February 28, 2025 • 64 mins
CALL IN: 508-637-5596
GUEST: Science blogger Michael D. Shaw
MICHAEL SHAW SUBSTACK: https://mdspov.substack.com
Charles Moscowitz LIVE
Website: https://charlesmoscowitz.com
Moscowitz Author Page:
https://www.amazon.com/stores/Charles-Moscowitz/author/B00BFLX7S0
Buy Me a Coffee, Join me for Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/moscowitz
GUEST: Science blogger Michael D. Shaw
MICHAEL SHAW SUBSTACK: https://mdspov.substack.com
Charles Moscowitz LIVE
Website: https://charlesmoscowitz.com
Moscowitz Author Page:
https://www.amazon.com/stores/Charles-Moscowitz/author/B00BFLX7S0
Buy Me a Coffee, Join me for Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/moscowitz
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
All right, welcome aboard everyone. Charles Moskowitz here live on
all of the usual networks. Michael D. Shaw is my guest.
Mike Hawaia.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Just great.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
And you've got your excellent article up Ethel Rosenberg and
the Model u N which I want to talk about.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Well, thank you, thank you. You were a big inspiration
for that one.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Well, you know that it's a good article. And I
just want to mention, just as a footnote here that
I'm also live on TikTok right now and we'll see
how long that lasts. But in terms of them shutting
it down, that could happen during this show, you know,
that seems the way it goes. However, I think there's
good news on that front. There is a really this
(00:48):
administration is seems to be determined in recent comments from
Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Cash Patel and
to FBI Director Dan Bongino, what a great they're saying
that they're going to have trans as they call it, transparency,
(01:09):
and when they say it, you know they mean it
because they've been there, they've seen they've been censored these
past four years, and they're going to move forward in
terms of ending this authoritarian, sorry to use this word,
but fascistic agenda of censoring opinion. And again, we're not
(01:31):
talking about censoring you know, violent you know, calls or
anything like that. We're talking about the censoring of opinion
that doesn't agree with any particular regime, something that's not American.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
American. You're seeing it happening in Europe.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
And by then we see Vice President Advance taking it
on with both fists, and that's an exciting thing to
see right there in front of them on and calling
them out. And we certainly have seen it here and
I think that this administration is dedicated to putting a
stop to it, and that the BONDI has said that
(02:13):
they're going to release all of the information around both
the Epstein files and also the JFK assassination, the RFK
and the MLK assassinations. Maybe they'll also get to the
Biden laptop and the Wiener laptop, not to mention Hillary's emails.
(02:34):
All of it the FBI has been sitting on and recently,
I think it was actually yesterday, the Attorney General released
a small segment of files from the Epstein case, and
what we discovered was that it's still incomplete. It's a
(02:55):
lot of it is redacted. And the theory is that
the FBI still has moles. You know, they still have
people in there who are deep staters who are hiding
the information. Maybe they might have already destroyed it more likely,
and that Attorney General Bondi has directly ordered FBI Director
Cash Pttel to find those people and fire them and
(03:17):
get the information out. So it's moving in the right direction.
This is this is a very difficult and courageous may
I say, endeavor to get rid of these people. These
are dangerous people who are determined and who probably have
destroyed We'll never see all of it because most it's
(03:37):
probably been destroyed anyways, and you.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Know how many of the moles are there in all
these Asians riddled with it just came out and said
that the Biden administration was fully aware that these sex
chat rooms were going on with the intel agencies for
the entire Biden administration didn't do anything about it.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Oh, that's the tip of the iceberg. I mean, this
goes way back. I remember former Congressman Bob Barr, remember
him from Georgia. He wrote a book about this back
in the nineties, and I believe. I interviewed him on it,
in which he said, look, the government has three million
employees and they are deeply embedded into every aspect of
(04:27):
our life, and that these are people who are baseless, unaccountable.
This is exactly what Steve Bannon is talking about when
he talks about the administrative state. This is what Michael
Jake Lennon talks about with the double government. I mean,
this is exactly what they're going after. And these people
are very powerful and dangerous people. They play for keeps.
(04:50):
So it's not going to be easy to do this.
It's going to take I mean, look at JFK, in
my opinion, gave his life taking this thing on. And
you know, it's it's a very tough tough nut to crack.
I mean, it's it's power, it's wealth. Speaking of wealth,
did you see that? Did you see that Barack Obama
(05:13):
getting a two point five million dollar a year of
royalty for the use of the word Obamacare, paid by taxpayers?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Did that actually occur? Yes?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
I don't know if you caught that story.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
No, I had heard some rumors about it.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
You mean that's for real, Yes, it is for real.
Since twenty ten, Barack Obama apparently patented the word obamacare
and started.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Collecting that he didn't like the term original.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Oh yeah, they hated it. I remember when I was
co hosting the show with doctor Patrick o'heffernan and I
used the word obamacare and hit a meltdown. Oh it's
an Affordable Care Act. And it's not even called Obamacare,
It's called the Affordable Care Act. So why is the
government paying him royalties to the tune of two point
five or two point two maybe, I don't know, over
(06:03):
two million dollars a year. I mean talk about scams.
I mean this is like I think his daughter got
a big check. We know that Hillary maybe go to
who knows well, who knows how much they take in,
but their daughter three million dollars to pay for her
wedding out of the US aid and ten million to
(06:24):
buy a mansion. Yeah, this is just I mean the
amounts of.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Was apparently pritzkergh who was fairly wealthy on his own by.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
The way, about multi billionaire as the owner of the
Hiatt hotels.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Multiple NGOs paying him money through the US government.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
Well, the NGOs, I mean these shadowy, unaccountable, you know,
private bureaucracies the way that worked. And look, this is
something that was discussed in the in the Founded in
the hearings on Foundations in the nineteen fifties, I mean
the Wiss Committee. Is that the USAID, which is a
(07:04):
government agency with public funds, would basically launder funds through
these NGOs and they would then in turn give it
away to all of their allies and friends, including these
leftist politicians, just because they can. And also they had
apparently the Taliban was getting huge sums of money under
(07:27):
the Biden regime through the USAID. Oh, it's going to
humanitarian causes. I mean really, I mean and that now
they're using the lie, well you're getting rid of No,
they're not getting rid of humanitarian causes. I mean, the
budget of the USAID maybe about ten percent of it,
maybe at most fifteen percent went to humanitarian causes. That's
(07:50):
been continued. That's not touched. They're continuing that. It's under
the direct auspices of the Secretary of State. It's the
other it's the rest of it that's gone. And now
you see what is it. There's a transgender clinic in
India has had to close its doors. Why because they
(08:12):
the USA I D money dry it up. That's why
you know this is uh, you know, it's it's starting
to show around the world who was getting money from
US A I D. And what their agenda was. Their
agenda was transhumanism, specifically transgenderism. Their agenda was critical theory,
specifically critical race theory. And their agenda was world you know,
(08:37):
weakening world sovereignty in the in the you know, in
the interests of alleged peace, and they're taking they're taking
it on over there. I mean, we have people in
government right now who know full well what's going on
and who are openly and brazenly taking it on. Did
you see any of that meeting. I think it was
(08:59):
there today with President Trump and Zolensky in the Oval Office.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
Well, I heard some quotes from it, and it is
about time. I mean, how many hundreds of billions of
dollars have we spent on graft getting people killed?
Speaker 1 (09:18):
It's been I mean that's I mean, where did who
actually put that money? You know, I know we noticed
that the minute that war started, the Clintons re established
the Global Initiative. I wonder why money started polling in
I mean, and Zolensky was using the same old language,
whereas Trump and Vance was was tremendous. The dude, the
(09:38):
they took out, you know, they took off the gloves.
I mean, it was like a real back and forth.
And he's like, here you are, you know, during the
campaign campaigning against us in American cities. I mean, and
now you're insulting this administration. But while we've given you
how many you know, billions of dollars? You know, you're
(09:59):
on the loop the end of the argument. I mean,
they made no bones about it. It was amazing. I mean,
it was all seen publicly. It's, you know, the kind
of stuff that usually goes on behind closed doors with Trump.
That just turned on the camera and they went for it.
It's fantastic.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
I wonder what the reaction of the left.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Is going to be there, because it's it's really causing fragmentation.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
There was quite an exchange between Georgia.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Galloway and Piers Morgan, uh where Piers Morgan was appearing
to defend this unlimited support of Ukraine. George it was
a big leftist of course, Yeah, just was sharing everything
Morgan said and it's about time. You know, who was
(10:51):
it that Kat Williams said, the truth will come out,
and it's it's really started you on all this.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
So your article about Ethel Rosenberg and the model you win,
I mean, it's like the question that it raises is
that how is it that you have people who are
such extremists, in the case of Ethel Rosenberg, that she's
willing to sacrifice her own life as a martyr in
defense of communism, and that that has certain parallels with
(11:25):
this opposition to President Trump. Now that these people that
you don't see too many people breaking out of this cage,
that their brains and their souls are locked, that they've
locked them into you know what I call a hologram.
They're like continuing to goostep. If you watch MSNBC for example,
(11:48):
and I do, like Rachel Meadow, I mean, it's like
they've just a doubling down as nothing has changed. It's
almost like it's like an alternative universe or something like that,
and a universe.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
But you can oversimplify and say it comes down basically
the atheism that.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
F L.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Rosenberg's religion, despite that she was nominally Jewish, was Communism.
So in a rather perversion of the word martyr, she
was happy to die for the cause despite being offered
any number of times.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
And Julius also, by the way, that if.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
They gave more details on the aspiring, their lives would
have been spared.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Right, And then other people like her brother did give
details that his life was spared. Yeah, and he said,
look I had you know, people like on the left
were like so critical or look at you, you're a rat.
And he goes, listen, I have a wife and children.
I've got a family here that I have to consider first.
So I had to do this. I mean, I'm saving
(12:59):
my own life. And but the issue of her martyrdom
is martyrdom in and of itself is okay? Is fine?
I mean, like in my history class, we're studying the
early Church and we're looking at the foundation of Venice
and several other things, and a lot of these incredible
stories of saints, like Saint Mark for example, I mean,
(13:21):
they were martyred, they died in to defend their belief.
You could find that also on the Jewish side too,
like the people who died at Masada and Rabbi a
Kieva and died at the hands of the Romans rather
than you know, surrender his faith that's one thing. But
(13:43):
to you know, to die like for Communism, to die
like as a suicide bomber, to kill as many Israelis
as possible, you know, that's something else. So it's not
the institution.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It's not exactly dying for a good cause.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
And right, I mean, I'd like to think that I
would be willing to die if it meant defending the
life of my own daughter, for example, my wife. I
remember when that there was a shooter who went into
a movie theater in I think it was in Colorado
a while ago, and you had men stand up and
stand in front of their wives to protect them, and
(14:20):
they were killed. It was a natural thing. I mean,
that's like, you know, you're willing to sacrifice your life
to preserve a value, something of such value to you,
and you you know, it's like a natural instinct. But
that's not you know, in the case of defending the
Soviet you know, attainment of nuclear bombs, I mean, that's
(14:45):
like insane, you know, it's sort of like you know,
I mean the like suicide people, you know, hijacking an
airplane and crashing it into the World Trade Center. It's
like why, you know, it gets what is it that
they are dying for.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Well, you know, there's been a lot of relitigation of
the story. Okay, it ends up as that put in
the article that even her sons admitted.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Quite recently years later.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah that Yeah, indeed the father was a flat out spy,
she was, she typed stuff up. Whatever. But it took
and they had a notice from from the.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
Get goes I just was canceled on TikTok. I don't know.
It wasn't Ethel Rosen. Well no, they said they were
restricting the number of people who can view this. They
haven't totally canceled it yet. Maybe it was maybe they
maybe they're soft on Ethel Rosenberg. Who knows anyway, whatever, So.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
They admitted it finally because they were forced to look.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
There were relatives that I had when I was it,
and in Itteen fifty three, I was a pretty young kid, right,
but I remember in the early sixties there were relatives
I had.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Who were hardcore leftists and even.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
They were saying, no, the rosea Vers are one hundred
sent guilty, and it was very convenient for them because
then they could show that they're not, you know, full
on comedies themselves. But Ethel was a true believer and
died for a bad cause, and the tieder course of
(16:30):
the model u N. No one in the model u
N has died for a cause that I know of.
But they have these points of view that are formed
and that's it. It never changes. And that's the Rachel
Mata situation, right that all this craft is coming out now,
that's going to show that so many of these social
(16:52):
welfare programs.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
Were all crap. We're all money laundering schemes. Because I
pointed out in the article, after all these twillions of
dollars are spent, these problems are still with us. How
is that possible? How is it?
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Well, it's possible because ninety nine percent of the money
went to NGO's one percent of the money went to
the people.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
I mean there.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
I had mentioned this many times in articles I've written
over the years. When the War on Poverty was first
launch in nineteen sixty four, LBJ made a televised visit
to some poor, down and out Appellation.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Guy whose name I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
It's in a few articles I wrote this mass he
was out of work, he was missing most of the teeth.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
It's almost like they had to find the stereotypical.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
No, I know, I mean he was auditioned.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
Yeah, so anyway, they come in there.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Look, you know, we're gonna get your job, we're gonna
get your training, we're gonna fix your teeth.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
All right, and he was supposed to be the exemplar
for all the people they were to save. So the
elite media did a one year follow up later. Well,
he got some training, he got some of his teeth fished.
(18:29):
But the point is he was still to me in
his crummy shack. He didn't have stable employment. And at
that point I realized, damn, if they don't even care
about the.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Poster boy, right, the one person yeah for.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
This program, then this is all a croc. Now.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
I noticed that when I was seventeen, eighteen years old,
but apparently none of the media cared or knew about it.
And that's the other thing. The media is a croc.
What's the latest example? You know what I'm going to say,
Jake Tapper saying, all along, Biden's in great shape.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Yeah yeah, So.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Now Tamper's gonna be up with a book documenting.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
The cover up that the media engaged to show his
decline and he's getting ream for this rem Okay, there's
video of him being stopped in airports, people mocking him.
And then you wonder, all these years of watching all
these elite figures and it's all crap, and those of
(19:41):
us like you and me that figured it was all
crap and being lonely voices, now it's as obvious as
the Day's law or no.
Speaker 1 (19:52):
So Tamper is being attacked for writing a book chronicling
what he had himself covered up all those years, which
is that Biden was in decline, and you have leftists
and people that don't want any criticism attacking him for that.
I mean, that's what we talked about earlier, like with
Rachel Matdow. Rachel Matdows spent three years with a tin hat.
(20:16):
You know, they talk about conspiracy theorists Trump you know
putin you know, basically conspired with or they like to
use the word colluded because they don't want to say conspired.
You know, that's for the right with Trump to steal
the twenty sixteen election. That's what that was all about.
(20:36):
And after three years of sending out these fake leaks
and night after night of doing these programs, most of
the stuff being complete crap or totally twisted. Finally, the
Malla report comes out saying that nothing of the kind.
You know, they dragged it out for three years, but
he said no, there was no evidence of this. And
(20:59):
then the report goes on to say, well, there might
be obstruction of justice because Trump criticized the Mother Group.
Oh oh, blah blah, you know this kind of crap.
But the point is the first page is the only
relevant page where I said, no, we didn't find anything.
Now you would think that Rachel Maddow would apologize, Well,
you think that she would at least acknowledge something. I mean,
(21:22):
and I remember sending her several tweets at that time.
I'm like, look, you present yourself as a patriot. You
say that you had, like I think your father was
a military man. You know, you come from a family
that I think goes back and you know, you feel
that you're doing what's best for your country. And I
watched her, you know, like on top of Mount Sinai
(21:45):
every night, Oh, America is on the siege and democracy
is threatened and the constitution. Can you at least acknowledge
that you were wrong here or if something nothing, No, acknowledgement.
She just they didn't mentioned it. They just kept going
and instead they focused on other shreds of stuff. And
(22:05):
then of course they then jumped the head foot into
the perfect phone call impeachment. It's it's because it.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Is funny that it all comes down to the same
story that it was the deterioration of Saint Francis, right
messure on the show. The late Saint Francis was a
conservative pund it. He later moved to what might uncharitably
(22:34):
be called white nationalism, although I'm using that.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
In quotation of arts right.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
Then he discovered that he had a certain audience, like
the Jared Taylor audience.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
Let me just interrupt you. I just got another warning
on TikTok. I'm still there. I think the trigger might
have been w h I T E n A T
I O N A L I s M. Just a thought.
I don't know what it was, but they picked up
on that word and they got a warning. Okay, go on, Wow,
yeah I say that. I think So that's okay. Look,
(23:12):
this is a we're this is censorship. I mean, this
is what we're dealing with now. I mean, we're having
a political conversation about stuff going on, but you know everything,
Maybe this is an example of the dangers of AI.
I don't think there's a person over at TikTok monitoring
the show. I think that this is what this is
the dark side of AI. Now I'm not against AI.
(23:35):
I think it could be a tool that, when in
the right hands, when used properly, can be very helpful.
But and chat, GPT and all the rest, I'm just
studying it actually, But the darker side of it is
that it can be programmed in a way to pick
up certain words and if you say those words, it
doesn't matter what the context.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
What's really stupid. If fast the cases I was using
it as for jor.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Look, I mean one of them, I lost my YouTube channel.
I mean there were three reasons, and one of them
was because I interviewed David I don't know if you
remember him, Yeah, I mean, and we were both of
us being somewhat observant Jews, talking about Jewish issues, and
somehow that came to the attention and we it was
called antisemitic. Okay, so not because of anything in particular
(24:26):
that we said, but it was probably looking back at it,
it was there was certain trigger words that we might
have used, and when they accumulated to a certain point,
it caused an electronic reaction. You know. That's what's going on.
That's the dangers of turning functions over to machines and electronics.
(24:48):
I mean, I mean, there was a case recently where
an insurance company stopped coverage of someone in the middle
of an operation, right, I mean, I think you heard
about that. It's not because some person did that. There
was some kind of an algorithm that had reached a
point where they had a you know, there was a
(25:08):
stop loss. It's kind of like I mean in the
stock market people, you know, when you invest in a stock,
you can put a stop loss on it electronically, which
means that if the stark valuation goes below a certain point,
it automatically dumps the stock and it sells. Not always
a good idea, by the way, but the point.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Is that if you that's highly trivial compared to how
languages used. Right, just to finish the thought anyway is
discovered yet an audience. Okay, so it ends up because
people are lazy that you tailor your message to this audience, right,
(25:49):
And it's the decline of Saint Francis and to some
extent Joe Sobrand. Yeah, well, that one's bad. But in
the case of ritual mad out in MSNBC, they know
that people will dutifully watch that network to get the
particular point of view that they want.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
So that it up. No, I think that's right. I mean,
I remember this was years ago during the Trump's first administration.
Michael Smerconish, he's a left leaning but reasonable radio talk
show hosts in Philadelphia. He's been there for a long time.
He's a lawyer, he's very smart. He made a mild
(26:36):
praise of President Trump for something that he had done.
I don't know what it was, I don't remember, and
I heard him talk about it. And for that, not
only were they getting protests and they got his sponsors
who had been with him all his career were getting
threats that they're going to get boycotted and death threats
(26:56):
and people lining up O. I mean that he had
to reach can't. I'm sorry, you know, A big miss big, big,
big mistake. And and so that's what Rachel Mattow I mean.
I think Rachel Maddow is a true believer. I think
she's deep in it. But even if she wasn't you know,
(27:16):
you can't you know they're going down with the ship.
I mean, they're not gonna you know, if you know, if.
Speaker 4 (27:21):
She's saying, here's they don't know anything different.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
They don't know anything different.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
I mean, you could come up with five thousand pages
of evidence showing that the vast majority of the social
programs were money laundering crab. But since their religion is
is I like to point out that you rewrite the
Gospels right. The charity is not giving the alms to
(27:49):
the poor, is giving the arms to Caesar and then
he'll distribute it to the poor or something like that.
Or I guess he will go through an NNGO to
distribute the money. And that's what they believe, and it doesn't.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Matter, no. And they also believe in the stuff that
the NGO is giving the money to. I mean like
they believe in Hsballah, you know, they believe in the Taliban.
You know, this is all transforming mankind. And they believe
in you know, the sex change operations in India. These
are things And what I'd say to them is if
they believe in these things, maybe they should open their
(28:26):
own checkbook and write a check to it fine, but no,
they want to have the taxpayers do it. They want
to have the US government do it. And you know,
that's a lot of what it is. And then you
know it is a religion. I mean, this is why
Ethel Rosenberg gave her life, not because it's not a
political It does prove that that's a religion. You know,
she believes in this. It has nothing to do with reality.
(28:49):
It has to do with the entire belief. They know
that you mentioned Lyndon Johnson. They know that the War
on Poverty failed, they know that the Great Society failed.
They know the Vietnam War failed. But of course that
that's another story. But the point is that they didn't
care it was successful from their view because it furthered
their socialistic fantasy. I mean, a weakened the country, a
(29:12):
weakened society. It rendered, you know, it ripped apart the
fabric of our of our system, which they support. So
that's that's what Rachel Mattow cares about. She doesn't care
about getting to any kind of moral truths. She cares
about destroying Trump because he represents an enemy of this leftist, collectivist,
(29:34):
internationalist ideal.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
Everybody right and is mentioned in that article that.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
Okay, as the late great did lude to you to say,
grants your opponent.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
His first premise.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
All right, so the first premise of the opponent is
these are great programs you've got to help the poor,
and so all right, well, wouldn't you have more money
to help them if you got rid of all the
fraud and waste? But they're not interested in that.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
No.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
I don't think that the left would be interested in
saving and preserving social security. That was the great program
of you know, of FDR. So they would get on
board with the fact that there's all this fraud. No,
they don't. They attack it. They don't care, you know,
they they don't At first, I don't want Trump to
(30:29):
get credit for cleaning it up. But even putting that aside,
they wouldn't like it if if Biden did it, they
just donated to them. It's like, and you.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
Asked yourself, well, what are the optics of this? So
what do you really stand for? I guess you stand
for the status quo of turning this into a money
losing socialist bureaucracy that's going to go bankrupt. But don't worry,
you know, the commiss are so you'll be okay, and
it's it's really sick and finally it's being exposed. But
(30:58):
I'll tell you there's true believers everywhere you go. And
it's not just socialism. I mean I had some years
ago a fruitless conversation with a guy who is allegedly conservative,
and we started talking about the rather now obvious point
that FDR knew about Pearl harbor In advanced there's a
(31:22):
serious historian that disputes that.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Right.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
His reaction was, no, I can't believe that. I won't
believe that.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
And how do you know, you know, it's hard, it's
harder to you know, somebody can't you know, admit that.
You know they can't. I mean I know people like
that too. I mean they're going to go to the grave,
goose stepping along to something. They just This is again
why this is a religion and it's a cult. It's
not a religion like you know that that has like
(31:56):
like early Christianity with martyrs, because it had a moral core.
You know, it actually was preaching truths. It's a religion
that is trying to pervert and contort reality, which makes
it even more lethal. It's a you know, and well
and well, and the adherence to it more loyal actually,
(32:17):
so that's why we have this you know u N.
You know this model U N establishment that it continues
to Like at a young age, they accepted a bill
of goods, they got rewards for that they got they
saw other people being punished for not accepting it. That's right,
(32:38):
and then they went on. I mean, you know, if
you take a look at any of these liberal events,
you know, like I don't know, the oscars come to mind,
you know, cultural events, Right, They're constantly giving each other
these awards, and they get up and they're worshiping these
statues and they're like, I want to thank the know
(32:59):
shlow mos so and so and you know, and I
want to and there's a wonderful and and they're praising
each other and their shelves are groaning under the weight
of these trophies, and it's just, you know, this is
how they It's like an insular kind of a world.
And if you see them interviewed on the late night
talk shows, their main conversation is I actually met with
(33:23):
whoever Borbachoff, you know, one of these left wing heroes,
and you know, we spend time in his presence and
oh and I'm part of this thing where we all
get together and so and so, I don't know, you know,
Catherine Hepburn, you know what ever, I mean, we could
just go. You know, they all like have this world
where they they know each other and they talk about
(33:44):
what it's like to be with each other and what
this person really is like, and it's it's kind of
like an insular world where they award each other and
they massage each other and they they adore and adulate
each other and it's a cult. Yeah. And then when
(34:04):
you're watching this on television as a regular joke six pack,
you know, you're like, wow, gee, I guess they do
know these people. Oh gee, wow, Henry christ I don't
know whoever. You know. Gee, that's amazing. They must be
so like this rarefied world. I remember a relative of
mine when briefly Caroline Kennedy, horrible person. Obviously she was
(34:30):
running for I think a senate in New York had
completely failed. Even the left had some. It was so awful.
You know, her one interview, but this person says, right.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
And it was only one interview, and she came across like.
Speaker 1 (34:44):
Klus completely completely tanked and and and you know, and
yet this person says to me, Yeah, but can you
imagine the rooms that she's been in with the people
that she's been exposed to. It's like these you know really,
I mean, it's like this kind of they imagine this
kind of almost you know, wonderland type place. I mean
(35:07):
with these people like oh, she's rubbed shoulders with you know,
these other people, and that they all it's like some
kind of a fairy dusters like brushing off on them,
and that we should give them credit just for that,
we should award them for being good socialists, you know,
you know big they've they've supported the right things, they
(35:28):
utter the right slogans, and so they're therefore the magic
door opens for them. And it's like this rarefied world
and they can't get out of it. That's what Rachel
Maddow is all about. She got ten million dollars a year.
I mean, this is an award. What the hell is
she doing? That's that's I mean, And they're talking about poverty.
(35:49):
I mean, really, joy Read, I mean, she's the most racist,
the most divisive. I mean, you know, she's the David.
She's like a black version of David Duke. I mean's
just you know, awful.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
I think David Duke had more class.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Yeah, I mean, she's absolutely vulg vile. And those women
on the view, oh.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
I mean just well quickly coming to an end.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Yeah, but you know, but the thing about it is
that not only are they spewing this toxic vile, but
people are like, oh yeah, they're plotting and like like
they're like it's so mindless, and it's like, yeah, like
look at them. They know people, and they've gotten to
sit around with Barack Obama and Big Mike you know whoever.
You know what I mean. It's like it's like they
(36:41):
all are sort of in this incestuous world are getting
divorced sposedly. I mean, no wonder we had this cropping
up of this. I don't know if I should say
this word on TikTok, but QAnon, remember that I'm not
end using that that was crazy, but I can appreciate
where that kind of came from. When you have these
(37:03):
elites in Hollywood in politics like Obama and them and
you and these you know, these exalted business figures like
Mark Zuckerberg and you know, and they all kind of
talk to each other and they control through their influence.
I don't want to use the word control. Let's just
say they influence large segments of our culture and our media,
(37:28):
and our high high institutions of learning, and you know,
even our businesses. And they you know, it's like you
do think sod to think. Gee, maybe these people are
you know, cutting off the heads of babies. I don't
know what the hell that they were into. I mean,
I'm not endorsing that at all, but you know, you
do wonder. I mean it kind of opens the door
(37:49):
for making those things seem almost plausible.
Speaker 3 (37:52):
Well, I mean here you use inductive reasoning. Yes, why
should any decent person want to suppress the Epstein files?
Speaker 1 (38:03):
Yeah exactly. You know, it's efer worse than that. You
know who the lawyer was on the Epstein case defending Epstein.
They keeping those files locked up? James Comey's daughter. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
I mean talk about you know, so, you know, I
wonder why people have conspiratorial thoughts.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
Well, they call it conspiracy theory, but what if it's true?
Speaker 1 (38:26):
Well, there were conspiracy theories and there are conspiracies. Yeah,
I mean I think that a responsible person tries to
debunk bad conspiracy theories and try to, you know, make
a case for ones that turn out to be true.
I mean, both things go on, But of course there
are conspiracies obviously. I mean it's just the way it is.
(38:47):
That's human nature. People are going to conspire and they're
going to use force and fraud and deception in order
to achieve corrupt ends, you know. I mean it happens
all the time in business. What do they think, you know,
they conspire to rip off another business so they can
have more success. There are laws against that. I mean,
(39:11):
murder is part of a conspiracy. You know, you're knocking
somebody off because they're in the way. Those are conspiracies.
There's a criminal conspiracies, So why would they think there's
not political conspiracies. It happens all the time because his
power involved, there's money involved, there's influence involved, and this
prestige involved, and people crave all of those things. And
(39:35):
if you are somebody standing in the way of your
achieving those things, you may get together with like minded
people and conspire to get those things at that other
party's expense. That's the that's human nature. That's why we
have a basic part of our government, a basic part
of every government throughout history in some version is a
(39:55):
department of justice. The department of Justice one of their functions,
and a congress is to investigate these conspiracies and expose
them and bring people to justice when it happens. It's
a basic I mean, there were conspiracies in your own family.
I mean, everybody deals with conspiracies all the time. It's
(40:17):
just it's just the way it goes. I mean, there
are conspiracies in your own mind. I mean, we all
it's just part of human nature.
Speaker 2 (40:24):
Well, you know this sounds like the beginning of a
new book for you.
Speaker 1 (40:29):
I am writing a chapter actually in my book on this,
and I've written on this topic. You know, it's just
it's just the way it goes. I mean, it's just
part of human nature. But you have to be responsible
because there are, you know, wrong conspiracies often are cooked
up by governments or by powers to kind of deceive
and engage in what's called a false flag, you know,
(40:52):
I mean, it's just a that's important. It's important to
reveal the bad conspiracies, the false conspiracies separate the eat
from the chaff. So anyways, but wow, but we have
you know, these are These are heady times, These are
exciting times. Every day. I feel like it's like Christmas morning,
(41:14):
waking up and getting gifts under the tree.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
You know, of course last week.
Speaker 3 (41:19):
Uh, at what point are some of those in the
mainstream media going to turn?
Speaker 2 (41:26):
I don't think you have to get.
Speaker 1 (41:29):
Lester Holt is going down to the ship. He's gone.
They're all, you know, they're just I think they're just
gonna They're just gonna they're they're gonna start to like
vanish after a while, because these these are people, you know,
they have to continue to maintain some relevancy. I mean
it's their entire I mean you now have major donors
(41:50):
who are backing out of the Democratic Party and this
whole I mean, what is there, what what do they
stand for? You know, they're against cutting the size of government.
They're against cutting waste and fraud in government. That's why
they hate Elon Musk. I mean, you know, and then
these things keep coming out which show how bad it is,
(42:13):
and they're going to rail against that. They want to
leave a permanent government infrastructure in place that people can't
be laid off. I mean Starbucks just laid off over
a thousand executives they just announced the other day. I mean,
you know that's happening in the private sector. What do
these government people, somehow sacroo sainct. Does anyone believe that
(42:35):
an actual service that we want government to provide is
going to be affected by firing half of these people?
I mean obviously not.
Speaker 3 (42:44):
No. And you didn't hear one p from the mainstream
media during COVID and the lockdowns when so many people
lost their jobs.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
That's right, all these small businesses, mom and pop stores. Meanwhile,
the big box places and Amazon they did gangbusters during that.
And also that Trump is it's so an innovative. I
saw an interview with Howard Lutnik, who is the new
Secretary of Commerce, and Trump said to him, he goes, look,
the post Office is losing because that's under the Secretary
(43:17):
of Commerce. They're losing how many billions of dollars a year?
What can we do? You know? Should we save it?
Should we get rid of it? And I want answers.
And the next day Lutnik was at a meeting with
Trump and Trump says, so, what did you come up with?
You know, he has one day, you know, and so
Lutnik said, had several very interesting suggestions. He pointed out that,
(43:40):
for example, the sense in the US census it cost
one hundred million dollars, and they hire trucks and people
and they have to pay them and give them lunch
and give them, you know, security, and they have to
go out and knock on every single door in America
to count people. He goes, why not just have the
post post office do this? They go to people's houses
(44:02):
every day, and we could do what you save one
hundred million dollars right there. The Post Office could do
things like delivering social security documents to a new board,
or they could do all kinds of functions that the
government's spending a fortune doing when you could consolidate it
and it would give the Post Office a little bit
more relevancy and more functionality while we streamline elements of it.
(44:27):
I'm just saying that these are incredible ideas. Why didn't
anyone think of this? I mean, it's like they're coming
up with I mean, it's amazing what they're doing. It's
like every day. And now Trump the other day that
today he's signing an executive order declaring English as the
official language of the United States, hallelujah. It's about time.
(44:50):
We won't have Spanish subtitles. I mean, you know, the
English it's like, oh no, you can't do that because
it's like I'm a racist. We have the one thing
that holds us together as a nation is our common language,
so we can communicate with each other even if we
don't like each other. You know, you have a simple
(45:12):
lingua franca. You have like the language of the land.
It doesn't mean English is superior. It just happens to
be the national language has been since the day you know,
you know, you know they got off the ship at
the Mayflower. I mean it's just that simple.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Well, yeah, I mean there is no country, maybe with
a possible exception in Switzerland, and even that isn't exactly true.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
You have multiple.
Speaker 3 (45:40):
Official languages in Switzerland, for example, it's regional and yeah,
it's a small country. So if you're a German speaking
Swiss person, you've certainly heard French in Lauson and you
can get by. But in candidates never worked.
Speaker 1 (46:03):
It doesn't work well. I mean it's like like Belgium
I think is coming apart because they've got.
Speaker 2 (46:10):
The thing in Belgium, and I hope they changed it,
but I don't think they did.
Speaker 3 (46:15):
Was they would have French and Flemish, all right, and
Flemish is sort of an old style dudge, right, so
what would happen is all these sides would have French
and Flemish on it. Then they get an argument about
which language would go first.
Speaker 2 (46:34):
I was in a car what an experienced.
Speaker 3 (46:39):
Doing some business in Brussels with a guy who was
really international, spoke many many languages, albeit not Flemish, and
the Brussels airport is in the Flemish part of Belgium. Okay,
So he goes to pay his parking at the airport
(47:01):
and the guy tells him how much in Fleturish. Well
you could understand that if you knew any German, right,
But instead the guy looks at him and says Common,
forcing him to answer in French.
Speaker 2 (47:17):
Just to be a language asshole er. So I mean,
I was astounded because this was such a cultured guy.
Speaker 3 (47:24):
I thought that they get caught up in this and
it's pathetic.
Speaker 2 (47:32):
So no, that bilingual thing doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (47:37):
No, it's important for any sovereign nation to have a
national language. It just is. I mean the British, you know,
for all of their faults. They united India with one language,
Hindi and also English by the way, and you know,
it created a cohesion. It doesn't mean you don't have
local languages, local dialects, which is all good, but you
(48:00):
have all public affairs are conducted. I mean the Roman Empire,
all public affairs were conducted in Latin. Didn't mean that
everybody spoke Latin. I mean in the region of Judea,
they spoke Aramaic, but they knew that the people in
charge knew Latin and that was the language of the land.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
There's as the scripture was Arabic in Arabic.
Speaker 1 (48:27):
Yeah, I mean even in Israel today, I mean it's Hebrew,
arab and English. Arabic and English, but you know, all
three languages are pretty well known. But Hebrew is the
national language. It says you have to have a national
language in order to have some kind of unity, so
that people can communicate with each other. You know, there
(48:47):
has to be it's a part of commerce. So I'm
proud of President Trump for doing that. Should have been
done years ago. It's an excellent development.
Speaker 3 (48:55):
Can imagine why do you even have to do it?
Speaker 1 (49:00):
But I guess you have to do it, you have
to do it. Somebody should have done it a long
time ago. But you're going to see howells from the left. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (49:09):
On that topic, there was of course an anti trumb
article written by La Todds travel writer.
Speaker 2 (49:19):
Mary mac namara.
Speaker 3 (49:21):
Then Trump must now are going to ruin your summer vacation, right,
How are they going to ruin your summer vacation? Well,
one of the reasons is that because of immigration policies,
hotels may have trouble now getting people. So does that
mean that she in the favor of exploiting illegals to
(49:44):
work in the hospitality industry?
Speaker 1 (49:48):
Basically, yeah, I mean And.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
So so this back to your point that you know,
as long as this privileged brat can go on her travel,
I don't care about anybody. So what kind of a
left wing socialist are you if it doesn't mean anything
other than you're wearing this team jersey for team all right? Right,
(50:18):
it's just pathetic, and you know you would be expected
to see more converts, but you really don't. Nothing's changed
since Henry the Eighth broke away from the Catholic Church. Really,
the Saint John Fisher was the only priest that that
(50:44):
was a martyr for refusing to change affiliation. Thomas Moore
was a martyr also, but I mean he wasn't a priest,
and it's like most of them went along with the program.
Speaker 1 (50:56):
So yeah, and I think he was a pretty bad
guy from what I understand history not to mention the
fact that, and I think E. Michael Jones, by the way,
he is right about this in his book about called
the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, which has very little to do
with Jews. It's all about Catholic versus Protestant. It's a
great history of that. I mean, he doesn't mention Jews
(51:18):
until the end of the book, practically a little sprinkling,
but he points out that Henry the Eighth, I mean,
that was a looting operation nothing more. They looted and
stole all the Catholic churches and properties and art and
all of the artifacts, and they just and they handed
them all out to their friends. And those friends that
(51:40):
got all those properties would become the British elites, like
the Rhodes, Cecil Roads and the Cecil family and all
these other people that are still there as the elites.
I think that's historically accurate.
Speaker 3 (51:54):
Well, it is, and you have to wonder, I mean,
Isa Isa Catholic. I have to wonder why the people
in the Anglican Church don't seem to care about this.
Speaker 2 (52:05):
That was all.
Speaker 1 (52:05):
Elicit They benefited from it, they got the you know,
the doorknob.
Speaker 3 (52:12):
Anglican of the present day didn't benefit from it.
Speaker 1 (52:18):
No, And I think that I think that the Protestant
takeover of Britain was not something that happened overnight, and
it involves a lot of very strong armed stuff going
and with the final curtain falling on guy Fox right.
I mean that's so, it took about one hundred years
(52:38):
and even to this day it's it's like the you know,
the Anglican Church, I mean, the King of England, they
have they can't you know, marry a Catholic and they
can't be Catholic, and that's like a no no. The
fact I think it was Tony Blair. His wife is Catholic,
(52:59):
and apparently they say that he secretly converted to Catholicism,
but he couldn't do it publicly because it's illegal for
the Prime Minister to be Catholic, and that only after
he left office did he become openly Catholic. They still
have that I think in England, it's it's interesting that
it's even like, I mean, I was reading that that
(53:20):
when when the King of England now Charles became king
and that he, you know, he's going to have the ceremony.
He had a he invited religious leaders from all part
of England to come and have a reception and meet him.
Accept the Catholic head it was not invited, and he
(53:42):
invited the Jewish guy and you know, various other religions.
But the next day he privately met with the Catholic prelate,
and the Catholic Church of England was like, this is great,
He's actually met us. You know, this is a step
in the right direction that we're actually getting a little acknowledgment. So,
(54:03):
I mean, those are traditions that continue in many ways.
It's an interesting history.
Speaker 2 (54:09):
Yeah. I mean, if you Michael Jones had stuck to there.
Speaker 1 (54:14):
Oh my god, he's become like he's gone way off
the deep end on.
Speaker 3 (54:19):
I think it's the old Michael Hoffman problem right there.
There's elements of Michael Jones audience. There are hardcore anti semits,
right they're sitting in donations and vibue books and well,
you know, we have to cater to this audience with God's.
Speaker 1 (54:40):
I think he's a true believer in what traditionally was
a view that permeated the Catholic Church but no longer does.
In that the Jews are collectively guilty for the fact
that two thousand years ago the Judean leadership have advocated
(55:00):
the execution of Jesus. Now, I mean, I get that,
you know that that and since Jesus is the Messiah,
Jesus's God, therefore they were guilty of killing God, and
as such they were guilty of overthrowing the order of
the universe, what the Greeks called the logos.
Speaker 3 (55:20):
All right, but the only problem with that interpretation is
that he had to die.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
And well, well, the problem is that they, Yeah, if
the Jews of Judea, who did not believe that Jesus
was the Messiah, but therefore they would view him as
a heretic, if they had maybe just exiled him, or
maybe they had sent him off or something. I mean,
it was obviously a big mistake for them to advocate
(55:47):
that he'd be executed, because I mean, I think we
learn from history they should not have done that. If
they had not done that, then then Christianity would have
developed maybe on different lines. Yeah, because I think Jesus
himself was very much his messiah ship was very much
within the overall realm of Jewish understanding of the Messiah.
(56:12):
It wasn't such a diversion.
Speaker 3 (56:14):
And but the divergent because their fashions developed against it.
That the the idea that the Christians going to supposedly
be mostly from Jewish stock that only lasted for one
generation or less. And with the famous you know, Paul
(56:36):
going to the circum sized, sorry to the uncertaincised Peter
go to the circum size.
Speaker 2 (56:43):
So it it is interesting, but.
Speaker 3 (56:48):
People just don't reflect on this stuff, and you have
these absurd contraditions like in the UK.
Speaker 2 (56:57):
Where they can't do this. So they can't do that.
And now if you set up a meme on something,
you can go to jail.
Speaker 1 (57:08):
Well, I mean, I think that during that meeting with
President Trump, jd Vance brought that right up to Keir
Starmer at that meeting he met with Trump the other day.
By the way, I wonder how the left feels about that.
I know that a relative of mine on my wife's side,
he's English and he's leftist, and he we know, and
(57:28):
he lives in New York. He loved clear Kiir Starmer's election.
How does he feel about Kir Starmer meeting Trump and
being so praising. Oh, you're welcome to come and stay
with the King. And I just wonder, I mean, you know,
this is maybe this gets back to the Rachel Maddow question.
(57:49):
You know, I mean, all of a sudden, now is
he going to be ousted from the pantheon of left
of the constellation of left wing heroes for this you know,
to me.
Speaker 3 (58:00):
Going to happen with this infighting, it's going to spiral
into this absurd if you will, circle jerk where they
don't know who to attack and.
Speaker 2 (58:12):
It's stuck an end where I mean, you could see
a smart.
Speaker 3 (58:15):
Guy like Bill Maher is already laying down the gauntlet,
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (58:22):
He started to attack many people on the left. You
can see the riding on the wall.
Speaker 1 (58:27):
He's been doing that for a while. And you know,
in a way, it shows what's happened to like the
Democratic Party because it's splintering. You have the Bill Mahers
of the world, and you know, who are like kind
of more centrist and they'll liberal, but they're not you
know they're not woke, as he says, and then you
(58:50):
have the hard woke who's still control the the apparatus
and who are just doubling down. I heard recently speaking
of woke that Pritzker. You mentioned Pritzker, Yeah, one of
the Pritzkers. And these people are multi billionaires. They come
from the Higat Hotel. Yea is a transsexual and presents
(59:14):
himself as a woman and is a big, big donor
to the Democratic Party and to Democratic candidates, which is
why they can't move away from that issue. They can't
move away from men and women's sports, They can't move
away from men and women's locker rooms and changing rooms
because of Pritzker's brother and the money pouring in probably
(59:39):
from other people too, So they are beholden to the
very forces that they claim to be against, big corporate
money buying the party, buying them up, so they can't
tell the truth. They're locked into it.
Speaker 3 (59:57):
But the more reliable to develop a populist network of leftists,
if you will, because anybody in any business will tell
you that you'd rather have a large number of small
orders than a small number of big orders for any
(01:00:17):
number of reasons. So to have some transsexual wheeld this
much power.
Speaker 1 (01:00:24):
It's just lazy, it is. And I don't think it's
just him. I think there are other forces. You know,
the USA. We know how much money USAID was shifting
to this cause. This is a big leftist cause. But
the thing is it does it's not popular with the
large segment of Democrats and liberals. They don't like this.
They don't want men and women's sports. They have daughters,
(01:00:46):
you know, you had here in Massachusetts. Congressman Seth Molten
spoke up. He says, look, I have daughters who are
attending high school and they don't want to play on teams.
He was, yeah, completely, he could. He was viciously attacked.
You had people, you know, with signs outside his office
(01:01:07):
in Salem and people attacking him all over the place.
So he yeah, he capitulated. He had to. I mean
it shows how what col cult like they are. You
kind of have an.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
You say he had to. Why did he have to.
Speaker 1 (01:01:25):
To keep his children from being beaten up in school?
I don't know. He just maybe it's his career. I mean,
this is the same thing that with abortion back in
the nineteen nineties. He Ray Flynn, former mayor of Boston,
former ambassador to the Vatican, and somebody who used to
do a radio show right before mine at a Christian station,
(01:01:46):
and who I knew. He told me that he was
drummed out of the Democratic Party because he was pro life,
that that was forbidden in the nineties. You know, around
that time, there's a purge of anyone in the Democratic
Party that was pro life, which included most Catholics.
Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
And but most but not all.
Speaker 1 (01:02:08):
I mean, no, no, you have Yeah, I've.
Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
Changed, he changed ripes, yeah, and Flynn at least left,
he did a.
Speaker 1 (01:02:19):
Lot of it was taken over by the pro choice movement.
That was a that was a litmus test. You could
not be anything but in the Democratic Party. Was that simple.
Either you had to change or get out. That's what happened.
So that's what's I think happening now with some of
these more radical ideas. If you're not if you're not
on board, you're gone. You know, you're out, And that's
(01:02:43):
going to hurt them, I think at this time, because
these are not popular ideas nobody, you know, they're not supported,
they're they're outdated. If they ever had any value, if
they ever had any validity at all. They don't. They
certainly don't know so anyway, Mike, But when you have
coming up on the sub stack.
Speaker 2 (01:03:03):
Well I think of it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:06):
Try to come up with with more threads out of
this Ethel Rosenberg thing. I mean, I got some decent
commentary on it, and it's got people are thinking that
there really are true believers.
Speaker 2 (01:03:24):
I mean, you can see it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:25):
So I think we'll be more into the media side
of it and the Jake Tapper and it's just they're
all phony.
Speaker 2 (01:03:33):
I don't even know if you believe anything.
Speaker 3 (01:03:35):
I think it's just whatever they have to say to
stay on top.
Speaker 1 (01:03:40):
I agree. I mean, either they're just doing it because
they have to they're afraid to step outside of the cult,
or the true believers. We don't know. I mean, it
doesn't really matter. The point is that they're saying on
and they're going down with the ship, hopefully God willing.
Speaker 4 (01:03:56):
Anyway, Yeah, yeah, I'll have to miss next week, okay, traveling,
Okay during you know, during the day, probably won't be available.
Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
But will we have a double good one two weeks
from now?
Speaker 1 (01:04:12):
You bet.
Speaker 2 (01:04:14):
In the meantime, you're and your site is winning.
Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Oh absolutely, And I've posted your article up you know,
with this show, So if anybody wants to go to
a substack, you're welcome to and keep on keeping on.
God bless America indeed talking next. Okay, take care,
All right, welcome aboard everyone. Charles Moskowitz here live on
all of the usual networks. Michael D. Shaw is my guest.
Mike Hawaia.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Just great.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
And you've got your excellent article up Ethel Rosenberg and
the Model u N which I want to talk about.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Well, thank you, thank you. You were a big inspiration
for that one.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Well, you know that it's a good article. And I
just want to mention, just as a footnote here that
I'm also live on TikTok right now and we'll see
how long that lasts. But in terms of them shutting
it down, that could happen during this show, you know,
that seems the way it goes. However, I think there's
good news on that front. There is a really this
(00:48):
administration is seems to be determined in recent comments from
Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Cash Patel and
to FBI Director Dan Bongino, what a great they're saying
that they're going to have trans as they call it, transparency,
(01:09):
and when they say it, you know they mean it
because they've been there, they've seen they've been censored these
past four years, and they're going to move forward in
terms of ending this authoritarian, sorry to use this word,
but fascistic agenda of censoring opinion. And again, we're not
(01:31):
talking about censoring you know, violent you know, calls or
anything like that. We're talking about the censoring of opinion
that doesn't agree with any particular regime, something that's not American.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
American. You're seeing it happening in Europe.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
And by then we see Vice President Advance taking it
on with both fists, and that's an exciting thing to
see right there in front of them on and calling
them out. And we certainly have seen it here and
I think that this administration is dedicated to putting a
stop to it, and that the BONDI has said that
(02:13):
they're going to release all of the information around both
the Epstein files and also the JFK assassination, the RFK
and the MLK assassinations. Maybe they'll also get to the
Biden laptop and the Wiener laptop, not to mention Hillary's emails.
(02:34):
All of it the FBI has been sitting on and recently,
I think it was actually yesterday, the Attorney General released
a small segment of files from the Epstein case, and
what we discovered was that it's still incomplete. It's a
(02:55):
lot of it is redacted. And the theory is that
the FBI still has moles. You know, they still have
people in there who are deep staters who are hiding
the information. Maybe they might have already destroyed it more likely,
and that Attorney General Bondi has directly ordered FBI Director
Cash Pttel to find those people and fire them and
(03:17):
get the information out. So it's moving in the right direction.
This is this is a very difficult and courageous may
I say, endeavor to get rid of these people. These
are dangerous people who are determined and who probably have
destroyed We'll never see all of it because most it's
(03:37):
probably been destroyed anyways, and you.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Know how many of the moles are there in all
these Asians riddled with it just came out and said
that the Biden administration was fully aware that these sex
chat rooms were going on with the intel agencies for
the entire Biden administration didn't do anything about it.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Oh, that's the tip of the iceberg. I mean, this
goes way back. I remember former Congressman Bob Barr, remember
him from Georgia. He wrote a book about this back
in the nineties, and I believe. I interviewed him on it,
in which he said, look, the government has three million
employees and they are deeply embedded into every aspect of
(04:27):
our life, and that these are people who are baseless, unaccountable.
This is exactly what Steve Bannon is talking about when
he talks about the administrative state. This is what Michael
Jake Lennon talks about with the double government. I mean,
this is exactly what they're going after. And these people
are very powerful and dangerous people. They play for keeps.
(04:50):
So it's not going to be easy to do this.
It's going to take I mean, look at JFK, in
my opinion, gave his life taking this thing on. And
you know, it's it's a very tough tough nut to crack.
I mean, it's it's power, it's wealth. Speaking of wealth,
did you see that? Did you see that Barack Obama
(05:13):
getting a two point five million dollar a year of
royalty for the use of the word Obamacare, paid by taxpayers?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Did that actually occur? Yes?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
I don't know if you caught that story.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
No, I had heard some rumors about it.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
You mean that's for real, Yes, it is for real.
Since twenty ten, Barack Obama apparently patented the word obamacare
and started.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Collecting that he didn't like the term original.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Oh yeah, they hated it. I remember when I was
co hosting the show with doctor Patrick o'heffernan and I
used the word obamacare and hit a meltdown. Oh it's
an Affordable Care Act. And it's not even called Obamacare,
It's called the Affordable Care Act. So why is the
government paying him royalties to the tune of two point
five or two point two maybe, I don't know, over
(06:03):
two million dollars a year. I mean talk about scams.
I mean this is like I think his daughter got
a big check. We know that Hillary maybe go to
who knows well, who knows how much they take in,
but their daughter three million dollars to pay for her
wedding out of the US aid and ten million to
(06:24):
buy a mansion. Yeah, this is just I mean the
amounts of.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Was apparently pritzkergh who was fairly wealthy on his own by.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
The way, about multi billionaire as the owner of the
Hiatt hotels.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Multiple NGOs paying him money through the US government.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
Well, the NGOs, I mean these shadowy, unaccountable, you know,
private bureaucracies the way that worked. And look, this is
something that was discussed in the in the Founded in
the hearings on Foundations in the nineteen fifties, I mean
the Wiss Committee. Is that the USAID, which is a
(07:04):
government agency with public funds, would basically launder funds through
these NGOs and they would then in turn give it
away to all of their allies and friends, including these
leftist politicians, just because they can. And also they had
apparently the Taliban was getting huge sums of money under
(07:27):
the Biden regime through the USAID. Oh, it's going to
humanitarian causes. I mean really, I mean and that now
they're using the lie, well you're getting rid of No,
they're not getting rid of humanitarian causes. I mean, the
budget of the USAID maybe about ten percent of it,
maybe at most fifteen percent went to humanitarian causes. That's
(07:50):
been continued. That's not touched. They're continuing that. It's under
the direct auspices of the Secretary of State. It's the
other it's the rest of it that's gone. And now
you see what is it. There's a transgender clinic in
India has had to close its doors. Why because they
(08:12):
the USA I D money dry it up. That's why
you know this is uh, you know, it's it's starting
to show around the world who was getting money from
US A I D. And what their agenda was. Their
agenda was transhumanism, specifically transgenderism. Their agenda was critical theory,
specifically critical race theory. And their agenda was world you know,
(08:37):
weakening world sovereignty in the in the you know, in
the interests of alleged peace, and they're taking they're taking
it on over there. I mean, we have people in
government right now who know full well what's going on
and who are openly and brazenly taking it on. Did
you see any of that meeting. I think it was
(08:59):
there today with President Trump and Zolensky in the Oval Office.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
Well, I heard some quotes from it, and it is
about time. I mean, how many hundreds of billions of
dollars have we spent on graft getting people killed?
Speaker 1 (09:18):
It's been I mean that's I mean, where did who
actually put that money? You know, I know we noticed
that the minute that war started, the Clintons re established
the Global Initiative. I wonder why money started polling in
I mean, and Zolensky was using the same old language,
whereas Trump and Vance was was tremendous. The dude, the
(09:38):
they took out, you know, they took off the gloves.
I mean, it was like a real back and forth.
And he's like, here you are, you know, during the
campaign campaigning against us in American cities. I mean, and
now you're insulting this administration. But while we've given you
how many you know, billions of dollars? You know, you're
(09:59):
on the loop the end of the argument. I mean,
they made no bones about it. It was amazing. I mean,
it was all seen publicly. It's, you know, the kind
of stuff that usually goes on behind closed doors with Trump.
That just turned on the camera and they went for it.
It's fantastic.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
I wonder what the reaction of the left.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Is going to be there, because it's it's really causing fragmentation.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
There was quite an exchange between Georgia.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Galloway and Piers Morgan, uh where Piers Morgan was appearing
to defend this unlimited support of Ukraine. George it was
a big leftist of course, Yeah, just was sharing everything
Morgan said and it's about time. You know, who was
(10:51):
it that Kat Williams said, the truth will come out,
and it's it's really started you on all this.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
So your article about Ethel Rosenberg and the model you win,
I mean, it's like the question that it raises is
that how is it that you have people who are
such extremists, in the case of Ethel Rosenberg, that she's
willing to sacrifice her own life as a martyr in
defense of communism, and that that has certain parallels with
(11:25):
this opposition to President Trump. Now that these people that
you don't see too many people breaking out of this cage,
that their brains and their souls are locked, that they've
locked them into you know what I call a hologram.
They're like continuing to goostep. If you watch MSNBC for example,
(11:48):
and I do, like Rachel Meadow, I mean, it's like
they've just a doubling down as nothing has changed. It's
almost like it's like an alternative universe or something like that,
and a universe.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
But you can oversimplify and say it comes down basically
the atheism that.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
F L.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Rosenberg's religion, despite that she was nominally Jewish, was Communism.
So in a rather perversion of the word martyr, she
was happy to die for the cause despite being offered
any number of times.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
And Julius also, by the way, that if.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
They gave more details on the aspiring, their lives would
have been spared.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Right, And then other people like her brother did give
details that his life was spared. Yeah, and he said,
look I had you know, people like on the left
were like so critical or look at you, you're a rat.
And he goes, listen, I have a wife and children.
I've got a family here that I have to consider first.
So I had to do this. I mean, I'm saving
(12:59):
my own life. And but the issue of her martyrdom
is martyrdom in and of itself is okay? Is fine?
I mean, like in my history class, we're studying the
early Church and we're looking at the foundation of Venice
and several other things, and a lot of these incredible
stories of saints, like Saint Mark for example, I mean,
(13:21):
they were martyred, they died in to defend their belief.
You could find that also on the Jewish side too,
like the people who died at Masada and Rabbi a
Kieva and died at the hands of the Romans rather
than you know, surrender his faith that's one thing. But
(13:43):
to you know, to die like for Communism, to die
like as a suicide bomber, to kill as many Israelis
as possible, you know, that's something else. So it's not
the institution.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It's not exactly dying for a good cause.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
And right, I mean, I'd like to think that I
would be willing to die if it meant defending the
life of my own daughter, for example, my wife. I
remember when that there was a shooter who went into
a movie theater in I think it was in Colorado
a while ago, and you had men stand up and
stand in front of their wives to protect them, and
(14:20):
they were killed. It was a natural thing. I mean,
that's like, you know, you're willing to sacrifice your life
to preserve a value, something of such value to you,
and you you know, it's like a natural instinct. But
that's not you know, in the case of defending the
Soviet you know, attainment of nuclear bombs, I mean, that's
(14:45):
like insane, you know, it's sort of like you know,
I mean the like suicide people, you know, hijacking an
airplane and crashing it into the World Trade Center. It's
like why, you know, it gets what is it that
they are dying for.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Well, you know, there's been a lot of relitigation of
the story. Okay, it ends up as that put in
the article that even her sons admitted.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Quite recently years later.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah that Yeah, indeed the father was a flat out spy,
she was, she typed stuff up. Whatever. But it took
and they had a notice from from the.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
Get goes I just was canceled on TikTok. I don't know.
It wasn't Ethel Rosen. Well no, they said they were
restricting the number of people who can view this. They
haven't totally canceled it yet. Maybe it was maybe they
maybe they're soft on Ethel Rosenberg. Who knows anyway, whatever, So.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
They admitted it finally because they were forced to look.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
There were relatives that I had when I was it,
and in Itteen fifty three, I was a pretty young kid, right,
but I remember in the early sixties there were relatives
I had.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Who were hardcore leftists and even.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
They were saying, no, the rosea Vers are one hundred
sent guilty, and it was very convenient for them because
then they could show that they're not, you know, full
on comedies themselves. But Ethel was a true believer and
died for a bad cause, and the tieder course of
(16:30):
the model u N. No one in the model u
N has died for a cause that I know of.
But they have these points of view that are formed
and that's it. It never changes. And that's the Rachel
Mata situation, right that all this craft is coming out now,
that's going to show that so many of these social
(16:52):
welfare programs.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
Were all crap. We're all money laundering schemes. Because I
pointed out in the article, after all these twillions of
dollars are spent, these problems are still with us. How
is that possible? How is it?
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Well, it's possible because ninety nine percent of the money
went to NGO's one percent of the money went to
the people.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
I mean there.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
I had mentioned this many times in articles I've written
over the years. When the War on Poverty was first
launch in nineteen sixty four, LBJ made a televised visit
to some poor, down and out Appellation.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Guy whose name I don't remember.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
It's in a few articles I wrote this mass he
was out of work, he was missing most of the teeth.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
It's almost like they had to find the stereotypical.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
No, I know, I mean he was auditioned.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
Yeah, so anyway, they come in there.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Look, you know, we're gonna get your job, we're gonna
get your training, we're gonna fix your teeth.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
All right, and he was supposed to be the exemplar
for all the people they were to save. So the
elite media did a one year follow up later. Well,
he got some training, he got some of his teeth fished.
(18:29):
But the point is he was still to me in
his crummy shack. He didn't have stable employment. And at
that point I realized, damn, if they don't even care
about the.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Poster boy, right, the one person yeah for.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
This program, then this is all a croc. Now.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
I noticed that when I was seventeen, eighteen years old,
but apparently none of the media cared or knew about it.
And that's the other thing. The media is a croc.
What's the latest example? You know what I'm going to say,
Jake Tapper saying, all along, Biden's in great shape.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Yeah yeah, So.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Now Tamper's gonna be up with a book documenting.
Speaker 3 (19:17):
The cover up that the media engaged to show his
decline and he's getting ream for this rem Okay, there's
video of him being stopped in airports, people mocking him.
And then you wonder, all these years of watching all
these elite figures and it's all crap, and those of
(19:41):
us like you and me that figured it was all
crap and being lonely voices, now it's as obvious as
the Day's law or no.
Speaker 1 (19:52):
So Tamper is being attacked for writing a book chronicling
what he had himself covered up all those years, which
is that Biden was in decline, and you have leftists
and people that don't want any criticism attacking him for that.
I mean, that's what we talked about earlier, like with
Rachel Matdow. Rachel Matdows spent three years with a tin hat.
(20:16):
You know, they talk about conspiracy theorists Trump you know
putin you know, basically conspired with or they like to
use the word colluded because they don't want to say conspired.
You know, that's for the right with Trump to steal
the twenty sixteen election. That's what that was all about.
(20:36):
And after three years of sending out these fake leaks
and night after night of doing these programs, most of
the stuff being complete crap or totally twisted. Finally, the
Malla report comes out saying that nothing of the kind.
You know, they dragged it out for three years, but
he said no, there was no evidence of this. And
(20:59):
then the report goes on to say, well, there might
be obstruction of justice because Trump criticized the Mother Group.
Oh oh, blah blah, you know this kind of crap.
But the point is the first page is the only
relevant page where I said, no, we didn't find anything.
Now you would think that Rachel Maddow would apologize, Well,
you think that she would at least acknowledge something. I mean,
(21:22):
and I remember sending her several tweets at that time.
I'm like, look, you present yourself as a patriot. You
say that you had, like I think your father was
a military man. You know, you come from a family
that I think goes back and you know, you feel
that you're doing what's best for your country. And I
watched her, you know, like on top of Mount Sinai
(21:45):
every night, Oh, America is on the siege and democracy
is threatened and the constitution. Can you at least acknowledge
that you were wrong here or if something nothing, No, acknowledgement.
She just they didn't mentioned it. They just kept going
and instead they focused on other shreds of stuff. And
(22:05):
then of course they then jumped the head foot into
the perfect phone call impeachment. It's it's because it.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Is funny that it all comes down to the same
story that it was the deterioration of Saint Francis, right
messure on the show. The late Saint Francis was a
conservative pund it. He later moved to what might uncharitably
(22:34):
be called white nationalism, although I'm using that.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
In quotation of arts right.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
Then he discovered that he had a certain audience, like
the Jared Taylor audience.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
Let me just interrupt you. I just got another warning
on TikTok. I'm still there. I think the trigger might
have been w h I T E n A T
I O N A L I s M. Just a thought.
I don't know what it was, but they picked up
on that word and they got a warning. Okay, go on, Wow,
yeah I say that. I think So that's okay. Look,
(23:12):
this is a we're this is censorship. I mean, this
is what we're dealing with now. I mean, we're having
a political conversation about stuff going on, but you know everything,
Maybe this is an example of the dangers of AI.
I don't think there's a person over at TikTok monitoring
the show. I think that this is what this is
the dark side of AI. Now I'm not against AI.
(23:35):
I think it could be a tool that, when in
the right hands, when used properly, can be very helpful.
But and chat, GPT and all the rest, I'm just
studying it actually, But the darker side of it is
that it can be programmed in a way to pick
up certain words and if you say those words, it
doesn't matter what the context.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
What's really stupid. If fast the cases I was using
it as for jor.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Look, I mean one of them, I lost my YouTube channel.
I mean there were three reasons, and one of them
was because I interviewed David I don't know if you
remember him, Yeah, I mean, and we were both of
us being somewhat observant Jews, talking about Jewish issues, and
somehow that came to the attention and we it was
called antisemitic. Okay, so not because of anything in particular
(24:26):
that we said, but it was probably looking back at it,
it was there was certain trigger words that we might
have used, and when they accumulated to a certain point,
it caused an electronic reaction. You know. That's what's going on.
That's the dangers of turning functions over to machines and electronics.
(24:48):
I mean, I mean, there was a case recently where
an insurance company stopped coverage of someone in the middle
of an operation, right, I mean, I think you heard
about that. It's not because some person did that. There
was some kind of an algorithm that had reached a
point where they had a you know, there was a
(25:08):
stop loss. It's kind of like I mean in the
stock market people, you know, when you invest in a stock,
you can put a stop loss on it electronically, which
means that if the stark valuation goes below a certain point,
it automatically dumps the stock and it sells. Not always
a good idea, by the way, but the point.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Is that if you that's highly trivial compared to how
languages used. Right, just to finish the thought anyway is
discovered yet an audience. Okay, so it ends up because
people are lazy that you tailor your message to this audience, right,
(25:49):
And it's the decline of Saint Francis and to some
extent Joe Sobrand. Yeah, well, that one's bad. But in
the case of ritual mad out in MSNBC, they know
that people will dutifully watch that network to get the
particular point of view that they want.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
So that it up. No, I think that's right. I mean,
I remember this was years ago during the Trump's first administration.
Michael Smerconish, he's a left leaning but reasonable radio talk
show hosts in Philadelphia. He's been there for a long time.
He's a lawyer, he's very smart. He made a mild
(26:36):
praise of President Trump for something that he had done.
I don't know what it was, I don't remember, and
I heard him talk about it. And for that, not
only were they getting protests and they got his sponsors
who had been with him all his career were getting
threats that they're going to get boycotted and death threats
(26:56):
and people lining up O. I mean that he had
to reach can't. I'm sorry, you know, A big miss big, big,
big mistake. And and so that's what Rachel Mattow I mean.
I think Rachel Maddow is a true believer. I think
she's deep in it. But even if she wasn't you know,
(27:16):
you can't you know they're going down with the ship.
I mean, they're not gonna you know, if you know, if.
Speaker 4 (27:21):
She's saying, here's they don't know anything different.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
They don't know anything different.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
I mean, you could come up with five thousand pages
of evidence showing that the vast majority of the social
programs were money laundering crab. But since their religion is
is I like to point out that you rewrite the
Gospels right. The charity is not giving the alms to
(27:49):
the poor, is giving the arms to Caesar and then
he'll distribute it to the poor or something like that.
Or I guess he will go through an NNGO to
distribute the money. And that's what they believe, and it doesn't.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Matter, no. And they also believe in the stuff that
the NGO is giving the money to. I mean like
they believe in Hsballah, you know, they believe in the Taliban.
You know, this is all transforming mankind. And they believe
in you know, the sex change operations in India. These
are things And what I'd say to them is if
they believe in these things, maybe they should open their
(28:26):
own checkbook and write a check to it fine, but no,
they want to have the taxpayers do it. They want
to have the US government do it. And you know,
that's a lot of what it is. And then you
know it is a religion. I mean, this is why
Ethel Rosenberg gave her life, not because it's not a
political It does prove that that's a religion. You know,
she believes in this. It has nothing to do with reality.
(28:49):
It has to do with the entire belief. They know
that you mentioned Lyndon Johnson. They know that the War
on Poverty failed, they know that the Great Society failed.
They know the Vietnam War failed. But of course that
that's another story. But the point is that they didn't
care it was successful from their view because it furthered
their socialistic fantasy. I mean, a weakened the country, a
(29:12):
weakened society. It rendered, you know, it ripped apart the
fabric of our of our system, which they support. So
that's that's what Rachel Mattow cares about. She doesn't care
about getting to any kind of moral truths. She cares
about destroying Trump because he represents an enemy of this leftist, collectivist,
(29:34):
internationalist ideal.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
Everybody right and is mentioned in that article that.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
Okay, as the late great did lude to you to say,
grants your opponent.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
His first premise.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
All right, so the first premise of the opponent is
these are great programs you've got to help the poor,
and so all right, well, wouldn't you have more money
to help them if you got rid of all the
fraud and waste? But they're not interested in that.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
No.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
I don't think that the left would be interested in
saving and preserving social security. That was the great program
of you know, of FDR. So they would get on
board with the fact that there's all this fraud. No,
they don't. They attack it. They don't care, you know,
they they don't At first, I don't want Trump to
(30:29):
get credit for cleaning it up. But even putting that aside,
they wouldn't like it if if Biden did it, they
just donated to them. It's like, and you.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
Asked yourself, well, what are the optics of this? So
what do you really stand for? I guess you stand
for the status quo of turning this into a money
losing socialist bureaucracy that's going to go bankrupt. But don't worry,
you know, the commiss are so you'll be okay, and
it's it's really sick and finally it's being exposed. But
(30:58):
I'll tell you there's true believers everywhere you go. And
it's not just socialism. I mean I had some years
ago a fruitless conversation with a guy who is allegedly conservative,
and we started talking about the rather now obvious point
that FDR knew about Pearl harbor In advanced there's a
(31:22):
serious historian that disputes that.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Right.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
His reaction was, no, I can't believe that. I won't
believe that.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
And how do you know, you know, it's hard, it's
harder to you know, somebody can't you know, admit that.
You know they can't. I mean I know people like
that too. I mean they're going to go to the grave,
goose stepping along to something. They just This is again
why this is a religion and it's a cult. It's
not a religion like you know that that has like
(31:56):
like early Christianity with martyrs, because it had a moral core.
You know, it actually was preaching truths. It's a religion
that is trying to pervert and contort reality, which makes
it even more lethal. It's a you know, and well
and well, and the adherence to it more loyal actually,
(32:17):
so that's why we have this you know u N.
You know this model U N establishment that it continues
to Like at a young age, they accepted a bill
of goods, they got rewards for that they got they
saw other people being punished for not accepting it. That's right,
(32:38):
and then they went on. I mean, you know, if
you take a look at any of these liberal events,
you know, like I don't know, the oscars come to mind,
you know, cultural events, Right, They're constantly giving each other
these awards, and they get up and they're worshiping these
statues and they're like, I want to thank the know
(32:59):
shlow mos so and so and you know, and I
want to and there's a wonderful and and they're praising
each other and their shelves are groaning under the weight
of these trophies, and it's just, you know, this is
how they It's like an insular kind of a world.
