he said.
He said, that's exactly what you just said.
That's wild.
He's a really smart guy.
Well, but that's true, Alex.
I've known you for over 14 years, and with all due respect, I don't know anything about Brett Bart or any of that alternative media, but I only know Alex Jones.
We've been through a lot of fights together in terms of 9-11, and we brought along millions of people along a narrative That's right.
And he's tied into that and he knows that.
He knows.
Of course he knows that.
But he has to rely on someone like you and others who can tell the truth.
That's why Mike Flynn came forth.
Well, I have to know for a fact he almost had him as the VP guy, but the party threw a fit.
He really admires Flynn.
So let's talk about understanding Trump psychology, what type of person Flynn is.
Well, Flynn, you know, I can't say I've known him personally.
I've met him and I've watched what he has done in a meeting where he brought in all kinds of social scientists, psychologists to expand out military intelligence into an area which it should have been, and it was when I began.
But he wanted to bring in psychology, social science into the intelligence field, and he was very effective at doing that.
And he was what we call the map out of the network.
He knew how to find and fix it and neutralize the terrorists at a very high speed along with General McChrystal.
The key to him was that he's a go-getter.
And in that process, like myself and like you and others and Trump, we're going to shake up the hen house and we're going to place a lot of people in an uncomfortable position Because he stands out, he says what he says, he made no apologies.
For revealing what was called, quote, secret information to our allies, Australia and Britain.
And it turns out he was a central leader.
Explain how that works.
You told me about it right when it happened, and then other people confirmed it, but that the Pentagon and then Dempsey, the chairman, actually told Obama, we're not going to do air power, we're not going to be the air force for al-Qaeda.
Senators then parroted that, and there was a, basically, and then Obama spun it later, and Hirsch came on about it, and talked about the fact, well, yeah, They forced Obama to go, okay, do a dual strategy, because they basically told him, we know you're running ISIS and al-Qaeda.
So then they ran a dual strategy of actually trying to contain it.
I mean, that to me is, that's the stuff of, I mean, that's beyond Operation Valkyrie, because it's bloodless, but it's the military actually blocking Obama and Hillary from turning the whole Middle East over to Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda.
Is that an accurate way to say it?
Yes, it is.
It's what you and I have called correctly, and I've lauded General Dempsey for it and Mike Flynn and others, it's called a soft coup.
And what we mean by a soft coup is, you know, when we invoke the image of a coup, everybody thinks we have tanks in the streets, or it's like the movie Siege with Bruce Willis and Denzel Washington.
No, that's not what happens in a coup.
The first coup that I may have been involved with was under Nixon.
When in fact Henry Kissinger, I give him the credit, and Schlesinger and Richardson took over the nuclear weapons and the power away from Nixon as he was deteriorating physically and mentally.
So that was a transfer of power without the Congress invoking any legislative requirements or in any way informing the public.
The most important element that we can do as an American, and Obama understands it as much as I can criticize him, It's one thing is the most important.
He must transfer power peacefully to the next officer, be it Trump or Hillary.
The reason for that has far more to do with the world perception of America and our financial system, because we are the only country That legally and democratically transfers power very quickly over without any problems.
Sure, sure.
Not to interrupt, this is so critical, but it seems like the world's in greater crisis.
German banks are in trouble.
The situation in Russia is escalating.
I don't, again, I don't lionize Russia, but it is a lot of escalation on the west part of Ukraine while we're working with them in Syria.
Crystallize that from your perspective.
Well, what's really happening is Russia's playing.
Putin is in serious, serious trouble at home.
He has gotten rid of his chief ally, it doesn't matter what his name is, who is his right-hand man, because he knows that there is an impending purge or a counter-coup against Putin.
So he's created a new entity above the FSB, which is the old KGB. He's created a new entity above the GRU, which is military intelligence, called the National Guard.
Now, that's a fancy way of saying I have private guards.
We don't have them.
So what's happening is he's trying to exert his power at a time when he is not in very great shape.
Financially, 20 out of 80 of his governmental units, in other words...
No, I know.
Russia's been under massive economic warfare, and he's creating a Praetorian Guard.
So that sounds scary to me.
Well, it is for Putin.
It isn't scary for us because, number one, Putin will not go to war because we do have alliances, believe it or not.
That are far stronger than Secretary Kerry does.
Our generals have a very strong alliance with the Russian soldiers and Russian intelligence going back for decades.
So, in effect, what I've always said to you and our audience is our intelligence and our military have their separate relationship, which is devoid of civilian oversight.
So our militaries know exactly how much they can go forward and how much they can push.
And we saw a powerful example of that when Obama was told, you know, we're not going to overthrow Syria for al-Qaeda.
Correct.
