Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Don't touch that dow or change the channel because it's
Sunday at seven pm on Ihearts WRKO. You're listening to
the Hard Truth and I'm John Deaton. Good evening everyone.
It's been a long week. We're all still reeling from
the Charlie Kirk assassination. More shootings, more violence, violence against
(00:24):
ICE agents are taking place. I got to tell you
we live in very, very troubling times. The division in
this country. I've talked about it on this show. It's
at a toxic level. We've got to learn to stop dehumanizing.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
The other side.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You know, it's like I said last week, when you
call people hitler and monsters and say that there's no
chance for democracy hereafter we'll never see elections again, and
you just keep going back and forth, it's going to
lead to violence. And I unfortunately believe there'll be more violence.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
I hope there's not.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
But my god, Congress couldn't even agree on a resolution.
You know, when that Melissa Hartman got murdered, there was
a resolution and it celebrated her life, it condemned the violence.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
It was.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Bipartisan and it was unanimous. Charlie Kirk gets murdered, assassinated
violently on the public screen, and Congress can't even get
together and come up with a way to celebrate the
(01:54):
man's life and condemn political violence. It's just another divisional
thing in this country. It's right up there right with
vaccines and mass and COVID and elections and where you know,
(02:15):
if something bad happened to this country like nine eleven again,
would we come together or would we just point the
finger at each other? Would one side say, see America
deserved it. I don't know. I really don't know. It
is very, very sad to think that people couldn't come
(02:36):
together just to acknowledge a man's life. Doesn't mean you
agree with everything he said. But if we struggle as
a country to condemn political violence for people exercising their
free speech, I don't know if we can ever unite,
(02:58):
to be honest with you, because that's something very very basic,
and I'm telling you free speech is at stake. It's
been under attack for years under Biden. It was under attack, Okay,
the Hunter laptop, Facebook X you know which was Twitter
(03:20):
back then, the FBI, the White House telling them take
that off. That's disinformation, deplatforming individuals and people in the
Biden demonstration celebrated it, they cheered it on. Donald Trump
got deplatformed from x or Facebook, and this conservative voice
got shut down because they said it.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Was hate speech.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
And now we see people on the right celebrating. Okay,
when someone on the other side gets deplatformed, you don't
do that. The First Amendment does not care who the
president is. The First Amendment does not care if you're
a Republican or a Democrat, a liberal or a conservative.
It doesn't care if you're gay, you're straight, you're transgender.
(04:06):
It does not care. And we got people like Pam Bondi,
who's the Attorney General, saying hate speech is going to
be eliminated. Hate speech is protected, Okay, it's only speech
that incites violence. Speech that that you don't like is protected.
I serve seven years in the Marine Corps not to
(04:30):
give you the right not to be offended, but to
give the right to be offended. You can be offended
if someone says something you don't like, if someone says
something that's anti Semitic, unless they are interfering with folks,
unless they're inciting violence against Jews. They said something that's hateful,
they said something that's disgusting and we should condemn it.
(04:55):
But the government does not step in and take away someone.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Right.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
So when we get to the tough student who wrote
an op ed that criticized Israel, Okay, so what she
criticized Israel. We criticized Biden when he was president. The
left is criticizing Trump and he's the president. That's what
we do in America. Yet that student visa was revoked,
(05:27):
and Marco Rubio says, well, it's a privilege.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
It's not right.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Yes, I understand that a student visa, but the person
was here living in American soil. We still honor the
First Amendment and it works both ways. And you know,
just remember this everybody, to all the people out there
that are cheering when you see your side take away
(05:51):
someone's right to free speech and you cheer it, just
know something the other side's going to be in charge again.
If you think that the Democrats are never going to
be in office again, if there's never going to be
a president who happens to be a Democrat who leans left,
then you're fooling yourself. Okay, we could see that in
(06:11):
twenty twenty eight. If the economy something goes bad or
things go wrong, if unemployment's too high, if inflation doesn't
get taken under control, then we could see a Gavin.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Newsom as president. I certainly don't want to see.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
It, but we could, and we could see a return
to them saying to now your team, that's hate speech.
Take that person off X, take that person off Facebook,
take that person off Instagram. You know, we have to
(06:46):
be consistent when we honor things like the First Amendment.
Even if it's disgusting and revolting, a person has a
right to say it. And unless it cites and sites violence,
unless it creates panic like fire in a crowded theater,
then a person has right to say it. If you
(07:08):
live in America, it's one of the things that separates
us from totalitarianisms and separates us from dictatorships. But we
are definitely continuing to see an assault on the First Amendment.
And I should hope people understand how delicate it is.
Now I want to switch gears and listen. You can
(07:34):
reach me at John at Hard Truthshow dot com. John
at Hard Truthshow dot com. You can challenge what I say.
And I got to tell you I'm switching gears because
I am troubled by the lack of transparency that we
(07:55):
seem to get when it comes to the FBI, when
it comes under Comy and now it's under Patel, when
it was Biden in charge. You know, did you trust
anything the FBI said?
Speaker 2 (08:10):
I mean they lied.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
You had all these intelligence officers literally intentionally lie and
say that the Hunter bat Biden laptop was fake, that
it was Russian disinformation, that it wasn't true. They knew
it was true, and they threatened and coerced social media
platforms to not.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Talk about it.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Right, just like you remember, you couldn't even say that
that COVID came from the WUNA lab.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
You couldn't say that it came from a Chinese lab.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
Everybody in the world, the most logical, logical explanation was
that the COVID virus came from the COVID lab in China,
considering that that's where COVID started. But you couldn't even
say that because we had government officials like the FBI,
(09:07):
the CDC, all these agencies telling people lies.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
And I had hoped that.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
We would see an improvement, But I got to ask you,
do you trust everything that the government and the FBI
has been saying, As it relates to Epstein, and.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
I'm bringing up Epstein.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
First and then we're going to move on to Charlie Kirk.
But they produce a video of the cell block that
has four minutes deleted from it. You can clearly see
(09:49):
that it has been edited. But the government underpaymbody puts
it out and says, look here, do you believe that
the cameras weren't working? It just happened. All the cameras
just happened to not be working. Do you believe that
the two guards both happened to fall asleep at the
(10:11):
same time that Epstein killed himself hung himself. Do you
believe there's jail cell was accidentally open un lot so
that someone else potentially could go in there and kill him.
Do you believe all the things that the FBI has
(10:32):
been telling us or do you think that they are
withholding stuff from us? And I submit to you, ladies
and gentlemen, that the FBI is lying to us, and
that includes cash Patil, that includes Dan Bongino.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
They could went in there. They sat a.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
Whole different tune before they got into that those offices,
and they've completely changed their mind. And then they tell
us that okay, just go away right. Here's a doctor tape,
here's an autopsy report that says that the bone in
his neck, which is most consistent with manual or ligature strangulation,
(11:19):
that that's broken. Normally, that bone, it's a floating bone
near your Adam's apple. If you hang yourself with a sheet,
for example, like they submit, it moves, so it wasn't fractured.
But if you have hands crushing the neck, or a
ligature like some kind of you know, extension cord or
(11:43):
something that, or rope or chain or something like that,
it often breaks that bone in your neck. Well, Epstein's
was do we believe the FBI? Next, we're going to
move to Charlie Kirk in the FBI. You're listening to
the Hard Truth. I'm John deep Welcome back to the
Hard Truth. You're listening to John Deeton. That's me, everybody.
(12:05):
Before the break, we were summon up the very incomplete,
suspicious what I believe can be fairly characterized as lies
by our federal government, the FBI regarding the Epstein regarding
Epstein's death, his alleged suicide. We're still waiting on the documents.
