When Truth Battles Politics: The Real Coronavirus Numbers

Send us a text

Something fundamental has shifted in America's coronavirus response. The gloves are officially off as the White House distances itself from Dr. Anthony Fauci, with Presidential advisor Peter Navarro penning a blistering critique: "Dr. Fauci has been wrong about everything I've interacted with him on." The evidence is damning - from opposing China travel restrictions that likely saved countless lives to flip-flopping on masks and dismissing hydroxychloroquine despite promising clinical results.

But deeper questions emerge about Fauci's connections to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which received millions in funding through his agency specifically for coronavirus research. Meanwhile, Florida finds itself under media scrutiny despite taking a dramatically different approach to protecting nursing homes than New York, where Governor Cuomo's policies led to thousands of preventable deaths. Adding to the confusion, several Florida hospitals have admitted reporting wildly inflated COVID-19 positivity rates - one facility's actual rate was just 9.4%, not the reported 98%. These revelations follow countless anecdotal reports of testing irregularities nationwide.

Beyond America's borders, the Chinese Communist Party has effectively ended Hong Kong's autonomy decades ahead of schedule, implementing a sweeping national security law claiming global jurisdiction over anyone criticizing China. This existential threat to free speech has already manifested in the arrest of a University of Minnesota student for tweets posted while in America. The digital Cold War accelerates as Britain joins the U.S. in banning Huawei from its 5G networks, recognizing the security threat posed by Chinese surveillance technology. The world now stands at a crossroads between transparency and authoritarianism, between manipulated data and hard truths.

Want to join the conversation? Reach me on Twitter @PeasantsPerspective, Parler @PeasantsPod, Facebook, or email [e-mail]. Your five-star reviews help others discover these critical discussions about the forces shaping our world.

Support the show

https://1776live.us/peasants_perspective

www.PeasantsPerspective.com

www.LeftBehindandWithout.org

www.givesendgo.com/GEJWJ

www.DollarsVoteLouder.com

buymeacoffee.com/peasant

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
And when they went to the queen To tell her Her
subjects had no bread, do youknow what she said?
Let them eat cake here.
You take the bomb.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
We're getting screwed , man.
Every time we turn around we'regetting screwed.
Oh, the revolution's gonna bethrough podcasting for sure.
That's the only way we talk.
It's the little guys, thelittle guys that take the brunt
of everything.
It's gotta stop.
Peasants, man, we're justpeasants, every one of us.

(00:40):
You watch those old movies.
You see the peasants in thebackground with the kings and
queens walking around.
We're those people.
We're those people.
Good morning, welcome to anotherepisode of Peasants Perspective
.
If you're joining me today, youmay not be joining me on
Spotify.
Apparently, yesterday, for somereason, spotify would not

(01:03):
upload the RSS feed that itnormally gets.
So, just you know, normally Iclick a few buttons and the
podcast goes everywhere whereyou can listen to it, except
yesterday it didn't go toSpotify.
I have no idea if Spotify fixedtheir issue.
I did reach out to customerservice.
I don't know.
We'll see.
So if you're not a spot, if younormally listen to me on
Spotify, then hopefully youfound this podcast on a

(01:25):
different player app.
Anyways, all right, you canreach me at Twitter, at Peasants
Perspective Parlor, peasantsPod, facebook, peasants
Perspective, and email atpeasantspod at gmailcom.
I love hearing from you guys.
Yeah, okay, let's jump into ittoday.
All right, a couple things thathave gone on.
The gloves have come off.
That is going to be the titleof today's show.

(02:00):
I think the gloves have comeoff and I don't know that
anybody really noticed it.
I I guess 3 pm there was a pressconference in the Rose Garden.
Now President Trump took a lotof heat about this press
conference because he kind ofwent political on it.
He was going to talk aboutChina, which he did, and he also
talked about Joe Biden and JoeBiden's America First platform,
which is really a total farce.
It's another one of thosebait-and-switch policies, kind

(02:21):
of like the Green New Deal isn'tanything about the environment,
it's all about the economy.
Same thing here and it looksreally similar to Bernie
Sanders' platform and DonaldTrump went through it bit by bit
.
But a couple other things havebeen going on as well and we're
going to play one clip from thatspeech.
But one of the things the bigthings, the big themes, the big
shift is the White House isdistancing itself from Anthony

(02:42):
Fauci Dr Fauci, one of the threeamigos who we have covered on
this podcast a handful of times.
There's being some distance putbetween him and the White House
.
So I want to read you thisarticle.
This is from the USA Today andthe USA Today.
They're no Trump fans per seand they're kind of the
simpleton news, but I want toread this.

(03:03):
This is put out by them, drFauci has.
So this is this is PeterNavarro is featured in this.
So Dr Fauci has good bedsidemanner with the public, but has
been wrong about everything I'veinteracted with him on.
That's Peter Navarro, theadvisor to the president.
In late January, when I wasmaking Peter Navarro was making

(03:26):
the case of the president totake down the flights from China
, fauci fought against thepresident's courageous decision,
which might as well have savedhundreds of thousands of
American lives.
It's true, the virus is real.
I mean what's going on in Chinaand what we saw in Wuhan?
That's real.
The virus is very real andwithout treatment, without
therapies, it can be veryserious, especially for the

(03:47):
vulnerable population.
There's no doubt about that.
Okay, that's a simple fact.
So is the flu.
So are a handful of otherviruses that can run through and
wreak havoc on a nursing homeor a vulnerable population.
That's what we saw happening inWuhan.
So Fauci fought against closingthe flights.
I wonder why that is.
I mean we see Fauci tied inwith China all over the place.

(04:11):
When I warned in late January ofa possible deadly pandemic, the
director of the NationalInstitute of Allergy and
Infectious Disease was tellingthe media not to worry.
That's Fauci.
When I was working feverishlyon behalf of the president in
February to help engineer thefastest industrial mobilization
of the healthcare sector in ourhistory, fauci was telling the

(04:33):
public the China virus was quotelow risk.
When we were building the maskcapacity in record time, fauci
was flip-flopping on the use ofmasks.
And when Fauci was telling theWhite House Coronavirus Task
Force there was only anecdotalevidence in support of
hydroxychloroquine to fight thevirus, I confronted him with
scientific studies providingevidence of safety and efficacy.

(04:56):
A recent Detroit hospitalshowed a 50% reduction in the
mortality rate when the medicinewas used early in treatment.
Now Fauci says a fallingmortality rate doesn't matter
when it's the single mostimportant statistic to help
guide the pace of our economicreopening.
The lower the mortality rate,the faster we can reopen.
So when you ask me whether Ilisten to Dr Fauci's advice, my

(05:19):
answer is only with skepticismand caution.
Peter Navarro, an assistant tothe president and a director of
the Office of Trade andManufacturing.
So the White House we've knownthis for a few days now that
they were going to be coming outagainst Dr Fauci.
This is an opening salvo ofcoming out against Dr Fauci.
And I have said this you know,show me one work product that Dr

(05:41):
Fauci that has produced thathas, you know, borne fruit that
has even been remotely close towhat he claims is going to
happen.
In fact, every work product hehas put out is oftentimes
claimed the exact opposite ofwhat he said.
And this is, you know.
This is really obvious when youlook at who Dr Fauci is.
I mean Dr Fauci.

