April 17, 2024 • 47 mins
The Street Communists from 2020 are back and making their presence known under a new cause. Jesse Kelly shares his thoughts on the phenomenon and gets an on-the-ground update from Julio Rosas. This, as the Biden administration continues to target political opposition. There was a major hearing on behalf of political prisoners before the Supreme Court. Julie Kelly joins with a breakdown. Plus, appearances from Christina Urso and William Trachman.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Our dirty comedies are week. We'll talk about that. The FBI, zvil,
we'll talk about that, street communism and America. An update
on the Supreme Court. So much tonight on. I'm right,
Let me give you some good news. We're gonna go
(00:23):
to Julio Rosas here in just a minute and talk
about what's happening in New York, what's happening everywhere else.
But before we do that, let me give you some
good news. There's enough bad news out there. The good
news is American communists are soft. You see the Communists
of old. As much as I hate them, Stalin Mao,
(00:44):
they really were tough guys. Stalin spent his youth shooting
people in robbing banks.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Mao.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Did you know he taught some of our troops jungle
warfare in China prior to World War Two. Mao's Junger fighter,
jungle fighter.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Tough guy. Our communists are not. They know how to
talk like one. They're not that tough though.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Do you see the sturdy little commune in Bakersfield, California
threatening the city council.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Hi, there, my name is Ridy Petel. I'm here to
speak in support of the city council. Introducing a ceasefire resolution,
specifically the one United Liberation Front has drafted. I don't
have faith that you'll do this.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
You guys are all horrible human beings, and Jesus probably
would have killed you himself. And while you guys parade
Gandhi around as a Hindu holiday called Chaititranavrathri, his starts
off this week. I remind you that these holidays that
we practice, that other people in the global seuth practice,
believe in violent revolution.
Speaker 5 (01:44):
Against their opprestus.
Speaker 6 (01:46):
And I hope one day somebody brings the guillotine and
kills all of you.
Speaker 5 (01:49):
Mother.
Speaker 6 (01:50):
Regardless of whether you elect people into office, they'll backstab you,
they'll let you die. And for that reason, you guys
want to criminalize us with metal detectors will see you
at your house.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
We'll murder you.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
That's against the law.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
You know, she knows how to talk like maw, but
apparently she didn't know that there come with consequences.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
You see, this.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Was her just like twenty four hours later, after the
police tracked her down, threw her in handcuffs and informed
her that she was facing multiple felony charges. You see,
(02:39):
the American communist was not raised in the jungles of
China or the Siberian hinterlands of Russia. The American communist
was born, bred, and nurtured in America's university system. And
therefore the American communist is soft. If we would just
nudge him, it would fall right over. And places like Florida,
(03:02):
you'd try to block traffic, you get nudged. That's weird
law enforcement getting these rabbage street communists out of the way.
(03:26):
What conditions would allow police to do such things? Joining
me now, my friend Julio Rosas joined his sub stack
is called mostly.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Peaceful, Okay, Julio.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Who were those cops and where did they get this
dangerous authority to get people out of the road.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Yes, kind of an unusual sight seeing these days.
Speaker 7 (03:46):
So that was in Miami, in the great state of Florida,
and obviously, with the way that law enforcement is able
to actually do their jobs, it's no surprising that they
were the anti Israel pro Hamas pro Alstein protesters were
quickly removed from the streets. I was in New York
City yesterday covering this widespread mobilization that was advertised for
(04:09):
weeks trying to disrupt the economy on tax day so
that our tax dollars don't go to help fund Israel
and all that. So as good as what happened in
Florida was, it was a rarity because in New York
traffic was congested from Manhattan to Brooklyn. We saw O'Hare
(04:33):
Airport in Chicago that that was blocked off for a
couple of for a little bit of time because of
these protesters with the Golden gate Bridge, I mean, and.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
That was just the main roadways.
Speaker 7 (04:41):
There was other kind of these small, small unit actions
that were being taken all across the country again with
this aim of trying to disrupt the economy.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Okay, who all want to nail down on this aspect
of what we saw yesterday because you just brought it
up in New York o hair Golden gate Bridge?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Whatnot?
Speaker 1 (05:00):
The organization? Because it hit me yesterday as I watched
how widespread this was. This is not random. People didn't
wake up and organize on Facebook that day and run
down in New York City's City Hall.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Who organized this? What?
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Why? Who funded it? Who are the groups behind this?
Where did this come from?
Speaker 7 (05:20):
So there's a there's a website called a fifteen dot
org and that was kind of this umbrella type organization.
They encouraged basically the local groups in any of the
cities to take autonomous action to try to have this
economic blockade.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
And so the people behind a.
Speaker 7 (05:39):
Fifteen dot organ is actually a little bit a little
bit shrouded in mystery.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
You know, there's no names behind it.
Speaker 7 (05:45):
You know, there's no about us a section listening God,
who's in charge of that?
Speaker 2 (05:50):
And so they they really.
Speaker 7 (05:52):
Just hammered in the point that they wanted all these
groups that in New York City, it was within our
life time, there's all these different there's this thing called
the Dissenters in Chicago that those were the kind of
the people that were kind of behind the old Hair action.
It it was just kind of what we what we've
been seeing the past couple of years, where this kind
(06:15):
of loose coalition within the far left that you know,
their tactics might be a little bit different. They might
have not agree entirely on a specific issue, although I
would say that they're pretty unanimous on how they view
Israel and the war in Gaza. Just to try to,
you know, make things as painful as possible for the
(06:35):
average American to in order to because people have been asking, well,
why are they doing this? They're going to make people angry.
And I've been saying since day one, since October eighth,
is that these people aren't trying to convince you. They're
just trying to make your life as miserable as possible
so that you just give in to their demands.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Julio, you mentioned these people in the Gaza Israel Palestine thing.
Are these people all Muslim activists? Is this a religious
thing for them? Are they just far left dirt ball comedies.
I'm asking because are these the same faces you've encountered
at these random protests for as long as you've been
covering them, you were at all the BLM antifa stuff
(07:14):
with the street animals out there?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Are these the same animals.
Speaker 7 (07:19):
Depending on location, but generally yes, I mean Dearborn Michigan.
Obviously with the large Muslim population over there that is
going to be mostly religious aspect to it.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
But here or over there in New York City.
Speaker 7 (07:32):
And Chicago, it's basically kind of the same thing because
it's kind of the same groups that were involved with
kind of allying with BLM back in twenty twenty, and
so that's why it kind of had to take a different,
big event like October seventh to kind of galvanize and
get them motivated to willing to get back out into
(07:53):
the streets again. And New York City has been hit
particularly hard by the far left since October seven. I mean,
they have disruptive events basically every week, at least at
least once a week there. You know, it's actually very
rare for them to not have something of some kind,
and so uh that that's why when there was this
kind of call to action to disrupt, that's why they
(08:14):
went were out of Wall Street right to to just.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Try to figure out a.
Speaker 7 (08:18):
Way of how to you know not and look, obviously
I'm not a fan of paying taxes either, but obviously
they're taking it to a little bit of an extreme
and so uh yeah, it's it's kind of the same actors,
kind of the same rhetoric. Uh basically, you know, even
though obviously their their main target Israel, they also hate
the United States.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
They hate they hate cops.
Speaker 7 (08:38):
They were always, uh, they're always getting into fights with them.
They're always trying to antagonize people that don't that happened
to be by that don't that don't follow their ideology.
So we'll see how this plays out as the election
heats up and I and we can expect that the
d n C in Chicago later the summer is going
to be pretty pretty eventful.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Speaking of the cops wrapping this up here, when people
are on the outside looking in, when I'm not in
San Francisco, I'm not in New York City, they look
and they ask. Many people have the same question, why
aren't the cops doing anything? You know, when you're blocking
off the Golden Gate Bridge, Why are the cops not
throwing everyone in the back of a paddy wagon when
you're storming city Hall? Why is everybody not getting a
(09:20):
face full of pepper spray and some handcuffs? What holds
the cops back in these places?
Speaker 7 (09:26):
It's because of twenty twenty.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
You know.
Speaker 7 (09:29):
One of the things back then was defunding the police.
And while that was successful initially, a lot of a
lot of money has been poured back into these police departments.
But the issue now is just that they're they're undermanned
and they're they're handcuffed by these policies being put forth
by these far left radicals in whatever government, and whether
(09:51):
it's city or state, and so you would think, yes,
you know, if you're going to endanger people and basically
hold them hostage for hours in on a bridge, but
it's there, you know, the cops aren't going to necessarily
kind of have the authority anymore to to take care
(10:12):
of these people pretty quickly, you know it did I
think it was like something like five hours or you know,
at least it was a couple of hours. And then
of course you know the Seattle too, so it just
it's very unportunate. And this is kind of the the
continuing effects of the mass lawlessness that we saw in
twenty twenty. So even though the police departments haven't been defunded,
(10:33):
the far left was pretty successful in hamstringing police departments
across the country as we're seeing now.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Sure we're oil, Thank you, brother, appreciate it. As always,
all right, we have so much to get to. There
was something big happening today in the Supreme Court and surprise, surprise,
Julie Kelly was all over it. We will discuss things
with her in just a moment before we do that.
Speaking of crime, are you ready? Are you ready to
(11:05):
encounter a Island criminal? They're out there, they're all around us. Look,
you want a little extra motivation right now, go to
your state's sex offender registry and put in your zip code.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Ah, not in my town. Put in your zip code.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Does your wife carry something on her that will allow
her to stop a bad man? Do's your son, that's
your father. That's what the burnup pistol launcher is all about.
This is non lethal, therefore it's legal in all fifty states.
I carry lethal and non lethal. I believe in carrying both.
You don't need a permit, you don't need a background check.
No matter where you live. They will mail it to
your front door. They shoot these pepper balls or tear
(11:42):
gas balls. They'll incapacitate a very bad man forty minutes.
