Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Dragon, Are the rules of engagement really necessary because they're
getting really stale. Maybe we need more updated ones, or
maybe just cut them out, make it shorter.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Well, if they're stale and old, then we need new ones.
Send new ones. To send us new ones. Need dog
one simple, Yeah, I'd love to have some new ones,
so send them right along.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
I wouldn't say that they're too long. The majority of
the ones we have are less than a minute. There
are some that go a little longer, but those are
I keep them in because I like them and they're fun.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
They're fun, and if you can't keep them less than
a minute, that's that's great. Here's the problem. You want
me to do the rules of engagement? Oh dear God, no,
then you're talking about half an hour minimum. Yeah, half
an hour minimum. And that's just to explain why we
have rules of engagement, let alone explaining the rules themselves.
(00:57):
So if you want, and we'd love.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
To new ones, that's exactly why we used the rules
of engagements from you googer listeners, because Michael was taking
five to ten minutes every hour talking about the rules
of engagement. So be thankful that some of these ones
are bitch minutes.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch bitch. Okay,
let's talk about drones. Somebody, let me see if I
can find the text. Somebody sent me a text message.
Where did it go? Get? So many sixty sixty twenty
one says drones just shut down airspace over right Patterson
(01:38):
Air Force Base. If these were enemies, they'd be gone.
Our government is up to something. Let's just do how
how can I construct this? Probably the best way to
construct this is last night? You know, I'm well, I'd
(02:00):
like yesterday, I was waiting for I had to go
to a reception, and I'm waiting for this reception to start.
So I'm I'm on X and I'm kind of just
going through. And social media is just splattered with speculation
about the apparent mysterious drones flying over New Jersey elsewhere,
(02:20):
including California. Now and now we at least, according to
one source of goober right, Patterson was shut down, I
assume temporarily because of a drone. And some of these
are coming to truly bombastic conclusions trying to explain the situation.
(02:43):
There's a commentator, a guy from Kansas named John Ferguson.
He runs a company named Saxon Unmanned. He submitted and
this has been several days ago, and I didn't see
until yesterday a viral take the drones. His video, originally
(03:04):
uploaded to TikTok, got hundreds of millions of views across
several platforms because Joe Rogan saw it, and then Joe
Rogan shared it. Sean Ryan and a bunch of other
popular commentators or so called influencers decided to share it,
and it literally got hundreds of millions of views across
all these different platforms, and so then it gets picked
(03:26):
up by a bunch of social media outlets. It I'm
not going to play the whole thing, but I'm going
to give you just a flavor.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
Of it of Saxon Aerospace here in Wichitaal Kansas. I'm
not normally a TikTok kind of a guy. I like
watching this stuff every once in a while, but I'm
a manufacturer of unmanned aircraft, military grade unmanned aircraft. As
you can see one of my systems here, there's all
(03:59):
of these mysterious drones going on off the East coast.
Speaker 5 (04:03):
And as a as.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
A professional, as a subject matter expert. I wanted to
give you all my opinion on what I think could
be going on with these drones.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I'm a subject matter expert, I'm an SME and I
want to give you my expert opinion on what may
be going on. Okay, well not.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
What is, but what Maybe I don't particularly believe that
these have a nefarious intent.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I could be wrong, but he's going to prefaricate the
entire way through this. If I played the entire nine minutes,
this is what. He makes a statement and then says.
But you know, on the other hand.
Speaker 4 (04:42):
I want to give you the truth, and what I
believe is my own school. You know, I don't want
to spread misinformation, as we know that there's a lot
of that going around.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
But anyway, so anyway, so there we go. I'm going
to tell you what I believe is my opinion. I
have no basis on it.
Speaker 6 (05:03):
But I I.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Wasted my entire I waste namas my life listening to this,
and I found it so inconsistent. It was unsourced. He
gave no specifics. Uh, and it just and it's not
just him, Uh, others have done it. Let me find
(05:30):
one that I thought was particularly interesting. Oh, John Kirby.
John John Kirby, Rear Admiral John Kirby, the spokes hole
for the National Security Council. He was on CNN taking.
Speaker 6 (05:43):
A big left turn here and something else under your
purview right now, John, I want to I want to
ask you more about this drone mystery that has continued.
You say that currently these drones do not pose any
sort of threat. The way I heard you say it
is you assess their either commercial awful drones, law enforcement drones,
hobbyist drones. Is what people are seeing. Nothing anomalous, no
(06:06):
criminal activity detected. Yet the mayor of Montville, New Jersey,
was just on with us and he essentially says he
does not believe that.
Speaker 7 (06:16):
Let me play this for you, someone is making a
really bad decision by an upcoming clean and say that
these are always drones.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
We're doing some.
Speaker 7 (06:29):
Sort of an operation.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
Nothing to see here. They are safe.
Speaker 6 (06:36):
And what the mayor is talking about is these are
our drones. Is he's saying these are government drones. He
is not happy with the response that he's been essentially
getting from you guys.
Speaker 8 (06:44):
What do you say, Well, I would repeat what we've
said yesterday and last night in a multiple agency statement.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
He's now become Kareem Abdul Jabbar. I've already answer this question.
I'll tell you the same thing I've told you before.
I'll answer the same way I answered it yesterday, the
day before, the day before that. I'm gonna keep giving
you the same answer.
Speaker 8 (07:08):
That we have taken a serious look at this. We
have gone through five thousand some odd sightings, we have
added detection capabilities to the region, we've even sent up
visual observers, and everything we're seeing to date, our assessment
tells us that these are commercial drones, hobbyist drones, or
law enforcement drones, all operating legally and lawfully. I mean
(07:31):
when people shoot video of that, Kate, I mean you're
seeing the lights on these.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Things, the navigation lights.
Speaker 8 (07:37):
That's what's required if you're going to be flying in
the US airspace at night.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Are navigation lights.
