Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Gates

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Tue Jul 29, 2025 10:25 pm

Washington Life profiled Tony Podesta’s home and art collection in 2014.

Image
Tony Podesta, posing with one of his favorite pieces of art in his home, by Louise Bourgeois’ called the “Arch of Hysteria”

Image
[right]Jeffrey Dahmer Victim, including severed head

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

Image
Biljana Djurdjevic

In a 2004 interview, Tony Podesta listed as one of his very favorite artists a sculptor named Patricia Piccinini.

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

Image
Patricia Piccinini

In another interview, Tony Podesta named the British “artist” Kim Noble as one of his other very favorites. Noble suffers from schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder (multiple personality disorder), and creates crude drawings of extreme sexual abuse, mostly of children. Noble herself was viciously sexually assaulted repeatedly between the ages of 1- and 3-years-old, and has spent much of her life in and out of mental institutions.

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

Image
Kim Noble

*******************

Epstein's Niece Exposes ALL From Bill Clinton to Cult of Baal Exclusive with Anya Wick - Podcast 771
by Shaun Attwood



EPSTEIN PATERNO
LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
FAMILY LAW ATTORNEYS

Steven B. Epstein

Image

Steve, a third-generation Colorado lawyer, limits his practice to all areas of family law including dissolution of marriage (divorce) and civil unions, custody, nuptial agreements, co-habitation agreements, partition of real estate, adoption, and international cases under the Hague Convention.
Steve has been honored since 2006 as a Colorado Super Lawyer and has earned the peer-chosen designation as a Best Lawyer in America.

Steve is a frequent lecturer to lawyers and psychologists in areas ranging from business valuation to the proper role of mental health professionals to the constitutional rights of parents and children.

As well, Steve is a frequent author of legal articles including the Colorado Family Law Practice Guide on Nuptial Agreements (2006-2013), as well as, for example, “Economic Fault and Equitable Division in Divorce” and “The Death Knell of Fantasy Values.”

In addition to his legal advocacy work, speaking and writing, Steve is available for family law consultation and for appointments as an expert witness.

Steve is a graduate of the Denver Public Schools (Manual High, 1977), Amherst College, 1981, and the University Of Colorado School Of Law, 1985. He is married to Kari, a classical cellist, and has three children, Noah, Anya, and Daniel.

https://epfamilylawattorneys.com/our-te ... b-epstein/


Transcript

[Anya Wick Epstein] I am Jeff Epstein's niece. Bill was on the flight logs because he went to the island. Jeffrey also went to many, many other places where me and other children were present. I believe he wanted to talk more about the other parties involved. And I know he didn't kill himself. I'm not sure whether they let him go and get plastic surgery and flee the country, or if they did kill him. But I do believe he was a pawn, and that his story blew up in the media to keep people from looking beyond him. If Jeffrey was the one villain in charge of it, then he's dead. It's all over. Everything's good now. MK Ultra is the practice of creating slaves with a severed memory. Many of whom were my siblings, who I only got to see at family reunions, when I would rush home from school to watch them on TV. [Music] I moved back to New York City because my ex-husband had a scheme to try to allow me to speak about some of this in court, since court testimony can be used as evidence to potentially open up a criminal case. But when I got to the hearing, I was only allowed to say my name and address, and the judge refused to let me speak beyond that. When we had gone to the FBI a couple years ago, they interviewed my father and said, "Oh, he said nothing happened, so we're going to close this case." Every successful politician who is born into this world have a vested interest in keeping it quiet. The cult of Baal, BAAL -- My family masqueraded themselves as Jewish publicly, but behind closed doors, at Passover dinners when I was drugged, would admit we are Satanists.  

[Shaun Attwood] So, I am here with Anya Wick, Epstein's niece, and I've been watching Anya on
Tik Tok. The link for her Tik Tok is in the description box. So please support Anya's work. And you know, my partner
Jen, has been really amazed by your story as well. A lot
of it is harrowing. For example, Bohemian Grove, and other extreme things that I'm
sure will fascinate the viewers. But before we get to all that stuff, you know, viewers, disclaimer, harrowing
content warning, and because of restrictions on my channel, Anya, I've got to make sure you give us permission to publish this video, and you wave your
anonymity.

[Anya Wick Epstein] Of course. Of course. Okay. Okay.

[Shaun Attwood] So before we get to
what you've been through, do you want to just set the table a bit, and let the view viewers know what it was like for
you growing up?

[Anya Wick Epstein] Yes, of course. So my name is Anya Wick, but at birth I was Ana Beth
Epstein. I was born in a house in Boulder, Colorado.
In 2015, I changed my name to Owen Theodore
Epstein. In 2020,
I changed it again to Anna Petrova.
I had realized what I was surrounded by my entire life, and thought I could hide from it.
And I married a man named Wick, kept that name, and
decided to start going public with my story just a few months ago.

I had chemically driven amnesia the majority
of my life. I am Jeff Epstein's niece, and I was raised as a sex slave.
My father had me separated from my mother and twin
brother, and administered a substance that was designed to sever my memory.
Every time I was went on family vacations, or a trip to the cabin in
the mountains, I was given this drug upon which everything would come flooding back.
But when it wore off, so would the majority of my memories of it. And I
would try to go to school, perform with my bands, be a regular person.
But it broke me subconsciously. I knew something was very wrong, but I
had internalized it on myself. And after attempts in 2015,
I got away from the slavery I was in by
taking testosterone, transitioning to male. I left Colorado in 2017.
and started piecing together back memories I had assumed were only nightmares
in about 2020. That's the very short version of my story. And Sean,
we could come at this from any angle, any point of time in my autobiography. I
invite you to just ask what you are curious about.

[Shaun Attwood] So let's slow it down then and just go
back to the beginning. How old were you when you first realized that
things weren't as they should be?

[Anya Wick Epstein] I had awareness of this in grade school. I remember
my supposed seventh birthday. I was actually already 10 years old.
Let me backtrack. My father and stepmother
had a baby girl in 1991 who was raised by another family.
In 1998, they signed me her birth date on my birth certificate, which they waited 10 years to file,
claiming my stepmother was my biological mother. They finally put me in school in the
gifted program, telling me I was tall. I thought it was very strange that my
mother was so callous with me. I knew it wasn't normal that I wouldn't let her touch me on the shoulder,
and I felt worlds away from my peers. I remember in the first grade sitting there
journaling that I don't feel seven. I feel much older.
I feel at once like there's something I'm missing that the rest of my classmates all understand,
and that I've lived a lot more than them. I remember being on the schoolyard,
talking with my few friends about what would it be like if you were tortured and didn't know it. They were like, what
are you talking about? I got in trouble with my friend's mother
for drawing stick figure [DELETED] at a slumber party.
Of course, it shouldn't be the child's fault if they've had exposure to anything like that, but I took the blame
instead of my parents. I always knew something was wrong.
But because my regular life, you know, my parents were upstanding
citizens, my father was a divorce attorney, my mother was on the PTA, I thought I
was the problem. I had some memories I retained, But because of the nature of the substance I was on, it made that reality so different than my
regular life. I thought these were nightmares that I was sick,
and I didn't tell anybody.

Why do you think your family got involved in these things?

It goes back for generations.
I remember my father confessing that my oldest brother is
eight years younger than him.

[DELETE] is cyclical with men especially when they stifle it,
they repeat the patterns, which I don't see as an excuse. I'm not
a [DELETE], but of course this happens with men.
and power and pressure to conform
is excellent as a tool for silencing people.
They told me that we belonged to the cult of baal.
They told me this with consistency
while I was being abused. Now, what you can look up about the cult of
baal information that is publicly available is that it is thousands of
years old. It is a Phoenician satanic fertility cult.
And publicly, it's supposed to have been eradicated,
but to my knowledge and my experience, it is not.
This is what people perceive the Illuminati to be. It is
a group of elites that practices
forced [DELETE] and uses these crimes to control people.
They happen to have a huge reach over politics and entertainment.
My great-grandfather., according to my father,
was Walt Disney. Before he moved to the United States,
his name was Artur Bicke. A R T U R B I C K E.
And his twin sister, who he had children with, who I am
descended from, was named Minnie.
That's where we get Mickey and Minnie Mouse. It's very cute, right? Except for
when you consider the abuse that I suspect is still
happening to children who go into the entertainment industry, children who are
born into it.

My father was abused by his parents, and
I was raised going to these giant [DELETE]
where I would meet other children who were put on television.
I was raised getting taken to Bohemian Grove
where I was, after a ceremonial corpse burning, Alex Jones
has talked about, and my memories of these
circumstances are still somewhat fragmented.
These assaults happened a couple times a month, and I'm blessed not to remember every detail.
But my father was consistent in what he told me.
It's hard for me to talk about.
I want to just answer your questions honestly,
as my answers align with what I was told and what I have experienced.
Now this is alleged -- when birth certificates have been
forged, it's not something I can immediately research myself --
all I have to go on is what lies in my memory of who I have met,
and what I was told.
But to answer your basic question, why my family does this?
Because it was done to them. Because
having one man bear as many children in a generation as possible,
and forcing them through these traumatic events, they believe it creates a
stronger bond, that creates more loyalty, that it keeps people from talking.
And for the most part, they're right, because I'm the only one of my siblings who has
directly spoken out about this. There are people who have hinted at it in
their music. Of course, Justin Bieber has talked
about being assaulted by Usher and Justin Timberlake
at P. Diddy's parties. But I don't think it's a coincidence they've only gone after Sean John Combs, P. Diddy,
and not his other alleged perpetrators who were born into the bloodline.
There seems to be a level of protection for people who are simply born into that
world, contrasted with people like Sean Combs, P. Diddy, or R. Kelly,
who joined as adults.

But I was not in the boardrooms.
I was a child on drugs. So I can't tell you exactly who
organizes this, exactly how it happens.
It's just speculation and memory.

Anya, you're a very powerful speaker,
and you're very well researched, and we've had a lot of survivors come on, and we salute you, you know, for for the
level of detail and knowledge that you have. I think it was David Icke who woke me up to the ancient cults and the
bloodlines that continue to these generations. And I think you're
the first survivor, perhaps, who's actually detailed how that has continued
over the ages. So if you could maybe expand on that a little bit. I think the
viewers would find this fascinating.

What specifically would you like expanded on?

So what was the cult that you mentioned earlier? The ancient one.

The cult of baal. B A A L.
I know very little about it. I My family masqueraded themselves as
Jewish publicly. But behind closed doors, you know, at
Passover dinners when I was drugged would admit, we are
Satanists. Now, what I can understand,
the public has caught on to this, but they call them the Illuminati.
And I find that interesting because Illuminati means illuminated.
I perceive the Illuminati in fact to be individuals like yourself,
other conspiracists like Alex Jones, even people like Kanye West, who have been trying to illuminate people to
this. I do not believe it is a unified organization,
but a loose collection of individuals who are illuminated to the cult of baal,
who have successfully mythologized themselves
as the Illuminati, and convinced people that
they are shapeshifting reptilians, myths that can be perpetuated
by the psychedelic nature of the tool that they use to abuse victims,
which is used to delegitimize people who catch on to what they have been doing.
And to be truthful, it was a reason I was anxious to come on here. You
know, when people talk about seeing men turn into lizards, it
makes everything seem a little bit more delegitimate. Now, when someone has been given
a powerful drug, their minds can experience something
like that. They can witness something like that. And it's something that kept me very confused as a child. I'm
in the material world in this plane. I'm being assaulted by my father, my uncles,
my cousins, but my mind is somewhere else. My mind is going on this fantasy ride.
And when I awake, I'm very confused.
I also believe there are people who have talked about these outlandish,
metaphysical, impossible experiences intentionally to derail conversations
about the cults, and their power in media and politics.


How prevalent are these Satanists in high society? And are they disguised?

Yes. They
control so much more than I think even I can
understand. I told you my father
boasted that his grandfather was Walt Disney. Now, I remember when Viacom
bought Fox, but Fox held a hard line on not selling
the news station. Steve raged and cried for a month.
Because that would have been a full monopoly on the American news market.
I remember meeting all sorts of politicians, American and
foreign, and entertainers. And as far as that goes, I'm happy to
answer honestly if you want to ask me about specific people, but I am very scared to name individuals if I am
unprompted.

If you say you've met somebody,
there's no legal consequences of that.

Okay.

Yeah. So if you want to tell us who you've met, and the viewers can just imagine what was
happening.

For your viewers across the pond, I do have fragments of memory of only once
meeting the royals on the one trip I took with my family over to the UK. And
it must have been 2005 or 2006.
I can't remember if it was the summer I went into the eighth grade, or into the ninth grade.
I have met everyone who has been an American
president in my lifetime, including
Donald Trump, who I have to say looked like he was at a funeral when he
was at the inauguration the second time around. So I don't think he wanted any part of it.
I have met
the Kardashians, which is why I believe Kanye West has appeared to have gone off his rocker.
I have met Harvey Weinstein the same night I met Jeffrey and Ghislaine,
and he wouldn't make eye contact with me. He did not want to participate in the
abuse of the small children. I believe that's a man who is behaving
as most Hollywood producers do. Which doesn't make what he did with those
actresses okay, but it looks to me like this is a man who was an easy scapegoat,
who wanted to expose what takes place with children in the
industry and with our family. There are a lot of people like that who
have been vilified, and while they are not innocent,
it's like choose your evil.

Jeffrey was not a hardcore [DELETE]. He was guilty for what he did to those
teenagers, but my family
ritualizes the three-year-olds, which Jeffrey was not privy to.
My twin brother
was raised on the Disney Channel. That was painful for me.
We were separated when we were four, and I didn't see him until he was on TV,
with a pilot episode in which
he pimps out his sister for a trading card.
There's a sequence of shots where the words royal tycoon flash on screen,
followed by a clip of the gross nerdy boy he tricks into going on a date with
plunging himself into a baby's crib.
He's been in the media for
making trouble on sets, and abusing his partners, and I'm
not saying his behavior is justified, but when you consider
what someone like that goes through as child, and the separation issues that are put on them,
it makes sense why abusive behavior is then repeated. And I pray for him regularly. I am anxious to talk about my siblings
because they are victims. I want
them to feel that it is safe for them to speak up, but I don't want to feel like I am
betraying them by naming them directly either. And I've already talked about, on
my Tik Tok channel, about the last
time I saw my mama. The last time I saw my mother,
I was getting by. It sounds like a comedy
line almost, and I've used it as a comedy line. I enjoy my standup. It's healing
for me. But I decided before coming on here,
I wasn't going to, with few exceptions, I didn't want to name anyone unless you asked me about them. I think there are a lot of people the public
speculate on. And if you bring them up, I'm happy to
talk about them.

So I think the view would be
very curious then about Jeffrey, and what's your view on
his role in the apparatus?

My understanding is that he, I met him in Aspen in 2007,
and that was a reintroduction. My father said, "Hey, remember your uncle Jeffrey?" And Jeffrey said,
"Hey, Anya, it's great to see you again." Ghislaine was there.
What they told me was that Jeffrey worked for Steven.
And as I've said, he's guilty for what he did to those teenage girls here in New York City, and down in
Florida, and St. Andrews, but I do not believe he was in charge of orchestrating
what has gone on in our family for generations.
With my experiences, I
believe he
wanted to talk more about the other parties
involved. And I know he didn't kill himself.
I'm not sure whether they let him go and get plastic surgery and flee the country, or if they did kill him,
but I do believe he was a pawn, and that his story blew up in the media
to keep people from looking beyond him.
If Jeffrey was the one villain in charge of it, then oh, he's dead.
It's all over. Everything's good now. And that leaves my father free to
continue three-year-olds,
and running Viacom from behind a veil, while his paralegal runs his divorce
practice, as he bragged about to me growing up.

So you're saying that Jeffrey wasn't involved in the full-on occult practices. He was just part of a machine,
and then they just used him to make an example out of.

He was involved in the full-on occult
practices, but not necessarily of his own volition. I have memories of men
being forced to assault me when they didn't want to.
I remember one man, this brilliant comedic actor, actually his better dramatic work,
my father's screaming at him, telling him to
penetrate me, and he makes one thrust and backs away, and my father gets
outraged and says, "You're going to come; you're going to come." And this poor man is crying throughout it, and I'm barely
conscious. Jeffrey may have been involved in the
full-on occult practices, but
he's not one of the hardcore
of this sickness where they are actually attracted to small children.

Yeah, Lady C mentioned that as well about hebephile or something versus --
So in terms of Maxwell then, what do you think her role was?

I think she enjoyed it much like my stepmother did.
I think she is as guilty as Jeffrey was.
But I didn't know her very well. I don't even remember a conversation with her.
I remember seeing her. I think she got off on the power of it.

I think with men who engage [DELETE]
and hebephilia, it's more of a sickness that arises from their own abuse. Like
my grandfather, my alleged grandfather,
Walt's son, who worked for the CIA, allegedly
faked his death to remove himself from my mother,
because he was so sickened by what he could not control doing to her.
I contrast that with my stepmother
who delighted in abusing me, and laughed at me when I was
incapacitated by the drug they had me on, and made fun of me drooling on myself,
being unable to speak.
I think with her and with Ghislaine,
I'm certain they were abused as children themselves, but there's a different kind of
psychopathy that grows within them where they get off on the power of it,
and abetting in these acts to please their partners.

Now, Kari Epstein was more sexually attracted to me than she was to her husband,
Steven. But she did also do these things in
order to stay in good graces with him.

And that was more out of survival. Kari was a very broke cellist in her early
adulthood with no familial support, whereas Ghislaine also comes from the aristocracy.
She had access to her own funds independent of Jeffrey. So I can't speculate too much on what she gained
from it besides psychopathic pleasure
and sadism. A schaudenfraude
of sorts. But I'm not a doctor.
She was not a large presence in my life.
That speculation on her personality is primarily based on what I know about my stepmother.


So would you say then that some of the techniques used on you would be classified under the MK Ultra program?

Yes, absolutely.

Could you explain that? Could you explain that for viewers who are not
familiar with MK Ultra?

Okay. These drugs were administered to me when I was an infant.
Macro doses were given every single time I was assaulted.
And I was kept on micro doses the rest of the time in my waking life
to maintain some control, some separation from my peers.
I actually didn't realize until very recently
that I was kept on micro doses, that I was kept on a small dose in my regular waking life.
Upon analysis of what would happen when I went on school trips away from Denver for a few days at a
time -- we would take trips to Washington DC, or New York, or California.
On those trips, after three or four days, I would actually start getting along
with my classmates. They'd be amazed. They'd say, "Wait, Anya, you're really cool and fun, and we like hanging out
with you." And I would end up being the center of the group. And not understand
why suddenly I'm connecting socially. But then we'd go back home,
I'd see my family again, and then the next time at school or at synagogue, I'd feel in my own weird little bubble
again. So I was put on these large doses
designed to knock me out when I was assaulted,
small doses to keep me complacent the rest of the time. What this did essentially was
sever my memory. Everything that happened to me, everything that was boasted about to me,
that occurred on those large doses, was locked away
in what I thought was a nightmare fantasy world.
I was primarily unconscious for the physical assaults. And if I was awake, I was so high, I
thought it was my own nightmares. This ensured
I wasn't going to go telling anybody about it.
This ensured I thought I was sick.
So when they paid a doctor to tell me that my PTSD responses like
jumping when my stepmother touched me, were bipolar,
I believed that. I believed it was my fault.
When I went to rehab in 2015 I was diagnosed with PTSD,
right off the bat. The doctors were frustrated with me because I couldn't tell them what traumatized me.
I was beating my head against the wall, and all I had going on in my head, I was stuck
on this idea that if I were born male,
I would be happier because my experience of womanhood,
I knew subconsciously, was slavery.
MK Ultra
is the practice of creating slaves
with the severed memory. Many of whom were my siblings,
who I only got to see at family reunions,
who I would rush home from school to watch on TV.
Me and [DELETE] are not the only twins. Most of us are separated.
I think I'm one of their only unsuccessful experiments, because what they do is they take one of
the twins, make them a child star,
and watch the other hone their craft independently so they
can rise to the level to reunite with them as adults.
And it works, because going through that trauma together,
no one else can understand it.
And that's part of the reason why I've been so anxious to do this podcast. There is still
a door for me that I can push open
if I choose to stop exposing this industry where people who love me,
want to see me again. And they do love me.
I know I'm in a situation where I'm struggling right now, but
they can't call me up because that would be to acknowledge how we met each other, right?
But they do love me. I remember in high school,
one of my younger brothers brought to one of the reunions
this little metal card he made in his metal shop class.
Engraved on one side was his name, and on the other was the name of my
boyfriend. And he said,
"I made this for you so you can try to remember. Hide this on
you. Hide this in your underwear, or in your bra, so you can find it when you get back
to the house in Denver. Don't let your parents see. Don't let your brothers see.
And it works.
After the drugs had worn off, I found this and I remembered who those boys
were to me, and I started packing up bags so I could run away to Hollywood,
but my younger brother found it, and showed Kari,
who gave me anesthesia, and threw it away. My family does this,
the cult of baal
they do MK Ultra because forging these trauma bonds
forges more loyalty. And
99 times out of 100, victims will choose
being with other victims over trying to speak,
to eventually prevent there being more victims.
And I'm talking to you because the children who are going through it
right now, one day are going to wonder why nobody cared
enough to try to stop it, to try to say something.
Now, they'll either find me, or
they will choose to keep their mouths shut, because they will understand
why, for the most part, victims of MK Ultra choose loyalty over truth.
That's why. And it allows them to maintain media control.

The first thing you see when you walk into Steve and Kari's house, is a giant
poster of Vladimir Lenin.
They boasted that one of my brothers is, in fact, the oldest son of the queen
of Jordan, where I have been.
Now that's just alleged, but if it's true, it could explain why Israel and Jordan
are allies. And considering that, and considering
my father's love for all things Russian,
it makes it look as though all of these wars
are just for show, designed to keep public perception off
of this sphere of control, and to keep money circulating through
different industries.


So Anya, why did you decide to start speaking out, and what challenges have you faced?

I decided to start speaking out because I don't want any children
in my family to have to continue growing up
wondering why they don't think that's their real
mother, or their real father, because I can't stand the pain of
knowing what those girls named "PAIN" and "HELP" are going through.
And the challenges I faced are what I've described with
loyalty, with wanting to see my siblings, and maybe wondering, okay,
is it better for those children going through the same abuse now,
to simply have a loving adult in some capacity in their lives,
or for them to grow up and know that someone tried to speak for them?
I am still split in half on that.
The consensus in my soul about what the right thing for those children is as split as my memories used to be.
Other challenges, you know, it's like you look at me and say, "Oh, well that's not true. She's crazy."
You know, 90% of the people who found me on TikTok know I'm telling the truth.
Look up a photo of Shia's mother, and see that we are identical.
They understand that you cannot Google the truth if someone is
claiming the official records have been forged.
But of course, the only proof I possess is in my DNA.
Getting anyone to do an A test isn't something I can do.


What is an "A" test for testing genes?

ChatGPT said:

An "A test" for testing genes likely refers to a complementation test, also historically called an "A–test" in classical genetics — particularly in fungi like Neurospora or Drosophila genetics. It is not a modern molecular test like PCR or sequencing, but rather a functional genetic assay used to determine whether two mutations that produce similar phenotypes are in the same gene (allelic) or in different genes (non-allelic).

Definition: Complementation (A) Test

Purpose:

To determine whether two mutant strains with similar phenotypes have mutations in the same gene or different genes.

How it works:

You cross two homozygous recessive mutants (e.g., strain A1 and strain A2), each with a mutation causing the same phenotype (e.g., white eyes in flies).
You observe the phenotype of the heterozygous offspring.
If the phenotype is wild-type → the mutations are in different genes → complementation occurs.
If the phenotype is mutant → the mutations are in the same gene → no complementation.

Example:

Two yeast strains can't synthesize adenine (both show a red colony phenotype). You cross them.
Offspring turn white → mutations complement → defects are in different genes.
Offspring stay red → mutations do not complement → defects are in the same gene.

In summary:

The “A test” or complementation test is a classical genetic method.
It helps map functional gene units before molecular DNA sequencing was available.
Still relevant in some areas of developmental biology and fungal genetics.


If you're referring to a modern genetic test called an "A test" (like in a clinical context), there’s no standardized genetic test by that name — if you saw this term in a specific report, publication, or context, feel free to share it and I can clarify based on that usage.


I moved back to New York City because my ex-husband had a scheme to try to allow
me to speak about some of this in court since court testimony
can be used as evidence to potentially open up criminal case. But
when I got to the hearing, I was only allowed to say my name and address, and the judge refused to let me speak beyond
that. When we had gone to the FBI a couple years ago,
they interviewed my father and said, "Oh, he said nothing happened, so we're
going to close this case." If every
A successful politician is born into this world. They have
vested interest in keeping it quiet. Now you have a woman who
because of the severity of the trauma that did happen. Yeah. It's just fiction.
suffered mental health problems, PTSD.
It's incredibly easy to paint me as insane. And my answer to that is,
why would I choose to talk about something so vile?
If it weren't real, I'm not profiting from this.
If I choose to let this interview go, I'm cutting myself out of the only
industry I have any sort of talent in
and the people I am closest to. Um,
it's fear. I
I cannot convince people
that Shawn Combmes was not acting alone
when I don't have proof. I don't have the video. It's probably at Larry David's house,
you know. Um, I wasn't able to record
the ceremonies at Bohemian Grove because I was rope bound.
They set up the abuse in a way to guarantee I was not going to be able to collect evidence while going through it.
All I have is my word and my DNA.
Why did you choose Tik Tok as a medium? Um
[Music] because
taking an artistic route, which I'm still working on. I'm still
trying to finish my screenplay. here. I'm still doing my standup just as my own outlet
would make my voice just another drop in the bucket of voices who have told the
truth through art in a way that will make it dismissed as fiction or as
humor. and
Tik Tok. I I didn't expect it to take off the way
it did. I first posted a video back in August
that got suck in 200 views.
Um, I chose Tik Tok because
it was not controlled by MA.
And I do believe the gentleman who owns that
initially founded his companies because he wanted to give some freedom to the people.
But it got bigger than his vision.
The United States wouldn't be trying so hard to get rid of Tik Tok
if Tik Tok were not granting more free speech
than the United States is comfortable with being in the hands of the public.
No one heard me until I went on TikTok.
I really care about the new song. So, we had uh ex wizard Satanist from
Bohemium Grove on uh a couple of weeks ago and he me he mentioned uh he told us a
story about the Clintons at Bohemium Grove. Did did you have any experience of the Clintons or at
Bohemian Grove? I have met both of them and their
daughters at Bohemian Grove. and at
resorts in Colorado. They loved going to ski lodges in the
offseason. They were not there in Aspen 27 2007
after the comedy festival. That's one I remember most vividly.
But it's all fuzzy. I don't know if we were in Steamboat or in Breenriidge, but I've met them a few times and
boasted all the time about how well she got along with Bill. Um,
she boasted about that even when we were sober.
So, Bill tried to distance himself from Jeffrey. Do you think there was a lot more going on between them?
Absolutely. Absolutely. I can't tell you what exactly,
but Bill was on the flight logs because he went to the island. He also went to many, many other
me and other children were present. It's just fact.
Yep. That's what Virginia said as well. Yes.
Do you think the death of Virginia is suspicious? Say that again. Pardon me. You think do
you think the death of Virginia is suspicious? Yes, I do. I
of course of course to survive a car crash and die in her home a few weeks
later. It had my viewers scared about me. Um,
what's protected me is my stating
that if they hurt me, it will only validate what I've been
talking about. That claim is keeping me safe.
if they did have an any tension of hurting me before,
they can't now without it making my voice a bigger story. 17 years.
And on the other side of that, um, a lot of them love me.
We grew up together. It's tragic.
I don't remember ever meeting Virginia. But that doesn't mean I didn't.
She may have been a cousin or a sister. I don't know. But I know she spoke the truth
about what Jeffrey and Gilane put her through. And I think she was gearing up to speak
more. I do not think that death was a coincidence. I do not believe that was suicide.
She had two young children.
She had two young children and she had already dedicated her life to speaking for other victims.
There is no reason she would have killed herself. And I know some of her family said it
might have been, but money talks.
Would you say that most people at the top of politics are compromised?
Yes, without a doubt. Without a doubt.
I know exactly who Donald Trump was talking about when he spoke of the New York elites during his first campaign
cycle. He had no mention of them during the re-election
because after that first presidency he realized he had no pull on his own strings and he was not going to be able
to do anything to expose this. I believe Obama wanted to do a lot more
that he promised in his campaigns as far as reasonable socialization of
our resources, you know, to bring us up with the rest of the developed world
when it comes to providing housing and health care and basic human rights and
found his hands tied because in America
people must be kept poor and busy. So they don't realize how much more power
they have when they are unified.
And and would you say that these politicians who are compromised it's of a sexual nature mostly
when people if politician is not born into the cult
they are forced to engage in criminal acts or submit
themselves so that those who are born in trust they
cannot snitch on what they are witnessing. because the families got dirt on them,
too. We see the same thing in Hollywood and in the music industry. Um, there's a
long tradition of black men wearing dresses after they make it famous. It's not because they're
forced to wear a dress. because they're using that to communicate with each other
and tell their viewers, I had to submit to get here.