(12:29):
We're still waiting to see other perpetrators be prosecuted. I
submit to you all out there that both governments, government
under Biden didn't produce the documents, and the government's not
producing the documents under Trump. And it's listen, Trump threw
(12:52):
Epstein out of Mari Largo. They were beefing.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
You know.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Trump was never on the island. He was on the
plane a few times. I underst I don't even think
it has to do necessarily with Trump, and I didn't
think Biden was involved. It's about the donors, man, It's
about the billionaires, okay, It's about Larry Summers. It's about
(13:18):
these Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, big names that contribute to
both parties who are involved. But it is insane to
say that. Okay, Epstein's the only one to rape those
girls on that island.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
He's the only one.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
Pam Bondi said, we got thousands of ours and all
of those hours, thousands of hours of tapes are just Epstein, Okay,
the alleged, not the alleged. The Epstein victims have gotten
together and they've said that they're going to start naming
names themselves, and that they're going to produce their own
(14:02):
list of Epstein clients. We know Prince Andrew was involved. Again,
there's pictures of Bill Clinton. He's clothed, but he's being
massaged over his clothing as he sits on a bench
on the island. The girl looks like he's fifteen or
sixteen years old. That is giving him a massage, all right.
(14:22):
And so it's not that they're protecting like a president,
or it's not like Trump is protecting himself. It's about
these donors, man, I'm telling you, it's about the billionaires
who are running the show. I think it is fair
to say that unequivocally Epstein was involved in intelligence and
(14:46):
I mean the CIA, and I mean massage. It is
absolutely crystal clear. The former US attorney from Florida had
basically said he was told to give Epstein to get
out jail free card, to give Epstein that sweetheart deal
that for raping children, did not go to prison, got
(15:09):
to go home on the weekends, and all that crap,
because his bosses at the Department of Justice told him that,
do it give him the deal. Epstein is with intelligence.
That's what's been done, and that's what's been said. So
that intelligence, undoubtedly CIA, Mossad.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
And they just don't want.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
It to come out and we need transparency.
Speaker 2 (15:39):
Okay, now that's just Epstein. Let me ask you guys
out there.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
I want you to email me John at Hardtruthshow dot com,
John at Haardtruthshow dot com. Do you believe everything coming
out of the FBI related to Charlie Kirk's assassination do
you I'm gonna play something. It may go past the break,
(16:08):
so I may have to interrupt it. But I was
on a popular podcast called Redacted, and the title of
this is ex prosecutor that talking about me says the
FBI's case has serious loopholes despite the notes, text, DNA evidence,
and arrest. Something about the official Charlie Kirk assassination story
(16:31):
fills off. John Deaton joins us that is from the
Redacted podcast. I'm reading their post on X and so
I want you to listen to this my appearance with
these hosts talking about Charlie Kirk's assassination.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
Well, when you listen to the press conference announcing charges
against Tyler Robinson, particularly at the state level in Utah,
it sounds like an open end shutcase, doesn't it. Surveillance footage,
text messages parents that turned him in an exit, wound
right out of the neck or shot in the neck,
all from the front, all pretty straightforward DNA evidence right
(17:10):
on the trigger of the gun. They find the gun,
they find showcasings with Antifa messages written on them. So done,
you know, move along here. Nothing to see. The text
messages seem like they're pretty darn damning laying everything out
exactly how he did it, his regrets about doing it,
how he felt like he needed to do it, all
of it. So just move along, right, very complete story. Yeah,
it's very convenient.
Speaker 4 (17:30):
But are you satisfied? Are you not satisfied?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
I don't know. I'm not satisfied. But there's emerging video
evidence and inconsistencies that paint a totally different picture here
raise questions. You know, was this guy a patsy that
he had perhaps nothing to do with it at all.
For one thing, the FBI only released a video that
shows the alleged shooter running, but the camera on the
building would have shown him laying in a prone position
(17:54):
firing the shot, as you can see here on your screen.
So we only get after this individual is running. We
don't get him laying in a prone position. We certainly
don't get him firing a gun, even though the camera
was pointed in that position and would have absolutely covered
the prone position of this shooter. The FBI's own video
they released on their YouTube channel doesn't show it, but
(18:15):
it's alleged in the indictment. They say it, and the
Utah State prosecutors say it as well, that they had
arm elbow prints, they have knee prints, and he was
laying in a prone position and fired this kill shot.
One shot, It's all it took. He even saved the
shell casing that was found later in the forest because
it's a bolt action rifle, so you don't pop it out.
(18:36):
It would have stayed inside of the rifle. Then they chose,
though to cut off the first few seconds of this video.
We'd love to see the actual footage of this show
us him laying there. The thing is, it's happening right
at the exact same moment that Charlie Kirk is being
shot when we see him running. We know this because
of the timestamp. When you see, of course, the rooftop
(18:56):
shot from inside the walkway in the cafe area of
the campus, we match that with the video of course
from inside the university walk away, and you can see
him already sprinting as people are ducking. He's already in
full sprint as people begin to duck, So he picks
up the rifle and runs it just a full sprint
and the people are just now reacting to this.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
Again, do we have the video of him jumping, because
I also have questions about that. When he jumps off,
there is a lot of commotion already in the quad
area because a SHOT's been fired and someone's been killed
over dead. Why are the people in the background walking
so casually at a casual gait if just a corner
away from them, people are screaming and running and those
(19:41):
people are just walking casually. Does that make sense to you?
Speaker 3 (19:44):
There's a lot that doesn't make sense to me. I mean,
And what kind of gun did he throw the gun down?
Did it adjust the scope as he throws it off
the roof? There was he carrying the gun at all?
It appears that he is if you look at the
high deff version of this, But interestingly, the FBI's own
website on their own YouTube channel shows this. After he
shot and killed Charlie Kirk, he jumped off the roof
(20:04):
and ran away. He left a gun and ammunition in
a wooded area near the university. This is the YouTube
video that the FBI published initially, and I hadn't caught
this before, but they're saying clearly in this video he
shot and killed Charlie Kirk. He in this video is
the one that we're after. He jumped off and ran away.
He shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Well, how do you
(20:27):
know that at this point when you publish this video,
how do you know that he's the one specifically that
shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Where in this video does
it show it? Please show it to us. So the
FBI's own YouTube channel says this, there's a lot of
other evidence. I want to get to here in a moment,
but I want to do I do want to bring
in an ex prosecutor, US Marine John Deaton, former US
(20:49):
Senate candidate, who knows these things inside it out, both
from the defense position and on the offensive position as
a prosecutor. John, thank you for joining us, Welcome to
the show.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Thank you for having me. It's my pleasure.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
So I guess as a when you're as a defender,
as a defense attorney, specifically, maybe put on your defense
attorney hat for a second. Here, and you're looking at
this indictment both at the federal level at the state level,
you see a lot of loopholes here. What are they?
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Well, the first thing is we've learned that the suspect,
this guy, has not cooperated. So if that's true, then
there's no confession. Normally, in a situation like this, the
FBI would rush to get a confession, which alleviates a
lot of the loopholes that you're starting to point at.
(21:37):
And so really, what you're engaging here doing right now
for your audience is exactly asking questions where the dots
the government cannot connect and listen. To execute someone, you're
going to have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
So the government's going to have to answer some of
these questions, where is the rifle or where's the videos?
(21:59):
Defense attorney, the first thing I'm going to want to
do is hit the government with discovery or request that says,
give me every video, what about neighborhood cameras, all the
ring cameras, And then you start basically working backwards to
establish a timeline and whether or not you can poke
reasonable doubt holes in that timeline. Before we take our break,
(22:21):
I want you to just think of that. Think about
the fact here we have a video of a fella
running right as the shot is being fired that kills
Charlie Kirk. How Come the video does not show him
(22:42):
laying in the prone position to take the shot. Why
is it immediately running? And when you see him running
on the rooftop, you don't see a long rifle, you know,
the kind that they're saying was used to kill. Oh,
Charlie Kirk. You don't see that. And there was no
(23:05):
time to break down that rifle. And even if you
broke down the rifle, even if you practice it a
thousand times, it's still going to take you, you know, thirty seconds,
some kind of amount of time. But instead, this guy's
running immediately as the shot is being fired, and we
(23:27):
don't see a rifle. And even if you was able
to break down the rifle, it doesn't fit in the backpack.
There's so many questions that the FBI hasn't answered yet. Okay,
And when you read the messages, the text messages, it
doesn't sound like one of these twenty two year olds.
It sounds like someone my age talking about squad car
and things of that. When we come back we'll do more.
