The Story the DOJ, FBI and Media Don't Want You to Know with Christina Bobb - Sarah Westall

Former Trump attorney Christina Bobb joins the program to reveal what really happened behind the scenes during the Mar-a-Lago raid. In this explosive interview, Bobb shares firsthand details about the FBI’s actions, the Biden Administration’s weaponization of the DOJ, and the unprecedented use of lawfare against a former president.She also opens up about her own experience being personally targeted for reporting on irregularities during the 2020 election — including the $1.6 billion lawsuit designed to silence journalists, create fear, and force compliance across the media landscape.

You can purchase her new book at https://ChristinaBobb.com 

See exclusives and more at https://SarahWestall.Substack.com

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hi, everybody, it's me Cinderella.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
Ax.

Speaker 1 (00:07):
You are listening to the Fringe Radio Network. I know
I was gonna tell them, Hey, do you.

Speaker 3 (00:14):
Have the app?

Speaker 1 (00:15):
It's the best way to listen to the Fringe Radio Network.
It's safe and you don't have to log in to
use it, and it doesn't track you or trace you,
and it sounds beautiful. I know I was gonna tell him,
how do.

Speaker 4 (00:29):
You get the app?

Speaker 1 (00:31):
Just go to Fringe radionetwork dot com right at the
top of the page. I know, slippers.

Speaker 4 (00:38):
We gotta keep cleaning these chimneys.

Speaker 3 (00:45):
This holiday.

Speaker 5 (00:46):
Discover meaningful gifts for everyone on your list at K
not sure where to start?

Speaker 4 (00:50):
Our Julry experts are here to help you.

Speaker 5 (00:52):
Find or create the perfect gift in store, online, book
your appointment today and unwrap love this season.

Speaker 4 (00:58):
Only at K, those cases were being challenged, and so
we didn't know who was going to come out the

(01:19):
winner because there was still litigation ongoing about problems with
the election. So if Donald Trump had actually won that litigation,
he would have won that state. And so, in order
to comply with federal election law that requires the electors
to meet on December fourteenth, the Trump Electors met on
December fourteenth to create the Trump slate of electors that
could be used in the event that Donald Trump actually

(01:40):
was successful in his litigation. And one. I mean, that's simple, right,
It's been done before. It happened in nineteen sixty when
John F. Kennedy originally lost Hawaii to Richard Nixon. He
was challenging Hawaii, he created an alternate slate of electors.
Ultimately he was successful and that alternate slate of electors
was the one that was actually counted. So there's historic

(02:01):
precedent for it. They followed exactly what Kennedy did in
nineteen sixty and according to Arctic Frost, the stuff that
came out from Arctic frost, and what the prosecutors are
alleging now, the prosecutors are alleging that that was fraudulent
and forgery. We're all charged with nine felon accounts of
conspiracy to commit forgery.

Speaker 3 (02:18):
Welcome to business, game Changers. I'm Sarah Westall. I have
attorney Christina bob She was the former attorney for President Trump.
In fact, she was the consul on record with the
Mara a Lago raid and she wrote a book called
Defiant inside the mar Lago raid, which you can get
at her website or at pretty much anywhere find books
or sold. But she's going to talk about the craziness

(02:41):
that happened inside that raid. But we're also going to
talk about the law fair that's going on in this country.
You know, I talk about my channels back up on
YouTube because they Google emitted in front of Congress that
they were indeed coerced by the government. I don't know
if people remember, we went to the ninth we went
all the way to the Federal Court, and they denied

(03:03):
any kind of government coercion. Now they're coming out publicly
and saying there was. So they lied to the courts
and they that's how they shut down our case by lying,
and now they're admitting it. And they brought all the
people who were wrongly taken down for political reasons against
the First Amendment. They reinstated our channels, and so I'm

