June 27, 2025 • 65 mins
Mario Magana and guest Michael Parker dive into conspiracy theories and global tensions, examining what lies beneath mainstream headlines.
• Comparing the legal cases of P. Diddy and Jeffrey Epstein, with Diddy likely facing serious consequences while Epstein's wider network remains protected
• Analysis of why Diddy might be the "fall guy" while more powerful figures connected to Epstein escaped justice completely
• Discussion about the mysterious circumstances of Epstein's death and the disappointing statements from Kash Patel and Dan Bongino
• Examination of the recent US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities and whether it achieved its intended results
• Analysis of how modern warfare has evolved beyond traditional conflicts into cyber attacks, economic warfare, and the fentanyl crisis
• Conversation about how World War III might already be happening through non-conventional means
• Questions about the future of Ghislaine Maxwell's case and whether the public will ever get full disclosure
• Reflections on the changing nature of media consumption and how social media has replaced traditional news sources
If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to follow Michael Parker on social media and YouTube under Michael Parker Media.
Fan Mail Be apart of the show, or send your suggestions or feedback.
Elevate the Extraordinary: Support U.S. Phenomenon!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to US Phenomenon, where possibilities
are endless.
Put down those same oldheadlines.
It's time to expand your mindand question what if?
From paranormal activity toUFOs, bigfoot sightings and
unsolved mysteries, this is USPhenomenon?
Speaker 2 (00:22):
From the Pacific Northwest in the shadow of the
1962 world's fair, the spaceneedle.
Good evening, good morning,good afternoon, wherever you are
on god's green earth, if youbelieve in that sort of thing.
Uh, I am your host, mariomagana.
This is us phenomenon.
Tonight we're gonna go to whereus phenomenon likes to go in
(00:44):
the conspiracy realms.
And tonight, no stranger tothis show, he has his own show
you can find on Michael ParkerMedia.
You can find it on YouTube oron any one of your favorite
podcasting platforms.
It is my pleasure to welcomeback a longtime contributor to
US Phenomenon, michael Parker.
Welcome back to the show, sir.
(01:04):
Thank you for having me, marioHowdy, it's always fun.
Now for those who may not knowyou, you have your own show that
you talk about and typicallyyou guys are doing more of the.
You kind of do more of the.
Why am I spacing on theterminology of your show?
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Well, I do a lot of different things and I've worked
for different companies doingdifferent types of shows.
So I've done everything fromkind of Art Bell type paranormal
stuff.
I've also done conspiracy stuff.
I've done straight currentevents it depends on the show.
But what I like to do and whatI currently do is a little bit
(01:49):
of all of it and um, and I thinkthat's what a lot of the people
that we admire these days kindof do.
So, you know, I I I'm droppinga show tomorrow that has to do
with, um, the possibility ofthere being invertebrate animals
in the atmosphere.
So it goes sometimes from supercrazy, weird stuff to pop
(02:14):
culture.
But you know what, anythingthat just kind of blows my mind
and makes me want to talk aboutit is open to discussion.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
I love that.
I love that and you've not beena, you've been a longtime
contributor to the show.
It's interesting because someof the things that I'd like to
talk about tonight I think it'sa plethora of stuff.
You know, the Diddy trial isgetting close to being coming
close to the end here and I kindof want to talk to you about
(02:41):
your thoughts on the Diddy trialversus the Epstein stuff.
When we look at this situation,I mean this trial, this is
really hammered through right.
They've really gone through,they've buckled down.
I mean, they have their ducksin a row with this case.
Do you believe that this isdifferent from the Epstein case,
(03:04):
where maybe there were somemistakes made in that case,
versus this one where they'relike that one's still kind of
pending, hasn't gone anywhere,feelings on this whole trial
(03:25):
versus are we looking at justthat?
You know that they were able tofine tune and say you know what
, let's, let's go after this,cause it's, these are this could
be kind of similar, um in in.
You know, the two casesthemselves could be very much,
very similar in a lot of uh, ina lot of ways.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Yes, so I a couple of thoughts on that.
So many people from the get-gokind of pointed out the fact
that this Diddy was theHollywood Epstein and that may
be a little bit of hyperbole butthere are certainly
similarities and they both wererunning these parties which
(04:00):
seemed to be blackmail kind ofparties where a lot of illicit
drugs and sex were happening.
Now the difference is Diddy,he's going down.
I mean, diddy is going down andhe's a Hollywood guy where
Epstein was almost atransnational intelligence asset
in my opinion and I thinkthere's a lot of people that
(04:22):
wouldn't disagree with that, inmy opinion, and I think there's
a lot of people that wouldn'tagree, wouldn't disagree with
that.
So there's things that aregoing to be done to Diddy that
were not being done to Epstein.
And look, just recently, acouple you know what was just a
couple of weeks ago, kash Pateland Dan Bocino come out and say
that you know they've seen filesthat we are all not privy to,
and you know that we are all notprivy to, and you know Epstein
(04:44):
did in fact, kill himself.
Look, I don't believe that.
I absolutely do not believethat, and I'm disappointed that
they had to say that.
You know what, maybe they'reright and I'm wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I mean, when you think about it, michael.
Let's go back to that piecewhere you and I talked about
this in a previous show.
We're like man oh did we okay,oh, I mean this was years ago,
but it's wild to say that thatthat's the case, that that was a
few years ago maybe, oh, maybethree or four.
Yeah, but, michael, you hadsaid we have both had talked
(05:19):
about this, like no way, how doall of a sudden cameras go out,
like obviously this, this prisonor this jail is no longer
around, it's, it's been shutdown.
But how convenient was it thatthere was no there, there was no
cameras, no, no surveillanceavailable during his incident of
(05:42):
, you know, of exterminatinghimself?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
Precisely so, and when I I misunderstood you, I
thought you meant that we haddiscussed the Kash Patel, but
you know.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Oh, no, no, no, not that piece no.
Speaker 3 (05:53):
Okay, so here's the deal.
You're exactly right, and wedid talk about this, because how
many things have to go wrongfor his suicide to go right,
right, yeah, I mean, and youknow, they are completely not
even talking about the ligaturemarks that were found on his
neck by forensic scientists.
All that aside, many of usbelieve that Epstein was killed,
(06:17):
and he was most likely killedbecause of the connections that
he had of people who neverwanted to be found out for the
things that they had done.
Now, with Diddy, we've got adifferent set of circumstances.
We've got stuff mostly dealingwith celebrities.
Only, I'm sure that there werepoliticians at some of these
parties, but not to the levelthat we're talking about being
(06:41):
involved with the Epsteinsituation, that we're talking
about being involved with theEpstein situation.
So, diddy, in some ways and Ido think he's guilty of most of
the things that he's beingcharged of I have not followed
the trial, probably as closelyas you have, even though I live
here in Los Angeles, because itwas an open secret that this
kind of stuff was going on for along time, just like with
Harvey Weinstein and many otherthings After a while, you're
(07:03):
just like yeah, I, I know that'shappening and anybody who's
halfway paying attention knowsthis is happening.
So diddy, in my prediction, goesdown hard, and part of that is
to make some of us feel like orkind of take our mind off the
fact that epstein didn't go downhard.
Epstein got out the easy way.
He either committed suicide,someone killed him or they took
(07:28):
him away and he's in witnessprotection somewhere, but
regardless he didn't end updoing a long time in jail.
So one of those things happenedwith Epstein.
Diddy, I think, goes down hard.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
It'll be interesting to see who else, if anyone else,
they go after within Diddy'scircle after all of this a large
underground type situation, yes, and very much, very much, very
(08:09):
tied into the same type ofthings that are alleged in
Diddy's case.
It's this.
It to me it feels like forsomeone like you and I, who have
been covering and chattingabout this, and even at the
beginning, when you talk aboutuss phenomenon talking about hey
, why aren't it, why isn'tanyone talking about bill gates
(08:32):
back then you and I were talkingabout this.
We had said what about bill?
No one's talking about.
you know, mr, mr northwest guy,mr microsoft and I'm not like
talking crap about thisindividual, but you're talking
about someone who was tied tohim as well, and I think yes, he
and I mean.
Speaker 3 (08:53):
It's pretty much a matter of record.
I think that that's part of whyhis wife says that she divorced
him was the relationship.
Now, personally, I thinkthere's probably a lot more than
that, but she was saying thatpart of the reason she divorced
Bill was his relationship withEpstein.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
And with, as you were just saying just a few minutes
ago, about who else may be tiedto Diddy, is it like… Lots of
people, I mean?
Yeah, I mean, think about it.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Big stars, big big stars, yeah, I mean, think about
it.
Big stars, big, big stars.
But but, mario, the only thingabout that is, even though a lot
of these big stars who, if youread any gossip columns, ladies
and gentlemen, you can find outwho I'm talking about but the
question is, will any of them godown?
And the reason I say that isbecause right now, the main
boogeyman, the main bad guy, isbeing portrayed as Diddy.
(09:47):
All the rest of the people thatwent along with this, do they
matter in the court of publicopinion?
Do they matter to the lawmakersand law enforcers who want to
make a case or make a story withthis Diddy thing?
I don't know if they will,because some of these people I
mean clearly, diddy was not theonly person involved with this
(10:10):
who was up to no good.
I mean and unfortunately I havea picture with Diddy- Well, hey,
man, a lot of people do, andyou know what, mario?
I'm glad you brought that upbecause a lot of people make a
big stink about okay.
Well, here's Trump picturedwith Epstein.
Maybe here's Mario with P Diddy.
(10:35):
But that actually doesn't meananything, because famous people
get their pictures made with alot of people and you and I, one
day, who knows, we might getinvited to some party and we
might intend it, we might attendit because we believe that it's
good for our career, or youknow, we're, we're there just to
(10:55):
shake some hands and get thehell out, and in the meantime,
somebody takes a picture with usof someone who then goes and
commits a crime.
Does that mean that we had anyrelationship?
You know, and I know that I'msaying the obvious, but, um,
that's just something, because alot of people take the really
lazy way out on that.
Oh well, so and so was picturedwith so and so, and that means
there's a connection?
Speaker 2 (11:15):
no, it doesn't it's interesting because when we go
back to the epstein files case Ishouldn't say files, but that
case itself there I don't knowthat this country is ready to
like there there might be somereally high-powered individuals
other than the ones that we mayhave kind of known about, um,
(11:40):
but again it doesn't mean thatthey were partaking in like you
said, or maybe they were.
We just don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
You know, and we may never know either too there were
very, very powerful peopleinvolved in all this, and I
would point to the work ofwhitney webb.
I mean, she's for years beendoing some of the best work out
there on this case and I'mnowhere in comparison to the
work that she's done.
I I think that we are.
I think there's a lot of thingsthat the American public and
(12:11):
the global public could actuallyhandle that's being held back
from us.
I mean, we're all adults.
I mean just go on social media.
If you want to find somethingreally horrible, it's there.
And even if you don't want tofind it, you'll come across it.
So you know, most of us haveseen or heard just about
everything at this point I mean,there's so much out there, like
(12:33):
you said yeah.
So I think that you know a lotof times they use that as an
excuse, thinking that we can'thandle it, when in fact we could
um, real quick.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
It looks like I'm getting a couple text messages
in here.
Let me uh scroll to those realquick.
There's a bunch of them, abunch of old stuff in here.
But I'm looking at a coupletext messages of um people
sending text messages in.
Uh, this one comes from yelm,says hey, mario, listening in
from Yale.
Big thanks to Michael Parker fortackling the tough topics
(13:05):
tonight.
Honestly, I didn't think mostfolks are ready for what could
be out there if the Epstein caseactually moves forward.
We're talking about names,networks, the truth that could
shake the foundations of thepolitical and culture and even
personal, of the political andculture and even personal.
(13:26):
So people, she said, or theysay some people won't be able to
handle that level of reality.
But it's overdue.
Keep the pressure on.
We're out here listening, wegot your back.
Oh, that's nice.
Thanks for hanging out andyelling and listening.
You know it's interestingbecause I think for you and I, I
think, being outsiders of thatcase itself, it would be kind of
(13:49):
nice to not turn this into ajfk conspiracy in regards to
like what if, what if, what, if,what, if you know it already,
is though I mean sure yeah but?
but we're not that, we're not.
We're not talking about 50-plusyears of history where they
(14:10):
could go through these files.
They could have a trial andthey can say, hey, look, this is
what it is Agreed.
And they can still pin it toGhislaine and say, look, you
were one of the mastermindsbehind this case.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
Okay and say, look, you were one of the masterminds
behind this case.
Okay, so I think there's a lotgoing on here and the Epstein
thing has been a bigdisappointment for a lot of
people, because a lot of peoplethought that Trump would come in
and sort this out and itdoesn't seem like that is
happening and it doesn't seemlike Kash Patel and Bongino are
doing that.
But maybe there's things thatwe don't know.
(14:47):
I kind of doubt that.
But the main thing that I wouldsay is that I don't want to put
this under the rug or anything,but we also have a lot of other
things, and I know that there'sa lot of people that Epstein
was like a really big thing tothem to get figured out and I am
not trying to gloss over anyatrocities that happened.
But there's also a whole otherset of things that we have on
(15:10):
our plate right now.
I don't know if anything willever be sorted out on the
Epstein situation.
I think that's part of thereason Diddy's going to go down
so hard is so that we're allkind of placated into this
thought that, oh see, justice isbeing served for this kind of
thing.
