July 18, 2024 • 35 mins
In this episode, Lisa interviews Jonathan Gilliam, a former Navy SEAL and FBI agent, about the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump on July 13th. They discuss the failures of the Secret Service and law enforcement in preventing the attack. Gilliam provides insights from his experience, emphasizing the need for well-trained and vigilant security personnel. The conversation also explores the lack of social media presence of the shooter, the timing of the Iranian threat assessment, and broader issues of distrust in governance and accountability within law enforcement and government agencies. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday & Thursday.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
What the hell happened on July thirteenth?
Speaker 2 (00:04):
How did a twenty year old outsmart the Secret Service,
an agency that is supposed to protect commanders in chief,
the most powerful men, not just in the United States
but in the entire world. How did a twenty year
old outsmart them? What the hell happened? Also, we know
that it's been reported that he was seen and known
by law enforcement earlier in the day. He was seen
(00:26):
with a rangefinder, which is used for long distance shots.
So how did he get those shots off at six '
eleven pm? Was that not concerning enough to stop? And
what does a Secret Service have to say about it?
The Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheedle blamed a sloped roof
for the security failure, But we've seen images of snipers
on a sloped roof behind the former president's podium, So
(00:48):
why is she lying to us?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Now?
Speaker 2 (00:50):
We're hearing about this Iranian threat to President Trump, even
though we've known about a threat since January twenty twenty,
when the former president took out Castam Solomoni.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
So why are we hearing about it now?
Speaker 2 (01:03):
We've got so many questions, very few answers, and we're
going to get those answers from a guy named Jonathan Gilliam.
Jonathan is a former Navy sealer. You know, I guess,
once a steal, always a seal, right, a former FBI agent,
host of the Experts podcast, and the best selling author
A Sheep no More. We're going to ask him to
merge those worlds that he has been living in and.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
Try to give us some answers.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Also want to know from him, what kind of developments
is he looking at moving forward, what is he paying
attention to? All that and more with Jonathan Gilliam, Stay tuned,
all right, So, Jonathan, you know, I think we're all
still assessing. You know, what happened on July thirteenth, a
(01:47):
massively historical moment, you know, the former attempted assassinate or
the attempted assassination of a former president Donald Trump. You know,
with your Steel background and the FBI background, you know,
how the hell did this happen?
Speaker 4 (02:00):
Well, I'm glad you brought up my backgrounds because the
two different backgrounds they're similar as far as the tactics go.
But and the honor and integrity that you would think
would get you into that job. But the big difference
between those two is that as a seal we are
we're trained as attackers, so that's our job is to attack.
(02:22):
We also do protection details and we're very very good
at it because we look.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
At things from the attackers point of view.
Speaker 4 (02:32):
And so when I went into law enforcement, I actually
started as a cop and then in Arkansas and then
went into the seal teams, and then from there I
was a Federal Air Marshal, So I was flying undercover
on planes for a year and then went from there
to contracting where I led a course called the Soft
(02:56):
Target Awareness Training, which is where I went all over
the country and teaching high value targets schools, malls, tall building,
stadiums and arenas how to look at themselves from an
attackers point of view. So even when I was an
air marshal, I was still looking at things from the
attackers point of view. If somebody got up and tried
(03:16):
to take over one of those planes, my job was
to attack them. So then when I went into the
FBI and started investigating, I became a hunter. We hunted,
you know, criminals on the Asian Organized Crime Squad. And
then when I transitioned into the soft target or excuse me,
(03:38):
the Special Events Unit, where I was the coordinator for that.
What I became then was the defender and I had
to teach again, just like when I was a contractor,
to teach these private sectors how to look at themselves
from the attackers point of view and then defend against that.
(03:58):
But my job was to go out there and look
at everything, do the threat assessments, do the advances, and
then come back and write an operations order so that
the FBI could put their resources in those areas, similar
to what the Secret Service does, but we weren't protecting anyone.
We were putting our resources out there to try to
(04:19):
find people that were going to do wrong or ways
to act and have a plan to act if something occurred.
So when you put all that together, the Secret Service
should be trained in a very similar fashion. And when
I was in college working at a hotel, all the
Secret Service agents that work for Clinton were coming in there,
(04:43):
and I was fascinated by them because they were all
like six foot five, former military, very athletic, and very aggressive.
They got Clinton is an incredible runner, believe it or not.
Most people didn't know that about him, but Secret Service
had to run six seven miles a day at a
six minute mile pace. So they were tremendous athletic and huge.
(05:06):
And so we didn't even know what DEI was back then.
And so as I got in the military and then
the FBI, I started to seeing the FBI this thing
that was happening where the recruitment was absolutely crazy. You
would have an operator like myself sitting next to somebody
(05:26):
who was an attorney, that makes sense, or somebody who
was an accountant, that makes sense, But then there were
all these other people that they just they had checked
boxes and they got it seemed like special privileges to
get in there.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
And I saw that.
Speaker 4 (05:42):
More and more to the point where I ended up
getting out of the FBI and starting my own company.
And now we see that full circle. So and the
reason I'm telling you all this is because this is
what occurred last Saturday, is that it was a culmination.
I believe we see it in the FBI, but it's
hard to pinpoint that because the FBI does investigations behind
(06:03):
the scenes. What the Secret Service does is in plain
sight of everyone, and typically nothing happens, right, So they
put a presence out there. They have a tremendous amount
of assets in that location that are very visible, some
that are not. And what happened on Saturday was that
the tactics, the procedures, the threat assessments, the advances that
(06:31):
they did, the interaction with law enforcement, and then the
time on target when the actual attack happened on the
president and that actual venue, the time on target to
get the principle, which was Trump from where he went
down into that vehicle. If he had had a sucking
(06:53):
chest wound or an artery in his leg or arm
that had been hit, he could have bled out by
the time they got him to that vehicle and not
put a tourniquet on that.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
So that's how long they took.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
And I've heard all these Secret Service agents on television,
former Secret Service agents talking about how they did a
great job there. But when you look at the totality
of the failures of that day, they started with the hiring,
the recruiting, and then putting those people in on the
job and then promoting them through the ranks. And so
(07:29):
you saw this meeting of the unright minds on that
day that allowed this to occur, and then when it
did occur, a complete breakdown in movement of the team
of the individual's total loss of what they were supposed
to do, as you could tell people that were not
(07:49):
fit either physically fit or height wise to protect this
particular individual, Donald Trump. And so I think if you
take all that that I just told you and you
relate that to Uvaldi, you'll see the same exact thing
happened in Uvaldi. It wasn't necessarily dei hires, but the
(08:11):
lower end standards because of the one common denominator in
all this, the left, leftists in government and in governments
around the country have deluded, degraded law enforcement to a
point where if they do have big, strong, aggressive, controlled
aggression warriors that are out there, they're punished and the
(08:34):
weaker people who don't rock the boat are left in
and people who are dei hires rise to the top.