You're gone, free, not in jail, and alive. Go get
a burn up pistol launcher. Swat teams across the country
use these things. They're sick. Be why RNA Bernard dot
com slash Jesse own your own self defense?
Speaker 8 (12:04):
All right, we'll be back. Well, there was a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Going on today in the legal world and the political world.
It's hard to keep track of all that, and I'm
certainly too stupid to do that.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
So that's why I.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Rely on people like Julie Kelly, who's all over this stuff.
The Supreme Court met today and there was all this
fancy legal mumbo jumbo habeas corpus or whatever. How these
people talk joining me now, Julie Kelly goes subscribe to
her substack called declassified.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
Julie.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
What happened today with the ritz and habeas corpus.
Speaker 9 (12:41):
And stuff and the men'sraa and the actus raya. I'm
not smart either have been picking up on all these
legal terms. So today was finally long awaited hearing of
the government's abuse DOJ's abuse of fifteen twelve C two
obstruction of an official proceeding. This was the statue that
was passed in the aftermath of the Enron Arthur Anderson
(13:04):
accounting scandal that the government this DOJ Americ Garland and
Matthew Graves, the DCUs attorney, have weaponized intentionally misinterpreted the
language to instead apply it to political protesters only those
though Jesse who were involved in the events of January sixth.
More than three hundred and fifty defendants have been charged
(13:25):
over the past three years with fifteen twelve C two.
It's a felony punishable by up to twenty years in prison.
Many defendants who have pleaded guilty or been convicted have
been sentenced two years in prison on this non violent
obstruction count. So the Supreme Court finally gave this practice,
this approach a long delayed scrutiny, and a majority of
(13:48):
the justices were extremely skeptical as to how the DOJ
has interpreted it, applied it, and how it's More importantly,
Jesse would not apply to many of the political protests
that we've seen in recent years, in recent months and
even ongoing as we speak this week.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Julie, what specifically, which prisoners are going to benefit from this?
And I know this is a really stupid question, but
I'm concerned about all of them. Are all of them
potentially going to get lighter sentences or maybe no sentences
because of this? Is this for one specific guy and
the rest of them are screwed?
Speaker 2 (14:28):
How's this work?
Speaker 9 (14:30):
So what's important to note, Jesse is that this felony
count usually becomes the animating charge in determining how long
a defendant will go to prison unless they have attacked
a police officer in addition to this fifteen twelve obstruction count.
But otherwise, if they're charged with obstruction, civil disorder, and
(14:50):
these common misdemeanors, this obstruction count really dictates how long
an individual will go to prison. And this is that's
what the judges base sentencing prison sentences on. Without this count,
a majority, overwhelming majority who have been charged or convicted
with fifteen twelve C two would only spend maybe twelve
(15:13):
months eight months.
Speaker 5 (15:14):
In prison for misdemeanors.
Speaker 9 (15:16):
Even with a civil disorder charge it could go up
to eighteen months. Instead, they're being sentenced to three four
five years in prison on this. Jacob Chancelly, as you know,
the most famous insurrectionist we joke, he was sentenced to
forty one months in prison for pleading guilty to the
substruction count. It has been very destructive. So actually some
(15:38):
judges Jesse are already releasing from prison people who have
been sent to jail on this fifteen twelve C two count,
predicting or anticipating that the Supreme Court will reverse it.
And in other cases that are pending either plea deals,
can jury trials, or sentencing hearings, they've all been delayed
until the Supreme Court renders an opinion. And it did
(16:00):
look today that a majority will reverse and overturn how
this DOJ has abused the statute and Jesse this should
result in some repercussions of the DOJ prosecutors at more
than seventeen federal judges in Washington who have signed off
on the abuse of this vague statue to punish Americans
(16:21):
who protested Joe Biden's election.
Speaker 5 (16:23):
On January sixth.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Julie, you mentioned the Supreme Court looks like they're leaning
towards overturning it, and that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
What were the highlights from today? I wasn't sitting in there.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Did the dirty comedies do something stupid they usually do?
And who on our side was actually decent?
Speaker 9 (16:41):
So there was an interesting line of questioning by Sam
Alito and Neil Gorsich and even some from Clarence Thomas
who opened up the questioning of the government side.
Speaker 5 (16:50):
US Solicitor General Elizabeth.
Speaker 9 (16:52):
Preligar, who said where they asked where else? And what
other instances has this statute been applied during political protests
or something that didn't involve tampering with evidence, documents, or witnesses,
which is in the entire fifteen twelve Criminal Code. And
of course she had no answer to that, And it
(17:14):
was Justice Alito who brought up some of the recent protests,
including and you'll love this, Jesse, Jamal Bogman's pulling of
the fire alarm that delayed an important congressional vote. He
actually brought that up, and she astonishingly said that those
examples would not rise.
Speaker 5 (17:33):
To the level of the j six fifteen twelve C.
Two prosecutions.
Speaker 9 (17:38):
She didn't really have a good explanation why, because you
know why, Jesse. She's not going to say, well, this
isn't going to apply to our side. This isn't going
to apply to Democrats and our protesters. It's only going
to apply to Republicans, conservatives, or Trump supporters. So I
think that was very illuminating to the justices to see
how they have weaponized the broad and vague language the
(18:00):
statue to only apply to a certain segment of the
American people.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
Okay, let's move on. There's sadly too much I have
to get to here. What impact does this have on
Trump's January sixth case. He's got a January six case
floating out there with that piece of trash, Jack Smith,
is this going to affect that?
Speaker 2 (18:21):
It is?
Speaker 9 (18:22):
See Jesse your waste murder than you give yourself credit for.
So yes, this count represents two of the four counts
in Jack Smith's criminal indictment against Donald Trump for the
events of January sixth.
Speaker 5 (18:34):
So if the Supreme Court.
Speaker 9 (18:35):
Comes back and basically says official proceeding, which is the language,
leads to a judicial proceeding or an investigation, not a
function of Congress, then not only will this exonerate three
hundred and fifty plus J six ers, but also it
would basically end what Jack Smith has accused Donald trumpet
with those two fifteen to two related counts in his
(18:58):
January sixth criminal indictment.
Speaker 5 (19:01):
So will he drop those counts?
Speaker 9 (19:03):
Obviously, if the Supreme Court comes back, Donald Trump will
go back and ask for those counts to be dropped
out of his indictment. What Jack Smith does after that,
who knows. He could bring a superseding indictment with other counts.
But this does have a big impact not just on this,
but also there's fifteen twelve C two counts in his
classified documents indictment against Donald Trump and two code defendants
(19:27):
as well, So this will have large reaching repercussions to
both the January sixth Prosecution and Special Council Jacksmith.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
Okay, how does this or does any of this? I
know another dumb question.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Does any of this affect his New York trial He's
going through right now. Everyone's covering and everyone's talking about it,
the Alvin Bragg thing. He's not allowed to criticize. He
has to be there every day. Does any of this
affect that?
Speaker 9 (19:54):
Not related to what happened in the Supreme Court today,
but it will impact what's happening in the class by
documents case in Florida because the fact that Donald Trump
will have to be in this courtroom in New York
for six to eight weeks every day. Judge Aileen Cannon
has made it very clear that she will allow and
she will defend Donald Trump's right as a defendant to
(20:17):
participate in all of the court hearings and to prepare
his own defense. So this Alvin Bragg eight six to
eight week charade debacle will impact Jack Smith's classified documents
case in Florida because she has already made clear that
she will protect Donald Trump's rights to participate in his defense.
(20:37):
And as this continues to move towards a trial date,
which we don't have yet there's still a lot of
pretrial things going on.
Speaker 5 (20:45):
This will certainly.
Speaker 9 (20:46):
Delay major parts of preparing that case to go to
trials sometime maybe later this summer.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Okay, truly, just give us the overall point of view
here is Donald Trump. We used to think he was
going to end up in the slammer before the election.
Now we've caught a whole lot of breaks here between
the Supreme Court, Fanny Willis not being able to keep
her parants on.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
We've got a lot of breaks here.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
Do we think that we've caught enough that at least
we're going to avoid.
Speaker 9 (21:15):
That well in terms of what we've talked about in
Donald Trump going to trial, especially in Washington on the
January sixth case, this will really all hinge on more
oral arguments next Thursday, April twenty fifth, and that will
be the oral arguments in the presidential immunity matter, the
question as to whether Donald Trump or any president is
(21:37):
immune from criminal prosecution for his conduct in office. Those
will be explosive oral arguments next Thursday, and it really
will dictate what the Supreme Court comes back with. If
they deny Donald Trump's claims of presidential immunity, then the
trial in Washington can restart, and that does pose a
(21:59):
chance that Donald Trump could be on trial in Washington
before the election, or inconceivably even on election day if
those proceedings restart based on the Supreme Court's decision and
that question.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
On election day. Yeah, Julie, thank you, man. I appreciate
it as always, all right, law fair. You remember that
whole FED napping hoax, Right, Julie's actually talked to us
about that many many times, where the FBI created their
own kidnapping plot. Well, we're going to talk a little
(22:37):
bit more about that little update. Before we get to that,
Let's talk about this four point eight percent. At the
end of this year, you will be four point eight
percent poorer than you were last year. That's what the
inflation numbers look like now. If they stay where they
are year over year, four point eight percent. We're just
watching our value, our standard of living go down and
(22:58):
down and down, and we feel powerless, but we're not powerless. Yeah,
you're powerless to save the dollar.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
You can't do that.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
You're powerless to control the FED and the spending, and
there's very little that you or I can do about that.
But we can make preparations. Just because the plane happens
to be going down doesn't mean we're out of parachutes.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
Do you have precious metals? You know?
Speaker 1 (23:23):
This is a basic, basic preparation everyone should make right.