And that's where General Dempsey and others, I don't want to name them, they back off and they just distill their own command and control systems.
Look, it can't work.
At the same time, you have a General Flynn who may get into a confrontation with James Clapper, who's Director of National Intelligence, whom I also admire.
And these are two very strong-headed generals, and that's exactly what you want in the military.
That is not going to be obsequious to the President of the United States.
You don't want a bunch of yes men?
No.
And in fact, what you have is then we have a CINCPAC commander who is, I think, of Japanese origin in the United States, American Japanese, but is a very strong Well, China is really trying to take advantage of all this, but in the meantime, China has a very serious problem.
Xi, President Xi, It's trying to use a concept of Mao Zedong that's outdated.
In other words, you can't use old shibboleths and old symbols in order to mobilize young kids.
The Chinese are very bright, they're very young, and they're very hungry.
They're basically going back to Toronto.
They're coming to the United States.
They want an education.
They need a vibrant...
So the Chinese think they're infiltrating us.
The truth is the West intellectually can't be beat.
They're going to join us.
Well, that's correct.
It's not an issue of where they're going to beat us.
The problem is China knows right now that economically, internally, it's falling apart.
And it doesn't have enough food to supply to the local region.
And more importantly, I go back to the issue of water, water, water.
So it is a paper tiger?
Well, it's a little bit more than a paper tiger.
Well, stay there.
We're going to be right back in the final segment.
And then who do we have taking over in the fourth hour?
Anthony Gucciardi.
I'm Alex Jones talking to Dr.
Steve Pachenik.
This is real radio, folks.
This isn't for dumbed-down idiots.
Anthony Gucciardi is going to be hosting the fourth hour, and there's a lot to cover we haven't gotten to yet.
In fact, I'll probably do a little bit of that hour with him.
I look at Hillary and the pay-to-play of the State Department and establishing that, and I find it hard to believe that some higher agency group or COG group didn't authorize it, but the more we burrow into it, they didn't.
There's a feeling of invincibility with George Soros and these other characters that they're so tied into the elites that they can get away with murder.
But then that adds to the criminality of just doing more and more, thinking you're invincible.
Dr.
Steve Pacinic, other tidbits, other key points.
There's a new story up on Infowars.com.
We have a chart by Wayne Madsen compiled.
Clinton Foundation donations linked to State Department favors.
It's now coming out that indeed she did this.
We always knew this.
I had Tosh Plumlee and other CIA contractor whistleblowers on four years ago saying, listen, this is what really happened in Benghazi.
You were on within a week of the situation saying similar things.
So if this was all known then, again, I have to ask about Hillary for someone that reportedly has bad eyesight, you know, is scared of things and, you know, is just doddering around.
It just seems really bold because I'm on a power trip.
I'm probably a little bit narcissistic.
Who isn't?
Who's confident?
But as I get more power, I get more conservative and more concerned about misusing it.
I don't understand the megalomania of, like, you get more power, you get more arrogant.
Can you explain that to me as a psychiatrist?
Well, yeah.
Basically, what happens is the sense of self, who you are, no longer becomes real.
And what you assume is a persona.
That is invincible.
So if everybody says you're not drunk, but in fact you are drunk, and you're not invincible when in fact you are invincible, then the fact becomes that you are literally working in an area of what we call self-delusion.
And she is very much in a world of her own.
She's not nuts.
She's not crazy.
It's not any of that issue.
She's just disconnected in her own world.
Yeah, I mean, you have to remember, when you become a politician and you live in the Senate, as she has, or you live in the White House, you live in a very isolated area.
She hasn't, you know, the most basic thing, let's get it down to basics, They don't drive a car.
Obama hasn't driven a car in eight years.
They don't go...
Sure, a huge extension of this is until just a few decades ago, the Queen of England had somebody wipe her butt.
I mean, I'm not trying to be gross, but they had the groom of the stool.
I mean, is that what you're getting at here?
Yeah.
The point is, they are no longer doing the ordinary things of ordinary day.
Nobody's taking out pampers for the kids.
Nobody's staying up at night.
Nobody has to take out the garbage.
Nobody's cleaning up the...
Nobody's got to balance the checkbook.
Nobody's got to get the dead possum out of the air conditioner.
Correct.
So what happens in effect is you become this other person that's taken care of.
And the more you're taken care of, the less you have a sense of strength within yourself and a greater sense of entitlement.
And for her, anything she does is an entitlement.
So she can be corrupt.
I mean, When HSBC gave $81 million to the Clinton Foundation, Comey didn't think that was anything wrong.
Comey didn't think that in any way he would be indicted for criminal activity.
Oh yeah, you got cut off.
We have to do five more minutes if we can do it.
You got cut off, Bob.
We never came back to it.