And if you see them interviewed on the late night
talk shows, their main conversation is I actually met with
(33:23):
whoever Borbachoff, you know, one of these left wing heroes,
and you know, we spend time in his presence and
oh and I'm part of this thing where we all
get together and so and so, I don't know, you know,
Catherine Hepburn, you know what ever, I mean, we could
just go. You know, they all like have this world
where they they know each other and they talk about
(33:44):
what it's like to be with each other and what
this person really is like, and it's it's kind of
like an insular world where they award each other and
they massage each other and they they adore and adulate
each other and it's a cult. Yeah. And then when
(34:04):
you're watching this on television as a regular joke six pack,
you know, you're like, wow, gee, I guess they do
know these people. Oh gee, wow, Henry christ I don't
know whoever. You know. Gee, that's amazing. They must be
so like this rarefied world. I remember a relative of
mine when briefly Caroline Kennedy, horrible person. Obviously she was
(34:30):
running for I think a senate in New York had
completely failed. Even the left had some. It was so awful.
You know, her one interview, but this person says, right.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
And it was only one interview, and she came across like.
Speaker 1 (34:44):
Klus completely completely tanked and and and you know, and
yet this person says to me, Yeah, but can you
imagine the rooms that she's been in with the people
that she's been exposed to. It's like these you know really,
I mean, it's like this kind of they imagine this
kind of almost you know, wonderland type place. I mean
(35:07):
with these people like oh, she's rubbed shoulders with you know,
these other people, and that they all it's like some
kind of a fairy dusters like brushing off on them,
and that we should give them credit just for that,
we should award them for being good socialists, you know,
you know big they've they've supported the right things, they
(35:28):
utter the right slogans, and so they're therefore the magic
door opens for them. And it's like this rarefied world
and they can't get out of it. That's what Rachel
Maddow is all about. She got ten million dollars a year.
I mean, this is an award. What the hell is
she doing? That's that's I mean, And they're talking about poverty.
(35:49):
I mean, really, joy Read, I mean, she's the most racist,
the most divisive. I mean, you know, she's the David.
She's like a black version of David Duke. I mean's
just you know, awful.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
I think David Duke had more class.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Yeah, I mean, she's absolutely vulg vile. And those women
on the view, oh.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
I mean just well quickly coming to an end.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Yeah, but you know, but the thing about it is
that not only are they spewing this toxic vile, but
people are like, oh yeah, they're plotting and like like
they're like it's so mindless, and it's like, yeah, like
look at them. They know people, and they've gotten to
sit around with Barack Obama and Big Mike you know whoever.
You know what I mean. It's like it's like they
(36:41):
all are sort of in this incestuous world are getting
divorced sposedly. I mean, no wonder we had this cropping
up of this. I don't know if I should say
this word on TikTok, but QAnon, remember that I'm not
end using that that was crazy, but I can appreciate
where that kind of came from. When you have these
(37:03):
elites in Hollywood in politics like Obama and them and
you and these you know, these exalted business figures like
Mark Zuckerberg and you know, and they all kind of
talk to each other and they control through their influence.
I don't want to use the word control. Let's just
say they influence large segments of our culture and our media,
(37:28):
and our high high institutions of learning, and you know,
even our businesses. And they you know, it's like you
do think sod to think. Gee, maybe these people are
you know, cutting off the heads of babies. I don't
know what the hell that they were into. I mean,
I'm not endorsing that at all, but you know, you
do wonder. I mean it kind of opens the door
(37:49):
for making those things seem almost plausible.
Speaker 3 (37:52):
Well, I mean here you use inductive reasoning. Yes, why
should any decent person want to suppress the Epstein files?
Speaker 1 (38:03):
Yeah exactly. You know, it's efer worse than that. You
know who the lawyer was on the Epstein case defending Epstein.
They keeping those files locked up? James Comey's daughter. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
I mean talk about you know, so, you know, I
wonder why people have conspiratorial thoughts.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
Well, they call it conspiracy theory, but what if it's true?
Speaker 1 (38:26):
Well, there were conspiracy theories and there are conspiracies. Yeah,
I mean I think that a responsible person tries to
debunk bad conspiracy theories and try to, you know, make
a case for ones that turn out to be true.
I mean, both things go on, But of course there
are conspiracies obviously. I mean it's just the way it is.
(38:47):
That's human nature. People are going to conspire and they're
going to use force and fraud and deception in order
to achieve corrupt ends, you know. I mean it happens
all the time in business. What do they think, you know,
they conspire to rip off another business so they can
have more success. There are laws against that. I mean,
(39:11):
murder is part of a conspiracy. You know, you're knocking
somebody off because they're in the way. Those are conspiracies.
There's a criminal conspiracies, So why would they think there's
not political conspiracies. It happens all the time because his
power involved, there's money involved, there's influence involved, and this
prestige involved, and people crave all of those things. And
(39:35):
if you are somebody standing in the way of your
achieving those things, you may get together with like minded
people and conspire to get those things at that other
party's expense. That's the that's human nature. That's why we
have a basic part of our government, a basic part
of every government throughout history in some version is a
(39:55):
department of justice. The department of Justice one of their functions,
and a congress is to investigate these conspiracies and expose
them and bring people to justice when it happens. It's
a basic I mean, there were conspiracies in your own family.
I mean, everybody deals with conspiracies all the time. It's
(40:17):
just it's just the way it goes. I mean, there
are conspiracies in your own mind. I mean, we all
it's just part of human nature.
Speaker 2 (40:24):
Well, you know this sounds like the beginning of a
new book for you.
Speaker 1 (40:29):
I am writing a chapter actually in my book on this,
and I've written on this topic. You know, it's just
it's just the way it goes. I mean, it's just
part of human nature. But you have to be responsible
because there are, you know, wrong conspiracies often are cooked
up by governments or by powers to kind of deceive
and engage in what's called a false flag, you know,
(40:52):
I mean, it's just a that's important. It's important to
reveal the bad conspiracies, the false conspiracies separate the eat
from the chaff. So anyways, but wow, but we have
you know, these are These are heady times, These are
exciting times. Every day. I feel like it's like Christmas morning,
(41:14):
waking up and getting gifts under the tree.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
You know, of course last week.
Speaker 3 (41:19):
Uh, at what point are some of those in the
mainstream media going to turn?
Speaker 2 (41:26):
I don't think you have to get.
Speaker 1 (41:29):
Lester Holt is going down to the ship. He's gone.
They're all, you know, they're just I think they're just
gonna They're just gonna they're they're gonna start to like
vanish after a while, because these these are people, you know,
they have to continue to maintain some relevancy. I mean
it's their entire I mean you now have major donors
(41:50):
who are backing out of the Democratic Party and this
whole I mean, what is there, what what do they
stand for? You know, they're against cutting the size of government.
They're against cutting waste and fraud in government. That's why
they hate Elon Musk. I mean, you know, and then
these things keep coming out which show how bad it is,
(42:13):
and they're going to rail against that. They want to
leave a permanent government infrastructure in place that people can't
be laid off. I mean Starbucks just laid off over
a thousand executives they just announced the other day. I mean,
you know that's happening in the private sector. What do
these government people, somehow sacroo sainct. Does anyone believe that
(42:35):
an actual service that we want government to provide is
going to be affected by firing half of these people?
I mean obviously not.
Speaker 3 (42:44):
No. And you didn't hear one p from the mainstream
media during COVID and the lockdowns when so many people
lost their jobs.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
That's right, all these small businesses, mom and pop stores. Meanwhile,
the big box places and Amazon they did gangbusters during that.
And also that Trump is it's so an innovative. I
saw an interview with Howard Lutnik, who is the new
Secretary of Commerce, and Trump said to him, he goes, look,
the post Office is losing because that's under the Secretary
(43:17):
of Commerce. They're losing how many billions of dollars a year?
What can we do? You know? Should we save it?
Should we get rid of it? And I want answers.
And the next day Lutnik was at a meeting with
Trump and Trump says, so, what did you come up with?
You know, he has one day, you know, and so
Lutnik said, had several very interesting suggestions. He pointed out that,
(43:40):
for example, the sense in the US census it cost
one hundred million dollars, and they hire trucks and people
and they have to pay them and give them lunch
and give them, you know, security, and they have to
go out and knock on every single door in America
to count people. He goes, why not just have the
post post office do this? They go to people's houses
(44:02):
every day, and we could do what you save one
hundred million dollars right there. The Post Office could do
things like delivering social security documents to a new board,
or they could do all kinds of functions that the
government's spending a fortune doing when you could consolidate it
and it would give the Post Office a little bit
more relevancy and more functionality while we streamline elements of it.
(44:27):
I'm just saying that these are incredible ideas. Why didn't
anyone think of this? I mean, it's like they're coming
up with I mean, it's amazing what they're doing. It's
like every day. And now Trump the other day that
today he's signing an executive order declaring English as the
official language of the United States, hallelujah. It's about time.
(44:50):
We won't have Spanish subtitles. I mean, you know, the
English it's like, oh no, you can't do that because
it's like I'm a racist. We have the one thing
that holds us together as a nation is our common language,
so we can communicate with each other even if we
don't like each other. You know, you have a simple
(45:12):
lingua franca. You have like the language of the land.
It doesn't mean English is superior. It just happens to
be the national language has been since the day you know,
you know, you know they got off the ship at
the Mayflower. I mean it's just that simple.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Well, yeah, I mean there is no country, maybe with
a possible exception in Switzerland, and even that isn't exactly true.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
You have multiple.
Speaker 3 (45:40):
Official languages in Switzerland, for example, it's regional and yeah,
it's a small country. So if you're a German speaking
Swiss person, you've certainly heard French in Lauson and you
can get by. But in candidates never worked.
Speaker 1 (46:03):
It doesn't work well. I mean it's like like Belgium
I think is coming apart because they've got.
Speaker 2 (46:10):
The thing in Belgium, and I hope they changed it,
but I don't think they did.
Speaker 3 (46:15):
Was they would have French and Flemish, all right, and
Flemish is sort of an old style dudge, right, so
what would happen is all these sides would have French
and Flemish on it. Then they get an argument about
which language would go first.
Speaker 2 (46:34):
I was in a car what an experienced.
Speaker 3 (46:39):
Doing some business in Brussels with a guy who was
really international, spoke many many languages, albeit not Flemish, and
the Brussels airport is in the Flemish part of Belgium. Okay,
So he goes to pay his parking at the airport
(47:01):
and the guy tells him how much in Fleturish. Well
you could understand that if you knew any German, right,
But instead the guy looks at him and says Common,
forcing him to answer in French.
Speaker 2 (47:17):
Just to be a language asshole er. So I mean,
I was astounded because this was such a cultured guy.
Speaker 3 (47:24):
I thought that they get caught up in this and
it's pathetic.
Speaker 2 (47:32):
So no, that bilingual thing doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (47:37):
No, it's important for any sovereign nation to have a
national language. It just is. I mean the British, you know,
for all of their faults. They united India with one language,
Hindi and also English by the way, and you know,
it created a cohesion. It doesn't mean you don't have
local languages, local dialects, which is all good, but you
(48:00):
have all public affairs are conducted. I mean the Roman Empire,
all public affairs were conducted in Latin. Didn't mean that
everybody spoke Latin. I mean in the region of Judea,
they spoke Aramaic, but they knew that the people in
charge knew Latin and that was the language of the land.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
There's as the scripture was Arabic in Arabic.
Speaker 1 (48:27):
Yeah, I mean even in Israel today, I mean it's Hebrew,
arab and English. Arabic and English, but you know, all
three languages are pretty well known. But Hebrew is the
national language. It says you have to have a national
language in order to have some kind of unity, so
that people can communicate with each other. You know, there
(48:47):
has to be it's a part of commerce. So I'm
proud of President Trump for doing that. Should have been
done years ago. It's an excellent development.