(03:26):
happy my channel's back, but I don't want to be
suppressed anymore. I don't want to be hurt anymore. And
just think of the damage that that caused. And so
we're going to talk about that's real law there, that's
real damage to I mean, it's a trillion, multi trillion
other corporation and the very very powerful that Justice Department
or the people of the Biden administration who told them

(03:51):
and coursed them and take the people like us down.
The most powerful people did that against people like me.
I don't have that kind of power. And so the
utter bullying and harassment. You know, they accused of us
of doing all these things, but the bully and harassment
that we just had to suffer through and average everyday

(04:14):
people are dealing with. And she's going to talk about
what people are dealing with. I know it's you hear
about Trump and the mar A Lago raid, but the
real consequences are what it's doing to this country. And
we're going to talk about some of the some of
the stuff that she's seen and how incredible it is.
I was saying it's one step away, because they were

(04:35):
intimidating her as a journalist, and the Dominion had a
one point six billion dollar lawsuit against her. In other countries,
they killed journals. You know, journalists are snuffed out, and
that's one step away from taking the extra step. I mean,
they're essentially snuffing us out by doing things those fear tactics.

(04:55):
The next thing is, you know, I don't want to
say it, but that's the next state. And we are
dangerously close to becoming a country like that when we
allow these people in power to use to just lie
and doever with the court system. So this is beyond
time for us to have these conversations. And if you

(05:17):
are interested in getting that book, I will have the
link below, or again you can go to christinabob dot com,
which is her website. Okay, so let's get into this
really good, engaging conversation with Christina Bob. I think you're
really going to like her. She's a you can tell
she's just a good person. We need good people in
this country. Okay, here is Christina Bob.

Speaker 2 (05:38):
Hi.

Speaker 3 (05:39):
Christina, welcome to the program.

Speaker 4 (05:40):
Thank you so much for having me. Sarah'm excited to
be here.

Speaker 3 (05:43):
You have some pretty interesting inside personal experiences with our
justice system that people have no idea just how crazy
it's become. And you were a former Trump attorney. You
worked on the elections, but you saw a lot of
other things from the inside. You're now with Judicial Watch.

(06:05):
But our countries moved to like post justice system furnace, right,
I mean, we're a law fair company or country where
the system just doesn't operate like it used to, if
it ever did.

Speaker 4 (06:17):
Yeah, I think that's true. I think what's happening is
people inside whatever administration it is, certainly the Biden administration,
This is very true. You know, there's arguments about it
in the Trump administration, although I think it's significantly less.
They're getting bolder and bolder with what they're willing to
use the Department of Justice for. And I think you know,

(06:40):
in decades past, people had a lot of especially people
that worked within the department, had a lot of respect
for what the department was. They wanted to be seen
as impartial. I'm not saying it was impartial, but they
at least tried, right, they tried to give that appearance.
I think that's out the window. I don't think, at
least during the Biden administration, I don't think they were
even trying to come across as impartial. In the Trump administration,

(07:03):
I think, you know, people are arguing saying that Donald
Trump is going after Comy and these these folks as retribution.
I don't necessarily agree with that, although you know, anytime
you have one party going after the other party. There's
cause for concern. I think all of these people belong
in prison for what they did to our nation. But

(07:25):
but yeah, there's a lot to break it, you know,
to break it down.

Speaker 3 (07:29):
Well, if they're not taking the Justice Department seriously and
they're using it, weaponizing it, and going against the constitution.
I know that just a few weeks ago, three to
four weeks ago in Congress, Google admitted to government coercion
during before the election, and all of our channels were
taken down. They reinstated all of us. But it's been

(07:52):
five years and they finally admitted to it. We went
to court. We're in the ninth Circuit and Google said
they acted alone, and they weren't acting alone. It's kind
of like, at what point do they have to pay
for the harm that they did to so many people?