But there's a lot that we needto work on right now, even
(15:32):
besides Epstein Sure, and Ithink that most people realize
there's a lot of horrible peoplein government, there's a lot of
horrible people in Hollywood,there's a lot of people in uh,
even in churches.
So I think that most realisticpeople know that a lot of people
are faulty and each one of usis, you know, let he or faulty,
(15:55):
meaning you know, we, we allhave our issues right.
So I don't think that, um, Idon't think that anybody's going
to be surprised if it does evercome come out that so-and-so
and so-and-so and so-and-so andso-and-so all did these sorted
things.
I think that that's alreadybaked into the story.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
I mean, I just want to know, because you know I want
to, I want to a lot of peopledo.
And I think that even comingback, we were like see, we told
you guys, you know, I want that.
I want that we have anothertext message coming in from
Edgewood, washington.
Hey, Mario, longtime listenerfrom Edgewood.
I want to thank you for havingMichael Parker on the show again
(16:34):
.
His insight is very sharp,unfiltered and exactly what we
need to hear in the media thesedays.
As for Epstein's case, itdeserves a real closure.
Too many names, too manyunanswered questions.
Keep up the great work.
Thank you both.
Yeah, that's nice.
Thanks for texting in.
If you want to send your textmessages, you can always send
(16:56):
them in at 775-990-5151.
Um.
One last thing about this,before we move forward with the
um where we go next, michael?
Um, you know, I think that youand I have really covered this
from from, from the beginning,all the way till to now, to
present time.
Um, I don't think anything'sreally changed for us in regards
(17:19):
to where we nothing like.
I'm not blown away by any ofthe news that's been put out
there, but also I haven't.
There hasn't been any freshinformation, and I think you
just said a few minutes ago thatthis baby right now, this, this
golden goose, is what we'llcall this, the, the diddy, the,
the baby oil of, and I'm makingall these terms because that's
(17:41):
all that they ever, you know,talk about.
In that case, the horrificthings that happened in Diddy's,
that has been alleged inDiddy's trial, is crazy.
There are people that have beenfollowing this case and the
transcripts and things of thatnature Not something that I have
the time or efforts or willingto do, because I don't need to
(18:03):
know what someone's you knowdegenerate, you know habits are
um, I just need someone toprotect those that are out there
to come to a conclusion, say,yes, this is not a good person,
these things happened, okay,boom, he's done.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
You know I listen, I ain't judging.
I mean I know that there aresome people who get really
fascinated by these trials.
I mean hollywood, you know,every once in a while we've got
to have a big trial, whether itbe oj, whether it be johnny dip
amber heard whether it be diddy,and even though you and I are
not super obsessed with thesetrials, a lot of people are, and
(18:46):
in a way, it's another form ofescapism because they can listen
to this and think well, youknow what?
I was feeling pretty bad aboutmyself, but when I look at these
guys, I'm not so bad and it isinteresting, and so in some ways
it's like the ultimate realityshow, right for sure.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
And so I I understand the entertainment, and that's a
weird thing to say, I know, Imean I understand I understand
the entertainment aspect ofthese high-profile trials I mean
it goes all the way back to theoj trial.
I mean that was like for sure,you know.
I mean they wall-to-wallcoverage and like they broke
into the world series to givethe verdict which I you know, I
(19:29):
was living in la when that washappening.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
I mean it was, it was huge.
I like I, I, the, I, the daythat he went on the, uh, that,
the, the, the truck chase withthe, you know, in the suv, with
his buddy Al Kiling or whoeverit was, I remember that day like
it was a huge day in Americanhistory.
I remember where I was at, Iremember watching it with my
(19:53):
buddies.
We were all kind of laughingbut yeah, it has a fascination
for people that we can't reallyexplain.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
And it's interesting when you go back and you look at
the trial of that case verymuch you're talking about the
90s, you're talking aboutReginald Denny, you're talking
about the whole riots in LA andit felt like….
Speaker 3 (20:20):
And the first famous Kardashian.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
Oh, yeah, robert Kardashian was part of oj's
legal team and and like, if youwatch some of those
documentaries, you see him withthe briefcase, oj's uh bag and
things of that nature.
Yeah, uh, it's just it.
I mean it is very much a must,it was a must watch situation me
was be very, very young, um,not having an idea.
(20:46):
But looking at the information,I mean I wasn't dumb, I sure was
like, well, I, I mean it's hisblood, I mean you know.
But again, when you look at theevidence and dna and things of
that nature, were things missmishandled?
Probably that's another,another show for another day.
But, um, I think for us, for me, and like you were saying, the
(21:09):
distractions out there andthere's so much going on right
now in the world, speculation,world war three possible, uh,
and we'll get into that here injust a little bit to have that
distraction.
People are looking for that andI, and, and we got to remember
this, and I know that if you'venever read the book Behold the
Pale Horse, this book would bevery adamant, very.
(21:34):
It's crazy.
This book is so old but it isso much relevant in today's day.
People may not know who williamcooper is, but I tell you right
now I'm sure he is rolling inhis grave right now, in regards
to the misinformation and howpeople are being led as sheep
(21:56):
and not being lions.
And I say this because, michaelparker, I'm telling you there
is sometimes when I'm like goingthrough and scrolling through
social media and I see the mostoutlandish, hideous
misinformation that is out there.
That is wild to me.
I can't, I can't pin.
(22:17):
I can pinpoint one off the topof my head where they're telling
people that you're not going tobe able to get back into the
country.
You have old, senior citizenslike my dad, who are out there
believing in the deep state andI'm like how do you even know
about the deep?
Well, I believe in the deepstate for a 72 year old, old
(22:38):
hippie.
All of a sudden now knowingabout the deep state, I'm like
wait, how do you know about thedeep state, dad?
Which is just interesting to me.
And before let me just finishthis on this piece people who
are in that older demographic,people believing that social
media is the new news presence,please remember, not every piece
(23:04):
of news is accurate.
Be sure to do your research, doyour homework.
That's all I ask of you, and Iknow that most of the people who
are watching or listening onour radio stations across the
pacific northwest are educatedenough to understand that.
But I tell you I I I had to doa double take and ask my dad.
(23:24):
I was like wait, should you behosting my show?
Because how do you know the?
This is, this is a, a gen.
You know, someone who came tothe united states has no idea,
but he's now being educated.
Somehow he's learning aboutlike I.
I didn't think that he would beat that level of like knowledge
(23:45):
of how, how he's getting fedabout learning about the deep
state, because I know it's notsomething that he's searching
for well, okay, I got a couplethoughts there.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
So, the deep state listen, if he's an, if he's an
ex-hippie, you know, if he wasfrom back in the hippie days, I
mean I think they were aware ofthe deep state.
Then they, we just didn't callit the deep state.
I mean, who killed jfk and, uh,you know who wanted us to have
a vietnam war?
I mean, who were the guysbehind Watergate?
(24:17):
And so these types of thingskind of always existed and the
left used to be very muchagainst the establishment right,
and I would argue that thesedays, the left, at least,
especially for the last eightyears, was the establishment,
including the media.
Which brings me to your secondpoint, which is about social
media.
(24:38):
Yes, there is a lot ofmisinformation out there, but at
this point in time and I read alot of it and I've been doing
this a long time and I, when Isee misinformation, unless I'm
just completely blown away withhow extreme it is, I usually
just roll past it.
Sure, and what I would say is,these days, with things like X,
(25:03):
they have supplanted mainstreammedia, and the reason that
happened is because people nolonger believe mainstream media.
This thing that's happeningright now with this low
confidence report about thebombing in Iran.
I mean, look, I don't know whatthe truth is, but basically
someone leaked a report of lowconfidence to the public,
(25:28):
basically saying that you knowthat attack did not go as well
as the president and Heg Suthersaying it does and Hegseth are
saying goes.
My point is that a lot of peopleno longer believe that the
mainstream media really has anyweight or validity left to it.
They believe it's just yourpropaganda of choice.
Okay, are you a CNN person?
Are you a Fox person?
(25:48):
Are you an MSNBC person?
And they feel like they couldgo to social media, like X
especially, or one of the others, but I think mostly X, and they
will find their politicalinfluencer of choice and they
prefer to hear that informationfrom them than from the
mainstream media.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
For one, I would never call MSNBC, cnn or Fox
News or Fox News.
I find those are to me, beingan old school radio guy TV
person, those are entertainmentTV to me.
Maybe back in the day they weremore towards covering stories,
(26:30):
but they still I would agreewith you, they are very much
opinion driven versus, say, likeABC, cbs, hey by the way bc
nice.
Speaker 3 (26:38):
However, I think the same thing applies there, if not
even more.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
It's almost state-run media at this point yeah, it's
crazy because when you say that,when you say state-run media,
that would mean that theadministration would be running
the media, then right.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
Except that the media is largely controlled by the
left and so, essentially underObama and Biden, yeah, it was
pretty much okay.
Here's your story.
Stamp it, you know, and it'sout Now.
Listen, I'm biased, but I gotto call it the way I see it and
I think most people see it.
The way that I see it Dependson your political inclinations.
(27:17):
But getting back to your firstpoint, what the way that I see
it?
It depends on your politicalinclinations.
But getting back to your firstpoint, what I'm trying to say is
who buys a newspaper anymore?
Not me.
Who buys magazines anymore?
Old people, who really watchesNBC, abc, nightly news?
Mostly people of the oldergeneration.
Cnn only exists because itplays in every airport.
I mean, nobody actually watchesit.
(27:38):
So people get their news off oftheir phone, Sure, and they're
watching their favoriteinfluencers to get the news.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
It's interesting when you talked about that piece in
regards to possibly these as wecontinue to talk about, as we
continue to talk about, I thinkwe transition now into the
conflict that the United Stateshas entered in, or I would say,
had prepared a military strikeagainst certain nuclear sites,
(28:14):
and not against the country inIran, not against the country,
but to these nuclear sites.
And there were reports that Idid see that said they didn't
they hit the targets, but thetargets.
If there was nuclear substancethere, there, there would have
been a there, there would havebeen a huge fallout when there.
I mean that, that I mean Idon't I'm not a nuclear
scientist, but you would thinkthat there would be some type of
(28:36):
backlash.
Or did they move?
You know, like I guess this isthe part of conspiracy you got
to ask hey, we're going to bombyou if you don't do your stuff.
And then Iran's like oh,they're going to bomb us, let's
move.
You know, let's move all thenuke stuff, all the you know we
need to move all of our suppliessomewhere else.
Yeah, all the you know, let's,we need to move all of our our
(28:59):
supplies somewhere else.
Yeah, they bombed them, butthey didn't get that piece, they
, they were able to hit thetarget.
It's then like then what wassaid was oh, iran's like, oh,
we're gonna get the, we're gonnaget the military bases.
We're like, oh crap, let's moveall the planes.
And then they moved the planes.
You're right, the speculationis going to be out there both
sides of the fence.
But at the end of the day,regardless of what side of the
(29:21):
fence you're on, we're still allUnited States.
Well, most of us are from thiscountry and we're all one
country together.
It shouldn't be divided, youknow, think about that.
Yeah, I mean you and I both.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
I agree with you me say okay.
So there's a couple of thingsgoing on here.
So when you texted me, I wasactually at a concert that night
.
I I thought that trump would dosomething.
I did not think that he wasgoing to do it this weekend.
So that caught me by surprise.
And, and you know, I wastalking to friends in the Middle
East in the days afterwards andon the morning that the
(30:03):
Iranians Iran hit the site inQatar, which basically was
almost like an arrangedretaliatory attack so that they
could save face.
And this is where all this getsreally weird.
Now I have seen a satellitephoto supposedly a photo,
(30:26):
whichever that main site waswhere there were what looked
like trucks on the road outsidethe thing.
So you ask yourself okay, well,if they were moving stuff, how
much stuff could they move andhow fast could they move it?
But at the end of the day, doesthat actually even matter?
I mean, because I have not alot of doubt that the damage
(30:50):
done to those sites was prettysevere.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
If they were able to move any of the nuclear material
they still have to enrich it.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
They have to do the final enrichment somewhere else.
And what I'm trying to say isthat, you know, I'm not a war
guy, but I'm also not a pacifist, and sometimes you have to do
things that you don't want to do.
So I'm not arguing that weshouldn't have done the strike.
I didn't really think that wasgoing to happen right then, but
(31:24):
it did.
But now this whole argumentabout this leaked document did
the strike do what theadministration is saying it did,
or not?
I kind of wish that theadministration was not going so
hard on this, because the harderthey go on it makes you think
well, maybe it didn't go thatwell, you know, but I don't know
one way or the other, I have noway to know.
(31:45):
However, what I do know is whenyou send that many planes and
you send that many bunkerbusting bombs and the idea had
been germinating they'd beenworking on this plan for 15
years it was just now theyfinally, and apparently the bomb
that we created to do this wascreated with that exact
destination intended.
(32:06):
So I think that we did do a lotof damage.
Can Iran still go on andcontinue their nuclear program?
I don't really know, but what Ido know it will take a while
and it will take a lot of money.
And I don't know if the peopleof Iran are up to doing that all
(32:27):
over again, because that is acountry of 90 million people and
you know, man, I'm surprisedthey're not fed up with it.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
And if you know, man, I'm surprised they're not fed
up with it.