Speaker 8 (07:42):
So clearly they're being operated in a lawful and legal way.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
And we've seen nothing, I like, Hay just to that conclusion.
Because they have navigation lights, therefore they must be operating
in a legal and lawful way.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Just because I'm driving a car must mean that I'm
operating that car in a legal way right.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Just because I'm driving at night, I have my headlights on.
Therefore I must be operating the car lawfully and legally,
with you know, no ill will or illegal purpose, or.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
I'm sure that car must be registered and insured too.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Yeah, and I'm sure that that car is also not
because it has its headlights on, it's driving at two am.
It's not you know, engaging in child trafficking or human trafficking.
It's just carrying you know, bottled water somewhere.
Speaker 8 (08:29):
From their behavioral nothing that tells us there's a public
safety dread or a national security thread. I do want
to add one point, though, We've still got about one
hundred leagues that the FBI is following up on, and
if we learn something that contradicts that or something more,
something additional, something more specific, my goodness, we're going to
come public and we're going to talk about it.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
How often does the FBI start an investigation and then
come out and tell you what they found out about
the investigation.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
All the time. I'm frankly tired of it. I know,
I'm just so tired of you know, JFK. I mean
they came out the next day and said, hey, it
was it was the guy in the bush over there.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Right, Yeah, exactly. Uh. You never hear the phrase, well,
we can't comment because it matters currently under investigation.
Speaker 8 (09:12):
You never hear that you've been trying to be as
transparent with the American people as we can.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
We're trying to be as transparent as we can.
Speaker 8 (09:21):
But I think it's also important to remember that there
are a million drones registered with the FAA and thousands
upon thousands that fly in US airspace legally every single day,
including in the Northeast Quarter. In fact, that's one of
the busiest areas.
Speaker 6 (09:34):
It's very true.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Oh well see any well, yeah, you know that's very true. Well,
I hadn't thought about it like that. So they're being
operated in a lawful and legal way. There is, I
think a worldwide epidemic of people that cannot ration reason think, rationally,
(10:03):
critically think, or anything else. Now, the guy that we
played originally the ninth I played you about one minute
of it, and the guy that goes on for nine minutes.
He begins by establishing his credibility. He runs a company
in Kansas, Saxopone Manned, which if you go to the
web page, claims to be a quote leading solutions provider
(10:27):
for unmanned and autonomous remote system technologies for the government, energy, infrastructure, agriculture,
and private industry. Now, after just a quick search, it
became unclear if Ferguson had any contracts at all with
the government. And it's really a very small shop, with
(10:48):
most sites in this seing him as having fewer than
five employees. Nonetheless, he established some semblance of credibility because well,
that's his bread and butter, that's that's what he did
or engages in in that's his business. And somebody can
have fewer than five employees and still have a lot
(11:08):
of credibility. Don't get me wrong. But when you present
yourself as like on your website that you know you
provide services to every possible sector you can think of,
including the government, well that's a that's a pretty big statement.
(11:32):
What I didn't play for you is his claim that
there's a missing nuclear warhead in this country. Oh do
you think there is a missing nuclear warhead in the
(11:53):
United States? Well, if you do, let me explain to
you that there have been general concerns about lose snookes
for probably forty years now. But there's no evidence of
his claim that eighty knukes went missing from Ukraine. He
also brings up the notion that this is some kind
of ploy to hook US into war with Russia. So
(12:15):
he further complicates everything you understand now, I mean, in
addition to being nine minutes long. Another reason why I
don't play this because for people who can actually reason,
his loose speculation and politicization of what should be a
major national security issue would light up major red flags
in any person's head if you're not stopping and thinking
(12:36):
about who is this guy? How would he know this?
But he gets even more flimsy. He claims he spoke
to a gentleman. Well, I'm that it wasn't a nahole.
It was a gentleman. But we don't get a name,
which causes a red flag with me because I like to,
you know, maybe somebody'd like to go interview that guy,
who he says has access to high levels in government,
(12:59):
and this so called gentleman has told Ferguson has told
him that the government ignores him. Ferguson says that the
gentleman has physically touched a warhead left over from Ukraine
and that the nuke is being shipped from Ukraine. To
the US. So now I put this in the category
of and I don't I want to do this, but
(13:22):
I don't want to do it. I get emails all
the time of people like this guy. For example, I
got one yesterday at twelve twenty in the afternoon. I
didn't see until mid afternoon. Starts out, I mean, it's
addressed to let's see the gb News Network, Dan Sheriff,
(13:48):
wherever that is, media, HHS, A couple of people at HHS, DHS,
Mark Belling, the talk show host, and me. We need
your powerful outside help. Everyone should understand this email or
(14:10):
we are all living in tyranny down here. This is
way beyond the modern day Watergate being covered up. This
is dot dot dot in all caps, the beginning of
the next Holocaust being covered up. Now, this email is
I don't know, two dozen paragraphs laws. I actually got
(14:31):
tired of reading it about the fourth of the way through,
and I kind of skimmed through it. And it ends
with local law enforcement is no help. This is real
me and my mother being professionally isolated by the mafia
for a Democrat cover up and takeover. And then he
named some local police departments which I will not name.
(14:55):
I get email like this all the time. I never
respond to it because I think that and I used
to have people get into my office when I was
practicing law, or we would imagine in FEMA. Oh my gosh,
the stuff I would get in FEMA. We went to
the FBI and they ignored us, but because FEMA is
(15:17):
the secret government, we thought we'd come to you instead.