(06:02):
He has funded the WuhanInstitute of is.
I mean Dr Fauci.
He has funded the WuhanInstitute of Virology through
the NIAID, so the NationalInstitute of Infectious Disease.
He's funded the Wuhan Instituteof Virology.
In 2014, he granted $666,000 tothe institute to study quote
across the human wildlifeinterface in China, molecular

(06:23):
characterization of novelcoronaviruses and host receptor
binding domain genes,mathematical models of
transmission and evolution.
So bats appear to be naturalreservoirs of these viruses.
So he actually funded the studyof coronaviruses at the Wuhan
Institute.
They go in this report that I'mlooking at here.

(06:46):
They go on to say that theyplan to spend the next six years
studying specifically wildlifemarkets in China, including
serological and molecularscreening of people working in
wet markets.
It's like they set this wholething up, or at least they knew
it was happening the way it wasgoing to happen.
They analyze host receptors andnovel coronavirus genes.
In addition, there'd bemathematical matrix models to

(07:07):
study its ability to evolve.
They did a whole bunch ofhumanized mice studies.
Humanized mice were introducedinto viral studies in 2008 by
funding from the NationalInstitute of Health and Research
, which they're not, we're notsupposed to do that.
Judicial Watch had a releasewhere they filed a lawsuit with
the government's involvement,with Planned Parenthood, and

(07:29):
they found that PlannedParenthood was selling organ
parts baby fetal parts,specifically for the purpose of
human hybrid mice studies.
I understand that these arecalled chimeras.
This is like hybridhuman-animal creations, so
they're genetically modifyingmice with human genes, and this

(07:51):
is where you see the mice thatare growing an ear on their back
or different things like that.
We've gotten to the point wherewe understand the DNA code so
well that we can actually growhuman parts on another animal by
manipulating their DNA.
I mean, that sounds great,right, like, okay, cool.

(08:16):
But think about theramifications of that.
With that kind of power andthat ability, should you want to
do something truly grotesque.
What's wrong?
What is stopping us now fromhaving a human-monkey hybrid?
There isn't right.
I mean this becomes a totalabomination.
Dr Fauci is funding this type ofresearch One of the researchers
worked with.
Anyways, I've got this threadhere that goes into a pretty big

(08:38):
detail about just kind of likethe history of the last handful
of years of what Fauci has beenworking on.
For six years the NIDF fundedefforts to prepare and contain
this virus in Wuhan.
What happened?
What came first?
What happened to molecularscreening?
Surely they would have found it.
$3 million, just a, you know.
I mean it's just grant aftergrant.

(08:59):
The research in Wuhan includedgain-of-function research.
The final total of thatresearch was $7.4 million.
Gain-of-function research thefinal total of that research was
7.4 million.
Gain-of-function manipulationviruses in labs, potential
spread for humans.
Gain-of-function is banned.
There's a worldwide ban ongain-of-function research
because that's where you make avirus more deadly or more
contagious.

(09:19):
But no, that's okay, dr Fauci,he can fund it all he wants.
So this is.
You know.
You do a little deep dive intoDr Fauci and you quickly realize
this guy is a swamp creature.
I mean, he is a medical swampcreature, if there ever was one.
In the WikiLeaks emails there'ssome Dr Fauci emails.
Now, you know, in the WikiLeaksemails there's thousands and

(09:40):
thousands of emails and some ofthem are more damning than
others.
But there's weird people thatpop up and people that I mean
just normal senators would emailthe president, the secretary of
state at the time, asking forthis, that or the other.
So it's not that big a deal allthe time.
But there's one particularemail in there where Dr Fauci
wrote to Hillary Clinton andessentially is giddy about her

(10:02):
and some experience he had withher, and it's.
It's just kind of funny, youknow, it's kind of strikes you
as like a little school kid.
Okay, so next thing, florida.
Florida has been taking a hugehit in the media lately because
you know there's like this,there's these.
There's the tale of two states.
There's the tale of New Yorkand there's the tale of Florida.
Both states have similarpopulation sizes, both, but

(10:22):
they're couldn't be fartherapart politically than any two
states.
You've got New York, which isrun by Andrew Cuomo, has a
Democratic supermajority, whichNew York is interesting because
the city of New York is reallyliberal, but the rest of New
York is extremely conservative,but New York City, being as
populous as it is, carries thefull weight of the electorate

(10:42):
there in New York.
Down in Florida you've got.
So Cuomo's the governor of NewYork, ron DeSantis is the
governor of Florida, and theyhandled the coronavirus very
differently.
So Cuomo did like more fulllockdown measures.
Obviously, you probably areaware that Cuomo actually signed
an executive order demandingthat patients with coronavirus

(11:04):
be put in nursing homes, whichwe're going to talk about that
in just a second Whereas RonDeSantis took an opposite
approach.
He created what he called adome around the nursing homes.
He basically put the nursinghomes on lockdown and prevented
mass spread inside of thenursing homes, and so you just
got two different results.
But Florida has always been inthe media's ire because the

(11:25):
Cuomos are supposed to be thegood guys.
And during the pandemicbreakout, when Cuomo was doing a
daily press briefing justbefore the president's press
briefing, a lot of peoplethought Cuomo would be a nice
candidate to sneak in instead ofJoe Biden and try to run Cuomo
for president.
I saw that all the time.
I think the day that thatpotential died was the day that
Cuomo Weared that white polot-shirt without a sport coat or

(11:48):
anything and you could see hisnipple rings through the t-shirt
.
That was probably the day hispresidential hopes really died.
But it was shortly after thatthat we found out about the
nursing home executive order andthat he had gone against advice
from his medical advisors Tosend patients into nursing homes
.
It really begs you to wonderwhere that policy originated

(12:09):
from, how that ever was a goodidea.
Like, at what point do you sendsick people into a room of
healthy people?
It just doesn't.
It defies logic to understandthis particular executive order
that he did.
Okay, so back to Florida.
So here's what's happening inFlorida Florida is getting
sucked into the politics of thelockdown.

(12:29):
So it's not even now thepolitics of the virus itself,
it's the politics of thelockdown.
So if you remember, when thisvirus was breaking out, one of
the things the Democrats wereconstantly pounding on was
testing, testing, testing.
We need lots and lots oftesting.
If you remember, nancy Pelosiwas like testing, testing,
testing, as she was trying tokeep her dentures in, and so

(12:49):
I've thought you know anytimethat the Democrats or anybody is
just pounding on one specificthing and it becomes a talking
point.
It makes me think there's aracket here.
There's something going on.
There's a reason why they wantthe testing and what I think
I've decided and discovered isthat the testing is a financial
benefit to certain Democrats.
I mean, obviously these testscost money to make, they cost
money to administer and thingslike that.

(13:11):
And I've got a feeling that ifyou go start following the money
, you'll find certainpoliticians that have got their
hands in the cookie jar when itcomes to testing.
But in addition to that, theyjust like mail-in ballots.
They can mess with the testing,they can mess with these rates.
So if you've been on socialmedia and you've spent any time
looking around at this stuff,you'll see all kinds of
anecdotal experiences wherepeople say that the tests just

(13:33):
aren't right.
So let me run through a few ofthe ones I've seen.
Now I'm not going to read themdirectly, I'm just going to kind
of run through the differentscenarios that I've seen and
then we're going to go to theactual news.
So I've heard yesterday on WarRoom Pandemic there was I don't
exactly remember who it was, buthe's, you know, high up
muckety-muck, not somebody whowould just be throwing out
accusations that don't have base.