And so that's what you've seen in both of these instances. Yeah,
they're very similar.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
Well, you know, but I guess what it's hard for
Americans to wrap their mind around is, you know, I
get the comparison to Uvaldi, but you're you're also talking
about you know, local police. Obviously, here we're dealing with,
you know, the Secret Service protecting former commander, a former commander,
you know, in chief, one of the most powerful men
of Republican nominee to be President of the United States.
(09:06):
So you know, you would think on a different level
we wouldn't be seeing similar breakdowns. And then you know,
I know you had mentioned sort of the the afterpart,
the slowness to get him into the car and to
get him out of the area and get him in a
more controlled environment. But even previously before that, I mean,
he was photographer. The shooter was photographed by the Secret
Service at least an hour before the attack. Reportedly, a
(09:28):
suspicious person was spotted at five forty one PM with
a rangefinder, which of course you know is used for
long distance shots, right.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
And then the shots happened at six eleven PM.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So that's a lot of time between all of that
where this guy could have been stopped wasn't stopped.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
So you know, I mean, how do they how do
they get that that wrong?
Speaker 4 (09:49):
Well, I know it sounds different that state local or
local state and federal law enforcement would be so different,
but they're actually very similar and they all suffer from
the same but they're there. This this controlled, aggressive, in shape,
large individual is what should be doing that job is
(10:13):
the same with a firefighter. If you know, if your
house is on fire or your apartment and you live
thirty floors up, do you expect somebody a man or woman.
I'm gonna even leave the female part out of this,
but somebody who was hired based on fairness. Do you
want somebody who's hired on fairness coming to try to rescue?
Do you want somebody who is the best of the
best coming there? And so that best of the best
(10:33):
in all aspects of this has been pushed out. The
reason I keep bringing subleaks is that the failures that
we saw, including the range finder, not taking that seriously,
not having good communications with law enforcement when the advance
was done, to put people on those roots or even
their own counter snipers on those roofs, to include people
(10:56):
who are of the right caliber to protect this large man,
and to not employ new and upgraded tactics like a
podium that is bulletproof. They don't use these bulletproof podiums
for some reason when they go out and speak in public.
So every failure that you see there is a culmination
(11:18):
of a long time coming, of this degradation of law
enforcement that has crept into local it's crept into the FBI,
it's crept into the Secret Service, to a point where
even the individuals that were with Trump inside the RNC
conference this week, they're bigger and they have more of
(11:41):
a presence. But if they're moving at the pace, and
so many of them have praised what they did after
the action took place, the shooting took place last Saturday,
if they move at that pace and any of their
protectees sustain a shot that is significant, they're going to
(12:01):
And so I think when we look at the thread assessment,
taking all these things into account, the threat assessment that
they did when they do their advance, they for some
reason did not look at the totality of the circumstances
and asked the question if a shooter could access that roof.
(12:22):
And if they did ask that question, they decided to
put law enforcement over there, or they said that's a
private company.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Well that doesn't stop.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
As you can see that old saying, if you want
to hide from the police, sell pencils in the.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Police parking lot.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
Apparently it's true because this guy was able to go
in show them at a range finder. They for some
reason didn't think that was odd enough to kick him
out and then he went in, came back out and
then walked over there and gone on the roof, and
whether he had a ladder or climbed up the air
conditioner unit, which they're saying, the fact is it was
(12:58):
a complete breakdown from the the top of the Secret
Service down to the person who did the advance, the
way the teams function together, and the local law enforcement
who became completely complacent that even they because this is
what happens when you put when you put one law
enforcement agency that has been affected by this and their
(13:19):
standards are low, and you put them in charge, the
other law enforcement agents around there will only reach to
their standard. It's not like they're going to go over
their standard typically and do their own threat assessment put
their own people on the roof.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
If it's not important to.
Speaker 4 (13:34):
The primary investigative or protective agency, it's not going to
be important to the other law enforcement agencies.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
I don't agree with that, but that's the way it
seems to work out.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
We've got a quick commercial break more with Jonathan on
the other side. I guess we're saying, now he cut
the law I have of LA Enforcement around three pm
that they obviously will continue to learn more about this.
It's obviously developing story. You know, I guess the reason
why people are so suspicious of the information we're being also,
(14:06):
you know, the lack of social media presence of this guy.
And then even beyond that, you know, we've got a
government who, you know, the FBI weaponized an internet rumor
against Donald Trump previously with the Russia collusion hoax. We've
got a government where former CIA directors lied to us
and told this hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation when
it was in fact the truth.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
And we have.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Democrats in Congress who recently sought to remove Donald Trump's
security detail, and you know, and a president who just
said Joe Biden should be caught in a bulls eye,
So Joe Biden saying President Trump should be caught in
a bulls eye. So you know, I mean there's a
healthy distrust there, and you know, and it's warranted, right,
and it's to their governments to blame for it.
Speaker 3 (14:48):
Yeah, I mean, look what they did.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
They the FBI took part in creating or handling made
up evidence in the Russian collusion issue and then took
that with not even vetting it or at least they
said they didn't vet it. That was their excuse. I
think they knew exactly where it came from. They took
it to a PHISA judge, which the FBI is an
entire unit that goes through and scrubs the stuff to
(15:11):
make sure it's verified before they go to a PHISA judge.
Because it's in secret, it has to be scrubbed right,
because the overwatch is not there that there would be
in a regular criminal court. So that unit failed somehow.
The PISA judge failed somehow. But when you look at
who was handling those things, it was very specific individuals that,
(15:35):
as we see now over a period of time, are
really a part of the collusion or the conspiracy to
basically overthrow the constitution in this country. And so when
you take that and you apply that to the Secret Service,
as an investigator, I can't rule out that a conspiracy
did not take place that day, that that kid was
(15:58):
somehow connected and they grubbed everything for him. I can't
unless I see proof that that absolutely did not happen,
then I have to at least keep that on the burner,
and well.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
Then that's what that's what an investigator does.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Go ahead you know, and it was reported too that
he tried out for the varsity rifle team, didn't make
it because he's a bad shooter.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
It's just there's just.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
A lot of weird And then now we're hearing, you know,
this Iranian threat assessment of an attempted assassination against you know,
the former president, when we've kind of known that this
was a possibility since Donald Trump took out Castam Solomoney
in January twenty twenty. I mean, this has been kind
of in the public circulating that Iran is wanted to
(16:42):
seek vengeance and revenge for that taking place. It's like,
why why are we hearing about that now? It just
seems like strange timing considering that this has already been
part of the broader public conversation.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
It's very similar to nine to eleven. You know, there
were threats before nine to eleven. Nothing changed. They just
sat on the information because because the government and law
enforcement in general has this strange love for the term
no known threat, right, So they get a general threat
and they know that somebody may be planning something, but
(17:14):
there's no specific threat to this particular event, and so
they say in the briefs there's no known threat, and
I try to get that eliminated from all the briefs
that I gave. I would always say we don't know
of a threat, but it doesn't mean there's not one,
so that you should be showing up today considering that
something will happen, and that is clearly not the case
(17:37):
for what happened this past weekend. But with conspiracies, the
problem with that is is you have a little bit
of information, credible information. The FBI was crooked, the EI
has crushed everything. The evidence that we see with the
Secret Service was so bad in their tactics and structure
and the threat assessments. So we have that evidence. But
(17:59):
what people do is they take that and based on
their uneducated opinion, they will create or even their educated opinion.