Speaker 4 (08:08):
One hundred percent, that's exactly right. And what I think
the mainstream media is missing when they're talking about this
is how much not just the law fair, but the
actions taken by Google, taken by the Department of Justice,
tick and by formerly Twitter you know now x is
that they're really significantly harming individual people. That's it's not

(08:30):
just a campaign an issue with a campaign. This is
not just an issue against a billion dollar company or
or a dollar company, Yes exactly. They they are coming
after everyday average Americans and like all the Arctic frost
that's coming all of that information that's coming out recently,
I was part of that. You know, I'm kind of
in this weird middle place. Because I worked for Donald Trump,

(08:52):
I had a little bit of a platform. You know,
some people who were following Trump closely knew who I was,
and you know, I was kind of wrapped up into that.
But really, in reality, you know, at least I felt
more just like your everyday American. You know, I don't
have a long history in politics. I really kind of
fell into it about the twenty twenty election, and so

(09:13):
I feel like I was kind of in the gap between,
you know, the everyday American who isn't connected to the
president first, you know, being a presidential you know, associate
some sort and so I kind of see it from
both angles, and they the people that are abusing their power,

(09:34):
whether it's the Department of Justice, whether it's Google, whether
it's these big companies that want a certain political agenda
served they're doing it at the expense of Americans, and
like I mentioned with Arctic Frost, a lot of the
targets on that list. There were four hundred names on
that list. Some of them more organizations, Some of them
were elected officials, you know, GOP senators and all that,
but a lot of them were just GOP volunteers, people

(09:57):
who had volunteered to be elector you.

Speaker 3 (10:00):
Know, explain what Artic frost is for the people who
don't know.

Speaker 4 (10:03):
Sure so, Artic Frost was the FBI DJ's you know,
that was their code name for the investigation into Donald
Trump and his supporters following January sixth, following the twenty
twenty election, and they came up with and this is
all coming out because Senator Grassley had issued a subpoena
and he he released a lot of the information that
DJ turned over to him. And what the FBI and

(10:26):
DOJ did shortly after the twenty twenty election was they
created a hit list of people that they wanted to
target and go after with no probable cause. It's not
like there was probable cause in these documents saying hey,
you know, it appears that Joe Schmoe robbed a bank
and we have videos advantance of Joe Shmoe robbing a bank,
we should go after Joe shamp.

Speaker 3 (10:44):
What was the criteria? Simply they supported Trump and they
had some core, they had the ability to influence others
to support them. Is that what well?

Speaker 4 (10:53):
I mean, that's a great way to summarize it. Yes,
that's what they did, but it's not spelled out well
in the documents. It's literally a list of names. It's
just a list of people that they targeted. And now
some of them they go into more detail, like you
have the list, and then there's other documents where they
describe how they're investigating these individuals and what they're doing.
But it wasn't. It wasn't kind of like what you're

(11:14):
describing where you find a crime and then you break
down how what kind of evidence we want from that crime? No, no, no,
this was literal.

Speaker 3 (11:21):
It was a hit list.

Speaker 4 (11:22):
The way I describe it. It's a hit list. And
they had a lot of people on there who were
just local volunteers of the Arizona GOP then Avada GOP,
and those volunteers ended up becoming electors. Now we've all
heard about the alternate electors, you know, the left of
us to call it the fake electors. All of that,
there's nothing fake about it. All of them were lawfully
appointed or elected by their party. But at the end

(11:44):
of the end of the day, these are just very
committed volunteers in their community that want to be part
of the political process, and basically, as a reward for
being so involved and being such a great volunteers, they
get appointed or elected to serve as an elector. It's
an honor, it's an absolute honored as a presidential elector.
And the DJ tried to scuttle that. I mean, they

(12:05):
tried to scare these people. They targeted all of these electors.
I'm still a criminal defendant as we speak out in Arizona.
I was never an elector, but you know I was associate.