(13:54):
He's a guy that you know is ona either one of the.
He's either running for Senateor he's on a presidential
committee of some kind.
Either way influential guy.
I could go back and look at itif somebody cared that much
exactly who it was.
But he said oh, he'scampaigning, because he says
he's out on the campaign trailand he says he personally spoke
to a woman who went to one ofthese testing centers you know

(14:15):
one of these like drive uptesting type places and while
she was there, something came upin her personal life and she
needed to leave and go take careof it and, just you know, ended
up not getting tested.
But when she'd pulled up there,she filled out you know a little
piece of paper, put her name onthe paper or whatever, and then
, after she had to go, she justsaid, hey, I got to go and she
left.
Well, later that day she got anotification on her phone saying

(14:39):
your test results are in.
You have tested positive forcoronavirus.
And this guy was like shedidn't even take a test, didn't
take a test.
He's like I have firsthandknowledge of a person that this
happened to.
So you have a situation whereit's like, okay, how do you get
a positive for that test.
Now, if it's just one example,one experience, that'd be fine.

(15:00):
But then you start gettingdozens of dozens and dozens of
others.
I saw one yesterday that wasalso very credible.
There's some county somewhere Ithink it's in Arizona where
there's starting to an onslaughtof people to be tested to be
tested, not to be checked in oranything.
There comes an onslaught ofpeople to be tested because

(15:29):
simultaneously, while this ishappening, hospitals are filling
up.
Why are they filling up?
Because they're opening up.
They're opening up and peoplewho needed elective surgeries,
people who delayed you know allkinds of medical procedures for
the last few months, are finallymaking it to the hospital and
they're filling up.
So, in conjunction with thefilling hospitals, if we can
ramp up testing and ramp uppositive test results, then it

(15:51):
kind of makes this correlativelike, okay, look, people are
going to the hospital with COVID.
It's not really the case.
So anyways, this particularhospital in Arizona, these
nurses and doctors weresuspicious of you know from
things they were seeing, and sothey decided to run a little
test.
So they popped open 10, not one, not two, not three, not four
10 coronavirus tests and thenthey sent them in without

(16:14):
swabbing anything.
They completely empty blanktest, no swabs, no, nothing Sent
them in.
They got 10, 10, 100% backpositive test results.
So that particular hospital isbeside themselves on what to do
because they're being told byhospital administrators and
government regulators and thingslike that how to proceed, but
yet they know for a fact thesetest results are absolutely bunk

(16:34):
.
You've got hundreds of cases ofpeople now, hundreds, not dozens
, hundreds of cases of peoplenow where families are going
after counties and hospitalsbecause their family members on
their death certificate died ofcoronavirus but they died of
other causes car accidents,gunshot wounds, things like that
.
So it's starting to become anissue because, as these people

(16:56):
are trying to get things likeinsurance payouts, you know
coronavirus is considered an actof God.
So depending on what your, youknow a pandemic.
So depending on what your lifeinsurance policy is, you may or
may not be covered, whereas youare covered in a car accident.
So this becomes reallyimportant and very serious.
So you've got all theseanecdotal experiences of people

(17:16):
with the testing not being rightand if you hearken back to the
kind of the beginning of thetesting, if you remember it was
that it was the president of,was it Tanzania or it was an
African country.
I could go back and look it upagain.
It was easy reference.
I think it was Tanzania.
But he got these tests and hesaid nah, I don't really like
what's going on here.
So he swabbed a fruit and a.
Was it a mosquito or somethinglike that?

(17:38):
It was a fruit and a mouse.
Anyways, he swabbed a rodentand a fruit and sent them in and
they both came back positivefor coronavirus.
So he actually fired his healthminister and fired cabinet
members that were promotingthese tests.
So this isn't like a new thing.
This has been going on.
But now in America, what are wedoing?
More tests than anyone else?
Well, florida had to admit alittle bit of an accident, a

(18:00):
little oopsies.
This comes from Just the News,john Solomon, but this is on
lots of news.
This was Fox News.
It was headline news all overthe place.
It's going to run through thenews cycle very quickly.
It's going to come and gounless there's more like it to
follow, which I'm sure there are.
But what's happening now isthese labs are going to get hip
to the fact that thismicroscope's on them.
Okay, a Florida hospitalhandling COVID-19 tests

(18:22):
confirmed to media this weekthat its near 100% positivity
rate was overstated by a factorof 10, raising already
heightened concerns thatnumerous labs are over-reporting
the number of confirmedinfections.
The Florida Division ofEmergency Management posts a
daily coronavirus update on itswebsite, which features a list
of positivity rates of everyCOVID testing facility in the

(18:45):
state.
Hundreds of labs and hospitalsthroughout Florida are regularly
testing state residents forcoronavirus.
In recent days, numerousfacilities have begun reporting
100% positivity rates, figuressignificantly higher than the
statewide average of around 15%.
Many of those labs claim theyhave tested only one patient,

(19:07):
claims they have tested only onepatient, though others with
100% rates, report testingdozens and sometimes hundreds of
patients.
Orlando news stations Fox 35said on Monday that it undertook
an investigation of thoseastronomical figures, after
which several medical facilitiesconfirmed that their actual
positive rates were much lowerthan those reported to the state
government.
So what's going on here is thehospital knows how many people

(19:30):
are actually sick.
They test a hundred people, butthere's actually six sick
people six.
But then the testing center,who's reporting independently to
the state, is reporting that ahundred people are sick with
COVID.
Do you see the discrepancythere?
You have six actual sick peopleon 100 tests, but the lab is
reporting.
All 100 tests are positive tothe state.

(19:51):
So you have this disconnect.
So Fox 35 in Florida called thehospital directly to get their
numbers and thencross-referenced them with the
lab.
The news station reported thatthe hospital, that a different
hospital Area Hospital, orlandoHealth, confirms errors in the
report, with hospital officialsstating that their positivity
rate is only 9.4%, not thereported 98%.

(20:16):
Another Orlando area-based lab,veterans Medical Center, listed
a positivity rate of 76%, but acompany official said that the
positivity rate for the centeris actually 6%.
The inflated numbers come asFlorida has been recording
record numbers of COVID-19infections, though an analysis
of state data by just the newslast week revealed that the

(20:36):
state's record-breaking countsof infections have been
overestimated by as much as 30%.
And so that's real.
Okay, it is what it is, right.
I mean, this is where we're atCoronavirus.
The whole response to it isjust a big fat hoax, right, guys
?
We can't even count sick peoplethat are supposedly coughing

(20:58):
and have pneumonia.
How do you think we're going tocount ballots for an election
here?
For goodness sakes, man.
It's just unbelievable.
So, in keeping with this, soyesterday, donald Trump so you
know Andrew Cuomo, the policythat he did in New York City was
at the outbreak of everything,he signed an executive order
that said that people thattested positive for coronavirus

(21:22):
could or would or should be putinto these care facilities,
these long-term nursing homes,in order to take the pressure
off the hospitals.
So his intended goal was to tryto take the pressure off the
hospitals.
You know, he would say thingslike it's like there's a tsunami
coming and we're just looking,we're just at the beach and we
can just see the crest on thehorizon.
You know he had all theseeuphemisms for how bad this was

(21:43):
going to be, and it could.
You know.
I mean, this thing could havegotten crazy, out of control.
Obviously it has the abilitiesto pile up the bodies if you put
it into nursing homes, and sohe decided to send patients into
these nursing homes.
Now this doesn't really makeany sense.
There's no precedent for thisIn the state of Washington.
We were potentially going tohave a serious outbreak like
this as well, and we were groundzero for the virus.