And that's what Oxford Gold Group is about. It's for
normal people to make basic preparations. You don't have to
go crazy. Don't go crazy. Let Oxford get some gold
or silver coins in your hands. Let them get it
in your retirement, your IRA, your four oh one k.
(23:44):
Let them get you ready for whatever it is that's coming.
But it is coming, call tell them. I tweety to call.
They'll take care of you.
Speaker 2 (23:52):
Eight three three nine gold. We'll be back.
Speaker 10 (24:05):
Earlier today, Attorney General Dana Nessel was joined by officials
from the Department of Justice and the FBI to announce
state and federal charges against thirteen members of two militia
groups were preparing to kidnap and possibly kill me.
Speaker 11 (24:20):
It was just literally a bunch of working class guys
who on the weekend got together and exercised their rights
and trained with firearms.
Speaker 12 (24:31):
So the FBI says, hey, we'll just pay for everything.
Speaker 13 (24:36):
But who arranged the meeting?
Speaker 8 (24:38):
The fbis paid for vokets work.
Speaker 13 (24:41):
Robison was getting paid to set this stuff up.
Speaker 11 (24:44):
So they make the route, they set the locations, they
make the plan, they do everything, and Adam's literally just
sitting in the basement of the vacuum repair shops smoking.
Speaker 12 (24:54):
Blonds all day. The whole goal was for the FBI
to spend millions of dollars to militia groups, record them
saying offensive stuff, and then frame them in a fake conspiracy.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
I'm excited for this. We've been talking about this story
for a while. It is eye popping and it's amazing
how many Americans don't know about it.
Speaker 2 (25:26):
Joining me now.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
The lady responsible for that incredible film which you should
go watch, Christina Urso. She is the director and producer
of Kidnap and Kill.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
She's also a journalist.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Okay, Christina, for those maybe it's their first night tuning
into I'm right, maybe they haven't seen your.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Wonderful film yet.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Why don't you give us a little background on this
kidnapping plot. I remember it like it was yesterday. I
woke up one day.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's an election. Yeer, look at my phone.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Oh my gosh, they were gonna kidnap and kill Gretchen Wimber,
that's crazy.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
What was the real story?
Speaker 14 (25:58):
Well, the official story, right was in October of twenty twenty,
a group of fourteen men were arrested and six were
charged federally with conspiracy to kidnap. Eight were hit with
state charges of providing material support. They said that these
men were part of two different militia groups that were
planning to kidnap Whitmer, like take her from her vacation cottage,
(26:23):
maybe do something to her security detail, take her over
the lake, and put her on trial in Wisconsin. That
was the official story. And then as this case went
to trial and discovery started to come out, the true
story was very different. And I can go into that
as far as how this whole thing comes together, because
it doesn't come together without the FBI being involved every
(26:47):
step of the way.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
Yes, I would prefer you go into that, take as
much time as you need. I want the American people
to know what exactly is going on with their secret
state police agency.
Speaker 14 (27:00):
Right. So going back to the timeframe, I mean, people
need to remember what was going on in twenty twenty.
We had the pandemic, and we had a bunch of lockdowns.
Michigan had the harshest lockdowns. So this is the backdrop, right,
there's also the Summer of Love. We're having mostly peaceful protests,
and you have a bunch of guys who are sitting around.
(27:21):
They can't really work, so they've got nothing really to do.
And the FBI had certain people they were monitoring online
and they essentially brought these individuals together. They infiltrated a
group called the Wolverine Watchmen. This was not initially a
militia group. It was more of like a prepper group
(27:42):
that was kind of mostly online. Right. It was created
online in November of twenty nineteen. By March of twenty twenty,
the FBI has not only infiltrated the group, but their informant,
Dan Chappel, becomes the leader effectively of this group. And
then other various people that the FBI had been monitoring
(28:03):
and kind of targeting. They then come together. Because the
FBI calls meetings for these militia groups and then pays
for the meetings. They arranged ftx's, which is called a
field training exercise. This is things that militia groups do.
They do defensive firearms training, they do medical training, things
of this nature, and so throughout the course of twenty twenty.
(28:27):
Throughout the summer, the FBI is creating these events, paying
for them, and using a network of twelve informants, and
then later on they introduced two to three undercover agents
to bring this group together and to try to get
something off the ground. Basically, but there was never really
a plot. You had the FBI's informants getting people intoxicated
(28:54):
and then recording them saying offensive things, and then those
little clips were played in court out of con text
to kind of create the appearance of a conspiracy where
really none existed.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
You speak to a bunch of people in this documentary
and gosh, I have so many things I want to
ask you, Well, what what made your jaw drop? I
know you already knew the story before you started, but
you always learn more as you dig into these things.
What did someone say to you that made you go,
oh my gosh, what?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Well?
Speaker 14 (29:26):
Okay, So I had actually covered the case from the
time the arrests began in October of twenty twenty. I
knew right away with the way the media covered this
that the true story is probably something different. And then
it wasn't until actually after the first trial, so to
kind of back this up. There were four trials in total.
The first federal trial resulted in zero convictions for the
(29:50):
government and two acquittals. It was when I spoke to Brandon.
I interviewed him after he was acquitted, and it wasn't
until I talked to him that I realized there's so
much about this story that people just don't know. Even
if you were following along, even if you were listening
in to the public access line and following the trial,
that you wouldn't know about. So it wasn't until I
(30:11):
began doing the documentary that I realized that there's so
much here, and there's you know, honestly, this case, I
think is a microcosm for all of the things that
we're seeing going wrong in America. Right We've got the
Weaponization Committee. I'm not sure why they haven't looked into
this case. There isn't really a greater example of weaponization
(30:33):
than the Whitmer case, in my opinion. It also there
was certain events that happened during the course of the
investigation where there's sort of like a January sixth connection,
for example, where I feel like the Whitmer case was
sort of a dry run for what happened later on,
and I can explain.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
That if you like, yes, please, I would like you
to what happened later on.
Speaker 14 (30:55):
Yeah. So, throughout the course of the investigation, while the
FBI is these people together, right during the summer of
twenty twenty, there are anti lockdown rallies occurring in Michigan.
There's one that happens in April of twenty twenty at
the Lancing Capitol and the FBI has their informant who's
now the leader of the Wolverine Watchman group. He's got
(31:17):
a couple of the members of the Watchmen with him.
They're attending this anti lockdown pro to a group. They're
in their full kit with their firearms, and the FBI,
by the way, is monitoring the entire thing as this
is happening, and their informant says on a wire like, oh,
I think these guys might be getting ready to do something. Well,
the FBI tells the Lancing Capitol police to stand down,
(31:40):
open the doors and let everybody in. So they wanted
them to go into the capitol armed, right, Well, the
guys stood in line, they went through COVID screening, they
go in and then the media runs with these pictures
of the watchmen inside the capitol and running with the
story of right wing militias storm the capital. They you know,
(32:01):
they were saying that they were looking for lawmakers and
things like this. But the handling agent in Detroit at
the time, the Special Agent in charge of the Detroit
Field Office, was a man named Stephen Dan Tuono, and
he's overseeing this whole thing. This is a storming of
the capitol, you know, prior to January sixth, and one
(32:22):
week after these men get arrested. October seventh of twenty twenty,
he's promoted by Christopher Ray from the head of the
Detroit Field Office to be the assistant director of the Washington,
d C. Field Office. So there he is overseeing another
storming of the capitol.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
How about that, Christina, This doesn't feel like.
Speaker 2 (32:45):
A one off to me.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
This feels like how the FBI does business. Maybe they've
done it this way in the past and we didn't know.
Maybe they intend to do this again in the future.
Do you get the feeling they intend to do this
again in the future.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Maybe they're doing it as we speak.
Speaker 14 (33:01):
Yes, I think that they have a history of doing this. Right,
you can go back and look at co intel Pro.
You can look at pat Con for a more recent example.
But in my investigation of the Whitmer case, it appears
that the Whitmer investigation actually has its origins and an
earlier FBI operation that seemed to be going on in
(33:23):
twenty eighteen where the FBI was trying to infiltrate different
militia groups. Now in the Whitmer case, the FBI also
is creating fake militia groups. This was something that for
people who aren't aware, one of their informants was posing
as a head of a national of a militia group
and he was posing as a national commander. The FBI
(33:45):
claimed that there was this nationwide meetup of militia groups
in June of twenty twenty where they claimed the origins
of the kidnapping plot began. Well, what they didn't say
is that the FBI called and shared that meeting through
their informant, who is also a convicted child sex offender.
(34:05):
He calls and chairs the meeting, and the meeting is
all for targets that people that the FBI is targeting
to bring those people together, and then there's numerous informants
there that are recording everything that is being said, and
they're trying to instigate. They're trying to get people to
talk about things. They're you know, saying like they're in
your backyard. You got to give them no quarter. They're
(34:27):
talking about you can't just take brick and mortar. Like,
their informants are repeatedly suggesting things, and then other people
are not going along with their suggestions. So the FBI
is creating their own militia groups. Some of the things
in this case, like one of the informants was posing
as the head of the Tennessee Chapter for again, a
(34:48):
fake group that doesn't exist outside of the FBI's fabrication.
The main target of their investigation was a vulnerable man
named Adam Fox. He at the time was homeless. He's
living in the basement of a vacuum repair shop at
a place called the Vakshack. And they set upon him
and they've got numerous informants suggesting things to him and
(35:12):
trying to essentially get him to become a leader. Well,
he's not a leader of anything. He's not really part
of any militia group. He wasn't a member of the
Wolverine Watchman. The FBI made him a member and then
they created a fake chapter for their fake militia group.