It's interesting because whenthat strike hit and I texted you
, I was like the first thingthat came to my mind was what
are the retaliatorial?
You know what is going to bethe retaliation of this?
And, let's be honest, if wewent for nuke sites where they
(32:58):
were going to, you know,wouldn't that give them the same
, the same?
I thought maybe retaliatorialpoint to say, okay, we're going
to hit military bases.
Maybe it's West Coast stuff,maybe it's they can't.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Because I don't think they have any ballistic
missiles at all, and I thinkthat's part of the issue.
So and in the run up to this Ididn't mean to cut you off, but
this is I think they're verylimited in what they can do
because they've already gonethrough a lot of their weapons
and the Israelis did a prettydeep job on Iran, so they're
(33:31):
very limited in what they canrespond with.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
Is it interesting that in recent days in social
media, that that bb, you knowbenjamin net now, yeah, who has
all these clips of him talkingabout, you know iran and how,
like this, this, this was likealmost a 30-year build-up to get
to where I felt to me like.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
I feel like the united states got punked into
doing something well, a lot ofpeople feel that way, you know,
mario, so and and I'm not sayingthat bb's a bad person, I'm
just saying like, why are wedoing his heavy lifting?
Speaker 2 (34:11):
like I, I don't want to say this.
I don't want to be hit.
I don't want the United Statesto be his bitch, you know what I
mean.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
You know like a lot of people feel the same way you
do.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
I have mixed emotions about this as well, and you
know I didn't want usnecessarily involved, um, but
now it's out of you and I'shands and it's been done, um so
I mean, we're still here to talkabout it, so you're right,
unless someone else decides toget involved and do the heavy
(34:42):
lifting and give them, you know,some type of power, because
obviously they clearly don'thave the muscle to, you know, to
get a missile all the way overhere.
They would have to get it fromRussia or China.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
And that hasn't happened.
I mean, mean, that is actuallya very important point.
So the allies, supposedlyallies of iran did not step up
for them, and I think that it'sbecause you got to weigh out
your you know what's my riskreward kind of thing here.
I mean, do I, do I really wantto go to bat for iran in this
(35:21):
type of a situation?
I mean, russia's got its handsfull right now, china has got
its own set of issues and Idon't think that I don't think
they they want to get involvedin this.
It's, you know, it's it's not ahigh enough priority for them.
If it was, they would have gotinvolved in it already and they
(35:42):
didn't.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
It's interesting that you say that and it seems to be
that everything has quieteddown some levels, but I think
even then, trump getting upsetand I don't even know if this is
true got upset at the peacetreaty that was made and then
they continued to fight eachother I think he was honestly
pretty irked about that, yeahbecause he had said he's like
(36:07):
you know, and that's it's.
It's good to see I I'm happythat the president was pissed.
I was was like, okay, cool,it's not like he's being a punk
and being punk.
Speaker 3 (36:21):
I felt the same way.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
You know what I mean.
I'm like, okay, good, he's gota spine.
I'm not saying that he doesn'tas a president, but it was good
to see.
Like, look, at this point intime, we all got to back him.
However, that is, he's makingthese calls.
He's doing what he thinks is inthe best interest of the
country, and if that's what isin the best interest of the
country, we will find out inhistory.
(36:43):
We will find out later, whenthe book has been written, we
will know.
But, like you said, it was niceto see him be pissed and
vocalize it and to say hey, sayhey, look, I'm not happy about
what's going on.
I, you know, I told these twoand for him he's probably like
these two kids he's, you knowthey're like stepbrother, you
(37:06):
know they're like two kidsfighting in the in the store and
they're like well, he's likeyou're both in a timeout well, I
honestly believe and this iswhy I've supported Trump through
three elections my number onecause is I'm an anti-war guy.
Speaker 3 (37:24):
That does not mean that I'm a pacifist and you just
roll over.
But I am not into foreignentanglements unless you got a
really damn good reason, and Ithink that's the way Trump's.
I think that's where Trump'scoming from and that was the
primary reason I well, that wasone of the primary reasons that
I supported him.
So I don't think that he wantsto be a war president.
(37:45):
I don't think he digs this.
I think he wants to helpeverybody make money, which is
the way that I feel, and I thinkthat that's what my friends in
the Middle East they think ofTrump.
They think that trump's thekind of guy he's actually trying
to make deals.
So this was not something Ithink that he wanted to do.
I don't think that he wants tocontinue um doing any kind of
(38:06):
military action if he doesn'thave to.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
he would rather make deals and history will tell us
in the future what, what, whatwill happen and, um, man, it
will be nice when this, when wecan all sleep peacefully because
, I'll be honest with you, afterall that stuff, I was like, I
was like man, this, this to mefelt very.
(38:28):
This took me back to the 1980s,like the cold.
It was ominous, it was ominousit was very much and I was like,
oh, heavy, very heavy maybereflect.
I was like I haven't had thesefeelings since, like the 80s,
you know, like are we gonna die?
Type situation.
And and the only reason why Isay that?
Because at that point in time,as this news was very fresh and
(38:55):
now I'm, I'm I'm not on mylaurels about what's going to
happen, but in regards to, okay,we got bases out here, we got,
you got would be island.
You have the naval, would youknow would be island.
You have bremerton.
You know they have the navalbase in bremerton, banger.
Then you got, uh, lewis mccordum down the, you know Air Force
and Army down in Tacoma.
(39:17):
So those are some hot sites thatcan, you know, just be taken
out.
And you know you're going totake out some population.
You know you're going to dosome damage.
There would be some tremendousloss of life.
And then if they decided thatit wasn't enough, I mean they'd
go after Boeing, you know, andBoeing's right here in Tukwila,
you would do some damage.
(39:38):
You would destroy the, therunway, the plants that are
still here, I mean, and they'rein that area, they're still
doing, you know, a lot ofdefense, a lot of space and
defense developmental stuffthere in Tukwila.
So, and that's just you knowsomeone who has the insight, who
worked in that building, youknow, has that kind of knowledge
(39:59):
.
But now that we fast forward towhere we're at today not so
much because you're like, okay,they don't even have enough you
know muscle to.
You know to do much of anything.
Maybe they can throw some bombs.
You know locally to other US,you know installations.
But that was my biggest fearduring that time.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
Right.
Right, and I think a lot ofpeople felt the same way.
My daughter is in San Diego andof course, there's, you know,
installations down there, so shewas concerned.
The deal is now, you know,there's this possibility of
sleeper cells.
I can't say that they don'texist.
However, you know, everybodyknows what's up right now, so
(40:43):
hopefully everyone is on as highalert as you're going to have,
right, I mean, I'm hoping thatall installations, all
industries, are on their bestbehavior and, you know, doing
their highest level of security,and I actually think they are,
because this is a real thing.
(41:04):
And, that said, I definitelyfeel better this week than I did
last week, and I don't knowwhat ends up happening, but I am
hopeful that this chapter isclosed, at least for a while,
and I hope that we can moveforward and have a safe 4th of
(41:27):
July.
Speaker 2 (41:28):
When we talk about this and I think I was going to
joke about this is it the end ofthe world as we know it?
As most of us who grew up inthe cold war era, maybe there
are a lot of people that grew upin a post 9 11 era.
If this continues, it's notgoing to look like a cold war
(41:55):
era.
Missiles, things of that naturewe're going to talk about.
We're talking like cyberattacks, uh infrastructures
being attacked in regards toelectrical, you know, things
that would pause a lot of thingsin the united states that could
cripple the country.
We're not talking about bombs.
(42:16):
We're talking about if they canhack into certain things and
make things change.
That's how I look at it.
Speaker 3 (42:23):
I think that's right.
I think that's right.
I think that you know, is thisworld war three?
Was this have we been in worldwar three in the fall of 2021?
I believe I was doing, I was onsomeone's show and I said at
that point I thought that wewere already in a form of world
war three, but it's not the typeof world war that people think
(42:45):
about.
I think that in the 21stcentury, governments are much
more sophisticated.
So the idea that you would havea widespread nuclear war, that's
not really good for anyone.
Sure, and as crass as thismight sound like, look okay.
So what if you annihilate somecountry with nuclear weapons?
(43:08):
Well then, nobody can doanything with it because it's
radioactive, not to mention allof the other people who start
firing.
So you can't really do thatrealistically.
You don't want to soil thecountry so much that it's
unusable.
What you could have is a lot ofbattles in third world countries
(43:30):
, um skirmishes, proxy wars, andI know that people have stated
that.
But I think to your point whata lot of World War III war would
actually look like.
Would be like fentanyl, wouldbe like COVID, would be like
cyber hacking.
It would be economic espionage.
(43:51):
It would be, I think, of theold song Murder by Numbers by
the police and in the song Stingtalks about.
You know, you don't really wantto shoot anybody or do anything
because it causes an awful lotof mess.
What you want to do is use morefinesse, which is, I think
World War III on a big levelwould be orchestrated with more
(44:12):
finesse.
It just doesn't look like a warmovie from the past.
It would, because nowespecially, look, war is not
green, right?
I mean, it's like you want, youwant to get bit out of shape
about the environment.
Well, war would would do that.
Speaker 2 (44:30):
So I think, uh, world war three is going to look a
lot different and, and the otherthing too, I think a lot of
people don't, and hopefully wenever have to see anything of
the nature of anyone using anytype of muscle or strength of a
nuclear weapon.
Um, because, let's be honest,if you're, unless we're ready to
(44:52):
not exist on a planet, I meanthat's essentially what would
happen.
You, you start and it's justit's going to be the fallout of
one would, like you said, willcontinue to roll downhill.
Um, and and I and I think thatI think you're right, I mean, I
think you're spot on in regardsto you're going to start seeing
(45:13):
different ways to continue tochange the narrative in regards
to how a war may look and feelon paper, or how it looks, you
know, if it's a commercesituation.
If it's, you know, a COVIDsituation, if it's a fentanyl
situation.
I mean, we've been dealing withthis fentanyl situation for a
(45:35):
while and it is it's killed.
Speaker 3 (45:39):
I don't even know how many people.
I've heard statistics thatpoint at the fact that fentanyl
and, ladies and gentlemen, ifI'm wrong, someone correct me,
but I think I've heard a fewpeople say that fentanyl has
killed more Americans than ourwars combined.
You know, that may be beoverstatement but it's killed a
(46:05):
lot of people.
Speaker 2 (46:05):
I mean since, uh, since 2023 alone, the response
of of 72 000 deaths since 2023alone yeah, since 2023.
I mean the.
It's crazy because think aboutthis, michael.
I mean I've never been a hugedrug person, but those who may
(46:28):
have partaked in, you know, acidback in those days in my, you
know, the late 90s um, that'snot something that they were
worried about, you know no um no, this is a major concern and
it's it's so devastating whenyou look at different cities and
where this is playing out, at,um, I mean, I, I mean one could
(46:53):
say that this is, uh, a way ofpopulation control too.
You know too, um, for those whoare of a lower class, who don't
have money to get services, togo to a hospital to get clean,
or they get put in a cycle ofForgive me, for those who may
have had a drug issue oraddiction in the past Right, it
(47:19):
is tough to break these habitswithout assistance.
Speaker 3 (47:25):
Well, and the deal with fentanyl is that you may
not even be a drug person.
Sure, you might take one thingone time and that's it.
And so the fentanyl thing is avery sophisticated weapon to use
against a country, because it'snot just the amount of people
that it kills, but there's alsothe trade itself, which then
creates money and creates ablack market.
(47:48):
So it's actually a reallysophisticated kind of weapon,
and I only point to that as oneof different types of things
that you could do.
Now, of course, I could bewrong about all this.
Back to the nuclear weaponsthing in Iran.
Would Iran be crazy enough touse a nuclear weapon if they had
it?
Maybe I don't know if theywould or not, because it's kind
(48:11):
of mutually assured destruction.
So you would have to be reallyhell-bent or intoxicated by your
religion to want to dosomething like that.
But um, I think there's otherways to go about war these days,
and they're more, they're moresophisticated well, I mean, when
(48:34):
we talk about this, it does.
Speaker 2 (48:36):
It does put chills on my back and make the head stand
up on on the back of my neckand, uh, by, by any means
necessary.
I just want to make sure thatif, if, when we look at these
things and people are out heretalking about these things not
everyone's good to agree likeand and that and that's we.
We always know that, but but Ithink we all know that that is
(49:03):
just someone of their statureshould not have a nuclear weapon
.
Now, how it's played out totoday's day, the United States
did what they thought wasnecessary and we will now see,
we will now judge how that looksmoving forward, and you know
(49:24):
what this could be.
This could be the, this couldbe them saying you know what,
we're not going to mess with theunited states anymore, we're
good, we're done, we're going tolisten, um, you know, and that
you know that they're, you knowwhat I wonder, you know what?
Speaker 3 (49:39):
I wonder mario.
Sure, I wonder if common iseven alive at this point.
I think today some kind ofmessage came out that I don't
even know if it's really him.
Sure, I mean, for several daysin a row, almost a week, we
don't know where the guy is.
I mean, the Israelis killed ahuge amount of his cabinet for
lack of a better word.
They killed all those nuclearscientists.
(49:59):
I mean, I don't know if theguy's alive or not.
He's, I believe he's like 86and I believe he has cancer.
So he's very frail.
And how do you lead a countryIf you're not visible in a time
(50:20):
of great stress to your country?