(22:04):
And when the virus gotintroduced here, the first, I
think, 11 deaths we had allwithin a couple of days.
I mean, I go back and look atthe timeline, but they all were
out of nursing homes.
It was like and then by thetime we were up to a hundred
deaths, it was 70, 75 of themwere in nursing homes.
So Washington state,immediately the first state in
the union recognized you got toprotect the nursing homes,

(22:25):
long-term care facilities, andwe put all the long-term care
facilities on just almostcomplete and total lockdown and
you know, we've kept our, ourdeath rate really low.
Actually we're 1300 people dead.
Maybe we're up to 1400 peoplenow, but we know that our
numbers are inflatedsignificantly and adjusted for,
adjusted for inflation, adjustedfor car accidents and cancer

(22:47):
and adjusted for all the otherreasons.
People died that wasn'tcoronavirus.
Our numbers are probablysitting under 1,000.
So that was the precedent thatwas set by Washington State
Cuomo.
Simultaneously, as it'sstarting to break out in New
York, he's sending people intothe nursing homes.
So, steve Scalise.
So in response to that, there'sbeen criticism from Cuomo.

(23:09):
So he initiated aninvestigation into his nursing
home policy and hisinvestigation into his nursing
home policy concluded that noone is at fault for the nursing
home policy.
So basically, cuomo has used agovernment you know, a
government investigation intothis to clear himself.

(23:30):
Well, that's not going to work,steve Scalise, who is the
Republican whip, minority whipin the house, which you know
power player, steve Scalise isthe one who got shot by the
Bernie Sanders supporter acouple years ago playing
baseball.
So Steve Scalise wrote he's ahouse member from New York, so
he's written a letter, signed onby others, basically saying no,

(23:50):
we're going to keep looking atthis and don't think this is
over.
You killed all those people.
I mean very strong, very strong.
So this is Donald Trump.
Listen to what Donald Trumpsaid yesterday about the
situation.

Speaker 3 (24:02):
Our senior citizens.
We could have used it for otherpeople.
They could have used it insteadof sending our seniors back
into nursing homes that wereinfected, where you lost
thousands of people.
Thousands of people in New Yorkdied because of poor management
by the governor and it's a verysad thing to see and very sad
to watch and very sad to look atthose statistics.

(24:23):
But we have an incredibleJavits Center that we built with
thousands of beds I think itwas 2,800 all ready to go and
they could have sent peoplethere or they could have sent
senior citizens there instead ofsending them into the nursing
homes.
And after all of that work andgetting it done, the Army Corps

(24:44):
of Engineers I mean the job theydid was incredible.
They built it in a matter ofdays.
When it was all completed, femaeverybody was there doctors we
ended up getting doctors.
They said we can't man it.
I said so we'll man it andwoman it.
And that's what we did.
We brought in doctors, nurses,everything.

(25:05):
We're all set.
We said where are the people?
They didn't send the people.
Very few people came in.
They could have sent them intothe Javits Center.
They could have sent them tothe hospital ship, which was
virtually unused, but we werethere.
By contrast, my administrationacted very early to ban travel
from China from Europe.

Speaker 2 (25:27):
So Donald Trump is laying this right at the feet of
Andrew Cuomo.
He's saying look, I did my part.
I came in and I built theJavits Center 2,800 hospital
beds at the Javits Center,specifically for quarantine
patients.
You know how many people wentto the Javits Center?
It was like 14 people.
It was like why did we buildthis thing?
We could have cared for thesepeople in the lobby right.

(25:48):
We sent the I don't remember ifit was the mercy or the comfort
.
Both ships got deployed, one toLA, one to New York, and same
thing.
I mean, I think they originallyit was supposed to be for
healthy patients, so they weregoing to redirect healthy
patients from the New Yorkhospitals to it.
But the first patient they sentwas a COVID positive patient.
So they immediately shiftedthat into a COVID facility

(26:09):
because they contaminated itwith their very first patient
that stepped on board was acoronavirus patient.
But then they didn't use thefacility.
They continued to send peopleto their nursing homes, to these
nursing homes for care andcaused thousands of people to
die.
And this isn't over, like it'sjust not over.
Listen to this.
This is Jake Tapper talkingabout Cuomo, because Cuomo was

(26:33):
kind of taking a victory lap now, like okay, because two days
ago they had zero deaths fromcoronavirus in New York, which
is significant.
Like let's clap and cheer,that's a big deal.
Like open up, let's do thisthing right.
Like I mean, that means, isn'tthat like the biggest indicator
that we've got this thing licked?
Nobody cares if we all just getthe sniffles, if nobody dies.

(26:53):
People run around all winterlong with runny noses and coughs
and hacks and sneezes.
We all know someone orourselves have been sick for
three or four or five weeks at atime.
As long as you're not dying,nobody cares.
Right, as long as you're notdying, nobody cares.
So if the deaths are at zero inNew York City, the place that's
hit hard, open, back up, man,let's do this.

(27:15):
Well, listen to how Jake Tappergoes through this.

Speaker 4 (27:22):
Speaking of New York, new York's Democratic governor,
andrew Cuomo, seems to be onsomething of a victory tour,
congratulating the state andhimself for defeating the virus,
even selling this poster whichshows his state getting over the
mountain by bringing down thecurve during the 111 days of
hell, as the governor put it.
The poster includes referencesto his daughters and a boyfriend
little inside jokes.
There are no illustrations,however, of the more than 32,000

(27:44):
dead New Yorkers, the highestdeath toll by far of any state.
No rendering on that poster ofcriticism that Governor Cuomo
ignored warnings.
No depiction of the study thathe could have saved thousands of
lives had he and Mayor deBlasio acted sooner.
No painting there on the posterof his since rescinded order
that nursing homes take allinfected patients in.

(28:06):
Here's what Governor Cuomo hadto say yesterday.

Speaker 5 (28:10):
What we went through and what we did was historic
Because we did tame the beast,we did turn the corner, we did
plateau that mountain and thenwe came down the other side and
they will be talking about whatwe did for decades to come.

Speaker 4 (28:33):
Here to discuss this and more is CNN chief medical
correspondent Dr Sanjay Gupta.
And Sanjay, look, I know a lotof New Yorkers are happy that
the infection numbers are downand you know we all hope that
they stay down.
But let's be clear this isrevisionism and a lot of the
crowing and Governor Cuomo goingon late night is offending a
lot of New Yorkers, given thefact that this is the highest
death toll of any state morethan 32,000 dead.

(28:56):
The next closest is New Jerseywith 17,000.
Are people going to be talkingabout what Governor Cuomo did
for decades to come in the wayhe hopes?