Which takes us to the portrait of Bill Clinton in the dress at Jeffrey's house. What was the significance of that?
Bill has engaged in
sexual acts where he was on the receiving end
and there's the metaphorical submission.
Um, he was likely forced to engage in acts against children that he didn't
want to engage in, which is associated with weakness, which
unfortunately is associated with femininity.
I didn't want to be a woman because I had it drilled into my head that female
meant you must submit.
And unfortunately, it's what we're seeing pervading through society now masquerading itself as
feminism. Uh, the ideology I fell for,
the ideology that saved my life states,
"Your gender, your personality
is not biologically determined, but is a social construct designed to
uphold the patriarchy. Your body or your sex
does not determine your gender or personality.
But you must change your body if it is not
congruent with your socially constructed personality.
inadvertently reinforcing those
patriarchal standards that are not biologically determined that we are supposed to be fighting.
Men put on the dress after they are forced to submit. Whether that means giving their bodies or taking
a body that they do not want to take. And we associate that submission with
femininity, which is a sickness for men and women
alike. It hurts men who do not want to be predatorial,
and it hurts women who do not want to be victims. It hurts young boys who are sensitive
and young girls who don't want to be objects. But
agency saves lives.
Taking testosterone is when they stop selling me. It saved my life.
I think most people who adhere to that ideology do so because they've reached a breaking
point where they cannot exist in toxic masculinity anymore.
because they cannot continue bearing the pain of being a woman. A woman woman in a society that tells you you are only an
object.
Bill had to submit in one way or another. That's the significance of the dress.
So, were you on testosterone then for a period of time? Yes, for 5 years.
And how did that affect you? Um, I'm now infertile, but that's
because I had a hyerectomy. The testosterone
made my uterus hurt. And my doctors at Mount Si
and my family encouraged me to remove my uterus instead of ceasing taking the
drugs that were making it hurt. Uh, my breasts had to be reconstructed.
My family paid for a masectomy. It lowered my voice. I've had to retrain
it to speak at a more neutral tone. I'll never be a soprano again.
But when I sing, I sound a lot more punk rock like I wanted to when I was younger.
Um, I had a full beard. It's mostly gone now.
I was getting casting calls for roles that required male nudity before I went back on estrogen.
Couldn't take them because I didn't have the member that they wanted on camera. Thank goodness I never went that far.
What was I going to do? Pack my speedo?
Risk it falling out between takes? Um,
no. COVID actually started triggering my desire to quit
that when I started having to wear a mask again and people from behind
knew I was female and would call me a she and I'd get upset about it and see
this mustache. Um,
I don't know. The piece then helped me face reality a little bit. Um,
it was also in that period I first took a micro dose
of the same substance that my family had me macro dosed on
and I had memories come back that I retained.
It took my therapist two years to get me to understand that these were
real memories, that it aligned with my psychological profile.
I did not want to believe it. It was easier for me to stay in denial.
I was happier when I was still in denial. My life was easier
when I was still in denial. But
these were the same memories that I thought were only nightmares when I was
a child. But as soon as those memories came back,
I remember just looking in the mirror at terror.
of resembling
those who had caused me pain. I love men. I do. I I have a problem
with men. I love men. But it was exceptionally horrifying
to see how much I looked like my father
and the pain of having done that to myself. that I did so much to destroy my body in
response to my body being destroyed.
So, I had to go back. I quit the testosterone as soon as I could. And
I was doing full drag makeup to hide my stubble and wearing wigs while I waited for my hairline to grow back in. It was
embarrassing. People thought I was a trans woman. a lot of them who just are waiting for their turn to speak, but
they wouldn't understand. I would tell them very concisely, I was born female. I was taking testosterone. I'm trying to
go back to female. So, you want to cut your dick off. You want to be a woman.
But those are the same kinds of people who, you know, and I explain
why when you Google it doesn't say he has a sister. because our birth certificates
were forged. They respond,
"Oh, I get what you're talking about, but then how come when I Google your dad, it says he only has three
children?" You You can't help some people understand what they're not willing to understand. It's
not my responsibility to fix stupid.
Anna, with these memories, do you want to talk about them or is it too traumatic?
I'm willing to talk about them. I was I stayed in denial after the
memories started surfacing because like I remembered having some nightmares
about being assaulted at the family cabin
some memories about meeting a bunch of celebrities at big parties. That was very confusing. But in 2020,
the first new memories to surface were not of the assaults, but of the circumstances around it.
Cuz for most of the assaults, I was usually unconscious.
I first remembered my family bragging about what they were
doing. And I go to my therapist and I say,
my family lied and told me that they were drugging me to me. Why would they
do that? And she'd said,
"Why would they tell you they were drugging you and you weren't?"
And I said, "Well, I know that they did drug me
because I tried a tiny tiny bit of what they bragged about giving me and I
remembered being on it all the time, but I don't remember the assault yet. I
remember having some nightmares about being assaulted." She says, "Okay, are you sure they were nightmares?"
And it would go on like that. Um
until I remembered instances of the physical assaults,
running and hiding from them, trying to hide myself in the bathroom, like that's going to help anything.
um running naked and barefoot down the mountain before pausing and forgetting
where I was and wandering back up the hill to the cabin
screaming out for my mother. Um, I went to go see three other doctors
after my therapist did so much to do EMDR with
me and get me to accept that the brain would not recall
false traumatic memories. Those are the memories that it blocks out.
Even when substance isn't part of it, people block out traumatic childhood
memories until adulthood. I went asking other doctors to tell me I
was schizophrenic and they didn't because I'm not. They said, "No,
you know, our opinion matches that of your other therapist." Um, and of course, the meds didn't do anything
because they're for an issue I don't have. Um,
but so it was a it was about a 2year process
between when the memories first started coming back and I retained memories of
being with my twin brother when we were toddlers.
I had memories of being with him as teenagers at these
reunions. and memories of my father and stepmother
and brothers making fun of me for not remembering about my twin brother
and I didn't want to believe it because it was too sad.
Um, it was 2 years before I remembered being little with him,
but my peers knew. There was one girl who was not dosed
properly when she came to the cabin with my family
and remembered what they did and everything they told her. That's when everybody at school started
calling me Ren Stevens. is the name of the sister character on
my brother's Disney TV show. And I thought they were making fun of me
because I was tall and a little bit anal retentive,
but they tried to show me. They pulled me into the computer lab and showed me a picture.
Who are they? I'm like, "Oh, that's his mom. Duh." They're like, "No, do you see
their faces? who do they look like? Where do you know them from? And getting mad at me and
saying, "You're older than us. You're You're not taller than us. You're just older than us. You're not smarter than
us. You're older than us. Why don't you remember this?" And I was pissed. I'd be offended. I thought the
kids who were trying to help me get out of my situation were bullying me
because it was safer for me still. I thought to just go through that than try to run away, try to face it. I couldn't
face it. my brain wouldn't let me. But that's how the memories came back.
It took about two years and four different doctors to get me to understand it was real.
I was in such deep denial. Uh, as far as specific memories, you're
welcome to ask me questions. I don't know where to start. I don't know if I'm going to get into too many specific details. It's just
I don't want it to be too traumatic for you. Yeah. Um you know re re going over these
things. More like you know your Tik Tok community, your viewers when you when
you're talking to them and stuff is is that cathartic for you to have the love
and support of these people? It is. um
not for my sake necessarily. The most cathartic for me is my creative
work. Another reason I've had a barrier because I would be welcome to just talk
about this through creative work, but then it would be another drop in the bucket
with people making art about the truth. Um, why I went to Tik Tok,
it's the hundreds of messages from people telling me
that they also experienced child sexual abuse and also lived in denial and hurting
themselves because of it and thanking me
for telling my story so they could feel brave enough to face their own.
It's for the 63y old man I made friends with in rehab
who told his story for the first time in his life
because I was brave enough to tell mine and you know for the next several weeks and thank you so much. I'm so excited to
keep telling my story to help other people heal from their own pain.
That's why What hope can you give people? That's why it's it's not
it's not the best outlet for my own healing, but it's the best way I can
help others with theirs and make something beautiful ripple out of the
pain that we were all put through. The more people talk about this,
the less likely it is to cycle through history. especially
men. I do believe men who are victimized are way more likely to become perpetrators
themselves. I know 60% of men in prison experience
child sexual abuse. And that's because it's so stigmatized.
They don't talk about it. And if they don't talk about it, they can't heal from it. And when they don't heal from it,
they crave reliving it. But they relive it from the other side
of it. Taking back that power that was taken
from them. It makes sense to a sick man.
I don't want there to be any more sick men.
I don't want there to be any more tortured little girls.
I I'm going to tell you about a dream I had last month. Um, great.
I was back visiting that house I grew up in on Birch Street,
but it was flooded with light and there were these Grecian columns as part of the construction
and my father was there, but he was my age in the stream. Like he could have
been my twin himself. And he was wearing yellow and glowing,
really happy to see me. And I
asked him, "How many times did they?" [Music]
And smiling at me, he said, "Thousands."
We went into the living room.
turned on the TV, watched basketball on mute while some music played like we would
growing up, and he took out the big kitchen knife and pulled down his pants
and handed me the knife.
And I began to make an incision when I woke up. the most healing nightmare I've
ever had. But that's why
I'm inclined to talk about it because
Steve never would have become a if he were not a victim of
What do you say to the survivors watching this? What do I say to the survivors?
Yes.
It wasn't your fault. You are not weak.
It is okay if you're not ready to talk about it, but you will feel better when you do.
You are valuable. You are not what happened to you.
You are loved. to my siblings specifically.
I understand why you feel like you can't speak,
but you can to spare your children the same internal
struggle. You have power.
Do you have responsibility?
I pray every day that I'll get to see you again one day.
But because I don't want the next generation going through what we went through,
I'm not okay with staying silent in order to make that happen. And I pray that a handful of you can say
something to victims again at large. You do not
have to perpetrate to take your power back.
All you have to do is claim what happened to you.
I don't want to call us victims. I
read a lovely little book from the AK press a couple weeks ago about consent and
they defined victims as people who are no longer with
us. people who lost the psychological battle
or even the battle against perpetrators like Virginia and survivors
as those who are still here.
We are not victims. We are survivors. We are empowered.
You can choose Whether to use that power
to be parts of waves of change
against the fabric of secrecy that's been draped across our society.
Or you can choose to be part of that fabric of secrecy which is going to keep you wounded. It's up to you.
Wow, that's really powerful. And yeah, I really appreciate you spending time with us.
And do you want to let the viewers know what they can see at your Tik Tok and and the links in the description box,
folks? Yeah, I'm uh
I want to start putting some of my comedy on there, some more art. I really want to start interviewing other
survivors. I have people watching me, but there are others who I think deserve to have their
stories told. The point of social media is social
community. I don't want to make it all about me. I don't want to make it all about my suffering. I know I've been offline for
a little while. Uh Tik Tok stresses me out. I don't like social media. I have too many messages to keep up with.
Um I need to find a job right now. like,
you know, I I'm not good at monetizing this and I need to be because I need an apartment.
Um, but
I'm going to try and give you guys more content again
cuz that community blew me away.
I wasn't prepared for it. And some of you I've gotten to be very
connected to, feel very attached to.
You're the reason my phone is still on because of the donations that you made when we thought I was going to need a
lawyer. So, I want to do something worthwhile with that.
Um, you changed my life.
insurance for the first time
in my life. People said, "We see you."
I've had to walk around the world wearing a bag on my head my whole life. And you guys took that bag off me.
I could breathe for the first time. And Whether
I'm going to keep talking about other victims like some of you want or just sharing my art and
platforming other survivor stories.
I want to keep that connection going. All we've got is each other.
It's the whole point of life is other people
and All of you on Tik Tok changed the course of mine.
I hope that's up to me. It's up to me to decide what I do with that snow.
Thank you. Oh, no. Thank you. And and viewers, you know, Anna's links are in the
description box. Please support her work. Huge thank you to Anna for coming on. And u if I have some survivors in
mind that we could send over, but I'm going to end this now. Let us know in the comments what you thought and take care wherever you are in the world. Much
love, especially look out for the kids. Thank you. Any
[Laughter]
blowing kiss? You're blowing kisses. You're blowing kisses.
He's so precious. Oh, thanks.
[Music]
Hey everybody. [Music]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Wed Jul 30, 2025 12:56 am

Trump has SHOCK ADMISSION on Victims on AIR FORCE ONE
MeidasTouch
Jul 29, 2025

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump admitting he was aware what Epstein was doing at Mar-A-Lago — and his admission was devastating and deeply incriminating.



Transcript

Finally, he admitted it. Donald Trump
just made a shocking and incriminating
admission aboard Air Force One as he is
leaving his disastrous trip from
Scotland. Donald Trump admitted that he
was aware that Epstein would hire
underage girls from Mara Lago, who
Donald Trump refers to as his help. He
was aware that Epstein hired Virginia
Giuffre in 2000 and Epstein sex trafficked
her. She was working as an underage
towel girl at Mara Lago. The timeline is
devastating for Donald Trump. Giuffre
worked at Mara Lago in 2000 and that's
when Epstein went over to Mara Lago and
eventually sex trafficked Virginia and
brought her from Mara Lago to be sex
trafficked. In 2002, Donald Trump told
New York magazine that Epstein is a
great guy who likes women on the younger
side. So Donald Trump would have been
aware in his own words that Epstein was
taking his help, the underage girls from
Mara Lago in 2000, but said Epstein is a
great guy who likes women on the younger
side. That was Donald Trump's direct
quote. In other words, Trump was aware
about this all.


Let me share with you
right now the audio that was captured on
Air Force One of Donald Trump saying it
in his own words. Listen to what he says
here. Play this clip.

Mr. President,
look Epstein has a certain reputation
obviously. I'm just curious, were some
of the workers that were taken from you,
were some of them young women?

Were some of them young women? Well, I
don't want to say, but everyone knows
the people that were taken and it was
the concept of taking people that work
for me that is bad. But that story has
been pretty well out there and the
answer is yes, they were. Yes, they were
_____.

What do they do?

In the spa.
In the spa.
Yeah. People that work in the spa. I
have a great spa. One of the best spas
in the world at MaraLago. And people were
taken out of the spa. Hired by him. In
other words, gone. And other people
would come and complain, "This guy is
taking people from the spa." I didn't
know that. And then when I heard about
it, I told him, I said, "Listen, we
don't want you taking our people,"
whether it was spa or not spa, I don't
want him taking people. And he was fine.
And then not too long after that, he did
it again and I said, "Out of here."

Mr. President, Mr. President, did one of
those stolen persons
include Virginia?

I don't know. I think she worked at
the spa.
I think so. I think that was one of the
people. Yeah. He stole her. And by
the way, she had no complaints about us
as you know. None whatsoever.

Now, I give credit to the press for
asking those questions. They did not ask
those questions the other day when
Donald Trump had that bizarre press
conference with Kier Starmer. The press
did ask Donald Trump then why his
relationship with Epstein ended. And
Donald Trump said Epstein would take my
help. He took my help. And I didn't like
how he took my help. That was very
different than what Trump and MAGA had
previously said that Epstein was kicked
out in 2004
because Donald Trump thought Epstein was
creepy and then banned him. So I think we know what that means
because we've been covering what went
down at Mara Lago. But just to remind
you, listen to what Donald Trump said
sitting next to Prime Minister Kier
Starmer. Play this clip.

People keep praying serious at the time
he threw him out of Mara Lago. Can you
settle that? What was it about? What
caused the breach?

That's such old
history. Very easy to explain, but I
don't want to waste your time by
explaining it. But for years, I wouldn't
talk to Jeffrey Epstein. I wouldn't talk
because he did something that was
inappropriate. He hired help. And I
said, "Don't ever do that again." He
stole people that work for me. I said,
"Don't ever do that again." He did it
again. And I threw him out of the place.
persona non grata. I threw him out and
that was it. I'm glad I did it if you want
to know the truth.

Now, I've been saying this for a very
long time that I don't know what's in
the files, but it must be incredibly
devastating because what's already out
there is incredibly devastating to
Donald Trump. I said Mara Lago was one
of the places where Epstein and Ghislaine
Maxwell would go and find girls to sex
traffic or they would bring girls over
and show them off to Donald Trump.
I'm not worried about saying that
publicly. These are undisputed
facts that are in court filings that
were in the Ghislaine Maxwell criminal
case. Virginia
Giuffre had talked
about that before she died by suicide
recently.

The father of Virginia Giuffre, one of the most outspoken survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse, has claimed his daughter did not die by suicide.

Giuffre, 41, died by suicide in Neergabby, Australia last week, according to a statement from her family last week. But now, her father Sky Roberts has questioned that version of events, telling Piers Morgan he believes someone “got to her” Giuffre.

“First of all, I couldn’t even believe it. I mean, I started crying right away,” Roberts said when asked about Giuffre’s death. “I’m still crying. I can’t believe that this is happening. It’s impossible.”

“And then for them to say that she committed suicide, there’s no way that she did,” he continued. “Somebody got to her.” ...

-- Virginia Guiffre’s dad insists she didn’t die by suicide, claims someone ‘got to’ her. Virginia Giuffre was 41 when she died in Neergabby, Australia, by Katie Hawkinson, Thursday 01 May 2025


And I've been talking
about Virginia Giuffre's story a long
time. As I've said, underage homeless
girl, 17 years old, she got a job as the
towel girl in the Mara Lago spa. You
heard Donald Trump talk about it
right there. Epstein and Ghislaine
Maxwell, they lived what, just a few
blocks over. They'd walk over and then
they'd find Virginia Giuffre there and
say, "Hey, you want to work with
Epstein? I see you're in this spa. I see
you were homeless." And that was
Epstein's MMO to pray on destitute
underage girls. And there was a
14-year-old girl as well, Jane Doe.
She's mentioned in Ghislaine Maxwell's
criminal trial, also a civil case where
she was brought over to Mara Lago, she
says, by Epstein and Ghislaine and showed
off to Donald Trump. And Epstein said,
"You like this little one. You like this
little one?", to Donald Trump or words to
that effect. Now, just to remind you of
Prime Minister Kier Starmer's press
conference with Donald Trump. During
that press conference, Donald Trump also
said that he didn't have the privilege
to go to Epstein's Island and he
calls it the privilege. I just want to
remind you of that here. Play this clip.

That was it. I'm glad I did. If you want
to know the truth. And by the way, I
never went to the island, and Bill
Clinton went there supposedly
28 times. I never went to the
island, but Larry Summers I hear went
there. He was the head of Harvard, and
many other people that are very big
people. Nobody ever talks about them.
I've never had the privilege of going
to his island. And I did turn it
down, but a lot of people in Palm Beach
were invited to his island. In one of
my very good moments, I turned it down,
and I didn't want to go to his island.

Yeah.
I mean, just think about that language,
the privilege. So, either he truly
believes it was a privilege, at which
case it's absolutely disgusting, he's
being sarcastic, which is absolutely
disgusting, or he's so cognitively
rattled, he can't find the right word,
so the word that comes to his mind is
privileged. Any of those scenarios is
not good for Donald Trump, and it's
utterly disgusting, might I add. But
Trump didn't have to go to the island,
because he was at Mara Lago, and Epstein
lived literally like two blocks down the
road with Ghislaine, and they would walk over
all the time. Donald Trump threw events
at Mara Lago. Put "events" in
quotes, or "parties," and I'll put that in
quotes, where it was just him and Epstein
and they would bring over what 30 or 40
girls or women of indeterminate age,
it wasn't clear, and tell them that there
was going to be VIPs to talk about their
modeling career. And according to people
who would help bring the girls,
thinking it was an actual modeling event,
they would say wait a minute, it's just
Donald Trump and Epstein. Of course
you have the 2002 quote from Donald
Trump saying Epstein is a great guy who
likes women on the younger side. Two
years after Epstein would have been sex trafficking Virginia
Giuffre,
who Donald Trump refers to as help. But
then we have the book that Donald Trump
signed for Epstein, which says, "You are
the greatest, Jeffrey. You are the
greatest." Let's hear from the
victims in their own words, shall we?
Virginia has since died by suicide, and
our heart goes out to, of course, her
and her family and everybody. uh uh all
of the victims is that's who we
highlight here on the Midas Touch
Network, what they went through. Um but
here's uh Virginia Jay in her own words
talking about what happened at Mara
Lago. Play this clip.

Virginia Roberts was working in the spa
at Donald Trump's Mara Lago Club in Palm
Beach when British socialite Ghislaine
Maxwell introduced her to
multi-millionaire Jeffrey Epstein.
The training started immediately. I
mean, it was everything down to how to
be quiet, be
subservient, give Jeffrey what he wants.
A lot of this training came from Ghislaine
herself. And being a woman, it kind of
surprises you that a woman could
actually let stuff like that happen, but
not only let it happen, but to groom you
into doing it. And then there's Jeffrey,
who's telling you, I want it this way.
No, go slower and don't do that and do
this.

And here she is again. And let's play
this clip.

I was recruited at a very young age
from Mara Lago, and entrapped in a world
that I didn't understand. And I've been
fighting that very world to this day. And
I won't stop fighting. I will never be
silenced until these people are brought
to justice.

So, all right. Now, here's a 2006 video
of Donald Trump on Howard Stern
saying that he's a sexual predator. When
asked by Howard Stern, you know a lot
about sexual predators, you are one. And
Donald Trump says that's true. Here,
play this clip.

All right. I was going to say that. But
you know about sexual predators and
things like that. I mean,
you are one.
All right. I was going to say that, but
so another one of Epstein's victims,
Maria Farmer, talked about how she would
work for Epstein. She was in gym clothes,
and she said she showed up to Epstein's
building, and Trump shows up to the
building as well. And Trump
was looking at her up and down and
Epstein says to Trump, "That one's
not for you. Go into the other room.

Was there another girl in the other room, or
what was happening? We don't know.
But listen to what the victims have to
say. Here's what Maria Farmer has to
say. Let's play it.

The time that is most memorable to
me is the time when he hit on me because
I was in the office. It was one of the
first times I started working for Jeffrey.
Donald Trump's a sleazebag. Okay.
Yes.
Um, it was when I started working for
Epstein, and it was 9:00 at night. And
Jeffrey Epstein's office was totally
empty. I told the New York Times this,
but of course they don't tell the whole
thing, right? Even though Mike Baker is
amazing, but they they would not allow
him to tell the truth.
So basically, I go into this office,
it's 9:00 at night, and I sit down, and a
few minutes later, and I'm wearing
running clothes, okay, so it was really
weird. It's 9:00 at night, and I'm
wearing running clothes because I didn't
have money. So I had to jog up there,
right? And so I've just
struggled, you know, for so long. So I'm
like up there in the office seated, and
I've got my running
clothes on, so my legs are showing. And
in walks this man that
when I reported him to the FBI, I said
that game show host Donald Trump, because
I thought he was a game show host.
He's so cheesy,
you know. You know he walks
in and I just kind of acknowledged him,
like a head nod or something,
and immediately
he's seated across from me, I mean
standing across the room from me, and I'm
seated, and he's like oh Maria.
Sorry, I was
just looking at something. He's
standing across the room, and he's
looking at me, and I'm like oh gross. You
know this guy's so gross. Anyway, he's
just looking, glaring at my legs, like
yum. I told my sister I felt like
I was his dinner.
or his lunch, you know?
The way he was looking at me. So Epstein
comes in
and by the way, I did not look good. I
was like not a pretty I'm not
exceptionally beautiful or anything like
that. These are just gross people, you
know what I mean?
Yeah. Yeah.
So I'm just like a normal person who
went on a run and I'm seated there. So
he assumed I was there for him. And Epstein,
this is how I know. Epstein walks up to
him and goes, "No, no, she's not here
for you." And they were smirking and
Epstein whispered something. He goes, "Go
in there." And so Trump, at
9:00 at night, goes in the other room.
There's someone in there for him.
Right. Right.
I don't know who. But Epstein said, "No,
no, no. She's not here for you."

And Maria Farmer's sister, Annie Farmer,
was also a victim of Epstein's.
Here's what she has to say about how
Trump is treating Ghislaine Maxwell and
giving her immunity deals, and what's
called Queen for a Day, and giving
Ghislaine Maxwell all of this special
attention and treatment. Here, play this
clip.

She didn't just procure girls and women
for Epstein, but she herself
participated in their abuse. I think
that's an important thing for people to
understand. And then she
also made threats. She made
threats to to my sister, to our family,
when it was clear that my sister had
reported her. And so I think that to
be told that suddenly she's being
brought to the table as a potential
source of information when she's
previously been charged with perjury by
the government, is very confusing and
unsettling.

Now here was Epstein at his deposition
when he was asked about his relationship
with Trump. Meidastouch unearthed
this video. Play it.

Have you ever had a personal
relationship with Donald Trump?

What do you mean by personal
relationships?

Have you socialized with him?

Yes, sir.
Yes.
Yes, sir.

Have you ever socialized with Donald
Trump in the presence of
females under the age of 18?

Though I'd like to answer that question
at least today, I'm going to have to
assert my fifth, sixth, and 14th
amendment rights, sir.

And then finally,
I want to play for you this clip from
Michael Wolff. Michael Wolff was Donald
Trump's biographer, and he was going to
potentially be the biographer for
Jeffrey Epstein. So he spent hours and
hours and hours with Trump, hours and
hours and hours with Epstein. He never
wrote the Epstein book. But he heard
firsthand from Epstein, he said that he
had seen photographs
that Epstein showed him of Donald
Trump with a stain on his shorts in his
crotch area with women
or girls of indeterminate age. It wasn't
clear how old they were, topless on
top of him. He I saw those photos.

So
does the FBI have those photos? Here's
what Michael Wolff said about his
view on Trump and Epstein's view towards
girls. Here, play this clip.

I want to clarify something. A lot of
people have taken exception in the
linkage of Donald Trump and Jeffrey
Epstein saying you don't mean that
Donald Trump liked little girls.
Let me just refocus this back to the
time that we're talking about. Donald
Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were obsessed
with models.
This was one of the key focuses of their
lives, as important as money. Models. How
many models have you had? How
many models do you know? How do you
get models? And they went through an
elaborate process. They invested in
model agencies. They started model
agencies. Donald Trump had beauty
pageants. Jeffrey Epstein became
involved with Victoria's Secret.
That became actually kind of
the centerpiece of his personal
and business life -- models. And I think
that it is safe to say they did not ask
models for their IDs.
Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein emerged
from the same world. To make a
distinction
between Jeffrey Epstein's girls and
Donald Trump's girls is pure sophistry.

Okay. And here's Michael Wolff talking
about those photographs that he saw
here. Play this clip.

But at any rate,
at one point after Trump had been
elected, and I was sitting talking to
Epstein and he said, "Wait a minute. I
got to show you something." And he
went into his safe, and he came out with
with with photographs. They were Polaroids, I think.
And he kind of
spread them out like playing
cards. And it was Trump. I think
there were a dozen of them. And it
was Trump with girls of an uncertain age
at Epstein's Palm Beach house where all
all of the things that he would
ultimately be accused of took place. And
I remember very vividly three of them.
There are two in which the
topless girls are sitting on
Trump's lap, and then a third in which he
has a stain on the front of his
pants, and the girls are kind of
pointing at it, sort of bent over
laughing, covering their mouths.
Exactly. Exactly. And those are the ones I
specifically remember and my assumption
is that they were in the
safe. And I have seen them on other
occasions when he took them out of the safe. And
I think it's certainly
not unlikely that they were in the safe
when the FBI came in after his arrest,
and took everything from the
house, including everything that was in
the safe.

Well, there you have it for
for yourself. Just listen to the facts.
Follow the facts. It's why we've been
talking about Virginia Giuffre and what
has happened to her. Of course,
she's now died by suicide, but
her being sex trafficked, from starting
at work in Mara Lago. And that kind of
funnel to Epstein exists. And you
heard Donald Trump say it in his own
words.

Wait, hit subscribe.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Wed Jul 30, 2025 3:08 am

Pam Bondi Gaslights The American People With a Bogus Complaint Against A Federal Judge
by Glenn Kirschner
Jul 29, 2025

Pam Bondi's Department of Justice continues to try to gaslight the American people in new and ridiculous ways, filing a complaint against the chief judge of federal district court in Washington, DC.

Notably, the Washington Post published a deep dive piece regarding the unethical conduct of the Trump administration in federal court cases: "Trump officials accused of defying 1 in 3 judges who ruled against him."

The Post documented how Trump officials have defied court orders in 38 cases, given false of misleading information to courts nine times, withheld evidence from courts five times, and created a pretext to go around court orders five times.

Against this backdrop of defying the courts, Pam Bondi just filed "misconduct complaint" against Chief Judge James "Jeb" Boasberg claiming that he engaged in "judicial misconduct" when he allegedly said at a judicial conference that he had "concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts, leading to a constitutional crisis."

And yet, that is EXACTLY what the Trump administration and his Department of Justice have done, are doing, and likely will continue to do.