If there are if there's a warhead, a nuke warhead
left over from Ukraine and that's being shipped to the
United States, there are no nuclear warheads in Ukraine, So
(15:39):
if you're geopolitically astute, that should poke a hole in
this guy's story right away. Ukraine agreed to dissolve its
nuclear program over thirty years ago, and to recap this
guy has no first hand information. I guess he's unaware
that Ukraine doesn't have any nukes, and we have to
trust him that his source is not your local conspiratorial
(16:00):
I don't know tech at uh. You know, working on
a as a producer on a radio program, you know
that that guy back there and speaking of warheads, the
guy constantly is referring to apparent missing weapons, and the
warhead is the part that contains the explosive mechanism. However,
(16:21):
a warhead needs to be mounted on a delivery system
in order in order for it to work. So is
the delivery system also part of this apparent Ukrainian or
Biden plot to throw American into a war with Russia.
Because that's what he that's what he's in, That's what
he's intimating, is that that's what's happening. He declares, the
drugs have these special sensors that can detect radioactive material.
(16:44):
You know, I got an e or a text message
from someone uh some again sometime yesterday, and I actually
responded to the text message because he wanted me to.
He wanted me to know that there are in places
like DC or New York, that there are secret things
(17:06):
that detect radiation. No Feacey Sherlock. I think I mentioned
that on air yesterday, and I, based on my queue clearance,
I actually know what they look like. And at one
time I don't remember now, but at one time I
knew where all these detectors were. We put them in
after nine to eleven. Why why are we being so
(17:32):
irrational about this? Oh, mass formation psychosis. I'm a trucker,
so I know exactly what these drones are doing up
there is that damn State patrol trying to catch us
by the hair as you will deserve to be caught.
That's the thing you deserve to be caught.
Speaker 9 (17:58):
I'm thinking. I'm just thinking them, Yeah, I don't want
to do that.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
You get to that point dragon where it's like, you know,
we get the last two segments. You want to go
out with a bang or do you want to go
out with a whimper?
Speaker 5 (18:24):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (18:24):
You know which one you're gonna choose. We just don't
know which one you want to do.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
Um, I don't know a lot. I think I've just
reached the point where it's like, yeah, you know what,
we'll do, We'll do this.
Speaker 3 (18:43):
It's December seventeenth at nine thirty. Do what It's December
seventeenth at nine thirty. And you've reached that point where like, ah,
you know what.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Screw it. Well, you've probably already heard by now that
Trump's request to dismiss Alvin Bragg's hush money case. Judge
Murshawn has dismissed Trump's motion to dismiss based on immunity
(19:14):
not surprising at all. Stephen Chung, Trump's campaign spokesman and
future White House Comms Director blasted the rulings, saying it
violate the Supreme Courts ruling on presidential immunity. This lawless
case should have never been brought in. The Constitution demands
that it be immediately dismissed. As President Trump must be
allowed to continue the presidential transition process and execute the
(19:36):
vital duties of the presidency unobstructed by the remains of
this or any other which hunt he said in a statement.
So what does this ruling do. It leaves the possibility
of Mershawn deciding that the sentencing phase of that jury
finding because it's not a guilt. It's not guilt until
(20:00):
the judge sentences him, so he's not a convicted felon yet.
But it leaves open the possibility, which I think can legitimate.
First of all, he can challenge the refusal to dismiss
based on the Supreme Court ruling that he's immune. He
can challenge that. He can also challenge the conduct of
the case. He can challenge the juries, but they can't
(20:23):
challenge the jury's findings. But he can challenge the evidence
presented to the jury. So he can still challenge and
appeal the jury's decision. But the thing that drives me
crazy is it leads the possibility of Judge Mrshaun coming
back and saying, I'm going to leave this case open
for the next four years. Now, in what world does
(20:51):
someone is someone found guilty by a jury and then
I'm going to put off sentencing for four years until
you leave the White House, and then I'm going to
sentence you. Because unless he challenges that decision, I think
(21:15):
that forestalls him appealing the jury's decision itself, because he
hasn't been sentenced, so the case hasn't been concluded, and
you can't appeal a conviction until you've been found guilty
and sentenced. Now again, I don't think it precludes him
(21:38):
appealing the dismissal of his motion to dismiss the case,
because I think that's immediately appealable. I'm just not quite
certain of New York law. But imagine that you get
convicted of I don't know, drunk driving, something serious but
(21:59):
not quite as serious as this, But they're not going
to sentence you for four years, So if you wanted
to appeal the conviction, you'd have to wait four years,
or you get convicted of I don't know embezzlement, murder rate,
I mean, pick a crime, but you can't appeal that
(22:22):
conviction because the conviction is not final until you're sentenced,
and they're gonna put it off for four years. Isn't
that the equivalent of denying your right to a speedy trial.
Isn't that cruel and unusual punishment to have to sit
around for four years before you can find out what
the sentence is and only then you can start appealing
(22:42):
the conviction. This is nuts. Someone needs to get to
that judge or Trump needs to immediately file some sort
of I don't know how you would do it, but
find that file some sort of appeal, maybe appeal to well,
he can't even appeal to the Supreme Court yet because
(23:02):
it's not a final decision by the New York Appellate Court,
which is their supreme court, so he can't even do that.
Maybe he could take maybe he could file a case
in federal court for a violation of a civil rights
you know, file a forty two USC in nineteen eighty
three case for violation of a civil rights in federal court.
(23:24):
But then that doesn't do anything in terms of resolving
the underlying jury finding of guilt, because there's been no
finality to that. The the decision here is a continuation
(23:47):
of law fare in such a manner that it's put
Trump in a legal purgatory. And I'm sure his law
be able to figure out a way to make some
sort of appeal to the New York Supreme Court, which
is the next level, but it's not what you and
(24:09):
I would think of as the Supreme Court, either on
the immunity decision or on if he does and he
hasn't yet, but if he does decide now to postpone
sentencing for four years, he could appeal that decision claiming
that that violates the civil rights, that that violates his
(24:29):
right to a speedy trial, and who knows what else.