Speaker 3 (12:15):
We're targeted because you were. You were trying to expose
the election on irregularities and stuff. So the thing is
is there has to be a healthy sense of responsibility
and respect for what it is that you have when
you have this much power, when you're the most powerful
country in the world, wielding the kind of resources they have.
Same with Google and alphabet when they are a multi

(12:37):
trillion dollar company. When you have those kind of resources
and you put your might behind going after somebody who
is a single individual with zero resources, maybe making you know,
one hundred thousand a year without any kind of you
know anything. Yeah, that is so out of whack. And
that's the definition of tyranny and bullying. They're bullying people

(12:59):
and it's extreme. It's abuse.

Speaker 4 (13:02):
It's abuse, and it's tragic. I mean, I have friends
that have lost their homes. I know people whose relationships
have deteriorated because the stress of all of it was
just so tragic. I am so fortunate that, at least,
particularly for the criminal case, I had enough of a
platform where people could see me and they could see
what was going on, and I had a donor step

(13:24):
in to help me with my criminal defense case, which
is amazing. There a godsend, I would have lost everything.
I would have lost my home, I would have I
would have lost everything, and so I'm really grateful that
they stepped in. But a lot of people didn't have that.
A lot of people don't have that. And the cases
are still ongoing. These cases are still open, and you know,
the media can wag their finger at the folks that

(13:45):
were involved in Arctic frost as much as they want,
but until you point out the fact that they are
hurting real everyday Americans and these people are still being
hurt by it. You know, it's great that you put
the stories out there, but it's not doing anything well.

Speaker 3 (13:58):
And you know, I listen to multiple different things because
I want to understand how they think. So I've been
spending some time listening to NPR and it makes me
angry sometimes because I know the backstory and some of
these things, but they just say it as if it's
fact that these people were criminals, and that's evil in

(14:20):
and of its evil. I know is a word that's
been overused, but that's almost criminal. Yeah, irresponsible, And they
act like they care so much about people, but it's
the opposite of caring. And I wish the people would
understand how their lack of caring and the hypocrisy of
what they're saying and doing. And it's so important. But

(14:43):
that's why freedom of speech is so important, so people
can see just really what these people are doing.

Speaker 4 (14:51):
Yeah. No, you're exactly right. And I'm so grateful that
you're starting the show with this because so many people
you don't want to start with the marloggo raid, or
start with some of the other more sensational stuff. But
in my opinion, and this is what I told the
publisher as well, I think this is the most important
aspect of the story because it's affecting everyday Americans. The
political class is going to do what the political class does,
and unless Americans are given the information and given the

(15:15):
freedom to actually challenge what the political class is doing,
you know, their power goes unchecked. And you're exactly right.
It absolutely is criminal. It's not just MPR, you know,
lying to the public disway opinion. They lie to the
grand jury. I mean they told they told the grand
jury that I went to Arizona to hand out ballots
and to participate in all of this, and they had

(15:36):
zero evidence to support and PR did that. No, no, no,
I'm sorry, the prosecutors did that. Sorry just comparing, but no,
the prosecutors the grand jury that I went to Arizona
and was handing out ballots, which I didn't in and
of itself, I don't see how that's illegal anyway, but
I didn't.

Speaker 3 (15:51):
But I was like, that fraud on the court. I mean,
at what point can they they just lie to the
court and make stuff up to create story, and it
doesn't they don't have to pay for the price.

Speaker 4 (16:03):
Well, that's the problem. The courts are allowing them to
do it, right, the courts are So my case was
filed in April twenty twenty four, so it's been about
a year and a half that it's been open, and
we had Arizona is one of I think it's the
only state in the country that has an anti slap
statue for criminal cases, meaning you can bring a basically

(16:24):
ask the court to dismiss the case because the prosecution
was brought for unconstitutional purposes. And so in our case,
we all filed an anti slat motion saying, hey, this
case needs to be thrown out because it was brought
for political purposes, which is a violation of our constitutional rights.
And the court agreed with us, granted the first half
of the motion. The second half of the motion. It

(16:45):
then shifts to the prosecutors to prove that they did
not bring it for political purposes, which is a very
very high bar to prove. The La lais out specific
things that they have to prove in order to meet that,
and there's not a chance in you know where that
the Arizona prosecutors would be able to prove that so
the court has just never held the second half of
the hearing for a year and a half. It's just
lingering open.