You can't you.
That doesn't.
That doesn't.
That doesn't cast a big um, itdoesn't make you look strong, it
makes you look like you'reeither dead already or you're a
coward.
So they've got.
You know, iran as a country hasgot a lot to figure out and you
know, I don't know if the guy'seven alive.
Speaker 2 (50:41):
And will this look like?
Let's say, they remove him fromoffice or he's no longer in
office.
Does this thing take a turnlike Iraq?
And you know it just goes.
You know up, sideways and down,you know like where.
Speaker 3 (50:53):
Well, that's a nice little point because a lot of
you know that question came upand Trump and Hegg said that.
A few other people said look,we do not want regime change,
which I think surprises a lot ofpeople.
They're like well, what do youmean?
I thought the whole idea wasthese guys are evil.
The problem is, as we saw withLibya and Iraq, what happens is
(51:15):
when you do that, it creates somuch chaos that then local
warlords move in.
I mean everything justdissolves into anarchy.
So you don't want that.
So you know the common name guymight be bad, but you don't
want the entire power structureto just dissolve.
So we don't need to be part ofthat.
(51:38):
If the Iranian people do that,that's another thing.
But we do not need and that'ssomething I feel strongly about
we do not need to partake inthat.
Speaker 2 (51:49):
And I think that we've learned as a country.
I hope, so I hope so you wouldthink so from back then.
And look, no disrespect to thepresident, the former president
W, in regards to going afterSaddam.
I mean, history looks back andwe definitely made the wrong
(52:10):
decision.
We made a wrong move and that'sokay.
It's not okay.
I shouldn't say that it's okay.
The agenda should we call itthe?
What do they call it?
What was the term used way backin the day?
Why can't I think of it?
The industrial complex?
(52:30):
To me, it felt very-.
Speaker 3 (52:31):
The military industrial complex.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (52:35):
I mean, look, that's a whole show in itself For sure.
I guess part of the reason thata lot of us voted for Trump is
that we felt like he wouldn'twant to do that, and I still
hope that that's the case, and Istill hope that the people in
his cabinet, you know, feel thatway, because what we don't want
(52:55):
is a bunch of neocon warmongers, all trigger, happy, ready to
go, you know, rip up the joint.
We don't need that.
Speaker 2 (53:07):
So hopefully that'll be the case.
I mean, we'll find out.
I think that I believe thatwhat what happened was it was
just a little bit of muscle tojust to say, hey look, and I was
really surprised.
I was like wow, I can't believethis is actually going down and
and again, I don't believe thatthey would do it unless they
(53:28):
thought they had to do it.
Speaker 3 (53:31):
You know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (53:31):
I think you're right and to agree or disagree.
Now, I'm not someone who waslike, okay, we need to do this.
I was like, okay, To me it feltlike who had the bigger you
know what I mean Like who'sgoing to call each other's bluff
and um, but it seems to me thateverything moving for as of
right now I mean things couldchange, but it seems to me that
(53:54):
everything is is back to whereit needs to be and hopefully
we're not like doing a show in abunker somewhere someday it
hadn't happened yet.
Speaker 3 (54:03):
So, fingers crossed.
And I will say this just onelast thing, because I told you
that I, I was talking to my wifein the days leading up to all
this.
We were both listening and andI looked at her, I was like, man
, I think trump's gonna dosomething.
She's like I, I do too.
Yeah, that being said, I didn'tthink he was gonna do it this
weekend, because he came outwith that thing oh, you know,
(54:24):
they're getting, they've got twoweeks or whatever to kind of
like you know, yeah, get a dialunder the tape.
Yeah, and then, next thing, youknow, on saturday, um, we do
this.
So I don't know whatprecipitated that.
Part of me thinks that maybewhen we saw all the trucks
trying to carry the stuff out ofthere, um, through the
satellite imagery, they're likeall right, we're going to do
this, or, who knows, maybe thiswas the plan all along.
(54:47):
I don't know.
But that die is cast, it hasbeen done, and now I hope that,
um, the ceasefire can hold, yeah, and that we can start moving
towards fixing the situationit's interesting because there
is so much video that is beingput out there and you don't know
if it's front post, pre youknow whatever.
Speaker 2 (55:07):
Um, the biggest thing too, when, when you saw some of
the, some of the videos that Isaw on network tv about the
president, them kind of likepoking the bear, like well are
you gonna do it or not?
You know what I mean.
He's like why would I tell youwhat I'm going to do?
Look, mario.
Speaker 3 (55:29):
That's one reason I like having a businessman as
president, because a politicianwho's never really worked in a
job will will say anything atany time to grandstand, but
trump's like yo.
If, if this country was mybusiness and I was the ceo, I'm
not telling you what I'm aboutto do, because I'm about to do a
(55:49):
deal, or I'm about to make anacquisition or whatever.
It's none of your damn businessand I don't want to mess up my
deal by telling you.
Speaker 2 (55:56):
So that's one thing I like about trump it was
interesting that I felt likethey kind of poked the bear and
he kind of was joking around andthings of that nature.
Um, as we get close to wrappingthings up here from the pacific
northwest, and the west coastin la for michael parker.
Again, thank you so much forcoming to hang out with us thank
you I.
I can't wait for us to doanother show that may give us
(56:20):
some more insight.
Do we think?
Do you, do you think they'regoing to go after Ghislaine
Maxwell?
You think they're just going toleave her in the prison?
Or do you think they're justgoing to say you know what?
We're just going to let this.
She's just going to rot in jailand we're not going to really
move forward with the case.
Speaker 3 (56:39):
That's complicated.
I nearly lost audio for just asecond.
One of my wires is shorting out, I don't know.
Unfortunately, because she'sattached to the Epstein case and
there's so much riding on thatwith so many people, I think
that I don't think she gets out.
(56:59):
I don't think I think that manyof the powers that be would
like for this to just fade intoour memory and us all be
distracted by other things thatare happening.
But I could be wrong.
I mean, a lot of what I've saidabout the Epstein case to you
today was not on a super deeplevel, because it's been a while
(57:23):
since I've looked into it and Ihaven't really kept up with
what's going on with Ghislaine.
But what I can say, even frommy point of view now, is she's
still an accessory to anincredibly dark and deep and
twisted, entangled situationthat has transnational
implications.
Speaker 2 (57:44):
It's wild on how how much he had clout and power over
individuals, over wealthyindividuals, which blows my mind
.
Even the guy who owned um, theguy who was the uh of Express
and Victoria's Secret Les Wexner, I believe, was his name Blows
(58:08):
my mind.
Speaker 3 (58:09):
Well, he made a Epstein.
When I was producing a showHidden Truth Show for another
host, we did a deep dive on thisas it was happening, and
Epstein would ingratiate himselfinto the lives of the rich and
famous because he wanted to berich and famous and so he would,
you know, kind of a fix it.
(58:30):
He was like a parasite.
He would have fixed himself tothese people.
And I'm not saying that LesWexner is a good person or a bad
person, I'm just saying thathis modus operandi was like find
a person with a lot of money,make yourself invaluable to them
, try to get a hold of theirmoney, move on to the next host.
Speaker 2 (58:51):
By any means necessary.
I mean, they alleged that theyhad relations together.
Speaker 3 (58:57):
Absolutely, and I don't doubt that at all, because
that's how ruthless this guywas.
I mean, listen, I believe thathe was a narcissistic sociopath.
I mean, I doubt that he had anytrue empathy for anyone.
So which is what you need ifyou're going to do these kinds
of activities and be thisruthless?
Speaker 2 (59:17):
well, that was a nice little bonus piece for us here.
On us phenomenon no, seriously,because sometimes we don't get
to go, you know, do extra stufflike that.
But yeah, no, it's seriously.
When you go back to look atthat whole thing, I I believe
that we're going to watch thisfade into into the history books
, where it's not going to gettalked about.
It's going to be the new jfkconspiracy, like that.
(59:41):
This will.
We will be always searching forthe answers.
I think that the jfk thing willgo away.
This will be modern day.
This will be the modern day jfk.
Uh, you know, it's one of it's,it's, it's.
Speaker 3 (59:55):
It's one of them, and I and I agree with you there's
too many threads to pull, it'sjust too big, and I don't't want
to give up and turn tail.
But at the same time, we've gotthings like this situation
that's on our plate right nowwith this unrest in the Middle
East.
We've got.
Ukraine.
We've got lots of issues todeal with, but that's what these
(01:00:18):
guys get paid to do.
So, kash Patel, dan Bagino,come on, man, show up, sort it
out, be straight with theAmerican people, please for sure
, for sure, for sure.
Speaker 2 (01:00:28):
And you know what, I think we can handle it yeah and
you know what look.
We know that we, we know thatpresidential, we know that
people of higher power Ishouldn't say I shouldn't pick
on anybody but we know thatthere have been cases and there
have been stuff that has comeout in past years where
(01:00:51):
high-ranking officials have donethe dirty stuff.
Oh for sure, I mean theKennedys, the alleged clans.
I don't want to die so I don'twant to find me on some beach
somewhere down at Alki.
I don't want to someplace.
You never know.
But again, alleged, alleged onall that stuff.
(01:01:14):
But look like I was tellingsomeone I don't care what you do
on your off time, it's not mybusiness.
You know, if you're doing it inthe White House, man, get a
different place.
Yeah, agreed, I don't care whatyou do on your own time, do you
?
That's you.
I just you know you're in apublic place, you're at work.
(01:01:37):
It's kind of tacky.
Speaker 3 (01:01:40):
Have some taste.
Speaker 2 (01:01:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:01:41):
Have some honor, yeah , have some respect for the
position and have some respectfor the people that elected you
to be in that position justanybody just, yeah, just just be
discreet okay, yeah for sure.
Speaker 2 (01:01:52):
I mean, well, it don't hurt anybody.
Yeah, don't hurt anybody.
And, by the way, uh, just so weall, just for the record, if,
if you were listening earlier,yes, I do have a picture with
puff daddy, uh, but he was.
He came to the radio stationevent.
This is the if you werelistening earlier, yes, I do
have a picture with Puff Daddy,but he came to the radio station
event.
This is the back story.
If you're listening and youmade it this far, but he came to
the radio station event.
I got my picture taken with him.
(01:02:12):
I haven't taken it down, it'sstill up, because I didn't do
anything.
He didn't put no baby oil on meand he didn't beat out of me,
so I'm good on that piece me andhe didn't beat out of me, so
I'm good on that piece.
Speaker 3 (01:02:28):
So, um, I I have another friend as well, who, who
has a picture with with diddyand, like I said before, man,
you were doing your job, he wasdoing his job, did he was doing
his job.
Sometimes the photo is just aphoto.
So, um, yeah, I keep your, Ikeep your picture, man.
No, no shame with that.
Speaker 2 (01:02:41):
Yeah, well.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
It is what it is, man .
Speaker 2 (01:02:45):
It is what it is From the Pacific Northwest.
As we wrap things up here, I'dlike to thank our guest, michael
Parker, for coming to hang outwith us this evening.
You can find him on his socialplatforms, at Michael Parker
Media on YouTube as well right,your shows there are available
for people to watch.
Speaker 3 (01:03:00):
Michael Parker Media and on social media available
for people to watch.
Michael parker media and onsocial media.
I'm, uh, michael parker, lamario.
Thank you for inviting me on.
I always have a good time and Ijust like to thank your
audience for listening and I'dlike to wish everybody a happy
fourth of july week coming up.
Speaker 2 (01:03:13):
Oh my gosh, right, I I always forget that that's like
right around the corner.
I'm, uh, I'm going to abarbecue, so I'm excited about
that.
I'm going to hang out and besocial.
Sometimes I don't.
I don't like to be out in thepublic and be social.
I'm telling you, michael, it'sjust one of those.
Speaker 3 (01:03:28):
We're kind of curmudgeon-y uh, old dudes, but
uh, but you got to go.
Hey, man, you got to go rip itup.
And uh, it's the fourth of july, let's go out there and
celebrate, hey before we go oneback.
Speaker 2 (01:03:38):
Yeah, um, can you believe that?
Uh, uh, joey chestnut'snut'sgoing to do Nathan's hot dog
eating contest again.
He's back in it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:51):
Okay, you know what I got.
To be honest, I don't know whoJoey Chestnut is.
Okay, so Is he one of thoseguys that?
Speaker 2 (01:03:57):
is a competition eater.
Yeah, he's a huge competitioneater.
I only watch on the 4th of Julyto see how many hot dogs these
guys can eat.
It is disgusting, but you're, Imean so him.
So the big thing was joey andkobayashi were going head to
head, and so I think I've heardof that guy, yeah yeah, so
(01:04:18):
kobayashi had the title and theneventually joey beat him and
then he has continued with therecord.
He stepped down for a year,somehow got disqualified, I
don't know.
Somehow something came up andthen he was promoting vegan hot
dogs lord knows why he was doingthat and then all of a sudden,
miraculously, he's back.
(01:04:38):
So I will be watching thenathan hot dog eating contest to
see if he's put down70-something.
Hot dogs Like 72 is the recordor some nonsense like that.
Speaker 3 (01:04:54):
Can you imagine training for that, and can you
imagine the next day?
Speaker 2 (01:04:59):
Oh my, I just yeah, it's disgusting.
Speaker 3 (01:05:01):
I'm sorry, I'm out of here.
Speaker 2 (01:05:02):
Yeah, as we wrap things up from the Pacific
Northwest.
Thank you, Michael Parker.
Thank you to all our affiliates, kosw, kapy and KVI, our
flagship station For my entireteam, soon to be retiring.
Or, yeah, he's retiring MarkChristopher.
Yeah, he's retiring MarkChristopher.
(01:05:22):
Myself, sophia Magana, orSophia and myself, mario Magana,
I got so flustered about himleaving.
Be sure to look up at the stars, because you never know what
you might see.
Good night, good night.
Welcome to US Phenomenon, where possibilities
are endless.
Put down those same oldheadlines.
It's time to expand your mindand question what if?
From paranormal activity toUFOs, bigfoot sightings and
unsolved mysteries, this is USPhenomenon?
Speaker 2 (00:22):
From the Pacific Northwest in the shadow of the
1962 world's fair, the spaceneedle.
Good evening, good morning,good afternoon, wherever you are
on god's green earth, if youbelieve in that sort of thing.
Uh, I am your host, mariomagana.
This is us phenomenon.
Tonight we're gonna go to whereus phenomenon likes to go in
(00:44):
the conspiracy realms.
And tonight, no stranger tothis show, he has his own show
you can find on Michael ParkerMedia.
You can find it on YouTube oron any one of your favorite
podcasting platforms.
It is my pleasure to welcomeback a longtime contributor to
US Phenomenon, michael Parker.
Welcome back to the show, sir.
(01:04):
Thank you for having me, marioHowdy, it's always fun.
Now for those who may not knowyou, you have your own show that
you talk about and typicallyyou guys are doing more of the.
You kind of do more of the.
Why am I spacing on theterminology of your show?
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Well, I do a lot of different things and I've worked
for different companies doingdifferent types of shows.
So I've done everything fromkind of Art Bell type paranormal
stuff.
I've also done conspiracy stuff.
I've done straight currentevents it depends on the show.
But what I like to do and whatI currently do is a little bit
(01:49):
of all of it and um, and I thinkthat's what a lot of the people
that we admire these days kindof do.
So, you know, I I I'm droppinga show tomorrow that has to do
with, um, the possibility ofthere being invertebrate animals
in the atmosphere.
So it goes sometimes from supercrazy, weird stuff to pop
(02:14):
culture.
But you know what, anythingthat just kind of blows my mind
and makes me want to talk aboutit is open to discussion.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
I love that.
I love that and you've not beena, you've been a longtime
contributor to the show.
It's interesting because someof the things that I'd like to
talk about tonight I think it'sa plethora of stuff.
You know, the Diddy trial isgetting close to being coming
close to the end here and I kindof want to talk to you about
(02:41):
your thoughts on the Diddy trialversus the Epstein stuff.
When we look at this situation,I mean this trial, this is
really hammered through right.
They've really gone through,they've buckled down.
I mean, they have their ducksin a row with this case.
Do you believe that this isdifferent from the Epstein case,
(03:04):
where maybe there were somemistakes made in that case,
versus this one where they'relike that one's still kind of
pending, hasn't gone anywhere,feelings on this whole trial
(03:25):
versus are we looking at justthat?
You know that they were able tofine tune and say you know what
, let's, let's go after this,cause it's, these are this could
be kind of similar, um in in.
You know, the two casesthemselves could be very much,
very similar in a lot of uh, ina lot of ways.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Yes, so I a couple of thoughts on that.
So many people from the get-gokind of pointed out the fact
that this Diddy was theHollywood Epstein and that may
be a little bit of hyperbole butthere are certainly
similarities and they both wererunning these parties which
(04:00):
seemed to be blackmail kind ofparties where a lot of illicit
drugs and sex were happening.
Now the difference is Diddy,he's going down.
I mean, diddy is going down andhe's a Hollywood guy where
Epstein was almost atransnational intelligence asset
in my opinion and I thinkthere's a lot of people that
(04:22):
wouldn't disagree with that, inmy opinion, and I think there's
a lot of people that wouldn'tagree, wouldn't disagree with
that.
So there's things that aregoing to be done to Diddy that
were not being done to Epstein.
And look, just recently, acouple you know what was just a
couple of weeks ago, kash Pateland Dan Bocino come out and say
that you know they've seen filesthat we are all not privy to,
and you know that we are all notprivy to, and you know Epstein
(04:44):
did in fact, kill himself.
Look, I don't believe that.
I absolutely do not believethat, and I'm disappointed that
they had to say that.
You know what, maybe they'reright and I'm wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I mean, when you think about it, michael.
Let's go back to that piecewhere you and I talked about
this in a previous show.
We're like man oh did we okay,oh, I mean this was years ago,
but it's wild to say that thatthat's the case, that that was a
few years ago maybe, oh, maybethree or four.
Yeah, but, michael, you hadsaid we have both had talked
(05:19):
about this, like no way, how doall of a sudden cameras go out,
like obviously this, this prisonor this jail is no longer
around, it's, it's been shutdown.
But how convenient was it thatthere was no there, there was no
cameras, no, no surveillanceavailable during his incident of
(05:42):
, you know, of exterminatinghimself?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
Precisely so, and when I I misunderstood you, I
thought you meant that we haddiscussed the Kash Patel, but
you know.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Oh, no, no, no, not that piece no.
Speaker 3 (05:53):
Okay, so here's the deal.
You're exactly right, and wedid talk about this, because how
many things have to go wrongfor his suicide to go right,
right, yeah, I mean, and youknow, they are completely not
even talking about the ligaturemarks that were found on his
neck by forensic scientists.
All that aside, many of usbelieve that Epstein was killed,
(06:17):
and he was most likely killedbecause of the connections that
he had of people who neverwanted to be found out for the
things that they had done.
Now, with Diddy, we've got adifferent set of circumstances.
We've got stuff mostly dealingwith celebrities.
Only, I'm sure that there werepoliticians at some of these
parties, but not to the levelthat we're talking about being
(06:41):
involved with the Epsteinsituation, that we're talking
about being involved with theEpstein situation.
So, diddy, in some ways and Ido think he's guilty of most of
the things that he's beingcharged of I have not followed
the trial, probably as closelyas you have, even though I live
here in Los Angeles, because itwas an open secret that this
kind of stuff was going on for along time, just like with
Harvey Weinstein and many otherthings After a while, you're
(07:03):
just like yeah, I, I know that'shappening and anybody who's
halfway paying attention knowsthis is happening.
So diddy, in my prediction, goesdown hard, and part of that is
to make some of us feel like orkind of take our mind off the
fact that epstein didn't go downhard.
Epstein got out the easy way.
He either committed suicide,someone killed him or they took
(07:28):
him away and he's in witnessprotection somewhere, but
regardless he didn't end updoing a long time in jail.
So one of those things happenedwith Epstein.
Diddy, I think, goes down hard.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
It'll be interesting to see who else, if anyone else,
they go after within Diddy'scircle after all of this a large
underground type situation, yes, and very much, very much, very
(08:09):
tied into the same type ofthings that are alleged in
Diddy's case.
It's this.
It to me it feels like forsomeone like you and I, who have
been covering and chattingabout this, and even at the
beginning, when you talk aboutuss phenomenon talking about hey
, why aren't it, why isn'tanyone talking about bill gates
(08:32):
back then you and I were talkingabout this.
We had said what about bill?
No one's talking about.
you know, mr, mr northwest guy,mr microsoft and I'm not like
talking crap about thisindividual, but you're talking
about someone who was tied tohim as well, and I think yes, he
and I mean.
Speaker 3 (08:53):
It's pretty much a matter of record.
I think that that's part of whyhis wife says that she divorced
him was the relationship.
Now, personally, I thinkthere's probably a lot more than
that, but she was saying thatpart of the reason she divorced
Bill was his relationship withEpstein.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
And with, as you were just saying just a few minutes
ago, about who else may be tiedto Diddy, is it like… Lots of
people, I mean?
Yeah, I mean, think about it.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Big stars, big big stars, yeah, I mean, think about
it.
Big stars, big, big stars.
But but, mario, the only thingabout that is, even though a lot
of these big stars who, if youread any gossip columns, ladies
and gentlemen, you can find outwho I'm talking about but the
question is, will any of them godown?
And the reason I say that isbecause right now, the main
boogeyman, the main bad guy, isbeing portrayed as Diddy.
(09:47):
All the rest of the people thatwent along with this, do they
matter in the court of publicopinion?
Do they matter to the lawmakersand law enforcers who want to
make a case or make a story withthis Diddy thing?
I don't know if they will,because some of these people I
mean clearly, diddy was not theonly person involved with this
(10:10):
who was up to no good.
I mean and unfortunately I havea picture with Diddy- Well, hey,
man, a lot of people do, andyou know what, mario?
I'm glad you brought that upbecause a lot of people make a
big stink about okay.
Well, here's Trump picturedwith Epstein.
Maybe here's Mario with P Diddy.
(10:35):
But that actually doesn't meananything, because famous people
get their pictures made with alot of people and you and I, one
day, who knows, we might getinvited to some party and we
might intend it, we might attendit because we believe that it's
good for our career, or youknow, we're, we're there just to
(10:55):
shake some hands and get thehell out, and in the meantime,
somebody takes a picture with usof someone who then goes and
commits a crime.
Does that mean that we had anyrelationship?
You know, and I know that I'msaying the obvious, but, um,
that's just something, because alot of people take the really
lazy way out on that.
Oh well, so and so was picturedwith so and so, and that means
there's a connection?
Speaker 2 (11:15):
no, it doesn't it's interesting because when we go
back to the epstein files case Ishouldn't say files, but that
case itself there I don't knowthat this country is ready to
like there there might be somereally high-powered individuals
other than the ones that we mayhave kind of known about, um,
(11:40):
but again it doesn't mean thatthey were partaking in like you
said, or maybe they were.
We just don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
You know, and we may never know either too there were
very, very powerful peopleinvolved in all this, and I
would point to the work ofwhitney webb.
I mean, she's for years beendoing some of the best work out
there on this case and I'mnowhere in comparison to the
work that she's done.
I I think that we are.
I think there's a lot of thingsthat the American public and
(12:11):
the global public could actuallyhandle that's being held back
from us.
I mean, we're all adults.
I mean just go on social media.
If you want to find somethingreally horrible, it's there.
And even if you don't want tofind it, you'll come across it.
So you know, most of us haveseen or heard just about
everything at this point I mean,there's so much out there, like
(12:33):
you said yeah.
So I think that you know a lotof times they use that as an
excuse, thinking that we can'thandle it, when in fact we could
um, real quick.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
It looks like I'm getting a couple text messages
in here.
Let me uh scroll to those realquick.
There's a bunch of them, abunch of old stuff in here.
But I'm looking at a coupletext messages of um people
sending text messages in.
Uh, this one comes from yelm,says hey, mario, listening in
from Yale.
Big thanks to Michael Parker fortackling the tough topics
(13:05):
tonight.
Honestly, I didn't think mostfolks are ready for what could
be out there if the Epstein caseactually moves forward.
We're talking about names,networks, the truth that could
shake the foundations of thepolitical and culture and even
personal, of the political andculture and even personal.
(13:26):
So people, she said, or theysay some people won't be able to
handle that level of reality.
But it's overdue.
Keep the pressure on.
We're out here listening, wegot your back.
Oh, that's nice.
Thanks for hanging out andyelling and listening.
You know it's interestingbecause I think for you and I, I
think, being outsiders of thatcase itself, it would be kind of
(13:49):
nice to not turn this into ajfk conspiracy in regards to
like what if, what if, what, if,what, if you know it already,
is though I mean sure yeah but?
but we're not that, we're not.
We're not talking about 50-plusyears of history where they
(14:10):
could go through these files.
They could have a trial andthey can say, hey, look, this is
what it is Agreed.
And they can still pin it toGhislaine and say, look, you
were one of the mastermindsbehind this case.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
Okay and say, look, you were one of the masterminds
behind this case.
Okay, so I think there's a lotgoing on here and the Epstein
thing has been a bigdisappointment for a lot of
people, because a lot of peoplethought that Trump would come in
and sort this out and itdoesn't seem like that is
happening and it doesn't seemlike Kash Patel and Bongino are
doing that.
But maybe there's things thatwe don't know.
(14:47):
I kind of doubt that.
But the main thing that I wouldsay is that I don't want to put
this under the rug or anything,but we also have a lot of other
things, and I know that there'sa lot of people that Epstein
was like a really big thing tothem to get figured out and I am
not trying to gloss over anyatrocities that happened.
But there's also a whole otherset of things that we have on
(15:10):
our plate right now.
I don't know if anything willever be sorted out on the
Epstein situation.
I think that's part of thereason Diddy's going to go down
so hard is so that we're allkind of placated into this
thought that, oh see, justice isbeing served for this kind of
thing.
But there's a lot that we needto work on right now, even
(15:32):
besides Epstein Sure, and Ithink that most people realize
there's a lot of horrible peoplein government, there's a lot of
horrible people in Hollywood,there's a lot of people in uh,
even in churches.
So I think that most realisticpeople know that a lot of people
are faulty and each one of usis, you know, let he or faulty,
(15:55):
meaning you know, we, we allhave our issues right.
So I don't think that, um, Idon't think that anybody's going
to be surprised if it does evercome come out that so-and-so
and so-and-so and so-and-so andso-and-so all did these sorted
things.