Speaker 6 (29:06):
decades to come in the way he hopes.
Unfortunately, I don't think so, jake.
I mean, I think we're veryearly days in this.
We're looking at the first fewpages of the history books and I
think there's a lot more to bewritten.
I'm a little surprised by thatposter I got to tell you because
I think, if anything, that'swhat this virus has taught us,
is that we need to have asignificant amount of humility.

(29:26):
This virus surprises us overand over again.
There's no place in the countrythat's not vulnerable, and I
think that we should havelearned.
I think we have learned thatvictory laps are not the thing
to be doing.

Speaker 2 (29:37):
Victory laps are not the thing to be doing.
It really is quite incredible,I mean, yeah, we're going to be
talking about this for decadesto come, but not in the way that
he thinks, not in the way thathe thinks at all.
In fact, we're probably goingto.
He's probably going to end upbeing one of the villains of
this whole story, I wouldimagine, especially as the
America tells the tale.
But the real villain of all ofthis, of everything that's been

(29:59):
going on, is China.
So the signal through the noisethere's lots of noise out there
there's lots of chatter,there's lots of opinion and you
know, I mean I'll throw myselfin there, I'm just a lot of
opinion and chatter too but thereal signal, the real problem,
the real existential threat tothe United States right now,

(30:20):
this moment, is communist China,it's the communist China party,
the CCP, and one thing thatI've heard over and over again
this year is Donald Trump andhis administration is the first
administration ever to actuallysingle out and separate the
difference between the Chinesepeople, or what they sometimes
call the Lao Bai Jing, which isinterpreted old hundred names,
which in America we would callthem the deplorables, or the.
You know, the Trump, the Trumpvoters, the, you know, the

(30:44):
silent majority, so to speak.
So that's the normal people inChina.
They're called Lao Bai Jing,the old hundred names, and what
you have to understand is thatthe Communist Party in China
rules in a dictatorship overChina.
They weren't elected right,they assumed and came to power

(31:05):
by force and they havemaintained force at the barrel
of a gun.
In fact, their foundingdocuments say just that that the
Chinese Communist Party willmaintain power by force over the
people because the ends justifythe means.
That's kind of the whole pointof communism is the ends justify
the means because they don'tbelieve in God.
So you know, kill, rape,pillage.

(31:26):
If you end up with utopia, thenthat's the goal.
If you've ever read the bookAnimal Farm, you remember there
were the pigs and the pigs werea little bit smarter than the
other animals, so they kind ofset up the whole farm right
After they ran the farmer off,and so the pigs have a manifesto
and everybody's equal and workstogether.
And then pretty soon the pig'sgot to go do a little bit more
you know executive work, alittle bit less labor.
They got short legs anyways andthey got to use their brains.

(31:49):
And next thing, you know.
Eventually you get to the pointwhere the animals look inside
the farmhouse.
Now the farmhouse representedthe government and represented
crony capitalism and itrepresented, you know, all the
fruit and all the profit of thelaborers who are the farm
animals and everything theyproduce.
But the farmer gets to liveinside his warm, cushy house and

(32:13):
so initially on the farm nobodywas allowed to live inside the
house.
It was a symbol of imperialism.
It was a symbol of whatever.
It's really similar to the waythe Black Lives Matter
protesters in Antifa talk aboutthe government.
You got to bring it down right.
It's a symbol.
We got to board up the WhiteHouse.
Well, eventually, at the end ofthe story, the pigs unboard the

(32:33):
house up, they move into thehouse, which offends some, but
they do it in such incrementalsteps throughout the book that
the farm animals pretty muchdon't kind of see it coming.
And then eventually they lookinside the windows and the pigs
have invited outside humans,right, other capitalist pigs to
come to the farm to trade andthey're all sitting around a
table and they're playing pokerand they're drinking.

(32:54):
And as the farm animals lookaround, I think that the final
sentence in the book issomething to the effect of, as
they look around the table, theycan't tell the difference
between the pigs and the people.
So you know, you've come fullcircle, full corruption.
And that's what the ChineseCommunist Party is.
Chinese Communist Party in thecountry of China has 1.2 to 1.4
billion people and there's only90 million Chinese Communist

(33:15):
Party members.
So the way to think about thatis like here in the United
States we've got politicalparties, so most people when we
like.
There's 360 million people inAmerica, but only 60 million of
them vote.
So you've got really 60 millionpolitically active people in
America.
In China, they have 90 millionpolitically active people.
So think of it in terms of that.

(33:36):
So there's 90 million peoplethat care enough to have
officially affiliated themselveswith the Chinese Communist
Party.
Now, who are these 90 millionpeople?
Well, the Chinese CommunistParty has a spy.
In every single apartmentbuilding, every single office
building, every singlemanufacturing building, every
single place has a hall monitor.
That's what the ChineseCommunist Party is mostly made
up of is hall monitors.

(33:57):
They're made up of the peoplethat tattle on you, that tell on
you, that pass information upto the leaders of the CCP so
that they can come punish you orwhatever the case is.
So they basically secure theirrights and freedoms, not
necessarily because they believein communism, but they don't
want to get beat up, so they'drather tell on someone and side
with power rather than side withwhat's right.

(34:18):
I guess you could think of itlike that.
So of the 90 million CommunistParty members, there's probably
only 9 million hardliners.
So there's probably only 9million hardliners.
So there's probably only 9million people that actually
really believe in communism,like, like to their core and
like understand thephilosophical underpinnings and
are truly atheist.
People, right, truly truly,that have that, that that

(34:39):
atheist vitriol that can exist,that that hatred for humanity
that exists in the Chinesecommunist party, I mean at the
highest levels.
So you're really talking abouta small number of people who,
through exclusive use of force,have been able to enslave a
large population.
And they're able to do thismainly because the Chinese
people have never really beenfree.
I mean, they only had a tasteof freedom for a few years

(35:01):
before Mao Zedong took over, andso they kind of don't know
freedom.
I mean, that's just the way itis.
I often think here in Americawe have to surrender our freedom
, because if a foreign countryactually invaded here.
I mean, there's so many guns,there's so many freedom-loving
patriots, we would fight backwith everything we have.
China never really did that.
They never really had theirindependence.
They got their independence andthen it was just immediately

(35:23):
taken by Mao, and at the time itwasn't like there was mass
communication and things likethat.
So what's been happening?
As you know world history, hongKong was a colony of China or of
Britain, and in 1997, after theBritish empire has been
dismantled, they basicallyturned Hong Kong back over to

(35:43):
China.
So they had what was called theuh, the uh, two.
One, one country, twogovernments.
One country, oh, one, uh, onecountry, two systems.
That's what they call it theone country, two systems, uh
system.
So Hong Kong was to, while itwas a part of China and was
under the flag of China, issupposed to operate as an
autonomous uh city oressentially like an autonomous

(36:06):
area, and they were to usedemocracy, rule of law, all of
which had been well establishedwhen they were a Chinese colony.
And Hong Kong is verysuccessful I mean, it's the
world's third largest financialmarket Well, china has been.
They had a 50 year.
The treaty that they signed in1997 gave Hong Kong 50 years.