(23:48):
Welcome back to the Hard Truth. You're listening to John
Deaton on Ihearts WRKO. You can reach the show at
John at Hard Truthshow dot com. John at Hardtruthshow dot com. Okay,
before we took the break, I was playing you my
appearance on the Redacted Podcast, and we were going through
(24:08):
the evidence, including the lack of evidence that has so
far been offered by the FBI, to tie Tyler Robinson
to the murder of Charlie Kirk. Now, I'm not suggesting
that this young man didn't kill him yet. I'm not
saying that. I'm not saying he wasn't a shooter. I'm
not saying anything. We don't have enough evidence yet. I'm
(24:31):
just pointing out that there's a lot of unanswered questions.
And because we have this lack of trust from our institutions,
like our FBI, it's hard to swallow that they just
want us to keep. You know, this is what we're
telling you move on in your life and forget any
of the other details. And I refuse to do so,
(24:55):
and many of you I know out there refused to
do so. But let's continue you with my appearance on
the Redacted Podcast.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
Check it out.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
I'm just very focused on this indictment and the loopholes
that defense would have to push here, because you're already
seeing the lack of evidence from the video side, we're
seeing there was a camera right behind Charlie Kirk. Where
is that video evidence that would show the trajectory of
the bullets? There's apparently a TPUSA individual who took the
camera down has that information. You can see here he
(25:30):
grabs it right out of the back of the tent
and then puts it in a bag. I know CANDUs
Owens has been asking, hey, can we see this footage please?
It would certainly answer the questions which trajectory this bullet
came from. In addition to which we also have now
evidence that the university has already been doing construction work
on the exact site. So we have overhead camera footage
(25:50):
now showing like they're actively almost like taking over this
crime scene. I mean, this is to my mind still
a crime scene. So now the university is already paid
over this entire area. What would you say as a
defense attorney.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
I would say that the first motions I would be
filing was a spoilation motion under the law, and if
the government can't produce that evidence, then you would get
a spoilation charge where the judge would say to the jury,
the government did not secure this evidence. You can assume
that it was not in favor of the government's theory
(26:24):
of the case, and therefore the evidence has been spoiled.
As a defense attorney, I would play a zero in
on the person jumping off the roof saying where is
the gun? You know, and then you break it down
in the milliseconds of he didn't have time to break
that rifle down. The rifle would not fit in his
(26:46):
backpack regardless where is the rifle? And you know that's
one big issue where then you start getting a chalkboard
and saying reasonable doubt number one, reasonable doubt number two,
and you just out all this evidence piecemeal.
Speaker 4 (27:02):
Now how long more question about how the FBI is
kind of peen in the pool here because they're showing
up for media appearances, which continues to change the narrative.
Cash btell Eve been saying he was there to begin with,
is getting in the way of investigators. What does that
hand a defense in terms of what they're saying. I mean,
(27:23):
we all know any kind of litigation you need to
be quiet to make your best case.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
Absolutely, and the fact that Cash Brittel tweeted out immediately
that they had the suspect when in fact they didn't.
They had that George Zenfella, the elderly guy acting as
a decoy. You can make a big mountain of evidence
just out of that, and then you start getting into
other theories of alternate explanations that caused Charlie dusk rush
(27:55):
the judgment. Listen, this isn't a slam dunk and listen,
Charlie Kirk deserves justice. Anyone who was in there deserves justice,
be brought to justice. I should say that was involved
in this assassination. But you know, Cash Bettel, quite frankly objectively,
is getting in his own way.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Yeah what you're saying, Sorry, go ahead, No, I want
to ask you before we let you go here from
a marine perspective, and that's you know, part of your
background as well, not just as a prosecutor and defense attorney.
But when you hear when you see that timeline and
you see this individual in full sprint mode, and when
you match up the time stamps and seeing he's in
full sprint mode, when the people in the audience are
(28:37):
just about to start ducking, like does that comport with
what your experience in the military would be sort of
a pop up and take off really that fast with
a rifle after a shot like that.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
No, not at all, And that's what I meant by
they're going to defense attorney will slow the video up
and highlight everything that your highlight and to drive that
reasonable doubt.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
But it doesn't matter your own common sense.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
And then obviously you're going to get trained professionals as
expert witnesses who can also poke holes in it that
it's just inconsistent with reality.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
All right, John Deanon, We appreciate you joining us as
we're unpacking this, but something just is not adding up here,
and we're hearing from judges and lawyers just like yourself
who are saying there's a lot of problems with this
case right now, you know. So we're going to see
we're going to see if this individual walks free because
they've screwed this up so badly. John, great to see you,
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
Thank you for having me have a great day.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Okay, So, now am I suggesting that Tyler Robinson is
going to walk free? And that is not going to
be found guilty. No, but think about the sloppiness of this.
Think about cash Bettel just literally tweeting out that we
(29:56):
got them the very first su spect. That was a huge, huge,
ill advised thing for him to do. You literally just
gave a jury potential reasonable doubt right there. Okay, who
is that guy, Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. My client,
(30:20):
Tyler Robinson, wasn't even the first person the FBI, I thought.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
The FBI Director of the.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
FBI, Cash Betel, tweeted out that they had solved the
case within the first ten seconds of the murder.
Speaker 2 (30:37):
And so.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I don't get it. And then when you add this
lack of transparency that the government and the FBI has
been consistently putting out, and it's not just Trump's team,
it's the Biden team, it seems that they want us
to be morons right back, the public to be idiots.
(31:02):
Remember we're talking about a government that for over sixty
five years wouldn't allow us any of the JFK files,
and they always come up with, you know, oh, well,
there's still people alive, and they don't want to just
come clean and admit the CIA killed an American president.
(31:29):
Because that's what happened, plain and simple. It's what happened.
Whether it was because of the Bay of Pigs or
whether because of he was going to dismantle the CIA. Okay,
but as undoubtedly Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone.
He was a government in confidential informant. That's who Lee R. V.
(31:56):
Oswald was. He was hired by the CIA at some
point he was on government payroll. Okay, this has all
been disclosed in documents, but for almost what seventy years,
they just don't want us to know that our own
government killed one of our own presidents, because that's what happened,
(32:17):
and so so many unanswered questions related to Charlie Kirk.
I mean, listen, when you add the things that we
went over here tonight that I did on that podcast,
and then you hear that the medical examiner said that
(32:39):
Charlie's bones were like Superman, and that he was so
healthy and his bone density and structure was so strong
that it stopped the bullet. Oh where is the bullet?
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Is what I want to know? Is it still in Charlie?
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Is that what the government wants us to believe? Would
they bury Charlie if the round was inside them, or
would they get the round out to match the ballistics
with the actual firearm rifle that they're saying Tyler Robinson used.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
To shoot him.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
And I can tell you from both hunting experiences from
my time in the Marine Corps learning you know, ammunition
and different types of weapons. I mean, this was basically
a hunting rifle, but one hundred and forty five yards.
It was between one hundred and forty five and one
(33:49):
hundred and seventy yards. I'm not sure exactly. That's not
very far, to be honest with you. And when you're
one hundred and forty five yards away and you have
a high powered rifle with a high powered scope from
an elevated position with a clear line of sight, it's
not that difficult of a shot if you've practiced it
a few times, if you practice using that scope and
(34:12):
how to calibrate it to put it for two hundred
yards or one hundred fifty yards or one hundred yards
whatever you.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Estimate your distance to be.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
But at one hundred and forty five yards, that caliber ammunition.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Would go through.
Speaker 1 (34:32):
Ninety nine humans out of ten thousand.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
I guess I mean.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
That there's only an entrance wound, there's no exit wound.
I mean, all these things are possible. And the point is,
you know, people wouldn't engage in conspiracy theories if the
government was just honest, if the FBI was just honest
and gave us accurate information, then there wouldn't be these
(35:00):
conspiracy theories, right. I mean, my god, Benjamin nan Yahoo,
the Prime Minister of Israel, has on five occasions publicly
said that Israel did not assassinate Charlie Kirk. I mean,
because people like Candice Owens and others, Okay, even Tucker
(35:24):
Carlson are implying that maybe Israel was behind it. I'm
not saying that. I'm not suggesting that. I certainly at
this point don't believe that. But we wouldn't be speculating
like that. These people wouldn't be out there if we
had a competent FBI that was honest. Listen to the
(35:45):
Hard Truth. I'm John Deep Welcome back to the Hard Truth.