They told Adam he was the head of the Michigan
chapter of the Patriot three Percenters, and then Adam inducts
(35:37):
the informant, Dan Chappel, the other informant, as the commanding
officer again of this fake militia group. And then the
FBI is saying, well, you know he created he was
the leader of this militia group, and it's like it
doesn't exist though outside of your fabrication, you have an
informant posing as a national commander. Your other informants are
posing as different heads of different states chapters of various
(36:01):
militia groups. I mean, they created a Facebook page for
this Michigan chapter of a fake militia group. That was
the FBI who was creating and administering it. They use
what they call online covert employees or ocees that are
running fake identities online to try to get people into
these groups and then funnel them into events like this
(36:22):
where the FBI can try to find a reason to
manufacture something to get something off the ground. They try
to target people who are more vulnerable, who might be
more suggestible that will go along with things that the
FBI is suggesting. So, yes, they have a history of
doing this, and they've not been held accountable for any
of the things that happened in this case, so there's
(36:44):
no reason to believe they wouldn't still be doing these things.
They've got every reason to do so, and I think
that they get paid for these things. They have financial
incentives to keep manufacturing things that they can then foil
and congratulate themselves for.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
They always find the morons and take advantage of them.
All right, Christina, really quickly, where can people watch your documentary?
Speaker 14 (37:07):
The website is kkfilm dot com. The film has not
yet been released. We are still going through the process
of putting together because this is such a big story.
There's fourteen different defendants, twenty unindicted co conspirators, all of
their family, and four different trials that we're trying to
(37:27):
condense into one. So we're still putting it all together.
But if people want to watch the trailer, they can
do so on our website and just bookmarket. You'll get
updates from us through that of when it's going to
be officially released.
Speaker 1 (37:41):
Okayankfilm dot com. Christina, outstanding work, Thank you, ma'am. All right,
we're not done yet. Someone's going after the communists. We'll
talk to him in a moment. Before we do that,
let's talk to you about this about your sore feet.
At the end of the day, your feet bother you,
don't They very common? It's not like you're abnormal. Honestly,
(38:01):
it happens to one of my sons, has it. So
what do you do? What you need? You need orthotics.
What you need is better shoes, honestly so. But what
shoes you buy, everyone's got an advertising for it out there.
What you need is gravity de fire gravity de fire. First,
you should understand it's going to come with custom orthotics
(38:22):
for you. Second, you need to understand you're dealing with
patented technology here. So at the end of the day,
that heal that bothers you, the left front part of
your foot, that that goes away, that doesn't happen anymore.
These things are life changing. Is that too far? Probably not,
though you want a pair you do is.
Speaker 2 (38:43):
What you need to do?
Speaker 1 (38:44):
You need to go to a gd e f y
dot com g d e f y dot com use
the promo code Jesse to save you a bunch of money.
Speaker 2 (38:54):
All right, we'll be back.
Speaker 15 (39:04):
Especial Washington.
Speaker 16 (39:05):
Can you quickly tell me what airspace requires an ADSB transponder?
Speaker 15 (39:10):
I'm not sure I can answer that question right now.
Speaker 16 (39:12):
So what are the six types of special use of
airspace that protect this national security that appear on FAA charts?
Speaker 15 (39:20):
Sorry, Senator, I cannot answer that question.
Speaker 16 (39:22):
So what are the operational limitations of a pilot flying
under basic med Senator?
Speaker 15 (39:27):
I'm not a pilot, So.
Speaker 16 (39:28):
Can you tell me what causes an aircraft to spend
or to stall?
Speaker 15 (39:32):
Again, Senator, I'm not a pilot.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
Gentlemen, was trying to be the head of the FAA.
The FAA seems to be a fairly important institution.
Speaker 2 (39:43):
Doesn't it.
Speaker 1 (39:44):
After all, those planes in the sky we don't want
I'm dropping out of the sky, do we? So what
kind of hiring are they doing over there? Joining me now,
William TrackMan, General counsel at Mountain States Legal.
Speaker 2 (39:57):
William, could you please enlighten us.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
What exactly are the qualifications they're using at the FAA
being this how that's such an important job with life
and death.
Speaker 2 (40:06):
And all that.
Speaker 13 (40:07):
Well, the fa clearly isn't sending their best obviously. Here
we have a situation where even at the highest level
of the FAA. This is someone who is nominated to
take charge my firm. Amount SAT's Legal Foundation has a
lawsuit related to air traffic controllers, which is a separate
hiring process, obviously, and in that process, they had a
pre employment test, and they looked at the results of
(40:30):
the pre employment test and decided that too many white
people p's the test, and so they would flush that
test and adopt a new one that would jerry mander
the racial pool and create I guess, a more favorable
racial balance for.
Speaker 2 (40:44):
The White House.
Speaker 13 (40:44):
And in our case, we represent over nine hundred would
be air traffic controllers who lost their schooling opportunities, they
lost their career opportunities because they couldn't pass the new test,
over nine hundred of them. Some of them passed with
one hundred percent the initial go around, and then they
couldn't pass the new test that was adopted by the FAA.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
So we are.
Speaker 13 (41:05):
Suing over race discrimination, and we're looking forward to prevailing
and making it so that this can't happen again.
Speaker 2 (41:12):
I'm looking forward to prevailing as well.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
Exactly how long has this kind of insanity gone on,
at least to your discovery so far in the airline industry.
Is this something that happened or started six months ago?
Has it been years in the making.
Speaker 13 (41:26):
It's been going on a while, probably a decade at
this point. Under the Obama administration, these were the sorts
of initiatives they were adopting in order to get at
quote unquote diversity within the air traffic controller hiring pool.
But just the last year or two, I think we've
all seen this dei effort ramp up. We've seen airlines
announce that they're going to make sure that fifty percent
(41:48):
of pilots are women.
Speaker 2 (41:49):
We've seen videos.
Speaker 13 (41:51):
Online of all non white staff on airplanes saying, look
how diverse we are. And then, of course we've just
got a number of incidents lately that involve disasters on airplanes,
like the Alaska Airlines flight, that indicate that merit is
not at the top of the list, and that instead
people are obsessed with race, they're obsessed with gender things
(42:12):
that ought not matter. I certainly couldn't care less about
the race or gender of the pilot and the cockpit
or the air traffic control on the ground when I
go from point A to point B. But that really
is something that people and the White House obsessed about.
They constantly think, how are we going to make this
pool of employees better reflect the exact racial demographics of
(42:34):
the country, when that qualification has nothing to do with
your skill, merit competence, experience, and so it's actually creating
a situation where we're recording danger. You know, I certainly
still fly, but I'm worried in the long run that
this will actually really result in a disaster and tragedy.
Speaker 1 (42:51):
William, will you explain have you found anything in the
course of all your discovery, any pushback from people within
the White House, maybe people within the FAA itself, because
this is one of those issues. I mean, look, all
race based hiring is stupid and wrong, and we acknowledge that,
but when it comes to things like flying, we're talking
(43:12):
about lives, hundreds thousands of lives on the line here.
No one has stepped up and said, uh, maybe we
should keep it merit based.
Speaker 13 (43:21):
Yeah, you don't say, like, this is a pretty important field, right.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
You know.
Speaker 13 (43:25):
It's one thing to tinker and socially engineer the workforce
in an HR department on the ground. It's quite another
thing to put all of our lives at risk by
hiring people who aren't the most qualified. Now, if you
ask the Biden White House what's your defense, they'll say, well,
the old tests really disadvantaged racial minorities.
Speaker 2 (43:43):
It had an impediment barrier, and all we were.
Speaker 13 (43:46):
Doing was getting rid of that barrier by adopting a
new test called the biographical assessment. But if there's one
thing that I couldn't care less about, it's the biography
of the air traffic controller. I mean just the title
of the test itself, biographical assessment is because it relates
more to your story, your narrative, your background than the
(44:06):
actual important thing if you're become, if you're going to
become an air to have controller, which is your merit,
your skill, your confidence, your experience. And none of those
things were at the top of the list for the FAA,
and even today we don't think that they are.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
You're also going to bat for farmers in a different case,
You're going to bat for farmers. What exactly is going
on there? What did the Biden White House try to do?
Speaker 13 (44:33):
So in contrast to the FAA case which started under
the Obama administration, and where we have to pour over
you know, hundreds of thousands of documents and interview witnesses.
Biden Whitehouse had no such embarrassment about just enacting a
program with facial racial preferences for disaster relief. So we
represent farmers in Texas who suffered natural disasters and were
(44:58):
entitled to various federal benefits under COVID nineteen relief programs,
but the amount of relief that they got was less
because they were not a racial minority or in most
cases not women. So the Biden administration enacted farm relief plans,
and then its own USDA officials decided that they would
(45:19):
dole out that relief based on race and sex. And
here it wasn't even as though Congress asked them to
do that. USDA just unilaterally decided that's the best way
to dole out farm aide. And so we're suing under
the equal Protection Clause. And we just filed very recently
in motion for a preliminary injunction which would halt the
program even before it's finished.
Speaker 2 (45:40):
And we like our chances.
Speaker 1 (45:42):
I like your chances, and that one too. Fingers crossed
for you, William. Thank you for doing what you do.
I appreciate it, sir. Thanks so much for we've got
light in the mood.
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Thanks.
Speaker 1 (46:01):
All right, it is time to lighten the mood. And
this is kind of one of those who do you
root for situations here.
Speaker 2 (46:09):
In this light in the mood.
Speaker 1 (46:10):
On one hand, everyone everyone understands my thoughts on the elderly.
Speaker 2 (46:15):
I love them.
Speaker 1 (46:16):
I believe in society they should be cherished, listen to.
They have so much wisdom, and I believe in being
respectful to them. At the same time, some people, not many,
not many, because the bitter people don't generally live to
be that old. But some people just get more and
more horrible every single year they're alive. And well, this
eleven year old kid ran into Granny from hell at
(46:38):
the game.
Speaker 6 (47:00):
You're loving year rules, you're eighty.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
They're a lot.