They may say this is through history, this is what's
occurred when that occurs, but they create. So that's twenty
percent of the pie. They create the other eighty percent
without knowing facts or any type of sources that can
(18:20):
be verified. So that's the worry about conspiracies is that
the American people will get tied up online arguing about
this instead of saying we demand THEI not be a
part of anything anymore and stand up to the government,
and so we get pulled off to the side. So conspiracies,
(18:41):
to me, the way they come about at these particular
times after these events, they really do resemble clickbait or
reverse propaganda where the left would create certain things to
get the right spun up.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
They do that.
Speaker 4 (18:58):
They handle us very well when it comes to propaganda
and spinning the conservatives up in this country. But I
think what we need to look at is getting the
overall picture of what occurred in how that threat assessment.
It all goes back to that threat assessment, so we
can completely eliminate for the conversation what happened after the
(19:22):
shot was taken. If we look at what happened before
the shot was taken, that there is a complete breakdown
in that threat assessment, and that involves local law enforcement.
So that's why the conspiracy part kind of as far
as with the Secret Service, that part kind of dies
for me because.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Local law enforcement was involved.
Speaker 4 (19:42):
They showed the same complacency, and we're talking about, you know,
fifty different individuals from multiple different law enforcement agencies all
showing the same complacency where they got locked inside a
fence and couldn't even get they even have that plan
that they may need an exit to a fence or
putting that fence around those buildings so that complacency kills
(20:04):
and I think that's what it did on Saturday. But
there are a couple things I would say three big
things that from me are standouts other than what the
failures of the Secret Service and law enforcement were. One
is the Iranian threat. Two is this report that I
just saw from one of the students that went to
(20:26):
school with him. And again you have to take those
witness reports with a grain of assault. But he said
that the guy was he wasn't as quiet as what
they make came out to be. He was he was
pretty quiet and even kill but when it came to
math or politics, he was very outspoken and somewhat snobby, right,
(20:46):
So that says a lot more. And then he said
he was a part of a group of a small group,
a secretive group of kids that talked a lot about
I think it was it was assassinations, but a lot
about overthrowing the politicians of the government.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
The third thing is.
Speaker 4 (21:08):
The fact that the father called law enforcement that day
and said his gun was missing. Now, I grew up
in a house with guns and rifles, and everybody I
grew up with had rifles in their home, and all
the kids were taught how to shoot at a young age.
It sounds like the shooter's father and him had a
(21:28):
relationship that did exist around a range where they went
and shot, and around this particular gun. So why was
his father so alarmed when that gun was missing that
he called law enforcement? Because the first thing I would
think is, well, he must have gone shooting without me.
I'm have to give him a call, right, But he
didn't do that. He didn't call his son. He called
(21:48):
law enforcement and said this gun was missing. So I
think there's more to this young man than we've been told.
I think there's probably some mental issues there, even potentially
from birth. And I think that there may be a
group of people, if that one witness is correct, If
there is a conspiracy, it might be between those those individuals,
(22:12):
and if those individuals had contact with Iran or anybody
inside the government, that would take it to another level.
But I think there's there's a couple of things right
there in particular that stand out beyond the Secret Service involvement.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I mean, I'd be less willing to engage in conspiracy
theories if they have not been so true.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
For short years, you know, like they've lied.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
About pretty much everything, and you know, the you know,
conservative conspiracy theorists have been right about you know, a lot,
and you know throughout these these years, and again we're
so there's not been a lot of time passed since
July thirteenth, so you know, there really isn't much to
speculate yet about as we learn more. You know, we
don't know motive yet in you know, parentheses. Obviously I
(23:01):
can't do that because we're not visual right now, we're audio.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
How much does a motive matter?
Speaker 2 (23:06):
I mean, this guy has been told throughout a lot
of his life, he's only twenty years old, that you know,
Trump is hitler and that he is a little threat
to democracy, that he should be put in a bull's eye.
I mean, how much does a motive matter in these
types of things?
Speaker 3 (23:23):
Well, when we look at how it occurred, that.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Finding out that, you know, finding the motive.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
I think it's important to separate the how from the why,
and the how it occurred is because of incompetence and
and just overall breakdown of how law enforcement does a
job what you talked about. But the why is important
because we want to understand how this individual was pushed
to this level. But you also want to understand and
(23:51):
find out if he was associated with other people, and
that's going to come from the why.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
So was this individual.
Speaker 4 (24:02):
Groomed brainwashed from the rhetoric that we hear consistently. I
think it's safe to say if you've seen prisoners of war,
for instance, who are told the same thing over and
over and over again, after a while, they begin to
believe that that's truth. You go to communist countries where
it is a closed society and they're not able to
(24:23):
be influenced by outside societies. They can tell them anything.
They can tell them that their leader is a god,
they can tell they can take even in this day
and age, they could take the teaching of solar eclipses
out of the classroom, and then they could convince a
certain portion of the country that they're going to predict
(24:47):
that the president can predict an eclipse, and then when
it happens, they can because they will know about it.
They say it's tomorrow, I'm going to turn the sun black. Right, So,
if you say these things and over and over again.
You know this, You're in communication, so you know how
this works. You say something over and over again, people
are going to start to believe it, and then you
(25:08):
keep the division up, they're going to pick sides. And
so when you have an individual like this that says
what he said, it follows exactly along the lines of
what the left preaches every day, day and out on
day in and day out online in media right, they
say these things the exact verbiage he used. Could he
(25:31):
have come up with that verbiage on his own through
critical thinking, I guess he could, But most likely he
gained that verbiage, exact verbiage from hearing it over and
over and over again and developing this fixation of Hitler
and Trump and politicians in general. It sounded like he
didn't like politicians at all, but this anti government type
(25:54):
of mentality. And nobody is bringing this up, but I
you know, he could have been influenced by the left,
but he also could have been influenced by libertarians and
never trumpers. They say the same thing all the time,
they just package it in a different sound bite and
they put it out there. And basically, I think what
(26:15):
we're seeing whether it's with school shootings that are carried
out by transgender confused or gender confused young men who've
been groomed all through school and told one thing that's
not the truth, but over and over and over again.
Or it's an individual who tries to take a shot
in the president. We have to look at what's being
(26:37):
said and look at their verbiage and see where that
comes from. I think motive is very important because people
are culpable of motivating people to do these things when
they go out there and lie it constantly and degrade
those who are trying to protect and uphold the Constitution.
And it seems like that's what the left always does.
(26:58):
And then libertarians just they don't like the person, then
they turn them into a villain.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
They say the same thing.