But the point being is just another example of how
no matter what, they're going to continue the law fair,
despite whether it's fair, whether it's lawful or what, they
don't care. They're going after him. Bernie Sanders is in
(24:52):
the news. Bernie Sanders is now expressing concern over Biden's
decision to pardon his son. Hunter suggests that it might
establish a dangerous precedent for future administrations. I wonder what
future administration you might be thinking about I don't know,
maybe the one coming out where Trump as indicated he
might just pardon all the Jay six defendants. You know,
(25:14):
I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that, as I said yesterday,
I think he should pardon and commute the sentences of
everybody involved, except those who were actually involved in vandalism
or you know, battering a cop. I'm actually beginning to
think that, based on the absolute horrible way they've prosecuted
(25:37):
these people, that maybe I'll just pardon everybody, just stick
in the eye of those judges in the DC courts
and just say, you know what, screw you, I'm done. Well.
Bernie's really upset about it. Think about it. Biden promised
(25:57):
that he would not pardon Hunter, and then he did it.
Even the judge that presided over Hunter's case called the
pardon partially unconstitutional. But I think that's simply an attempt
to rewrite history. I don't think it's unconstitutional at all.
I think it's politically stupid, but I don't think it's unconstitutional.
Speaker 10 (26:20):
Bernie Sanders, let me ask you about President Biden's pardon
of his son Hunter. Former Biden senior advisor Anita Dunn
said she agrees with the decision to pardon them, she
disagrees with how it was carried out, the criticism of
the Justice Department. And I want to remind you of
what we heard from President Biden himself on this topic
(26:41):
earlier this year.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Take a look.
Speaker 5 (26:43):
Will you accept the jury's outcome, their verdict, no matter
what it is.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Yes? And have you ruled out a pardon for your son?
Speaker 10 (26:51):
Yes, I said, I advised by the jury decision, I
will do.
Speaker 2 (26:55):
That, And I'm not partner Senator.
Speaker 10 (26:59):
Was it the right decision for the country to pardon
Hunter Biden?
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Well, I think two things.
Speaker 5 (27:06):
When you have his opponents going after his family as
a father, as a parent, I think we can all
understand Biden trying to protect his son and his family.
On the other hand, I think the precedent being set
is set is kind of a dangerous It was a
very wide open pardon which could, under different circumstances, lead
(27:26):
the problems in terms of future presidents dragging one.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Of those numbers.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
We're just looking at the number of pardons by president
here and again toward to the Book of Knowledge to Wikipedia.
So regarding the source, it says that Biden has commuted
or rescinded more than eight thousand convictions, ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
Does he give a time frame for that? It just
says as of December twenty twenty four. I wonder how many.
I wonder how many he's been doing over the past,
you know, three years and eleven months.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
And if we want to talk comparables, Trump, who is
in office roughly about the same amount of time four years, right, Yeah,
two hundred and thirty seven. We got back one more president.
We look at the president Barack Obama eight years as president,
but only did just shy of two thousand.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
People, Okay, and Bush or Clinton?
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Bush did two hundred according to the Wikipedia, and Clinton
did four hundred and fifty nine.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Hw did seventy seven. And now you get to Carter.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
In the Vietnam Reagan did four h six cost and
then we jumped back to the Carter, which, yeah, without
the Vietnam Draft dodgers would have been five hundred and
sixty six, but with.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
The draft dodgers, it's got to be four thousand. It
says two two hundred thousand.
Speaker 9 (28:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Yeah, Just like Bernie Sanders is concerned about a precedent
one that provision of the Constitution will not be changed
despite whatever Joe Biden's done. I think that Bernie Sanders
is more concerned about empty pardons for the January sixth
(29:04):
committees and for the Biden family. And I think they
know that if Biden pardons his brother James, for that matter,
even doctor Jill Biden or Ashley or anybody else, that
that is that's like, you know, when you're not supposed to.
But when somebody invokes their Fifth Amendment privilege, many laymen think, oh,
(29:27):
that's because you're guilty. Now. I don't always think that.
I think many times people invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege
because they know if they say one thing today and
then they just slightly change it, you know, five weeks
later in another deposition, now they're going to get caught
in a perjury trap. But I think in this case,
he pardons the family, he knows that they engaged in
(29:49):
illegal behavior, and then if he pardons himself, game over.
Speaker 8 (29:55):
Mike I always had a moment of total clarity, and
it confused their lo out of me.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
I know, clarity is awful. So why did this story
not make big like national news? The Kassa Diablo strip
club located in Portland, Oregon, of course, is doubly woke.
It combines two woke ideologies, Satanism and veganism. There's a
(30:27):
promo post that features a naked cartoon she demon that
is posing suggestively with the carod above this slogan, Yeah,
I think I can say this. We put the meat
on the pole, not on the plate. Uh, maybe you
want to avoid the cossa diablo. He was pretty slow
(30:51):
last Sunday night, about half a dozen or so patrons
watching dancers take the stage at the Vegan Strip Club.
And then things kind of livened up when one of
the strippers came up behind a guy in fact, I
think it was the DJ came up behind him and
(31:12):
knifed him in the back a knife, a knife attack.
Things livened up after that. A week later, Alan remains
in the hospital with damage to his lung. Cast of
diablow dancer Peyton Lathan, twenty nine years old, is in jail,
charged with three felonies. Now the attack appears to be,
(31:36):
according to this news story of The Oregonian, appears to
be entirely unprovoked. Afterwards, they found Nathan or Lathan hiding
in the bushes. She announced repeatedly during arrest, that she's
going to plead insanity. We worked for John Hinckley, why
wouldn't it work for her? But he couldn't prove he
was insane by working at a satanic vegan strip club.
(32:00):
I think her case might be pretty easy to prove,
because if you're a satanic vegan, isn't that prime e
facial evidence that indeed you maybe backcrop crazy? Crazy? Isn't
amazing you can find every little thing like it's again,
It's like the bottled water. You can say it's all
(32:23):
the same, theces and all the bottles, but they all
have different labels on it, and you can go pick
whatever you want. You can be whatever you want. I
think it just proves my theory that all vegans are
saving
Dragon, Are the rules of engagement really necessary because they're
getting really stale. Maybe we need more updated ones, or
maybe just cut them out, make it shorter.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Well, if they're stale and old, then we need new ones.