Transcript

So friends, Donald Trump and Pam Bondi
have taken gaslighting to ridiculous new
lows.
Wait until you hear about a complaint
that Pam Bondi had one of her flunkies
at the Department of Justice file
against the chief judge of federal
district court in Washington DC.
Let's talk about that because justice
matters.
[Music]
Hey all, Glen Kersner here. So friends,
Attorney General Pam Bondi just had her
chief of staff
file a complaint regarding something
they claim the chief judge of federal
district court in Washington DC said.
The first question is why would Pam
Bondi's chief of staff file this kind of
a complaint? Well, maybe it's because
Pam Bondi fired the top ethics official
at the Department of Justice because,
you know, who needs any oversight of the
ethical practices of Bondi and company?
So, she had her chief of staff file this
complaint. And what does the complaint
allege the chief judge of federal
district court in Washington DC to have
said? That is Judge James Jeb Booseberg.
Get this. The complaint alleges that
Judge Booseberg said he had concerns
that the Trump administration
might violate federal court orders.
Shocking. I know. What outrageous
misconduct for somebody to articulate
they have concerns about the Trump
administration possibly defying federal
court orders. Friends, before we go to
the new reporting about this new
gaslighting by Bondi and company, we
have to talk about this complaint. We
have to evaluate it against the backdrop
of what Trump and company have been
doing in federal courtrooms
all around the country from coast to
coast. Here is a new deep dive piece
that was recently published by the
Washington Post. Headline: Trump
officials accused of defying one in
three judges who ruled against him.
Trump a comprehensive analysis of
hundreds of lawsuits against Trump
policies shows dozens of examples of
defiance, delay, and dishonesty which
experts say pose an unprecedented threat
to the US legal system. And that article
begins,
President Donald Trump and his
appointees have been accused of flouting
courts in a third of the more than 160
lawsuits against the Trump
administration in which a judge has
issued a substantive ruling, a
Washington Post analysis has found,
suggesting widespread non-compliance
with America's legal system. Plaintiffs
say Justice Department lawyers and the
agencies they represent are snubbing
rulings, providing false information,
failing to turn over evidence, quietly
working around court orders, and
inventing pretexts to carry out actions
that have been blocked.
Judges appointed by presidents of both
parties have often agreed. None have
taken punitive action to try to force
compliance. however, allowing the
administration's defiance of orders to
go on for weeks or even months in some
instances. The Post examined 337
lawsuits filed against the
administration since Trump returned to
the White House and began a rapidfire
effort to reshape government programs
and policy. As of mid July, courts had
ruled against the administration in 165
of the lawsuits. The Post found that the
administration is accused of defying or
frustrating court oversight in 57 of
those cases, almost 35%.
And friends, here's a sampling of some
of what the federal court judges are
saying about Trump, his administration,
and his DOJ.
defendants Trump and company have failed
to respond in good faith and their
refusal to do so can only be viewed as
willful and intentional non-compliance
said US District Judge Paula.
There is reason to believe that the
defendants Trump and company are
thumbming their nose at both this court
and the court of appeals, said US
District Judge Amy Bur Jackson. It
appears that OM sought to overcome a
judicially imposed obstacle without
actually ceasing the challenged conduct.
The court can think of few things more
disingenuous, said US District Judge
Lauren L. Ali Khan. And friends, just
one more thing before we turn to this
absurd complaint that they filed against
the judge. The Washington Post, as part
of its deep dive expose into the
unethical conduct in court of Trump and
company, they published a helpful
visual, a chart, a graph of sorts, you
know, tracking the conduct of Trump and
company in court.
How Trump officials are allegedly
defying the courts. Not complying with
court orders, 38 cases. Giving false or
misleading information, nine times
withholding evidence, five times
creating pretext to go around court
orders, five times.
Okay, friends, against that backdrop of
what Trump, his administration, and his
Department of Justice have actually been
doing in federal court, let's turn to
the reporting about their new complaint
regarding something that Judge Boseberg
said. This from Politico.
Headline: Trump administration escalates
its war with the courts. This time
targeting Judge Boseberg.
The Trump administration escalated its
battle Monday to cast as rogue partisans
federal judges who have blocked
President Donald Trump's priorities.
This time taking aim at James Boseberg,
the chief judge of the US District Court
in Washington DC.
Attorney General Pam Bondi announced her
office had filed a misconduct complaint
against Booseberg over comments reported
recently in right-leaning news outlets
that Boseberg made at a meeting of
judges in March with Supreme Court Chief
Justice John Roberts in attendance.
This social media post by Bondi on X
quote, "These comments have undermined
the integrity of the judiciary and we
will not stand for that." Bondi wrote on
X. That's right. Only the Department of
Justice and the Trump administration
will undermine the judiciary by defying
court orders early and often. Pam Bondi
apparently won't stand for anybody else
undermining the judiciary. I guess
that's the exclusive province of Pam
Bondi's Department of Justice. Are you
[ __ ] kidding me, friends? With
apologies for the fbomb.
You know, this is gaslighting at its
most absurd. So, here is the complaint,
and I'm not going to read it to you, but
let's have a look at what this complaint
alleges. Judge Booseberg said
at a judicial conference meeting in
March of 2025,
Judge Booseberg allegedly expressed
concerns that the administration would
disregard rulings of federal courts
leading to a constitutional crisis.
That is the sum total of what the
complaint alleges. Judge Boseberg said
that he had a concern that the
administration would defy court orders
and it has and it is and it likely will
continue to do so. This is not judicial
misconduct. This is gaslighting at its
most absurd.
I mean, what will Pam Bondi allege next?
Will she file a complaint against Judge
Booseberg, saying he wears a bad blonde
combo over and an orange spray-on tan
and a red tie that's too long and he
cheats at golf.
Gaslighting at its most absurd. And
friends, let me finish up with a word
about Judge James Jeb Booseberg.
He was a prosecutor's prosecutor and
he's a judge's judge. And I know because
I worked with him when he was a federal
homicide prosecutor together with me at
the DC US Attorney's Office. I
supervised him when I was chief of
homicide and he was prosecuting murder
cases day in and day out. I worked cases
with him. I tried a particularly
difficult, emotional, gut-wrenching
murder case, double homicide, involving
a an elderly brother and sister who
lived together, living out their golden
years, and they were murdered. They were
butchered in their own home. I tried
that double homicide case with Judge
Booseberg. James Booseberg was first
appointed as a judge by President George
W. Bush.
Thereafter, he was appointed as a judge
by President Barack Obama.
James Boseberg is somebody who has
always been respected on both sides of
the aisle and he's deeply respected in
DC criminal justice circles
which makes this absurd complaint filed
by Bondi and company all the more
offensive and I suspect it will be
dismissed, discarded, out of hand
because justice
matters.
Friends, as always, please stay safe.
Please stay tuned and I look forward to
talking with you all again tomorrow.
[Music]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Wed Jul 30, 2025 3:38 am

Supreme Court Tries to RUN AWAY from Their Trump NIGHTMARE
by Sidney Blumenthal, Sean Wilentz, and Professor Leah Litman
Legal AF
Jul 29, 2025

The Court of History's Sidney Blumenthal & Sean Wilentz are joined by Professor Leah Litman to discuss the Supreme Court and their repeated rulings in favor of the Trump Administration.



Transcript

I'm Sean Wentz. Welcome to the Court of History with my compadre partner in
something in many things, especially the court of things illegal and historical, Sydney Blumenthal. We're here to we're
going to go back to talk about at the Supreme Court directly about the Supreme Court. Those of you who been following us know that we've talked about the
court a fair amount. Um we've been talking about things that are about constitutional, legal, and historical
matters, but now we're going to get back onto the court itself. Um, and you know,
Sydney, I was thinking a lot about a lot I thinking more than I wanted to about John Roberts lately. And you know,
you'll remember some time back when when the president was saying that he was
going to impeach a lot of judges, right? That this was, you know, he was going to impeach this judge and that budge. They're all bunch of crooks and
phonists, etc., etc. And then John Roberts objected and he got a lot of credit for having objected having stood
up to the president of the United States, right? And and and defending the Supreme Court from this, you know, would
be authoritarian. And I wrote down the quotation of what he actually said at that time, which was the following
quote. For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to
disagreement concerning a judicial um uh what is it? Decree.
um the normal appellet review process exists for that purpose. All right, so that was John Roberts dressing down the
president. But you know, looking back on that, that doesn't look like a dressing down. That looks like an advice bit of
advice to the president, which is to say, don't go to impeachment. Just come on through the normal appellet division.
You'll be okay. What do you think? Well, we're um they've been act uh the
Supreme Court has been um knocking down uh appallet decisions
one after another on the shadow docket without offering any actual decisions.
Uh there have been rulings but no opinions. Uh there's no reasoning offered. It's
utterly arbitrary. um in keeping with the autocratic logic of what they're
upholding that Trump is doing uh case after case. And the question is whether
or not John Roberts is engaged in a feckless appeasement strategy or not. um
and hopes that somehow he can fend off Trump and in the end then retain the
independence of the court, whatever that means, to do whatever purpose uh it
might be. Um there's a lot to talk about here. There sure is. And we have just the
person to talk about it with. We're very very fortunate to have with us today Leah Litman. Leah Litman is the
professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School. She's the also the co-host of Strict Scrutiny, a podcast
about the Supreme Court of the United States. She's the author of Lawless: How
the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes, about which the New York Times
book review said that Lawless renders dense constitutional analysis into something urgent and accessible, nothing
less than a field guide for navigating our current constitutional crisis.
Welcome, Leah. Welcome to the Court of History. It's great to have you. Thanks so much for having me. The court's in session. I'd rather be
I'd rather be in the court of history than the Supreme Court. So happy to be here. Indeed. Indeed.
We are court of history to talk about the Supreme Court. Well, yes. And and as Cindy has want to
say, this is of course the highest court is the court of history. So, you know, we can do it that way. Certainly by ethical standards and
principles. Well, in the end, you know, assuming there still is history, but that's another whole topic. Um
Leah, we people come up to me all the time. I suppose you too. and and and want to know what is with what's with
this court, right? And some people say, is it just a MAGA court that we didn't
really realize it until the immunity decision or something that it's that's gone full MAGA with the exception of the three liberals obviously, but enough of
a majority or is it as as Sid was just um suggesting? Is it just John Roberts
trying to um what preserve the in some misbegotten way try to preserve the
court's power or its its relevance its authority by trying to appease the president? What do you think? Do you
have any thoughts about that? I think it's a both and situation. I think there are certainly some members
of the Republican supermajority who I would describe as MACA and basically on board with a lot of elements of what the
Trump administration is doing. I think of John Roberts as someone who does care about the perception of the Supreme
Court's institutional neutrality, even if he is unwilling to make substantive
rulings uh that would actually shore up the court's institutional legitimacy. I also think that even those Republican
appointees who are probably put off by some of what Donald Trump does are in
reality also on board with a lot of what the Trump administration is doing from,
for example, expansive assertions of executive authority, firing the heads of
different agencies who are supposed to be independent of the president. Those are things that they think they can
basically get, you know, in some sort of deal with Donald Trump.
Yes. As you say in your book, I mean, Neil Gorsuch is on record, even before he was, you know, appointed saying that
the that basically the administrative state is a monstrosity which is very difficult to square with the Constitution of the United States. Kind
of announcing beforehand this is what he's going to be doing and now he's doing it. Um, I mean, that was about as MAGA as as you can get, right?
Exactly. I mean like you had Steve Bannon declaring during Trump 1.0 that their goal was deconstruction of the
administrative state. You know what is the juristprudence of the Republican appointees on the Supreme Court but to
defang administrative agencies seize more power for the courts and for the president at the expense of those
independent agencies. Right. And and as Justice Kagan once said, u the administrative state, what
does that mean? That means basically the government we've got, you know, um and and that's what they're really out to to
wreck. Um, well, do we want to say who the who the who
the break it down all nine of them? We know about the three. I want to talk about the three liberals actually a
little bit later on because they're showing some interesting differences among themselves of of late, but is it
just um, you know, is it is it you know, Alto um, and Thomas and then where do we go? is is is Gorsuch seems to be full
MAGA and then there's the internal mystery of of of of Justice Barrett. Um
is it three and two and three? Is that the way it's working? Honestly, I still view them as a core
six with Thomas and Alo just kind of anchoring the wing nut um aspect of that
coalition. Um, and I say that they are six because all of them have some issue
or maybe issues in which their views are slightly more idiosyncratic or heterodox
compared to their Republican colleagues. For Neil Gorsuch, it's federal Indian law. For the Chief Justice and Brett
Kavanaaugh, it's this small subset of criminal procedure issues where they look at a case and just think this
cannot be. for Amy Barrett. It turns out that's been one or two issues of
executive power. Like for example, whether a state court can sentence Donald Trump, you know, to the 34 felony
convictions on which he was convicted. And so I don't really view the
Republican coalition as having any great real mystery underlying it, including
Justice Barrett. I'm happy to talk more about that. Um, but I think all of them have their issue in which they're a
little bit different. And it just so happens that Justice Barrett's issue is the one that has been most salient over
the last year. Right. Yeah. I wonder, you know, what their mentality is at the present moment
because the mentality of the Republicans in the Congress is that this is their
moment when they have absolute power over both chambers and the presidency
and they have a majority in the court to do everything as quickly as they can uh
with the possibility that they may lose one or the other chamber in 2026.
Supreme Court of course has a lifetime uh tenure and um that gives it a
different sensibility. But how plugged in are they to really
going the limit here uh with Trump to get their maximum
u program that they've their wish list. I have called them the YOLO court, the
you only live once court um for a reason. You know, you're right. They have lifetime tenure and so they can
wait things out in a way that elected representatives cannot. On the other hand, they have been ticking off the
wish list of the right-wing legal movement uh with considerable pace. They overruled Row versus Wade. They ended
effectively affirmative action programs in higher education. They overruled the Chevron doctrine under which courts were
supposed to give deference to administrative agencies. You know, they just upheld a law banning gender
affirming care for transgender minors. If you look at their docket, they have cases about the end of the view the
future of the Voting Rights Act. They have cases about whether discrimination against transgender individuals is
unconstitutional. So, I think they are really moving at a quick pace in order to do a lot of what
the Republican legal movement has been wanting to do for a while. And I think
Donald Trump gives them an occasion to do so in at least two different ways. One is Trump just siphons off so much
attention from what the court is doing that they don't get in the same amount of trouble that I think they would if
they were occupying more of the public's focus and attention or more front page
news. I mean, my goodness, they basically gave states the power to defund Planned Parenthood at the end of
the term, and that decision was completely drowned out by whatever the latest insanity was out of the Trump
administration. And then Donald Trump also gives them the occasion to expand presidential power, which has also been
a big part of the conservative legal movement. And given how he is want to
basically claim the power to do everything, uh that gives them many different cases to affirm their
increasingly expansive vision of presidential power. Yeah. And they're doing it without having to justify it, right? And this is
where the shadow docks come in. I mean, you know, it's all being done. They may they're hiding and and and but it's
really it's really extraordinary. I've never seen anything like this in American history. Yeah. So I think it is really
symptomatic of how they are just not behaving like a court. They are behaving like an arm of a partisan agenda where
they're basically just giving the executive branch permission to implement its policies without bothering to
explain provide reasons for why the executive can do so consistent with the
law. Um you know in my view they have enabled the Trump administration to get
off scot-free with violating several lower court orders. And I think that too
is another way in which they are just not behaving like a judicial institution because they don't seem to care that the
administration is pretty openly defying lower court orders. Yeah, Roberts isn't saying nothing about
this. Um um while he made a nanod and
dyine comment earlier uh about the extensive violent threats to judges
across the board. Um and yet he's trying to maintain his image as an
institutionalist which at this point um strikes me as um
an empty image. Um and uh he increasingly uh is removing the mask of
partisanship from the court. Um and um in particular, Roberts's main issue of
concern to him over the years, over decades, has been to the destruction of
uh uh all the legislation involving the civil rights movement and particularly
voting rights. Um and that's his special mission. And yet he uh cultivates um the
institutionalist perception I think he is a superb politician uh in
being able to make decisions and cultivate an image in the media which is way more favorable and generous than he
deserves. Um you're right of course that when he was a young lawyer in the Reagan administration, he was authoring memos
describing how violations of the Voting Rights Act shouldn't be too easy to approve and opposing the expansion of
the Voting Rights Act. You know, also as a lawyer in the Reagan administration, he was writing memos urging that
presidents should be able to have more power over independent agencies and that independent agencies were
unconstitutional. Well, guess what he has done once he was a justice? Dismantle a key provision of the Voting
Rights Act. They have another provision really what remains of the Voting Rights Act potentially in their crosshairs for
next term. They have all but destroyed independent agencies just over the last year. you know, in addition to the
decisions that have been undercutting them for the several years prior. And so I think his behavior on the court just
doesn't look that different from his behavior as a political appointee, an
executive branch lawyer for a Republican administration. And I think it's very important for people to understand that
these justices, they had careers, you know, before they were appointed to the bench. and all the things they said, did
believe, they don't disappear once they become a justice. Yeah. Just and just to finish up on on
on Roberts in particular, we had we had Judge Lutig on on the show a few
episodes back and he good friend of of of of the Chief Justices. You talked about it and we asked him, you know,
what's in his mind? Does he realize that people are ranking him, you know, right there with Roger Tony as maybe the
worst, you know, chief justice in the United States? Is he aware of that? Is he? And and and it's interesting. He's The judge said, "Yes, yes, he he hears
all of that. He's he's self self-comprehension is not his weak suit. It's his strong suit. He understands all
of that. And yet he's going along with all of this stuff anyway. Is it is that a puzzle?"
So, I don't really view it as a puzzle. I think it is more of a reflection of our increasingly polarized
politics and media. um the democratic decline of our institutions
um and also this conservative grievance mindset that has overtaken the Republican party. So the increase in
polarization means I think the Republican appointees are increasingly comfortable just focusing on the views
of Republican commentators who are part of MAGA and the Republican media who is
saying great things about the things that they are doing and they feel more comfortable discounting independent
media, bipartisan voices, progressive voices and whatnot. I think he also has less reason to care about general public
opinion given how hard it is now for popular majorities to win the presidency
and to win control of Congress. And so when he faces less prospect of political
push back from simple majorities that too gives him an excuse to just care
less about what general public opinion is. And then you add to that this idea
that has just cannibalized the Republican party, which is that everyone is out to get Republicans and
Republicans are somehow the big victims. And I think that too might play into a mindset that allows him to discount
fair, reasonable criticism of what the court is doing. Yeah. Yeah. I want to talk to you about
that ideology of grievance which they have translated
into a rhetoric and then translated it again into a juristprudence.
Mhm. Um, you know, I um have spent a lot of time um with Abraham Lincoln and um
the Confederates uh and the Southerners before the war, the Civil War um also
developed this ideology of false grievance. Mhm. And some of the same rhetoric um still
endures today that existed then as the
rationalization of slavery for and in particular the word liberty
um because liberty was used um uh by the slave owners uh in terms of their
liberty to own human property. Um and Lincoln uh fixed on this um and
delivered whole speeches uh u uh deconstructing
um their manip their manipulation and exploitation of this rhetoric. And yet
this same word now has come back um to justify the imposition of Christian
nationalism and to destroy the separation of church and state just as an example of the kind of ideology of
grievance that's entered into the destruction really of American law. I'm
glad there's a quote perfect quotation from a southern newspaper on the edge of
secession um which ran a quote I'm quoting freedom is slavery.
Yeah. So I'm glad you started out with the example of the former confederacy um because I think that is one of the more
astonishing right uh instances of turning oppressors into victims. Um, and
actually the first paper I wrote as an academic, which was my job market paper, was about how the Supreme Court's
decision in Shelby County versus Holder, which had dismantled a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, actually
channeled parts of the Lost Cause and Redemption Movement, which argued, of course. Exactly. That's a Robert's opinion. And
so, you know, that movement of course argued that the North was basically too mean to the South and that it was
imperative. You know, here I might be paraphrasing or quoting one of the examples from my book, but imperative to
treat and respect the South as an equal. They turn the Confederacy into the victim of reconstruction and use that
idea to dismantle reconstruction and usher in Jim Crow segregation. And you
can see those same ideas in Shelby County versus Holder, the Roberts opinion that dismantled part of the
Voting Rights Act. You know that opinion talks about how the Voting Rights Act is
desperate treatment, a legal term of art for intentional discrimination against the former Confederacy. So in
this case about the Voting Rights Act, you know, the crown jewel of the Civil Rights Movement, this protection against
voter discrimination, in a case about voter discrimination, they turn the former Confederacy into the victims of
discrimination. And it's that sort of inversion of discrimination and equality
that I think anchors a lot of different areas of law. And all of the chapters in
my book are about different areas of law that reflect that idea. You know, you mentioned this idea of Christian
nationalism, discrimination against religion. Happy to elaborate more on how
that area of law has just been completely cannibalized by this idea of conservative grievance. Yeah, I don't
want to leave um this um for a moment, but let's just fix the point on John
Roberts here on Shelby and its root and
its root in um Confederate thinking um
from which um has you know the fruit of this po poison tree is the destruction
of the civil rights legislation and the voting rights act and all the way back.
So that the comparison of Roberts to Roger Tony who was the author of the
DreadScott decision and was chief justice then from chief justice to chief justice is not um um sheer pmic but in
fact um a kind of direct lineage.
Yes. I mean, I think that the Roberts court has a series of what I would describe as neoconfederate rulings in
which they are ushering in, you know, the pre-Ivil rights movement world in
which we lived in from hobbling, you know, the pre-clarance process of the voting rights act to undermining what
remains of the voting rights acts protections against discrimination to ending efforts to integrate, you know,
institutions of higher education, you know, to undermining section 1983, the
general federal federal civil rights statute that was a key part of reconstruction. You know, this last term
in their decision about whether you can challenge a state's ability to exclude Medicaid providers. The statute that
they weakened was section 1983 in that case. So, I think there are many
different rulings that reflect that sort of neoconfederate ideology and neoconfederate results. And it's no
accident that in that case, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson's descent likened the Supreme Court's decision in that
case to previous efforts to undermine civil rights protections in the wake of the Civil War and likened the court what
they were doing, you know, recently to the court facilitating the end of reconstruction. Well, Leah, you just you
actually hit on just what I wanted to talk about next, which is Justice Jackson and the differences among the
liberals and how you deal with um I love the idea. I don't like the I idea of
calling this court the neo-confederate court rather than just simply the MAGA court. I mean, I think it's very very important point, but but what do you
make of that distinction of of that split, if you will, or if it is a split? There's certainly a different different
way of dealing with it. What do you think? It is very um I think notable to
me that there are real differences between the Democratic appointees um in their willingness to write separately,
the tone and register in which they write separately and to call out their colleagues, you know, for engaging in
behavior that is not consistent, you know, with I think judicial standards. Um, I think Justice Jackson has shown
herself to be very willing to speak in ways that are easily understood and
translatable to a broader audience than maybe, you know, could read a typical
legal descent. I think she has also been willing to say things um that some of her colleagues have not, you know, even
though some of Justice Kagan's descents have been quite pointed. Um, you know, she referred to, for example, you know,
one of the court's previous decisions as not just inadequately explained, but also poorly explained, you know, and she
has had some, you know, sharp words. She accused a Justice Alto majority opinion that undermine the Voting Rights Act as
occupying a law-free zone. So, you know, they have had their sharp words, but I do think Justice Jackson's willingness
to identify broader patterns in the court's jurisprudence and fault the court for that. And the plainness with
which she speaks is really different as to what explains it. I think part of it is a temperament issue. I think part of
it is that Justice Jackson came to the court after the end of Row versus Wade and so she was not engaged in this
project of trying to compromise and appease the justices to ward off you
know the end of Row and potentially other rights as well. Yeah. Do you think,
let me just on this point, do you think that um justices Kagan and Sotomayor
actually think that somehow that by tempering their rhetoric in their
descents that uh unlike Jackson that they can con persuade their colleagues
to a more temperate uh position and uh lead to further compromises? And do you
feel that this is a kind of delusional politics or a practical politics and uh
that you know Jackson is engaged simply in a rhetorical project rather than an
actual politics? Yes. So I I do think that both justices Kagan and Sotomayor, you know, Sotomayor
probably to a lesser extent think that, you know, declining to disscent,
declining to write plainly, sometimes joining, you know, with the Republican
appointees to cobble together majority is that those are all ways in which they might be reducing the speed, you know,
with which the court arrives at, you know, its radical reashioning of law and society, you What do I think about that?
Um, you know, I do think that they are probably able to get some things in the
short term um that might forstall or at least delay the inevitable. You know, is
that worth um you know, the trimming their sales and appeasement? You know,
on that, I probably find myself more in agreement with Justice Jackson that at this point, given everything the court
is doing, the court's just inability to care about law, to provide reasons, and
the extent to which they are enabling the Trump administration, that all of that combined means it is more important
to call out the court and try to, I don't know, energize the public um the
uh Democratic elite um to understand the extent to which the Supreme Court is now
part of our democracy problem rather than a solution to it. What you said something about the
inevitable and also about them getting something. What is the something they
think they can get and what's the inevitable? Yeah. So, let's think about the court's steady destruction of the establishment
clause. Um, over the last, let's say, 10 years, the Republican controlled Supreme
Court has increasingly invalidated measures that sought to limit the extent to which states were supporting
religious schools, right? They sought to limit the extent to which states could decline to provide funds to religious
public schools. You know, at first they said, okay, well, states have to give them money for non-religious reasons
like playground resurfacing. And then it became oh well actually you have to give
money to schools generally as part of tax exemptions. Now all of a sudden we are on the precipice of them saying
states are obligated to create religious public charter schools. The inevitable
is like the complete demolition of the separation of church and state and the creation of prayer and schools and
religious public schools. So, I think that the Democratic appointees, right, kind of delayed that, you know, by
joining rulings that said, "Oh, we're just saying states have to give money to playground resurfacing rather than
saying seven years ago, you know, states have to fund religious public schools."
So, that's kind of what I mean by delay and for stalling inevitable.
And how much of it might be I mean, you mentioned DOBS earlier, Leah, and that's true. I mean, but Jackson's also the
first, what should we say, postTrump appointee, post jobs and but but but she understands, I think, the way what's
going on really in a different way than than either Sodtoayor or or Kagan would. Um they came out of a time when there
was a normal court, let's say it was a conservative court, but it was a normal court. Yeah.
Yeah. Degrees of normality. But in any case, it's not way it was then and and that she sees that in a way that's, you
know, with with greater clarity perhaps than than Mary. It's not just a matter of temperament. It's a matter of
experience. I think that that is also probably part of it. Um, you know, I look at law
students today. I look at my time as a law student. Um, and I look at, you know, the people who taught me law. And
I think we all grew up and were socialized in and, you know, began the
profession at very different moments for the Supreme Court, the federal courts, and the legal profession. You know, more
broadly, you know, I clerked at the Supreme Court when the court came within one vote of dismantling the entire
affordable care act based on this cockamame theory that was completely inconsistent with precedent. So I saw up
close, you know, a court that in my view was on a steady decline and on the precipice of just imploding and no
longer functioning as a court. I think law students today see a Supreme Court that is enabling, you know, a president
who behaves in autocratic ways. And so yes, I think that that sort of professional development and experience
absolutely colors one's assessment of institutions and the right approach to take within and to institutions.
Yeah, this raises the question, you're a law professor teaching constitutional
law and yet the constitution's literally being dismantled before our eyes. the um
in the past the ideology that was offered as the rationalization for all of the decisions for to achieve
conservative ends um and uh were was originalism or history and tradition or
textualism and now they've gone beyond it to nothing nothing
uh uh offering no reasoning but but um but also into a kind of authoritarian
Ian postconstitutionalism uh that's far that's beyond any even
originalist conception and what what's your view? Yeah. So part of what I try to describe
in the book is how the justices basically used tools like originalism you know as cover to enable the
Republicans agenda. But that's what they were at the end of the day tools. They
were pretty convenient, you know, at confirmation hearings because that allowed appointees to say things like
originalism and textualism rather than women dying in parking lots. Um, and
now, you know, that they have a supermajority. Um, and again more insulation from popular majorities. I
think they are emboldened. And so, you know, I think the court is increasingly acting like everything or at least most
things that Donald Trump does are just the law and they treat his edicts as the law. um because those represent, you
know, the policies and views and preferences of the Republican party. Um they don't bother to explain themselves.
When they do explain themselves, there isn't a lick of history or focus on the text of a statute. You know, in opinions
that explain, you know, what the free exercise clause or establishment clause mean. You know, it's not like the
justices are doing some extensive analysis of history. you know, in their
opinion announcing that the president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution. I mean, that would just be
horrifying, you know, to the people who drafted and ratified the constitution who sought to make a system where there
are no kings. And I think the reasoning in that decision just reflects the justice's pragmatic assessment of what
is worse, criminal liability for the president or, you know, a president who
is unfettered and unbound by law. Yeah, I mean Trump v US to me that was the
signal that they'd gone beyond originalism that now it's going to be just raw power and and really that's
what the decision says. He says that you know the president should have a lot of power so we're going to let him have a lot of power. That's the reasoning.
There's no not like it would be good for our constitutional system if presidents right like had the ability to act
without being fearful of you know criminal consequences. They know better than Madison. They know better than everybody. It's all there,
right? I thought one of the telltale signs recently was the confirmation hearing
for Amal Boove to uh to the uh um to the appellet court of the third district.
And uh uh and as an afterthought, uh Josh Holly, senator from Missouri, um
said, "You're an originalist, right?" Like just check the box, please.
And he actually said it. He said, "I'm I believe in a textual textual textualist." And then he asked him about
textualism is, you know, and do you for Satan and all of his works. Um and um
and he you know basically Bob said, "Yeah, boss, whatever you say." Yeah. But but it has become a code word,
a sort of euphemistic code word outside of the court, outside of the judicial system. It's now everywhere that if you
want to, you know, if you want to u um um kill women, u just say you're a textualist. That's fine. But it's
everywhere. Yeah. And so part of what my book does it is it describes the rise of
originalism and how when originalism was first being floated, you know, by the Reagan administration and the Federalist
Society, they needed to basically signal what they were saying when they said
originalism. And so you had officials in the Reagan administration saying quite explicitly a juristp prudence of
original intentions is the way to roll back things the Warren Court did like recognizing rights for women, minorities
and criminal defendants. And then you had Reagan administration officials writing, you know, in books documents
for the executive branch that originalism was a way to advance the social issues and social policies of the
Republican party. And once those views become fused, once they become so associated with one another, you don't
need to say that anymore. Yeah. And a major a major element in doing all making this all possible, of
course, was the Federalist Society. Yes. And and Leonard Leo and his group. And recently there was this spat between
Trump and Leonard Leo. Didn't he call Leonard Leo an evil person for a while? But he seems to have these spats and they disappear.
He's still appointing federalists. Exactly. people, you know, from Leo's list.
Yeah. He's just looking for the most hackish among them. Right. Right. Right. Yeah. I want to ask you about another
thing. What um what theta Scotch Paul of Harvard has called McConnellism.
Uh and and that also gets us back to the um to the Gilded Age Court, the you
know, the destroyed reconstruction, right? but also had this particular
strand of McConnellism uh was is devoted to destroying all
barriers to the influence of big money and John Roberts has been instrumental
in this beginning with the Citizens United decision. So we're and this has
laid the groundwork for a new guilded age and this is a new guilded age court as well. Mhm.
I totally agree. Um, this is another one of the areas of law, you know, not just campaign finance, but also the law of
political corruption that I write about in the book because I think the through line in the campaign finance decisions
and the decisions on political corruption is this sense that the super rich are just entitled to buy influence
and access to spend unlimited amounts of money. And that's just the way for them
politics works and should work. And here too, you have this wild grievance narrative where in the campaign finance
decisions, the court is oblquely talking about how the first amendment protects, you know, the rights of minorities.
Well, which minority is the court protecting? The rights of the mega rich. You know, who the court thinks campaign
finance legislation unfairly discriminates against, you know, by not allowing them to basically use their
accumulated wealth to purchase political power. The reasoning in these decisions is just ridiculous. You know, in
Citizens United, for example, the decision you mentioned, the court says things like, "Well, these unlimited
corporate expenditures, they're not going to give rise to corruption or even the appearance of corruption." You know,
I'm sorry, the 2024 election basically gave a lie to that. We all saw the
richest man in the world purchase himself a seat at the table, you know, with access to the White House. So yes,
these decisions are very much part of the new political order that I think the court is constructing and deeply
committed to. It's the money talks rule. Yeah. You know.
Yeah. So we also have an an unprecedented attorney general to match
this kind of Supreme Court, Pam Bondi, who um exists to implement the whims of
Donald Trump. Mhm. Um, and I wonder what your view is in relationship to what she's doing and the
court. I mean, I think she has just so thoroughly discredited herself, you
know, in any number of decisions. you know, she was one of the people who was repeatedly insisting Kil Mara Brego
Garcia, you know, the man who was wrongfully expelled to El Salvador, would one never return to the United
States, and two, you know, was some sort of violent gang member, something they have been unable to convince, you know,
any judge, um, uh, you know, to date. Um, so I think yes, you're absolutely
right. Right. This is another kind of crony loyalist who has been appointed to the Trump administration and who is just
content kind of paring the lies and um you know dishonest talking points you
know that dear leader provides her. Yeah. But now she's not just caught up. I mean the Epstein business I mean now
she seems to be you know whoops. Yeah. What's your view what's your view of the legal issues involved in the
Epstein issue? We now have the dangling of a pardon or clemency to Glain Maxwell
by the deputy attorney general acting on behalf of the president,
the president's private lawyer uh in exchange for clearing him perhaps
or um incriminating his enemies within.
Uh we don't know. And um uh Senator Dick Durban today sent a letter to the
Justice Department demanding the um to know exactly what um Todd Blanch, Deputy
Attorney General, asked former personal attorney or maybe not former personal attorney to Donald
Trump, right? Ask what her responses were. Um she has filed now um uh her latest appeal to the
Supreme Court. It's not a new thing. It's reported as though it's new. It's not new. She's been doing this all along. They've been kicking the can on
it. And um um and they've been oppo the administration has opposed
um any uh any request on her part to uh throw out her case uh and uh said that
the matters closed and she deserves her sentence until now. Right. So,
um I mean where does this where does this Epstein thing go and can it ever get I can't imagine but I'm one never
knows the perversity of what goes on how it gets to the Supreme Court. Yeah. I mean legal issues where does it
go? I mean to my mind this possible exercise of the pardon power is just part of a broader project and pattern of
Donald Trump abusing and using the powers of the office to advance his own personal interest and political gain.
Like to him there is no conceptual space between a public purpose and benefiting
Donald Trump and his political interests. And so he just uses right like all powers of the presidency to
that end. And I think dangling this pardon, you know, for Gileain Maxwell to basically potentially incriminate, you
know, his political opponents and exonerate him is very much a part of that pattern. you know, as to the law. I
mean, pardon power is one of the powers that the Supreme Court in their egregious immunity decision listed as
exclusive to the president and basically you can't challenge it even if it is exercised for impermissible purposes,
right, for personal retribution or private gain. Um, so I agree. I don't
see there being a way to really challenge a possible pardon for Maxwell
in the courts. Um, and that is again this deeply awful consequence of
allowing this autocrat who is one of the
worst people in the world to hold the office of the presidency. Yeah. So, um, there's also the question
of, um, the suppression of the actual
Epstein files as opposed to the fictional ones, right? and um and the resistance to
releasing them and what they might do to um you know um redact them. Um
so what's your view? I mean they could tomorrow if they wanted release all of the information in
the government's possession um about Jeffrey Epstein, you know, his supposed client lists, right? or any sort of
blackmail, you know, he engaged in uh visav the powerful individuals who were part of his network. Um the fact that
they haven't done so is a choice and my guess is it probably reflects their assessment of the political interests of
Donald Trump and the Republican party. Um I think the fact that this administration is so willing to brazenly
lie um over and over should give us real hesitation and pause in the event they release anything you know whether it's
redacted or whether it's not as to whether the information that they are providing us is remotely complete. Um, I
also think they are attempting to create this sideshow and distraction to get away with not releasing the Epstein
files by going to court and asking courts for permission to release the grand jury files, which again they can't
do without court's permission. Um, and in their legal filings, they're not even
trying to convince courts. They have satisfied the requirements for the release of grand jury materials. I think
they are just setting up a fall guy, the courts, you know, for them not releasing
any more information related to Epstein. Yes, Leah, you use the word brazeness
and that's that's that's what it really becomes. I mean, it's with the Maxwell business in particular. I mean, it's so
transparent what's going on. I mean, we were talking about this being a cover up, but usually when you have a cover
up, you're trying to hide the fact that it's a cover up. They're blaring with a megaphone in Time Square that it's a
cover up. I mean, it's extraordinary how far they're willing to go. It is one of those things where the
cover up, right, is probably not worse than the underlying crime. Um, but they are certainly conducting it in a way uh
that makes it all the more of a focal point. Okay, we're just about out of time, unfortunately, but but Sid, you want to
ask one last question? Well, um, where where does the court go
right now? um you know uh some people hold out um the hope that there's a you
know a Hollywood ending here, there's a happy ending that they're engaged in all
this um appeasement of Trump uh in order to buy what will be, you know,
resistance to Trump in the end. Um, and this strikes me as um um human nature
hoping for an optimistic conclusion in the face of harsh reality. What do you
think? Yeah, what you just described as fiction. I wrote a non-fiction book. Um the reality is the court is going to
continue advancing, you know, the Christian nationalist elements of the Republican coalition and the Trump administration targeting trans people,
attacking civil rights for minorities. At the same time, they are going to continue granting Donald Trump, you
know, an everexpanding set of powers to violate laws, you know, that insulate individuals from presidential firing.
They are going to continue to give him relief from lower court orders that rule against the administration, suggesting
the real problem here is not Donald Trump's many legal violations, but the fact that lower courts would dain to do
anything about it. Um, I am not holding out hope that the court is going to save us. I think it is clear they are not. um
even if you know in some case here and there they might rule against the Trump administration.
Well, with that dose of reality that we all very much need, if we're going to if we're going to get anywhere, we have
better understand where we are. And um you've certainly Leah really shown us a great deal about where we are um for for
better and for worse. At any rate, thank you so much for coming on. It was great. You've been a great guest having having
you is a real pleasure. And for Sydney Blumenthal and myself, Sean Wence, and the Court of History, we'll see you next
time. Can't get your fill of legal AF? Me neither. That's why we formed the Legal AF Substack. Every time we mention
something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the Substack, you'll find the
court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called, wait for it, Morning AF. What
else? All the other contributors from Legal Affair are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews.
We got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where legal AF on
Substack. Come over now to free subscribe. [Music]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Wed Jul 30, 2025 6:21 am