Speaker 3 (17:07):
And so meanwhile, all these people are struggling and suffering
and they're going through these emotional things because it's never ending.
At what point, I mean, how do how do we
clean this up? When the justice system is so broken?
What are avenues to be able to You know, people
keep talking about common law le I just throw out

(17:27):
the whole system, But I mean is it fixable? And
what are avenues to actually get around this lawfare that
is so bad that the courts are ignoring the laws
and implementing they're just not doing their duty.

Speaker 4 (17:44):
Yeah. Yeah, And you know, people ask me all the time,
like how do we fix the system? The system is fine.
I think the system actually works. The problem is you
have people in very powerful places that are abusing it
and that are allowing things to happen that should not
be happening. And I'm specifically talking about judges right now.
I mean you have all of these judges. I mean,
look at here in Washington, d C. Where President Trump

(18:06):
has many cases pending. Because these judges are allowing activists
to muddy the courts muddy at President Trump's agenda. You know,
they're trying to throw sand in the gears, and the
courts are allowing it. And so ideally I would love
This is not in the realm of possibility at the moment,
but I would love to see one or two judges

(18:27):
impeached and just say, hey, look, we do have checks
and balances in this country, and if you are going
to abuse your position on the bench, you're going to
get impeached. And the reason I say it's not in
the realm of possibility at the moment is because even
if the House, even if the House impeached a judge,
you need two thirds of the Senate to convict. And
we can't even get a continuing resolution passed out of
the Senate. You know, there's no way you're going to

(18:47):
get that out of the Senate.

Speaker 3 (18:49):
Well, it's kind of like, and I like to use
sports analogy because I coach sports and played sports from
my whole life. Yeah, and and sports is so trivial
compared to this. This is real life consequence. Yeah, but
if you if you have a referee who is just
decide they're not going to follow her. They're just going
to make up their own rules and do their own thing.
Then that the game is complete crap, right, Yeah, And

(19:11):
the way to rectify that is that referee gets fired
never gets hired again.

Speaker 4 (19:15):
Yeah right, So exactly right.

Speaker 3 (19:16):
The game is okay, but if you've got a rep
that's not implementing it, then it doesn't. You might as
not even played the game, right, that's the analogy. Yeah,
and that's why people are like, well, I don't even
want to use the system if they're not going to
follow the rules of the system.

Speaker 4 (19:30):
Yeah, that's that's one hundred percent right. That's a very
good analogy. The system itself is not broken, it's the
people that are in positions of power. We are seeing
Supreme Court finally kind of pushed back on that a
little bit. President Trump has had a lot of wins
in the Supreme Court, which is I mean, that's good, right,
that it's stopping the chaos, But there's so much chaos

(19:52):
at the lower level.

Speaker 3 (19:53):
And so.

Speaker 4 (19:54):
You know, Justice Roberts, she's Justice Roberts. I don't see
him as you know, a bulwark of justice, but he's
the chief Justice, and he's the one that needs to
be sending the message to the lower courts, hey, reign
in your political activity, meaning your political decisions. You know,
you're not gonna you're not gonna like what's coming down.

(20:15):
But you know, short short of the Chief Justice taking
a stand saying hey, lower courts, do your job correctly,
actually follow the law, or short of Congress the whole
Congress impeaching a judge or passing legislation, they can pass
legislation limiting the role of the lower courts because the

(20:36):
lower courts are not constitutional. It's the Supreme Court that's constitutional.
The lower courts follow from statute, so they could legislate.
But if you don't have a court that's going to
do his job, and you don't have Congress that's going
to do its job, it's going to make it really
hard for the President to do his job because the
other two branches are not they're not providing the checks
and balances that they're designed to to create.