Speaker 4 (27:04):
So I think the motive is very important because it
helps us understand the why, and included in that why,
will be co conspirators if there are any.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Jonathan, when you were an evy seal, I guess you're
always an evy seal. But yeah, true, did a sloped
roof ever get in your way?
Speaker 3 (27:24):
Oh goodness? Not only that.
Speaker 4 (27:26):
I just responded to Elon Musks where you talk about
how that truck that he has has a sloped roof?
Speaker 3 (27:33):
What if it was inverted slope? Right?
Speaker 4 (27:35):
Could you ever get out of that? Is that like
a black hole? I mean, are you stuck once you
fall into an inverted slope?
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Quick break? More in trying to figure out what the
hell happened? What do you make of?
Speaker 3 (27:48):
I mean?
Speaker 1 (27:48):
The Secret Service director can really cheat old? This is
this is her excuse?
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Well, first of all, she says the buck stops of her,
but refuses to resign and has not been fired, which
she should be. But blame the sloped roof for the
security failure?
Speaker 4 (28:05):
Well, does she blame the sloped roof on the accurate
shot that the Secret Service counter sniper took. He was
on the exact slanted roof as the other one. The
other one was probably less slanted than the one that
they were on behind President Trump. So I think I
cannot believe the sound bites, Lisa, that come out of
(28:25):
these people at times where they and it's always on
the left. I mean, sometimes you get people on the
right to say ridiculous things, But to say that, to
say that it was because of slanted roof when there's
a video out there of counter snipers on a sloped
I should say sloped on a sloped roof is mind
(28:45):
bogglingly stupid and incompetent. And when you add to that
the vitriol that many in office, including Biden and staffers
and people from Hollywood, all these people who run in
the same circles, the vitriol that they say, it's mind
(29:06):
boggling to know that many of these people are either
influencers of anyone or leaders in our country. And I
use that word very lightly, but in position of leadership
in this nation, and just.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
Know accountability whatsoever. And when we still know accountability after Afghanistan,
She's not big fired, My orcus is still there. I mean,
the left is the only place where you can fail upwards,
you know, like Republicans believe in the accountability and and firing.
And you know Trump did, he fired everyone, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
Yeah, but Trump?
Speaker 4 (29:37):
And who I am a huge Trump supporter and I've
always been his supporter. I was probably the first person
in the media when I was hosting Sean Hannity's radio
show for him, that came out in support of Trump
because he was operationally proven and he had failed. And
then came back and did a better job, and I
hope the failures that he had in his first presidency
(30:00):
when he wins this election, that he will correct those.
And one of those failures was listening to the Washington
d C satellites that orbit constantly, the bill bars, the
Chris Christie's who got Chris Fay in? You know, these
individuals that come there that have been a part of
government for the longest time and made it into the
(30:21):
highest ranks. Those are not the people you need advising
and helping the president lead this country. You need warfighters,
You need people who are not just been in the trenches,
but people who are in the trenches, and bring them
out and let them take over these agencies, show and
rededicate themselves in loyalty to their country. So what's interesting
(30:46):
about the reason I even got into that is that
you were absolutely right. There's no accountability and no repercussions
for anything the left does because the left owns the government.
They may not have the majority in Congress, but they
own it because they are unified, and the Conservatives or
the Republicans are not unified. So you can take a
smaller unified group and walk all over the non unified group.
(31:11):
Even if you don't have the majority, and that's what occurs.
So when we look at all these different issues, whether
it be the influence on the shooter, the lack of tactics,
and the breakdown of what occurred that allowed that shooting
to happen, the way things are degrading in this country,
every single and you can go through and look at
all this, Every single major issue that we have with
(31:35):
this nation at this time is because of the Democrat
Party and the leftists.
Speaker 3 (31:40):
Every single one is because of them.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
I agree, before we go, what are you looking? What
developments are you looking for? As the story moves toward
you know, what are you paying attention to? What should
people pay attention to?
Speaker 4 (31:56):
Well that first of all, you want to look and
hold the FBI cantle and if they're making press releases
like they did two days ago that say we haven't
found evidence for this, we don't think this, we don't
believe that this.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
Is the case.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
We don't need to know that. What they're doing right
there is what they always do. They are programming you
to expect nothing, And I don't want to know what
you haven't found. I want to know what you're looking for.
And then when you find it. You can come and
tell me. But I don't need to be groomed into
believing that, oh, it's just some simple guy that somehow
got on the roof, and you know, shame on the
(32:33):
Secret Service. I want to know what happened. I want
to know his motivation, who he was, why he did
the things, who he hung out with. And it's interesting
because if this was a white police officer that just
shot an armed or let's say the guy didn't have
a gun, but he was trying to run over cops
(32:53):
with a car and they shot and killed him, and
he was black, we would know everything about those cops.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
We would know everything.
Speaker 4 (32:59):
About that guy, the guy shot that was good, that
he was a young boy one time, and he has
a mom. You know, we would we would find out everything.
And I think what we're seeing here is that when
it comes to when the liberals are in charge, even
the stuff that we see from the FBI is not
reported or investigated correctly. And I think the American people
(33:22):
should keep a close watch.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
That's what I'm doing.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
I'm keeping a close watch on the verbiage that the
FBI uses, that the Secret Service uses, that the President uses.
I'm keeping close watch on that and then within there
potentially find details like these these two things about this
young young man that carried out the attack and the Iranians.
(33:44):
Those are details that we can now put on a
board and as things come out, we can connect and
see if those things connect. Instead of saying, well, I
think it has to do with the fact that the
government wants to kill Trump. Okay, there probably are plenty
of those people in the government, but were they they
We can put that over here as well, But don't make.
Speaker 3 (34:03):
That eighty percent of what you believe happen.
Speaker 4 (34:06):
Make it one of the top headlines on your board,
and then start collecting the evidence and that will lead
you to what happened.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
That's how I look at all these things.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
No, I agree, and that you know. That's what we
try to do on the show, is to get to
the truth of things. Johnathan really appreciate well, first of
all your service to the country, and then secondly, this
is super interesting. I learned so much from you, so
we'd love to have you back on. I want to
keep following the story because it just seems like, you know,
there's more to it.
Speaker 4 (34:31):
But anytime you know, you and I were on Bill
O'Reilly show, not together, but at the same same night
with Scaramucci. This was years ago, the only time I've
ever seen you at Fox, and I remember that night
so well because the dress or the green room was packed.
It was like, you know something, any Fox News fan
(34:51):
would go crazy. Kimberly Gilford was in there, You were
in there, Guttfeld was in there. And then Bill O'Reilly
walked in and close the curtain to get his hair done,
and I looked up and I was the only one
left there.
Speaker 2 (35:04):
He's such a he's such a care I but I
love on show a show. I did it every week
across from Wad Williams, and he was so funny.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
I liked him a lot. But Jonathan, thank you so much.
I really appreciate your time.