You were trying to explain how Comey was involved and why he's compromised?
Well, he's highly compromised, and the man has no integrity.
Neither did Mueller when he was involved in 9-11.
So who do you pick as the director of the FBI? From the very beginning, you had a man who was a cross-dresser.
Why don't we put General Flynn as the head of the FBI? Well, you could, but he would probably throw out 80% of the FBI. He and I don't tolerate civilian inactivity and Incompetency very well.
Flynn works with, the same way I do, the military.
So when you have a civilian intelligence organization, they're not as good as in the military, as the Defense Intelligence Agency with 20,000.
But let's get back.
I mean, he's highly compromised.
Worked at Hogan& Hartston with Loretta Lynch.
Back in 70 seconds, we'll get into Comey and why he's compromised under Steve Pachinik in five more minutes.
Then Anthony Guciardi takes over.
We've got big specials running at Infowarsstore.com that are about to end.
20% off on Living Defense and other products.
I love how Hillary Clinton gave 97% plus of her charitable donations to her own foundation.
It's called money laundering.
People have a lot of nerve, folks.
If you already did that, we'd be in prison.
It's just crazy.
You have this mole-like woman just, like, stumbling around, running everything because of her arrogance, everyone bowing down, and her using the false...
Chivalry of the West that she's a woman.
But this is the modern feminist age.
So don't use the fact you're a woman to do all this dirty stuff and then punch us and we don't punch back.
I think she's fair game.
That's another issue I was just thinking about.
Dr.
Pachinik, we've got four minutes left.
Thanks for your time today.
StevePachinik.com.
Finish up with Director Comey and why you're saying he backed off the call for an indictment of Hillary Clinton.
Well, because he was part of a law firm that developed, number one, the emails...
He knew very well.
Hogan and Hartson were the ones who did the patent research and the patent application for MXLogic, Inc., which is the Denver-based company with the encryption codes that Hillary had.
He was involved with a law firm that did Hillary's taxes, and he was on the board of directors of HSBC, the corrupt bank, which siphons off all the drug cartel money.
And that bank gave $81 million to Hillary Clinton Foundation.
And it goes on and on and on.
And he is part of this corrupt entity.
And then when he just, you know, split his decision saying, oh, well, I can't indict her, which was nonsense.
He can't indict her because he couldn't indict Petraeus as well.
He didn't want to.
He didn't have the courage.
He didn't have the conviction.
But Trey has committed major felonies by giving over the aid.
Sure, sure.
Shifting gears then, what about Bill Clinton just going on a plane and not caring and then saying, come, he's full of BS? Just the arrogance of Clinton is amazing.
Well, because they think we are Disneyland for their world.
And in fact, they have never been held accountable.
There's never been a regime change under them.
and the worst that ever happened is that he was picked off for a fellatio with Monica Lewinsky, and he thinks that was a joke.
And so the left and most of the people adored them like Nero.
And they...
Disconnected, entitled, arrogant?
It's entitlement, it's arrogance, but it's also a point at which they don't care.
They don't care about America, they don't really care about anybody else.
They care about the fact that Bill and Hillary Clinton are the king and queen of Haiti, the king and queen of America, the king and queen of the world.
I mean, that's basically the way they see themselves.
They're the lowest of the low, and they really presume themselves to be the highest of the high.
Unfortunately, they tainted a very sweet daughter who was really going to be a pre-med student and ended up to be tainted by marrying somebody whose parents were also crooked.
So crookedness begets crookedness, which begets crookedness.
And so it's their own world.
In the old days, we would have called it the Jewish-Italian mob.
The Pritzkers out of Chicago.
And we have one of their descendants, Peggy Pritzker, who's under Obama.
And we have Obama, who's the scion of all the mob boys in Chicago.
So the corruption goes on all the time.
And it goes on both sides, the Bush, the Clinton.
It really doesn't matter until you get to the moment where a man like Trump, who may be compromised in his own ways, I mean, you're not an angel when you run casinos, but the minute he comes in and he says, you know what, I want to blow up the system and see what happens.
Then you get yourself a verbal revolution, which everybody's watching.
No, that's right.
That's right.
And I think Trump, regardless of what happens with Trump, he's a bellwether, like you said, a figurehead.
Correct.
Big change is coming.
And then your show will become even more important because after the elections, What will happen, there will be a scattered amount of people who will say, well, how do we coalesce now?
What are the different parties?
And no longer will you have a Republican party, as we know it.
No longer will you have a Democratic party.
But you may have four or five different parties.
Sure, we're just arriving at the big shake-up.
Thank you, Dr.
Bachetti.
Anthony Gossiardi coming up.
We'll talk to you again soon.
Powerful info.
▲
Export Selection