Jeffrey Sachs: At the Precipice of World War 3
by Glenn Diesen & Prof. Jeffrey Sachs
Jul 29, 2025

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs is a world-renowned economics professor, an advisor to political leaders around the world, a bestselling author, and a global leader in sustainable development. Prof. Sachs cautions that hegemonic ambitions, hubris, the demise of rationality, and the collapse of democracy have introduced a global crisis.



Transcript

Hi everyone and welcome back. We are joined again today by Professor Jeffrey Saxs. Uh so it's great to have you back
on the program. Glenn, great to be with you as always. Thank you. Well uh we have one crisis after the
other now all over which are escalating wars from Europe to the Middle East. Uh
it's become common to casually speak of war against China. we have this doomsday clock for nuclear war which keeps moving
in the wrong direction. uh so economic wars, social upheaval, I would say a crisis of political legitimacy,
especially in Europe, and an absence of genuine diplomacy to find solutions to
all of these problems which only continue to mount. And uh couldn't help but to notice that we got some people,
including Steve Bannon, arguing that World War II has already begun in terms
of all these conflicts coming together. uh how are you reading the looking at
all of this combined uh what are the yeah core drivers uh pushing the world
towards this crisis. Yes, this is indeed a a very dangerous
time as I think everyone on the planet understands the world is disrupted in
fundamental ways. In other words, the world is changing dramatically in some ways potentially for the better because
uh technology the possibilities of making positive breakthroughs are very
real. uh in some ways positive because poor countries are catching up,
improving living standards in many places, especially in Asia, but also
disrupted extraordinarily dangerously obviously by the spread of nuclear
weapons, by the changing geopolitics because as the world has gone from first
a so-called bipolar world of the US and the Soviet Union between 1945 in 1991 to
a supposedly or allegedly unipolar world at least as declared by the United
States after 1991. We clearly are in a multi-polar world today where the United
States, China, Russia and arguably other countries, India another
and I would say Europe if it could ever get its act together but it does not
currently have its act together would be another uh now compete for power but
without uh norms without a shared vision. Uh and indeed I would say uh in
a world in which the west meaning the US-led world is rather desperately
trying to keep its primacy or its hold on power over China, Russia and the
BRICS countries more generally. So that's a lot of disruption. Add in the
fact that we have climate disasters everywhere. uh an inconvenient point
that is uh brushed aside by many, for example, by Trump and others because it
just doesn't fit other narratives, but is extraordinarily real. Even China and
Beijing experienced massive loss of life in recent days from
extreme flooding. The uh events in Los Angeles of massive forest fires earlier
this year are among the largest measured catastrophes in terms of damages and
losses that we've ever seen. This is happening all over the world. So the world is filled with disruption
and at the same time the quality of leadership in the west is dismal. Donald Trump is a
an unstable uh unpredictable not merely transactional
but uh I would say uh person without uh any longer term perspective uh
leading the United States right now. Europe clearly without any leadership
whatsoever. It's in a state progressively of open collapse politically.
uh Ursula Vanderlayan is is a disgrace. And we saw this with the most recent
so-called trade negotiations between Europe and the United States where Europe just basically accepted US
dictats. And so with the western leadership uh terrible with Donald Trump
filled with the delusions of US power uh with the rapid disruptions uh in
technology environment in geopolitics in economics uh all over the world with the
spread of nuclear weapons with the local uh but not so local I should say
absolute disasters such as Israel's genocide in uh Gaza, aided and emedded
by the United States and Europe. All of this adds up to extraordinary
instability and extraordinary danger. You mentioned the doomsday clock. I
refer to it very often because it is our most uh clear and dramatic graphic of
the world state of affairs. It purports or aims to measure how close we are to
complete global disaster such as nuclear war or nuclear Armageddon. And the clock
hand is put by these experts at the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists at a mere
89 seconds to midnight. The closest to midnight or to disaster that the clock
has been depicted since it was unveiled in 1947. In other words, uh we've arrived at this
age of AI and advanced technologies and space technology and all this weaponry
uh closer to uh global suicide than uh
ever before. Yeah. Well, a good example of this
though would be well Europe in terms of uh lacking direction and leadership. I
often point to Germany as a fascinating example because they're now very
casually discussing, you know, banning their opposition party about acquiring nuclear weapons.
Something openly being discussed. Uh their goal for prosperity appears to be
military caninism. There's open support for genocide in Palestine and they're
speaking of war with Russia getting more involved and nobody speaks of peace anymore. Uh so all is not well. Uh do
you see something this unique about Europe's lack of direction or is this uh
um a similar problem as the United States faces?
Well, first I would say that um it's a retrogression in Europe. It's not that
Europe has always been so uh awful in its politics. In uh recent decades after
World War II, which of course was one of the greatest calamities of history, uh
Europe seemed to take note within Europe, not imposed from the outside,
but within Europe that a different way was needed and the way would be uh
peace, cooperation, and creating a community, a a European
community that eventually became a European Union and Europe uh was stood
back up and not uh simply as a vassel of the United States. Uh there were leaders
in Europe certainly who spoke up and said the US is on the wrong track or the
right track. The US was broadly an ally under NATO but uh Europe was not
subservient. There was independent politics and Germany is a is a case in point because Villi Bront for example
was a very uh independent and bold chancellor of West Germany who said we
need a different approach to the east. The O politique uh we need to have a
cooperative arrangement with the Soviet Union not to see ourselves as doomed to
war in Europe. And that opened up a uh a a new kind of politics that helped to
give rise to Mikl Gorbachov's politics. uh and I as a young economist at the
time uh came to be part of advisory
groups to Mikl Gorbachev and to Boris Yelen and to Leoned Kuchma of Ukraine
when it gained its independence in the early 1990s. I'd visited German leaders
in the early 1990s. It seemed that Europe was building a peaceful European
home as Gorbachov had said from Rotterdam to Vladivosto. In other words,
the idea that the old divisions of the cold war period uh would end and Europe
and Russia and the former Soviet Union would find peace uh would find
collective security uh and find economic uh shared prosperity through trade and
investment seemed to be taking shape. I believed it in the early 1990s. I
certainly did my best to help it come about. I advised many governments in
Eastern Europe and my main idea there was that they would join this new union,
but that the union wasn't to just move the Berlin Wall a few hundred kilometers
to the east and exclude Russia, but that this would build a a true European home.
That was the idea. Perfectly possible. many European leaders were in favor of
it. So it raises the question, Glenn, what went wrong? And in my view uh one
major thing went wrong and that is the United States uh leadership became
completely delusional and arrogant, drunk on power, believing its own press
releases that the US was now the sole superpower, the most powerful country
that ever stroed the planet. uh the new Rome except surpassing Rome, the country
that could do anything uh that it uh wants to do and
conjoined with that Europe fell into line. So those are the two things in my
view that proved uh absolutely disastrous from the promise of the early
1990s in the United States. the neocons took power and the neocons basically was
a philosophy of the CIA, the deep state
and uh some pseudo intellectuals, let me call them that, who said now the US runs the
show and they proudly took on the idea that yes, the US is the world's
policeman in those words. Actually, that used to be a derogatory idea. Oh, it US
pretends to be the world's policeman. But they said, "Yes, of course, the the US is the world's policeman. We are the
sole superpower." For a while, many in Europe said, "No,
no, no, no. We don't join you, for example, in the war in Iraq, the US war
in Iraq, which was a war of arrogance, a war
together with Israel to overthrow a regime for no real reason. But it was
phonied up as a war against Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. And it was a disaster in destabilization
in loss of life and uh creating chaos in the world in in breaking apart the
European common home. But it even then in 2003 there were voices in Europe that
said no this is not a good idea. Germany and France said no uh we don't side with the United States in this war. That was
the last independence of Europe, however, because the neocons, George
Bush Jr., who was president then, put the foot
down and said, "Europe, get into line." By 2008, Europe was subservient to the
United States most dramatically at the Bucharest NATO summit that year in 2008
when NATO said that NATO would expand to Ukraine and to Georgia, which was the
predicate, the setup for the war in Ukraine today and Europe. even in the
memoirs of Chancellor Angela Merkel for one day tried to object and then after
the first day of the Bucharest summit Europe folded its hand and it hasn't
been independent ever since uh Merkel said okay we'll go along with this uh
NATO enlargement was uh committed Europe has lost its voice ever since that A
actually German chancellors are one more pathetic than the next. Mertz is now an
open wararmonger. Uh completely unpopular, plummeting popularity. Uh
because the public does not want this. Parties like AFD, which are called
extremist right-wing parties, are actually parties that say we don't want World War II. Uh this is all through
Europe. The so-called extreme right is not the militarist right. It's the opposite. The mainstream is the
militarist uh faction now uh because it fell into line with the US neocons and
lost its independence. Uh European Union leaders became vassels of the United
States after 2008. Uh who who does Ursula Vanderland work for? Uh clearly
the United States, not for Europe. She just exposed this again in this
unbelievably ridiculous so-called trade agreement where Europe gave everything to the
United States even though Europe is a bigger uh region 450 million people
compared to 335 million in in the United States but Europe said we hold no cards
we can't negotiate we fold our hand we give everything to the United States and
that's Vanderlayan So all of this is to say, Glenn, that
Europe lost its way. It lost its independence. It lost its clarity. And
one of the things that happened, just to add, is that Europe became in its
rhetoric partly guided by the US deep state uh insanely rustic.
uh insanely rousophobic to the point that it cannot think straight honestly
for one moment about how we came to this war in Ukraine, how we could get out of
it. uh if you try to say something honest about it, such as NATO
enlargement, such as the West dissing and dumping the Minsk agreement, such as
the US refusing to limit its deployment of anti-bballistic missile systems on
Russia's borders. If you say anything like that, oh, you're a Putin apologist. because that became the rhetoric of
European vassal politics to the US deep state. It's very sad. But Europe lost
its independence and the trade agreement is the most vivid display of that. Uh
this is not an agreement between two major powers. This is an agreement between the United States and a vassal
region. Well, I think uh it's interesting what you said about the the left and right
because only on the what we call far right or far left do they actually talk about peace. Uh instead we now have the
radical center it seems. Uh but this this does appear to be the problem. The wararmongering center.
Yeah. Yeah. If if if you're if if you aren't wararmongering, you're deemed to
be an extremist. It's it's unbelievable and it's so wrongheaded and now Europe has backed
itself into the worst corner complete
dependence embarrassing humiliation to the United States on the
one side and in the same week having a dismal regression of relations with
China the same way. So Europe is basically isolating itself, raising the
fever pitch, completely lost. And this is uh this is terrible. We need Europe.
We we need a healthy Europe. It's the opposite of what we have right now.
I think the just the Europeans got too committed to the idea of liberal hedgeimonyy after the cold war. That is
uh it create the assumption that the world would be a much more peaceful place if the liberal democracies of the
west would simply dominate and this created I think no political imagination for anything other than hedgemony which
is problematic when the world shifts towards multiparity which is why you see this panic I think and uh complete
subservience to the US as evident by wonderland's capitulation and uh it's
kind of strange to see the same people who called for cutting off economic ties with Russia, China now
complaining that they had to fold and capitulate completely to Trump. But uh when America is the only game in town
because he severed all other relations, uh they don't seem to see any uh
connection there. But uh do you see it's it's right Glenn it's so interesting for me you know when I said
earlier this year and in fact in a speech in the uh European Parliament get
your act together the US is a threat to you understand this your rousophobia is
backing you into corner oh Mr. Sachs. This is propaganda. This is ridiculous.
It plays out exactly that way. And they don't seem to understand this. And one
of the things about diplomacy, it's a very basic point. It's diplomacy 101 or
even before that, you talk to the other side to understand it. Uh to try to even
understand your own situation. Europe doesn't talk to Russia. doesn't talk,
doesn't have the most basic diplomacy. Uh, stirs rousophobia. If you talk to
Russia, you're an appeaser. It's ridiculous. And this just backs Europe
more and more into this pathetic state of affairs where it's fearful of
everybody and it's great ally. The United States is coming to grab every
piece it can and demand you buy our gas six times more expensive than Russia's.
We're going to take Greenland from you. Just wait. Let's see Ursula Vanderlane say, "Yeah, they only took Greenland.
They didn't take all of Denmark. It was the best deal we could get." You can already imagine the words from Ursula
Vanderlayan in in this way. Well, you advised governments around the
world and um Trump previously posted a speech of yours uh on social media
related to the Middle East, but what would you advise Trump today to get out of this mess, for example, in in
Ukraine? Because for some reason now he talks about only a ceasefire and Putin
is not a nice guy anymore. I mean, this is the kind of language. So if if if you could advise him, what what what would
you say? Well, first, the United States cannot
dictate terms, period. So there's an incredible arrogance of power that has
been true of the United States for a long time. Uh it was especially put into overdrive uh by uh the end of the Soviet
Union in 1991. Uh Trump said he is opposed to the neocons but the arrogance
continues. So Trump doesn't like this, Trump doesn't like that. I give you 10 days, I give you 12 days, I give you 50
days, whatever it is, Trump's idea is that he can demand the outcome. No.
Second, Trump said informally, privately, in discussions
that his envoy Witkoff had in Russia supposedly, "Yes, we understand NATO was
a provocation. and NATO enlargement was a provocation. But Trump is too weak to
stand up and explain to the American people in Europe that NATO enlargement was a bad idea to Ukraine, hopelessly
bad idea, dangerous, provocative against promises that were made in 1990. uh
against the premise of Ukraine's permanent neutrality which was the basis of its independence in 1991.
If Trump were a normal but strong leader, he would explain what's going
on. He doesn't. I think privately there were glimmers that he knew, that JD
Vance knew, uh that his envoy knew and so forth. And these were reported as
private discussions. But when it comes to diplomacy, you have to state the
case. It's not all secret. It has to be with public backing. It has to be able
to tell the wararm mongers like Lindsey Graham or uh uh Richard Blumenthal, the
two senators who are big wararm mongers in in the US and big recipients of funds
from the military-industrial complex. Back off because this is the real point.
Trump needs to say publicly, yes, NATO will not enlarge. That's the basis for
peace in Ukraine. Yes, uh the West should not have dissed the Minsk 2
agreement and so forth. And you build the political base for a real peace. As
I think many people know that watch this, but probably not enough are aware,
all the talk about ceasefire as opposed to a peace agreement is a
misdirection. Ceasefire means we stop, the fighting stops, but there's no peace
so it can start up on our terms when we want it to start up again. What Russia
has rightly been saying, correctly been saying, is let's get to the root causes
of this conflict and the root causes of conflict, find a path to collective
security so the fighting won't resume. That's what a real leader in the United
States would accept. We've had real leaders that understand points like
this. We had Franklin Roosevelt who understood points like this. John F. Kennedy understood points like this.
Richard Nixon was able to make strategic decisions correctly. There have been
others, but Trump unfortunately seems incapable of doing this. And partly it's
the continuing delusion. I can announce sanctions against Russia in 12 days.
Come on. This is this is not even uh Hollywood
movie material. Uh but this is the way that bad movie. I mean this is the way
that uh the US is behaving right now. It is not only not conducive to peace, it's
conducive to spreading chaos. Making demands rather than having diplomacy
settles nothing. When it comes to the Middle East, this is the most painful
and obvious situation. Israel is a rogue
criminal state. Period. It is committing genocide. It's murdering people before
our eyes. It is starving children to death. None of this is complicated. What
is tragic, of course, is the hold of the Zionist lobby in the United States.
Exactly where that hold comes from. Whether it's money of donors, whether it's Protestant evangelical voters, or
whether it's blackmail by Mossad on the Epstein list, who knows? It's very hard
to figure out. But the right thing for the United States to do is obvious,
which is to stand up and say Israel is committing genocide. It must stop
immediately. The United States stops arming and funding Israel. Period.
Because there need to be two states, a state of Palestine next to a state of
Israel now. Period. And genocide must stop. Well, I could probably give that
advice forever. I don't think uh Trump is listening. Uh the hold of uh this
madness on US politics is not easy to understand. Even if you've been trying
to figure that out for 50 years, even if you've been reading John Mirshimer and
Steven Walt and others for decades, it's not easy to understand how the US and
much of Europe, including Germany, by the way, including uh UK effectively are
complicit in genocide today in Israel's starvation of up to two million people
in Gaza, children dying before our eyes, people being killed by Israel open fire
openly acknowledged by the way when they go to a feeding point. So
how this hold persists and why uh I can't give you a
definitive answer to it. But it does just seem that every policy
is about doubling down though because with Russia now again you have this 10day ultimatum where Trump going to
either have to be doing a very embarrassing reversal or end up in a very direct conflict with the Russians
and Gaza there's you know either lay down your weapons or otherwise we will
have to continue the destruction of the Palestinians. You hear the same rhetoric with Iran as well that is uh you know
Trump pointing out that Iran still talking about enrichment which means that they perhaps
have to go bomb again. I mean there is there's no no one speaking there's no
genuine diplomacy is quite uh depressing. So just I guess a quick final
yes and and at the at the basis of this again is is arrogance the overriding
arrogance of the US. Now it's in embodied by Trump but what Trump
represents is as I've said a bit ambiguous whereas the the power that
drives this definitely the CIA Mossad relations go back many decades and are
very very strong. The deep state in the United States is absolutely real. But
the point is this arrogance that the United States will settle the terms in
the Middle East. It will settle the terms with Iran. It will settle the terms with Russia. It will settle the
terms with China. And this is dangerous and delusional because we are in a
multipolar world. By the way, simply the fact of nine nuclear armed countries
means a multi-polar world because we're not in a world where conventional arms
dictate our future, but where a nuclear war could end everything. And it could
come from anywhere. It could come from any one of these nine countries. We need
diplomacy and we need to be speaking honestly, directly uh
and and on a basis of uh some measure of
standards and mutual respect among major powers so that we avoid disaster. Trump.
I don't think he has it in him, unfortunately, which means that it's going to be uh
the harrowing fact that Trump will make demands and they won't lead to results
that will be our reality for uh a period to come. Uh, of course, when Europe
capitulates to Trump, it feeds this uh craziness that we have right now, it
feeds this arrogance. That's very, very dangerous. If Europe had acted like
Europe has said, Mr. Trump or Europe, you're the United States. If you want to do something mutual and bilateral, let's
discuss this, but we don't unilaterally fold to your demand. It would have made
the world a lot safer. It would have made Europe a lot safer.
So, do you agree with Bannon's sentiment that this could be a we could either be in it or at least a prelude to World War
II or is it uh hyperbolic? Well, let let me say in a strange way because these
are almost opposites in some sense, but Pope Francis used to say years before
Bannon has said it that we're already in World War II. Pope Francis was the world's greatest person of peace. Uh,
and he said uh already a decade ago that he felt we were in World War II.
Certainly the circumstances we have right now, you could imagine a a
wonderful historian such as yourself or IR specialist such as yourself writing
in the aftermath of war. Well, look, here are all the pieces. We could see it happening. We could see it spreading. It
feels in this sense like the 1930s. Of course, not to make glib comparisons
because history does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme as is been said many
times. Uh but the point is whether we're in World War II or in a
period that could lead to such disaster, it's undoubted the dangers that we're in
right now. We need diplomacy. Diplomacy means that great powers say we respect
each other. We don't make ultimatums. Remember it was the ultimatum of the
Hapsburg Empire uh to uh uh to to uh uh
uh its opponents after the assassination of the Arch Duke. Uh that uh was the uh
prelude to uh and and and an ultimatum pushed ultimately by the German military
high command. Uh that was the prelude pushed on Serbia. That was the prelude
to World War I. Don't make ultimatums. Period. That's an ultimatum. Please
don't make ultimatums. That's the way you get to war. Don't put on true social. Russia has 10 days. My god.
My god, this is absolutely the opposite of what should be done right now in this
world. Well, Professor Stanax, as always, thank you so much for your time and um yeah,
hopefully there will be some changes um and make better choices. Uh you said it
feels a bit like the 1930s. I often think about Antonio Grchi writing in the the late 20s or early 30s that he wrote
the current crisis derives from yeah the old world is dying and the new world
cannot be born and it's within this interregnum that this morbid symptoms appear and uh it does feel like time
but it it feels like it but a new world based on multilateralism can be born and
that's what we need to help to to midwife life. Yeah, it looks like a very dangerous
Yeah. birth. So hopefully Yeah, could be a better time. So, let's talk soon and and hope for some
good news. Thank you. Thank you.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Wed Jul 30, 2025 7:29 am

Part 1 of 2

Putin DESTROYS Trump’s Threat, Ukraine Pays the Price w/ Patrick Henningsen & Alex Krainer
by Danny Haiphong, Patrick Henningsen, and Alex Krainer
Streamed live on Jul 29, 2025 #putin #ukraine #trump

Trump just issued another ultimatum to Putin, from 50-days to "10-12 days" to settle the war and Putin's response is shocking. Patrick Henningsen and Alex Krainer join this livestream to cover exactly how Russia is maneuvering Trump's threats, as well as a full breakdown of geopolitical developments from Gaza to the Red Sea and beyond.



