6-18-24 - 8am - Secret Service, Election Irregularities and Manifesto

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Hey, Mike, it does seempretty obvious they're going to try and replace
Brandon with somebody else. Do youthink Michelle Obama would go for it?
No, somebody They got to getnews someme. I don't know. I
don't see him have a national appeal. There's got to be somebody. They're
not just gonna lie down and takethis lightly. I just wonder who they're

(00:20):
gonna try and replace him with.Uh. I mean there's you know,
they're governors and senators and others,but it will not be Michelle Obama and
I and I I'm not accusing youof this, but I just wish Republicans
would quit focusing on Michelle Michelle,you know, Barack Obama, and I'm

(00:41):
gonna and then I'm a focus onwhat I wanted to talk about. But
gotta deal with damn talk Aback,right. Uh. Barack Obama, in
an interview for that Hollywood fundraiser,was talking about how he doesn't even paying
attention to cable news anymore. Heis too focused on his Netflix project and
you know, whatever he's doing todraw in money, traveling around the world,

(01:06):
living in his big houses all overthe country, running the White House,
right now through his staff meetings.Uh, and Michelle Obama has zero
interest in doing it, So justget get it out of your mind.
It's just not going to happen.And it's i'd put it out about what,
well, is there a chance?There's always a chance, but it's

(01:29):
like zero point zero zero zero zerozero zero zero one that she's going to
be the nominee so close to youknow, a healthy, middle aged to
younger person dying from COVID alone.I'm sorry, what it's about the same
chance? Yeah, okay, okay, I missed about the same chance.

(01:51):
And I was like, how's hetalking about a middle aged younger person dying?
Got it? COVID? They gota loan, got it? Got
it? I'm gonna be got it? So what I'm good? Yeah,
okay, here we go, Herewe go. The me had a Hollywood
fundraiser. A member of the UnitedStates Secret Service was robbed a gunpoint in

(02:15):
Orange County. This happened on Saturday. Discharged their firearm during the incident.
Now it's unclear whether the agent involvedwas a member of the Biden traveling security
detail or he was just on assignment, or that was his that was his

(02:36):
location that he was working the SecretService. Set in statement, a member
of the U S Secret Service wasthe victim of an armed robbery in Tustin,
California, late Saturday when returning froma work assignment. The employee discharged
their service weapon during the incident,but unknown if the assay lunz plural struck.

(03:00):
We are thankful that the employee didnot sustain any any injuries. Now,
of course, the police department inTustin says the investigation is open and
ongoing. So here's Biden and afundraiser in California, along with a bunch
of celebrities at the Peacock Theater.It's reported that Biden had already gotten back

(03:23):
to his hotel room by nine pm, half an hour before the arm robb
reincident. This is the latest ina continuing number of events of unwanted publicity
for the President's protective Service. Rememberback in late April that a member of

(03:49):
Kamala Harris's Secret Service detail was involvedin a physical fight with her superior.
Then it was revealed that the agentin question, Michelle Hersey, had thrown
minstrel pads to other agents and hada really concerning history of mental health incidents.

(04:09):
Agents within the Service had raised alot of concerns, numerous concerns about
Hersey's erotic behavior and history. TheSecret Service was, I'm using the verb
was because I don't think it anylonger. Is it's still probably the premiere,

(04:34):
but it's becoming tainted, it's tarnished, and I think I know why
there is no longer in this countrya standard and the Secret Service, to
me was that kind of that standardof professionalism. You know, you're trained

(04:55):
to take a bullet for the presidentif you're on the detail or train that
way anyway, but it was theepitome of professionalism. It was the epitome
of here's our mission, whether thatis, you know, to track down,
hunt down, and arrest and goafter counterfeiters, but also to protect

(05:23):
dignitaries and their protectees, and todo it in such a way that the
that the chances of someone you know, attacking and hurting or killing or assassinating
any of their protectees was slim tonone. That presidential bubble, and for

(05:48):
that matter, of the vice presidentialbubble, which I've been in also was
a bubble where you just as youas you watched it from in side the
bubble every move they make, everythingthey do, and I was privileged to

(06:09):
not just be inside the bubble forboth the President and the Vice President,
but to be on the outside ofthe bubble in the planning of events,
where I would be inside the bubblewith the President and watching all the meticulous
planning in detail that they went throughalong with the White House Advanced Team,