(36:26):
So for 50 years, china couldn'timpose itself on the government
of Hong Kong.
You're supposed to let it beautonomous?
Well, we're only halfwaythrough that and Hong Kong has
completely taken away or Chinahas completely taken away Hong
Kong's sovereignty of whateverit had.
Over time, they've infiltrated,they've you know, all kinds of
machinations, and last yearthere started to be some serious

(36:49):
protests because what happenedwas they passed this law.
It's an extradition law and itsaid if you're found guilty of a
crime against China in HongKong, then China can extradite
you.
They can take you out of HongKong, where you have rule of law
, judges, jury by trial, allthose things, and they can take
you to China and try you there.
Well, once you cross over intomainland China, there is no jury

(37:10):
of your peers, there is no ruleof law.
If Xi, who's the president ofChina, declares something, it is
law.
If he says you die, you die.
There is no appeal, there's norule of law.
It's completely.
Whatever the Communist Partysays goes.
That's it.
So the fact that now they cantake someone who's guilty of a

(37:32):
crime against China, which areplenty right it's very easy to
break laws in China.
Um, they can extradite you andbasically do whatever they want.
Well then it's upped it evenmore.
That was last summer, so thatthat triggered a whole
essentially year of protests andHong Kong's in a tough spot.

(37:53):
So you got to remember they'vegot this treaty, which basically
means in 50 years nobody'sgoing to own private property in
Hong Kong, because there's noprivate property in China.
If you buy a house in China,you get a mortgage and you
basically get to live in thathouse to the end of the mortgage
, At what time it reverts backto the ownership of China.
So it's just a lease.
All construction loans andmortgage loans in China are just
leases.
You're leasing it and then youjust give it back to China at

(38:16):
the end.
So all of Hong Kong, the futureis pretty bleak.
If you're a 20-something,30-something-year-old in Hong
Kong, you're going to have tolive in Hong Kong when China
takes back over.
So you know you're slowlystarting to see the divestment
of banks, divestment of things.
So the longterm economy in HongKong is facing a lot of
struggles.
So you've got a lot of likepeople who are starting to

(38:38):
realize the only way out of thisis freedom.
Right, the only way to have afuture in Hong Kong is to
somehow maintain freedom, andChina is squeezing that out of
Hong Kong rapidly.
What you've got here is asituation just like when Hitler
was taking over Czechoslovakia.
You've got this, or you've gotthe same exact situation going

(38:59):
on here.
You've got China is moving intoHong Kong.
Now, what they did just recentlywas they passed what was called
the national.
A national it's going to cometo me in a second but basically
they passed a rule that saidthat Hong Kong is now under
complete China rules.
So they've just completely saidno, we're not honoring that

(39:19):
treaty, it's ours, it's underour rule.
So there's no more rule of lawin Hong Kong right now.
And they've moved in lots ofChinese mainland troops.
So that's significant, becauseyou know, when you've got
Chinese Hong Kong policeofficers, they're only going to
be so brutal to their brothersand sisters.
Right, there's a certain linethat you just don't cross when
you have community policing.

(39:40):
That's the beauty of communitypolicing.
Well, now you've got militarypolicing.
You've got military people frommainland China who are not
sympathetic to the Hong Kongpeople and they are in their
policing.
And here's the deal.
This new law says this If you'reguilty of a crime against China
, that they can punish you andtake you back to China and you

(40:01):
serve a minimum of 10 years injail just for speaking ill of
China.
And the way that they wrotethis national security law the
way they wrote it is it hasjurisdiction over the whole
world.
So anybody in the whole worldwho ever speaks bad of China can
now be taken by China.
China has basically said we cantake you.
Now how does this hit home?

(40:22):
Why am I covering this for uspeasants?
For one thing, the Lao Bai Jingthey're our brothers and
sisters, right, they're thedeplorables across the ocean and
they're just like us.
They care about their families.
They've been devastated by thecommunist party, and so you know
we've got some kinship there.
But even more so in our ownpersonal self-interest, let me
read you this little story.
So this came out yesterday.

(40:43):
Excuse me, this came out.
This came out a little whileago, but this is.
This is the exact situation.
University of Minnesota sentstudents sent to Chinese prison
for critical tweets.
So this student, when he was inthe United States, had sent
some critical tweets about theChinese government and then he
went over to China.
So a 20-year-old of Universityof Minnesota student named Lao

(41:04):
Dekuying so he is a Chinese, wasarrested in China and sentenced
to six months in prison forsending tweets critical of the
Chinese government while he wasin the US.
According to court documentsreported on by Axios, the report
says that Lau was arrested inhis hometown of Wuhan, so he
went back to visit where hereturned after finishing up the
spring semester in Minnesota inJuly 2019.

(41:24):
He was then held for severalmonths and sentenced in November
, all for the post that thegovernment referred to as
denigrating a national leader'simage.
Lau's Twitter account, whichAxios can say can be found here,
contains tweets and retweetscomparing President Xi to
various cartoon characters,including Winnie the Pooh and
the villain from the 1990 showcalled Biker Mice from Mars.

(41:47):
The arrest and sentence couldchill any criticism of the
government by Chinese citizens,even when they're in foreign
countries.
Over the past year, the Chinesepolice has escalated their
fight to censor social media andcrack down on critical posts.
Chill any criticism of thegovernment by Chinese citizens,
even when they're in foreigncountries.
Over the past year, the Chinesepolice has escalated their
fight to censor social media andcrack down on critical posts by
arresting more users who postcontent that they consider
objectionable.
Plenty of internationallypopular sites including YouTube,

(42:08):
twitter, facebook and Instagramare blocked in the country and
can only be accessed by a smallcommunity of users who can get
around it with special software.
They break through the firewallwith VPNs and things like that.
So, because China blocks offinformation, okay, so I'm at
risk just for having done thispodcast.
So I've just pretty muchdecided I'll never get to see

(42:31):
China or anything that's underChina rule, right?
Because at this point, whatwe're saying here is now China,
china's going to get reallysquirrely with this.
Okay, everywhere where they'vegot their one belt, one road
initiative, they're going tostart enforcing this.
Weak countries that havecompromised their sovereignty
you know countries in Africa,maybe Italy, countries that have

(42:51):
really, really softened theirsovereignty.
When it comes to China, youjust watch, I'll find it, it'll
happen.
But at some point they're goingto arrest somebody outside of
their territorial jurisdictionand that's when all hell's going
to break loose, because thatmeans everybody's at risk.
Everybody's at risk of beingtortured, beaten by China, and

(43:15):
this is terror.
If they do that a couple times,then pretty soon people will
start to be quiet andself-censor, and that just leads
to change in behavior.
It leads to acceptance, whichis basically where we're at now,
except we're just waking up toit.
Britain this week this isbreaking from the national polls
.
This was yesterday Britain bansHuawei from their 5G network.