Transcript

Welcome everyone. Welcome back to another live stream. I'm your host Danny Hiong and we have a great show for you
today. You know, Donald Trump is now threatening Russia again. He's reduced his so-called 50-day deadline for Russia
to make peace in Ukraine to just under two weeks. This comes as the U. EU just took a bludgeoning at the trade
negotiations table and Ukraine continues to lose ground on the battlefield amid unrest that threatens to oust Zalinski.
In fact, US and UK counterparts are discussing this scenario right now. But
what explains this chaotic yet seemingly frozen policy of the US under Trump visa
v Ukraine? What has Russia's response been? Hint hint. It's been quite
devastating. To discuss all this and more, I have two very special guests with me today. Patrick Henningson of
21st Century Wire and independent analyst, financial analyst, Alex Craner.
Gentlemen, thanks so much for joining me today. Great to be with you. Good to be with you, Danny. Thank you for the invite.
Of course. Yes. Uh it's Alex's first time on this channel. Won't be his last. So, it's really good to be with both of
you. And let's get uh going with this. I wanted to talk about the revised
deadline, the revised ultimatum uh from Donald Trump first to Russia. Here is
what he said with uh Kier Starmer during his meeting with him. I'm going to make a new deadline of
about 10 uh 10 or 12 days from today. There's no reason in waiting.
There's no reason in waiting. It's 50 days. I want to be generous but uh we
just don't see any progress being made. So after this was said uh gentlemen uh
Russia responded in a variety of ways as it generally does. So first we had a
massive strike uh that was backed of course by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Um, the New York Times highlights
the prison which was attacked uh in Kiev uh that killed 16, but it's part of a
wave, as the New York Times says, of strikes directed at 73 Ukrainian cities
and villages over the course of the evening after this ultimatum was made.
Now, there's also Dmitri Medvev. He had this to say. he was sparring with uh
Lindsey Graham and first I'll just show that's Lindsey Graham's response but this is what he had to say first he said
Trump is playing the ultimatum game with Russia 50 days or 10 he should remember two things Russia isn't Israel or even
Iran each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war not between Russia and Ukraine but with his own country
don't go down the sleepy Joe road and uh Lindsey Graham you all can read this on
your own audience But the main message was get to the peace table and Medve said you cannot
dictate terms to Russia. Uh negotiations will end when all of our objectives of
the military operation have been achieved. So Patrick uh your response to
all of these developments given uh what is not only happening in Ukraine but overall with really the US's posture
visav Russia and and the world situation. That's the question isn't it Danny? Uh
the US's posture what posture? That's the question is I don't see any uh any
posture to speak of. Uh I see a lot of pivoting. I see a lot of flip-flopping.
I see a lot of confusion and I see a lot of quite frankly desperation by by
Ukraine itself of course but also by the Trump administration taking these kind of uh ambiguous um
remarks about you know deadlines and so forth. Um it's at at some point it it it
loses credibility and and I think this is the problem. I I don't think see the problem is Donald Trump um there's no W
there's no political W for Trump but there is a W there is a W for for
certain people like certain vested interests the W is and this in my
opinion this is the fallback position of the United States the W is to extend this conflict to uh keep ramping up arm
sales uh to watch European defense stocks go through the roof as they have
been uh for the last year and US defense stocks as well. That's that's a W. They
don't want you can't say that from a political point of view. It's kind of an unsaavory thing for any politician, even
Trump, um to say too loudly, but that's the W. And the W for Russia is to
continue making the same type of steady progress that they're making on the battlefield. And so there what and
Medvidev is right. One way or another, Russia is going to secure uh its uh
national security interests. It's going to defend its interests one way or another. And it doesn't look like the
United States or Ukraine or NATO is going to stop them. So that's kind of where we're at. This is kind of uh an
unofficial standoff, if you will. That's what it looks like because there's no Russia is not going to abide by any
unconditional demands or you know terms of surrender laid down by Donald Trump
and it's not going to happen. So there's no and there's no serious talk from Washington about the political
settlement and and from Russia's point of view, let's just be honest, it hasn't changed much in uh you know since since
February 2022. It's not much different than the original Istanbul agreement.
Yes, the territories and the borders have changed somewhat since then. Um, Ukraine's lost more uh actual territory
and they'll probably lose more the longer it goes. For Ukraine, it's cut your losses, but that's that's
politically untenable as long as Zilinski is in. So, the big question, Danny, is what comes after 50 days or 10
or 12 days? Is it going to be another sneak attack? Because that's what happened before the last uh impass, the
last negotiations. We saw galliant ray, the brave Ukrainians hitting the Russian nuclear deterrent. Or is are we looking
at regime change? Isni coming in to replace Zinski or are we just basically
playing the same game we've been playing for the last how long of this this
facade of negotiations. Meanwhile, as I said initially, the pe the vested
interests already have their game in place. And so that's the real game behind the scenes. Russia has its game.
the west h has its financial game as well and the rest is political theater for us. That's that's the question. What
what is going to happen after 10 or 12 days? Alex, same question to you.
Uh well, uh I I agree generally with everything that Patrick just said. Uh I
think that what's really really important to always keep in mind is that
we are witnessing the clash of two systems. generally
uh which makes the conflict in Ukraine uh the same conflict that we we're witnessing in the Middle East, the same
conflict that might happen uh with China in the future. And uh the you know the
logic of this conflict is such that you can't be you know you have to be on one side or the other and the two sides you
know the two systems of governance is uh the western
um oligarchic uh neoc colonialist imperialistic system of governance
versus pretty much the rest of the world. And now it so happens that there are certain powers in the world that are
willing and able to resist the dictat of the empire.
The these powers being primarily Russia and China and uh also Iran.
And so you know the the question is then what what side did the Trump
administration take in this conflict? And
my conclusion based on the past 6 months of Trump administration's uh
activities has been that Trump has really taken the side or against the empire.
So very often Trump makes these statements which are
I think largely scops. you know, he makes these statements for certain
audiences and he's in the UK now and the UK is the most desperately
um wararmongering side in this in this uh conflict with Ukraine.
The empire that we have in the west today is still headquartered in the city of London. that's still its strategic um
spiritual and uh and uh you know it's it's it's still the the the main
headquarters the United States has been mainly the financial and military muscle
for the empire and uh I think that Trump has been consistently trying to
extricate the United States from this imperial role but this is a very
complicated task because the the the groups and interests that have benefited
the most from the United States being the uh the empire's enforcement arm
um are the mo are the most powerful groups in the United States being you know the banking cartel
the military-industrial complex and and and certain other uh groups and so you
know he's in he's in London now he's in the UK now his meeting with Starmer. I
think that he has to give them the impression that he is still game for
being the enforcement arm for the empire. But I think that in reality has
he has no intention of doing this. Um, if we go back to the to the beginning of
the administration, even before he was inaugurated, we had Marco Rubio who said that the United States that his
administration is regarding the postworld war II order
as more than obsolete. He said that it was it has even been weaponized against
the United States and that the new reality are the multipolar integrations.
Now uh it is it it seems fairly definite that Trump
administration has chosen the path of multipolar integrations. where I where I have my doubts is that
Trump being Trump, he he won't accept joining the group as
one among the equals, you know, to say, "Okay, now we're going to make nice with
Russia, with China, with India, with with with with Iran and so forth." He's going to try to um
it seems to me that he's going to try to hijack the project and and make it his own. So derail the BRICS movement and
try to finagle his own multipolar way. So I wouldn't, you know,
I wouldn't take his statements about uh giving Vladimir Putin so many days or
however many days. I wouldn't take that seriously at this point. the let's remember what
the only way that he could change course in the war in Ukraine
and even that wouldn't be enough if the if the United States actually stepped in and said right we're going to provide a
real ironclad security guarantee for the government in Kiev uh Trump's not going
to do that and so everything else is is is just marginal posturing positioning
uh scops uh deception. Uh I think it'll take time for us to know what his true intentions
are. Patrick, uh how do you see this then?
Because on the one hand, uh you know, Alex says that there is reason to believe Trump eventually and is
finagling a kind of different posture for the United States. And at the same time uh uh the results it seems like of
this conflict appear to be going in the same direction that they've been going under the B administration. So what is
your uh assessment of this and your response to Alex? Yeah I mean I I I reported on you know
Marco Rubio at the time. I think it was a interview was did with Megan Kelly actually uh where he mentioned the
multipolar world and you know I think he just been or the beginning of the administration first couple of days and
that was the last I heard of anybody in the administration saying such such a thing. So while it's on record and many
of us did report at the time and and I was obviously very happy to hear that
but everything that has transpired since has been uh unipolar rhetoric coming
from the administration and you know they I I'm not privy to any plans they
have behind the scenes but how the optics globally are that the United States is acting more like a unipolar
actor than ever before because uh previous administrations even the
neocons uh to to a degree still acting within the international system and the
international system is com is comprised of rule sets. Okay. Uh obviously the
United States has set many of the the rule sets but their allies as well have
adopted those through the G7 and these other consensus building institutions
over the years and trade, commerce, uh international relations, treaties, uh
agreements, accords all take place within that rule set. The problem with
Trump is it it's hard to identify any discernable
uh adherence to any rule set. It's almost like it's diplomacy on the fly.
It's intimidation. It's almost like international racketeering. Even if uh
you know Trump was building a golf course uh in Miami uh and you know
having to deal with the teamsters and the local planning commission the governor and whatnot, you can't get
everybody in to sort of do the project and halfway in pull out and then shoot you know shoot the governor or threaten
threaten to bomb the this you know the state legislature which is kind of what the United States is doing
internationally. So at that point the whole system breaks down. So there's no deal to be had if if you can't attach
yourself or follow or any agreed upon rules or terms of engagement like like
you have in the business world like we have in our countries in terms of laws. Of course, the United States flouts to
to a large degree. International law is a facade and international norms are a facade, but you still need them in order
to pretend or at least give the impression that there is some order and
then people can work together to either, you know, make things happen, to stop bad situations, to pause, to rebuild.
The United States is basically, I think, taking a wrecking ball to all of that in a very short space of time. Starting
with the Biden administration, mind you, but the the last 6 months of the Trump administration haven't been very good.
If you look at all the three major flash points, you have Ukraine, you have uh
Iran, and then you have Gaza in the Middle East. And in terms of the US
deals or diplomacy, they fumbled all three of those. And then let's add global tariffs to that as well. There
are four major geopolitical global uh major flash points and areas of concern.
The US I think in my opinion have fumbled on all four of those and to the detriment of the United States I think
economically on the tariff wars but now he's using tariffs in a way that tariffs were never supposed to be used which is
he's using them as sanctions as another form of sanctioning and the the ultimate
here is this uh after 10 or 12 days I guess he's what threatening 100% tariffs
uh against anybody as a form of secondary sanctions the the dares to trade with Russia. That's not going to
happen. That's not going to happen for uh for for the mere fact that this is the president that got elected. Okay.
Many of us voted for that man uh because he would said he'd end the Ukraine war in 24 hours. So that's a big jump from
ending the Ukraine war then declaring war on economic war. Okay? Because
that's what sanctions or uh weaponized tariffs are uh as tools of coercion
against your allies. So they're not going to be able to do that to China, India or Europe. Europe trades with
Russia. Europe buys energy from Russia still billions worth uh uranium and so
forth. You know, there's it's it's just not going to happen. So like where are we going with this? That's the thing.
And at some point is everything that the US or this administration says says
publicly is it just going to be disregarded as oh well, you know, it's what Trump said this week could change
next week. And I I think everyone's just going to kind of go along and do their business and basically tell him what he
needs to hear, nod, okay, and then, you know, cross your fingers and hope for the best. But, uh, you know, I don't
think any of this stuff is going to stick. That that includes the trade deals, you know, that includes the
economic deals. Look at that that trip to the Middle East with with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Trillions of dollars
of direct investment into the United States. That's not going to happen. But he he he got a huge win public relations
wise. Fox was just through the over the moon over that. And the same with Vanderion this week. Similar sort of
pronouncements afterwards about DFI into the US from Europe. Europe doesn't have any money to they can't throw 700
billion into the US and invest. I mean Europe's uh having trouble holding its
uh seams together at the moment. So to pay for the rearming of Europe, they
have to go into deficit spending uh uh and austerity measures to, you know, to
prepare for World War II. They they can't prop up the US economy. Like what's Trump talking about? So that's
the thing. How much of this is just, you know, p throwaway public relations
fodder to get from one situation to the next? And how how how much of it is
actually based on anything real? What are the policy changes? What's actually
going to change beyond the rhetoric? That's the big question.
Yeah. And uh you know, Alex, so Russia has been very clearheaded uh throughout
this whole process. Here's uh uh Sergey Lavro, foreign minister of Russia. He
had these words to say at a recent forum he presented at. I'll just read it since it's all in Russian, but it's it is
subtitled. We have a lot of things to do. The main of these things is of
course to defeat the enemy. First time in all of Russia history is fighting
alone against the whole west. Um so these were were quite striking words and
uh you know Alex also Russia is continuing to make huge gains on the battlefield. This is from uh Ukransh
Ukranska Pravda Ukrainian source that Russia is edging toward procross in a semi-enirclement in the Det Oblast and
that this you know this is about weeks away or so from falling and that's a huge uh that would be a huge defeat uh
for Ukraine. So, Alex, uh, your assessment of this, the Russian response, uh, to all of this because I
think we have our perceptions and our understanding of how Trump is in the United States and of course the entire
collective west is behaving here, but also there's the Russian response to this. So, your take?
Well, Russia is doing what it's doing because it is ex existential for them. you know the western powers
uh and when we when I say western powers you know it's been France it's been Poland it's been Lithuania it's been
Sweden uh Germany it's it's Ukraine uh the the actual power is the is the is
the banking establishments that end up financing all these wars but they've been they've been uh going at Russia for
um more than 300 years now and it is very clear that they will never stop.
And so the the for for for for the Russians, it's very clear that they have to simply remove the source of threat
that they have to uh remove their uh security threats and sources of their
vulnerability. So what the Russians are doing makes perfect sense and the way
they're doing it has been extremely responsible. They have at every step of
the way they gave peace a chance. they, you know, 4 days after they started this
the the special military operations, they already started the negotiations. So I
think that history will judge Russia kindly in the
sense that uh Russia's actions can be explained and they make sense. Uh the
west western actions uh it's it's very different. It's it's been some kind of a
fanatical obsession with um destroying Russia, partitioning
Russia, regime changing it, and turning the Russian population into a
basically slave labor force to help Western financial interests extract Russian resources uh for the benefit of
Western uh corporations and banks. Um
I you know I I don't I don't know whether we can arrive at sensible
judgment about what is going on on the basis of public statements by either Russian side or the American side. I
think that they are all concealing their hand.
uh you know Trump has it's you know Trump not just during his this six
months of his term in office now but practically since he started politics
he has been consistent in the sense of wanting to extricate the
United States from the from its imperial role and returning it to its republican
traditions. Uh we saw that in in his first administration it didn't go so well. He
got practically immediately sabotaged and he got run over by the by the big
Russia gate scandal. So it's very difficult for me to imagine
that he just made that pivot from January on of this year and that he put
the United States back in the driver seats of the unipolar global order. It's
very hard for me to to accept that. Um it it just it just doesn't really make
sense. And and and and if that were his intention, then why the whole huge
massive elaborate deception to begin with? Because he was facing very
powerful headwinds to even get into the White House. He could have just as easily say, "Hey,
business as usual. We're going to continue exactly the way the Bush Bush 43, Obama, Biden, Clinton, everybody
else did. And he would have faced no opposition, no impeachments, none of this. And then, you know, this this new
camaraderie with Kier Starmer, I don't buy that for a second either because, you know, let's go back to the Russia
gate scandal. That whole thing was cooked up by the British intelligence
services and I know as a fact that Trump very
perfectly understands this and he understands that the British have done everything to prevent Trump from
becoming president. here. Starmer himself sent 100 um labor operatives in
the last stages of the um of the election to try to turn the swing states
to Kamala Harris. Uh Kier Starmer's political patron Tony
Blair was the political patron of Barack Obama.
And and and not only that, but remember who cooked up the the the the the dossier, the the the the the Russia gate
dossier was Christopher Steel, the MI6 guy. The Christopher Steel took Donald
Trump to court in London and in April of this year obtained a
685,000 pound judgment against Trump.
So this is not being talked about, but the idea that Trump is somehow oblivious to
all this and that he's suddenly treating Kier Starmer's cabinet as as friends,
partners, and allies. I I I can't quite square this with with
what I know about Trump. I think that there's there's a great deal of deception and scops uh going on
and that it'll it'll take time for us to understand. But he's also said many times many times in many statements he
said that he trusts Vladimir Putin. So, it makes me wonder if there aren't um
continued communications and cooperation between Russia and the United States.
Uh that are that are ongoing and that all of these public statements are for public consumption to their own domestic
audiences. And I'm not necessarily talking about the the the average voter.
I'm I'm talking about perhaps the military-industrial complex uh the
you know the intelligence apparatus the the the the deep state and all of these people who you know are still hoping
somehow to you know as the Brits say flood the zone around Trump and and turn him around to their uh to their camp.
So, I'm I'm, you know, I'm I'm generally very suspicious of all these public statements
because I can't see Trump uh pivoting from his longheld position,
you know, 1776 and and turning the United States into a manu global
manufacturing powerhouse, which is which is probably the his main reason for
going all with these tariffs like a loose cannon.
And and so I you know I I I I tend to be I I tend to try to find enough dots to
connect below the surface appearances of things to try to understand what's going on. And now if it is true
that uh they are preparing to replace Zalni with sorry Zalinski with Zalusni.
I'm gonna say this, and I'm totally going on the limb because I've been paying attention to this story since
since the time Zalusni vanished for two weeks in Ukraine.
Remember, he just vanished. I think that the Brits are walking into a trap. And I think that if Zalusni
takes over in Ukraine, the West is going to lo lose Ukraine and and Ukraine is
going to pivot back into the Russian orbit.
Uh Patrick, uh Alex asked a question earlier like why all the deception uh on
on the Trump side if his overall goal was just to remain in the uniolar camp?
So I definitely want your reaction and you know these public statements. Well, on the one hand, you know, they are
getting quite uh, how should I say, bombastic and threatening to the point
where you have a US general Chris Donghue literally saying that NATO is going to take Linenrad if this war
escalates in the direction that they see it, which is Vladimir Putin and Russia is going to, you know, uh, take Ukraine
and beyond. So but your your your answer to this question given that there is a
lot of talk being had but then there's also a lot of things happening too for example this uh latest trade deal with
the EU which has not only uh this horrific uh imbalance in the tariff
situation but also promises that the EU will buy US weapons to do what's been happening continue the conflict your
thoughts well I mean look uh I don't I don't uh
look at it as deception as much as just political theater which is nothing new.
Uh all politicians throughout history and administrations uh engage in political theater. I just think with the
Trump administration there's more of it and also he is running foreign policy
from you know from a social media account effectively true social and X
and that's completely unconventional and it it probably isn't going to work. Um, so there's no real there's nothing
anchoring any any of these statements. Um, there's nothing that's coherent or
that abides by any kind of due process or anything like that. So, it's all just
kind of disposable uh uh comments and stuff like that. So, I don't really take it that seriously, but other countries
might be taking it seriously. I mean, us in the punditry class, of course, we're very like cynical um and skeptical no
matter who we're talking about, but other countries are like, well, can I do business with the US? Um, can I can I
engage with them on any meaningful level? Can are they agreement capable? And Sergey Lavrov said it years ago, the
United States is no longer no longer agreement capable. That's including Joe Biden. So, is this I think this is a
systemic problem with the United States. that's kind of lost its uh its its place
in the world. It's also losing respect from a lot of its allies. So, from that
point of view, I mean, anything that Trump said on the campaign trail, no matter how good it sounds, um
it it it's not it's just it's it's rhetoric. It's because to make these
things happen, you know, and every president does it. Every single US president that I and that I've seen
since George W. Bush has has campaigned on an anti-war no nation building
platform and they've won. The ones who've done that have won. George W. Bush defeated Al Gore on that basis.
Okay? No new nation building etc. And look what happened with George W. Bush. Barack Obama came in peace president day
one. I'm going to end the war in Iraq of course and he won. He got the anti-war vote. He got the uh uh you know
Wisconsin, northern Wisconsin, Michigan. He got the Puritans. He got the Norwegian Americans. all those keys uh
uh bellweather counties and so forth. He won those and came became president in 2008. But what happened during two terms
of Obama? Well, something quite different. Donald Trump ran on a peace platform in 2016 and he he he did start
new wars in his first term. Um and he engaged in existing wars as well. So,
uh, he put boots on the ground in Syria and he basically pushed the Abraham Accords forward, which led to October
7th. And he continued the, uh, absolute debacle in Yemen, just for starters. And
he gave, uh, uh, offensive weapons to Ukraine and really ramped up that the
the conditions for what eventually would take place in February of 2022. Joe
Biden uh ran sort of as a stable alternative to an unstable Trump and
that that wasn't what happened. Joe Biden was a disaster, one of the worst presidents in US history. But the
problem is Donald Trump is is matching him on policy and and it's it's like
Donald Trump has inherited a portfolio from Joe Biden that is almost unfixable.
Okay. The only way to get out of some of these situations or to ameliate them would be to take a drastic 180 degree
turn and then take all the political flak that comes with that. And this is a president just not willing to do that.
He's not willing to go against the Israeli lobby in any any serious way. He allowed the lobby to appoint every
single member of his cabinet that has anything to do with national security or foreign policy. Okay. Howard Lutnik and
Jared Kushner presided over that uh process of shortlisting cabinet members and everybody's pro-Israel to the hilt
and that means they really don't care and they don't have the skill set to help uh alleviate the situation Ukraine
and and Donald Trump's pyramid decision-m uh structure that he likes to do to micromanage everything as a chief
executive means that you can't have anybody in there that could potentially intellectually outrank him in any
serious way. So you have a bunch of like social media posers and uh Pete Hagsth
is a weekend host from Fox News who is highest rank as a major in the US
military and he was a reservist from Minnesota or something like that and his biggest claim to fame was he was a Gitmo
looking after goat herders and taxi drivers. So I mean he I guess he did a tour in in Afghanistan and uh Iraq, but
that is nobody to run a $1 trillion uh global defense leviathon. I'm sorry.
There is a hundred generals that are more qualified than Pete Hexath. Why was he selected? He was selected because the
Israeli lobby said we want him and Trump saw him on Fox. So everything kind of came together serendipitously.
So I mean that but the reality is the deep state in Britain and the United
States deep state and the Five Eyes complex are so intermingled, okay, you can't pull them apart. Trump could sort
of say things that are uncomfortable politically against the British, but at the end of the day, you can't pull these
two countries and their establishments and institutions apart. You can't pull Wall Street from the city of London. You
can't pull MI6 and GCHQ from the NSA and the CIA. It's just not going to happen.
And not only that, they they share a nuclear deterrent. Okay? And so it's
it's just the same thing with Israel. There's no way you could. The US can't discipline Israel. France can't
discipline Israel because Israel has a nuclear arsenal which they obtained from France and the United States and and
they're both running political cover allowing this uh entity to basically run
rough shot over the region for so long on behalf of them by the way because Israel does their bidding geopolitically
in the in the the the great game 2.0. But the the that's and the other but the
other thing is the US is so heavily invested in arming the Arctic and
building 47 new military bases in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
Scandinavia has the biggest military expansion US footprint in the world. But
when it's done, it will be as big or bigger than what's in the Middle East in terms of military footprint by the
United States. So all this talk of NATO being this and NATO being irrelevant, that's not what
that's not where the money is being being uh put into, the money is saying no, it's not irrelevant. It's expanding.
And no matter what any US president says to turn that Titanic around, I I
honestly don't think it's almost like it's impossible to do. Um they are arming the Arctic. They're committed to
it. So is Britain and the rest of the leading NATO countries. And so is as Alex said, the global capital is is
behind that. So I mean this is a this is a difficult thing to to change course
with. It it would take some kind of an unpopular politician to make a dent in it or
they'd have to be very very strategic in doing that. And what can Donald Trump do in three years? the next per the one
thing that could possibly potentially be positive is that if Trump makes such a mess of things in three years, he's
setting the table for the next president who comes in to to to make it look like they're reasonable and maybe pull back
on some of the crazy stuff. So, in that case, Trump could be, you know, positive in the long run, you know, just from a
relatively positive from a relative point of view. But right now, it's I
don't know. I don't know. I see a what's happening on the ground is happening and
it doesn't look like anything significantly changing on the ground. In fact, it's kind of getting worse in some
areas. So, I Yeah. So, I agree with Alex in that sense is you can't really trust or believe anything that is being said
publicly. Yeah. And uh you know, definitely want to uh get to the situation in West Asia,
Gaza, etc. uh later on in the program, but uh first uh Alex, I wanted to uh you know earlier
you said and you know you I've heard you say this many times that the world is becoming multipolar and and and that's
there is no questioning this and I think one of the interesting things about what's happening with the United States
and and the West and how they are addressing the Ukraine conflict is it almost feels like an admission that
things are falling apart. And we see this in so many ways. I mean, we saw
this I I'm sure you followed the horrific trade deal that uh the EU just
signed with Donald Trump. And here's how Ursula Vanderion described the experience which uh kind of highlights
the real descent that Europe has has taken. No, no, it was very difficult because we
started far far apart from each other. Uh it was tough. um fair but it was
tough and um therefore rightly so uh you saw the tension at the beginning so we
had to work hard to come to a common position and till the very end as always in negotiations you don't know whether
you'll find the landing point the landing zone at the very end or whether it crashes um so
so uh Alex and Patrick a fair here is
the EU gets nothing and the US gets everything and even the things that the
EU did promise they're admitting they can't even guarantee uh they are promising uh upwards of a trillion
dollars of of investment in the United States including 600 billion in uh uh uh
investment that will largely be private sector and and cannot necessarily be controlled uh by the state and then you
also have the situation with Zalinski Alex that you've also highlighted here where uh Zalinsky has been subject to
massive protests from his own base mind you after he attempted to get rid of
Nabu or or put it under his dominion, the executive's dominion, uh the so-called police agency in Ukraine, uh
he tried to pass a bill. That bill was scrapped right away after massive protests occurred. But now there are
discussions of Zelusni, Zelusni and maybe uh Budanov and and all kinds of
figures potentially replacing Zency. So things seem to be falling apart, Alex. Um, and I'm curious on how you see this
uh shaping and forming the policy trajectory that we've been discussing.
Oh, you're muted. It's very hard to You're good. It's It's very hard to imagine that
Russia isn't going to win uh their war in in Ukraine. I mean, that's that's
pretty much over. uh now for the for the western powers what is uh critical now
is to try to preserve uh Ukraine's access to the Black Sea. So
to prevent Russia from taking Odessa and the and the rest of the Black Sea coast
and to make sure that uh the government in Kiev whatever it is uh you know Zalinski, Zalusni, Boroshenko, whoever
that they remain aligned with the west and then you know the western powers
will regroup and try to uh stage further
u attacks on Russia by by whatever means they can. you know, it could be terror,
it could be uh some form of opium wars, uh sabotage operations, uh
whatever way of trying to destabilize uh Russia and bring about a regime change
and uh you know replace Putin with some new uh you know Boris Yelen that's the
objective and so in order to to ensure uh the access to Russia into the into
the Russian soft belly through a friendly uh with with a friendly government
cooperating with this. Uh they need the the Kiev government to re remain aligned
with the west and they need to keep access to the port of Odessa.
For the Russians, uh the objective is exactly the opposite except that they don't need to they don't need to take
Odessa by force. They don't need to conquer uh the rest of Ukraine by force.
they need to uh make sure that the government in Kiev realigns back with
Moscow and then you know they can take over the remainder of of of uh Ukraine
administratively so so to say you know they can they can demand new new
elections they can support their own candidates people who are friendly to Russia they can demand uh war war crimes
tribunals for all the for all the neo neoazi thugs, people who are responsible for the for the May uh 2014 massacre in
Odessa and on and on and on. And that way uh with time they can purge Ukraine
from this uh neo-Nazi faright extreme uh pro-western element and then you know
Ukraine becomes something like a Bellarus you know um a country that's
aligned with Russia that's an ally and a and a buffer between Russia and the west and this is exactly what the western
powers are trying to prevent. Now uh where does Trump stand in this? You know, it I I agree with Patrick that the
appearance of things is is not positive. It it it looks absolutely awful. But,
you know, among other things, I I'm I'm I'm trying, you know, I'm trying to pick up
the cues also from Trump's allies and his supposed enemies. And I see that the
Russians are still kind of relaxed and
cooperative, whereas the West is is is flat out uh
hysterical about Trump. You know, the Brits and the Western Europeans
uh absolutely detest Trump. They hate him. Very different to the way they looked at
Obama, at Biden, and so forth. So something is different. And whatever is
you know um whatever is percolating below the surface is is a different
current than what we had before. I could be wrong you know because you know some people say well the simplest explanation
explanation tends to be the right one. But you know, I would remind everybody that when Putin came to power in 1999
that his greatest supporter was Tony Blair and he was the first statement who came
to visit Putin when he became president. He was overtly supportive of Vladimir
Putin. In fact, Sir Richard Derlov from the MI6 who was who was the head of MI6
at the time actually conceded that the MI6 had a hand in bringing Vladimir
Putin to power. And then over the next two to three years,
the appearance of things was that Vladim that Vladimir Putin was absolutely their
errand boy in in you know um during the first two years of his presidency.
He had nine meetings with Tony Blair. He got a he got a a a state visit in the in
the United Kingdom. first first Russian statement since I think the 1800s at
some point who got a state visit in Britain and he rode, you know, with a
with a queen in a in an open top car. And I think that this this too was a
deception, but it was necessary because Vladimir Putin had to and whoever was backing him, whoever was supporting him,
they needed to secure his political base uh to remove the risk of him being
overthrown if he showed his hand too soon. And it was only in 2003 when he
lined up, you know, Russia's oligarchs, the the gang of seven bankers and and others and set the rules that the West
realized, oh, uh, crap, we got we got played. And so I can't discount that in this
case as well we have a lot of deception on the part of the Trump administration
and that it'll take time for us to understand is did he really pivot back
to the unipolar global order or is he committed to uh returning the
United States to its republican tradition and embracing the the multipolar uh integrations process?
Yeah, Patrick, your reaction to this.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2025 2:49 am