(06:31):
Because when the President travels and goesto event, the two main groups that
are involved are the White House AdvancedTeam and the Secret Service, and they
work in conjunction as a team.Now, everybody knows who has final say,
and that's the Secret Service. TheWhite House Advanced Team may want to,
you know, we want the Presidentto go stand on this balcony and

(06:54):
speak to throngs of thousands that wereally you know, and the Secret Service
will say, well, we can't. We can't vetterbody in those throngs,
and that presents, you know,there's too many places where things could happen
and all we could do is react, and so we don't know, you
can't do that. Now, oftentimesI would hear the Secret Service say,
but as an option, you coulddo this instead, because that allows us

(07:16):
to secure a perimeter to protect thepresident from any attempts on his life.
So, yeah, you might dothat. In the White House advanced team
would say, well, okay,how can we make that work? I
don't see now. Granted I haven'tbeen there for a while, but in
my almost six years in DC,I never ever came across a Secret Service

(07:40):
agent who was so badcracked crazy thatthey are throwing minstrel pads at other agents,
and that other agents had reported that. Second tired of Second, tired
of what. It would fascinate mebecause I would I would have lunch on

(08:01):
a fairly regular basis with the headof the Secret Service at that time and
just having a conversation. I mean, every once in a while i'd say,
you know, hey, listen,I was with it because he didn't
travel all the time of the president. Would I would ask questions over lunch,
like, you know, why Iwas there while we were in Los

(08:22):
Angeles or while we were in Philadelphia, while we were in the middle of
nowhere. I would see the agentsdo this, whatever this might be,
and why what was that all about? And to hear the stories about the
logistics and the planning and how theyrelied on just like just like soldiers in

(08:46):
a foxhole, they relied on theirbuddies. Well, the Secret Service relies
on each other because they know thatif there is one week link that will
be at exploited by someone who wantsto create having chaos or harm to the
president, and they'll see that weekLea and they'll take it. It is

(09:09):
a degradation of just everything that wedo in this country. Someone on the
text line to sort of segue intothis, says that I keep missing the
elephant in the room, dominion votingmachines. Well, no, I haven't.

(09:31):
Over three hundred election officials across fiveswing states are screaming about ballot irregularities
and election integrity in those jurisdictions.Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina,
and Wisconsin have all cited instances raisingconcerns about voter registration practices, ballot
counting, and chain a custody ofballots once they've been submitted. The far

(09:58):
left, far left democratic line nonprofitcalled Public Wise has accused three hundred and
thirty four state and local officials ofbeing election deniers and working to undermine democracy.
But an examination of the actual claimsbeing made by state and local election

(10:18):
officials actually does reveal legitimate concerns aboutthe security and the integrity of our elections.
Now, before I continue in thispart of the story, go back
to the Secret Service for a moment. There is something that the American public

(10:39):
kind of subliminally, without really unconsciouslyis about it work. The American public
has unconsciously assumed that the United StatesSecret Service is this organization of the utmost
integrity, absolutely committed to their mission, and that we don't have to worry
about it. We don't have toworry about the safety president or any other

(11:01):
dignitaries or protectees because the Secret Servicedoes its job and does its job well.
Well. There was a time whenwe thought about our election systems.
We don't worry about that way.This is the freaking the United States of
America. But this examination, whenyou really look closely the claims being made

(11:24):
by the state and state and localelection officials, does reveal legitimate concerns about
the security and the integrity of ourelections in at least two of the jurisdictions
that were listed by public wise officials, and those jurisdictions have correctly called into
question well documented election ill irregularities andpotential illegalities. Let's walk through a couple

(11:50):
of them. Fulton County, Georgia. One of the officials listed by public
Wise is George's Lieutenant Governor, BurtJones. He's a Republican. He opposed
the certification of the twenty twenty fourpresidential election results in Fulton County, Georgia.
Now back in May, an investigationby Georgia election officials found that Fulton

(12:13):
County had implemented improper procedures during itstwenty twenty I said twenty twenty four.
I mean twenty twenty, but itapplies to twenty twenty four. They found
that Fulton County, this is thehome of Fanny Willis. You know.
We call her Fanny because all wecare about is areer. I'll never get
that one. We call her Fannybecause it's funny that they had implemented improper

(12:37):
procedures during the twenty twenty presidential electionrecount. The inquiry was prompted by a
complaint lodged on July eight, twentytwenty two. That complaint alleged the inappropriate
count of seventeen thousand, eight hundredand fifty two ballots. Now afterwards,