Send new ones. To send us new ones. Need dog
one simple, Yeah, I'd love to have some new ones,
so send them right along.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
I wouldn't say that they're too long. The majority of
the ones we have are less than a minute. There
are some that go a little longer, but those are
I keep them in because I like them and they're fun.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
They're fun, and if you can't keep them less than
a minute, that's that's great. Here's the problem. You want
me to do the rules of engagement? Oh dear God, no,
then you're talking about half an hour minimum. Yeah, half
an hour minimum. And that's just to explain why we
have rules of engagement, let alone explaining the rules themselves.
(00:57):
So if you want, and we'd love.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
To new ones, that's exactly why we used the rules
of engagements from you googer listeners, because Michael was taking
five to ten minutes every hour talking about the rules
of engagement. So be thankful that some of these ones
are bitch minutes.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch bitch. Okay,
let's talk about drones. Somebody, let me see if I
can find the text. Somebody sent me a text message.
Where did it go? Get? So many sixty sixty twenty
one says drones just shut down airspace over right Patterson
(01:38):
Air Force Base. If these were enemies, they'd be gone.
Our government is up to something. Let's just do how
how can I construct this? Probably the best way to
construct this is last night? You know, I'm well, I'd
(02:00):
like yesterday, I was waiting for I had to go
to a reception, and I'm waiting for this reception to start.
So I'm I'm on X and I'm kind of just
going through. And social media is just splattered with speculation
about the apparent mysterious drones flying over New Jersey elsewhere,
(02:20):
including California. Now and now we at least, according to
one source of goober right, Patterson was shut down, I
assume temporarily because of a drone. And some of these
are coming to truly bombastic conclusions trying to explain the situation.
(02:43):
There's a commentator, a guy from Kansas named John Ferguson.
He runs a company named Saxon Unmanned. He submitted and
this has been several days ago, and I didn't see
until yesterday a viral take the drones. His video, originally
(03:04):
uploaded to TikTok, got hundreds of millions of views across
several platforms because Joe Rogan saw it, and then Joe
Rogan shared it. Sean Ryan and a bunch of other
popular commentators or so called influencers decided to share it,
and it literally got hundreds of millions of views across
all these different platforms, and so then it gets picked
(03:26):
up by a bunch of social media outlets. It I'm
not going to play the whole thing, but I'm going
to give you just a flavor.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
Of it of Saxon Aerospace here in Wichitaal Kansas. I'm
not normally a TikTok kind of a guy. I like
watching this stuff every once in a while, but I'm
a manufacturer of unmanned aircraft, military grade unmanned aircraft. As
you can see one of my systems here, there's all
(03:59):
of these mysterious drones going on off the East coast.
Speaker 5 (04:03):
And as a as.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
A professional, as a subject matter expert. I wanted to
give you all my opinion on what I think could
be going on with these drones.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I'm a subject matter expert, I'm an SME and I
want to give you my expert opinion on what may
be going on. Okay, well not.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
What is, but what Maybe I don't particularly believe that
these have a nefarious intent.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I could be wrong, but he's going to prefaricate the
entire way through this. If I played the entire nine minutes,
this is what. He makes a statement and then says.
But you know, on the other hand.
Speaker 4 (04:42):
I want to give you the truth, and what I
believe is my own school. You know, I don't want
to spread misinformation, as we know that there's a lot
of that going around.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
But anyway, so anyway, so there we go. I'm going
to tell you what I believe is my opinion. I
have no basis on it.
Speaker 6 (05:03):
But I I.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Wasted my entire I waste namas my life listening to this,
and I found it so inconsistent. It was unsourced. He
gave no specifics. Uh, and it just and it's not
just him, Uh, others have done it. Let me find
(05:30):
one that I thought was particularly interesting. Oh, John Kirby.
John John Kirby, Rear Admiral John Kirby, the spokes hole
for the National Security Council. He was on CNN taking.
Speaker 6 (05:43):
A big left turn here and something else under your
purview right now, John, I want to I want to
ask you more about this drone mystery that has continued.
You say that currently these drones do not pose any
sort of threat. The way I heard you say it
is you assess their either commercial awful drones, law enforcement drones,
hobbyist drones. Is what people are seeing. Nothing anomalous, no
(06:06):
criminal activity detected. Yet the mayor of Montville, New Jersey,
was just on with us and he essentially says he
does not believe that.
Speaker 7 (06:16):
Let me play this for you, someone is making a
really bad decision by an upcoming clean and say that
these are always drones.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
We're doing some.
Speaker 7 (06:29):
Sort of an operation.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
Nothing to see here. They are safe.
Speaker 6 (06:36):
And what the mayor is talking about is these are
our drones. Is he's saying these are government drones. He
is not happy with the response that he's been essentially
getting from you guys.
Speaker 8 (06:44):
What do you say, Well, I would repeat what we've
said yesterday and last night in a multiple agency statement.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
He's now become Kareem Abdul Jabbar. I've already answer this question.
I'll tell you the same thing I've told you before.
I'll answer the same way I answered it yesterday, the
day before, the day before that. I'm gonna keep giving
you the same answer.
Speaker 8 (07:08):
That we have taken a serious look at this. We
have gone through five thousand some odd sightings, we have
added detection capabilities to the region, we've even sent up
visual observers, and everything we're seeing to date, our assessment
tells us that these are commercial drones, hobbyist drones, or
law enforcement drones, all operating legally and lawfully. I mean
(07:31):
when people shoot video of that, Kate, I mean you're
seeing the lights on these.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Things, the navigation lights.
Speaker 8 (07:37):
That's what's required if you're going to be flying in
the US airspace at night.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Are navigation lights.
Speaker 8 (07:42):
So clearly they're being operated in a lawful and legal way.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
And we've seen nothing, I like, Hay just to that conclusion.
Because they have navigation lights, therefore they must be operating
in a legal and lawful way.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Just because I'm driving a car must mean that I'm
operating that car in a legal way right.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Just because I'm driving at night, I have my headlights on.
Therefore I must be operating the car lawfully and legally,
with you know, no ill will or illegal purpose, or.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
I'm sure that car must be registered and insured too.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Yeah, and I'm sure that that car is also not
because it has its headlights on, it's driving at two am.
It's not you know, engaging in child trafficking or human trafficking.
It's just carrying you know, bottled water somewhere.
Speaker 8 (08:29):
From their behavioral nothing that tells us there's a public
safety dread or a national security thread. I do want
to add one point, though, We've still got about one
hundred leagues that the FBI is following up on, and
if we learn something that contradicts that or something more,
something additional, something more specific, my goodness, we're going to
come public and we're going to talk about it.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
How often does the FBI start an investigation and then
come out and tell you what they found out about
the investigation.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
All the time. I'm frankly tired of it. I know,
I'm just so tired of you know, JFK. I mean
they came out the next day and said, hey, it
was it was the guy in the bush over there.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Right, Yeah, exactly. Uh. You never hear the phrase, well,
we can't comment because it matters currently under investigation.
Speaker 8 (09:12):
You never hear that you've been trying to be as
transparent with the American people as we can.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
We're trying to be as transparent as we can.
Speaker 8 (09:21):
But I think it's also important to remember that there
are a million drones registered with the FAA and thousands
upon thousands that fly in US airspace legally every single day,
including in the Northeast Quarter. In fact, that's one of
the busiest areas.
Speaker 6 (09:34):
It's very true.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Oh well see any well, yeah, you know that's very true. Well,
I hadn't thought about it like that. So they're being
operated in a lawful and legal way. There is, I
think a worldwide epidemic of people that cannot ration reason think, rationally,
(10:03):
critically think, or anything else. Now, the guy that we
played originally the ninth I played you about one minute
of it, and the guy that goes on for nine minutes.
He begins by establishing his credibility. He runs a company
in Kansas, Saxopone Manned, which if you go to the
web page, claims to be a quote leading solutions provider
(10:27):
for unmanned and autonomous remote system technologies for the government, energy, infrastructure, agriculture,
and private industry. Now, after just a quick search, it
became unclear if Ferguson had any contracts at all with
the government. And it's really a very small shop, with
(10:48):
most sites in this seing him as having fewer than
five employees. Nonetheless, he established some semblance of credibility because well,
that's his bread and butter, that's that's what he did
or engages in in that's his business. And somebody can
have fewer than five employees and still have a lot
(11:08):
of credibility. Don't get me wrong. But when you present
yourself as like on your website that you know you
provide services to every possible sector you can think of,
including the government, well that's a that's a pretty big statement.
(11:32):
What I didn't play for you is his claim that
there's a missing nuclear warhead in this country. Oh do
you think there is a missing nuclear warhead in the
(11:53):
United States? Well, if you do, let me explain to
you that there have been general concerns about lose snookes
for probably forty years now. But there's no evidence of
his claim that eighty knukes went missing from Ukraine. He
also brings up the notion that this is some kind
of ploy to hook US into war with Russia. So
(12:15):
he further complicates everything you understand now, I mean, in
addition to being nine minutes long. Another reason why I
don't play this because for people who can actually reason,
his loose speculation and politicization of what should be a
major national security issue would light up major red flags
in any person's head if you're not stopping and thinking
(12:36):
about who is this guy? How would he know this?
But he gets even more flimsy. He claims he spoke
to a gentleman. Well, I'm that it wasn't a nahole.
It was a gentleman. But we don't get a name,
which causes a red flag with me because I like to,
you know, maybe somebody'd like to go interview that guy,
who he says has access to high levels in government,
(12:59):
and this so called gentleman has told Ferguson has told
him that the government ignores him. Ferguson says that the
gentleman has physically touched a warhead left over from Ukraine
and that the nuke is being shipped from Ukraine. To
the US. So now I put this in the category
of and I don't I want to do this, but
(13:22):
I don't want to do it. I get emails all
the time of people like this guy. For example, I
got one yesterday at twelve twenty in the afternoon. I
didn't see until mid afternoon. Starts out, I mean, it's
addressed to let's see the gb News Network, Dan Sheriff,
(13:48):
wherever that is, media, HHS, A couple of people at HHS, DHS,
Mark Belling, the talk show host, and me. We need
your powerful outside help. Everyone should understand this email or
(14:10):
we are all living in tyranny down here. This is
way beyond the modern day Watergate being covered up. This
is dot dot dot in all caps, the beginning of
the next Holocaust being covered up. Now, this email is
I don't know, two dozen paragraphs laws. I actually got
(14:31):
tired of reading it about the fourth of the way through,
and I kind of skimmed through it. And it ends
with local law enforcement is no help. This is real
me and my mother being professionally isolated by the mafia
for a Democrat cover up and takeover. And then he
named some local police departments which I will not name.
(14:55):
I get email like this all the time. I never
respond to it because I think that and I used
to have people get into my office when I was
practicing law, or we would imagine in FEMA. Oh my gosh,
the stuff I would get in FEMA. We went to
the FBI and they ignored us, but because FEMA is
(15:17):
the secret government, we thought we'd come to you instead.
If there are if there's a warhead, a nuke warhead
left over from Ukraine and that's being shipped to the
United States, there are no nuclear warheads in Ukraine, So
(15:39):
if you're geopolitically astute, that should poke a hole in
this guy's story right away. Ukraine agreed to dissolve its
nuclear program over thirty years ago, and to recap this
guy has no first hand information. I guess he's unaware
that Ukraine doesn't have any nukes, and we have to
trust him that his source is not your local conspiratorial
(16:00):
I don't know tech at uh. You know, working on
a as a producer on a radio program, you know
that that guy back there and speaking of warheads, the
guy constantly is referring to apparent missing weapons, and the
warhead is the part that contains the explosive mechanism. However,
(16:21):
a warhead needs to be mounted on a delivery system
in order in order for it to work. So is
the delivery system also part of this apparent Ukrainian or
Biden plot to throw American into a war with Russia.