I'm John Deaton. You are listening to ihearts WRKO six
eighty eight M. You can reach me at the Hard Truth.
John at Hardruthshow dot com. John at hartrootshow dot com.
After saying that about five hundred times. You think I
would be able to do it without slipping up, But hey,
(36:07):
we keep it real here on the hard truth. And
what else is there to talk about. There's so much
to talk about.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
Mayor Wu is.
Speaker 1 (36:21):
Going to be the next mayor of Boston. In fact,
Josh Craft, who was challenging her, has dropped out after
the preliminary because Mayor Wu got seventy five percent of
the vote and so she's running unopposed. And it really
(36:44):
is a tragic thing.
Speaker 2 (36:46):
Listen. I think Mayor.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Wu is a disaster for Boston. I think that there
are basic things that you don't do. You could protect
people's rights without protecting.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Rapists and criminals.
Speaker 1 (37:06):
I mean, I don't agree with the administration and some
of the obviously implementation that they've done with deportations, but
if our elected officials would work with the government, then
they could control some of it. But there's a certain
(37:28):
things that should be easy, right. It should be very
easy to say this guy who came over here two
years ago illegally and is charged with child rape or
has been selling drugs, that we're going to deport that guy,
(37:50):
and when he or she is arrested we're going to
hold that.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
Person that is a here illegally. In the last few years, b.
Speaker 1 (38:06):
Has been charged with a violent crime like child rape
or drug distribution. That should be an easy call, Like here, ice,
take this bad guy and get him out.
Speaker 2 (38:22):
Of our country.
Speaker 1 (38:25):
Get him away from other young kids so that he
doesn't rape or molest another child. Let's make sure that
if he's so drugs and distributed drugs, that he doesn't
give any more of these fit no contaminated drugs that
kill people the very first time they try it. Let's
(38:50):
get them off the street. Those are easy. I mean,
I don't understand why they would side for those folks.
Now I understand siding with other folks. Someone's been here
ten years and yes they're here illegally, and they have
a family, and they're paying their taxes and they're on
the books, or their visa is expired. Yes, I understand
(39:14):
they're technically here illegal. But that's not a drug dealer.
That's not a child rapist. We got to be able
to make a distinction. But Mayor Wu and Governor Healey
are the type of they just say no, we're going
to hide the drug dealers and the rapists. So that
Ice doesn't catch them, and you want that does that
(39:35):
exasperates the problem because now because you're not cooperating to
get the bad guys out, then Ice comes in and
then it's chaotic. And I may not agree with the
way ICE always operates. I certainly have some strong disagreements,
like snatching that tough student because she wrote an op
(39:58):
ed against Israel.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
Agree with that wholeheartedly.
Speaker 1 (40:03):
But getting rid of a rapist is an easy one.
It's easy here get.
Speaker 2 (40:09):
Rid of them.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
But they don't do that, and so they protect those folks.
But that's who the mayor is going to be again,
because that's who the people have voted, you know. But
what is so disheartening is that some of these individuals
run unopposed. You know.
Speaker 2 (40:30):
One of the most demoralizing things.
Speaker 1 (40:33):
That I experienced when I ran against Elizabeth Warren. I
remember going to the primary day when I went to
vote for myself and I voted you know where I
live in Bolton, And when I got to the ballot,
(40:53):
I was the only contested race, right. All the others
were uncontested in the primaries. It could be a council member,
it could be any type of committee person, school district,
it would just be unopposed Democrat, unopposed, unopposed Democrat, unopposed Democrat.
(41:18):
Same thing in the general election when I voted for
myself against Elizabeth Warren, it was like the only contested
race except for like president of the United States. Everything
else on the state level was uncontested and it was
all Democrats, And my god, that's not healthy. I would
(41:40):
feel the same way if it was all Republicans. And
we've got to do something about that. Whether you're an
independent or whether you're a disenfranchised Democrat, whether you're a Republican,
we've got to get good people to challenge this one
party rule because it is killing Massachusetts.
Speaker 2 (42:05):
It really is.
Speaker 1 (42:08):
It is absolutely every statewide office, every federal office, every
congress member, both United States Senator, Secretary of State, treasurer, auditor,
attorney general, governor, lieutenant governor just goes on and on.
The state Senate and the state House eighty five percent Democrats,
(42:32):
and that's just not a healthy system. So if you're
out there and you're listening and you've thought about running
for local office.
Speaker 2 (42:40):
I encourage you to do it. Reach out to me.
Speaker 1 (42:44):
I'll help you in any way that I can. We've
got to get common sense people voting. And so that's
the news on the election front. Mayor we will be
our next mayor. On the Republican Gubnti Toyo race, we
have obviously Brian Shortsleeve who's on the show, Mike Kneely
(43:06):
who's on the show. Rumor has it that there will
be a third person enter the race, A lot of
rumors out there. I have no idea, but a lot
of talk about Mike mcnog very successful entrepreneur and very
(43:28):
impressive guy as well. If he does get in the race,
we're gonna have a three person governor's race for the
Republican primary to go up against Mori Heally in twenty
twenty six. Now on the Senate side, there's been some news.
(43:53):
We know that Jake Auchinclaus, Congressman auching Claus has officially
said he will not challenge Markey. He's not going to
get in the Democratic primary. However, strong rumor that seth Molten.
He was in Salem with a TV crew or a
(44:14):
video crew camera following him. He was asked is he
going to get in the race against Markey for the
Democratic primary for US Senator? He did not rule it out.
He said he had not made up his mind. But
a lot of indications are pointing that Seth Molten is
going to challenge Ed Markey for the Democratic primary for
(44:35):
US Senator. Also, there's still a rumor that Diana Presley
is going to also potentially enter the Democratic primary to
challenge Ed Markey. Now that will be interesting. I can
tell you that Seth Molten has two point two million
dollars cash on hand. Ed Markey has two point two
(44:58):
million cash on hand. And you know what would be
a beautiful thing if it happened, just for help for
it to be a healthy system, is that if the
Democrats had a contestant primary and the Republicans didn't this
time around for US Senate.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
Now that'd be interesting.
Speaker 1 (45:19):
Like last year when I ran, of course, Elizabeth Warren,
no one challenged her on the Democratic primary, so she
didn't have to worry about a primary. I had two
other fellas get on the ballot, and so I had
to fight them to win the primary. And I ended
(45:39):
up winning the primary, and I ended up winning it
pretty big. I got sixty five percent of the vote
despite three people being on the ballot. However, the primary
is September third. So I won the primary big, but
it gave me nine weeks to try to challenge Elizabeth Warren.
Not just imagine that I got two months to challenge
(46:02):
someone is entrenched in a big name like hers, and
I had eight hundred grand left in a cash on hand.
She had twenty three million, and she was Elizabeth Warren,
one of the most well known United States Senators in
the United States of America. And I was a first
time candidate with no name recognition, and I did get
(46:25):
over forty percent. I did have one point three million
people vote for me, So thank you. But it sure
would be nice to see the Democrats fighting it out,
the Republicans get behind a good candidate, and we have
a real good challenge for Ed Markey, because I think
Ed Markey, I think you can beat Seth Moulten. I
(46:48):
don't know if he's in the race, and Seth Moulten
and I and A Presley are all in the race.
Who knows what happens there. But listen, Lorie Trey, Hand,
Elizabeth Warren of others have already endorsed.
Speaker 2 (47:04):
Ed Markey.
Speaker 1 (47:04):
Imagine that they've rushed to endorse a guy that has
been in office for fifty years. Nineteen seventy six, Jimmy
Carter was not even president yet, all right, Jimmy Carter
nineteen seventy six. Ed Markey has been in Washington, DC
(47:26):
ten years longer than the average person's been alive. In Massachusetts,
average voter's forty years old. He's twice the age and
been in office a decade longer than they've been alive.
So I'm hoping someone steps up to challenge Ed. Marky,
you listen to the hard truth. I'm John Deton.
Speaker 2 (47:45):
Have a great week.