Speaker 1 (47:03):
Okay, it's such a savage burn, so simple, get a life.
Speaker 2 (47:15):
Everyone cheers, all right, I'll see them all m
Our dirty comedies are week. We'll talk about that. The FBI, zvil,
we'll talk about that, street communism and America. An update
on the Supreme Court. So much tonight on. I'm right,
Let me give you some good news. We're gonna go
(00:23):
to Julio Rosas here in just a minute and talk
about what's happening in New York, what's happening everywhere else.
But before we do that, let me give you some
good news. There's enough bad news out there. The good
news is American communists are soft. You see the Communists
of old. As much as I hate them, Stalin Mao,
(00:44):
they really were tough guys. Stalin spent his youth shooting
people in robbing banks.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Mao.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Did you know he taught some of our troops jungle
warfare in China prior to World War Two. Mao's Junger fighter,
jungle fighter.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Tough guy. Our communists are not. They know how to
talk like one. They're not that tough though.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Do you see the sturdy little commune in Bakersfield, California
threatening the city council.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Hi, there, my name is Ridy Petel. I'm here to
speak in support of the city council. Introducing a ceasefire resolution,
specifically the one United Liberation Front has drafted. I don't
have faith that you'll do this.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
You guys are all horrible human beings, and Jesus probably
would have killed you himself. And while you guys parade
Gandhi around as a Hindu holiday called Chaititranavrathri, his starts
off this week. I remind you that these holidays that
we practice, that other people in the global seuth practice,
believe in violent revolution.
Speaker 5 (01:44):
Against their opprestus.
Speaker 6 (01:46):
And I hope one day somebody brings the guillotine and
kills all of you.
Speaker 5 (01:49):
Mother.
Speaker 6 (01:50):
Regardless of whether you elect people into office, they'll backstab you,
they'll let you die. And for that reason, you guys
want to criminalize us with metal detectors will see you
at your house.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
We'll murder you.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
That's against the law.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
You know, she knows how to talk like maw, but
apparently she didn't know that there come with consequences.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
You see, this.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Was her just like twenty four hours later, after the
police tracked her down, threw her in handcuffs and informed
her that she was facing multiple felony charges. You see,
(02:39):
the American communist was not raised in the jungles of
China or the Siberian hinterlands of Russia. The American communist
was born, bred, and nurtured in America's university system. And
therefore the American communist is soft. If we would just
nudge him, it would fall right over. And places like Florida,
(03:02):
you'd try to block traffic, you get nudged. That's weird
law enforcement getting these rabbage street communists out of the way.
(03:26):
What conditions would allow police to do such things? Joining
me now, my friend Julio Rosas joined his sub stack
is called mostly.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Peaceful, Okay, Julio.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Who were those cops and where did they get this
dangerous authority to get people out of the road.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Yes, kind of an unusual sight seeing these days.
Speaker 7 (03:46):
So that was in Miami, in the great state of Florida,
and obviously, with the way that law enforcement is able
to actually do their jobs, it's no surprising that they
were the anti Israel pro Hamas pro Alstein protesters were
quickly removed from the streets. I was in New York
City yesterday covering this widespread mobilization that was advertised for
(04:09):
weeks trying to disrupt the economy on tax day so
that our tax dollars don't go to help fund Israel
and all that. So as good as what happened in
Florida was, it was a rarity because in New York
traffic was congested from Manhattan to Brooklyn. We saw O'Hare
(04:33):
Airport in Chicago that that was blocked off for a
couple of for a little bit of time because of
these protesters with the Golden gate Bridge, I mean, and.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
That was just the main roadways.
Speaker 7 (04:41):
There was other kind of these small, small unit actions
that were being taken all across the country again with
this aim of trying to disrupt the economy.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Okay, who all want to nail down on this aspect
of what we saw yesterday because you just brought it
up in New York o hair Golden gate Bridge?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Whatnot?
Speaker 1 (05:00):
The organization? Because it hit me yesterday as I watched
how widespread this was. This is not random. People didn't
wake up and organize on Facebook that day and run
down in New York City's City Hall.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Who organized this? What?
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Why? Who funded it? Who are the groups behind this?
Where did this come from?
Speaker 7 (05:20):
So there's a there's a website called a fifteen dot
org and that was kind of this umbrella type organization.
They encouraged basically the local groups in any of the
cities to take autonomous action to try to have this
economic blockade.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
And so the people behind a.
Speaker 7 (05:39):
Fifteen dot organ is actually a little bit a little
bit shrouded in mystery.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
You know, there's no names behind it.
Speaker 7 (05:45):
You know, there's no about us a section listening God,
who's in charge of that?
Speaker 2 (05:50):
And so they they really.
Speaker 7 (05:52):
Just hammered in the point that they wanted all these
groups that in New York City, it was within our
life time, there's all these different there's this thing called
the Dissenters in Chicago that those were the kind of
the people that were kind of behind the old Hair action.
It it was just kind of what we what we've
been seeing the past couple of years, where this kind
(06:15):
of loose coalition within the far left that you know,
their tactics might be a little bit different. They might
have not agree entirely on a specific issue, although I
would say that they're pretty unanimous on how they view
Israel and the war in Gaza. Just to try to,
you know, make things as painful as possible for the
(06:35):
average American to in order to because people have been asking, well,
why are they doing this? They're going to make people angry.
And I've been saying since day one, since October eighth,
is that these people aren't trying to convince you. They're
just trying to make your life as miserable as possible
so that you just give in to their demands.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Julio, you mentioned these people in the Gaza Israel Palestine thing.
Are these people all Muslim activists? Is this a religious
thing for them? Are they just far left dirt ball comedies.
I'm asking because are these the same faces you've encountered
at these random protests for as long as you've been
covering them, you were at all the BLM antifa stuff
(07:14):
with the street animals out there?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Are these the same animals.
Speaker 7 (07:19):
Depending on location, but generally yes, I mean Dearborn Michigan.
Obviously with the large Muslim population over there that is
going to be mostly religious aspect to it.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
But here or over there in New York City.
Speaker 7 (07:32):
And Chicago, it's basically kind of the same thing because
it's kind of the same groups that were involved with
kind of allying with BLM back in twenty twenty, and
so that's why it kind of had to take a different,
big event like October seventh to kind of galvanize and
get them motivated to willing to get back out into
(07:53):
the streets again. And New York City has been hit
particularly hard by the far left since October seven. I mean,
they have disruptive events basically every week, at least at
least once a week there. You know, it's actually very
rare for them to not have something of some kind,
and so uh that that's why when there was this
kind of call to action to disrupt, that's why they
(08:14):
went were out of Wall Street right to to just.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Try to figure out a.
Speaker 7 (08:18):
Way of how to you know not and look, obviously
I'm not a fan of paying taxes either, but obviously
they're taking it to a little bit of an extreme
and so uh yeah, it's it's kind of the same actors,
kind of the same rhetoric. Uh basically, you know, even
though obviously their their main target Israel, they also hate
the United States.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
They hate they hate cops.
Speaker 7 (08:38):
They were always, uh, they're always getting into fights with them.
They're always trying to antagonize people that don't that happened
to be by that don't that don't follow their ideology.
So we'll see how this plays out as the election
heats up and I and we can expect that the
d n C in Chicago later the summer is going
to be pretty pretty eventful.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Speaking of the cops wrapping this up here, when people
are on the outside looking in, when I'm not in
San Francisco, I'm not in New York City, they look
and they ask. Many people have the same question, why
aren't the cops doing anything? You know, when you're blocking
off the Golden Gate Bridge, Why are the cops not
throwing everyone in the back of a paddy wagon when
you're storming city Hall? Why is everybody not getting a
(09:20):
face full of pepper spray and some handcuffs? What holds
the cops back in these places?
Speaker 7 (09:26):
It's because of twenty twenty.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
You know.
Speaker 7 (09:29):
One of the things back then was defunding the police.
And while that was successful initially, a lot of a
lot of money has been poured back into these police departments.
But the issue now is just that they're they're undermanned
and they're they're handcuffed by these policies being put forth
by these far left radicals in whatever government, and whether
(09:51):
it's city or state, and so you would think, yes,
you know, if you're going to endanger people and basically
hold them hostage for hours in on a bridge, but
it's there, you know, the cops aren't going to necessarily
kind of have the authority anymore to to take care
(10:12):
of these people pretty quickly, you know it did I
think it was like something like five hours or you know,
at least it was a couple of hours. And then
of course you know the Seattle too, so it just
it's very unportunate. And this is kind of the the
continuing effects of the mass lawlessness that we saw in
twenty twenty. So even though the police departments haven't been defunded,
(10:33):
the far left was pretty successful in hamstringing police departments
across the country as we're seeing now.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Sure we're oil, Thank you, brother, appreciate it. As always,
all right, we have so much to get to. There
was something big happening today in the Supreme Court and surprise, surprise,
Julie Kelly was all over it. We will discuss things
with her in just a moment before we do that.
Speaking of crime, are you ready? Are you ready to
(11:05):
encounter a Island criminal? They're out there, they're all around us. Look,
you want a little extra motivation right now, go to
your state's sex offender registry and put in your zip code.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Ah, not in my town. Put in your zip code.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Does your wife carry something on her that will allow
her to stop a bad man? Do's your son, that's
your father. That's what the burnup pistol launcher is all about.
This is non lethal, therefore it's legal in all fifty states.
I carry lethal and non lethal. I believe in carrying both.
You don't need a permit, you don't need a background check.
No matter where you live. They will mail it to
your front door. They shoot these pepper balls or tear
(11:42):
gas balls. They'll incapacitate a very bad man forty minutes.
You're gone, free, not in jail, and alive. Go get
a burn up pistol launcher. Swat teams across the country
use these things. They're sick. Be why RNA Bernard dot
com slash Jesse own your own self defense?
Speaker 8 (12:04):
All right, we'll be back. Well, there was a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Going on today in the legal world and the political world.
It's hard to keep track of all that, and I'm
certainly too stupid to do that.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
So that's why I.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Rely on people like Julie Kelly, who's all over this stuff.
The Supreme Court met today and there was all this
fancy legal mumbo jumbo habeas corpus or whatever. How these
people talk joining me now, Julie Kelly goes subscribe to
her substack called declassified.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
Julie.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
What happened today with the ritz and habeas corpus.
Speaker 9 (12:41):
And stuff and the men'sraa and the actus raya. I'm
not smart either have been picking up on all these
legal terms. So today was finally long awaited hearing of
the government's abuse DOJ's abuse of fifteen twelve C two
obstruction of an official proceeding. This was the statue that
was passed in the aftermath of the Enron Arthur Anderson
(13:04):
accounting scandal that the government this DOJ Americ Garland and
Matthew Graves, the DCUs attorney, have weaponized intentionally misinterpreted the
language to instead apply it to political protesters only those
though Jesse who were involved in the events of January sixth.
More than three hundred and fifty defendants have been charged
(13:25):
over the past three years with fifteen twelve C two.
It's a felony punishable by up to twenty years in prison.
Many defendants who have pleaded guilty or been convicted have
been sentenced two years in prison on this non violent
obstruction count. So the Supreme Court finally gave this practice,
this approach a long delayed scrutiny, and a majority of
(13:48):
the justices were extremely skeptical as to how the DOJ
has interpreted it, applied it, and how it's More importantly,
Jesse would not apply to many of the political protests
that we've seen in recent years, in recent months and
even ongoing as we speak this week.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Julie, what specifically, which prisoners are going to benefit from this?
And I know this is a really stupid question, but
I'm concerned about all of them. Are all of them
potentially going to get lighter sentences or maybe no sentences
because of this? Is this for one specific guy and
the rest of them are screwed?
Speaker 2 (14:28):
How's this work?
Speaker 9 (14:30):
So what's important to note, Jesse is that this felony
count usually becomes the animating charge in determining how long
a defendant will go to prison unless they have attacked
a police officer in addition to this fifteen twelve obstruction count.
But otherwise, if they're charged with obstruction, civil disorder, and
(14:50):
these common misdemeanors, this obstruction count really dictates how long
an individual will go to prison. And this is that's
what the judges base sentencing prison sentences on. Without this count,
a majority, overwhelming majority who have been charged or convicted
with fifteen twelve C two would only spend maybe twelve
(15:13):
months eight months.
Speaker 5 (15:14):
In prison for misdemeanors.
Speaker 9 (15:16):
Even with a civil disorder charge it could go up
to eighteen months. Instead, they're being sentenced to three four
five years in prison on this. Jacob Chancelly, as you know,
the most famous insurrectionist we joke, he was sentenced to
forty one months in prison for pleading guilty to the
substruction count. It has been very destructive. So actually some
(15:38):
judges Jesse are already releasing from prison people who have
been sent to jail on this fifteen twelve C two count,
predicting or anticipating that the Supreme Court will reverse it.
And in other cases that are pending either plea deals,
can jury trials, or sentencing hearings, they've all been delayed
until the Supreme Court renders an opinion. And it did
(16:00):
look today that a majority will reverse and overturn how
this DOJ has abused the statute and Jesse this should
result in some repercussions of the DOJ prosecutors at more
than seventeen federal judges in Washington who have signed off
on the abuse of this vague statue to punish Americans
(16:21):
who protested Joe Biden's election.
Speaker 5 (16:23):
On January sixth.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Julie, you mentioned the Supreme Court looks like they're leaning
towards overturning it, and that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
What were the highlights from today? I wasn't sitting in there.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Did the dirty comedies do something stupid they usually do?
And who on our side was actually decent?
Speaker 9 (16:41):
So there was an interesting line of questioning by Sam
Alito and Neil Gorsich and even some from Clarence Thomas
who opened up the questioning of the government side.
Speaker 5 (16:50):
US Solicitor General Elizabeth.
Speaker 9 (16:52):
Preligar, who said where they asked where else? And what
other instances has this statute been applied during political protests
or something that didn't involve tampering with evidence, documents, or witnesses,
which is in the entire fifteen twelve Criminal Code. And
of course she had no answer to that, And it
(17:14):
was Justice Alito who brought up some of the recent protests,
including and you'll love this, Jesse, Jamal Bogman's pulling of
the fire alarm that delayed an important congressional vote. He
actually brought that up, and she astonishingly said that those
examples would not rise.
Speaker 5 (17:33):
To the level of the j six fifteen twelve C.
Two prosecutions.
Speaker 9 (17:38):
She didn't really have a good explanation why, because you
know why, Jesse. She's not going to say, well, this
isn't going to apply to our side. This isn't going
to apply to Democrats and our protesters. It's only going
to apply to Republicans, conservatives, or Trump supporters. So I
think that was very illuminating to the justices to see
how they have weaponized the broad and vague language the
(18:00):
statue to only apply to a certain segment of the
American people.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
Okay, let's move on. There's sadly too much I have
to get to here. What impact does this have on
Trump's January sixth case. He's got a January six case
floating out there with that piece of trash, Jack Smith,
is this going to affect that?
Speaker 2 (18:21):
It is?
Speaker 9 (18:22):
See Jesse your waste murder than you give yourself credit for.
So yes, this count represents two of the four counts
in Jack Smith's criminal indictment against Donald Trump for the
events of January sixth.
Speaker 5 (18:34):
So if the Supreme Court.
Speaker 9 (18:35):
Comes back and basically says official proceeding, which is the language,
leads to a judicial proceeding or an investigation, not a
function of Congress, then not only will this exonerate three
hundred and fifty plus J six ers, but also it
would basically end what Jack Smith has accused Donald trumpet
with those two fifteen to two related counts in his
(18:58):
January sixth criminal indictment.
Speaker 5 (19:01):
So will he drop those counts?
Speaker 9 (19:03):
Obviously, if the Supreme Court comes back, Donald Trump will
go back and ask for those counts to be dropped
out of his indictment. What Jack Smith does after that,
who knows. He could bring a superseding indictment with other counts.
But this does have a big impact not just on this,
but also there's fifteen twelve C two counts in his
classified documents indictment against Donald Trump and two code defendants
(19:27):
as well, So this will have large reaching repercussions to
both the January sixth Prosecution and Special Council Jacksmith.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
Okay, how does this or does any of this? I
know another dumb question.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Does any of this affect his New York trial He's
going through right now. Everyone's covering and everyone's talking about it,
the Alvin Bragg thing. He's not allowed to criticize. He
has to be there every day. Does any of this
affect that?
Speaker 9 (19:54):
Not related to what happened in the Supreme Court today,
but it will impact what's happening in the class by
documents case in Florida because the fact that Donald Trump
will have to be in this courtroom in New York
for six to eight weeks every day. Judge Aileen Cannon
has made it very clear that she will allow and
she will defend Donald Trump's right as a defendant to
(20:17):
participate in all of the court hearings and to prepare
his own defense. So this Alvin Bragg eight six to
eight week charade debacle will impact Jack Smith's classified documents
case in Florida because she has already made clear that
she will protect Donald Trump's rights to participate in his defense.
(20:37):
And as this continues to move towards a trial date,
which we don't have yet there's still a lot of
pretrial things going on.
Speaker 5 (20:45):
This will certainly.
Speaker 9 (20:46):
Delay major parts of preparing that case to go to
trials sometime maybe later this summer.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Okay, truly, just give us the overall point of view
here is Donald Trump. We used to think he was
going to end up in the slammer before the election.
Now we've caught a whole lot of breaks here between
the Supreme Court, Fanny Willis not being able to keep
her parants on.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
We've got a lot of breaks here.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
Do we think that we've caught enough that at least
we're going to avoid.
Speaker 9 (21:15):
That well in terms of what we've talked about in
Donald Trump going to trial, especially in Washington on the
January sixth case, this will really all hinge on more
oral arguments next Thursday, April twenty fifth, and that will
be the oral arguments in the presidential immunity matter, the
question as to whether Donald Trump or any president is
(21:37):
immune from criminal prosecution for his conduct in office. Those
will be explosive oral arguments next Thursday, and it really
will dictate what the Supreme Court comes back with. If
they deny Donald Trump's claims of presidential immunity, then the
trial in Washington can restart, and that does pose a
(21:59):
chance that Donald Trump could be on trial in Washington
before the election, or inconceivably even on election day if
those proceedings restart based on the Supreme Court's decision and
that question.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
On election day. Yeah, Julie, thank you, man. I appreciate
it as always, all right, law fair. You remember that
whole FED napping hoax, Right, Julie's actually talked to us
about that many many times, where the FBI created their
own kidnapping plot. Well, we're going to talk a little
(22:37):
bit more about that little update. Before we get to that,
Let's talk about this four point eight percent. At the
end of this year, you will be four point eight
percent poorer than you were last year. That's what the
inflation numbers look like now. If they stay where they
are year over year, four point eight percent. We're just
watching our value, our standard of living go down and
(22:58):
down and down, and we feel powerless, but we're not powerless. Yeah,
you're powerless to save the dollar.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
You can't do that.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
You're powerless to control the FED and the spending, and
there's very little that you or I can do about that.
But we can make preparations. Just because the plane happens
to be going down doesn't mean we're out of parachutes.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
Do you have precious metals? You know?
Speaker 1 (23:23):
This is a basic, basic preparation everyone should make right.
And that's what Oxford Gold Group is about. It's for
normal people to make basic preparations. You don't have to
go crazy. Don't go crazy. Let Oxford get some gold
or silver coins in your hands. Let them get it
in your retirement, your IRA, your four oh one k.
(23:44):
Let them get you ready for whatever it is that's coming.
But it is coming, call tell them. I tweety to call.
They'll take care of you.
Speaker 2 (23:52):
Eight three three nine gold. We'll be back.
Speaker 10 (24:05):
Earlier today, Attorney General Dana Nessel was joined by officials
from the Department of Justice and the FBI to announce
state and federal charges against thirteen members of two militia
groups were preparing to kidnap and possibly kill me.
Speaker 11 (24:20):
It was just literally a bunch of working class guys
who on the weekend got together and exercised their rights
and trained with firearms.
Speaker 12 (24:31):
So the FBI says, hey, we'll just pay for everything.
Speaker 13 (24:36):
But who arranged the meeting?
Speaker 8 (24:38):
The fbis paid for vokets work.
Speaker 13 (24:41):
Robison was getting paid to set this stuff up.
Speaker 11 (24:44):
So they make the route, they set the locations, they
make the plan, they do everything, and Adam's literally just
sitting in the basement of the vacuum repair shops smoking.
Speaker 12 (24:54):
Blonds all day. The whole goal was for the FBI
to spend millions of dollars to militia groups, record them
saying offensive stuff, and then frame them in a fake conspiracy.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
I'm excited for this. We've been talking about this story
for a while. It is eye popping and it's amazing
how many Americans don't know about it.
Speaker 2 (25:26):
Joining me now.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
The lady responsible for that incredible film which you should
go watch, Christina Urso. She is the director and producer
of Kidnap and Kill.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
She's also a journalist.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Okay, Christina, for those maybe it's their first night tuning
into I'm right, maybe they haven't seen your.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Wonderful film yet.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Why don't you give us a little background on this
kidnapping plot. I remember it like it was yesterday. I
woke up one day.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's an election. Yeer, look at my phone.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Oh my gosh, they were gonna kidnap and kill Gretchen Wimber,
that's crazy.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
What was the real story?
Speaker 14 (25:58):
Well, the official story, right was in October of twenty twenty,
a group of fourteen men were arrested and six were
charged federally with conspiracy to kidnap. Eight were hit with
state charges of providing material support. They said that these
men were part of two different militia groups that were
planning to kidnap Whitmer, like take her from her vacation cottage,
(26:23):
maybe do something to her security detail, take her over
the lake, and put her on trial in Wisconsin. That
was the official story. And then as this case went
to trial and discovery started to come out, the true
story was very different. And I can go into that
as far as how this whole thing comes together, because
it doesn't come together without the FBI being involved every
(26:47):
step of the way.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
Yes, I would prefer you go into that, take as
much time as you need. I want the American people
to know what exactly is going on with their secret
state police agency.
Speaker 14 (27:00):
Right. So going back to the timeframe, I mean, people
need to remember what was going on in twenty twenty.
We had the pandemic, and we had a bunch of lockdowns.
Michigan had the harshest lockdowns. So this is the backdrop, right,
there's also the Summer of Love. We're having mostly peaceful protests,
and you have a bunch of guys who are sitting around.
(27:21):
They can't really work, so they've got nothing really to do.
And the FBI had certain people they were monitoring online
and they essentially brought these individuals together. They infiltrated a
group called the Wolverine Watchmen. This was not initially a
militia group. It was more of like a prepper group
(27:42):
that was kind of mostly online. Right. It was created
online in November of twenty nineteen. By March of twenty twenty,
the FBI has not only infiltrated the group, but their informant,
Dan Chappel, becomes the leader effectively of this group. And
then other various people that the FBI had been monitoring
(28:03):
and kind of targeting. They then come together. Because the
FBI calls meetings for these militia groups and then pays
for the meetings. They arranged ftx's, which is called a
field training exercise. This is things that militia groups do.
They do defensive firearms training, they do medical training, things
of this nature, and so throughout the course of twenty twenty.
(28:27):
Throughout the summer, the FBI is creating these events, paying
for them, and using a network of twelve informants, and
then later on they introduced two to three undercover agents
to bring this group together and to try to get
something off the ground. Basically, but there was never really
a plot. You had the FBI's informants getting people intoxicated
(28:54):
and then recording them saying offensive things, and then those
little clips were played in court out of con text
to kind of create the appearance of a conspiracy where
really none existed.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
You speak to a bunch of people in this documentary
and gosh, I have so many things I want to
ask you, Well, what what made your jaw drop? I
know you already knew the story before you started, but
you always learn more as you dig into these things.
What did someone say to you that made you go,
oh my gosh, what?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Well?
Speaker 14 (29:26):
Okay, So I had actually covered the case from the
time the arrests began in October of twenty twenty. I
knew right away with the way the media covered this
that the true story is probably something different. And then
it wasn't until actually after the first trial, so to
kind of back this up. There were four trials in total.
The first federal trial resulted in zero convictions for the
(29:50):
government and two acquittals. It was when I spoke to Brandon.
I interviewed him after he was acquitted, and it wasn't
until I talked to him that I realized there's so
much about this story that people just don't know. Even
if you were following along, even if you were listening
in to the public access line and following the trial,
that you wouldn't know about. So it wasn't until I
(30:11):
began doing the documentary that I realized that there's so
much here, and there's you know, honestly, this case, I
think is a microcosm for all of the things that
we're seeing going wrong in America. Right We've got the
Weaponization Committee. I'm not sure why they haven't looked into
this case. There isn't really a greater example of weaponization
(30:33):
than the Whitmer case, in my opinion. It also there
was certain events that happened during the course of the
investigation where there's sort of like a January sixth connection,
for example, where I feel like the Whitmer case was
sort of a dry run for what happened later on,
and I can explain.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
That if you like, yes, please, I would like you
to what happened later on.
Speaker 14 (30:55):
Yeah. So, throughout the course of the investigation, while the
FBI is these people together, right during the summer of
twenty twenty, there are anti lockdown rallies occurring in Michigan.
There's one that happens in April of twenty twenty at
the Lancing Capitol and the FBI has their informant who's
now the leader of the Wolverine Watchman group. He's got
(31:17):
a couple of the members of the Watchmen with him.
They're attending this anti lockdown pro to a group. They're
in their full kit with their firearms, and the FBI,
by the way, is monitoring the entire thing as this
is happening, and their informant says on a wire like, oh,
I think these guys might be getting ready to do something. Well,
the FBI tells the Lancing Capitol police to stand down,
(31:40):
open the doors and let everybody in. So they wanted
them to go into the capitol armed, right, Well, the
guys stood in line, they went through COVID screening, they
go in and then the media runs with these pictures
of the watchmen inside the capitol and running with the
story of right wing militias storm the capital. They you know,
(32:01):
they were saying that they were looking for lawmakers and
things like this. But the handling agent in Detroit at
the time, the Special Agent in charge of the Detroit
Field Office, was a man named Stephen Dan Tuono, and
he's overseeing this whole thing. This is a storming of
the capitol, you know, prior to January sixth, and one
(32:22):
week after these men get arrested. October seventh of twenty twenty,
he's promoted by Christopher Ray from the head of the
Detroit Field Office to be the assistant director of the Washington,
d C. Field Office. So there he is overseeing another
storming of the capitol.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
How about that, Christina, This doesn't feel like.
Speaker 2 (32:45):
A one off to me.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
This feels like how the FBI does business. Maybe they've
done it this way in the past and we didn't know.
Maybe they intend to do this again in the future.
Do you get the feeling they intend to do this
again in the future.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Maybe they're doing it as we speak.
Speaker 14 (33:01):
Yes, I think that they have a history of doing this. Right,
you can go back and look at co intel Pro.
You can look at pat Con for a more recent example.
But in my investigation of the Whitmer case, it appears
that the Whitmer investigation actually has its origins and an
earlier FBI operation that seemed to be going on in
(33:23):
twenty eighteen where the FBI was trying to infiltrate different
militia groups. Now in the Whitmer case, the FBI also
is creating fake militia groups. This was something that for
people who aren't aware, one of their informants was posing
as a head of a national of a militia group
and he was posing as a national commander. The FBI
(33:45):
claimed that there was this nationwide meetup of militia groups
in June of twenty twenty where they claimed the origins
of the kidnapping plot began. Well, what they didn't say
is that the FBI called and shared that meeting through
their informant, who is also a convicted child sex offender.
(34:05):
He calls and chairs the meeting, and the meeting is
all for targets that people that the FBI is targeting
to bring those people together, and then there's numerous informants
there that are recording everything that is being said, and
they're trying to instigate. They're trying to get people to
talk about things. They're you know, saying like they're in
your backyard. You got to give them no quarter. They're
(34:27):
talking about you can't just take brick and mortar. Like,
their informants are repeatedly suggesting things, and then other people
are not going along with their suggestions. So the FBI
is creating their own militia groups. Some of the things
in this case, like one of the informants was posing
as the head of the Tennessee Chapter for again, a
(34:48):
fake group that doesn't exist outside of the FBI's fabrication.
The main target of their investigation was a vulnerable man
named Adam Fox. He at the time was homeless. He's
living in the basement of a vacuum repair shop at
a place called the Vakshack. And they set upon him
and they've got numerous informants suggesting things to him and
(35:12):
trying to essentially get him to become a leader. Well,
he's not a leader of anything. He's not really part
of any militia group. He wasn't a member of the
Wolverine Watchman. The FBI made him a member and then
they created a fake chapter for their fake militia group.