Speaker 3 (35:19):
This was awesome. Thank you.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
That was Jonathan Gilliam. I really appreciate him taking the
time to join the show. I thought he was very
interesting and I hope you did too. I also want
to thank you guys at home for listening every Monday
and Thursday, but you can listen throughout the week. I
want to think John Cassio and my producer were putting
the show together until next time.
What the hell happened on July thirteenth?
Speaker 2 (00:04):
How did a twenty year old outsmart the Secret Service,
an agency that is supposed to protect commanders in chief,
the most powerful men, not just in the United States
but in the entire world. How did a twenty year
old outsmart them? What the hell happened? Also, we know
that it's been reported that he was seen and known
by law enforcement earlier in the day. He was seen
(00:26):
with a rangefinder, which is used for long distance shots.
So how did he get those shots off at six '
eleven pm? Was that not concerning enough to stop? And
what does a Secret Service have to say about it?
The Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheedle blamed a sloped roof
for the security failure, But we've seen images of snipers
on a sloped roof behind the former president's podium, So
(00:48):
why is she lying to us?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Now?
Speaker 2 (00:50):
We're hearing about this Iranian threat to President Trump, even
though we've known about a threat since January twenty twenty,
when the former president took out Castam Solomoni.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
So why are we hearing about it now?
Speaker 2 (01:03):
We've got so many questions, very few answers, and we're
going to get those answers from a guy named Jonathan Gilliam.
Jonathan is a former Navy sealer. You know, I guess,
once a steal, always a seal, right, a former FBI agent,
host of the Experts podcast, and the best selling author
A Sheep no More. We're going to ask him to
merge those worlds that he has been living in and.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
Try to give us some answers.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Also want to know from him, what kind of developments
is he looking at moving forward, what is he paying
attention to? All that and more with Jonathan Gilliam, Stay tuned,
all right, So, Jonathan, you know, I think we're all
still assessing. You know, what happened on July thirteenth, a
(01:47):
massively historical moment, you know, the former attempted assassinate or
the attempted assassination of a former president Donald Trump. You know,
with your Steel background and the FBI background, you know,
how the hell did this happen?
Speaker 4 (02:00):
Well, I'm glad you brought up my backgrounds because the
two different backgrounds they're similar as far as the tactics go.
But and the honor and integrity that you would think
would get you into that job. But the big difference
between those two is that as a seal we are
we're trained as attackers, so that's our job is to attack.
(02:22):
We also do protection details and we're very very good
at it because we look.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
At things from the attackers point of view.
Speaker 4 (02:32):
And so when I went into law enforcement, I actually
started as a cop and then in Arkansas and then
went into the seal teams, and then from there I
was a Federal Air Marshal, So I was flying undercover
on planes for a year and then went from there
to contracting where I led a course called the Soft
(02:56):
Target Awareness Training, which is where I went all over
the country and teaching high value targets schools, malls, tall building,
stadiums and arenas how to look at themselves from an
attackers point of view. So even when I was an
air marshal, I was still looking at things from the
attackers point of view. If somebody got up and tried
(03:16):
to take over one of those planes, my job was
to attack them. So then when I went into the
FBI and started investigating, I became a hunter. We hunted,
you know, criminals on the Asian Organized Crime Squad. And
then when I transitioned into the soft target or excuse me,
(03:38):
the Special Events Unit, where I was the coordinator for that.
What I became then was the defender and I had
to teach again, just like when I was a contractor,
to teach these private sectors how to look at themselves
from the attackers point of view and then defend against that.
(03:58):
But my job was to go out there and look
at everything, do the threat assessments, do the advances, and
then come back and write an operations order so that
the FBI could put their resources in those areas, similar
to what the Secret Service does, but we weren't protecting anyone.
We were putting our resources out there to try to
(04:19):
find people that were going to do wrong or ways
to act and have a plan to act if something occurred.
So when you put all that together, the Secret Service
should be trained in a very similar fashion. And when
I was in college working at a hotel, all the
Secret Service agents that work for Clinton were coming in there,
(04:43):
and I was fascinated by them because they were all
like six foot five, former military, very athletic, and very aggressive.
They got Clinton is an incredible runner, believe it or not.
Most people didn't know that about him, but Secret Service
had to run six seven miles a day at a
six minute mile pace. So they were tremendous athletic and huge.
(05:06):
And so we didn't even know what DEI was back then.
And so as I got in the military and then
the FBI, I started to seeing the FBI this thing
that was happening where the recruitment was absolutely crazy. You
would have an operator like myself sitting next to somebody
(05:26):
who was an attorney, that makes sense, or somebody who
was an accountant, that makes sense, But then there were
all these other people that they just they had checked
boxes and they got it seemed like special privileges to
get in there.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
And I saw that.
Speaker 4 (05:42):
More and more to the point where I ended up
getting out of the FBI and starting my own company.
And now we see that full circle. So and the
reason I'm telling you all this is because this is
what occurred last Saturday, is that it was a culmination.
I believe we see it in the FBI, but it's
hard to pinpoint that because the FBI does investigations behind
(06:03):
the scenes. What the Secret Service does is in plain
sight of everyone, and typically nothing happens, right, So they
put a presence out there. They have a tremendous amount
of assets in that location that are very visible, some
that are not. And what happened on Saturday was that
the tactics, the procedures, the threat assessments, the advances that
(06:31):
they did, the interaction with law enforcement, and then the
time on target when the actual attack happened on the
president and that actual venue, the time on target to
get the principle, which was Trump from where he went
down into that vehicle. If he had had a sucking
(06:53):
chest wound or an artery in his leg or arm
that had been hit, he could have bled out by
the time they got him to that vehicle and not
put a tourniquet on that.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
So that's how long they took.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
And I've heard all these Secret Service agents on television,
former Secret Service agents talking about how they did a
great job there. But when you look at the totality
of the failures of that day, they started with the hiring,
the recruiting, and then putting those people in on the
job and then promoting them through the ranks. And so
(07:29):
you saw this meeting of the unright minds on that
day that allowed this to occur, and then when it
did occur, a complete breakdown in movement of the team
of the individual's total loss of what they were supposed
to do, as you could tell people that were not
(07:49):
fit either physically fit or height wise to protect this
particular individual, Donald Trump. And so I think if you
take all that that I just told you and you
relate that to Uvaldi, you'll see the same exact thing
happened in Uvaldi. It wasn't necessarily dei hires, but the
(08:11):
lower end standards because of the one common denominator in
all this, the left, leftists in government and in governments
around the country have deluded, degraded law enforcement to a
point where if they do have big, strong, aggressive, controlled
aggression warriors that are out there, they're punished and the
(08:34):
weaker people who don't rock the boat are left in
and people who are dei hires rise to the top.
And so that's what you've seen in both of these instances. Yeah,
they're very similar.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
Well, you know, but I guess what it's hard for
Americans to wrap their mind around is, you know, I
get the comparison to Uvaldi, but you're you're also talking
about you know, local police. Obviously, here we're dealing with,
you know, the Secret Service protecting former commander, a former commander,
you know, in chief, one of the most powerful men
of Republican nominee to be President of the United States.