Part 2 of 2

Um, I'll just I'll just comment on um
because I think the British factor is is is important. Um,
that you have to understand something about the mindset. I think a present
company understands this. the the the belief in Westminster is there's a
fanatical fanatical I would even say evangelical
belief that they they the British will defeat Russia that they defeat Russia.
It's always been Britain's the brains, America's the muscle. That hasn't changed so much. And so uh they threw a
solid and kind of made Trump look good with operation spid web. I my personal
belief that that was a British directed operation probably with the help of uh Israelis as well because similar tactics
were used against um Iran uh in in the opening gambit of Israel's uh attack on
Iran. So, so you have to understand that that they believe that it's all that all
that's needed is to find the right technical solution and that they will o adapt and overcome. The British mantra
adapt and overcome and they have the SBU, they have the uh the SBS, British
and the SAS and so forth and and that they can win by disrupting, sabotaging and derailing and ultimately maybe
decapitation um of the Russian state. And no matter how long that takes, no matter they're
not, as Alex said correctly, they're not going to give up that this is a primordial fanatical belief uh that that
is some for some reason still there and manifest. So uh if you look at the British defense strategic defense review
which was released a few months ago um they had uh operation kill web that's
the name of their full uh spectrum drone attack doctrine. Okay. And just a week
after that was released um in Britain you saw operation spid
launched and that was good for NATO, it was good for Trump. it. Trump believed it gave leverage. Um, it made Ukraine
look strong. It put Russia on its back heels. In reality, all it did was, you know, piss off the bear. Basically, if
you look at the Russia really stepped up its uh its its progress and its
responses from the air and so forth, which you've shown earlier, Danny, um since that time, but they believe, the
British believe that they have the technology that they will deploy that technology um and they will overwhelm
Russia with the with these various tactics and technologies and their sort of deep cover and subtuge operations
over time that they'll do it. Um I I I personally disagree. I think the Russian state, its institutions are very
resilient, probably the most resilient um some of the most resilient on the planet, second to maybe the United
States um and you know some European countries of course, but very strong, very resilient, as is their economy, as
is their balance of resolve. So, in the balance of resolve uh category,
historically, Russia has proven that it's committed to go the distance and do what it takes to secure its interests um
and to protect mother Russia. And I think they're demonstrating that in Ukraine. But that doesn't mean the British are going to give up given the
chance. So, right now, the British u are running have been handling Zalinski from
a soft power PR point of view also with close protection with British personnel
protecting Zalinski. uh he is ba he basically is handled by uh for all
intents and purposes close range by British intelligence and of course it was no surprise that they brought Zulusi
to London to act as the Ukrainian ambassador you know give him eleution lessons English lessons put him in a
savile ro suit he publishes his memoirs a couple months ago and now he's a sort of politician they're grooming him for
for for the possibility of being installed to replace an unpopular and a
failing ultimately an expired let's say an expired Zalinski uh in order to create some kind of a change or at least
the facade of of of a change of the situation. So again this the British are in the in the sort of catbird seat in
terms of controlling the political machinery more with the United States is
doing other uh things. So think of this like division of labor. I don't see the US at odds at all with Britain and I
think that's the advantage. Of course, this has always been the advantage of the Anglo-American um empire is this
idea that somehow they're separate when in fact they're not. They might have political differences um with as Alex
pointed out with Russia Gate and driving um you know, Dear Love and and Steel and
all these people driving um Russia Gate and undermining the Trump administration. But it also disciplined
the Trump administration. It disciplined them uh in a certain way. it it it it
forced them into line in a certain way. Um and it it forced them to kind of I I
don't know engage with, you know, other uh entities of the deep state in a certain way. But um I'm sure they would
have preferred Hillary Clinton. I mean, obviously, but uh second term,
maybe they didn't feel confident Camala Harris could, you know, credibly pull anything off. and they believed that
maybe that Trump could um and that and he kind of won by a landslide as well
which was difficult to uh to derail. So um from that point of view but that
that's my feeling I I I think if if it's left to the British deep state they'll
play the long game. They'll play the So, keep this. Do it. But see what what what they're going to do. Drone technology is
a gamecher because if you're talking about decapitating regimes through
terrorism, let's let's just call it what it is, full spectrum terrorism, this is
going to provoke a a preemptive nuclear action by a country like Russia at some point. You can't keep doing this.
There's going to be a visceral reaction at some point down the line if it's an existential threat to Russia. They can
take out regimes, any regime probably given time with the with the technology that's being developed, autonomous AI
drones. I mean, it's it's this is another another game. So, they're they're depending on Russia's patience.
They're depending on Russia keeping the door open for negotiations and this expectation of goodwill, but that's kind
of being whittleled away gradually. Russia's no longer leaving that door open. The Iranians are no longer leaving
that door open. They no longer trust the US. So this is these are the conditions
for war actually. And that to me is the biggest concern.
And you know uh I definitely want both of your reactions to this uh before we
move on. Uh so Alex first to you. Yeah, I definitely don't want to underestimate the influence of the if we want to call
them junior partners of the United States. If the American Empire is the uh you know big enchilada then the junior
partners cannot be underestimated in their influence. But at the same time, whether it's the UK, the EU, but at the
same time, I in the beginning, I went over all the ways that the Ukraine
situation, the Ukraine project is is falling apart from the EU's uh inability
to even keep promises that it subserviently agrees to with the United States to of course the un instability
of Ukraine itself. So, you know, you mentioned uh the US returning to its
republican roots, and what's so interesting about the US is that it's been at war for over 90% of its history.
And uh immediately as it became powerful enough to expand beyond its uh colonized
borders, it began to usurp the former uh colonies uh for example, the
Philippines. But when we look at this history then I guess what is different
about or what could be different about the Trump administration given that we have on the one side all of this
pressure to keep the Ukraine conflict going as it falls apart and on the other um an empire that has existed for many
many many decades centuries now uh that operates in a particular kind of way. So your
response to this and then Patrick can conclude before we move on.
Oh, sorry. You're muted. There you go. Please forgive me. Can I can you clarify
what what the question is? I Yeah. Yeah. Just your response to the um
the fact that you have kind of this uh double-edged sword here. You have the US as an empire for so many decades now,
centuries that operates in a particular kind of way with an objective expansionism uh dominance, uniolar
dominance. And then on the other, the Ukraine project itself falling apart from the EU to Ukraine, which in and of
itself creates big pressures to continue the conflict, let alone uh rather than end it.
Yeah. The you know, how how the United States fell into being an empire practically from the start is a is a is
a deep mystery, you know, and and part of that mystery is that the history that they taught us in school is complete
nonsense. And I think it always goes back to the financial interests
uh that are that are rooted in the in the city of London. And the United States has actually been on the hook to
those financial interests uh practically through their throughout their history. And as Patrick rightly said that those
two systems are so profoundly intertwined that it's it's difficult to imagine even uh being able to um unravel
that Gordian knot. Uh but I think that in this sense uh the Russia gate scandal
might actually be the sword that going to cut that knot open because inevitably
the the investigations are going to be leading to London. And I think that just
yesterday we had a a new revelation by by um Frank Schwitzer, I think it his name is
Frank. Uh that that that you know where he said explicitly that the the the
whole thing was cooked up in London between the British intelligence and the
the CIA station chief in London who was uh Gina Haspel at the time. She was sent
there by John Brennan. uh who was also in close
a close collaborator with uh Robert Hanigan who at the time of the of the Russia
gate was the head of the GCHQ the British equivalent of the National
Security Agency. Uh I understand that it's very hard to to imagine any of this unraveling uh
falling apart and Great Britain becoming a a neutral island nation minding its
own business. Uh but you know every empire throughout history has collapsed
and fallen apart and so will the British Empire. um Britain may have been able to
pull off this and that throughout its history because it's always been in a very strong position and even when its
military was was weak, it still dominated the global financial system
and it still does too. But you know uh that is uh not the case today in the
same way that it has been let's say in the '9s in the 80s in the 70s and and and farther in the past uh the United
States uh since the first Trump administration has been able to wrestle the control
over the dollar uh of the price of the US dollar and the and the treasury debt
from London by creating sofur because you know the price of money was defined
in London up until that point uh through library London interbank uh offer rate
today we have uh in the United States we have sofur secured overnight uh lending
re lending rate that's not exactly but you know uh the the price of debt is
being set in the United States so that that extremely important part of the US
sovereign has been wrestled away from London.
Uh Britain is today in a in a in an extremely extremely dire straits
economically and a lot of what we see the British do today is is actually born
out of panic. Um their military is next to no existent.
Their navy is extremely weak and and they are losing their industrial base as
we speak. And then you know they have this government which which seems to be doing everything to accelerate the the
the decay the the decline of Great Britain. Uh at the same time you know
throughout history the British playbook was was was a mystery to its target
powers its rivals in the world. You know Russia and China and India and so forth. And so the British found it relatively
easy to subdue them, to colonize them, to penetrate and co-opt their you know
um institutions of governance and and the and gain control of the lever levers
of power in in all these nations. But I think that today that has changed
because the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians and and and and certain other
uh regional powers in the world understand how the system works and how
they how they're vulnerable to the British uh secret diplomacy, to their
intelligence um apparatus, to the to uh British uh NOS's and private
government contractors who come in and they and they start to uh you know they start to uh penetrate the whole system
and I think that there's a there's a very powerful and robust push back against that and I I still I still you
know if you if you ask me to make a bet I would still bet that the that the Trump administration
uh has actually correctly identified who the enemy is and that they have uh set
their crosshairs on the city of London um Of course, you know, you cannot go up
against that overtly and to say like London is the enemy because that would
be, you know, that would be the the the equivalent of rearranging the furniture in the house of blind. You don't do
that. So, you know, you have to kind of fight that fight by deception and and
covertly. Yeah. Patrick, uh, we can close on this and, you know, if you all have time, we
can do one more segment, but Patrick. Yeah, I think um I think you guys are all overlooking the real uh source of
British imperial power over history and that is that the the weather is so
horrible here that uh it's allowed perfidious Albian to spend lots of time
indoors plotting and scheming how to pillage their adversaries. That's the
secret to British power, just so you guys know. No. Um,
in in all seriousness, um, yeah, I mean, I I kind of agree with, uh, Alex on that
kind of long arc of history and and I and you know, this isn't 1900. This
isn't 1800. This isn't even 1945. Uh, China is the uh, emergent global
superpower. economically, politically, they I I of course maybe all their eggs
in one basket with the Chinese Communist Party as the preeminent institution, but we can't argue with what they have done
technologically, educational wise, culturally, it's phenomenal. So, this is
a very different world we're living in now in 2025. And I'm not even talking about India or talking about a number of
other Southeast Asian countries that will ultimately emerge as well um as
powerhouses uh as well as even in Central Asia um in the Middle East in
fact and Africa as well. So the world's very different and um but I I I the
problem it's not so much about who has the economic power. The obsession is who
is going to lead the civilizational arc. Um and that will be you know
linguistically um intellectual propertywise in a lot of these different areas. Um the rule of
law, maritime law, uh democratic uh forms of government and so forth,
consensus building institutions. Who's going to draw these up? Who's going to control them? We've got a potential
split happening between east and west, between the quote global south and the
old north. Okay? So, this is a very real point in history that we're looking at right now. So, this is a very different
world. So, that the British and the Americans and and the European countries are going to kick and scream all the way
till the last possible minute. And I think this is pro part of what's driving
the uh Europe's hawkish strident I mean kind of insane delusional uh you know
war talk over Ukraine. I because European politicians have not been able
to u have a stridident position since the second world war and they have it
now. It's, you know, I I I can't pretend what it's like to be in power and have that type of power where you when you're
a wartime leader, even if you're from a small European country, that's additional power that is is conferred
and acred to your position. Um, and that's significant. We can't underestimate that. Look at Freddick
Mertz and it's almost insane watching him in his early days coming to office. I'm like, something's wrong there. But
that's what it is. They haven't had the ability to do that. And that that urge is there that primordial urge is there.
And uh this is what we're seeing in Scandinavia. I mean the Swedes have lost their mind. The Finns have lost their
mind. I think with the the the overall collective defense, collective deterrent power of NATO, but with the United
States standing in the background. And so that's the difference. And so that so
we're the these are really difficult choppy political waters to navigate here
because the orders are in flux and that's it's it's going to be very very
messy and um and confusing as well and I see a increased detachment from the
political consensus and what people actually think and believe on the ground as well that's becoming more and more
prevalent as is the wealth gap as well. So we have we have potentially some serious things um emerging
in the next few years. Yeah. No, it's an explosive situation. Uh gentlemen, do you have time? I I
generally try to cover West Asia. You know, there's a lot to cover there. Do you have another 20 minutes or so? Is
that all right? Um I can do about 10 minutes, I think. Okay. Okay. Well, let's
try it. Okay. If you're good and you know, Patrick, if you have to head out after uh and Alex, you're able to finish up.
That's that's great. Um, all right. Because I I definitely wanted to talk about this. Uh, I have not been able to
cover it yet. So, Yemen has announced a huge uh escalation in its Red Sea uh
operation. Um and what it is saying is
that uh they will on Sarala will go into phase four of the maritime blockade
essentially targeting any ship of any company from any nationality or destination that is using Israeli ports.
So anything that they can reach they will hit it. Now why is Yemen doing
this? Why is Answer Allah doing this? We know that they have almost every other day been firing at Israel including as
we speak u firing ballistic missiles and hypersonic missiles toward Tel Aviv and surrounding areas. Now the why here is
really important um and maybe we can uh begin with you Alex because we have a
situation that is absolutely devastating in Gaza right now that Israel and of course the US right at its side is
facilitating. The UN is reporting and this is getting coverage all over western mainstream media now that there
is widespread famine and starvation uh uh spreading across Gaza meaning many of
the indicators of this and many people are dying just of this let alone the
horrific numbers of people that are being killed children included by Israeli and USbacked fire. Now,
the New York Times seems to now just realize that this war became unjust even
though this has been going on since October 2023 and Yemen itself declared
its blockade back in November of 2023. So, Alex, I definitely want your uh
reaction to this because there's a contrast here. There's the almost Johnny
come lately response of the United States, the Western mainstream media to the plight of Gaza and Yemen's
uh continued an ongoing operation which Israel has said they now have to put as
a consistent and open front in opposition to what many are calling a
genocide in Gaza. So your take your thoughts? Yeah, even Kier Starmer has now come
around to being feeling concern for the for the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza. Um the the Yemenes uh have been
explicit about what they want. They want uh Israel to stop uh bombing Gaza and
they want to reopen um uh humanit the flow of humanitarian relief goods uh for
the people of Gaza, water, food, medicine, uh energy. And so they said,
"We'll stop uh lobbing rockets into Israel when Israel uh stops uh bombing
uh the people of Gaza and when they allow humanitarian relief to reach uh
the people. So it seems to me that the Yemenes Ansarala are are are the only
group in the world in fact that is that is u
taking action in this conflict on the right for on the right side of history for the right reason which which would
which would make them actually the Jedis in this in this conflict between the empire and the rest of humanity.
Yeah. Patrick, your I know you've been covering this particular situation both uh not only on the Yemen side but
especially the Gaza side. So your reaction? Well, just start with Yemen. Um if you look at if you look at the trajectory of
answer Allah, the west called the Houthis. Look at the trajectory of their military capabilities since the uh the
United States uh launched its proxy war via Saudi Arabia and the UAE against
Yemen. uh under Obama in his second term, March 2015.
Look at the trajectory of Yemen's military capability in 10 years. Okay,
it's phenomenal. So, if this is where Yemen is today in 2015, where do you
think Yemen's going to be in 2030? What do you think their capabilities are
going to look like then? uh you've got a potential uh Arab
nationalist state in on the on the Arabian Peninsula with significant
deterrent capabilities and very easily able to reach out and touch uh Israel as
well as US bases uh in the Middle East in much the same way Iran um is able to
maybe not to the level of Iran terms they don't have the infrastructure that the Iranians have uh in terms of
missiles and space program and things like that. But I would not bet against the Yemenes um because they're Yemen's
military capabilities are fit for purpose. Okay? They're designed for
purpose and they playing a really unique role um in the region and they put
themselves out and made a made a difference um have enfor been able to
effectively sanction Israel you enforcing it with hard power. um
basically in a way that you know no other country is willing to do and quite
frankly uh many are not able to do. So this is kind of an interesting thing.
The uh the Aliat port is not is not operational now that's because of the
Yemenes. um if there's going to be a Bengorian canal project and that this is
going to happen by, you know, ethnically cleansing and exterminating the native Palestinian population uh in the in Gaza
in the West Bank, I probably think Yemen's going to have something to say about that. And I I probably think
they'd be in a position to be able to deter the construction and the development of such projects. Okay,
that's something to consider. And I I I don't know if uh people in America or
Europe are taking that possibility seriously enough. I don't know if they if they fully get that.
Yeah. And um you know, Alex, some people surmise that Israel, you know, has empire ambitions. Of course, they have
expansionist ambitions and some have said that Israel is already attempting, if not already, an empire. But at the
same time, this empire seems very outstretched. And I think the Yemen case
highlights this. And of course the fact that uh wow Israel has completely
decimated Gaza and and just committed nightmare a nightmare situation for the Palestinian people. Uh that nightmare
situation has had a pretty big effect on Israel's perception around the world. So
your assessment of all of this Oh, sorry. You're muted.
I I tend to think that Israel has come to the end of the road. You know, Israel um you know,
a segment of Israeli leadership might have such delusions of grandeur that they think that they're going to be
establishing an empire and that they're going to be building an erit Israel and
be taking parts of the territory of, you know, Jordan and Syria and Turkey and
Egypt and so forth and Iraq. But uh the reality is that Israel is and always has
been a co a colonial settler project
created by the British Empire in order for the British financial interest to
control uh that region, the Middle East, not only for its um not only for its
energy resources, but because for the last two and a half thousand years, this
has been one of the most important strategic points because it's it's a
crossroads between north and south and east and west and and and so much of the global trade um passes through that
region that it's it's it's absolutely pivotal and whoever controls that part of the world is in a in a very powerful
position um with respect to Asia south southwest Asia with respect to north uh Africa and
and eastern Europe And so, um,
Israel has stretched itself so thin. It's its
economy has been devastated. Uh, the IDF is pretty much disintegrating.
Um, the society is starting to malfunction. It's a it's a dysfunctional society at this point. And to imagine
that on this base you're going to build an empire, you know, it's it's being de-industrialized. It's it's completely
completely dependent on the United States and Western Europe for, you know,
for financial and and military support, you know, the the arms, the ammunitions, the the military equipment. Uh it it's
just a it's just a delusion and it's not going to happen. And it, you know, it was it was in 2012 that Henry Kissinger,
who who knew a little something about all these things, um said that 10 years from now there
will be no more Israel. So that would have said um 2022. So he got the timing right, but I
think that he got the prognosis uh correctly.
Yes. And uh Patrick did have to go, but Alex, if you're willing to stick with me for for just a little while longer
because I definitely want to give this some attention. Um absolutely. Yeah. Because uh when we think about the
situation, Alex, I pulled it up earlier, but I I need to pull it up again because this just stuck out to me. How Israel's
war became unjust. You know, we see as the Yemen Yemen people, we see as Iran continues to support the Palestinian
people in its own ways, uh especially diplomatically, but also including supporting the resistance. You know,
this is a long time. Many people may know that the New York Times actually spouts out quote unquote news from
opinions. Uh I think that's quite ironic actually. Um but what they are arguing
here is that Israel's cause was righteous but now the hunger that
Palestinians are facing. So here you see uh one can have a righteous cause. One's folk could be wicked and brutal and
responsible for the conflict's toll and still there's an obligation to rep refrain from certain tactics uh i.e.
using food as a weapon. Alex, but you know, I I'm curious on your reaction to this because you have here Israel saying
they're going to continue operations in Syria. They're going to launch a big offensive against Yemen. They're going
to continue the Gaza war until when you know the genocide until the final solution. But you know all of this
points to what is appears to be a desperate attempt by the collective west itself led by the US
to gloss over all of this and um you know uh pepper over a situation that
doesn't look too favorable in the long term. Your thoughts?
It it looks absolutely awful and it's it it looks so awful that I think that it's it's starting to dawn even on the most
fanatical supporters of Israel that they will not be able to whitewash this. Uh
you know, they're used to doing this. You know, they they whitewash history and they count on being able to do this
in the future. But, you know, this what what's going on in Gaza now is so obvious and it's it's in front of
everyone every day. We see it in in in pictures and videos. Uh we get we we
know the the the you know the the estimation range of of casualties which
which which goes from what 60,000 of confirmed dead to to more than more than
half more than more than more than more than 400,000 which is uh pretty much
over 20% of the whole population of Gaza. And so, uh, you know, they
understand that they're on the right on the wrong side of history. You know, to say that Israel's fight is a righteous
one. Uh you you could only argue that on the assumption that Israel was created
as a as a as a as as a homeland for the Jews who were you know suffering
everywhere around the world who were subjected to the Holocaust and pilgrims and expulsions
and who you know deserved a a homeland of their own. So if you on that premise,
you could say, well, you know, okay, so that might make their fight a righteous
one. It's a stretch, but you could make that argument, let's say. But that's not
true. You know, that's that's the that's the narrative that would been sold for generations.
But Israel from the from from its from its conceptual beginnings way before
1948, right? So, we're talking about the second half of the of the 19th century.
Uh, it was it was envisioned as a colonial settler project
uh by the vested interests of the British Empire. Uh, it's you know, as
far as we know, uh, it started with the Balffor Declaration. But what was the Balffor declaration? It was just a
letter of the of the foreign minister of Britain to uh Lord so Lord Arthur
Balffor to Lord uh Walter Rothschild. So from from a British politician to a
British banker. I I don't know how that makes it legitimate but everybody pretends that that makes it legitimate.
And uh Lord Walter Rothschild was the father of
Nathan Rothschild who was the best friends forever with Arthur Balffor and
he was practically hanging out at the foreign office on a daily basis. So it
was a you know it was a pretty much a a conspiracy of the of the most of the
most cynical kind. and uh they both were part of the Alfred you know both meaning
Nathan Rothschild and and Arthur Balffor were part of the of the Alfred Milner's
roundt group and the roundt group said
said on record that the the British Empire could not remain a maritan empire
unless you seated that region meaning Palestine with a quote um
particularly uh patriotic stock.
I don't know if that's an exact quote, but it was it was very
the the gist of it that it had to be seated with a very patriotic stock that
those two those two words are are are in the statement which was given to Manchester Guardian at some point I
think in 1916 or or or something thereabouts. And so this was this was
thought through and the British imperial interests also understood that uh the
the U United States support for Israel was absolutely pivotal. It was absolutely essential. So they prepared
that you know and they they the Rothschilds even commissioned uh the writing of the Scoffield Bible and uh
you know then Hollywood came in later uh with the with the with the film Exodus. And so there was a there was a very very
thorough extensive preparation of the you know of the of the western mindset
to create Israel is a cultural fact that that that narrative that Israel was a homeland for the for the Jews. Uh as as
we now know Jews are safer anywhere else than in Israel. They're the least safe
in Israel. And the Jews are the safest actually in Iran where they have, you know, it's the second largest
Jewish community in the Middle East and they have lived there unmolested for for
over 2,000 years. So the whole thing has been a lie as as everything about the
empire is everything about the empire is a lie at some level or at multiple
levels. And the same is true for Israel. And I think that u ultimately the whole
thing collapses under the weight of of of its own incoherence.
And I think that we're watching it happen. Only it's happening in such a tragic way that I think that the West
will remain standing with their hands blooded and that blood will will not
wash. I I don't think that they're going to be able to pretend that there was some potato famine or some kind of a I
don't know man famine whatever they they invent after the fact. Uh this is this
is how empire does its business. I'll I'll throw in this last bit of
statistic. uh be
over a period of about 127 years that
between 1756 and uh I think 1880s
at some point or or or 1900 uh there have been uh 33 major famines
in India recorded um not a single one since India has been
independent since 1947. Not a single one. So it's not the agriculture, it's
not the climate, it's not the Indians inability to produce food. It was something to do with the with the
British rule. And uh before the British came to India in 1756.
For the previous 2,000 years, there have been 16 famines recorded. So you see
there was there was something special about that same system of governance
that is now fighting for its hegemony in the Middle East uh by trying to preserve
Israel. Yeah. And you know we've seen US
contractors firing at Palestinians in Gaza, killing Palestinians. We've seen of course Israeli forces constantly
doing this. And now it's so cynical that uh this hunger issue that is reaching
this climax in Gaza uh is becoming this almost uh code for restoring some kind
of morality to uh the west which has been completely and utterly uh destroyed
if it ever had existed to begin with um given this situation. And so, you know,
Alex, your your final thoughts on this. Israel, of course, is is the the endgame
for Israel and the US behind it is Iran. And they're still looking at Iran. They
see Ansarala as an extension of Iran. Um, you know, I didn't have you on during the 12-day uh quote unquote
12-day war, but uh this appears to be the endgame, a bigger war with Iran. And
uh Ansarala with all of its heroics and courage um is a force. It seems like an
unstoppable force in the way of uh to toppling all the dominoes to get to
this. So So your thoughts on on the overall endgame here? Well, one thing that the the 12 year 12
day war has shown is that Israel cannot defeat Iran and that the the the
opposite is true. Iran can defeat Israel. Uh, I mean, you know, it cannot defeat Iran short of using the nuclear
weapons. And I think even if they use nuclear weapons, Iran could carry on long enough to defeat Israel all the
same. Uh, so there's no, you know, there's no future for Israel. I mean,
you know, I I know that there's still many people out there who have this sentimental attachment to the to the
whole idea of Israel, but it has no future. It's a it's a settler colonial project and and and as such it it has
reached the end of the road. Um the you know another another thing I wanted to
mention with regards to the 12 to to the 12-day war that it was you know it was preceded by the US attack on on Iran.
And this is this is exactly one of those uh episodes in history that uh gives me
pause in judging the Trump administration because uh the United States bombing Iran was was so
colossally idiotic that I I couldn't believe that they would even do it. And so I you know
I I made a prediction on a number of podcasts that I participated with. They said that either the attack won't happen
at all or if it does happen, it's going to be some kind of a choreographed telegraphed event where, you know, Trump
is going to make the United States, you know, it's going to make a big show of
bombing Iran. Uh, but it's actually going to be like an agreed an agreed
type of WWF fight, you know, where the fight is not real, it's for show. And
the way we're going to know that to be so is because Iran's response is going to be a choreographed telegraphed event.
And this is exactly what happened. And so, you know, I don't
I don't know how to predict what happens because I know that Trump is facing tremendous pressure to go to war against
Iran from the, you know, from from the Christian Zionist and from the I'm
sorry, from the Jewish Zionists and from the Christian evangelicals, which are very powerful v voting block in the
United States. But I also have a very strong impression that Trump wants to avoid this at all costs. And you know,
we have to remember that the objective of going to war against Iran isn't just to go to war against Iran. The objective
is to regime change Iran, right? And you know, this never happened. And
Trump has been explicit that he doesn't want a regime change in Iran. And his uh
bombastic statements that they have obliterated the Iranian nuclear program and he's
really insisting on that terminology. is the reason for that is because
Iran's nuclear program has been the justification and the pretext for
attacking Iran in the first place. So if he if he or orchestrated this this
telegraph bombing raid and then climbed up on the high horse to say we
obliterated the whole thing. What he has done is he has removed the pretext
and now he's put the whole western empire in a very embarrassing position because you know we are all about
freedom and democracy and human rights and so we can't just regime change
countries. We have to have a a a a palatable justification.
And so if that justification has been obliterated then you know how do you justify going
back to war against Iran? So, I you know, I don't I don't dare predict what's going to happen next. You know,
are is is Trump going to be forced into going to war against uh Iran again?
Well, that might happen if if if Benjamin Netanyahu if his government
falls and then somebody else comes uh in power like some smotri or
Bengavir, some some some fanatical person like that.
Uh a lot will happen. You know uh the the the the brewing civil war in Syria
is complicating things immensely. the the efforts to destabilize
Egypt and to trigger a civil war in Egypt is going to complicate things
additionally. And so I I think it's extremely extremely difficult to try to predict
what what will happen in the Middle East uh what will happen uh to to Israel to
Benjamin Netanyahu's government. uh Jordan Jordanian government might not
have a long time to to to stand. Egypt might, you know, slip into a civil war,
but maybe, you know, maybe General Cece will decide that going to war against Israel is a lesser evil than allowing a
civil war to to to start in um in Egypt. Uh, and so, um,
we'll see what happens, but it's a it's a it's a very complicated. It's very painful. And unfortunately,
I think that the the Palestinian people are going to take the brunt of the of the pain.
Yeah. Yeah. As they already are. And that's why Yeah. as that's why uh we
have to highlight it here on this program as much as we can. Um, and uh, as you were saying, you know, we can't
predict anything, but one thing we can be certain of is if the United States has difficulty
keeping up an air campaign against Yemen, uh, the difficulties with Iran are just that much more uh, significant.
And one big killer of a US administration of a presidency is to engage in a hot war,
especially one that you cannot win and one that will the entire world economy, which is exactly what will
happen if that occurs. So Trump has very good reason to um dance around as much
as he can the uh prospect of going to a full war. But, uh, Alex, it was a great
show today. I want to point everyone to the video description so they can see where uh, they can both support Alex and
Patrick who was here earlier. Um, you can follow both of their substacks in the video description below as well as
all the places where you can support this channel. I want to thank everyone who gave super chats. U, thank you so
much. You can go to the video description to see Patreon, Substack, and so many other places. Uh definitely
follow Alex and Patrick's Substack. Anything else you want to say before we head out of here, Alex?
Uh well, I I I just want to encourage everybody to uh to to speak out, to to
study, uh to communicate, to refuse to be um intimidated because us speaking
out, us figuring out what's actually going on, uh is probably our best bet to
to to to preserve and defend peace in the world. that is, you know, uh to
prevent uh World War II from breaking out. And I think that we're we're in
fairly good shape because we are the first generation ever to have all this technology, the ability to connect uh
and and and broadcast these these these conversations in the real time. And so
uh we can avoid the march to World War II in the way that previous generations
were not able to do. But we have to, you know, we have to speak out. That's that's that's what we have to do. And I
think that that that could make a huge difference to how history unfolds from
here on out. Yes. And uh you know, I think we had a
great exchange of very of our perspectives today, everybody. So hit the like button as you go. uh that uh
will help boost this conversation and boost this message as far and as wide as it can in the algorithm. Without further
ado, everyone, take good care. This is the last stream of the month. I'll be back uh beginning of August. I'll let
you know who is coming on with me. Until then, until next time, take care. Thanks again, Alex. We'll head out together.
Thanks to all the moder Yeah. Thanks to all the moderators. Thanks to all the moderators. Thanks to
everybody super chats. Thanks to all the viewers. Bye-bye
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2025 7:03 am

EPA Stops Protecting The Environment | Americans Need To Have More Sex | Don Jr.: My Dad Is So Hot
The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
Jul 30, 2025 #Colbert #Comedy #Monologue

The EPA is seeking to scrap limits on greenhouse gas emissions, America’s fertility rate hit an all-time low, and the president’s son weighed in on the Sydney Sweeney American Eagle eugenics controversy.