(43:36):
So 5G is the internet of things,right, just like the internet
came along and we all got emailand our AOL accounts and it
revolutionized the way wecommunicate because it basically
made Snell Mel less relevantfor regular routine
communications.
And then things advance.
We get the cell phone.
Okay, now the landline's kindof obsolete and then pretty soon
I mean, there's lots of peopleand you listening to this, you

(43:57):
might not even when was the lasttime you logged onto a computer
?
Right, lots of people reallylive their entire lives off
their cell phones.
I can say for myself once I acouple of years ago, once I kind
of got really heavily involvedin construction gosh, I mean,
I'd go two, three weeks withoutpopping open my laptop.
Right, you can do everythingfrom your cell phone.
So 5G is like a super fastwireless network that allows

(44:19):
your cell phones and everythingto operate at beyond normal.
You know, even like what's theword I'm looking for Even like
normal DSL and normal cablespeeds.
You know real high speed, andthis will allow things to be
included in the network.
So right now, if you aretechnologically savvy, you know

(44:40):
you might have an Apple watchand it syncs up with your phone.
And then when you get in yourcar, it tells you oh, you're
this far from you know,depending on the time of day.
I used to get in the car and itwould say you know, starbucks
is two miles away, because itknows at this time of day I
always go to Starbucks.
And then it says you know,you're at 5 o'clock.
When I jump in my car, the GPSwould always pop up Home, you
know you're this many miles fromhome.

(45:00):
It like anticipates where I'mgoing.
Well, refrigerators haveinternet technology now, and so
it can tell you when you're outof milk.
I mean, we're going to get tothe point where a lot of things
in our life are going to beautomated by these systems, and

(45:21):
5G facilitates that.
And Huawei, which is a part ofthe PLA, which is the People's
Liberation Army, which is theChinese Communist Army, pla, is
in charge of Huawei.
They have claimed for yearsthat they're a private company.
They are not a private company,they are totally a part of
their military operation.
But what they've done is theChinese government has
subsidized Huawei.
And then they have taken theHuawei infrastructure and

(45:45):
technology for 5G and they'vespread it all across their Belt
and Road Initiative countries.
So you know, you've got theseHuawei 5G towers and you've got
Huawei phones, you've got allkinds of Huawei apparatus.
All of the Huawei gear has backdoors in it so that the Chinese
Communist Party can spy on you.
So if you're using a Huaweiphone, huawei software, they're
spying on you.
They're taking all your dataand, as the 5G networks grow
pretty soon, they're not justtaking who you called and where

(46:07):
you are, they're taking you knowwhat your grocery shopping
habits are, what your healthhabits are if you've got health
problems.
The amount of data andinformation that they can have
makes them unbelievably powerfulunbelievably powerful.
So Huawei is a real threat toany country's national security
and sovereignty and they havereally snuck their way in by

(46:29):
paying for this expensive 5Gequipment in competition with,
say, verizon, because thegovernment is subsidizing it.
So you know, get your 5G forfree and just make this.
You know we'll come in andinstall it for you and the
tradeoff there is, but we'regoing to spy on you.
So the United States, when Trumpgot elected, got hip to this
and they banned Huawei from theUnited States.
They banned Huawei phones, theybanned Huawei infrastructure

(46:51):
Everything Huawei can't have it.
And in addition, they'veinformed their Five Eyes
partners, so New Zealand,australia, canada and United
Kingdom and the USA.
They informed the other fourmembers of the Five Eyes
networks that if you use Huaweiequipment, we will not share
technology with you orintelligence with you, so

(47:14):
essentially ending the Five eyesrelationship based on Huawei.
So Trump drew a line in thesand and said you either side on
the side of America, you sideon the side of China, and Huawei
is that line.
And so Britain had already hadsignificant investments of
Huawei and their 5G network inBritain, and yesterday Britain
came out and officially fullybanned Huawei from their 5G
network.
They will be completelyreplacing all existing 5G

(47:38):
infrastructure by 2017, and thenthey will be phasing out of it
soon.
So this was covered as it wasbreaking on War Room yesterday.
So let's just listen to that.

Speaker 7 (47:49):
I want to just jump in real quick as well, while I
have the time to talk about thislatest polling coming out of
the United Kingdom.
Now you know that betweenmyself and Nigel Farage, we've
really been the only onespushing this what we call the no
Way Huawei campaign from lastyear, talking about how Huawei
was overtaking the Britishtelecommunications

(48:09):
infrastructure, the 5G networksall of this stuff On the back of
the coronavirus, the HenryJackson Society.
We had Dr Alamendoza on lastweek Fabulous.
They've done a poll and thepoll came out in the Sunday
Times yesterday and theyactually sent me all of the
crosstabs.
I want to go through them realquick for you.
74% of Britons blame theChinese government for what's
happened here.
74%, 74%, 71% say sue theChinese government if it can be

(48:32):
proved that they breachedinternational law in this
cover-up of the whole thing.
83% say the UK should demand aninternational inquiry into the
matter.
I guess that's poolingresources from all over the
world to get to the bottom of it.
It's my Nuremberg trial.
And the plurality 40% are nowagainst Huawei, while only 27%

(48:53):
support Huawei in Britain'sfive-day budget.

Speaker 3 (48:56):
But they still don't totally translate what the
Chinese Communist Party did tothem in the virus to.
We can't have the ChineseCommunist Party in our telecom
system, is that?

Speaker 7 (49:06):
because that's still not a direct link.
Yeah, they don't believe.
Britons aren't aware,necessarily en masse, that there
is a direct link between all ofthese oligarchic type companies
in China and the ChineseCommunist Party.
There's a.
There's a lack of publicinformation there.
Some of that's been filled overthe last couple of weeks.
You're getting more reporting,which is why the numbers are
shifting.
But in addition to that, alsoremember most people are saying

(49:29):
or rather the differentialbetween the 40 percent and the
27 percent here.
The rest are saying we justdon't know yet, so they're
waiting for more evidence.

Speaker 2 (49:36):
Okay, so he's talking more about the polling, but
that polling is what led toBritain finally making this
decision.
So the political pressurefinally got great enough that
they said no more Huawei.
It's awesome, awesome news.
Okay, wrapping up, a couple ofother funny things that are kind
of weird.
So Morning Joe.
Joe Scarborough on MSNBC.
If you remember his story, heserved in the House and he had

(49:59):
an intern that was working withhim and she suddenly died one
night while they were workinglate in the office together.
She fell and hit her head anddied.
Anyways, donald Trump hasaccused Joe Scarborough of a
cover-up and he has called for areinvestigation into the cold
case of the Joe Scarborough of acover-up, and he has called for
a reinvestigation into the coldcase of the Joe Scarborough
killing, as he kind of calls itand calls him crazy Joe.

(50:20):
Well, he co-hosts Morning Joewith Mika Brzezinski.
Mika Brzezinski is verypolitically connected.
I can't remember who her dad is.
Her dad was like a HenryKissinger type person, anyways.
So they're married.
They have the show together.
Well, he's been taking a littlebit of time off, so he took
about a week off and Mika wrotethis.

(50:42):
A word on my husband.
Joe is taking a week off, weekor two off.
Now, keep in mind he runs anational TV show.
Like usually when these guystake days off, they take a day
or two.
I mean they usually don'treally see these guys take like
a whole week off.
I mean they're paid like $20million a year to talk right, so
I mean that's like prettysignificant.
So he's taking a week off ortwo.
He may jump in or may not.
The reason I told him to.

(51:03):
So she's saying the reason is Itold him to.
When he's not by my side in themorning, I fill the void.
For 13 years Joe's beenanalyzing, advocating,
prognosticating, like no one can.
Nobody comes close.
This is rarely I do better.
Come on, guys.
This is rarely recognized, bythe way, because it makes it
look so easy.
This show has become a vitalpart of the political landscape.