(09:06):
So you know, you would think on a different level
we wouldn't be seeing similar breakdowns. And then you know,
I know you had mentioned sort of the the afterpart,
the slowness to get him into the car and to
get him out of the area and get him in a
more controlled environment. But even previously before that, I mean,
he was photographer. The shooter was photographed by the Secret
Service at least an hour before the attack. Reportedly, a
(09:28):
suspicious person was spotted at five forty one PM with
a rangefinder, which of course you know is used for
long distance shots, right.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
And then the shots happened at six eleven PM.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So that's a lot of time between all of that
where this guy could have been stopped wasn't stopped.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
So you know, I mean, how do they how do
they get that that wrong?
Speaker 4 (09:49):
Well, I know it sounds different that state local or
local state and federal law enforcement would be so different,
but they're actually very similar and they all suffer from
the same but they're there. This this controlled, aggressive, in shape,
large individual is what should be doing that job is
(10:13):
the same with a firefighter. If you know, if your
house is on fire or your apartment and you live
thirty floors up, do you expect somebody a man or woman.
I'm gonna even leave the female part out of this,
but somebody who was hired based on fairness. Do you
want somebody who's hired on fairness coming to try to rescue?
Do you want somebody who is the best of the
best coming there? And so that best of the best
(10:33):
in all aspects of this has been pushed out. The
reason I keep bringing subleaks is that the failures that
we saw, including the range finder, not taking that seriously,
not having good communications with law enforcement when the advance
was done, to put people on those roots or even
their own counter snipers on those roofs, to include people
(10:56):
who are of the right caliber to protect this large man,
and to not employ new and upgraded tactics like a
podium that is bulletproof. They don't use these bulletproof podiums
for some reason when they go out and speak in public.
So every failure that you see there is a culmination
(11:18):
of a long time coming, of this degradation of law
enforcement that has crept into local it's crept into the FBI,
it's crept into the Secret Service, to a point where
even the individuals that were with Trump inside the RNC
conference this week, they're bigger and they have more of
(11:41):
a presence. But if they're moving at the pace, and
so many of them have praised what they did after
the action took place, the shooting took place last Saturday,
if they move at that pace and any of their
protectees sustain a shot that is significant, they're going to
(12:01):
And so I think when we look at the thread assessment,
taking all these things into account, the threat assessment that
they did when they do their advance, they for some
reason did not look at the totality of the circumstances
and asked the question if a shooter could access that roof.
(12:22):
And if they did ask that question, they decided to
put law enforcement over there, or they said that's a
private company.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Well that doesn't stop.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
As you can see that old saying, if you want
to hide from the police, sell pencils in the.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Police parking lot.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
Apparently it's true because this guy was able to go
in show them at a range finder. They for some
reason didn't think that was odd enough to kick him
out and then he went in, came back out and
then walked over there and gone on the roof, and
whether he had a ladder or climbed up the air
conditioner unit, which they're saying, the fact is it was
(12:58):
a complete breakdown from the the top of the Secret
Service down to the person who did the advance, the
way the teams function together, and the local law enforcement
who became completely complacent that even they because this is
what happens when you put when you put one law
enforcement agency that has been affected by this and their
(13:19):
standards are low, and you put them in charge, the
other law enforcement agents around there will only reach to
their standard. It's not like they're going to go over
their standard typically and do their own threat assessment put
their own people on the roof.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
If it's not important to.
Speaker 4 (13:34):
The primary investigative or protective agency, it's not going to
be important to the other law enforcement agencies.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
I don't agree with that, but that's the way it
seems to work out.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
We've got a quick commercial break more with Jonathan on
the other side. I guess we're saying, now he cut
the law I have of LA Enforcement around three pm
that they obviously will continue to learn more about this.
It's obviously developing story. You know, I guess the reason
why people are so suspicious of the information we're being also,
(14:06):
you know, the lack of social media presence of this guy.
And then even beyond that, you know, we've got a
government who, you know, the FBI weaponized an internet rumor
against Donald Trump previously with the Russia collusion hoax. We've
got a government where former CIA directors lied to us
and told this hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation when
it was in fact the truth.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
And we have.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Democrats in Congress who recently sought to remove Donald Trump's
security detail, and you know, and a president who just
said Joe Biden should be caught in a bulls eye,
So Joe Biden saying President Trump should be caught in
a bulls eye. So you know, I mean there's a
healthy distrust there, and you know, and it's warranted, right,
and it's to their governments to blame for it.
Speaker 3 (14:48):
Yeah, I mean, look what they did.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
They the FBI took part in creating or handling made
up evidence in the Russian collusion issue and then took
that with not even vetting it or at least they
said they didn't vet it. That was their excuse. I
think they knew exactly where it came from. They took
it to a PHISA judge, which the FBI is an
entire unit that goes through and scrubs the stuff to
(15:11):
make sure it's verified before they go to a PHISA judge.
Because it's in secret, it has to be scrubbed right,
because the overwatch is not there that there would be
in a regular criminal court. So that unit failed somehow.
The PISA judge failed somehow. But when you look at
who was handling those things, it was very specific individuals that,
(15:35):
as we see now over a period of time, are
really a part of the collusion or the conspiracy to
basically overthrow the constitution in this country. And so when
you take that and you apply that to the Secret Service,
as an investigator, I can't rule out that a conspiracy
did not take place that day, that that kid was
(15:58):
somehow connected and they grubbed everything for him. I can't
unless I see proof that that absolutely did not happen,
then I have to at least keep that on the burner,
and well.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
Then that's what that's what an investigator does.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Go ahead you know, and it was reported too that
he tried out for the varsity rifle team, didn't make
it because he's a bad shooter.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
It's just there's just.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
A lot of weird And then now we're hearing, you know,
this Iranian threat assessment of an attempted assassination against you know,
the former president, when we've kind of known that this
was a possibility since Donald Trump took out Castam Solomoney
in January twenty twenty. I mean, this has been kind
of in the public circulating that Iran is wanted to
(16:42):
seek vengeance and revenge for that taking place. It's like,
why why are we hearing about that now? It just
seems like strange timing considering that this has already been
part of the broader public conversation.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
It's very similar to nine to eleven. You know, there
were threats before nine to eleven. Nothing changed. They just
sat on the information because because the government and law
enforcement in general has this strange love for the term
no known threat, right, So they get a general threat
and they know that somebody may be planning something, but
(17:14):
there's no specific threat to this particular event, and so
they say in the briefs there's no known threat, and
I try to get that eliminated from all the briefs
that I gave. I would always say we don't know
of a threat, but it doesn't mean there's not one,
so that you should be showing up today considering that
something will happen, and that is clearly not the case
(17:37):
for what happened this past weekend. But with conspiracies, the
problem with that is is you have a little bit
of information, credible information. The FBI was crooked, the EI
has crushed everything. The evidence that we see with the
Secret Service was so bad in their tactics and structure
and the threat assessments. So we have that evidence. But
(17:59):
what people do is they take that and based on
their uneducated opinion, they will create or even their educated opinion.