Transcript

Welcome one and all to the late show.
I'm your host Steven Colbert. Folks,
you know what? You know what? Thank you
for that. Thank you for that. That's
very nice. But you folks in this theater
are the ones who deserve an ovation
because these brave citizens, let me
tell you what happened. These brave
citizens in this theater today, they
just stood outside in 100°ree
temperatures
on a New York City sidewalk in the
summer. 100° outside only to come in
here where it's about 42 degrees.
And when those two weather fronts
collide, it creates a cyclonic action
like in their butt sweat. It just
I think the I think north of the
equator, the butt sweat goes this way.
Wow.
Wow.
Unfortunately, these hot summers are uh
you know, nothing new because we are
coming off the hottest year ever
recorded on Earth. The hottest year
ever. Scientists warned scientists
warned it would happen if we put Pedro
Pascal in this many movies
everywhere. You ever seen young seen
young Pedro Pascal?
Faced with this clear threat to
humanity, the Trump EPA is leaping into
action, announcing it wants to eliminate
regulation for greenhouse gases.
No, stop booing. You're just releasing
more CO2.
You're part of the problem.
The EPA announced it wants to throw out
the so-called endangerment finding from
2009, which concluded that greenhouse
gases endanger public health and
welfare. Getting rid of it will allow
the EPA to eliminate rules to reduce
climate pollution from cars and trucks.
Okay, but you're the Environmental
Protection Agency. You're supposed to
protect the environment. You're just
You're just giving up. This explains why
Woodsy Al has updated his catchphrase to
why give a hoot. I'm just filling my
pockets with rocks and walking into the
river like Virginia Wolf.
Wow.
Yesterday.
Wow.
Yesterday. He's sad.
He's sad.
Exactly.
Yesterday, head of the EPA, Lee Zelden
and Energy Secretary Chris Wright went
on the Fox News to push back against
what they think of as the climate change
hoax. The goal is to restore confidence
in science and data and rationalism.
That's what that's what enabled the
creation of modern science. Then we slid
back into sort of a cancel culture
Orwellian
uh squelching of science. Nice try,
fellas. But it makes it hard to dismiss
global warming when you're sharing the
screen with a heat index of 126°
in Missouri.
The popcorn comes from pops.
I haven't seen a cognitive disconnect
like that since the original ending of
Jaws.
A friendly dolphin. I think he liked me.
There's uh well there's more proof out
there that the earth is mad at us
because just yesterday a massive 8.8
magnitude earthquake struck off of
Russia's far eastern Kamchatka
Peninsula. Thankfully this only resulted
in a few injuries despite the fact that
occurred along Russia's so-called Mega
Thrust Fault. It's the Mega Thrust Fault
which is right next to Hump Canyon and
the Cape of I had a big dinner. Can we
just watch Gilded Age?
The footage
the footage is pretty intense. Check out
this video of the earthquake hitting
right in the middle of someone's
surgery. And if you look closely, you'll
see there's see it just jumps right
there. There's a there's there's it
skips that missing footage.
That missing footage in that that's when
the government sent the earthquake to
kill Jeffrey Epstein.
Allegedly.
Yeah. Allegedly.
Allegedly. Allegedly.
We have no idea idea if
uh Trump is back from Scotland. Uh but
while he was uh
what
but while he was over there he unveiled
a new impression. You see his his new
Aberdine golf course over there had some
zoning issues back in the past and he
claims he got help from a certain
Scottish celebrity.
Sean Connory got me the zoning. He let
out a howl once. He said, "Let the
bloody bloke build his damn golf
courses."
You do a very good Scottish accent.
Yeah. Well, but he did say that. He
said, "Let the bloody bloke build his
bloody golf courses." That is uncanny.
I do other accents, too. Here's Italian.
Let the bloody bloke build his bloody
spaghetti.
How about French? Let the bloody bloke
have his bloody three-way.
Now, Scottish officials say that Mr.
Connory was not involved in the due
process that led to the granting of
planning permission for Trump's Golf
Resort, but he did in fact lend his
support to the project. And you know, it
must be a really nice golf course
because Shan Connory is never going to
be associated with a lowquality product.
I mean, this is the man most famous for
playing the iconic action hero Zardas.
Wow. Yes. Wow. That's It's a It's a
diaper with bandelers. There you go.
The Epstein story isn't going away no
matter how much Trump talks about it.
And the the latest analysis latest
analysis turns this entire story on its
head because remember remember how
there's that video from outside
Epstein's cell with the the missing
minutes in it. Well, forget that cuz
let's take a look at a still from the
tape. Which do you think is Epstein's
cell? Is it one, two, or three? Have you
locked in your answer? Great. You're
wrong.
Because Epstein cell isn't even visible
in the frame. It's up a staircase behind
that wall. So, we've all been focusing
on the missing minutes when in fact
there's a missing all of it.
CBS News, our friends over at CBS News
put up this helpful graphic. Epstein
cell is the red one in the lower right
there. The only camera we have is
footage covering a common area and just
a tiny sliver of the staircase that led
to the area outside of Epstein's cell
upstairs. So, it wasn't even the whole
staircase. Anyone really skinny could
have slipped past that camera. Okay, he
just has to be a skinny person. So that
narrows the lead suspect in Epstein's
death to anyone on OMIC
or or as the scientists call it the fat
shot drug.
That's not all.
Is he on it? Is he on it?
That's not all because the main entrance
to this prison area is also not on
camera. So, an outsider could easily
have entered Epstein's cell and then
erased the evidence as they left.
But enough about Trump's scandals. Let's
talk about his policies which are
scandalous. We just found out that due
in part to his tariffs, the maker of
Charmin has said it will raise its
prices. No. Oh no. Charmin is a sponsor
of this show and a quality product that
I use myself. There is no other way to
say it. Trump's tariffs really chap my
ass.
And I don't care.
I don't
I don't I don't I don't I don't care how
high the prices get. I am not using
seventh generation.
You know their slogan. Seventh
generation made from only the angriest,
sharpest trees.
Hey, any Let me ask you this a personal
question if you don't mind. Are there
any parents in the audience?
All right, great. Anybody who didn't
clap, get to work. You know how babies
are made. It's quite pleasant and it's
quite important because the CDC just
dropped a new report saying that
fertility rates in the US have reached
an all-time low in 2024. Now, I can't
believe I have to say this, but
Americans need to have more sex. Okay,
I'm already I'm I'm already doing my
part to start the spark. I just showed
you Zardas.
Show them again, Jim. there.
Are you
are you are you are you pregnant yet?
Now, in case you did not know, the
fertility rate is the average number of
children that women are expected to
have, while the birth rate is how many
kids overall were born. The CDC released
this helpful explainer.
I'm a mommy.
Mommy.
I'm a mom. Mamasita. Really?
No, I'm a mommy.
A mom of what? A dog?
I have a daughter.
Like in real life?
Yeah.
Like a daughter? Like a real baby?
Yeah, like a human child.
We got technical.
We got a little technical there.
Mama.
Mama. Uh, according to the uh the
Centers for Disease Control, couples are
delaying marriage and worrying about
having enough resources to raise
children. Well, of course they're
worried. You can't ask people to have
kids and raise the price of toilet
paper. The bathroom is where we parents
go to hide from our children. Come on.
Stay out. Come on.
Stay out.
Daddy's on the toilet. Oh god, they
learned how to open the doors like tiny
velociaptors.
Now folks, uh before we talk about this
next story, I don't want to alarm you,
but the internet is mad about something.
This time it's a commercial from
American Eagle Outfitters starring
Sydney Sweeney. Take take a look.
Jeans are passed down from parents to
offspring, often determining traits like
hair color, personality, and even eye
color.
My jeans are blue.
Sydney Sweeney has jeans.
And just like Sydney Sweeney, I also
carry the gene for sexy commercial
scratchy voice.
I get it from my uncle on my mother's
side. He used to he used to say to me,
"Stephen, I lost your birthday money at
the dog track."
[Laughter]
Now
Now, are you pregnant?
Now, some people look at this and
they're seeing something sinister,
saying that the jeans, jeans, genetics,
denim word play in an ad featuring a
white blonde woman means American Eagle
could be promoting eugenics, white
supremacy, and a Nazi propaganda. That
might be a bit of an overreaction.
Although Hitler did briefly model for
mine comfort fit jeans,
whatever the truth,
how do you say how do you say badon in
German? Whatever the truth, this
controversy has been raging. And today,
Don Jr. weighed in with this AI picture
of his dad
in the same outfit with the caption, um,
Donald is so hot right now.
Let me get this straight, Don Jr., you
look at Sydney Sweeney,
and your first thought is, she's hot
like my dad.
Reminds me of Shakespeare's love sonnet.
Shall I compare thee to a 79year-old
fart machine? We got a great show for
you tonight.
My guests are
and Senator Alysa.
When they come back, some exciting
announcements from the band. Join us.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2025 10:48 pm

Jacques Baud: "Israel May Cease to Exist"
by Glenn Diesen & Colonel Jacques Baud
Jul 29, 2025

Colonel Jacques Baud is a former military intelligence analyst in the Swiss Army and the author of many books. Colonel Baud discusses how Israel has overextended itself and may destroy itself.



Transcript

Hi everyone and welcome back. We are joined today by Colonel Jac Buu uh former member of the Swiss uh strategic
intelligence service. So it's good to have you back on the program sir. Nice to be back with you. Thank you very
much for inviting me. So the reason I wanted to talk to you today was about uh yeah this situation
with Israel. Uh it appears that uh well this can't go on forever. It seems to be
exhausting everything from its uh uh well most of its resources not just
weapons, money uh its reputation both among allies and adversaries uh human
resources as people are exiting and uh overall uh the decline of the United
States also suggests that the whole uh international system or world order which it operated in and was allowed to
go down this path is also eroding. I was uh wondering your thoughts to what
extent the Israel represents a case of strategic overreach.
I think it's interesting because today we have two major conflicts going on. I
mean obviously Israel as you mentioned it with the Palestinians but also uh
Ukraine and in both cases we have a lot of similarities.
Um we see that in both cases we have a government uh namely the Israeli one and
the Ukrainian ones who are in fact exhausted to some extent and
there's a a an increasing feeling that in both cases
the government is waging kind of a private war. I mean, it's obvious in
Israel because because of the uh specific uh condition and the legal
procedures that uh may uh happen on on
Netanyahu once he leaves the the power. It's different obviously in in Ukraine
but probably not so different because we feel that in Ukraine there is a a strong
uh uh effort from the government to stay in place and and to to to avoid any um
situation where the government should uh would be obliged to quit and u and and
probably also because of procedures and we had all these this issue of Nabu Sapo in the recent
days. But in Israel, this is obviously the case that we have here a private war
wages by waged by Netanyahu. And if we add to this uh people like
Benjamin um Smrich Bazel Smrich sorry and Benv who in fact to some extent
which also kind of a private ideological so it's not because of legal uh um
constraint but because of ideological issue they wage an ideological war Um,
Smootri and and Benvad, they are very keen in having the whole of the
Palestinian territory under Israeli control and therefore there is
absolutely no sign and since Natano cannot rule without the the those two
especially their party therefore we don't see any appeasement in in this
conflict. On the contrary, it seems that they they go, as you just explained,
from bad to worse because they are exhausting everything, including
patience of of the Israelis themselves, including uh lives of Palestinian
obviously, but also of the uh the military. there's a even an increasing
discontent within the uh the IDF.
We see also that the the traditional allies of of Israel, namely Western
Europe and obviously the US have more and more interrogation and questions
about the the purpose of the conflict. and not just the purpose but the way it
is waged again uh we are here I think we're find
in fact Israel is somehow u revealing what it is because
um as I have explained on other channels Israel is a country that since its very
inception even before it started ed to exist um in
in 1944 47 it never abodeed by law and that's
that's that's absolutely fascinating. It has it is a country that never abode by
law. They had their own rules and they pledged to have uh kind of a special
status and and that's something which is in my view unique in in the modern world
especially um when we consider that Israel is considered and was considered better but
I said as um an advanced position a strong point of the western society and
the western civilization in the Middle East and the only democracy of the Middle East and things like this but in
fact it's a country that never applied international law and that that goes as
far as 194 so even before it existed in fact that's that's very interesting the
problem is that because of World War II True.
We we I mean the west western societies and western countries never dared to
oblige or constrain Israel to abide by international law. There was an attempt
for that in 1949 as Israel wanted to enter the United
Nations. It was request requested or required
from the United Nations. The security council ask Israel to make a public
pledge that as a condition to be member of the United Nations. It should pledge
to follow the international law. I think no other country has done has was
obliged to do so. But Israel was obliged to do so. that was in May 19 uh uh 1949
as a condition to stay in the in the United Nations and that's very interesting. There are a lot of
interesting legal discussion about this because obviously uh since then there
are hundred more than 150 UN resolution that condemn Israel that said that
Israel is not uh abiding by international law and abiding by UN
resolution. And a lot of people have said well in fact if we come back to the
declaration of Israel in 1949 we should expel Israel from United Nations. So
there's an interesting case here that has developed and there are interesting discussion if you go and check on
international law uh um website and things like this very interesting debates on that. But in essence, uh,
Israel is a country that has behaved like a rogue state. And what we have
witnessed in the last one year and a half or so
in fact is probably the tip of the iceberg because we have never seen such
a brutality and such an acknowledgment of brutality because we have seen in
many cases um and and the west namely in
fighting in Iraq or in other places Vietnam. uh then and other places they
they were neither they were they were they weren't uh uh so um uh sweet
either. I mean they they were quite brutal and we had we had a lot of uh
bombardment of civilian population and all that. But here in in Israel, the the
the strange thing is that it's in fact somehow acknowledged by the government.
is is is even explained as a strategy
to fight terrorism obviously um and in despite
the various effort from some country of the international community namely South
Africa with the um the complaint they carried at the um international court of
justice where uh obviously there was some indication that we are witnessing a
possible or plausible genocide. Uh this has not
refrained Israel from using again and again the same method, the same way of
waging war against not just against Hamas but against the whole Palestinian population. So there there is I think
it's a very fascinating case here in legal terms but also in political and
moral ethical terms as a former military I would say I'm
ashamed uh by the the the thing that by the fact that Israeli officers and
soldiers call themselves officers and soldiers because for me it's mere
terrorism. It's nothing else. they express like a joy in in killing
children and think like this. And uh we had not just now by the way we had about
10 years ago and even more we had um testimonies of soldiers saying they were
they were killing or firing on children
uh in Gaza just for fun. Just for fun. Uh, and there was a famous case that
happened I think it was in 2009 where uh a couple I mean a group of children
playing on the beach in Gaza were just killed by Israeli soldiers and they they
said what well we didn't know we didn't know what to do so for fun we just
killed them. And that's that's something that I
we have never seen that in history. I think not even not even during World
War II, we have seen that in concentration camps. People killing for
fun. It was methodic. It was I mean, you can qualify all everything uh the way you
want what what the Germans did. But it didn't appear that they were fun in in
killing people. Here it is. And that's that's something which is quite unique
and makes this conflict unique. And the way the the government
respond to international critique make it um unique as well. And that goes beyond
what we see in in Gaza because when we
have uh the recent 12 day days war with Iran and this attack of Israel against
Iran knowing that's that's fascinating knowing that the US intelligence
community had stated there were that there were no nuclear weapons in Iran.
So meaning that there is no rational factual justification for
starting a war, attacking civilians, bombing civilians and things like this.
And I think it's it's quite unique in history.
I think the some of this is changing though some of the immunity as you said
Israel is it seems to operate under its own u unique rules given that it's
considered to be this um living in a dangerous neighborhood as the Americans always say but is seen as being part of
western civilization it is able to project military power into a strategic
region and as you mentioned the world war II the uh yeah the crimes committed
against the Jews there and the Holocaust, you know, added to um yeah, giving you some extra leeway, I guess.
But uh uh but the conditions it um it's allowed to operate under is quite
unique. No other countries are allowed to develop nuclear weapons and uh have
no accountability. simply skirted the whole non-uclear non-prololiferation
treaty uh the occupation of uh um of territory the apartheid policies the
seemingly endless non-stop wars but as we come to this genocide though it's
must be well not must be it is definitely the most well doumented
genocide in history we can every morning watch the new videos of a children being
massacred heard refugee camps being bombed. Um again the children all being
shot waiting for food and uh this is complemented by statements coming from
their leadership where they very openly state the intent that they can't have
the Palestinians there anymore and you see a wide sentiment among the public as well. So it does appear that they have
taken it too far and I guess under the topic of uh Israel exhausting itself. I
think the goodwill is also coming to an end and I there's something interesting has happened as well that is even among
the Israeli population there's now discussions
in the Israeli media to what extent Israel is doing what the Nazis are doing. This is uh was a big no no in the
past that is uh you wouldn't compare Israel with Nazis. It's been done but usually comes with ramifications
but now in the American political system you see especially on the political right which was quite unique. Uh people
opposing uh the the endless support for Israel and you see now western
governments in well in Europe as well also feeling pressured. I'm not sure how genuine you see this. Uh you probably
seen the press conference with uh Starmer from the United Kingdom where he now suddenly
expresses great concern for the starvation and killing of Palestinians.
Again, a bit late for this empathy and I guess I'm a bit cynical in terms of how
genuine he is. Uh but do you see um a massive shift here uh both among what
this Israeli public is willing to put up with but also what uh western governments you know even if they
quietly wants to support Israel its limits now I guess what the public will permit
absolutely and and if we look at it we look if I answer your question from a
geopolitical point of view uh during I think the whole cold war
the Israel was considered as I said before like an advanced position of the west in the Middle East and we have to
remember that the at the very beginning that's very interesting to go back to
history because in at the end of World War II the whole Mediterranean was under
the control of the allies in fact the French and the British.
I mean the western Meditaran was mostly French and the eastern Meditaran mostly
uh British and the the Soviets wanted an access to
the Mediterranean Sea and therefore they pledged a support to those Jewish
resistance movement against the British um with the hope that once Israel would
become an independent state. This would be a kind of a a Soviet strong point
around the Mediterranean. And um it didn't turn exactly as Stalin
wanted. In fact, as soon as the Israelis got the independence in May 1948,
uh despite the fact that they had been supported with weapons and and and money
uh for their independence war, uh the the Israelis turned toward the
West and that uh that created some reaction in the Soviet Union and the
Soviet Union started and to uh trying to
take control of other countries in the Mediterranean. And you had kind of a
shift in the 50s. Uh the Arab state became more and more uh
related or associated or yes to the Soviets and the West lost a lot of uh of
its colonies. Therefore you had the case of Algeria, you had the case of Egypt,
you had all these case where the the west was expelled and Israel became then
the very the the the the strong point of the west in a Middle East that was quite
largely under Soviet influence. And therefore that explains why the west for so long
accepted all the u uh the the
deviation let's say of the Israeli state and u and remember that uh during the
the cold war um Palestinian movements uh Yaser Rafat and others were essentially
Marxist movement in fact and that reinforced this support that the West
had for Israel. But since the collapse of the um the
Warsaw pact and the communist block in in in Eastern Europe, things have
changed and we have seen a lot of countries including Syria by the way who tried to um have better ties with the
West. the west uh refused to some extent and that led to the situation we know
today in in Syria. But there was this this uh attempt from um Arab countries
to get closer to the west. And today these countries who used to be just pro
suppliers of oil and and and raw material today they have developed their
own industry. they are they have obviously evolved in in two industrial
states. The case of Iran is is is an example case in point. And we have today
a Middle East which is quite intellectually and economically
closer to the West than Israel is. And you may remember that a few weeks ago
you had um Donald Trump visiting Saudi Arabia and uh Saudi Arabia making a
pledge for 600 billion or even more like like a trillion dollars investment in
the US and so on. meaning that the significance of Israel in the regional
context of Middle East has changed and radically changed because today the rest
of the Middle East I mean the non-Israel part of the Middle East is in fact a
kind of a they they could be considered as part they could be because I'm not
sure the policies that we have in the west have understood the move that was going on.
But in any case, we have a Middle East which is in demand for having better
relations with the West, which is rich enough to supply the West, to buy
products, to uh to engage into partnerships, to engage into economic
and industrial cooperation and think like this. while Israel is in fact a
state that lives only not he doesn't provide much to the west he receives
from the west so we we have here this this uh uh I would say structural change
that we have in the Middle East that today appears very clear clearly
because with the the kind of embargo or
blockade that is waged by the Houthis in the um in the Red Sea. we have seen that
now the port of Elat in uh in Israel is basically bankrupt and nonfunctional
uh other ports and that was uh demonstrated during the Iranian uh the
12 war 12 days war with Iran that other
ports like EA and so on are extremely vulnerable and that Israel is in fact
extremely dependent on the west. He's not a partner that can provide something
to the west. It is just a a partner that receives from the west and what he gives
in return are simply problems. You see, so the and on the other hand we
have other countries in the Middle East who in fact seems closer to solution
providers. So uh um Israel is today a problem
maker, a troublemaker while the rest of the Middle East has turned to be
solution maker and you know problem solvers. So the the situation completely
reversed and that is a part of the explanation
of this change in perception and obviously as you rightly pointed out all
this goes uh together with what we can see every day those massacres those
brutal behavior uh misbehavior from soldiers and and all that and that of
course uh impacts quite significantly on the public opinion and in the west we
have the problem that the and that's not just related to the Palestinian conflict
by the way but what we have seen in relation to the Ukrainian conflict especially is the the the the in the
broadening gap between the ruling elites s or the leadership that we have both in
uh in countries UK, France and so on but also between uh with with the elites of
the European Union for instance and the population and that's what we we have in in in
Germany like uh now the day which is progressing so quickly that now the
government thinks about uh uh uh banning the the party and think like this. So we
see that this uh this um um broadening
gap between the public opinion I mean the population and the elites has also
played a role because for a while the this elite and probably that was also
part of the gap that is uh uh broadening as I said because for as you said it's
very late that these leaders in Europe realize the the the magnitude of the
catastrophe that is going on in Palestine. Uh but be because in the
early stage I mean last year and even early this year nobody even questioned
the the tactics and the methods and the weapons used by um by Israel. And today
they realize that there is probably an effect of the uh popular pressure.
That's probably one aspect. But also they realize that more and more uh the
the um the support provided to Israel becomes politically and I would say
legally internable because we
we see that everything they do basically is uh I mean they do the Israelis the
the Israeli government does is without any excuse. use because even
even if you admit that the Hamas would be a terrorist organization
you you you don't destroy a population just for the sake of reaching a few
combatants and by the way the various reports we had from various organization
include the IDF itself by the way uh that despite all the killings the
massacres the destruction of infrastructure of population of uh uh
medical infrastructure of food uh infrastructure and all that. Despite all
that, they were not able to reduce significantly the uh combating or fighting power or
fighting capabilities of of the Hamas. meaning that is something fundamentally
wrong in the strategy which is used and therefore there is a um probably a
growing sense in Europe and including I mean if I talk to my military colleagues
a former military from the uh NATO because despite the fact I'm Swiss I
used to work for five years in NATO and and of course I had my peers and I had
contact with them and when I talked to them and they all
senior officers I mean colonels and and so from the um of NATO countries I mean
I I I don't know a single one who is
uh um in favor or supporting Israel.
Uh I think people everybody realize that this is not the way you solve the
problem. even if you admit that Hamas is
a terrorist organization which in my view has not been demonstrated by the way uh I have written several books on
terrorism especially Islamic terrorism and uh I've written the the book which
is behind me here on the Alexa flood operation which is the 7th of October
2023 but before that I wrote several books on asymmetric warfare in the
Middle East. And I studied the case of Hamas very extensively.
And even if we admit that the Hamas used to start as a terrorist organization
probably in the late 80s early 90s I would say that since the uh early 2000s
uh you don't see and they said they will abandon the the terrorist strategy and
there is no slightest indication that u they they um they didn't apply this
policy of not uh um behaving like terrorist organization. They the Hamas
in the early 2000 pledged to be a political organization. That's what they
have done. That's why they won the local elections in 2002 and then the regional
elections in 2005 which gave them the power in in Gaza
especially uh because the US didn't want to accept the result of the election and
therefore tried to topple the uh Hamasled government or yes the the
Hamasled author authorities and that led to this clashes with the FATA at the
time and that was one almost one year clashes between the two organizations.
But uh if we if we are uh if we look with the honest eye on the uh the
behavior of the Hamas, I I I really defy
uh and challenge anyone to tell me ex what makes the Hamas a terrorist organization.
Um it certainly started that way that is uh that's that's uh that in the uh at
the end uh or or during the second inif certainly did did so but then it has
changed his policies as understood as did Yaser Rafat in 1974
when he realized that terrorism was in fact um playing against the Palestinian
movement at large because um it was uh it was it affected the perception of the
worldwide opinion towards the Palestinians and it was better to uh
abandon terrorism and they the PLO in 1974
officially abandoned terrorism. There were still some uh factions that
continued to rely on terrorism, but PLO
by and large refused that and and the Hamas did exactly the same process in
the during the early 90s up to the early 2000s.
So even if we assume if we accept the Israeli narrative that
Hamas is a terrorist organization today, the way they try to solve the problem is
something that will in in in any case that will never solve the terrorist
problem. So if you if you really wanted to solve a terrorist problem then you would adopt
and in my books I I suggest a lot of I've written a lot a specific book on
fighting against jihadi terrorism and I I suggest strategies to to um to deal
with that that kind of terrorism which is very specific. It's not the same kind of terrorism we used to have in the U in
Europe in the in the 70s 80s or so. It's very different. Even if the word
terrorism is widely used, it reflects a very different
um uh uh substance and and you have asymmetric terrorism as you have
symmetric terrorism. Although in the west we tend to use the word asymmetric for defining terrorism whatever it is.
But in fact you have also symmetric terrorism. So therefore um the to
address terrorism you need to have a much refined perception of what you are
fighting against and what kind of strategy you want. But what we see in Israel is definitely not a strategy that
is designed to defeat terrorism. Uh I I I think the the Israelis on the
contrary have a strategy that I would say uh in fact provoke terrorism. If you
want terrorism, you do exactly what the Israeli do. If you wanted to suppress terrorism,
then you would deal with the problem completely differently. And this is again nothing really new there because
all these thoughts and strategies have been also um studied in the early 50s
late 40s uh by the British especially when they had to deal with terrorism in
gerilla in the south Southeast Asia and all that and they had a lot of thoughts
in dealing with terrorism but we have forgotten those lessons and we tend to
reply to what we call terrorism M which is by the way today it is a word that
doesn't reflect something very specific when you don't like somebody just says a
terrorist and today when you have people demonstrating in UK for instance they
demonstrate for Palestine or they they they use the emblem of a watermelon
and using the the emblem of watermelon qualifies them as a supporter of
terrorism. So meaning that the word has no longer any meaning and therefore you
cannot have a strategy to fight against it and therefore everything you do you you brutal force is accepted and that's
also the reason why for so long the west has in fact tolerated or accepted uh the
um the misbehavior of the Israeli government towards the Palestinians.
There's um it does appear that the language have been um constructed for
narrative control that is uh any expression of um understanding for the
position of the Palestinians would then be equated to terrorism
uh Hamas support anti-semitism. So there's always this ability to shame in
order to crush descent or make descent illegitimate by presenting it as uh well
delegitimizing the descent. Uh not that different from uh any of our other wars,
one could add because you see the same I guess in the exactly the same. You know my uncle used
to be in a French resistance despite the fact I'm Swiss. I had a a French uncle.
He used to be in French resistance. He was considered as terrorist by the Germans.
There you go. Well, well, in terms of the sustainab of the sustainability of
all of this, uh do you see any economic uh problems brewing in Israel because uh
uh especially in the war with Iran? Now, they took some heavy
punishment in terms of destruction of infrastructure uh energy infrastructure. Um we see with
the conflict uh with Yemen intercepting some ships uh they're having some
economic losses with their ports and the overall sense of insecurity as this um
the sense of control and dominance in the region slips. uh more Israelis are
fleeing the country as well which is uh and if I'm not mistaken especially the
young people which is problematic because they work in many of the high-tech sectors which really drives
the economy. Is this a bump in the road or do you think this is a wider or deeper problem
which will be difficult to resolve? I think it's a deeper problem and again you have you have a variety I mean
Israel is a very complex country and I mean sociologically speaking and
you have multi-layered type of problems because
obviously as you said you had the direct effect of wars and strikes from Houthis
Iran and all that and and we mentioned the uh the port of Aat that that has
that is bankrupt today because no ship is um allowed to to um to reach that
port. And but there are other other factors. uh one factor which is quite
strong today is the fact that because the IDF has problem to recruit people
that they want to change the law and also uh obliged because in the I mean there
is no constitution in Israel but there's a set of basic laws that rule uh the um
it's a corpus of of laws that constitute some kind of constitution ution of Israel. And in in a in a there are laws
in the basic laws of Israel that in fact prevent or forbid to have the um Jewish
fundamentalists uh included in the armed forces. They
should be exempted from recruitment. And basically what you have in the IDF are
people who are not part of these uh very fundamentalist
uh um part of the country. And now because they need soldiers uh they have
the same problem as in Ukraine again we have back to they they the government
won't like to change the law and that creates a lot of problem and in turn
this has led a lot of people outside of uh um of of Israel to say well Israel is
no longer a Jewish state because it it doesn't even abide by Jewish
uh it doesn't even respect the the the Jews themselves. So you and and that led
to uh and not only that there are other factors and obviously what we see on the news plays a role in that but you have
also a kind of a disinvestment uh of several country um companies uh
who refuse now to operate in Israel or to have any uh um contact with Israel or
exchange with Israel. they refuse to fund companies in Israel and all that.
So the you have the direct effect of war but you have an indirect effect which is the the investment
effect and that in fact is is extremely
heavy on the u the the um the not just the Israeli economy but also the um the
society. If you add to this that today a lot of people I mean
normally you have a lot of tourism I mean you have uh u obviously you have
cities like Jerusalem and all that who attract a lot of tourists every year but
apparently now people don't want to go to Israel anymore um including Jews
refuse to go to Israel anymore not simply because of the security situation, but because of the moral and
political stance of the country. And so it's it's uh and that's that's also new
because obviously you always had security concerns related to Israel.
As we said, terrorism is not something new. Um today, it's no longer terrorism
as such or probably less. is probably the the risk of rockets and missiles or
think like this. I mean a lot of people have been taken by surprise uh during
the um Iran uh this 12 day war you know. So uh you may find yourself in the same
situation especially if Netanyahu we I mean a lot of people consider that
Netanyahu will strike Iran again meaning that Iran will strike back again and
therefore it's not the best condition to to take vacations in in Israel even if
you are Jew by the way. So um if you add
all this you see that uh I some people have tried to to uh make kind of a count
to to quantify the loss of of Israel it's of billions every month billions I
don't know exactly what how these figures are reliable or not but
uh this this the whole crisis will certainly be a major financial economic
crisis for Israel in the long run. And um and and probably longer than this
because a lot of people you you as you rightly said who have left Israel
um and I have seen testimonies from people coming back from Israel to France
for instance and they have said we are not going back to to Israel. We're not
going back to Israel. this is done. Uh we wanted uh it was an experience. A lot
of people left um Europe in 2012
2014 as you had this wave of terrorist activities in the in the in the west uh
related to the Islamic State. Again, this is always the same thing. We create
problem in Iraq. We create problem in Libya. We create problem in Syria and all that. We make life impossible in
those countries and those countries they return us the favor and therefore we
have terrorist activities in our country and all that. Anyway, um after in this
period in the about 10 years ago, a lot of Jews left especially France because
France is the largest Jewish country in Europe if I can put it that way as it is
the largest Muslim country in the in Europe by the way. Um so a lot of Jews
left to make their aliyah to um to Israel.
um they take the opportunity in fact because they said well we don't feel safe in um in France but now they are
coming back because they see that the situation is worse in Israel. So we have a situation that may durably
um for the long term a a disaster for Israel and um well this
is this is the consequence of the inactivity of the western polic polity
um had the western leadership understood what is at stake and that Israel has
everything to lose by misbehaving uh by disregarding the international law
and all that. Should the West had prevented that and helped Israel to
solve the problem differently, probably Israel would not be in that situation. So it's ironical to see that
because we we nobody wanted or nobody nobody dared to uh take influence in the
conflict or try to prevent massacre of population. That's exactly the reason or
the yes the reason why today Israel is despised by everybody and has become
kind of a rogue state. And and I I think here we have it it's a we have a similar
situation as with the Ukraine. You know, I always said when you are as a party of
the conflict, if you are Palestinian, if you are Israeli, if you are Ukrainian or Russian, then you behave like a
Ukrainian, like a Russian and all that. And I completely understand that. I I know people in Ukraine, I know people in
Russia and I perfectly understand their their stance towards the conflict
because they feel that they have a relation with the nation with the
country and all that. So I understand that the problem is that when we are an
outsider like specifically as a Swiss uh but that
applies to any European when we are outsiders that we have the privileged
the privilege not to be involved in the conflict and we we we don't use this
opportunity to help not one of the actors but to help to help both of the
actors by providing kind of mediation uh uh service by providing
advice and to try to to to help both uh
parties to avoid being uh let's say emotional or taking emotional decision
and start to be factual and I think the European leadership both at country
level and at European Union level failed to do so. We cannot
expect that from the US because the US has obviously vested interest in all
these conflicts. They started those conflict. Therefore, we cannot expect them to be uh um perfect mediator also.
But Europe would have been or European countries uh regardless of which
country. I obviously have Switzerland in in mind. But uh um because we have we
are that we have no reason to be involved in a conflict. Why didn't we
take the opportunity to advise those countries, those parties from the very
beginning? And I mean not just talking about Israel
and and Palestine, not just on the from the 7th of October 2023, but before the
7th. I explain in my book here that the crisis started well before and all the
signs all the indicators of a major uh uh situation major crisis were already
uh available in the spring of 2023.
And had we and in fact I started to write the book before the 7th of October
2023 because I had the indica I mean I felt
that it would at a certain point it would explode meaning that if I had this
feeling why didn't European countries have a similar feeling and tried to
uh take influence over the different actors in order to prevent the explosion
that we had uh from the 7th of October. Nobody did that. And I I think here it's
a major failure of a the intelligence strategic intelligence in the west. And
remember this is my this is my uh uh professional
background. Um here I think strategic intelligence has failed definitely
failed in all European countries all and the you also have the failure of the
European leadership or European polity at large to understand what was at stake
and to have the courage to come
both. I mean you we could have exactly the same the same narrative for for
Ukraine by the way. In that case for Palestine, how come nobody had the courage to come
before what happened on the 7th of October 2023 in order to see and to make
Netanyahu or the government aware that something was boiling and was
ready to explode and some mediation would have prevented that. Um again
I to me it's not it's obviously the failure of the Israeli government
definitely so but it's also the failure of the western governments who didn't
make any the slightest effort to prevent that to find solutions and now the the
the problem has has raised so high then you have the water here and you have to
react and that's exactly what we have seen with kstar summer. Exactly that.
I think it's fascinating how yeah these wars both the Israeli wars as well as the war in
um Ukraine how they are now eating away at the west as well militarily
economically but also the the political legitimacy because as you said instead of positioning themselves as security
providers or someone who would uh seek to resolve the conflicts by getting so deeply involved D in what war?
Effectively losing wars and also wars of aggression. It's uh quite yeah quite a
horrible um horrible mistake which has been done. But uh um yeah my my last question
though was about uh just Netanyahu uh how stable do you think he is now? How
stable his is his position? Uh and also where does the pressure comes from? Is
it the political opposition? Is it the public, the military or the intelligence
services? Uh is uh any of the current policies strengthening his hand or I say
undermining his own position? Well, again, I'm I'm I'm not aware of
all the details and all the whereabouts of what's happening in the in in the um
in the backstage of of everything we see. and and obviously a lot of is happening and you have a lot of people
trying to get some inference and and all that. You have all this issue as I said
of the fundamentalists, the Haredi um um
group in in Israel and uh those people like Benvier Matri who are definitely
strongly related to the settlers in um in the in the West Bank in the West Bank
especially. And uh in addition to that you have obviously
this injunction uh by the international criminal court not the international
criminal court sorry the intern the um international court of justice that um
Israeli have absolutely no right to be in West Bank and therefore they should
in fact leave the the the area. this is a a Palestinian territory and they have
nothing to do there and um the internal court of justice and there is also a UN
resolution on that um that says that every country should help Israel to
fulfill its obligation. Uh so there's a lot of aspect that plays there and
Smatri and and Bengia are strongly tied to the settlers because they they come
up they they were settlers before I think Benguia was uh from settler
origin. So that means that these guys are um they
they are more and more into um uh uh um
in in German you have the word sak um it's um how would you say that it's a
it's a street without end you know um
oh I don't have the the name right now in in mind um in any case So that means
they are trapped in some cases and and therefore um I I I see that in that in
such situation you may have extreme reactions and there were some rumors
recently uh that Nathaniel had been poisoned. I don't think it was the case,
but probably it's a it's a kind of rumor we may have again. And I think Netanyahu
is very concerned about his own safety or security because we we might have a
situation and we have a similar situation in Ukraine by the way that the the government in in is in such a
situation that there's no way out basically and therefore we might well
have something happening but I don't think they have strengthened
their position. They have strengthened the uh the legal framework. They have strengthened the
security framework. All that has been strengthened to some extent and the laws
and all that. And we have exactly the same in in Ukraine by the way. But the
the situation of the government in itself has is not strengthened and the
the reason for strengthening security laws and law enforcement and all that is
precisely because the government is uh in a very precarious situation. So I I I
think we again I don't have any crystal ball here and um I can't predict the future but u
I would suggest that um there might be some change in Israel and
that will be a radic I mean it has to be a radical change. I don't know if it will be, but it has to be a radical
change because otherwise Israel and I think some people predicted and I have
the feeling that I mean again I'm not predicting but I'm warning uh more than
predicting that Israel may cease to exist uh because the conditions for
maintaining that stability is no longer here. uh you have a growing pressure
coming from the neighboring countries to have a policy changes in Israel. Um not
political change but policy changes but that may evolve into political changes
including probably uh some um forceful action. I don't know. Uh I hope not. But
again uh and and you have also the pressure from the west that is also
increasing on the government. So something has to change and therefore my view is that Netanyahu is trying to
preserve his position because he tries to avoid uh to be confronted to the
court for uh his uh um the accusation of of corruption and whatever. Um and I
don't know if he will be if he will succeed on that but certainly that what he's doing is not in
favor of Israel and Israel will suffer from his own uh ambition and his own
let's say willingness not to accept the the legal consequences of what he head.
So we we are definitely uh in a situation where Israel is uh is closing
towards closing in towards a a crossing a very important turning point in its uh
in its existence and and if it missed the point it may
well disappear. I mean that's something uh because I again we have also some a
lot of things are not coming into the media in the west but you have a lot of
trouble regarding um the um the the um mount of temple you know the
the uh the Alexa mosque and so on. Um and and this in fact and and when we
talk about uh the operation of the Hamas that I have behind me, it's the Alaka
flood. al Axa because in fact a lot of troubles that started before October
2023 were in fact related to what's happening on the mount of temple and
this has completely been forgotten by western media but this is exactly the
kind of thing that may trigger an intervention from other Muslim countries
because uh even the mus the the the the the the
mount of temple uh is uh as as you know a holy
a holy place both I mean for Christians for Muslims and for the Jews and any
change to the existing situation might trigger definitely uh it's a second holy
place of of or the third second or third holy place for the Islam so the the
Muslim will not tolerate any change of that. And there is a serious threat because as you know fundamentalist Jews
want to build the third temple of Solomon there and that means to destroy
the the mosque which is on the one of the therefore you have a lot of issues
that are related and and a lot of issues that are not even mentioned in our uh
media that makes the the the picture of the conflict extremely complex And even
you know if we have a situation for instance in Jerusalem on the mount of
temple that may trigger an Arab intervention
probably not the Palestinian situation but the mount of temple and and and but
nobody talks about it. Therefore we we have also a kind of a distorted
understanding of the conflict. But that plays a central role for countries such
as Saudi Arabia and probably even countries such as Syria. I mean remember
that Ahmed al- Shah used to be a fundamentalist.
So for him uh certainly the second or third holy
place of Islam has some kind of importance. Therefore, uh you you might
have a kind of holy alliance for of all the neighbors of Israel in
the case you have some changes of the mount of temple and and but this is
something which is totally ignored by the west and uh so there's a lot of
unknown factors that may come into the game here and that that's why I say we
have to be very very careful and When some say that Israel might disappear,
it's probably not totally unfounded. You know, I'm not saying it's sure. I'm
not saying it will happen and all that, but it's a I I think this should be a
serious concern because there are so many aspects. As I said before, the the
the problem Israel has multi-layered problems and um we tend to speak about
just about the Palestinians, but in fact there are many others that are not addressed and uh not certainly not
addressed in in the west when we talk about the situation there and all this
may play an important role in the future and the forer future of Israel.
Yeah, this is uh the the strange rhetoric I feel coming out of Israel that is uh all these events which are
described as great threats are also presented as great opportunities as if
they're standing on the border now of all or nothing. So of course the the and
this applies to everything that is the destruction of the Alexa mosque, the destruction of Gaza, uh the idea of
knocking out Iran as the head of the snake, the threat but also opportunity of bulcanizing Syria, using Golani and
his henchmen in Syria to go after Hezbollah. Uh having this territorial
annexation of course in Syria to be able to create a new pathway up north. Um
it's just uh it's very yeah it it does appear that this is the
moment for Israel to either take advantage of what it sees as um in a
chaotic situation or indeed be consumed by it as well. I think this is uh
whenever you have a strategic situation where well it's everything or nothing
you usually see the actors being willing to take huge immense risks and gamble
everything. Uh it does appear this is where Israel is at this moment cuz there is no there is no going back at the
moment either. That's what I think they realized with with Iran why there has to be a second war there because uh the
relationships they have across the world now is being spoiled domestically
also the situation has been shook up. people should if people are coming back they have to kind of resolve or at least
make the pieces fall in a good place after the uh whole board has been thrown
up the air. So no it's um it's a very dangerous uh situation when when this is
uh how Israel probably sees it that is now is the time to go for full victory
or essentially yeah knowing that they can also go under.
This is absolutely true and we have a very similar situation in Ukraine. We see exactly the same situation where
uh the government doesn't see any exit point and therefore might might be
tempted to uh escalate the situation.
And this is exactly the situation we have in Israel. It's it's very interesting the
similarities because the leadership in Israel in fact comes from the region of
Ukraine. You see they they have the same culture has the same religion by the way
but also same culture. They come from the same region uh Poland um west
western Ukraine and all that. So meaning that we have very similar situation with
people who are let's say driven by vengeance, revenge,
uh who are not keen in negotiating
and this is not just now. This has been demonstrated well before the the the
crisis we have right now. But we have seen that in the past they they are not
uh willing to negotiate or if they negotiate they are ready to
to to to abandon what they have signed for other reasons. So this is exactly
the same behavior you have on both uh both countries and this is this sense
that when you don't see a solution a practical solution
negotiated solution uh then in fact you don't even look for a negotiated
solution you have to go to uh uh shift
gear and and go to escalate And that leads to situation that may be
extremely dangerous for both uh both conflict. And the interesting thing is
that for both factors for both conflict the main actor or the let's say the
actor that could play the significant and probably the most constructive role
if I can say that way would be the United States. The problem is that we
don't have in the United States a leadership that in my view understands
what is at stakes in both areas. um and um
in in the US tend to oversimplify the problems uh to tend to find solution in so-called
deals which are in fact imposed to a party not even negotiated. We have
exactly the situation in Ukraine as we have with the Hamas. They try to impose a situation which in fact leads to
nothing because nobody wants to abide by a deal which has been imposed. It has to
be negotiated in good faith and um the
the current administration in the US tends to make deals. I mean it's it
reminds me the uh the Godfather you know the movie they make proposal you can't
refuse. This is uh this is that this is mafia
like uh deals. So and that's exactly what we had with the European Union just
days ago. It's exactly that. You know, I increase the tariffs and um you don't
want that. Okay, we negotiate, I reduce the tariffs and in addition you give me that. So, you know, this is this is
simply mafial like deals and that's exactly how the current
administration deals with crisis in um in they they tried to to solve the
crisis in Palestine, in Iran and in Ukraine and it failed in in all the
three cases and Iranians have said no I mean you cannot impose us uh we are
ready to negotiate we are ready to to discuss us, but we don't want an imposed
uh deal, you know, and we have exactly the same thing with the Hamas, and we have exactly the same thing with with
uh with the Russians, and that's why Trump is disappointed by Vladimir Putin.
But it's clear, you know, he he comes with the idea that he's the strongest.
There's nothing better than the United States, nothing bigger, nothing stronger, nothing nothing most effective
than the US. Therefore, why would the other refuse the uh a deal? The problem
is that in none of this conflict, none of them, neither in Palestine nor in um
in Iran nor in Ukraine, US has a leverage against the
Palestinians, the Iranians and the Russians has no leverage. Therefore now all these these
areas and that that is the expression of this context that has changed and I
mentioned that before this changing conflict make that today the west has no
longer the leverage it used to have for this region and uh that it could use in
order to impose a solution. Today it's no longer the case. It cannot impose it.
And the problem is that the west has not understood that they have not understood
that they don't they are no longer the ones who can decide for the others. And
if they want to solve a problem, they have to talk to other but not just talking by unilaterally to have a
dialogue. Dialogue you have the word die that means two. You know a dialogue is
with two people and uh so and the dialogue means that basically
you should both sides should at the end of the day find their interests in the
deal not just one and uh that's that's exactly the problem
we have with the current administration. This is a key factor because as we see
and it's interesting to see that in all the three conflict or three crisis
nobody tries even tries to find a solution uh through the European
diplomacy. There's not even an attempt to involve the the European diplomacy.
As you talk about negotiation, try to find a solution.
Everybody looks at the US. It's fascinating for all the three
countries. I mean, for Iran, it's it's a little bit different because it has more a bilateral dimension because obviously
there was a bilateral issue between the US and Iran. Therefore, it's obvious that the US might be,
let's say, an actor in this dialogue. But when it comes to Palestine,
there is no fundamental reason for having the US. You might well well have
other actors, European actors, uh, Asian actors, Middle Eastern actors,
uh, and and the same in Ukraine. Basically there is no specific reason
although here also the the US has a specific issue with Russia uh yes with
Russia and and even Marco Rubio said that the conflict was a proxy war
basically between the US and Russia. Therefore that makes the involvement of
the US more or less natural. But even though uh we might have other
actors uh um in in the game but it's not the case. I mean Europe is definitely
absent from every diplomatic initiative. There is not a single action that has
been decided by the European Union or even more no single action acted uh uh
done by the um by the European Union. So it's tragic and and again everybody
relies on the US. So the US might be the key for everything but the administration is not in an intellectual
position in a political position to solve the problem. In fact they in most
case part of the problem. I think that's one of the challenges of our time that is to rediscover
diplomacy. I think um this is something we lost after the cold war in the
hegemonic era again why multilateralism doesn't tend to thrive when there's only
one central power you do end up with situations where one side dictates and I
think uh this mentality is one of the real challenges as we're readjusting back to a multipolar world when the US
and its allies can't impose uh its dictatouts anymore Um, anyways, uh,
Colonel, thank you so much for your time. I think I already went a bit over time, so thank you so much. I appreciate
it. It was my pleasure. Thank you very much for inviting me. Thank you.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Ga