Don't touch that dow or change the channel because it's
Sunday at seven pm on Ihearts WRKO. You're listening to
the Hard Truth and I'm John Deaton. Good evening everyone.
It's been a long week. We're all still reeling from
the Charlie Kirk assassination. More shootings, more violence, violence against
(00:24):
ICE agents are taking place. I got to tell you
we live in very, very troubling times. The division in
this country. I've talked about it on this show. It's
at a toxic level. We've got to learn to stop dehumanizing.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
The other side.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You know, it's like I said last week, when you
call people hitler and monsters and say that there's no
chance for democracy hereafter we'll never see elections again, and
you just keep going back and forth, it's going to
lead to violence. And I unfortunately believe there'll be more violence.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
I hope there's not.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
But my god, Congress couldn't even agree on a resolution.
You know, when that Melissa Hartman got murdered, there was
a resolution and it celebrated her life, it condemned the violence.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
It was.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Bipartisan and it was unanimous. Charlie Kirk gets murdered, assassinated
violently on the public screen, and Congress can't even get
together and come up with a way to celebrate the
(01:54):
man's life and condemn political violence. It's just another divisional
thing in this country. It's right up there right with
vaccines and mass and COVID and elections and where you know,
(02:15):
if something bad happened to this country like nine eleven again,
would we come together or would we just point the
finger at each other? Would one side say, see America
deserved it. I don't know. I really don't know. It
is very, very sad to think that people couldn't come
(02:36):
together just to acknowledge a man's life. Doesn't mean you
agree with everything he said. But if we struggle as
a country to condemn political violence for people exercising their
free speech, I don't know if we can ever unite,
(02:58):
to be honest with you, because that's something very very basic,
and I'm telling you free speech is at stake. It's
been under attack for years under Biden. It was under attack, Okay,
the Hunter laptop, Facebook X you know which was Twitter
(03:20):
back then, the FBI, the White House telling them take
that off. That's disinformation, deplatforming individuals and people in the
Biden demonstration celebrated it, they cheered it on. Donald Trump
got deplatformed from x or Facebook, and this conservative voice
got shut down because they said it.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Was hate speech.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
And now we see people on the right celebrating. Okay,
when someone on the other side gets deplatformed, you don't
do that. The First Amendment does not care who the
president is. The First Amendment does not care if you're
a Republican or a Democrat, a liberal or a conservative.
It doesn't care if you're gay, you're straight, you're transgender.
(04:06):
It does not care. And we got people like Pam Bondi,
who's the Attorney General, saying hate speech is going to
be eliminated. Hate speech is protected, Okay, it's only speech
that incites violence. Speech that that you don't like is protected.
I serve seven years in the Marine Corps not to
(04:30):
give you the right not to be offended, but to
give the right to be offended. You can be offended
if someone says something you don't like, if someone says
something that's anti Semitic, unless they are interfering with folks,
unless they're inciting violence against Jews. They said something that's hateful,
they said something that's disgusting and we should condemn it.
(04:55):
But the government does not step in and take away someone.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Right.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
So when we get to the tough student who wrote
an op ed that criticized Israel, Okay, so what she
criticized Israel. We criticized Biden when he was president. The
left is criticizing Trump and he's the president. That's what
we do in America. Yet that student visa was revoked,
(05:27):
and Marco Rubio says, well, it's a privilege.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
It's not right.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Yes, I understand that a student visa, but the person
was here living in American soil. We still honor the
First Amendment and it works both ways. And you know,
just remember this everybody, to all the people out there
that are cheering when you see your side take away
(05:51):
someone's right to free speech and you cheer it, just
know something the other side's going to be in charge again.
If you think that the Democrats are never going to
be in office again, if there's never going to be
a president who happens to be a Democrat who leans left,
then you're fooling yourself. Okay, we could see that in
(06:11):
twenty twenty eight. If the economy something goes bad or
things go wrong, if unemployment's too high, if inflation doesn't
get taken under control, then we could see a Gavin.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Newsom as president. I certainly don't want to see.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
It, but we could, and we could see a return
to them saying to now your team, that's hate speech.
Take that person off X, take that person off Facebook,
take that person off Instagram. You know, we have to
(06:46):
be consistent when we honor things like the First Amendment.
Even if it's disgusting and revolting, a person has a
right to say it. And unless it cites and sites violence,
unless it creates panic like fire in a crowded theater,
then a person has right to say it. If you
(07:08):
live in America, it's one of the things that separates
us from totalitarianisms and separates us from dictatorships. But we
are definitely continuing to see an assault on the First Amendment.
And I should hope people understand how delicate it is.
Now I want to switch gears and listen. You can
(07:34):
reach me at John at Hard Truthshow dot com. John
at Hard Truthshow dot com. You can challenge what I say.
And I got to tell you I'm switching gears because
I am troubled by the lack of transparency that we
(07:55):
seem to get when it comes to the FBI, when
it comes under Comy and now it's under Patel, when
it was Biden in charge. You know, did you trust
anything the FBI said?
Speaker 2 (08:10):
I mean they lied.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
You had all these intelligence officers literally intentionally lie and
say that the Hunter bat Biden laptop was fake, that
it was Russian disinformation, that it wasn't true. They knew
it was true, and they threatened and coerced social media
platforms to not.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Talk about it.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Right, just like you remember, you couldn't even say that
that COVID came from the WUNA lab.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
You couldn't say that it came from a Chinese lab.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
Everybody in the world, the most logical, logical explanation was
that the COVID virus came from the COVID lab in China,
considering that that's where COVID started. But you couldn't even
say that because we had government officials like the FBI,
(09:07):
the CDC, all these agencies telling people lies.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
And I had hoped that.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
We would see an improvement, But I got to ask you,
do you trust everything that the government and the FBI
has been saying, As it relates to Epstein, and.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
I'm bringing up Epstein.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
First and then we're going to move on to Charlie Kirk.
But they produce a video of the cell block that
has four minutes deleted from it. You can clearly see
(09:49):
that it has been edited. But the government underpaymbody puts
it out and says, look here, do you believe that
the cameras weren't working? It just happened. All the cameras
just happened to not be working. Do you believe that
the two guards both happened to fall asleep at the
(10:11):
same time that Epstein killed himself hung himself. Do you
believe there's jail cell was accidentally open un lot so
that someone else potentially could go in there and kill him.
Do you believe all the things that the FBI has
(10:32):
been telling us or do you think that they are
withholding stuff from us? And I submit to you, ladies
and gentlemen, that the FBI is lying to us, and
that includes cash Patil, that includes Dan Bongino.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
They could went in there. They sat a.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
Whole different tune before they got into that those offices,
and they've completely changed their mind. And then they tell
us that okay, just go away right. Here's a doctor tape,
here's an autopsy report that says that the bone in
his neck, which is most consistent with manual or ligature strangulation,
(11:19):
that that's broken. Normally, that bone, it's a floating bone
near your Adam's apple. If you hang yourself with a sheet,
for example, like they submit, it moves, so it wasn't fractured.
But if you have hands crushing the neck, or a
ligature like some kind of you know, extension cord or
(11:43):
something that, or rope or chain or something like that,
it often breaks that bone in your neck. Well, Epstein's
was do we believe the FBI? Next, we're going to
move to Charlie Kirk in the FBI. You're listening to
the Hard Truth. I'm John deep Welcome back to the
Hard Truth. You're listening to John Deeton. That's me, everybody.
(12:05):
Before the break, we were summon up the very incomplete,
suspicious what I believe can be fairly characterized as lies
by our federal government, the FBI regarding the Epstein regarding
Epstein's death, his alleged suicide. We're still waiting on the documents.
(12:29):
We're still waiting to see other perpetrators be prosecuted. I
submit to you all out there that both governments, government
under Biden didn't produce the documents, and the government's not
producing the documents under Trump. And it's listen, Trump threw
(12:52):
Epstein out of Mari Largo. They were beefing.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
You know.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Trump was never on the island. He was on the
plane a few times. I underst I don't even think
it has to do necessarily with Trump, and I didn't
think Biden was involved. It's about the donors, man, It's
about the billionaires, okay, It's about Larry Summers. It's about
(13:18):
these Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, big names that contribute to
both parties who are involved. But it is insane to
say that. Okay, Epstein's the only one to rape those
girls on that island.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
He's the only one.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
Pam Bondi said, we got thousands of ours and all
of those hours, thousands of hours of tapes are just Epstein, Okay,
the alleged, not the alleged. The Epstein victims have gotten
together and they've said that they're going to start naming
names themselves, and that they're going to produce their own
(14:02):
list of Epstein clients. We know Prince Andrew was involved. Again,
there's pictures of Bill Clinton. He's clothed, but he's being
massaged over his clothing as he sits on a bench
on the island. The girl looks like he's fifteen or
sixteen years old. That is giving him a massage, all right.
(14:22):
And so it's not that they're protecting like a president,
or it's not like Trump is protecting himself. It's about
these donors, man, I'm telling you, it's about the billionaires
who are running the show. I think it is fair
to say that unequivocally Epstein was involved in intelligence and
(14:46):
I mean the CIA, and I mean massage. It is
absolutely crystal clear. The former US attorney from Florida had
basically said he was told to give Epstein to get
out jail free card, to give Epstein that sweetheart deal
that for raping children, did not go to prison, got
(15:09):
to go home on the weekends, and all that crap,
because his bosses at the Department of Justice told him that,
do it give him the deal. Epstein is with intelligence.
That's what's been done, and that's what's been said. So
that intelligence, undoubtedly CIA, Mossad.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
And they just don't want.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
It to come out and we need transparency.
Speaker 2 (15:39):
Okay, now that's just Epstein. Let me ask you guys
out there.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
I want you to email me John at Hardtruthshow dot com,
John at Haardtruthshow dot com. Do you believe everything coming
out of the FBI related to Charlie Kirk's assassination do
you I'm gonna play something. It may go past the break,
(16:08):
so I may have to interrupt it. But I was
on a popular podcast called Redacted, and the title of
this is ex prosecutor that talking about me says the
FBI's case has serious loopholes despite the notes, text, DNA evidence,
and arrest. Something about the official Charlie Kirk assassination story
(16:31):
fills off. John Deaton joins us that is from the
Redacted podcast. I'm reading their post on X and so
I want you to listen to this my appearance with
these hosts talking about Charlie Kirk's assassination.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
Well, when you listen to the press conference announcing charges
against Tyler Robinson, particularly at the state level in Utah,
it sounds like an open end shutcase, doesn't it. Surveillance footage,
text messages parents that turned him in an exit, wound
right out of the neck or shot in the neck,
all from the front, all pretty straightforward DNA evidence right
(17:10):
on the trigger of the gun. They find the gun,
they find showcasings with Antifa messages written on them. So done,
you know, move along here. Nothing to see. The text
messages seem like they're pretty darn damning laying everything out
exactly how he did it, his regrets about doing it,
how he felt like he needed to do it, all
of it. So just move along, right, very complete story. Yeah,
it's very convenient.
Speaker 4 (17:30):
But are you satisfied? Are you not satisfied?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
I don't know. I'm not satisfied. But there's emerging video
evidence and inconsistencies that paint a totally different picture here
raise questions. You know, was this guy a patsy that
he had perhaps nothing to do with it at all.
For one thing, the FBI only released a video that
shows the alleged shooter running, but the camera on the
building would have shown him laying in a prone position
(17:54):
firing the shot, as you can see here on your screen.
So we only get after this individual is running. We
don't get him laying in a prone position. We certainly
don't get him firing a gun, even though the camera
was pointed in that position and would have absolutely covered
the prone position of this shooter. The FBI's own video
they released on their YouTube channel doesn't show it, but
(18:15):
it's alleged in the indictment. They say it, and the
Utah State prosecutors say it as well, that they had
arm elbow prints, they have knee prints, and he was
laying in a prone position and fired this kill shot.
One shot, It's all it took. He even saved the
shell casing that was found later in the forest because
it's a bolt action rifle, so you don't pop it out.
(18:36):
It would have stayed inside of the rifle. Then they chose,
though to cut off the first few seconds of this video.
We'd love to see the actual footage of this show
us him laying there. The thing is, it's happening right
at the exact same moment that Charlie Kirk is being
shot when we see him running. We know this because
of the timestamp. When you see, of course, the rooftop
(18:56):
shot from inside the walkway in the cafe area of
the campus, we match that with the video of course
from inside the university walk away, and you can see
him already sprinting as people are ducking. He's already in
full sprint as people begin to duck, So he picks
up the rifle and runs it just a full sprint
and the people are just now reacting to this.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
Again, do we have the video of him jumping, because
I also have questions about that. When he jumps off,
there is a lot of commotion already in the quad
area because a SHOT's been fired and someone's been killed
over dead. Why are the people in the background walking
so casually at a casual gait if just a corner
away from them, people are screaming and running and those
(19:41):
people are just walking casually. Does that make sense to you?
Speaker 3 (19:44):
There's a lot that doesn't make sense to me. I mean,
And what kind of gun did he throw the gun down?
Did it adjust the scope as he throws it off
the roof? There was he carrying the gun at all?
It appears that he is if you look at the
high deff version of this, But interestingly, the FBI's own
website on their own YouTube channel shows this. After he
shot and killed Charlie Kirk, he jumped off the roof
(20:04):
and ran away. He left a gun and ammunition in
a wooded area near the university. This is the YouTube
video that the FBI published initially, and I hadn't caught
this before, but they're saying clearly in this video he
shot and killed Charlie Kirk. He in this video is
the one that we're after. He jumped off and ran away.
He shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Well, how do you
(20:27):
know that at this point when you publish this video,
how do you know that he's the one specifically that
shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Where in this video does
it show it? Please show it to us. So the
FBI's own YouTube channel says this, there's a lot of
other evidence. I want to get to here in a moment,
but I want to do I do want to bring
in an ex prosecutor, US Marine John Deaton, former US
(20:49):
Senate candidate, who knows these things inside it out, both
from the defense position and on the offensive position as
a prosecutor. John, thank you for joining us, Welcome to
the show.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Thank you for having me. It's my pleasure.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
So I guess as a when you're as a defender,
as a defense attorney, specifically, maybe put on your defense
attorney hat for a second. Here, and you're looking at
this indictment both at the federal level at the state level,
you see a lot of loopholes here. What are they?
Speaker 1 (21:17):
Well, the first thing is we've learned that the suspect,
this guy, has not cooperated. So if that's true, then
there's no confession. Normally, in a situation like this, the
FBI would rush to get a confession, which alleviates a
lot of the loopholes that you're starting to point at.
(21:37):
And so really, what you're engaging here doing right now
for your audience is exactly asking questions where the dots
the government cannot connect and listen. To execute someone, you're
going to have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
So the government's going to have to answer some of
these questions, where is the rifle or where's the videos?
(21:59):
Defense attorney, the first thing I'm going to want to
do is hit the government with discovery or request that says,
give me every video, what about neighborhood cameras, all the
ring cameras, And then you start basically working backwards to
establish a timeline and whether or not you can poke
reasonable doubt holes in that timeline. Before we take our break,
(22:21):
I want you to just think of that. Think about
the fact here we have a video of a fella
running right as the shot is being fired that kills
Charlie Kirk. How Come the video does not show him
(22:42):
laying in the prone position to take the shot. Why
is it immediately running? And when you see him running
on the rooftop, you don't see a long rifle, you know,
the kind that they're saying was used to kill. Oh,
Charlie Kirk. You don't see that. And there was no
(23:05):
time to break down that rifle. And even if you
broke down the rifle, even if you practice it a
thousand times, it's still going to take you, you know, thirty seconds,
some kind of amount of time. But instead, this guy's
running immediately as the shot is being fired, and we
(23:27):
don't see a rifle. And even if you was able
to break down the rifle, it doesn't fit in the backpack.
There's so many questions that the FBI hasn't answered yet. Okay,
And when you read the messages, the text messages, it
doesn't sound like one of these twenty two year olds.
It sounds like someone my age talking about squad car
and things of that. When we come back we'll do more.