I think that that's alreadybaked into the story.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
I mean, I just want to know, because you know I want
to, I want to a lot of peopledo.
And I think that even comingback, we were like see, we told
you guys, you know, I want that.
I want that we have anothertext message coming in from
Edgewood, washington.
Hey, Mario, longtime listenerfrom Edgewood.
I want to thank you for havingMichael Parker on the show again
(16:34):
.
His insight is very sharp,unfiltered and exactly what we
need to hear in the media thesedays.
As for Epstein's case, itdeserves a real closure.
Too many names, too manyunanswered questions.
Keep up the great work.
Thank you both.
Yeah, that's nice.
Thanks for texting in.
If you want to send your textmessages, you can always send
(16:56):
them in at 775-990-5151.
Um.
One last thing about this,before we move forward with the
um where we go next, michael?
Um, you know, I think that youand I have really covered this
from from, from the beginning,all the way till to now, to
present time.
Um, I don't think anything'sreally changed for us in regards
(17:19):
to where we nothing like.
I'm not blown away by any ofthe news that's been put out
there, but also I haven't.
There hasn't been any freshinformation, and I think you
just said a few minutes ago thatthis baby right now, this, this
golden goose, is what we'llcall this, the, the diddy, the,
the baby oil of, and I'm makingall these terms because that's
(17:41):
all that they ever, you know,talk about.
In that case, the horrificthings that happened in Diddy's,
that has been alleged inDiddy's trial, is crazy.
There are people that have beenfollowing this case and the
transcripts and things of thatnature Not something that I have
the time or efforts or willingto do, because I don't need to
(18:03):
know what someone's you knowdegenerate, you know habits are
um, I just need someone toprotect those that are out there
to come to a conclusion, say,yes, this is not a good person,
these things happened, okay,boom, he's done.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
You know I listen, I ain't judging.
I mean I know that there aresome people who get really
fascinated by these trials.
I mean hollywood, you know,every once in a while we've got
to have a big trial, whether itbe oj, whether it be johnny dip
amber heard whether it be diddy,and even though you and I are
not super obsessed with thesetrials, a lot of people are, and
(18:46):
in a way, it's another form ofescapism because they can listen
to this and think well, youknow what?
I was feeling pretty bad aboutmyself, but when I look at these
guys, I'm not so bad and it isinteresting, and so in some ways
it's like the ultimate realityshow, right for sure.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
And so I I understand the entertainment, and that's a
weird thing to say, I know, Imean I understand I understand
the entertainment aspect ofthese high-profile trials I mean
it goes all the way back to theoj trial.
I mean that was like for sure,you know.
I mean they wall-to-wallcoverage and like they broke
into the world series to givethe verdict which I you know, I
(19:29):
was living in la when that washappening.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
I mean it was, it was huge.
I like I, I, the, I, the daythat he went on the, uh, that,
the, the, the truck chase withthe, you know, in the suv, with
his buddy Al Kiling or whoeverit was, I remember that day like
it was a huge day in Americanhistory.
I remember where I was at, Iremember watching it with my
(19:53):
buddies.
We were all kind of laughingbut yeah, it has a fascination
for people that we can't reallyexplain.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
And it's interesting when you go back and you look at
the trial of that case verymuch you're talking about the
90s, you're talking aboutReginald Denny, you're talking
about the whole riots in LA andit felt like….
Speaker 3 (20:20):
And the first famous Kardashian.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
Oh, yeah, robert Kardashian was part of oj's
legal team and and like, if youwatch some of those
documentaries, you see him withthe briefcase, oj's uh bag and
things of that nature.
Yeah, uh, it's just it.
I mean it is very much a must,it was a must watch situation me
was be very, very young, um,not having an idea.
(20:46):
But looking at the information,I mean I wasn't dumb, I sure was
like, well, I, I mean it's hisblood, I mean you know.
But again, when you look at theevidence and dna and things of
that nature, were things missmishandled?
Probably that's another,another show for another day.
But, um, I think for us, for me, and like you were saying, the
(21:09):
distractions out there andthere's so much going on right
now in the world, speculation,world war three possible, uh,
and we'll get into that here injust a little bit to have that
distraction.
People are looking for that andI, and, and we got to remember
this, and I know that if you'venever read the book Behold the
Pale Horse, this book would bevery adamant, very.
(21:34):
It's crazy.
This book is so old but it isso much relevant in today's day.
People may not know who williamcooper is, but I tell you right
now I'm sure he is rolling inhis grave right now, in regards
to the misinformation and howpeople are being led as sheep
(21:56):
and not being lions.
And I say this because, michaelparker, I'm telling you there
is sometimes when I'm like goingthrough and scrolling through
social media and I see the mostoutlandish, hideous
misinformation that is out there.
That is wild to me.
I can't, I can't pin.
(22:17):
I can pinpoint one off the topof my head where they're telling
people that you're not going tobe able to get back into the
country.
You have old, senior citizenslike my dad, who are out there
believing in the deep state andI'm like how do you even know
about the deep?
Well, I believe in the deepstate for a 72 year old, old
(22:38):
hippie.
All of a sudden now knowingabout the deep state, I'm like
wait, how do you know about thedeep state, dad?
Which is just interesting to me.
And before let me just finishthis on this piece people who
are in that older demographic,people believing that social
media is the new news presence,please remember, not every piece
(23:04):
of news is accurate.
Be sure to do your research, doyour homework.
That's all I ask of you, and Iknow that most of the people who
are watching or listening onour radio stations across the
pacific northwest are educatedenough to understand that.
But I tell you I I I had to doa double take and ask my dad.
(23:24):
I was like wait, should you behosting my show?
Because how do you know the?
This is, this is a, a gen.
You know, someone who came tothe united states has no idea,
but he's now being educated.
Somehow he's learning aboutlike I.
I didn't think that he would beat that level of like knowledge
(23:45):
of how, how he's getting fedabout learning about the deep
state, because I know it's notsomething that he's searching
for well, okay, I got a couplethoughts there.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
So, the deep state listen, if he's an, if he's an
ex-hippie, you know, if he wasfrom back in the hippie days, I
mean I think they were aware ofthe deep state.
Then they, we just didn't callit the deep state.
I mean, who killed jfk and, uh,you know who wanted us to have
a vietnam war?
I mean, who were the guysbehind Watergate?
(24:17):
And so these types of thingskind of always existed and the
left used to be very muchagainst the establishment right,
and I would argue that thesedays, the left, at least,
especially for the last eightyears, was the establishment,
including the media.
Which brings me to your secondpoint, which is about social
media.
(24:38):
Yes, there is a lot ofmisinformation out there, but at
this point in time and I read alot of it and I've been doing
this a long time and I, when Isee misinformation, unless I'm
just completely blown away withhow extreme it is, I usually
just roll past it.
Sure, and what I would say is,these days, with things like X,
(25:03):
they have supplanted mainstreammedia, and the reason that
happened is because people nolonger believe mainstream media.
This thing that's happeningright now with this low
confidence report about thebombing in Iran.
I mean, look, I don't know whatthe truth is, but basically
someone leaked a report of lowconfidence to the public,
(25:28):
basically saying that you knowthat attack did not go as well
as the president and Heg Suthersaying it does and Hegseth are
saying goes.
My point is that a lot of peopleno longer believe that the
mainstream media really has anyweight or validity left to it.
They believe it's just yourpropaganda of choice.
Okay, are you a CNN person?
Are you a Fox person?
(25:48):
Are you an MSNBC person?
And they feel like they couldgo to social media, like X
especially, or one of the others, but I think mostly X, and they
will find their politicalinfluencer of choice and they
prefer to hear that informationfrom them than from the
mainstream media.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
For one, I would never call MSNBC, cnn or Fox
News or Fox News.
I find those are to me, beingan old school radio guy TV
person, those are entertainmentTV to me.
Maybe back in the day they weremore towards covering stories,
(26:30):
but they still I would agreewith you, they are very much
opinion driven versus, say, likeABC, cbs, hey by the way bc
nice.
Speaker 3 (26:38):
However, I think the same thing applies there, if not
even more.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
It's almost state-run media at this point yeah, it's
crazy because when you say that,when you say state-run media,
that would mean that theadministration would be running
the media, then right.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
Except that the media is largely controlled by the
left and so, essentially underObama and Biden, yeah, it was
pretty much okay.
Here's your story.
Stamp it, you know, and it'sout Now.
Listen, I'm biased, but I gotto call it the way I see it and
I think most people see it.
The way that I see it Dependson your political inclinations.
(27:17):
But getting back to your firstpoint, what the way that I see
it?
It depends on your politicalinclinations.
But getting back to your firstpoint, what I'm trying to say is
who buys a newspaper anymore?
Not me.
Who buys magazines anymore?
Old people, who really watchesNBC, abc, nightly news?
Mostly people of the oldergeneration.
Cnn only exists because itplays in every airport.
I mean, nobody actually watchesit.
(27:38):
So people get their news off oftheir phone, Sure, and they're
watching their favoriteinfluencers to get the news.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
It's interesting when you talked about that piece in
regards to possibly these as wecontinue to talk about, as we
continue to talk about, I thinkwe transition now into the
conflict that the United Stateshas entered in, or I would say,
had prepared a military strikeagainst certain nuclear sites,
(28:14):
and not against the country inIran, not against the country,
but to these nuclear sites.
And there were reports that Idid see that said they didn't
they hit the targets, but thetargets.
If there was nuclear substancethere, there, there would have
been a there, there would havebeen a huge fallout when there.
I mean that, that I mean Idon't I'm not a nuclear
scientist, but you would thinkthat there would be some type of
(28:36):
backlash.
Or did they move?
You know, like I guess this isthe part of conspiracy you got
to ask hey, we're going to bombyou if you don't do your stuff.
And then Iran's like oh,they're going to bomb us, let's
move.
You know, let's move all thenuke stuff, all the you know we
need to move all of our suppliessomewhere else.
Yeah, all the you know, let's,we need to move all of our our
(28:59):
supplies somewhere else.
Yeah, they bombed them, butthey didn't get that piece, they
, they were able to hit thetarget.
It's then like then what wassaid was oh, iran's like, oh,
we're gonna get the, we're gonnaget the military bases.
We're like, oh crap, let's moveall the planes.
And then they moved the planes.
You're right, the speculationis going to be out there both
sides of the fence.
But at the end of the day,regardless of what side of the
(29:21):
fence you're on, we're still allUnited States.
Well, most of us are from thiscountry and we're all one
country together.
It shouldn't be divided, youknow, think about that.
Yeah, I mean you and I both.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
I agree with you me say okay.
So there's a couple of thingsgoing on here.
So when you texted me, I wasactually at a concert that night
.
I I thought that trump would dosomething.
I did not think that he wasgoing to do it this weekend.
So that caught me by surprise.
And, and you know, I wastalking to friends in the Middle
East in the days afterwards andon the morning that the
(30:03):
Iranians Iran hit the site inQatar, which basically was
almost like an arrangedretaliatory attack so that they
could save face.
And this is where all this getsreally weird.
Now I have seen a satellitephoto supposedly a photo,
(30:26):
whichever that main site waswhere there were what looked
like trucks on the road outsidethe thing.
So you ask yourself okay, well,if they were moving stuff, how
much stuff could they move andhow fast could they move it?
But at the end of the day, doesthat actually even matter?
I mean, because I have not alot of doubt that the damage
(30:50):
done to those sites was prettysevere.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
If they were able to move any of the nuclear material
they still have to enrich it.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
They have to do the final enrichment somewhere else.
And what I'm trying to say isthat, you know, I'm not a war
guy, but I'm also not a pacifist, and sometimes you have to do
things that you don't want to do.
So I'm not arguing that weshouldn't have done the strike.
I didn't really think that wasgoing to happen right then, but
(31:24):
it did.
But now this whole argumentabout this leaked document did
the strike do what theadministration is saying it did,
or not?
I kind of wish that theadministration was not going so
hard on this, because the harderthey go on it makes you think
well, maybe it didn't go thatwell, you know, but I don't know
one way or the other, I have noway to know.
(31:45):
However, what I do know is whenyou send that many planes and
you send that many bunkerbusting bombs and the idea had
been germinating they'd beenworking on this plan for 15
years it was just now theyfinally, and apparently the bomb
that we created to do this wascreated with that exact
destination intended.
(32:06):
So I think that we did do a lotof damage.
Can Iran still go on andcontinue their nuclear program?
I don't really know, but what Ido know it will take a while
and it will take a lot of money.
And I don't know if the peopleof Iran are up to doing that all
(32:27):
over again, because that is acountry of 90 million people and
you know, man, I'm surprisedthey're not fed up with it.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
And if you know, man, I'm surprised they're not fed
up with it.
It's interesting because whenthat strike hit and I texted you
, I was like the first thingthat came to my mind was what
are the retaliatorial?
You know what is going to bethe retaliation of this?
And, let's be honest, if wewent for nuke sites where they
(32:58):
were going to, you know,wouldn't that give them the same
, the same?
I thought maybe retaliatorialpoint to say, okay, we're going
to hit military bases.
Maybe it's West Coast stuff,maybe it's they can't.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Because I don't think they have any ballistic
missiles at all, and I thinkthat's part of the issue.
So and in the run up to this Ididn't mean to cut you off, but
this is I think they're verylimited in what they can do
because they've already gonethrough a lot of their weapons
and the Israelis did a prettydeep job on Iran, so they're
(33:31):
very limited in what they canrespond with.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
Is it interesting that in recent days in social
media, that that bb, you knowbenjamin net now, yeah, who has
all these clips of him talkingabout, you know iran and how,
like this, this, this was likealmost a 30-year build-up to get
to where I felt to me like.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
I feel like the united states got punked into
doing something well, a lot ofpeople feel that way, you know,
mario, so and and I'm not sayingthat bb's a bad person, I'm
just saying like, why are wedoing his heavy lifting?
Speaker 2 (34:11):
like I, I don't want to say this.
I don't want to be hit.
I don't want the United Statesto be his bitch, you know what I
mean.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
You know like a lot of people feel the same way you
do.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
I have mixed emotions about this as well, and you
know I didn't want usnecessarily involved, um, but
now it's out of you and I'shands and it's been done, um so
I mean, we're still here to talkabout it, so you're right,
unless someone else decides toget involved and do the heavy
(34:42):
lifting and give them, you know,some type of power, because
obviously they clearly don'thave the muscle to, you know, to
get a missile all the way overhere.
They would have to get it fromRussia or China.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
And that hasn't happened.
I mean, mean, that is actuallya very important point.
So the allies, supposedlyallies of iran did not step up
for them, and I think that it'sbecause you got to weigh out
your you know what's my riskreward kind of thing here.
I mean, do I, do I really wantto go to bat for iran in this
(35:21):
type of a situation?
I mean, russia's got its handsfull right now, china has got
its own set of issues and Idon't think that I don't think
they they want to get involvedin this.
It's, you know, it's it's not ahigh enough priority for them.
If it was, they would have gotinvolved in it already and they
(35:42):
didn't.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
It's interesting that you say that and it seems to be
that everything has quieteddown some levels, but I think
even then, trump getting upsetand I don't even know if this is
true got upset at the peacetreaty that was made and then
they continued to fight eachother I think he was honestly
pretty irked about that, yeahbecause he had said he's like
(36:07):
you know, and that's it's.
It's good to see I I'm happythat the president was pissed.
I was was like, okay, cool,it's not like he's being a punk
and being punk.
Speaker 3 (36:21):
I felt the same way.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
You know what I mean.
I'm like, okay, good, he's gota spine.
I'm not saying that he doesn'tas a president, but it was good
to see.
Like, look, at this point intime, we all got to back him.
However, that is, he's makingthese calls.
He's doing what he thinks is inthe best interest of the
country, and if that's what isin the best interest of the
country, we will find out inhistory.
(36:43):
We will find out later, whenthe book has been written, we
will know.
But, like you said, it was niceto see him be pissed and
vocalize it and to say hey, sayhey, look, I'm not happy about
what's going on.
I, you know, I told these twoand for him he's probably like
these two kids he's, you knowthey're like stepbrother, you
(37:06):
know they're like two kidsfighting in the in the store and
they're like well, he's likeyou're both in a timeout well, I
honestly believe and this iswhy I've supported Trump through
three elections my number onecause is I'm an anti-war guy.
Speaker 3 (37:24):
That does not mean that I'm a pacifist and you just
roll over.
But I am not into foreignentanglements unless you got a
really damn good reason, and Ithink that's the way Trump's.
I think that's where Trump'scoming from and that was the
primary reason I well, that wasone of the primary reasons that
I supported him.
So I don't think that he wantsto be a war president.
(37:45):
I don't think he digs this.
I think he wants to helpeverybody make money, which is
the way that I feel, and I thinkthat that's what my friends in
the Middle East they think ofTrump.
They think that trump's thekind of guy he's actually trying
to make deals.
So this was not something Ithink that he wanted to do.
I don't think that he wants tocontinue um doing any kind of
(38:06):
military action if he doesn'thave to.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
he would rather make deals and history will tell us
in the future what, what, whatwill happen and, um, man, it
will be nice when this, when wecan all sleep peacefully because
, I'll be honest with you, afterall that stuff, I was like, I
was like man, this, this to mefelt very.
(38:28):
This took me back to the 1980s,like the cold.
It was ominous, it was ominousit was very much and I was like,
oh, heavy, very heavy maybereflect.
I was like I haven't had thesefeelings since, like the 80s,
you know, like are we gonna die?
Type situation.
And and the only reason why Isay that?
Because at that point in time,as this news was very fresh and
(38:55):
now I'm, I'm I'm not on mylaurels about what's going to
happen, but in regards to, okay,we got bases out here, we got,
you got would be island.
You have the naval, would youknow would be island.
You have bremerton.
You know they have the navalbase in bremerton, banger.
Then you got, uh, lewis mccordum down the, you know Air Force
and Army down in Tacoma.
(39:17):
So those are some hot sites thatcan, you know, just be taken
out.
And you know you're going totake out some population.
You know you're going to dosome damage.
There would be some tremendousloss of life.
And then if they decided thatit wasn't enough, I mean they'd
go after Boeing, you know, andBoeing's right here in Tukwila,
you would do some damage.
(39:38):
You would destroy the, therunway, the plants that are
still here, I mean, and they'rein that area, they're still
doing, you know, a lot ofdefense, a lot of space and
defense developmental stuffthere in Tukwila.
So, and that's just you knowsomeone who has the insight, who
worked in that building, youknow, has that kind of knowledge
(39:59):
.
But now that we fast forward towhere we're at today not so
much because you're like, okay,they don't even have enough you
know muscle to.
You know to do much of anything.
Maybe they can throw some bombs.
You know locally to other US,you know installations.
But that was my biggest fearduring that time.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
Right.
Right, and I think a lot ofpeople felt the same way.
My daughter is in San Diego andof course, there's, you know,
installations down there, so shewas concerned.
The deal is now, you know,there's this possibility of
sleeper cells.
I can't say that they don'texist.
However, you know, everybodyknows what's up right now, so
(40:43):
hopefully everyone is on as highalert as you're going to have,
right, I mean, I'm hoping thatall installations, all
industries, are on their bestbehavior and, you know, doing
their highest level of security,and I actually think they are,
because this is a real thing.
(41:04):
And, that said, I definitelyfeel better this week than I did
last week, and I don't knowwhat ends up happening, but I am
hopeful that this chapter isclosed, at least for a while,
and I hope that we can moveforward and have a safe 4th of
(41:27):
July.
Speaker 2 (41:28):
When we talk about this and I think I was going to
joke about this is it the end ofthe world as we know it?
As most of us who grew up inthe cold war era, maybe there
are a lot of people that grew upin a post 9 11 era.
If this continues, it's notgoing to look like a cold war
(41:55):
era.
Missiles, things of that naturewe're going to talk about.
We're talking like cyberattacks, uh infrastructures
being attacked in regards toelectrical, you know, things
that would pause a lot of thingsin the united states that could
cripple the country.
We're not talking about bombs.
(42:16):
We're talking about if they canhack into certain things and
make things change.
That's how I look at it.
Speaker 3 (42:23):
I think that's right.
I think that's right.
I think that you know, is thisworld war three?
Was this have we been in worldwar three in the fall of 2021?
I believe I was doing, I was onsomeone's show and I said at
that point I thought that wewere already in a form of world
war three, but it's not the typeof world war that people think
(42:45):
about.
I think that in the 21stcentury, governments are much
more sophisticated.
So the idea that you would havea widespread nuclear war, that's
not really good for anyone.
Sure, and as crass as thismight sound like, look okay.
So what if you annihilate somecountry with nuclear weapons?
(43:08):
Well then, nobody can doanything with it because it's
radioactive, not to mention allof the other people who start
firing.
So you can't really do thatrealistically.
You don't want to soil thecountry so much that it's
unusable.
What you could have is a lot ofbattles in third world countries
(43:30):
, um skirmishes, proxy wars, andI know that people have stated
that.
But I think to your point whata lot of World War III war would
actually look like.
Would be like fentanyl, wouldbe like COVID, would be like
cyber hacking.
It would be economic espionage.
(43:51):
It would be, I think, of theold song Murder by Numbers by
the police and in the song Stingtalks about.
You know, you don't really wantto shoot anybody or do anything
because it causes an awful lotof mess.
What you want to do is use morefinesse, which is, I think
World War III on a big levelwould be orchestrated with more
(44:12):
finesse.
It just doesn't look like a warmovie from the past.
It would, because nowespecially, look, war is not
green, right?
I mean, it's like you want, youwant to get bit out of shape
about the environment.
Well, war would would do that.
Speaker 2 (44:30):
So I think, uh, world war three is going to look a
lot different and, and the otherthing too, I think a lot of
people don't, and hopefully wenever have to see anything of
the nature of anyone using anytype of muscle or strength of a
nuclear weapon.
Um, because, let's be honest,if you're, unless we're ready to
(44:52):
not exist on a planet, I meanthat's essentially what would
happen.
You, you start and it's justit's going to be the fallout of
one would, like you said, willcontinue to roll downhill.
Um, and and I and I think thatI think you're right, I mean, I
think you're spot on in regardsto you're going to start seeing
(45:13):
different ways to continue tochange the narrative in regards
to how a war may look and feelon paper, or how it looks, you
know, if it's a commercesituation.
If it's, you know, a COVIDsituation, if it's a fentanyl
situation.
I mean, we've been dealing withthis fentanyl situation for a
(45:35):
while and it is it's killed.
Speaker 3 (45:39):
I don't even know how many people.
I've heard statistics thatpoint at the fact that fentanyl
and, ladies and gentlemen, ifI'm wrong, someone correct me,
but I think I've heard a fewpeople say that fentanyl has
killed more Americans than ourwars combined.
You know, that may be beoverstatement but it's killed a
(46:05):
lot of people.
Speaker 2 (46:05):
I mean since, uh, since 2023 alone, the response
of of 72 000 deaths since 2023alone yeah, since 2023.
I mean the.
It's crazy because think aboutthis, michael.
I mean I've never been a hugedrug person, but those who may
(46:28):
have partaked in, you know, acidback in those days in my, you
know, the late 90s um, that'snot something that they were
worried about, you know no um no, this is a major concern and
it's it's so devastating whenyou look at different cities and
where this is playing out, at,um, I mean, I, I mean one could
(46:53):
say that this is, uh, a way ofpopulation control too.
You know too, um, for those whoare of a lower class, who don't
have money to get services, togo to a hospital to get clean,
or they get put in a cycle ofForgive me, for those who may
have had a drug issue oraddiction in the past Right, it
(47:19):
is tough to break these habitswithout assistance.
Speaker 3 (47:25):
Well, and the deal with fentanyl is that you may
not even be a drug person.
Sure, you might take one thingone time and that's it.
And so the fentanyl thing is avery sophisticated weapon to use
against a country, because it'snot just the amount of people
that it kills, but there's alsothe trade itself, which then
creates money and creates ablack market.
(47:48):
So it's actually a reallysophisticated kind of weapon,
and I only point to that as oneof different types of things
that you could do.
Now, of course, I could bewrong about all this.
Back to the nuclear weaponsthing in Iran.
Would Iran be crazy enough touse a nuclear weapon if they had
it?
Maybe I don't know if theywould or not, because it's kind
(48:11):
of mutually assured destruction.
So you would have to be reallyhell-bent or intoxicated by your
religion to want to dosomething like that.
But um, I think there's otherways to go about war these days,
and they're more, they're moresophisticated well, I mean, when
(48:34):
we talk about this, it does.
Speaker 2 (48:36):
It does put chills on my back and make the head stand
up on on the back of my neckand, uh, by, by any means
necessary.
I just want to make sure thatif, if, when we look at these
things and people are out heretalking about these things not
everyone's good to agree likeand and that and that's we.
We always know that, but but Ithink we all know that that is
(49:03):
just someone of their statureshould not have a nuclear weapon
.
Now, how it's played out totoday's day, the United States
did what they thought wasnecessary and we will now see,
we will now judge how that looksmoving forward, and you know
(49:24):
what this could be.
This could be the, this couldbe them saying you know what,
we're not going to mess with theunited states anymore, we're
good, we're done, we're going tolisten, um, you know, and that
you know that they're, you knowwhat I wonder, you know what?
Speaker 3 (49:39):
I wonder mario.
Sure, I wonder if common iseven alive at this point.
I think today some kind ofmessage came out that I don't
even know if it's really him.
Sure, I mean, for several daysin a row, almost a week, we
don't know where the guy is.
I mean, the Israelis killed ahuge amount of his cabinet for
lack of a better word.
They killed all those nuclearscientists.
(49:59):
I mean, I don't know if theguy's alive or not.
He's, I believe he's like 86and I believe he has cancer.
So he's very frail.
And how do you lead a countryIf you're not visible in a time
(50:20):
of great stress to your country?
You can't you.
That doesn't.
That doesn't.
That doesn't cast a big um, itdoesn't make you look strong, it
makes you look like you'reeither dead already or you're a
coward.
So they've got.
You know, iran as a country hasgot a lot to figure out and you
know, I don't know if the guy'seven alive.
Speaker 2 (50:41):
And will this look like?
Let's say, they remove him fromoffice or he's no longer in
office.
Does this thing take a turnlike Iraq?
And you know it just goes.
You know up, sideways and down,you know like where.