They told Adam he was the head of the Michigan
chapter of the Patriot three Percenters, and then Adam inducts
(35:37):
the informant, Dan Chappel, the other informant, as the commanding
officer again of this fake militia group. And then the
FBI is saying, well, you know he created he was
the leader of this militia group, and it's like it
doesn't exist though outside of your fabrication, you have an
informant posing as a national commander. Your other informants are
posing as different heads of different states chapters of various
(36:01):
militia groups. I mean, they created a Facebook page for
this Michigan chapter of a fake militia group. That was
the FBI who was creating and administering it. They use
what they call online covert employees or ocees that are
running fake identities online to try to get people into
these groups and then funnel them into events like this
(36:22):
where the FBI can try to find a reason to
manufacture something to get something off the ground. They try
to target people who are more vulnerable, who might be
more suggestible that will go along with things that the
FBI is suggesting. So, yes, they have a history of
doing this, and they've not been held accountable for any
of the things that happened in this case, so there's
(36:44):
no reason to believe they wouldn't still be doing these things.
They've got every reason to do so, and I think
that they get paid for these things. They have financial
incentives to keep manufacturing things that they can then foil
and congratulate themselves for.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
They always find the morons and take advantage of them.
All right, Christina, really quickly, where can people watch your documentary?
Speaker 14 (37:07):
The website is kkfilm dot com. The film has not
yet been released. We are still going through the process
of putting together because this is such a big story.
There's fourteen different defendants, twenty unindicted co conspirators, all of
their family, and four different trials that we're trying to
(37:27):
condense into one. So we're still putting it all together.
But if people want to watch the trailer, they can
do so on our website and just bookmarket. You'll get
updates from us through that of when it's going to
be officially released.
Speaker 1 (37:41):
Okayankfilm dot com. Christina, outstanding work, Thank you, ma'am. All right,
we're not done yet. Someone's going after the communists. We'll
talk to him in a moment. Before we do that,
let's talk to you about this about your sore feet.
At the end of the day, your feet bother you,
don't They very common? It's not like you're abnormal. Honestly,
(38:01):
it happens to one of my sons, has it. So
what do you do? What you need? You need orthotics.
What you need is better shoes, honestly so. But what
shoes you buy, everyone's got an advertising for it out there.
What you need is gravity de fire gravity de fire. First,
you should understand it's going to come with custom orthotics
(38:22):
for you. Second, you need to understand you're dealing with
patented technology here. So at the end of the day,
that heal that bothers you, the left front part of
your foot, that that goes away, that doesn't happen anymore.
These things are life changing. Is that too far? Probably not,
though you want a pair you do is.
Speaker 2 (38:43):
What you need to do?
Speaker 1 (38:44):
You need to go to a gd e f y
dot com g d e f y dot com use
the promo code Jesse to save you a bunch of money.
Speaker 2 (38:54):
All right, we'll be back.
Speaker 15 (39:04):
Especial Washington.
Speaker 16 (39:05):
Can you quickly tell me what airspace requires an ADSB transponder?
Speaker 15 (39:10):
I'm not sure I can answer that question right now.
Speaker 16 (39:12):
So what are the six types of special use of
airspace that protect this national security that appear on FAA charts?
Speaker 15 (39:20):
Sorry, Senator, I cannot answer that question.
Speaker 16 (39:22):
So what are the operational limitations of a pilot flying
under basic med Senator?
Speaker 15 (39:27):
I'm not a pilot, So.
Speaker 16 (39:28):
Can you tell me what causes an aircraft to spend
or to stall?
Speaker 15 (39:32):
Again, Senator, I'm not a pilot.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
Gentlemen, was trying to be the head of the FAA.
The FAA seems to be a fairly important institution.
Speaker 2 (39:43):
Doesn't it.
Speaker 1 (39:44):
After all, those planes in the sky we don't want
I'm dropping out of the sky, do we? So what
kind of hiring are they doing over there? Joining me now,
William TrackMan, General counsel at Mountain States Legal.
Speaker 2 (39:57):
William, could you please enlighten us.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
What exactly are the qualifications they're using at the FAA
being this how that's such an important job with life
and death.
Speaker 2 (40:06):
And all that.
Speaker 13 (40:07):
Well, the fa clearly isn't sending their best obviously. Here
we have a situation where even at the highest level
of the FAA. This is someone who is nominated to
take charge my firm. Amount SAT's Legal Foundation has a
lawsuit related to air traffic controllers, which is a separate
hiring process, obviously, and in that process, they had a
pre employment test, and they looked at the results of
(40:30):
the pre employment test and decided that too many white
people p's the test, and so they would flush that
test and adopt a new one that would jerry mander
the racial pool and create I guess, a more favorable
racial balance for.
Speaker 2 (40:44):
The White House.
Speaker 13 (40:44):
And in our case, we represent over nine hundred would
be air traffic controllers who lost their schooling opportunities, they
lost their career opportunities because they couldn't pass the new test,
over nine hundred of them. Some of them passed with
one hundred percent the initial go around, and then they
couldn't pass the new test that was adopted by the FAA.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
So we are.
Speaker 13 (41:05):
Suing over race discrimination, and we're looking forward to prevailing
and making it so that this can't happen again.
Speaker 2 (41:12):
I'm looking forward to prevailing as well.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
Exactly how long has this kind of insanity gone on,
at least to your discovery so far in the airline industry.
Is this something that happened or started six months ago?
Has it been years in the making.
Speaker 13 (41:26):
It's been going on a while, probably a decade at
this point. Under the Obama administration, these were the sorts
of initiatives they were adopting in order to get at
quote unquote diversity within the air traffic controller hiring pool.
But just the last year or two, I think we've
all seen this dei effort ramp up. We've seen airlines
announce that they're going to make sure that fifty percent
(41:48):
of pilots are women.
Speaker 2 (41:49):
We've seen videos.
Speaker 13 (41:51):
Online of all non white staff on airplanes saying, look
how diverse we are. And then, of course we've just
got a number of incidents lately that involve disasters on airplanes,
like the Alaska Airlines flight, that indicate that merit is
not at the top of the list, and that instead
people are obsessed with race, they're obsessed with gender things
(42:12):
that ought not matter. I certainly couldn't care less about
the race or gender of the pilot and the cockpit
or the air traffic control on the ground when I
go from point A to point B. But that really
is something that people and the White House obsessed about.
They constantly think, how are we going to make this
pool of employees better reflect the exact racial demographics of
(42:34):
the country, when that qualification has nothing to do with
your skill, merit competence, experience, and so it's actually creating
a situation where we're recording danger. You know, I certainly
still fly, but I'm worried in the long run that
this will actually really result in a disaster and tragedy.
Speaker 1 (42:51):
William, will you explain have you found anything in the
course of all your discovery, any pushback from people within
the White House, maybe people within the FAA itself, because
this is one of those issues. I mean, look, all
race based hiring is stupid and wrong, and we acknowledge that,
but when it comes to things like flying, we're talking
(43:12):
about lives, hundreds thousands of lives on the line here.
No one has stepped up and said, uh, maybe we
should keep it merit based.
Speaker 13 (43:21):
Yeah, you don't say, like, this is a pretty important field, right.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
You know.
Speaker 13 (43:25):
It's one thing to tinker and socially engineer the workforce
in an HR department on the ground. It's quite another
thing to put all of our lives at risk by
hiring people who aren't the most qualified. Now, if you
ask the Biden White House what's your defense, they'll say, well,
the old tests really disadvantaged racial minorities.
Speaker 2 (43:43):
It had an impediment barrier, and all we were.
Speaker 13 (43:46):
Doing was getting rid of that barrier by adopting a
new test called the biographical assessment. But if there's one
thing that I couldn't care less about, it's the biography
of the air traffic controller. I mean just the title
of the test itself, biographical assessment is because it relates
more to your story, your narrative, your background than the
(44:06):
actual important thing if you're become, if you're going to
become an air to have controller, which is your merit,
your skill, your confidence, your experience. And none of those
things were at the top of the list for the FAA,
and even today we don't think that they are.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
You're also going to bat for farmers in a different case,
You're going to bat for farmers. What exactly is going
on there? What did the Biden White House try to do?
Speaker 13 (44:33):
So in contrast to the FAA case which started under
the Obama administration, and where we have to pour over
you know, hundreds of thousands of documents and interview witnesses.
Biden Whitehouse had no such embarrassment about just enacting a
program with facial racial preferences for disaster relief. So we
represent farmers in Texas who suffered natural disasters and were
(44:58):
entitled to various federal benefits under COVID nineteen relief programs,
but the amount of relief that they got was less
because they were not a racial minority or in most
cases not women. So the Biden administration enacted farm relief plans,
and then its own USDA officials decided that they would
(45:19):
dole out that relief based on race and sex. And
here it wasn't even as though Congress asked them to
do that. USDA just unilaterally decided that's the best way
to dole out farm aide. And so we're suing under
the equal Protection Clause. And we just filed very recently
in motion for a preliminary injunction which would halt the
program even before it's finished.
Speaker 2 (45:40):
And we like our chances.
Speaker 1 (45:42):
I like your chances, and that one too. Fingers crossed
for you, William. Thank you for doing what you do.
I appreciate it, sir. Thanks so much for we've got
light in the mood.
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Thanks.
Speaker 1 (46:01):
All right, it is time to lighten the mood. And
this is kind of one of those who do you
root for situations here.
Speaker 2 (46:09):
In this light in the mood.
Speaker 1 (46:10):
On one hand, everyone everyone understands my thoughts on the elderly.
Speaker 2 (46:15):
I love them.
Speaker 1 (46:16):
I believe in society they should be cherished, listen to.
They have so much wisdom, and I believe in being
respectful to them. At the same time, some people, not many,
not many, because the bitter people don't generally live to
be that old. But some people just get more and
more horrible every single year they're alive. And well, this
eleven year old kid ran into Granny from hell at
(46:38):
the game.
Speaker 6 (47:00):
You're loving year rules, you're eighty.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
They're a lot.
Speaker 1 (47:03):
Okay, it's such a savage burn, so simple, get a life.
Speaker 2 (47:15):
Everyone cheers, all right, I'll see them all m
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
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.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.