(12:58):
The investigation revealed not only duplicate ballotimages, implying probable multiple scanning of some
ballots, but also the thousands ofballot images are missing and two years later,
no one's found them. In lateMay, a woman by the name
of Julie Adams. She's a Republicanmember of the Fulton County, Georgia Board

(13:20):
of Elections. She filed a lawsuitagainst the county's election director, Nadine Williams,
alleging that she barred state officials fromaccessing critical election information during this year's
primary elections. We used to neverhear these kinds of problems, just as
we used to never hear of anyproblems with the US Secret Service. The

(13:45):
institutions of this country that we havejust taken for granted are being decimated,
and I believe they're being decimated purposelyby Democrats, globalists, marks all of
these groups their intent on destroying thiscountry. Maricopa County, Arizona. I

(14:07):
got a lot of ties to MaricopaCounty in Arizona. Again public Wise,
that left leaning group. They claimthat Maricopa County is being nefariously influenced by

(14:28):
conservative election officials and now Maricopa Countyfaces an ongoing lawsuit for continuing to violate
state election law. The plaintiffs inthat lawsuit alleged that county officials failed to
maintain the mandatory, legally required chainof custody for ballots, and that it
resulted in a discrepancy of over twentyfive thousand votes. Razor thin margins decided

(14:58):
several twenty twenty two state wide racesin Arizona. For example, the gubernatorial
contest between Katie Hobbes and Kerry Lakewas separated by only seventeen thousand, one
hundred and seventeen votes. Now,not all of those twenty five thousand votes
in the lawsuit that they're alleging irregularitiesmay or may not have changed that outcome,

(15:24):
but it raises the question about theintegrity of the election itself. And
when you don't have confidence in theintegrity of an election, whether that number
would have changed the outcome or not. That's what causes people whose brains then

(15:46):
start racing. What if this,What if that it's been stolen, there
was cheating, you know, anyall of which could be true. Let's
go to North Carolina. The issueof non citizen voters has now drawn the

(16:06):
attention of federal officials and the Departmentof Justice. Don't laugh, but at
least the Department of Justice is undertakingan extentive investigation into the occurrence, resulting
in multiple prosecutions. In North Carolina, federal prosecutors had brought charges against thirty

(16:27):
seven non citizens who voted in NorthCarolina's twenty sixteen election. By a three
to one ratio, those non citizenssupported Democrats over Republican Canada. They cast
ninety nine ballots in multiple elections goingas far back as nineteen ninety six.

(16:48):
Now, most of the non citizensparticipated only in federal elections and cast ballots,
and only a handful of local elections. Still, what the hell is
that just the tip of the iceberg. The article about the Secret Service agent
that was rob was written so badly, forced and fingernails on a chalkboard.

(17:11):
The agent discharged their weapon, goodlord, The agent discharged his weapon.
The agent discharged her weapon. Evenjournalists don't know how to write at a
fourth grade level. You got toget with the program. Uh yeah,

(17:33):
you don't know how that Secret Serviceagent identified And we don't want to point
out that it might have been afemale agent because they're inferior. Whoa one
of the most most famous moments inAmerican journalism. By the way, let

(17:59):
me just you know, I'm gonnago back and look at the story because
I I wonder if that was meusing that pronoun, or if that was
the pronoun in the story, andmake the gobers go look it up.
Michael says, go here dot com. The story is posted, then we
really want to go back. Well, I'm just curious, where where did
you find the story? It wasa Fox News one? Was it a

(18:19):
Fox News? Mine? Wasn't theFox News story? So it's interesting.
I wonder if I've succumbed to thelanguage. Let's talk about journalism for a
moment. Nineteen seventy one, theNew York Times and The Washington Post published

(18:41):
excerpts of what would be known asthe Pentagon Papers. Remember that Daniel Elsberg,
that was the Defense Department analysts thatworked for the Rand Corporation, had
given the two newspapers top secret documents. And those documents showed not only that
the United States was losing the warin Vietnam, but that the Pentagon had
known that the US couldn't win thewar for many years. But yet kept

(19:03):
fighting it anyway. The Pentagon,the executive branch, did everything they could
to prevent the publication of the documents, but the Supreme Court ruled that the
First Amendment protected the newspaper's right topublish them, even though Ellsberg had broken
the law by leaking the documents.Now we get the Twitter files, and