Speaker 3 (50:53):
Well, that's a nice little point because a lot of
you know that question came upand Trump and Hegg said that.
A few other people said look,we do not want regime change,
which I think surprises a lot ofpeople.
They're like well, what do youmean?
I thought the whole idea wasthese guys are evil.
The problem is, as we saw withLibya and Iraq, what happens is
(51:15):
when you do that, it creates somuch chaos that then local
warlords move in.
I mean everything justdissolves into anarchy.
So you don't want that.
So you know the common name guymight be bad, but you don't
want the entire power structureto just dissolve.
So we don't need to be part ofthat.
(51:38):
If the Iranian people do that,that's another thing.
But we do not need and that'ssomething I feel strongly about
we do not need to partake inthat.
Speaker 2 (51:49):
And I think that we've learned as a country.
I hope, so I hope so you wouldthink so from back then.
And look, no disrespect to thepresident, the former president
W, in regards to going afterSaddam.
I mean, history looks back andwe definitely made the wrong
(52:10):
decision.
We made a wrong move and that'sokay.
It's not okay.
I shouldn't say that it's okay.
The agenda should we call itthe?
What do they call it?
What was the term used way backin the day?
Why can't I think of it?
The industrial complex?
(52:30):
To me, it felt very-.
Speaker 3 (52:31):
The military industrial complex.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (52:35):
I mean, look, that's a whole show in itself For sure.
I guess part of the reason thata lot of us voted for Trump is
that we felt like he wouldn'twant to do that, and I still
hope that that's the case, and Istill hope that the people in
his cabinet, you know, feel thatway, because what we don't want
(52:55):
is a bunch of neocon warmongers, all trigger, happy, ready to
go, you know, rip up the joint.
We don't need that.
Speaker 2 (53:07):
So hopefully that'll be the case.
I mean, we'll find out.
I think that I believe thatwhat what happened was it was
just a little bit of muscle tojust to say, hey look, and I was
really surprised.
I was like wow, I can't believethis is actually going down and
and again, I don't believe thatthey would do it unless they
(53:28):
thought they had to do it.
Speaker 3 (53:31):
You know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (53:31):
I think you're right and to agree or disagree.
Now, I'm not someone who waslike, okay, we need to do this.
I was like, okay, To me it feltlike who had the bigger you
know what I mean Like who'sgoing to call each other's bluff
and um, but it seems to me thateverything moving for as of
right now I mean things couldchange, but it seems to me that
(53:54):
everything is is back to whereit needs to be and hopefully
we're not like doing a show in abunker somewhere someday it
hadn't happened yet.
Speaker 3 (54:03):
So, fingers crossed.
And I will say this just onelast thing, because I told you
that I, I was talking to my wifein the days leading up to all
this.
We were both listening and andI looked at her, I was like, man
, I think trump's gonna dosomething.
She's like I, I do too.
Yeah, that being said, I didn'tthink he was gonna do it this
weekend, because he came outwith that thing oh, you know,
(54:24):
they're getting, they've got twoweeks or whatever to kind of
like you know, yeah, get a dialunder the tape.
Yeah, and then, next thing, youknow, on saturday, um, we do
this.
So I don't know whatprecipitated that.
Part of me thinks that maybewhen we saw all the trucks
trying to carry the stuff out ofthere, um, through the
satellite imagery, they're likeall right, we're going to do
this, or, who knows, maybe thiswas the plan all along.
(54:47):
I don't know.
But that die is cast, it hasbeen done, and now I hope that,
um, the ceasefire can hold, yeah, and that we can start moving
towards fixing the situationit's interesting because there
is so much video that is beingput out there and you don't know
if it's front post, pre youknow whatever.
Speaker 2 (55:07):
Um, the biggest thing too, when, when you saw some of
the, some of the videos that Isaw on network tv about the
president, them kind of likepoking the bear, like well are
you gonna do it or not?
You know what I mean.
He's like why would I tell youwhat I'm going to do?
Look, mario.
Speaker 3 (55:29):
That's one reason I like having a businessman as
president, because a politicianwho's never really worked in a
job will will say anything atany time to grandstand, but
trump's like yo.
If, if this country was mybusiness and I was the ceo, I'm
not telling you what I'm aboutto do, because I'm about to do a
(55:49):
deal, or I'm about to make anacquisition or whatever.
It's none of your damn businessand I don't want to mess up my
deal by telling you.
Speaker 2 (55:56):
So that's one thing I like about trump it was
interesting that I felt likethey kind of poked the bear and
he kind of was joking around andthings of that nature.
Um, as we get close to wrappingthings up here from the pacific
northwest, and the west coastin la for michael parker.
Again, thank you so much forcoming to hang out with us thank
you I.
I can't wait for us to doanother show that may give us
(56:20):
some more insight.
Do we think?
Do you, do you think they'regoing to go after Ghislaine
Maxwell?
You think they're just going toleave her in the prison?
Or do you think they're justgoing to say you know what?
We're just going to let this.
She's just going to rot in jailand we're not going to really
move forward with the case.
Speaker 3 (56:39):
That's complicated.
I nearly lost audio for just asecond.
One of my wires is shorting out, I don't know.
Unfortunately, because she'sattached to the Epstein case and
there's so much riding on thatwith so many people, I think
that I don't think she gets out.
(56:59):
I don't think I think that manyof the powers that be would
like for this to just fade intoour memory and us all be
distracted by other things thatare happening.
But I could be wrong.
I mean, a lot of what I've saidabout the Epstein case to you
today was not on a super deeplevel, because it's been a while
(57:23):
since I've looked into it and Ihaven't really kept up with
what's going on with Ghislaine.
But what I can say, even frommy point of view now, is she's
still an accessory to anincredibly dark and deep and
twisted, entangled situationthat has transnational
implications.
Speaker 2 (57:44):
It's wild on how how much he had clout and power over
individuals, over wealthyindividuals, which blows my mind
.
Even the guy who owned um, theguy who was the uh of Express
and Victoria's Secret Les Wexner, I believe, was his name Blows
(58:08):
my mind.
Speaker 3 (58:09):
Well, he made a Epstein.
When I was producing a showHidden Truth Show for another
host, we did a deep dive on thisas it was happening, and
Epstein would ingratiate himselfinto the lives of the rich and
famous because he wanted to berich and famous and so he would,
you know, kind of a fix it.
(58:30):
He was like a parasite.
He would have fixed himself tothese people.
And I'm not saying that LesWexner is a good person or a bad
person, I'm just saying thathis modus operandi was like find
a person with a lot of money,make yourself invaluable to them
, try to get a hold of theirmoney, move on to the next host.
Speaker 2 (58:51):
By any means necessary.
I mean, they alleged that theyhad relations together.
Speaker 3 (58:57):
Absolutely, and I don't doubt that at all, because
that's how ruthless this guywas.
I mean, listen, I believe thathe was a narcissistic sociopath.
I mean, I doubt that he had anytrue empathy for anyone.
So which is what you need ifyou're going to do these kinds
of activities and be thisruthless?
Speaker 2 (59:17):
well, that was a nice little bonus piece for us here.
On us phenomenon no, seriously,because sometimes we don't get
to go, you know, do extra stufflike that.
But yeah, no, it's seriously.
When you go back to look atthat whole thing, I I believe
that we're going to watch thisfade into into the history books
, where it's not going to gettalked about.
It's going to be the new jfkconspiracy, like that.
(59:41):
This will.
We will be always searching forthe answers.
I think that the jfk thing willgo away.
This will be modern day.
This will be the modern day jfk.
Uh, you know, it's one of it's,it's, it's.
Speaker 3 (59:55):
It's one of them, and I and I agree with you there's
too many threads to pull, it'sjust too big, and I don't't want
to give up and turn tail.
But at the same time, we've gotthings like this situation
that's on our plate right nowwith this unrest in the Middle
East.
We've got.
Ukraine.
We've got lots of issues todeal with, but that's what these
(01:00:18):
guys get paid to do.
So, kash Patel, dan Bagino,come on, man, show up, sort it
out, be straight with theAmerican people, please for sure
, for sure, for sure.
Speaker 2 (01:00:28):
And you know what, I think we can handle it yeah and
you know what look.
We know that we, we know thatpresidential, we know that
people of higher power Ishouldn't say I shouldn't pick
on anybody but we know thatthere have been cases and there
have been stuff that has comeout in past years where
(01:00:51):
high-ranking officials have donethe dirty stuff.
Oh for sure, I mean theKennedys, the alleged clans.
I don't want to die so I don'twant to find me on some beach
somewhere down at Alki.
I don't want to someplace.
You never know.
But again, alleged, alleged onall that stuff.
(01:01:14):
But look like I was tellingsomeone I don't care what you do
on your off time, it's not mybusiness.
You know, if you're doing it inthe White House, man, get a
different place.
Yeah, agreed, I don't care whatyou do on your own time, do you
?
That's you.
I just you know you're in apublic place, you're at work.
(01:01:37):
It's kind of tacky.
Speaker 3 (01:01:40):
Have some taste.
Speaker 2 (01:01:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:01:41):
Have some honor, yeah , have some respect for the
position and have some respectfor the people that elected you
to be in that position justanybody just, yeah, just just be
discreet okay, yeah for sure.
Speaker 2 (01:01:52):
I mean, well, it don't hurt anybody.
Yeah, don't hurt anybody.
And, by the way, uh, just so weall, just for the record, if,
if you were listening earlier,yes, I do have a picture with
puff daddy, uh, but he was.
He came to the radio stationevent.
This is the if you werelistening earlier, yes, I do
have a picture with Puff Daddy,but he came to the radio station
event.
This is the back story.
If you're listening and youmade it this far, but he came to
the radio station event.
I got my picture taken with him.
(01:02:12):
I haven't taken it down, it'sstill up, because I didn't do
anything.
He didn't put no baby oil on meand he didn't beat out of me,
so I'm good on that piece me andhe didn't beat out of me, so
I'm good on that piece.
Speaker 3 (01:02:28):
So, um, I I have another friend as well, who, who
has a picture with with diddyand, like I said before, man,
you were doing your job, he wasdoing his job, did he was doing
his job.
Sometimes the photo is just aphoto.
So, um, yeah, I keep your, Ikeep your picture, man.
No, no shame with that.
Speaker 2 (01:02:41):
Yeah, well.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
It is what it is, man .
Speaker 2 (01:02:45):
It is what it is From the Pacific Northwest.
As we wrap things up here, I'dlike to thank our guest, michael
Parker, for coming to hang outwith us this evening.
You can find him on his socialplatforms, at Michael Parker
Media on YouTube as well right,your shows there are available
for people to watch.
Speaker 3 (01:03:00):
Michael Parker Media and on social media available
for people to watch.
Michael parker media and onsocial media.
I'm, uh, michael parker, lamario.
Thank you for inviting me on.
I always have a good time and Ijust like to thank your
audience for listening and I'dlike to wish everybody a happy
fourth of july week coming up.
Speaker 2 (01:03:13):
Oh my gosh, right, I I always forget that that's like
right around the corner.
I'm, uh, I'm going to abarbecue, so I'm excited about
that.
I'm going to hang out and besocial.
Sometimes I don't.
I don't like to be out in thepublic and be social.
I'm telling you, michael, it'sjust one of those.
Speaker 3 (01:03:28):
We're kind of curmudgeon-y uh, old dudes, but
uh, but you got to go.
Hey, man, you got to go rip itup.
And uh, it's the fourth of july, let's go out there and
celebrate, hey before we go oneback.
Speaker 2 (01:03:38):
Yeah, um, can you believe that?
Uh, uh, joey chestnut'snut'sgoing to do Nathan's hot dog
eating contest again.
He's back in it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:51):
Okay, you know what I got.
To be honest, I don't know whoJoey Chestnut is.
Okay, so Is he one of thoseguys that?
Speaker 2 (01:03:57):
is a competition eater.
Yeah, he's a huge competitioneater.
I only watch on the 4th of Julyto see how many hot dogs these
guys can eat.
It is disgusting, but you're, Imean so him.
So the big thing was joey andkobayashi were going head to
head, and so I think I've heardof that guy, yeah yeah, so
(01:04:18):
kobayashi had the title and theneventually joey beat him and
then he has continued with therecord.
He stepped down for a year,somehow got disqualified, I
don't know.
Somehow something came up andthen he was promoting vegan hot
dogs lord knows why he was doingthat and then all of a sudden,
miraculously, he's back.
(01:04:38):
So I will be watching thenathan hot dog eating contest to
see if he's put down70-something.
Hot dogs Like 72 is the recordor some nonsense like that.
Speaker 3 (01:04:54):
Can you imagine training for that, and can you
imagine the next day?
Speaker 2 (01:04:59):
Oh my, I just yeah, it's disgusting.
Speaker 3 (01:05:01):
I'm sorry, I'm out of here.
Speaker 2 (01:05:02):
Yeah, as we wrap things up from the Pacific
Northwest.
Thank you, Michael Parker.
Thank you to all our affiliates, kosw, kapy and KVI, our
flagship station For my entireteam, soon to be retiring.
Or, yeah, he's retiring MarkChristopher.
Yeah, he's retiring MarkChristopher.
(01:05:22):
Myself, sophia Magana, orSophia and myself, mario Magana,
I got so flustered about himleaving.
Be sure to look up at the stars, because you never know what
you might see.
Good night, good night.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
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