Because that's what he that's what he's in, That's what
he's intimating, is that that's what's happening. He declares, the
drugs have these special sensors that can detect radioactive material.
(16:44):
You know, I got an e or a text message
from someone uh some again sometime yesterday, and I actually
responded to the text message because he wanted me to.
He wanted me to know that there are in places
like DC or New York, that there are secret things
(17:06):
that detect radiation. No Feacey Sherlock. I think I mentioned
that on air yesterday, and I, based on my queue clearance,
I actually know what they look like. And at one
time I don't remember now, but at one time I
knew where all these detectors were. We put them in
after nine to eleven. Why why are we being so
(17:32):
irrational about this? Oh, mass formation psychosis. I'm a trucker,
so I know exactly what these drones are doing up
there is that damn State patrol trying to catch us
by the hair as you will deserve to be caught.
That's the thing you deserve to be caught.
Speaker 9 (17:58):
I'm thinking. I'm just thinking them, Yeah, I don't want
to do that.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
You get to that point dragon where it's like, you know,
we get the last two segments. You want to go
out with a bang or do you want to go
out with a whimper?
Speaker 5 (18:24):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (18:24):
You know which one you're gonna choose. We just don't
know which one you want to do.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
Um, I don't know a lot. I think I've just
reached the point where it's like, yeah, you know what,
we'll do, We'll do this.
Speaker 3 (18:43):
It's December seventeenth at nine thirty. Do what It's December
seventeenth at nine thirty. And you've reached that point where like, ah,
you know what.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Screw it. Well, you've probably already heard by now that
Trump's request to dismiss Alvin Bragg's hush money case. Judge
Murshawn has dismissed Trump's motion to dismiss based on immunity
(19:14):
not surprising at all. Stephen Chung, Trump's campaign spokesman and
future White House Comms Director blasted the rulings, saying it
violate the Supreme Courts ruling on presidential immunity. This lawless
case should have never been brought in. The Constitution demands
that it be immediately dismissed. As President Trump must be
allowed to continue the presidential transition process and execute the
(19:36):
vital duties of the presidency unobstructed by the remains of
this or any other which hunt he said in a statement.
So what does this ruling do. It leaves the possibility
of Mershawn deciding that the sentencing phase of that jury
finding because it's not a guilt. It's not guilt until
(20:00):
the judge sentences him, so he's not a convicted felon yet.
But it leaves open the possibility, which I think can legitimate.
First of all, he can challenge the refusal to dismiss
based on the Supreme Court ruling that he's immune. He
can challenge that. He can also challenge the conduct of
the case. He can challenge the juries, but they can't
(20:23):
challenge the jury's findings. But he can challenge the evidence
presented to the jury. So he can still challenge and
appeal the jury's decision. But the thing that drives me
crazy is it leads the possibility of Judge Mrshaun coming
back and saying, I'm going to leave this case open
for the next four years. Now, in what world does
(20:51):
someone is someone found guilty by a jury and then
I'm going to put off sentencing for four years until
you leave the White House, and then I'm going to
sentence you. Because unless he challenges that decision, I think
(21:15):
that forestalls him appealing the jury's decision itself, because he
hasn't been sentenced, so the case hasn't been concluded, and
you can't appeal a conviction until you've been found guilty
and sentenced. Now again, I don't think it precludes him
(21:38):
appealing the dismissal of his motion to dismiss the case,
because I think that's immediately appealable. I'm just not quite
certain of New York law. But imagine that you get
convicted of I don't know, drunk driving, something serious but
(21:59):
not quite as serious as this, But they're not going
to sentence you for four years, So if you wanted
to appeal the conviction, you'd have to wait four years,
or you get convicted of I don't know embezzlement, murder rate,
I mean, pick a crime, but you can't appeal that
(22:22):
conviction because the conviction is not final until you're sentenced,
and they're gonna put it off for four years. Isn't
that the equivalent of denying your right to a speedy trial.
Isn't that cruel and unusual punishment to have to sit
around for four years before you can find out what
the sentence is and only then you can start appealing
(22:42):
the conviction. This is nuts. Someone needs to get to
that judge or Trump needs to immediately file some sort
of I don't know how you would do it, but
find that file some sort of appeal, maybe appeal to well,
he can't even appeal to the Supreme Court yet because
(23:02):
it's not a final decision by the New York Appellate Court,
which is their supreme court, so he can't even do that.
Maybe he could take maybe he could file a case
in federal court for a violation of a civil rights
you know, file a forty two USC in nineteen eighty
three case for violation of a civil rights in federal court.
(23:24):
But then that doesn't do anything in terms of resolving
the underlying jury finding of guilt, because there's been no
finality to that. The the decision here is a continuation
(23:47):
of law fare in such a manner that it's put
Trump in a legal purgatory. And I'm sure his law
be able to figure out a way to make some
sort of appeal to the New York Supreme Court, which
is the next level, but it's not what you and
(24:09):
I would think of as the Supreme Court, either on
the immunity decision or on if he does and he
hasn't yet, but if he does decide now to postpone
sentencing for four years, he could appeal that decision claiming
that that violates the civil rights, that that violates his
(24:29):
right to a speedy trial, and who knows what else.