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2025 11:54 pm

Trump’s Epstein Furor Grows as MAGA Karens MTG and Boebert Demand Answers | The Daily Show
The Daily Show
Jul 24, 2025 #JoshJohnson #Epstein #DailyShow

Josh Johnson covers the aftermath of revelations that Trump knew he was on the Epstein list: Pam Bondi bails on her CPAC appearance, videos connecting Epstein to Trump surface, and everyone in the MAGA-verse, from GOP lawmakers to the QAnon Shaman, want answers. #DailyShow #JoshJohnson #Trump #Epstein



Transcript

Jeffrey Epstein died back in 2019,
but not since Tupac Shakur has a dead man
dropped so many bangers, all right?
[LAUGHTER]
Yesterday, video of the government
questioning him back in 2010 started making the rounds.
And you'll never guess whose name came up.
Go ahead.
Guess.
I'm going to put that down--
[BOOING]
--I'm going to put that down as a yes?
[LAUGHTER]
I'll be honest, I've never heard anybody plead anything
other than the fifth before.
But this guy is so guilty, he's calling out every Amendment
he can think of.
Like, no, no, no, what's the one with the women voting?
Uh, 19-- throw that in too.
Now, this video is dropping less than
a day since we found out Pam Bondi reportedly warned
Trump back in May that his name was in the files
multiple times.
And it just so happens her next appearance
was scheduled last night at a summit
against human trafficking.
Pam, show us what you got.
I do have a note from the attorney general,
from Attorney General Pam Bondi that I wanted to share.
I'm sorry to miss all of my CPAC friends today.
Unfortunately, I am recovering from a recently
torn cornea, which is preventing
me from being with you.
Damn.
Even Pam Bondi's cornea is like,
release the Epstein files, or I quit.
[LAUGHTER]
I don't even understand this.
Like, why does her cornea mean she can't talk?
Like, I don't know a lot about women's bodies,
and this is embarrassing to ask.
But is the cornea in the throat?
[LAUGHTER]
Like, the only member of the Trump administration
that I would believe has an eye injury
is FBI Director Kash Patel.
[LAUGHTER]
[APPLAUSE]
I can't tell if that man is blind or can see the future.
[LAUGHTER]
He always looks like he just saw the Epstein files.
[LAUGHTER]
[CHEERING]
But yeah, a lot of people were suspicious about this excuse,
because now everything is being viewed within the context
of the Epstein story.
So Bondi skipping a panel on sex trafficking was bad timing.
And speaking of bad timing--
Roy Black, a prominent criminal defense attorney
who defended Epstein, passed away on Monday
at the age of 80.
Yes, yes.
Epstein's lawyer died.
But don't we all?
[LAUGHTER]
That man was 80.
That's a very normal age to be pushed into an oncoming train,
all right?
Well, no matter what the reason was,
Epstein's lawyer dying just looks bad.
He had his whole life to die, and he choose now?
That's inconsiderate.
Because of all this, Trump has lost total control
of the situation.
Even his allies in Congress are turning on him.
REPORTER: In an effort to gain clarity,
three Republicans joined Democrats on the House
Oversight Committee to subpoena the Justice
Department to give Congress all of the Epstein files.
This fight's coming, no matter--
I mean, this is here.
And I'm ready to take this vote.
I think we should take this vote
and move forward, move this country forward.
And people deserve transparency.
Nancy Mace, damn.
Trump is even losing the white women, which
is great because it means we're getting the white women
and we're getting those files, all right?
This feels like when you're at the airport,
and Southwest has delayed you for 23 hours.
You're standing in line at customer service,
and there's a white woman in line in front of you,
bubbling harder than prosecco.
[LAUGHTER]
She's even doing the, like--
ugh.
[SPLUTTERING]
[LAUGHTER]
And then she turns to you and says,
I'm going to say something.
And you're like, yes, yes.
Yes, white lady.
Go up there and get that manager for all of us.
All right?
And it's not just Nancy Mace.
This is an issue across the entire Karen American community
all, right?
Marjorie Taylor Greene wants the files.
Lauren Boebert wants a special counsel.
She's like, I came to Washington to expose pedophiles
and jack people off.
[LAUGHTER]
And I'm fresh out of people to jack off.
[APPLAUSE]
Now-- now, it may be surprising that some
of the most die-hard congressmen
are going against Trump on this.
But you have to remember that they ultimately
just want to be reelected.
And right now, their voters are absolutely losing
it over this Epstein thing.
How much are your constituents
clamoring for more information about Epstein right now?
It's the number one phone call that we get by far.
It's probably 500 to 1.
500 to 1?
Yeah.
It's number one phone calls that we get.
I'm sorry, 500 to 1?
I want to know about Epstein files, but that is wild.
That means people are calling in 500 times
about Jeffrey Epstein for every one caller
who's just like, hey, uh, my tap water poison.
[LAUGHTER]
And I could understand it if everything else in your state
is going fine.
But this congressman's from Missouri, OK?
They have real problems, but they're
using all their Boost Mobile minutes on this thing.
I'll talk to my kids next month.
This Epstein thing is too important.
And worst of all for Trump, it's
not just his allies in Congress or conservative Americans.
He's pissed off his most important base of support--
crazy-ass lunatics.
REPORTER: Jacob Chansley, the QAnon shaman
who became famous for his horned outfit
during the January 6 Capitol riot,
is lashing out at the man who gave him a pardon.
Chansley called the president a fraud.
[CHEERING]
Like, wow.
Do you know how down bad you are
when the guys who went to prison for you
are turning on you?
Like, I need to stress this real quick.
He went to jail for Trump.
This would be like if Nelson Mandela
came out of prison like, (IMITATING NELSON MANDELA)
you know what?
I'm done with Black people.
[LAUGHTER]
(IN REGULAR VOICE) Hey.
These guys believe in everything but you.
Take a look.
REPORTER: He also suggested that the president
had defiled a corpse.
Billionaire Elon Musk wasn't spared either,
with Chansley describing the world's
richest man as a baby eater.
[LAUGHTER]
This-- this is so, so bad.
That's the thing about QAnon.
Like, if Kendrick Lamar wanted to ruin your life,
at least he'd do a bunch of research
on you and your family.
QAnon just comes out and says you're eating spines.
And there's no way for you to prove you don't eat spines.
In fact, every time you've got something between your teeth,
they're like, see, see?
He flossing babies.
[LAUGHTER]
At this point, forget about excuses.
Trump is going to need psychoactive drugs to get
people's minds off Epstein.
And luckily, he has one.
NARRATOR: Are you depressed over the missing Epstein files?
Is the increasing suspicion that the president is part
of a vast sex-trafficking conspiracy
keeping you awake at night?
Then you need Ozempstein.
It's the revolutionary new drug from the Trump administration
that suppresses the body's natural urge to want to know
more about Jeffrey Epstein.
Before Ozempstein, I would constantly ask myself,
why are Trump and Jeffrey Epstein in so many
pictures together?
But now I'm good.
[LAUGHTER]
NARRATOR: Ozempstein's powerful mix of untested stimulants
reduce your body's skepticism of whatever
Trump officials say.
So you'll go from this--
I think the DOJ should immediately move to unseal
all the Epstein documents.
NARRATOR: --to this.
Honestly, I'm done talking about Epstein
for the time being.
If you find yourself craving transparency,
reach for the Ozempstein.
And in minutes, you'll lose your suspicions so you can
get back to living your life.
Side effects include brain damage and that thing that's
happening to Trump's ankles.
Thanks to Epstein, I don't care that Trump signed
Epstein's birthday card with a drawing
of a woman's pubic hair.
But why would he if he wasn't--
oh my god, I need another dose.
Where is it? Where is it?
Hurry, hurry.
I'm starting to wonder about that missing
minute of prison footage.
It's too suspicious.
NARRATOR: Ozempstein.
Oh, god.
[GRUNTS]

**********************************

J6 Pardon Recipient ‘QAnon Shaman’ Turns on ‘Fraud’ Trump: ‘F*ck This Stupid Piece of Sh*t’
by Charlie Nash
Mediaite
Jul 24th, 2025, 6:26 am
https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/j6- ... ce-of-sht/

Image
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

January 6 pardon recipient Jake Chansley, better known in the media and online as the “QAnon Shaman,” lashed out at President Donald Trump this week in a series of posts calling Trump a “piece of shit” and a necrophile.

Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Fuck this stupid piece of shit...
What a fraud...
11:40 AM · Jul 23, 2025


“Fuck this stupid piece of shit… What a fraud…” Chansley wrote in response to a post of Trump’s famous mugshot on Wednesday.

Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Fuck this stupid piece of shit...
What a fraud...
11:40 AM · Jul 23, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Oh yeah & Fuck Israel!
And Fuck Donald Trump!
10:21 AM · Jul 23, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
What do you think Epstein & Isreal have on Trump???
2:22 PM · Jul 23, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Listen to me...
What if I told EVERYONE ON THE INTERNET that Donald Trump fucked a corpse to get his billions of dollars...
Would you believe me???
I told you about how he contacted me after J6 & about how he is simping for Israel...
When I was in Austin Texas I was approached by someone from the Trump camp...This person & a few others and I went to get food at a restaurant & converse...
In this location this member from the Trump camp INDIRECTLY threatened me...he looked me in the eye...& said something pertaining to the economy & the tarrifs & then he pointed his 2 fingers like a gun at my forehead & said "Trump just said let's shoot the fuckin hostage and be done with it."
OR something to that effect...
Now I have been refusing to cooperate with the Trump administration & i blew the whistle on how they are a shill for Israel as many of you all well know by now...
So...witin minutes after this threat on my life was made...I sent myself this text message to my email address...just in case I was killed there would be record of the threat being made that night & who I was with...
I knew that the Trump admin had my phone tapped so, they would likely see the message I sent myself...that was also an insurance policy...
Just like they see this message now...
READ THE WORDS IN THE IMAGE...
They are continuing to threaten me & my life...I am just letting you all know now...
THE TRUMP ADMIN IS NOT AN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT...I WAS WRONG....IT NEVER WAS...
IT WAS ALWAYS ISRAEL FIRST...
To you Israel & the Trump Admin...
Don't YOU ever FUCKING try to destroy me or hurt me, or those who I love EVER FUCKING AGAIN...


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Its time to play WHAT IF!
WHAT IF...in order for Trump to get BACK into the billionaire's club...he had to fuck a corpse AGAIN...
How Many Times Did Trump File For Bankruptcy?
THAT is YOUR President! NOT MINE!
I am the President of the New Constitutional Republic of the U.S.A.
2:21 PM · Jul 23, 2025


Chansley went on to suggest that the president had sex with a corpse, writing, “Its time to play WHAT IF! WHAT IF…in order for Trump to get BACK into the billionaire’s club…he had to fuck a corpse AGAIN… How Many Times Did Trump File For Bankruptcy? THAT is YOUR President! NOT MINE! I am the President of the New Constitutional Republic of the U.S.A.”

The QAnon Shaman previously accused Trump of having “fucked a corpse to get his billions of dollars…”

Image

Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Did Marco Rubio fuck a baby too?
7:18 AM · Jul 17, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Now!
TPUSA is a MOSSAD mask, designed to infiltrate the Christian community in America & align them with Israel & Epstein + his clients!
They have LARGE SEX TRAFFICKING RINGS that OBEDIENT SPIES get access to, they use CODE SYMBOLS AS WORDS TO COMMUNICATE!
Flower?
Hot dog?
NWDTM?
11:04 AM · Jul 13, 2025


Chansley also lashed out at several of Trump’s administration officials and allies, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, House Speaker Mike Johnson, Department of Justice official Harmeet Dhillon, Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA, diplomat Richard Grenell, and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

In a series of posts, Chansley implied Speaker Johnson was a cross-dresser and accused Grenell of practicing “Babylonian black magick” and using “psychic powers to control the minds” of “sex slaves.”

Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Yall got NO IDEA what is out there...
But I do
The Truth can be a Punch or a Punchline...
Can you see it now???
11:10 AM · Jul 7, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
You are so full of shit...
You're a fuckin disgrace...
We both know why too... "General"
6:17 PM · Jul 23, 2025


Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Rick Grinnell & His Black Magick Faggot Shit
Alright, so when I heard about who Rick Grinnell was & the decisions he told TRUMP to make...I knew he was a man worth watching...Though, I did not spend time listening to him in his interviews...I spent time with RICK...(burp)quantum entanglement...
First of all...
YES as far as I can tell, dude is into Talmudian/Babylonian black magick faggot shit...
Homosexual orgies are his cup of tea as far as I can tell, but he has connections elsewhere & can pretty much get you whatever you want...I believe he is even behind some of the child sex trafficking rings as well, cuz he is MOSSAD...maybe I'm wrong...but I don't think so...while he believes that facilitation is NOT participation...blood is on those hands...ain't it Rickey??? NWDTM??? Only a select group of people know what that means...don't we Rick? You didn't know that I KNEW...but yeah...I was there for your vows too amigo...lol fuck you think??? You think I didn't know...I was just waiting for the right time dude...Intel is EVERYTHING Rickey...and what makes intel powerful is time being used as leverage...
Now, Rickey here...was the one who told Trump NOT to release the JFK file in his first admin...RICKEY here is ALSO responsible for MUCH of the cold hearted abuses that I HAVE SUFFERED...lol oh rick...you fucked up brah...
So, allow me to break this down for y'all in a way that is easy to understand & can then be expanded onto every other country in the world...cuz what was done here in the USA is what was done in every other nation on the planet...
People like Rick here are like psychic vampires, they have extremely sophisticated psychic genetics that have been passed down to them from their ancestors who have been practicing this black magick shit in secret for centuries...
NOW...I know this because my mind is beyond space & time & I can see him for what he is in the higher dimensions...
Ya see...
Psychic vampires like Rick prey on the men (or women) that they like & they use their psychic powers to control the minds of those they wish to turn into their mind controlled sex slaves, they have the ability to bite people and inject them with venom that allows those subjected to the venom to become under a hypnotic spell of sorts that attaches the bitten to the biter...
Image
As time goes on they accumulates more & more people to be a part of the bitten NETWORK of black magick faggot shit...where they do homosexual rituals invovling pentagrams, sigils, candles, demonic possession, pedophilia, blood letting, blood drinking, intoxicants of every kind, sacrifices & of course worshipping Saturn/Satan/Lucifer/Draco/ai...
A lot that goes into it...they are litterally summoning demons for possession or in some cases to be set lose in the world to possess the bodies of others & cause chaos...y'all got no idea...
Anyway...
I advised the "president" to take EVERYTHING Grinnell said with a grain of salt if I recall correctly...I ALSO told the "president" that Grinnell was spending a lot of time with Kash Patel & Abe Hamadeh...GOT EM...
Now...WDTM? Well I also told the "president" that I was well aware of the 3 of their...shall we say..."frolickings in Vegas"...as it were...lol and it was shortly after I told the "president" THAT...good old Kash Patel got himself a pretty young girlfriend...and she is HOT they sure now how to pick 'em huh? You guys got no idea lol the temptations I have said NO to for YOU! lol
MOVING ON...
About Abe...ya see I HAPPEN TO KNOW the UNDERAGE teenager Abe & his network of weirdos are trying to recruit/GROOM to "take Abe's spot in the congress" when "its time" for Abe to move on to bigger & better things in the corrupt republican government they thought they were gonna have...lol didn't count on a REAL ALPHA & OMEGA stepping up to the plate...did they???
NOW...IDK...and I am not gonna make a fuss HERE in THIS WAY...just YET...just leting ALL you MFs know I AM WATCHING YOU ALL VERY FUCKING CLOSELY!
Image
Spontaneous Combustion is REAL look into it...and look into the occult shite those people were into BEFORE they burst into flames...NWDTM????
NOW...
Rickey here has REALLY...shall we say "screwed the pooch" as it were...is that accurate Rickey? All that BS in the Middle East was YOUR baby...Yeah?
How does he know?
ALWAYS...
I think that perhaps this MOSSAD asset needs to be arrested IMMEDIATELY!
Because...THAT IS ALL OF MY FUCKING BUSINESS!
Rick...never try to destroy a mind that you cannot understand...
9:05 AM · Jun 25, 2025


“People like Rick here are like psychic vampires, they have extremely sophisticated psychic genetics that have been passed down to them from their ancestors who have been practicing this black magick shit in secret for centuries,” wrote Chansley. “NOW…I know this because my mind is beyond space & time & I can see him for what he is in the higher dimensions…”

He also claimed Grenell possessed “the ability to bite people and inject them with venom that allows those subjected to the venom to become under a hypnotic spell,” and accused the Trump administration official of being part of a network “where they do homosexual rituals invovling [sic] pentagrams, sigils, candles, demonic possession, pedophilia, blood letting, blood drinking, intoxicants of every kind, sacrifices & of course worshipping Saturn/Satan/Lucifer/Draco/ai.”

Image
Jake Angeli-Chansley
@AmericaShaman
Fuck Elon Musk! That baby eating POS is as fake a Trump...
6:15 PM · Jul 23, 2025


Chansley also lashed out at Trump ally-turned-enemy Elon Musk, writing, “Fuck Elon Musk! That baby eating POS is as fake [as] Trump…”

Chansley became of the most famous participants in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riots after he was photographed with a fur hat, horns, and without a shirt. He was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his part in the incident before he was ultimately pardoned in January 2025 as Trump re-took office.

“I got a pardon baby! Thank you President Trump!” he wrote at the time. “Now I am gonna by (sic) some motha f***in guns!”

Last week, Trump was criticized by January 6 pardon recipient Owen Shroyer, who protested that Trump had “moved on from” his original supporters, before expressing concern over the president’s health.

Trump also received criticism from Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, who also had his January 6-related sentence commuted by Trump in January.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37775
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to United States Government Crime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests