Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Breitbart News border reporter Randy Clark at any point in
the last couple of months, Randy, have you you know
you read border reporter? Have you put in it all?
Like you know? I I think I've done this long enough.
I might want to try. Am I needed in another department?
Is there any fatiga? This is tough stuff to cover
(00:22):
and increasingly different it is.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And it's changed in such a way because you remember
we heard, you know, after the last four years, every
state is now a border state. So I'm still a
border reporter, right it is every state is a border state.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah, I remember the first time. This is going back
years ago. This is why I've always I've been I
shouldn't say always, but this is tipping point. We're playing
such hardball, such hardball as being played, you know, the
ice in the streets and everything, because it's a tipping point.
I remember one story involving it's just a horrible story
(00:58):
involving someone in the country legally, and it was this
whole ring brought down and it was in Ohio, and
I thought, wow, when Ohio is a is a border state. Uh,
that's when you know we've passed the point of no return.
I wanted to ask you a question, Randy before we
get into some of the stories that you've done one
(01:20):
in particular. But I was just playing back the a
tear that Megan Kelly went on last night. I don't
know if you saw that with regard to the actress
Natalie Portman crying on the red carpet at Sundance, and
it ticked Megan Kelly off, and she's like, where were
your tears for Lake and Riley? You know you have
(01:40):
your tears for for Alex Prettie, you know, where are
your tears for Lake and Riley? I don't think that's
I just don't think that argument's going to get someone
on the right anywhere. Lake and right, horrible story, but
it's easily like it's easily dismissed as WHOA, that's too totally.
That's a horrible thing that happened to a woman in
(02:02):
isolated by one a monster of a man. This These
are in the streets of our city passers by. I
don't think it's a valid comparison. What say you?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
You know there, You're right, there's certainly, uh, you know,
certainly two different, very real situations that are both both tragic,
uh and so I think we've just we just have
to focus on, you know what, what we need to
do to rectify four years of an open border, because
there will be consequences. Right, It's much like the the
Afghanistan withdrawal and the tens of thousands of folks that
(02:38):
king here. They weren't properly vetted. We really don't know
what's what we're looking at in the future. Many of
those folks may just live amongst us in society and
all will be well, but we may we may find
some folks that have entered illegally at the Southwest border.
In the last four years, millions of them were released,
some were allowed in parole programs to come through. And
I interviewed those folks and they were never asked any
(02:59):
questions about what the merits of an asylum claim they
had was. They were just told, if you get an appointment,
you're in you and all the family. So the elephant
in the room for immigration has always been what do
we do with folks that get to places like Ohio
and Minnesota. There has never been any enforcement efforts that
match the scale of the entries at the Southwest border.
(03:22):
You know, now, what I've known because I've seen it firsthand.
It's not done because it's messy. It involves families, it
involves children because they are still in an illegal status.
So we're seeing that play out and you're going to
see the emotions on both sides of this aisle. It's
not pretty.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
Yeah, well, and that's it. You know. I wish we
could get to a plate because I do believe there's
agreement that we have to on both sides that all right,
nobody wants somebody who has broken the law, never mind
repeatedly been deported come back. Nobody wants that man. But
we're standing here in protection of those who came here
(04:03):
and work hard, they want to be here, they haven't
done anything wrong. We're all in agreement on that. So
I feel like people with massive platforms, like a Megan Kelly,
she'd be better served to have Portman on and win
her over than just bite her head off, foul mouth.
I'm a fan of Meghan College. It might not sound
like it, but I just want us to get somewhere,
(04:25):
and I'm looking at the streets of Minneapolis. I don't
see us getting anywhere there. Well, you know you're right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
You're right, And you know America is sharply divided now
more than it ever has been before. You know, we
now have a former president saying, hey, it's your job
to pretty much resist. And when would you have thought
a president would use, you know, terms like that. So
instead of saying, look, let's this guy won, let's get
behind him and let's wish well for America like we
(04:55):
used to do, you know in years in elections pass,
we don't do that now. And just that's what we're
seeing in Minnesota with you know, the border Star Tom
Homan coming out and saying, hey, I reached you know,
some kind of a consensus with you know, the Attorney
General Ellison now this morning or yesterday. Rather Ellison says, hey,
I agreed with it nothing. So it's hard to get
(05:16):
folks who are in the game to agree, much less
those who are watching from the outside.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Well that's well said. Yeah, you're right. Huh. And again
rom with Randy Clark from Bright Bar. So the article
of yours that I wanted to start off with too,
what a headline. You know, Border Patrol agents actions in
Minneapolis shooting will likely fall within the agency's policy. Two questions, really,
(05:42):
when if and when that's announced? I get no, it
falls within will it splash? Will it be front page news?
And do you think that's that'll cause chaos in the
streets when it's declared no, he was acting constitutional law,
you know, interpreted by federal courts, you know, reasonable at
(06:04):
the time for supplied et cetera, et cetera. You think
that's just going to cause further chaos.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
You know, if Ice is not in Minnesota, still on
the streets and with the Bordertrol and apprehending folks who,
let's say, aren't the worst of the worst, that hey
you're here illegally or we arrested somebody that was if
they're not on the streets, I don't think the base
is going to be motivated. But it's going to come
down to what the people in power say. The reaction
(06:31):
from those anarchists should be. If they call those if
they stick the dogs out again, you could see violence.
Do I think it's going to be a George Floyd, No,
it's not.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
Yeah, that was a reference point.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Yeah, yeah, I don't think we're going to see that.
And you know, and what I meant by that headliner,
that was my job in the Bordertrol for twenty years
as a manager to take an initial look. It's not
an investigatory look, but it's a look at Hey, I've
got everybody's statements. I'm going to hand it over to
internal affairs or I'm going to handle over the BI
and I'm going to push it up the chain. My
(07:03):
analysis was based on a cursory review of face value
facts that are submitted at the time of the incident.
It appears to be within or outside of policy.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Right.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
The investigation could turn up something totally crazy later on,
but at the time on face value appears to be
within policy. Well, what the actions of these this agent
was and the other one that fired appears to be
at face value within policy.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Right.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
There's, like you said, there's a lot of case law
that gives officers leeway to be wrong but not be
unreasonable in their actions. Right, this man may not have
just you know, should not have been shot because we
may find out that officer did carry his weapon away
from the scene as he was being shot. The question
is did the officer know that? And I'm going to
(07:51):
tell you he probably didn't. He's an eight year veteran
that's a firearms instructor. They know the policy. They teach
the policy to other agents. He not only knows how
to shoot, well, he knows when to shoot. So his
testimony is like, we're going to fall within all of
the parameters of that policy.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's an interesting statement to make there because another question
I had, just in an effort to be fair really
more than anything, is you know, it was interesting for
footage to surface of eleven days before him, this sweet
nature we're being peddled. What a sweet ICYU nurse. All
of a sudden there's footage eleven days prior of him
kicking a daylight, hawking a loogie on a vehicle. And
(08:34):
then they start saying, you know, Ice, they were, they
knew him. Is that Do you think that that's I
don't know how possible it is for an ICE agent
to remember the faces and in the thick of you know,
running down a city street. No, oh, there's that pain
in the ass guy. I don't know who they're recognizing.
You think that's possible, You.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Know, I think it's possible if you talk to the
office that were there eleven days before. But remember one
is ICE and one is border Troll. They share intelligence,
So yeah, I'm sure they've got you know, some yeah,
I'm the most dangerous. And the thing to remember for
those who are gauging whether they shoot is good or bad,
remember that eleven days before has this little bearing on
(09:20):
the shooting. That's only the court of public opinion. It
has his little bearing on the shooting, as anything that
happened in the aftermath. Right, the slow motion video that
we're looking at. All that matters is what did that
officer do and were his actions from the standpoint of
another reasonable law enforcement officer? Were the objectively reasonable at
the very second he pulled the trigger, That's all this
(09:42):
should be judged.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Yeah, you know, I had made the observation prior to
what happened with pretty too spent days saying because I
was watching footage of people in the streets antagonizing ICE.
I played one clip of one guy try to start
a fight, you know, as an American citizen, a protester
trying to start a fight with an ICE agent, and
(10:06):
I don't know if he shoved him. I'm looking at
my producer to see if they because we watched the
video together. But he was calling him short, saying he
got short man syndrome, fight someone, and I thought, you know,
the person he's going to collect right now, probably doesn't
want you agitating him to the extent that you are.
And I think that is a message, right. I could
(10:30):
imagine the woman you know upstairs in an apartment with
five children who's about to be taken back to Guatemala.
It's like, could you not piss him off the way
you are right now? I don't know how much they
want that. But if these people are being paid to provoke,
and that was my next question for you, well that
that's a totally different piast. You know, I struggle to
(10:53):
understand protesting just as someone you know, I got kids,
I got to get home to you know, you want
to do that, God bless you. You know, the paid protester,
that's an ugly thing to me. And if we are
to find out that this guy and good that they're paid,
that there's some sophisticated operation where checks are being caught,
(11:16):
that serious business. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
I think we all suspect that. I think there's some
evidence when you look on some of their signal chats
and the website, some of them have admitted, hey, this
is my job, right, and maybe that's just you know,
a way of them expread from this, like Hey, I'm
independently wealthy and I just do this for fun. But
we've hijacked the term, you know, protests, and we've even
called it peaceful protest because you know as well as
(11:41):
I do, is if you're unhappy about something, I'm unhappy
and you and me go stand on a sidewalk peacefully
with a sign, folks aren't going to pay attention to.
They're going to say, who are those two old men?
Unhappy men? Nothing's going to change because it takes a
lot of patience and a good cause. And when you're
in the minority and the cause may not rise to
what you want, you're not going to see action quick enough.
(12:02):
But if you get in the streets and you get
the news cameras there because you're assaulting agents and you're
throwing stuff at him and you're spitting at him, your
perspective gains a lot of traction that it otherwise wouldn't it.
And in this case it seems to have worked. It
showed America, hey, look, check out what's happening here, and
it shouldn't be look at you know, they're arresting children
or and they can make all the outlandish claims they want.
(12:25):
They don't have to be verified immediately, and we're seeing
the aftermath of that.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Yeah, and one last thing before I let you go,
And I appreciate you taking the time this morning and
the articles that you're cranking out on this. What do
you make?
Speaker 2 (12:39):
You know?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Frey was really outspoken. Here's foul mounting his own right.
He seems to have disappeared in the last couple of days.
I haven't heard a peep out of the Minneapolis mayor
in the last few days. Maybe I'm just missing it.
Is he laying glow a little bit?
Speaker 2 (12:58):
You know? I don't think so. The last I saw
of him was yesterday and it was a little bit
about what he was saying at the Conference of Mayors
and he pretty much came out like Jay Gavara and said, hey, look,
we're victorious now, and you know, we're the shining example
for cities of stopping this invasion of ice. So he's
still there. But maybe maybe they've asked him, hey, let's
let's all cool our heels for a little bit because
(13:19):
we're seeing less of them.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Yeah, but how's he How does he feel they're victorious?
Why would he think they were victorious?
Speaker 2 (13:27):
Well, I think because you've seen Chief Bovino removed from
Many Minneapolis to his sector. We see noahm not as
vocal as she was. We see Tom Holman brought in
and he's now saying, we're going to focus just on
criminal aliens, right, and that's what they don't want that,
but they'll they'll kind of entertain the thought, get off
(13:49):
of our streets, right, Get off of our streets,
Breitbart News border reporter Randy Clark at any point in
the last couple of months, Randy, have you you know
you read border reporter? Have you put in it all?
Like you know? I I think I've done this long enough.
I might want to try. Am I needed in another department?
Is there any fatiga? This is tough stuff to cover
(00:22):
and increasingly different it is.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And it's changed in such a way because you remember
we heard, you know, after the last four years, every
state is now a border state. So I'm still a
border reporter, right it is every state is a border state.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah, I remember the first time. This is going back
years ago. This is why I've always I've been I
shouldn't say always, but this is tipping point. We're playing
such hardball, such hardball as being played, you know, the
ice in the streets and everything, because it's a tipping point.
I remember one story involving it's just a horrible story
(00:58):
involving someone in the country legally, and it was this
whole ring brought down and it was in Ohio, and
I thought, wow, when Ohio is a is a border state. Uh,
that's when you know we've passed the point of no return.
I wanted to ask you a question, Randy before we
get into some of the stories that you've done one
(01:20):
in particular. But I was just playing back the a
tear that Megan Kelly went on last night. I don't
know if you saw that with regard to the actress
Natalie Portman crying on the red carpet at Sundance, and
it ticked Megan Kelly off, and she's like, where were
your tears for Lake and Riley? You know you have
(01:40):
your tears for for Alex Prettie, you know, where are
your tears for Lake and Riley? I don't think that's
I just don't think that argument's going to get someone
on the right anywhere. Lake and right, horrible story, but
it's easily like it's easily dismissed as WHOA, that's too totally.
That's a horrible thing that happened to a woman in
(02:02):
isolated by one a monster of a man. This These
are in the streets of our city passers by. I
don't think it's a valid comparison. What say you?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
You know there, You're right, there's certainly, uh, you know,
certainly two different, very real situations that are both both tragic,
uh and so I think we've just we just have
to focus on, you know what, what we need to
do to rectify four years of an open border, because
there will be consequences. Right, It's much like the the
Afghanistan withdrawal and the tens of thousands of folks that
(02:38):
king here. They weren't properly vetted. We really don't know
what's what we're looking at in the future. Many of
those folks may just live amongst us in society and
all will be well, but we may we may find
some folks that have entered illegally at the Southwest border.
In the last four years, millions of them were released,
some were allowed in parole programs to come through. And
I interviewed those folks and they were never asked any
(02:59):
questions about what the merits of an asylum claim they
had was. They were just told, if you get an appointment,
you're in you and all the family. So the elephant
in the room for immigration has always been what do
we do with folks that get to places like Ohio
and Minnesota. There has never been any enforcement efforts that
match the scale of the entries at the Southwest border.
(03:22):
You know, now, what I've known because I've seen it firsthand.
It's not done because it's messy. It involves families, it
involves children because they are still in an illegal status.
So we're seeing that play out and you're going to
see the emotions on both sides of this aisle. It's
not pretty.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
Yeah, well, and that's it. You know. I wish we
could get to a plate because I do believe there's
agreement that we have to on both sides that all right,
nobody wants somebody who has broken the law, never mind
repeatedly been deported come back. Nobody wants that man. But
we're standing here in protection of those who came here
(04:03):
and work hard, they want to be here, they haven't
done anything wrong. We're all in agreement on that. So
I feel like people with massive platforms, like a Megan Kelly,
she'd be better served to have Portman on and win
her over than just bite her head off, foul mouth.
I'm a fan of Meghan College. It might not sound
like it, but I just want us to get somewhere,
(04:25):
and I'm looking at the streets of Minneapolis. I don't
see us getting anywhere there. Well, you know you're right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
You're right, And you know America is sharply divided now
more than it ever has been before. You know, we
now have a former president saying, hey, it's your job
to pretty much resist. And when would you have thought
a president would use, you know, terms like that. So
instead of saying, look, let's this guy won, let's get
behind him and let's wish well for America like we
(04:55):
used to do, you know in years in elections pass,
we don't do that now. And just that's what we're
seeing in Minnesota with you know, the border Star Tom
Homan coming out and saying, hey, I reached you know,
some kind of a consensus with you know, the Attorney
General Ellison now this morning or yesterday. Rather Ellison says, hey,
I agreed with it nothing. So it's hard to get
(05:16):
folks who are in the game to agree, much less
those who are watching from the outside.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Well that's well said. Yeah, you're right. Huh. And again
rom with Randy Clark from Bright Bar. So the article
of yours that I wanted to start off with too,
what a headline. You know, Border Patrol agents actions in
Minneapolis shooting will likely fall within the agency's policy. Two questions, really,
(05:42):
when if and when that's announced? I get no, it
falls within will it splash? Will it be front page news?
And do you think that's that'll cause chaos in the
streets when it's declared no, he was acting constitutional law,
you know, interpreted by federal courts, you know, reasonable at
(06:04):
the time for supplied et cetera, et cetera. You think
that's just going to cause further chaos.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
You know, if Ice is not in Minnesota, still on
the streets and with the Bordertrol and apprehending folks who,
let's say, aren't the worst of the worst, that hey
you're here illegally or we arrested somebody that was if
they're not on the streets, I don't think the base
is going to be motivated. But it's going to come
down to what the people in power say. The reaction
(06:31):
from those anarchists should be. If they call those if
they stick the dogs out again, you could see violence.
Do I think it's going to be a George Floyd, No,
it's not.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
Yeah, that was a reference point.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Yeah, yeah, I don't think we're going to see that.
And you know, and what I meant by that headliner,
that was my job in the Bordertrol for twenty years
as a manager to take an initial look. It's not
an investigatory look, but it's a look at Hey, I've
got everybody's statements. I'm going to hand it over to
internal affairs or I'm going to handle over the BI
and I'm going to push it up the chain. My
(07:03):
analysis was based on a cursory review of face value
facts that are submitted at the time of the incident.
It appears to be within or outside of policy.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Right.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
The investigation could turn up something totally crazy later on,
but at the time on face value appears to be
within policy. Well, what the actions of these this agent
was and the other one that fired appears to be
at face value within policy.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Right.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
There's, like you said, there's a lot of case law
that gives officers leeway to be wrong but not be
unreasonable in their actions. Right, this man may not have
just you know, should not have been shot because we
may find out that officer did carry his weapon away
from the scene as he was being shot. The question
is did the officer know that? And I'm going to
(07:51):
tell you he probably didn't. He's an eight year veteran
that's a firearms instructor. They know the policy. They teach
the policy to other agents. He not only knows how
to shoot, well, he knows when to shoot. So his
testimony is like, we're going to fall within all of
the parameters of that policy.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's an interesting statement to make there because another question
I had, just in an effort to be fair really
more than anything, is you know, it was interesting for
footage to surface of eleven days before him, this sweet
nature we're being peddled. What a sweet ICYU nurse. All
of a sudden there's footage eleven days prior of him
kicking a daylight, hawking a loogie on a vehicle. And
(08:34):
then they start saying, you know, Ice, they were, they
knew him. Is that Do you think that that's I
don't know how possible it is for an ICE agent
to remember the faces and in the thick of you know,
running down a city street. No, oh, there's that pain
in the ass guy. I don't know who they're recognizing.
You think that's possible, You.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Know, I think it's possible if you talk to the
office that were there eleven days before. But remember one
is ICE and one is border Troll. They share intelligence,
So yeah, I'm sure they've got you know, some yeah,
I'm the most dangerous. And the thing to remember for
those who are gauging whether they shoot is good or bad,
remember that eleven days before has this little bearing on
(09:20):
the shooting. That's only the court of public opinion. It
has his little bearing on the shooting, as anything that
happened in the aftermath. Right, the slow motion video that
we're looking at. All that matters is what did that
officer do and were his actions from the standpoint of
another reasonable law enforcement officer? Were the objectively reasonable at
the very second he pulled the trigger, That's all this
(09:42):
should be judged.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Yeah, you know, I had made the observation prior to
what happened with pretty too spent days saying because I
was watching footage of people in the streets antagonizing ICE.
I played one clip of one guy try to start
a fight, you know, as an American citizen, a protester
trying to start a fight with an ICE agent, and
(10:06):
I don't know if he shoved him. I'm looking at
my producer to see if they because we watched the
video together. But he was calling him short, saying he
got short man syndrome, fight someone, and I thought, you know,
the person he's going to collect right now, probably doesn't
want you agitating him to the extent that you are.
And I think that is a message, right. I could
(10:30):
imagine the woman you know upstairs in an apartment with
five children who's about to be taken back to Guatemala.
It's like, could you not piss him off the way
you are right now? I don't know how much they
want that. But if these people are being paid to provoke,
and that was my next question for you, well that
that's a totally different piast. You know, I struggle to
(10:53):
understand protesting just as someone you know, I got kids,
I got to get home to you know, you want
to do that, God bless you. You know, the paid protester,
that's an ugly thing to me. And if we are
to find out that this guy and good that they're paid,
that there's some sophisticated operation where checks are being caught,
(11:16):
that serious business. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
I think we all suspect that. I think there's some
evidence when you look on some of their signal chats
and the website, some of them have admitted, hey, this
is my job, right, and maybe that's just you know,
a way of them expread from this, like Hey, I'm
independently wealthy and I just do this for fun. But
we've hijacked the term, you know, protests, and we've even
called it peaceful protest because you know as well as
(11:41):
I do, is if you're unhappy about something, I'm unhappy
and you and me go stand on a sidewalk peacefully
with a sign, folks aren't going to pay attention to.
They're going to say, who are those two old men?
Unhappy men? Nothing's going to change because it takes a
lot of patience and a good cause. And when you're
in the minority and the cause may not rise to
what you want, you're not going to see action quick enough.
(12:02):
But if you get in the streets and you get
the news cameras there because you're assaulting agents and you're
throwing stuff at him and you're spitting at him, your
perspective gains a lot of traction that it otherwise wouldn't it.
And in this case it seems to have worked. It
showed America, hey, look, check out what's happening here, and
it shouldn't be look at you know, they're arresting children
or and they can make all the outlandish claims they want.
(12:25):
They don't have to be verified immediately, and we're seeing
the aftermath of that.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Yeah, and one last thing before I let you go,
And I appreciate you taking the time this morning and
the articles that you're cranking out on this. What do
you make?
Speaker 2 (12:39):
You know?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Frey was really outspoken. Here's foul mounting his own right.
He seems to have disappeared in the last couple of days.
I haven't heard a peep out of the Minneapolis mayor
in the last few days. Maybe I'm just missing it.
Is he laying glow a little bit?
Speaker 2 (12:58):
You know? I don't think so. The last I saw
of him was yesterday and it was a little bit
about what he was saying at the Conference of Mayors
and he pretty much came out like Jay Gavara and said, hey, look,
we're victorious now, and you know, we're the shining example
for cities of stopping this invasion of ice. So he's
still there. But maybe maybe they've asked him, hey, let's
let's all cool our heels for a little bit because
(13:19):
we're seeing less of them.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Yeah, but how's he How does he feel they're victorious?
Why would he think they were victorious?
Speaker 2 (13:27):
Well, I think because you've seen Chief Bovino removed from
Many Minneapolis to his sector. We see noahm not as
vocal as she was. We see Tom Holman brought in
and he's now saying, we're going to focus just on
criminal aliens, right, and that's what they don't want that,
but they'll they'll kind of entertain the thought, get off
(13:49):
of our streets, right, Get off of our streets,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.