But the point being is just another example of how
no matter what, they're going to continue the law fair,
despite whether it's fair, whether it's lawful or what, they
don't care. They're going after him. Bernie Sanders is in
(24:52):
the news. Bernie Sanders is now expressing concern over Biden's
decision to pardon his son. Hunter suggests that it might
establish a dangerous precedent for future administrations. I wonder what
future administration you might be thinking about I don't know,
maybe the one coming out where Trump as indicated he
might just pardon all the Jay six defendants. You know,
(25:14):
I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that, as I said yesterday,
I think he should pardon and commute the sentences of
everybody involved, except those who were actually involved in vandalism
or you know, battering a cop. I'm actually beginning to
think that, based on the absolute horrible way they've prosecuted
(25:37):
these people, that maybe I'll just pardon everybody, just stick
in the eye of those judges in the DC courts
and just say, you know what, screw you, I'm done. Well.
Bernie's really upset about it. Think about it. Biden promised
(25:57):
that he would not pardon Hunter, and then he did it.
Even the judge that presided over Hunter's case called the
pardon partially unconstitutional. But I think that's simply an attempt
to rewrite history. I don't think it's unconstitutional at all.
I think it's politically stupid, but I don't think it's unconstitutional.
Speaker 10 (26:20):
Bernie Sanders, let me ask you about President Biden's pardon
of his son Hunter. Former Biden senior advisor Anita Dunn
said she agrees with the decision to pardon them, she
disagrees with how it was carried out, the criticism of
the Justice Department. And I want to remind you of
what we heard from President Biden himself on this topic
(26:41):
earlier this year.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Take a look.
Speaker 5 (26:43):
Will you accept the jury's outcome, their verdict, no matter
what it is.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Yes? And have you ruled out a pardon for your son?
Speaker 10 (26:51):
Yes, I said, I advised by the jury decision, I
will do.
Speaker 2 (26:55):
That, And I'm not partner Senator.
Speaker 10 (26:59):
Was it the right decision for the country to pardon
Hunter Biden?
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Well, I think two things.
Speaker 5 (27:06):
When you have his opponents going after his family as
a father, as a parent, I think we can all
understand Biden trying to protect his son and his family.
On the other hand, I think the precedent being set
is set is kind of a dangerous It was a
very wide open pardon which could, under different circumstances, lead
(27:26):
the problems in terms of future presidents dragging one.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Of those numbers.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
We're just looking at the number of pardons by president
here and again toward to the Book of Knowledge to Wikipedia.
So regarding the source, it says that Biden has commuted
or rescinded more than eight thousand convictions, ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
Does he give a time frame for that? It just
says as of December twenty twenty four. I wonder how many.
I wonder how many he's been doing over the past,
you know, three years and eleven months.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
And if we want to talk comparables, Trump, who is
in office roughly about the same amount of time four years, right, Yeah,
two hundred and thirty seven. We got back one more president.
We look at the president Barack Obama eight years as president,
but only did just shy of two thousand.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
People, Okay, and Bush or Clinton?
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Bush did two hundred according to the Wikipedia, and Clinton
did four hundred and fifty nine.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Hw did seventy seven. And now you get to Carter.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
In the Vietnam Reagan did four h six cost and
then we jumped back to the Carter, which, yeah, without
the Vietnam Draft dodgers would have been five hundred and
sixty six, but with.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
The draft dodgers, it's got to be four thousand. It
says two two hundred thousand.
Speaker 9 (28:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Yeah, Just like Bernie Sanders is concerned about a precedent
one that provision of the Constitution will not be changed
despite whatever Joe Biden's done. I think that Bernie Sanders
is more concerned about empty pardons for the January sixth
(29:04):
committees and for the Biden family. And I think they
know that if Biden pardons his brother James, for that matter,
even doctor Jill Biden or Ashley or anybody else, that
that is that's like, you know, when you're not supposed to.
But when somebody invokes their Fifth Amendment privilege, many laymen think, oh,
(29:27):
that's because you're guilty. Now. I don't always think that.
I think many times people invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege
because they know if they say one thing today and
then they just slightly change it, you know, five weeks
later in another deposition, now they're going to get caught
in a perjury trap. But I think in this case,
he pardons the family, he knows that they engaged in
(29:49):
illegal behavior, and then if he pardons himself, game over.
Speaker 8 (29:55):
Mike I always had a moment of total clarity, and
it confused their lo out of me.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
I know, clarity is awful. So why did this story
not make big like national news? The Kassa Diablo strip
club located in Portland, Oregon, of course, is doubly woke.
It combines two woke ideologies, Satanism and veganism. There's a
(30:27):
promo post that features a naked cartoon she demon that
is posing suggestively with the carod above this slogan, Yeah,
I think I can say this. We put the meat
on the pole, not on the plate. Uh, maybe you
want to avoid the cossa diablo. He was pretty slow
(30:51):
last Sunday night, about half a dozen or so patrons
watching dancers take the stage at the Vegan Strip Club.
And then things kind of livened up when one of
the strippers came up behind a guy in fact, I
think it was the DJ came up behind him and
(31:12):
knifed him in the back a knife, a knife attack.
Things livened up after that. A week later, Alan remains
in the hospital with damage to his lung. Cast of
diablow dancer Peyton Lathan, twenty nine years old, is in jail,
charged with three felonies. Now the attack appears to be,
(31:36):
according to this news story of The Oregonian, appears to
be entirely unprovoked. Afterwards, they found Nathan or Lathan hiding
in the bushes. She announced repeatedly during arrest, that she's
going to plead insanity. We worked for John Hinckley, why
wouldn't it work for her? But he couldn't prove he
was insane by working at a satanic vegan strip club.
(32:00):
I think her case might be pretty easy to prove,
because if you're a satanic vegan, isn't that prime e
facial evidence that indeed you maybe backcrop crazy? Crazy? Isn't
amazing you can find every little thing like it's again,
It's like the bottled water. You can say it's all
(32:23):
the same, theces and all the bottles, but they all
have different labels on it, and you can go pick
whatever you want. You can be whatever you want. I
think it just proves my theory that all vegans are
saving
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.