(19:29):
then the Twitter files, we findout that individuals that had links to both
US military and US intelligence organizations hadbeen trying for years to convince reporters that
they should no longer follow the PentagonPaper's principle because they were claiming that doing

(19:51):
so would help foreign adversaries. Theyused the argument at the same moment that
they were attempting to pre bunk predeb the Hunter Biden laptop, and that
was months before The New York Postpublished articles about its existence. I don't
have any problem with the Pentagon Papers. I remember at the time not having

(20:14):
any problem with the Pentagon Papers.There are certain things that and the newspapers.
If you go back and study thehistory of the Pentagon Papers, both
the Times and the Post really deliberatedover whether or not to publish those The

(20:37):
editorial rooms were fighting tooth and nailone side against the other about whether or
not we're going to publish those theymade it. I think they made the
right decision. There was nothing inthere. And this goes back to my
belief that we weigh overclassify too muchinformation. It's so easy to first,

(21:00):
too many people have classification authority,People at the program office level have the
authority to do classifications. I reallythink it ought to be really wrapped up,
tightened up, drawn back, whateverphrase you want to use. This

(21:22):
ability to just stamp and declare thatthis is top secret, or this is
secret, or you know, inall the sub classifications. I think too
many people have that authority, andit's just way too easy to document or
classify something as top secret because it'sjust well that's kind of controversial. Well

(21:44):
I don't really want the public toknow about this. You can't be an
informed citizenry if you actually don't knowwhat the government is doing, and overclassification
prevents you from understanding what's going on. How many of you think that the
the Intel agencies should have been tryingto debunk or pre debunk the Hunter Biden

(22:11):
laptop story. There's absolutely no reasonto classify that. There's absolutely no reason
to prevent the public from knowing aboutthe Hunter Biden laptop, and kudos to
the New York Post for publishing thosestories about it. But now moving forward,

(22:32):
there's a judge in Tennessee that mightviolate the Supreme Court's famous Pentagon Papers
ruling and actually order a reporter inNashville, a guide by the name of
Michael Patrick Lee Lahey. This judgemight actually order this reporter to reveal the
source of documents that were leaked tohim gif he one, what I'm talking

(22:56):
about. The elite documents they're inquestion come from a transidentified woman named Audrey
Hale. Remember Audrey, She wasjust a confused person who broke into that
Christian school last year and killed sixpeople and left behind what left behind an

(23:23):
entire manifesto. As of yesterday,the editor of The Tennessee Star will appear
in court for what is known asa show cause hearing. A show cause
hearing is where you have to showcause a reason why the judge should or
should not do something. The judgewill consider his arguments for wide lay he

(23:45):
should not be held in contempt ofcourt for having published excerpts from that manifesto.
Why are we at this point.We're at this point because the FBI
had the FBI. Now, waita minute, this is a local crime
story. I know it's say socalled mass shooting, and I know it

(24:11):
says school shooting, but it involveswhat the local cops. The FBI is
now jumping in trying to block therelease of the documents. You know why,
because I don't mean to laugh.It is this, It is this
stupid. They want to block releaseof the manifesto in any more of these

(24:33):
documents because they fear copycat killings bya segment of the population more vulnerable or
open to conspiracy theories. I don'tthink we need to worry about copycats.
Nope, copycats exist, and theyseem to be doing this regardless of whether

(24:56):
somebody's already done it or not.It's happening all the time in Chicago.
We're lucky that girl dad made itthrough Chicago without a carjacking or somebody shooting
somewhere else. And a lot ofthese people, when you start digging around
and you look into their social mediaaccounts, you start digging around in their

(25:17):
homes or their laptops, their homedesktop computers, or whatever. You find
out they're all back crap crazy,they all got manifestos of some sort.
I think this case is really importantfor anybody that cares about free speech,
or that cares about a free press, or for that matter, the Pentagon
Papers principle. So the reporter's attorneylast week filed an emergency motion arguing that

(25:41):
the judge's order would violate the FirstAmendment and would violate Tennessee state law.
Ray's attorneys also filed an emergency motionwith the appellate Court, Although it's not
yet responded to the motion, Idon't expect that they will anytime soon.
The Nashville Police Department is investigating severalofficers accused of leaking the documents. Now

(26:04):
the reporter, we'll see how serioushe is about this that the reporter says
he will go to jail before revealinghis source. You know, the idea
that a reporter obtains. Let's justsay that the leaker was a member of

(26:30):
the Nashville Police Department. Don't getfocused on that, Get focused instead on
why is the Nashville Police Department andthe FBI so really afraid of that manifesto
getting fully published? Why and whyshouldn't we know? And in fact,

(26:59):
they about the theater shooter. Weknow he was back cracked crazy, and
of course we got most of hisas far as I know, we've probably
got all of his documents. Theremay be some medical records that are still
sealed. I don't know. Butwhy shouldn't we have this and why do
we now get to the point inthis country where when a reporter obtains documents

(27:26):
that we believe the reporter has,Oh, I can't, I can't take
that document. Well here, no, no, no, no, here,
I'm just giving it to you.What if the document just showed up
in a Manila envelope? But writemost of the letters that Dragon and I
get that have no return address orthere has a fake address dan kaplis law.

(27:47):
Are we supposed to just not openthem? I always open them because
I'm always curious and I never knowwhat's going to show up. Well,
I also know how to open them, so if there's light pattern in it,
it bows over on Dragon and noton me. But that's another story.
This to me, this Nashville shootercase is another example of the First

(28:10):
Amendment being violated because the government doesn'tbelieve that you can be trusted with information
about what's really going on? Copycator not, Mark my words, there
will be another school shooting, markmy words. Monday, maybe I'll come
in and do a Chicago crime reportand we'll talk about the number of shootings

(28:34):
and the number of people killed orinjured just over the weekend. Oh,
by the way, because this weekis Juneteenth, so the South side of
Chicago, it is probably having alot of festivities. By the way,
we've ran those numbers before that youare more likely to get shot and killed
in Chicago than you are to evenbe involved in a school shooting, and

(28:59):
being involved meaning a student at theschool that happened to have a school shooting.
So yeah, just saying yeah,I just want to say that the
FBI's excuse falls on deaf years withme, and I just think that mister
Lahey and the Tennessee start. Goodfor you, Good for you for publishing

(29:22):
these stories. Maybe Biden wasn't callingout to Jackie the congresswoman. Maybe he's
calling out to Jackie Kennedy on assesand he thinks he's living in camelot.

(29:42):
I have said something awful in thepast, and I will say it again.
There are days not today's, nottoday's not one of those days.
But there are days when I lookat people who are mentally ill. That
don't mean like a really sick mentalillness, but just you know, just
and those who enjoy their mental illness. Yeah, I get it. Wouldn't

(30:03):
that became a nice dragon just tobe kind of Yeah, I just live
in Camelot, happy crazy. That'sjust happy crazy. Yeah, just happy,
happy, clueless happy clueless. Soundsgreat. Back to the third floor.
Oh yeah, right, that iskind of a sidelin down there,
isn't it. Uh huh uh.The colorade of Supreme Court is something that

(30:26):
I rarely agree with. Well manwho rephrase that? I rarely agree with
the colorado of Supreme Court, Andthey did something that I agree with.
How about that? That's how Imeant to put it. Yeah, that
makes much more sense. Yeah,much more sense. So they made the
correct decision. In a recent CastleDoctrine case, a guy shot a wild
and crazy individual that was outside theshooter's apartment. The shooter remained inside the

(30:48):
apartment behind a locked and secure door. Now what happened is the guy was
acting crazy. So the guy behindthe secure door, inside the locked door,
I decided to just shoot the gothe guy out in the parking lot.
Now, if I got a crazyguy in my front lawn, I
can't just shoot him. I mean, if dragon shows up who is crazy

(31:11):
certifiably, I can't just shoot himbecause he's on my lawn. He has
to start trying to threaten me bybreaking in my house for the castle doctrine
immunity to apply. It permits peopleto use any degree of force, including
deadly force, against an intruder,and that immunity only kicks in only in
a dwelling and when a home occupantbelieves that the intruder is about to commit

(31:34):
a crime. So does colorad ofSupreme Court ruled that yes, this guy
can be charged with murderer attempted tomurder. I forget which one he's charged
with. And if the castle doctrinedoes not apply in this case, that
is not a good taxpayer relief shot. Now, the color out of Supreme
Court normally does not get these casesright. In this case, they happen

(31:56):
to get one right. But thenagain, a broken watch is right twice
a day. So what'll we dowhen we get back? Who cares?
Oh, you know what, there'sa story I've been money to do for
some time about January sixth. Andsince I finished the video that Nick seriously

(32:17):
did about January six let's go backto January sixth, that insurrection that almost
destroyed the country.