(23:48):
Welcome back to the Hard Truth. You're listening to John
Deaton on Ihearts WRKO. You can reach the show at
John at Hard Truthshow dot com. John at Hardtruthshow dot com. Okay,
before we took the break, I was playing you my
appearance on the Redacted Podcast, and we were going through
(24:08):
the evidence, including the lack of evidence that has so
far been offered by the FBI, to tie Tyler Robinson
to the murder of Charlie Kirk. Now, I'm not suggesting
that this young man didn't kill him yet. I'm not
saying that. I'm not saying he wasn't a shooter. I'm
not saying anything. We don't have enough evidence yet. I'm
(24:31):
just pointing out that there's a lot of unanswered questions.
And because we have this lack of trust from our institutions,
like our FBI, it's hard to swallow that they just
want us to keep. You know, this is what we're
telling you move on in your life and forget any
of the other details. And I refuse to do so,
(24:55):
and many of you I know out there refused to
do so. But let's continue you with my appearance on
the Redacted Podcast.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
Check it out.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
I'm just very focused on this indictment and the loopholes
that defense would have to push here, because you're already
seeing the lack of evidence from the video side, we're
seeing there was a camera right behind Charlie Kirk. Where
is that video evidence that would show the trajectory of
the bullets? There's apparently a TPUSA individual who took the
camera down has that information. You can see here he
(25:30):
grabs it right out of the back of the tent
and then puts it in a bag. I know CANDUs
Owens has been asking, hey, can we see this footage please?
It would certainly answer the questions which trajectory this bullet
came from. In addition to which we also have now
evidence that the university has already been doing construction work
on the exact site. So we have overhead camera footage
(25:50):
now showing like they're actively almost like taking over this
crime scene. I mean, this is to my mind still
a crime scene. So now the university is already paid
over this entire area. What would you say as a
defense attorney.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
I would say that the first motions I would be
filing was a spoilation motion under the law, and if
the government can't produce that evidence, then you would get
a spoilation charge where the judge would say to the jury,
the government did not secure this evidence. You can assume
that it was not in favor of the government's theory
(26:24):
of the case, and therefore the evidence has been spoiled.
As a defense attorney, I would play a zero in
on the person jumping off the roof saying where is
the gun? You know, and then you break it down
in the milliseconds of he didn't have time to break
that rifle down. The rifle would not fit in his
(26:46):
backpack regardless where is the rifle? And you know that's
one big issue where then you start getting a chalkboard
and saying reasonable doubt number one, reasonable doubt number two,
and you just out all this evidence piecemeal.
Speaker 4 (27:02):
Now how long more question about how the FBI is
kind of peen in the pool here because they're showing
up for media appearances, which continues to change the narrative.
Cash btell Eve been saying he was there to begin with,
is getting in the way of investigators. What does that
hand a defense in terms of what they're saying. I mean,
(27:23):
we all know any kind of litigation you need to
be quiet to make your best case.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
Absolutely, and the fact that Cash Brittel tweeted out immediately
that they had the suspect when in fact they didn't.
They had that George Zenfella, the elderly guy acting as
a decoy. You can make a big mountain of evidence
just out of that, and then you start getting into
other theories of alternate explanations that caused Charlie dusk rush
(27:55):
the judgment. Listen, this isn't a slam dunk and listen,
Charlie Kirk deserves justice. Anyone who was in there deserves justice,
be brought to justice. I should say that was involved
in this assassination. But you know, Cash Bettel, quite frankly objectively,
is getting in his own way.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Yeah what you're saying, Sorry, go ahead, No, I want
to ask you before we let you go here from
a marine perspective, and that's you know, part of your
background as well, not just as a prosecutor and defense attorney.
But when you hear when you see that timeline and
you see this individual in full sprint mode, and when
you match up the time stamps and seeing he's in
full sprint mode, when the people in the audience are
(28:37):
just about to start ducking, like does that comport with
what your experience in the military would be sort of
a pop up and take off really that fast with
a rifle after a shot like that.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
No, not at all, And that's what I meant by
they're going to defense attorney will slow the video up
and highlight everything that your highlight and to drive that
reasonable doubt.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
But it doesn't matter your own common sense.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
And then obviously you're going to get trained professionals as
expert witnesses who can also poke holes in it that
it's just inconsistent with reality.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
All right, John Deanon, We appreciate you joining us as
we're unpacking this, but something just is not adding up here,
and we're hearing from judges and lawyers just like yourself
who are saying there's a lot of problems with this
case right now, you know. So we're going to see
we're going to see if this individual walks free because
they've screwed this up so badly. John, great to see you,
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
Thank you for having me have a great day.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Okay, So, now am I suggesting that Tyler Robinson is
going to walk free? And that is not going to
be found guilty. No, but think about the sloppiness of this.
Think about cash Bettel just literally tweeting out that we
(29:56):
got them the very first su spect. That was a huge, huge,
ill advised thing for him to do. You literally just
gave a jury potential reasonable doubt right there. Okay, who
is that guy, Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. My client,
(30:20):
Tyler Robinson, wasn't even the first person the FBI, I thought.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
The FBI Director of the.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
FBI, Cash Betel, tweeted out that they had solved the
case within the first ten seconds of the murder.
Speaker 2 (30:37):
And so.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I don't get it. And then when you add this
lack of transparency that the government and the FBI has
been consistently putting out, and it's not just Trump's team,
it's the Biden team, it seems that they want us
to be morons right back, the public to be idiots.
(31:02):
Remember we're talking about a government that for over sixty
five years wouldn't allow us any of the JFK files,
and they always come up with, you know, oh, well,
there's still people alive, and they don't want to just
come clean and admit the CIA killed an American president.
(31:29):
Because that's what happened, plain and simple. It's what happened.
Whether it was because of the Bay of Pigs or
whether because of he was going to dismantle the CIA. Okay,
but as undoubtedly Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone.
He was a government in confidential informant. That's who Lee R. V.
(31:56):
Oswald was. He was hired by the CIA at some
point he was on government payroll. Okay, this has all
been disclosed in documents, but for almost what seventy years,
they just don't want us to know that our own
government killed one of our own presidents, because that's what happened,
(32:17):
and so so many unanswered questions related to Charlie Kirk.
I mean, listen, when you add the things that we
went over here tonight that I did on that podcast,
and then you hear that the medical examiner said that
(32:39):
Charlie's bones were like Superman, and that he was so
healthy and his bone density and structure was so strong
that it stopped the bullet. Oh where is the bullet?
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Is what I want to know? Is it still in Charlie?
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Is that what the government wants us to believe? Would
they bury Charlie if the round was inside them, or
would they get the round out to match the ballistics
with the actual firearm rifle that they're saying Tyler Robinson used.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
To shoot him.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
And I can tell you from both hunting experiences from
my time in the Marine Corps learning you know, ammunition
and different types of weapons. I mean, this was basically
a hunting rifle, but one hundred and forty five yards.
It was between one hundred and forty five and one
(33:49):
hundred and seventy yards. I'm not sure exactly. That's not
very far, to be honest with you. And when you're
one hundred and forty five yards away and you have
a high powered rifle with a high powered scope from
an elevated position with a clear line of sight, it's
not that difficult of a shot if you've practiced it
a few times, if you practice using that scope and
(34:12):
how to calibrate it to put it for two hundred
yards or one hundred fifty yards or one hundred yards
whatever you.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Estimate your distance to be.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
But at one hundred and forty five yards, that caliber ammunition.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Would go through.
Speaker 1 (34:32):
Ninety nine humans out of ten thousand.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
I guess I mean.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
That there's only an entrance wound, there's no exit wound.
I mean, all these things are possible. And the point is,
you know, people wouldn't engage in conspiracy theories if the
government was just honest, if the FBI was just honest
and gave us accurate information, then there wouldn't be these
(35:00):
conspiracy theories, right. I mean, my god, Benjamin nan Yahoo,
the Prime Minister of Israel, has on five occasions publicly
said that Israel did not assassinate Charlie Kirk. I mean,
because people like Candice Owens and others, Okay, even Tucker
(35:24):
Carlson are implying that maybe Israel was behind it. I'm
not saying that. I'm not suggesting that. I certainly at
this point don't believe that. But we wouldn't be speculating
like that. These people wouldn't be out there if we
had a competent FBI that was honest. Listen to the
(35:45):
Hard Truth. I'm John Deep Welcome back to the Hard Truth.
I'm John Deaton. You are listening to ihearts WRKO six
eighty eight M. You can reach me at the Hard Truth.
John at Hardruthshow dot com. John at hartrootshow dot com.
After saying that about five hundred times. You think I
would be able to do it without slipping up, But hey,
(36:07):
we keep it real here on the hard truth. And
what else is there to talk about. There's so much
to talk about.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
Mayor Wu is.
Speaker 1 (36:21):
Going to be the next mayor of Boston. In fact,
Josh Craft, who was challenging her, has dropped out after
the preliminary because Mayor Wu got seventy five percent of
the vote and so she's running unopposed. And it really
(36:44):
is a tragic thing.
Speaker 2 (36:46):
Listen. I think Mayor.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Wu is a disaster for Boston. I think that there
are basic things that you don't do. You could protect
people's rights without protecting.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Rapists and criminals.
Speaker 1 (37:06):
I mean, I don't agree with the administration and some
of the obviously implementation that they've done with deportations, but
if our elected officials would work with the government, then
they could control some of it. But there's a certain
(37:28):
things that should be easy, right. It should be very
easy to say this guy who came over here two
years ago illegally and is charged with child rape or
has been selling drugs, that we're going to deport that guy,
(37:50):
and when he or she is arrested we're going to
hold that.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
Person that is a here illegally. In the last few years, b.
Speaker 1 (38:06):
Has been charged with a violent crime like child rape
or drug distribution. That should be an easy call, Like here, ice,
take this bad guy and get him out.
Speaker 2 (38:22):
Of our country.
Speaker 1 (38:25):
Get him away from other young kids so that he
doesn't rape or molest another child. Let's make sure that
if he's so drugs and distributed drugs, that he doesn't
give any more of these fit no contaminated drugs that
kill people the very first time they try it. Let's
(38:50):
get them off the street. Those are easy. I mean,
I don't understand why they would side for those folks.
Now I understand siding with other folks. Someone's been here
ten years and yes they're here illegally, and they have
a family, and they're paying their taxes and they're on
the books, or their visa is expired. Yes, I understand
(39:14):
they're technically here illegal. But that's not a drug dealer.
That's not a child rapist. We got to be able
to make a distinction. But Mayor Wu and Governor Healey
are the type of they just say no, we're going
to hide the drug dealers and the rapists. So that
Ice doesn't catch them, and you want that does that
(39:35):
exasperates the problem because now because you're not cooperating to
get the bad guys out, then Ice comes in and
then it's chaotic. And I may not agree with the
way ICE always operates. I certainly have some strong disagreements,
like snatching that tough student because she wrote an op
(39:58):
ed against Israel.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
Agree with that wholeheartedly.
Speaker 1 (40:03):
But getting rid of a rapist is an easy one.
It's easy here get.
Speaker 2 (40:09):
Rid of them.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
But they don't do that, and so they protect those folks.
But that's who the mayor is going to be again,
because that's who the people have voted, you know. But
what is so disheartening is that some of these individuals
run unopposed. You know.
Speaker 2 (40:30):
One of the most demoralizing things.
Speaker 1 (40:33):
That I experienced when I ran against Elizabeth Warren. I
remember going to the primary day when I went to
vote for myself and I voted you know where I
live in Bolton, And when I got to the ballot,
(40:53):
I was the only contested race, right. All the others
were uncontested in the primaries. It could be a council member,
it could be any type of committee person, school district,
it would just be unopposed Democrat, unopposed, unopposed Democrat, unopposed Democrat.
(41:18):
Same thing in the general election when I voted for
myself against Elizabeth Warren, it was like the only contested
race except for like president of the United States. Everything
else on the state level was uncontested and it was
all Democrats, And my god, that's not healthy. I would
(41:40):
feel the same way if it was all Republicans. And
we've got to do something about that. Whether you're an
independent or whether you're a disenfranchised Democrat, whether you're a Republican,
we've got to get good people to challenge this one
party rule because it is killing Massachusetts.
Speaker 2 (42:05):
It really is.
Speaker 1 (42:08):
It is absolutely every statewide office, every federal office, every
congress member, both United States Senator, Secretary of State, treasurer, auditor,
attorney general, governor, lieutenant governor just goes on and on.
The state Senate and the state House eighty five percent Democrats,
(42:32):
and that's just not a healthy system. So if you're
out there and you're listening and you've thought about running
for local office.
Speaker 2 (42:40):
I encourage you to do it. Reach out to me.
Speaker 1 (42:44):
I'll help you in any way that I can. We've
got to get common sense people voting. And so that's
the news on the election front. Mayor we will be
our next mayor. On the Republican Gubnti Toyo race, we
have obviously Brian Shortsleeve who's on the show, Mike Kneely
(43:06):
who's on the show. Rumor has it that there will
be a third person enter the race, A lot of
rumors out there. I have no idea, but a lot
of talk about Mike mcnog very successful entrepreneur and very
(43:28):
impressive guy as well. If he does get in the race,
we're gonna have a three person governor's race for the
Republican primary to go up against Mori Heally in twenty
twenty six. Now on the Senate side, there's been some news.
(43:53):
We know that Jake Auchinclaus, Congressman auching Claus has officially
said he will not challenge Markey. He's not going to
get in the Democratic primary. However, strong rumor that seth Molten.
He was in Salem with a TV crew or a
(44:14):
video crew camera following him. He was asked is he
going to get in the race against Markey for the
Democratic primary for US Senator? He did not rule it out.
He said he had not made up his mind. But
a lot of indications are pointing that Seth Molten is
going to challenge Ed Markey for the Democratic primary for
(44:35):
US Senator. Also, there's still a rumor that Diana Presley
is going to also potentially enter the Democratic primary to
challenge Ed Markey. Now that will be interesting. I can
tell you that Seth Molten has two point two million
dollars cash on hand. Ed Markey has two point two
(44:58):
million cash on hand. And you know what would be
a beautiful thing if it happened, just for help for
it to be a healthy system, is that if the
Democrats had a contestant primary and the Republicans didn't this
time around for US Senate.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
Now that'd be interesting.
Speaker 1 (45:19):
Like last year when I ran, of course, Elizabeth Warren,
no one challenged her on the Democratic primary, so she
didn't have to worry about a primary. I had two
other fellas get on the ballot, and so I had
to fight them to win the primary. And I ended
(45:39):
up winning the primary, and I ended up winning it
pretty big. I got sixty five percent of the vote
despite three people being on the ballot. However, the primary
is September third. So I won the primary big, but
it gave me nine weeks to try to challenge Elizabeth Warren.
Not just imagine that I got two months to challenge
(46:02):
someone is entrenched in a big name like hers, and
I had eight hundred grand left in a cash on hand.
She had twenty three million, and she was Elizabeth Warren,
one of the most well known United States Senators in
the United States of America. And I was a first
time candidate with no name recognition, and I did get
(46:25):
over forty percent. I did have one point three million
people vote for me, So thank you. But it sure
would be nice to see the Democrats fighting it out,
the Republicans get behind a good candidate, and we have
a real good challenge for Ed Markey, because I think
Ed Markey, I think you can beat Seth Moulten. I
(46:48):
don't know if he's in the race, and Seth Moulten
and I and A Presley are all in the race.
Who knows what happens there. But listen, Lorie Trey, Hand,
Elizabeth Warren of others have already endorsed.
Speaker 2 (47:04):
Ed Markey.
Speaker 1 (47:04):
Imagine that they've rushed to endorse a guy that has
been in office for fifty years. Nineteen seventy six, Jimmy
Carter was not even president yet, all right, Jimmy Carter
nineteen seventy six. Ed Markey has been in Washington, DC
(47:26):
ten years longer than the average person's been alive. In Massachusetts,
average voter's forty years old. He's twice the age and
been in office a decade longer than they've been alive.
So I'm hoping someone steps up to challenge Ed. Marky,
you listen to the hard truth. I'm John Deton.
Speaker 2 (47:45):
Have a great week.
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!