They may say this is through history, this is what's
occurred when that occurs, but they create. So that's twenty
percent of the pie. They create the other eighty percent
without knowing facts or any type of sources that can
(18:20):
be verified. So that's the worry about conspiracies is that
the American people will get tied up online arguing about
this instead of saying we demand THEI not be a
part of anything anymore and stand up to the government,
and so we get pulled off to the side. So conspiracies,
(18:41):
to me, the way they come about at these particular
times after these events, they really do resemble clickbait or
reverse propaganda where the left would create certain things to
get the right spun up.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
They do that.
Speaker 4 (18:58):
They handle us very well when it comes to propaganda
and spinning the conservatives up in this country. But I
think what we need to look at is getting the
overall picture of what occurred in how that threat assessment.
It all goes back to that threat assessment, so we
can completely eliminate for the conversation what happened after the
(19:22):
shot was taken. If we look at what happened before
the shot was taken, that there is a complete breakdown
in that threat assessment, and that involves local law enforcement.
So that's why the conspiracy part kind of as far
as with the Secret Service, that part kind of dies
for me because.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Local law enforcement was involved.
Speaker 4 (19:42):
They showed the same complacency, and we're talking about, you know,
fifty different individuals from multiple different law enforcement agencies all
showing the same complacency where they got locked inside a
fence and couldn't even get they even have that plan
that they may need an exit to a fence or
putting that fence around those buildings so that complacency kills
(20:04):
and I think that's what it did on Saturday. But
there are a couple things I would say three big
things that from me are standouts other than what the
failures of the Secret Service and law enforcement were. One
is the Iranian threat. Two is this report that I
just saw from one of the students that went to
(20:26):
school with him. And again you have to take those
witness reports with a grain of assault. But he said
that the guy was he wasn't as quiet as what
they make came out to be. He was he was
pretty quiet and even kill but when it came to
math or politics, he was very outspoken and somewhat snobby, right,
(20:46):
So that says a lot more. And then he said
he was a part of a group of a small group,
a secretive group of kids that talked a lot about
I think it was it was assassinations, but a lot
about overthrowing the politicians of the government.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
The third thing is.
Speaker 4 (21:08):
The fact that the father called law enforcement that day
and said his gun was missing. Now, I grew up
in a house with guns and rifles, and everybody I
grew up with had rifles in their home, and all
the kids were taught how to shoot at a young age.
It sounds like the shooter's father and him had a
(21:28):
relationship that did exist around a range where they went
and shot, and around this particular gun. So why was
his father so alarmed when that gun was missing that
he called law enforcement? Because the first thing I would
think is, well, he must have gone shooting without me.
I'm have to give him a call, right, But he
didn't do that. He didn't call his son. He called
(21:48):
law enforcement and said this gun was missing. So I
think there's more to this young man than we've been told.
I think there's probably some mental issues there, even potentially
from birth. And I think that there may be a
group of people, if that one witness is correct, If
there is a conspiracy, it might be between those those individuals,
(22:12):
and if those individuals had contact with Iran or anybody
inside the government, that would take it to another level.
But I think there's there's a couple of things right
there in particular that stand out beyond the Secret Service involvement.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I mean, I'd be less willing to engage in conspiracy
theories if they have not been so true.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
For short years, you know, like they've lied.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
About pretty much everything, and you know, the you know,
conservative conspiracy theorists have been right about you know, a lot,
and you know throughout these these years, and again we're
so there's not been a lot of time passed since
July thirteenth, so you know, there really isn't much to
speculate yet about as we learn more. You know, we
don't know motive yet in you know, parentheses. Obviously I
(23:01):
can't do that because we're not visual right now, we're audio.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
How much does a motive matter?
Speaker 2 (23:06):
I mean, this guy has been told throughout a lot
of his life, he's only twenty years old, that you know,
Trump is hitler and that he is a little threat
to democracy, that he should be put in a bull's eye.
I mean, how much does a motive matter in these
types of things?
Speaker 3 (23:23):
Well, when we look at how it occurred, that.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Finding out that, you know, finding the motive.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
I think it's important to separate the how from the why,
and the how it occurred is because of incompetence and
and just overall breakdown of how law enforcement does a
job what you talked about. But the why is important
because we want to understand how this individual was pushed
to this level. But you also want to understand and
(23:51):
find out if he was associated with other people, and
that's going to come from the why.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
So was this individual.
Speaker 4 (24:02):
Groomed brainwashed from the rhetoric that we hear consistently. I
think it's safe to say if you've seen prisoners of war,
for instance, who are told the same thing over and
over and over again, after a while, they begin to
believe that that's truth. You go to communist countries where
it is a closed society and they're not able to
(24:23):
be influenced by outside societies. They can tell them anything.
They can tell them that their leader is a god,
they can tell they can take even in this day
and age, they could take the teaching of solar eclipses
out of the classroom, and then they could convince a
certain portion of the country that they're going to predict
(24:47):
that the president can predict an eclipse, and then when
it happens, they can because they will know about it.
They say it's tomorrow, I'm going to turn the sun black. Right, So,
if you say these things and over and over again.
You know this, You're in communication, so you know how
this works. You say something over and over again, people
are going to start to believe it, and then you
(25:08):
keep the division up, they're going to pick sides. And
so when you have an individual like this that says
what he said, it follows exactly along the lines of
what the left preaches every day, day and out on
day in and day out online in media right, they
say these things the exact verbiage he used. Could he
(25:31):
have come up with that verbiage on his own through
critical thinking, I guess he could, But most likely he
gained that verbiage, exact verbiage from hearing it over and
over and over again and developing this fixation of Hitler
and Trump and politicians in general. It sounded like he
didn't like politicians at all, but this anti government type
(25:54):
of mentality. And nobody is bringing this up, but I
you know, he could have been influenced by the left,
but he also could have been influenced by libertarians and
never trumpers. They say the same thing all the time,
they just package it in a different sound bite and
they put it out there. And basically, I think what
(26:15):
we're seeing whether it's with school shootings that are carried
out by transgender confused or gender confused young men who've
been groomed all through school and told one thing that's
not the truth, but over and over and over again.
Or it's an individual who tries to take a shot
in the president. We have to look at what's being
(26:37):
said and look at their verbiage and see where that
comes from. I think motive is very important because people
are culpable of motivating people to do these things when
they go out there and lie it constantly and degrade
those who are trying to protect and uphold the Constitution.
And it seems like that's what the left always does.
(26:58):
And then libertarians just they don't like the person, then
they turn them into a villain.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
They say the same thing.
Speaker 4 (27:04):
So I think the motive is very important because it
helps us understand the why, and included in that why,
will be co conspirators if there are any.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Jonathan, when you were an evy seal, I guess you're
always an evy seal. But yeah, true, did a sloped
roof ever get in your way?
Speaker 3 (27:24):
Oh goodness? Not only that.