(51:24):
Joe created the platform pitchto Phil Griffin, anyway.
So she just kind of goes on.
Joe's job is like jugglingprecious China and fire sticks
because he's running probablyfrom an indictment.
He puts himself out therebecause he loves politics, loves
his country.
Joe's a quick intellect andpassion for our country.
Anyways, super interesting.
He's just taking a week or twooff while his wife continues to

(51:45):
host.
So it's not like a vacation,it's just really weird.
Another one of those like Ithink something's about to
happen here.
A couple other things.
So there was a Blackpool womanin Europe that was arrested.
She was arrested with 81,000images of child sex abuse.
She's being jailed for onlynine months.

(52:06):
This is boggling to me.
There are some parts of thisworld that just do not take
these things seriously.
I don't understand it.
She's only getting nine months?
Uh and uh she's.
It says in here 677 of theimages were of the most serious
kind.
Um, she got caught because shehad a heart attack and tried to
access her images via a publicwifi as she recovered from her

(52:28):
heart attack.
Um, another significant thingthat happened in the in the
human trafficking and child sexroundup, open Secret reported
yesterday Jan Harzan arrestedfor soliciting sexual activity
from a 13-year-old.
And who is he?
He's the head of a major UFOorganization.
This is huge.
He's the executive director ofMutual UFO Network.

(52:49):
These guys run like a TVchannel.
They gosh, they do, they, they,they do.
There's big, I mean.
It says in here it says uh,let's see.
It says, uh, there's a quote inhere.
It's how impactful this isAnyways big deal.
Uh, it's a, it's a really bigdeal in the UFO network.

(53:10):
Uh, this guy was kind of thehead of it all.
Another really good thinghappened yesterday is the number
one wanted person in the wholeworld for child pornography,
specifically child pornography,the most wanted pedophile
mastermind behind the dark netsites that served thousands

(53:30):
across the globe, is arrested.
He was arrested in France andwe don't know his name.
I don't think we ever knew hisname, other than those who were
seeking after him.
This was a guy who justoperated on the internet and
himself was a.
He did the victimizing as well,so, and videoed it and things

(53:51):
like that.
Anyways, that's good.
I just, you know, there's a partof me just thinks, like when
you, when you wrap up thedarkest elements of society,
right, it's like you, you createthis, like righteousness just
shines through, like every timeone of these vile people is
taken down, the ripple effect ofthe future not being victimized

(54:16):
, right, like if you've gotsomeone who's a serial abuser
and you take them off thestreets, then there's no one, he
won't abuse any more people.
So every single one of thesepersons is a victory.
And when you roll up networksand when you roll up like the
number one guy that's runningthese websites and then you're
able to shut those websites downright.
A lot of times it's theopportunity to commit these

(54:38):
crimes Like these crimeswouldn't happen if the
opportunities aren't there.
For the most part, you know,there's very few people that
seek these things outproactively.
A lot of people stumble acrossthem and then get sucked into
the vortex of it.
So it's so amazing when thesepeople get wrapped up.
I mean it just makes me sohappy and it again tells me
there's progress being made, butit's being made in the shadows
because the implication of whosome of these people are just is

(55:02):
ranging.
Another interesting thing, whichI'm going to cover later as I
continue to digest it andunderstand it.
But I got some informationabout Justin Trudeau dumped on
my lap, so I thought it was alittle bit odd when the USMCA
was memorialized, that JustinTrudeau didn't come down to the
United States to uh, to thesigning.
In fact he he just sent adelegation and uh, the, but the

(55:24):
president of Mexico came and itwas everybody kind of thought it
was super odd.
Well, it might not be quite asodd, because part of the signing
of the USMCA, if you actuallyread through it, there's some
anti-corruption things andthere's some very clear verbiage
about what it means to becorrupt and not be corrupt.
And Justin Trudeau is goingthrough some things in Canada.
He has affiliated himself withsome very, very corrupt people

(55:48):
and has probably himself beeninvolved.
What I've looked at so far,what got dropped on my lap,
which is just a Twitter thread,but nonetheless it's pretty
damning.
So I've got a feeling thatJustin Trudeau didn't come to
America because he might havebeen at risk of possibly being
detained in America per therules as they're written, so he
might've wanted to avoid thatwhole scenario.

(56:10):
This is very, very interesting,very interesting.
So we're going to see what'sgoing on with Justin Trudeau and
how the relationship withDonald Trump continues to go.
If you remember, justin Trudeauwas backed by Barack Obama,
which is a big deal.
By the way, united Statespresidents are not supposed to
endorse people running in othercountries like that, so the fact

(56:31):
that Barack Obama endorsed himand did a good get out to vote
campaign is very, veryconcerning, to say the least,
and so we'll see how this playsout.
But, man, this could be fun.
I mean, as far as I'm concerned, some of these people, some of
the some parts of the world, canjust burn, right?
I mean, some of these corruptorganizations and institutions,
they can just burn.
We'll figure it out after it'sover.

(56:51):
I mean, I don't want to burnthe whole thing down, but some
of it's got to be fixed, allright?
Well, that about wraps it upfor me today.
I appreciate you spending sometime with me.
You can find me at the PeasantsPerspective on Twitter or
Peasants Pod on Twitter,peasants Pod on Parler, the
Peasants Perspective on Facebook, and you can email me at
peasantspod at gmailcom.
And if you like the podcast,please share it.

(57:12):
I appreciate it very much andfive-star reviews love them.
Thanks, bye.

Speaker 1 (57:21):
Who are the Britons?
We all are.
We are all Britons and I amyour king.
I didn't know we had a king.
I thought we were an autonomouscollective.
You're fooling yourself.
We're living in a dictatorship,a self-perpetuating autocracy,
in which the working class is oh, there you go, bringing class
into the gang.
That's what it's all about.
If only people would, please,please, good people.

(57:41):
I am in haste.
Who lives in that castle?
No one lives there.
Then, who is your lord?
We don't have a lord.
What I told you.
We're an anarcho-syndicalistcommune.
We take it in turns to act as asort of executive officer for
the week.
Yes, but all the decisions ofthat officer have to be ratified
at a special bi-weekly meeting.

(58:02):
Yes, I see, by a simplemajority.
In the case of pure internalaffairs, be quiet.
But by a two-thirds majority inthe case of Be quiet.
I order you to be quiet, order.
Who does he think he is?
I'm your king.
Well, I didn't vote for you.
You don't vote for kings.
Well, how do you become kingthen?
The lady of the lake, her armclad in the purest, shimmering

(58:24):
samite, held aloft Excaliburfrom the bosom of the water,
signifying by divine providencethat I, arthur, was to carry
Excalibur.
That is why I'm your king.
Listen, strange women lying inponds distributing swords is no
basis for a system of government.
Supreme executive power derivesfrom a mandate from the masses,

(58:48):
not from some farcical aquaticceremony.
Be quiet.
You can't expect to wieldsupreme executive power just
because some watery tart threw asword at you.
Shut up.
I mean, if I went round sayingI was an emperor just because
some moistened bint had loved ascimitar at me, they'd put me
away.
Shut up, will you Shut up?
Ah, now we see the violenceinherent in the system.
Shut up.
Come and see the violenceinherent in the system.

(59:10):
Help, help.
I'm being repressed, bloodypeasant.
Oh, what a giveaway.
Did you hear that?
Did you hear that?
That's what I'm on about.
Did you see him repressing me?