Speaker 3 (48:55):
Can imagine why do you even have to do it?
Speaker 1 (49:00):
But I guess you have to do it, you have
to do it. Somebody should have done it a long
time ago. But you're going to see howells from the left. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (49:09):
On that topic, there was of course an anti trumb
article written by La Todds travel writer.
Speaker 2 (49:19):
Mary mac namara.
Speaker 3 (49:21):
Then Trump must now are going to ruin your summer vacation, right,
How are they going to ruin your summer vacation? Well,
one of the reasons is that because of immigration policies,
hotels may have trouble now getting people. So does that
mean that she in the favor of exploiting illegals to
(49:44):
work in the hospitality industry?
Speaker 1 (49:48):
Basically, yeah, I mean And.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
So so this back to your point that you know,
as long as this privileged brat can go on her travel,
I don't care about anybody. So what kind of a
left wing socialist are you if it doesn't mean anything
other than you're wearing this team jersey for team all right? Right,
(50:18):
it's just pathetic, and you know you would be expected
to see more converts, but you really don't. Nothing's changed
since Henry the Eighth broke away from the Catholic Church. Really,
the Saint John Fisher was the only priest that that
(50:44):
was a martyr for refusing to change affiliation. Thomas Moore
was a martyr also, but I mean he wasn't a priest,
and it's like most of them went along with the program.
Speaker 1 (50:56):
So yeah, and I think he was a pretty bad
guy from what I understand history not to mention the
fact that, and I think E. Michael Jones, by the way,
he is right about this in his book about called
the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, which has very little to do
with Jews. It's all about Catholic versus Protestant. It's a
great history of that. I mean, he doesn't mention Jews
(51:18):
until the end of the book, practically a little sprinkling,
but he points out that Henry the Eighth, I mean,
that was a looting operation nothing more. They looted and
stole all the Catholic churches and properties and art and
all of the artifacts, and they just and they handed
them all out to their friends. And those friends that
(51:40):
got all those properties would become the British elites, like
the Rhodes, Cecil Roads and the Cecil family and all
these other people that are still there as the elites.
I think that's historically accurate.
Speaker 3 (51:54):
Well, it is, and you have to wonder, I mean,
Isa Isa Catholic. I have to wonder why the people
in the Anglican Church don't seem to care about this.
Speaker 2 (52:05):
That was all.
Speaker 1 (52:05):
Elicit They benefited from it, they got the you know,
the doorknob.
Speaker 3 (52:12):
Anglican of the present day didn't benefit from it.
Speaker 1 (52:18):
No, And I think that I think that the Protestant
takeover of Britain was not something that happened overnight, and
it involves a lot of very strong armed stuff going
and with the final curtain falling on guy Fox right.
I mean that's so, it took about one hundred years
(52:38):
and even to this day it's it's like the you know,
the Anglican Church, I mean, the King of England, they
have they can't you know, marry a Catholic and they
can't be Catholic, and that's like a no no. The
fact I think it was Tony Blair. His wife is Catholic,
(52:59):
and apparently they say that he secretly converted to Catholicism,
but he couldn't do it publicly because it's illegal for
the Prime Minister to be Catholic, and that only after
he left office did he become openly Catholic. They still
have that I think in England, it's it's interesting that
it's even like, I mean, I was reading that that
(53:20):
when when the King of England now Charles became king
and that he, you know, he's going to have the ceremony.
He had a he invited religious leaders from all part
of England to come and have a reception and meet him.
Accept the Catholic head it was not invited, and he
(53:42):
invited the Jewish guy and you know, various other religions.
But the next day he privately met with the Catholic prelate,
and the Catholic Church of England was like, this is great,
He's actually met us. You know, this is a step
in the right direction that we're actually getting a little acknowledgment. So,
(54:03):
I mean, those are traditions that continue in many ways.
It's an interesting history.
Speaker 2 (54:09):
Yeah. I mean, if you Michael Jones had stuck to there.
Speaker 1 (54:14):
Oh my god, he's become like he's gone way off
the deep end on.
Speaker 3 (54:19):
I think it's the old Michael Hoffman problem right there.
There's elements of Michael Jones audience. There are hardcore anti semits,
right they're sitting in donations and vibue books and well,
you know, we have to cater to this audience with God's.
Speaker 1 (54:40):
I think he's a true believer in what traditionally was
a view that permeated the Catholic Church but no longer does.
In that the Jews are collectively guilty for the fact
that two thousand years ago the Judean leadership have advocated
(55:00):
the execution of Jesus. Now, I mean, I get that,
you know that that and since Jesus is the Messiah,
Jesus's God, therefore they were guilty of killing God, and
as such they were guilty of overthrowing the order of
the universe, what the Greeks called the logos.
Speaker 3 (55:20):
All right, but the only problem with that interpretation is
that he had to die.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
And well, well, the problem is that they, Yeah, if
the Jews of Judea, who did not believe that Jesus
was the Messiah, but therefore they would view him as
a heretic, if they had maybe just exiled him, or
maybe they had sent him off or something. I mean,
it was obviously a big mistake for them to advocate
(55:47):
that he'd be executed, because I mean, I think we
learn from history they should not have done that. If
they had not done that, then then Christianity would have
developed maybe on different lines. Yeah, because I think Jesus
himself was very much his messiah ship was very much
within the overall realm of Jewish understanding of the Messiah.
(56:12):
It wasn't such a diversion.
Speaker 3 (56:14):
And but the divergent because their fashions developed against it.
That the the idea that the Christians going to supposedly
be mostly from Jewish stock that only lasted for one
generation or less. And with the famous you know, Paul
(56:36):
going to the circum sized, sorry to the uncertaincised Peter
go to the circum size.
Speaker 2 (56:43):
So it it is interesting, but.
Speaker 3 (56:48):
People just don't reflect on this stuff, and you have
these absurd contraditions like in the UK.
Speaker 2 (56:57):
Where they can't do this. So they can't do that.
And now if you set up a meme on something,
you can go to jail.
Speaker 1 (57:08):
Well, I mean, I think that during that meeting with
President Trump, jd Vance brought that right up to Keir
Starmer at that meeting he met with Trump the other day.
By the way, I wonder how the left feels about that.
I know that a relative of mine on my wife's side,
he's English and he's leftist, and he we know, and
(57:28):
he lives in New York. He loved clear Kiir Starmer's election.
How does he feel about Kir Starmer meeting Trump and
being so praising. Oh, you're welcome to come and stay
with the King. And I just wonder, I mean, you know,
this is maybe this gets back to the Rachel Maddow question.
(57:49):
You know, I mean, all of a sudden, now is
he going to be ousted from the pantheon of left
of the constellation of left wing heroes for this you know,
to me.
Speaker 3 (58:00):
Going to happen with this infighting, it's going to spiral
into this absurd if you will, circle jerk where they
don't know who to attack and.
Speaker 2 (58:12):
It's stuck an end where I mean, you could see
a smart.
Speaker 3 (58:15):
Guy like Bill Maher is already laying down the gauntlet,
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (58:22):
He started to attack many people on the left. You
can see the riding on the wall.
Speaker 1 (58:27):
He's been doing that for a while. And you know,
in a way, it shows what's happened to like the
Democratic Party because it's splintering. You have the Bill Mahers
of the world, and you know, who are like kind
of more centrist and they'll liberal, but they're not you
know they're not woke, as he says, and then you
(58:50):
have the hard woke who's still control the the apparatus
and who are just doubling down. I heard recently speaking
of woke that Pritzker. You mentioned Pritzker, Yeah, one of
the Pritzkers. And these people are multi billionaires. They come
from the Higat Hotel. Yea is a transsexual and presents
(59:14):
himself as a woman and is a big, big donor
to the Democratic Party and to Democratic candidates, which is
why they can't move away from that issue. They can't
move away from men and women's sports, They can't move
away from men and women's locker rooms and changing rooms
because of Pritzker's brother and the money pouring in probably
(59:39):
from other people too, So they are beholden to the
very forces that they claim to be against, big corporate
money buying the party, buying them up, so they can't
tell the truth. They're locked into it.
Speaker 3 (59:57):
But the more reliable to develop a populist network of leftists,
if you will, because anybody in any business will tell
you that you'd rather have a large number of small
orders than a small number of big orders for any
(01:00:17):
number of reasons. So to have some transsexual wheeld this
much power.
Speaker 1 (01:00:24):
It's just lazy, it is. And I don't think it's
just him. I think there are other forces. You know,
the USA. We know how much money USAID was shifting
to this cause. This is a big leftist cause. But
the thing is it does it's not popular with the
large segment of Democrats and liberals. They don't like this.
They don't want men and women's sports. They have daughters,
(01:00:46):
you know, you had here in Massachusetts. Congressman Seth Molten
spoke up. He says, look, I have daughters who are
attending high school and they don't want to play on teams.
He was, yeah, completely, he could. He was viciously attacked.
You had people, you know, with signs outside his office
(01:01:07):
in Salem and people attacking him all over the place.
So he yeah, he capitulated. He had to. I mean
it shows how what col cult like they are. You
kind of have an.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
You say he had to. Why did he have to.
Speaker 1 (01:01:25):
To keep his children from being beaten up in school?
I don't know. He just maybe it's his career. I mean,
this is the same thing that with abortion back in
the nineteen nineties. He Ray Flynn, former mayor of Boston,
former ambassador to the Vatican, and somebody who used to
do a radio show right before mine at a Christian station,
(01:01:46):
and who I knew. He told me that he was
drummed out of the Democratic Party because he was pro life,
that that was forbidden in the nineties. You know, around
that time, there's a purge of anyone in the Democratic
Party that was pro life, which included most Catholics.
Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
And but most but not all.
Speaker 1 (01:02:08):
I mean, no, no, you have Yeah, I've.
Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
Changed, he changed ripes, yeah, and Flynn at least left,
he did a.
Speaker 1 (01:02:19):
Lot of it was taken over by the pro choice movement.
That was a that was a litmus test. You could
not be anything but in the Democratic Party. Was that simple.
Either you had to change or get out. That's what happened.
So that's what's I think happening now with some of
these more radical ideas. If you're not if you're not
on board, you're gone. You know, you're out, And that's
(01:02:43):
going to hurt them, I think at this time, because
these are not popular ideas nobody, you know, they're not supported,
they're they're outdated. If they ever had any value, if
they ever had any validity at all. They don't. They
certainly don't know so anyway, Mike, But when you have
coming up on the sub stack.
Speaker 2 (01:03:03):
Well I think of it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:06):
Try to come up with with more threads out of
this Ethel Rosenberg thing. I mean, I got some decent
commentary on it, and it's got people are thinking that
there really are true believers.
Speaker 2 (01:03:24):
I mean, you can see it.
Speaker 3 (01:03:25):
So I think we'll be more into the media side
of it and the Jake Tapper and it's just they're
all phony.
Speaker 2 (01:03:33):
I don't even know if you believe anything.
Speaker 3 (01:03:35):
I think it's just whatever they have to say to
stay on top.
Speaker 1 (01:03:40):
I agree. I mean, either they're just doing it because
they have to they're afraid to step outside of the cult,
or the true believers. We don't know. I mean, it
doesn't really matter. The point is that they're saying on
and they're going down with the ship, hopefully God willing.
Speaker 4 (01:03:56):
Anyway, Yeah, yeah, I'll have to miss next week, okay, traveling,
Okay during you know, during the day, probably won't be available.
Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
But will we have a double good one two weeks
from now?
Speaker 1 (01:04:12):
You bet.
Speaker 2 (01:04:14):
In the meantime, you're and your site is winning.
Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Oh absolutely, And I've posted your article up you know,
with this show, So if anybody wants to go to
a substack, you're welcome to and keep on keeping on.
God bless America indeed talking next. Okay, take care,
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.
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.