Speaker 4 (27:26):
I just responded to Elon Musks where you talk about
how that truck that he has has a sloped roof?
Speaker 3 (27:33):
What if it was inverted slope? Right?
Speaker 4 (27:35):
Could you ever get out of that? Is that like
a black hole? I mean, are you stuck once you
fall into an inverted slope?
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Quick break? More in trying to figure out what the
hell happened? What do you make of?
Speaker 3 (27:48):
I mean?
Speaker 1 (27:48):
The Secret Service director can really cheat old? This is
this is her excuse?
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Well, first of all, she says the buck stops of her,
but refuses to resign and has not been fired, which
she should be. But blame the sloped roof for the
security failure?
Speaker 4 (28:05):
Well, does she blame the sloped roof on the accurate
shot that the Secret Service counter sniper took. He was
on the exact slanted roof as the other one. The
other one was probably less slanted than the one that
they were on behind President Trump. So I think I
cannot believe the sound bites, Lisa, that come out of
(28:25):
these people at times where they and it's always on
the left. I mean, sometimes you get people on the
right to say ridiculous things, But to say that, to
say that it was because of slanted roof when there's
a video out there of counter snipers on a sloped
I should say sloped on a sloped roof is mind
(28:45):
bogglingly stupid and incompetent. And when you add to that
the vitriol that many in office, including Biden and staffers
and people from Hollywood, all these people who run in
the same circles, the vitriol that they say, it's mind
(29:06):
boggling to know that many of these people are either
influencers of anyone or leaders in our country. And I
use that word very lightly, but in position of leadership
in this nation, and just.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
Know accountability whatsoever. And when we still know accountability after Afghanistan,
She's not big fired, My orcus is still there. I mean,
the left is the only place where you can fail upwards,
you know, like Republicans believe in the accountability and and firing.
And you know Trump did, he fired everyone, you know.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
Yeah, but Trump?
Speaker 4 (29:37):
And who I am a huge Trump supporter and I've
always been his supporter. I was probably the first person
in the media when I was hosting Sean Hannity's radio
show for him, that came out in support of Trump
because he was operationally proven and he had failed. And
then came back and did a better job, and I
hope the failures that he had in his first presidency
(30:00):
when he wins this election, that he will correct those.
And one of those failures was listening to the Washington
d C satellites that orbit constantly, the bill bars, the
Chris Christie's who got Chris Fay in? You know, these
individuals that come there that have been a part of
government for the longest time and made it into the
(30:21):
highest ranks. Those are not the people you need advising
and helping the president lead this country. You need warfighters,
You need people who are not just been in the trenches,
but people who are in the trenches, and bring them
out and let them take over these agencies, show and
rededicate themselves in loyalty to their country. So what's interesting
(30:46):
about the reason I even got into that is that
you were absolutely right. There's no accountability and no repercussions
for anything the left does because the left owns the government.
They may not have the majority in Congress, but they
own it because they are unified, and the Conservatives or
the Republicans are not unified. So you can take a
smaller unified group and walk all over the non unified group.
(31:11):
Even if you don't have the majority, and that's what occurs.
So when we look at all these different issues, whether
it be the influence on the shooter, the lack of tactics,
and the breakdown of what occurred that allowed that shooting
to happen, the way things are degrading in this country,
every single and you can go through and look at
all this, Every single major issue that we have with
(31:35):
this nation at this time is because of the Democrat
Party and the leftists.
Speaker 3 (31:40):
Every single one is because of them.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
I agree, before we go, what are you looking? What
developments are you looking for? As the story moves toward
you know, what are you paying attention to? What should
people pay attention to?
Speaker 4 (31:56):
Well that first of all, you want to look and
hold the FBI cantle and if they're making press releases
like they did two days ago that say we haven't
found evidence for this, we don't think this, we don't
believe that this.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
Is the case.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
We don't need to know that. What they're doing right
there is what they always do. They are programming you
to expect nothing, And I don't want to know what
you haven't found. I want to know what you're looking for.
And then when you find it. You can come and
tell me. But I don't need to be groomed into
believing that, oh, it's just some simple guy that somehow
got on the roof, and you know, shame on the
(32:33):
Secret Service. I want to know what happened. I want
to know his motivation, who he was, why he did
the things, who he hung out with. And it's interesting
because if this was a white police officer that just
shot an armed or let's say the guy didn't have
a gun, but he was trying to run over cops
(32:53):
with a car and they shot and killed him, and
he was black, we would know everything about those cops.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
We would know everything.
Speaker 4 (32:59):
About that guy, the guy shot that was good, that
he was a young boy one time, and he has
a mom. You know, we would we would find out everything.
And I think what we're seeing here is that when
it comes to when the liberals are in charge, even
the stuff that we see from the FBI is not
reported or investigated correctly. And I think the American people
(33:22):
should keep a close watch.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
That's what I'm doing.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
I'm keeping a close watch on the verbiage that the
FBI uses, that the Secret Service uses, that the President uses.
I'm keeping close watch on that and then within there
potentially find details like these these two things about this
young young man that carried out the attack and the Iranians.
(33:44):
Those are details that we can now put on a
board and as things come out, we can connect and
see if those things connect. Instead of saying, well, I
think it has to do with the fact that the
government wants to kill Trump. Okay, there probably are plenty
of those people in the government, but were they they
We can put that over here as well, But don't make.
Speaker 3 (34:03):
That eighty percent of what you believe happen.
Speaker 4 (34:06):
Make it one of the top headlines on your board,
and then start collecting the evidence and that will lead
you to what happened.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
That's how I look at all these things.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
No, I agree, and that you know. That's what we
try to do on the show, is to get to
the truth of things. Johnathan really appreciate well, first of
all your service to the country, and then secondly, this
is super interesting. I learned so much from you, so
we'd love to have you back on. I want to
keep following the story because it just seems like, you know,
there's more to it.
Speaker 4 (34:31):
But anytime you know, you and I were on Bill
O'Reilly show, not together, but at the same same night
with Scaramucci. This was years ago, the only time I've
ever seen you at Fox, and I remember that night
so well because the dress or the green room was packed.
It was like, you know something, any Fox News fan
(34:51):
would go crazy. Kimberly Gilford was in there, You were
in there, Guttfeld was in there. And then Bill O'Reilly
walked in and close the curtain to get his hair done,
and I looked up and I was the only one
left there.
Speaker 2 (35:04):
He's such a he's such a care I but I
love on show a show. I did it every week
across from Wad Williams, and he was so funny.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
I liked him a lot. But Jonathan, thank you so much.
I really appreciate your time.
Speaker 3 (35:19):
This was awesome. Thank you.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
That was Jonathan Gilliam. I really appreciate him taking the
time to join the show. I thought he was very
interesting and I hope you did too. I also want
to thank you guys at home for listening every Monday
and Thursday, but you can listen throughout the week. I
want to think John Cassio and my producer were putting
the show together until next time.
Host
Lisa Boothe
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.