Speaker 3 (20:56):
Well, and that's the problem with the courts is the
were all stuck with it. So like in a busy,
if you order a wedding cake and they just make
whatever they want. You want it to be pink and
they keep giving black or whatever color. You know, I
mean they just do whatever people wouldn't buy from them.
But when it comes to a court system, you have
to use the flip and court system. And if it

(21:17):
doesn't get fixed and people don't have any other recourse
other than I mean, what is our recourse if the
system and it's not you say it's not broken, Maybe
it's another it's what's the right word for it. If
they're not actually following the constitution, then where's the point.
It's almost like these judges, if there's a pattern of

(21:37):
not following the law themselves, then that should be an
automatic dismissal and automatic impeachment.

Speaker 4 (21:44):
Well, that's why your show is so important and shows
like yours that are actually talking about this, because like,
my judge is elected, right that you vote at a
lot of times off cycle elections, but a lot of
these judges are elected at the state level, local level,
and so people need to be aware of, like who
are these judges? How do we get them out? You

(22:05):
know and replace At the state level, you can replace
the judges. It's a little bit harder at the federal
level because they can't be replaced unless they're impeached. But
I to me, the solution is exposing all of these people.
It's hard work. It's a lot. It's grunt work doing
what you're doing, you know, pulling the information out and
trying to expose it to the people, i e. The
voters that have the ability to replace these people. But

(22:29):
we need better people in these positions. I mean, that's it's.

Speaker 3 (22:32):
Just bottom line. I went through it. I suffered from it,
you know, with the and watched and personally had to
deal with the fact of what it was like. So yeah,
I got to learn firsthand. Like you, there's nothing like
learning firsthand going Wow, this is actually happening, and this
can happen to any one of us and it's really
harming us. But can you I mean, you're an attorney
with judicial Watch, what are the kinds of things that

(22:54):
are happening? I Mean people are like, well, what are
you talking about? Why is it so bad? Talk about
some of the patterns of behavior that you're seeing. Yeah,
people get an idea of just how extreme some of
this behavior is.

Speaker 4 (23:07):
Yeah, so in my case, and I've got a lot
of examples from my case, but it's all over the place.
But in my case, you know, we had filed that
anti slat motion and we were required to file it
within forty five days of the indictment, meaning we had
to file it in June of twenty twenty four, which
we did. And the reason why you have such a
short timeline is because the motion is designed to get

(23:28):
rid of the case quickly, because if your constitutional rights
are being violated, we want you to get out of
that quickly, right, And so we filed it right away.
Like I said, it's still lingering. The court has not
even held the second half of the hearing it. But
the original judge who heard the original hearing, he was
the one that sat on it. The hearing, I want
to say, was in July or August sometime, and then

(23:53):
he sat on it from months and months and months
and we couldn't hear anything. We're like, what is going
on with this judge? Why aren't we getting a ruling
on our emotion?

Speaker 3 (24:00):
We'll talk about hold on before we give us like
at least a brief description on why you're even in
court so that the people who don't know understand. Sure.

Speaker 4 (24:09):
So I'm a criminal defendant with the alternative electors in Arizona,
and they were trying to say that the activity of
the alternate Electors the Trump Electors in Arizona was illegal.
It is not what they were doing. The law requires
the electors to vote on December fourteenth, like that date
is written in statute. Well, on December fourteenth of twenty

(24:30):
twenty Arizon in my case, Arizona, and this is true
for all the other states. Those cases were being challenged,
and so we didn't know who was going to come
out the winner because there were still litigation ongoing about
problems with the election. So if Donald Trump had actually
won that litigation, he would have won that state. And so,
in order to comply with federal election law that requires

(24:51):
the electors to meet on December fourteenth, the Trump Electors
met on December fourteenth to create the Trump slate of
electors that could be used in the event that Donald
Trump actually was successful in his litigation. And one that's
I mean, that's simple, right, yep. It's been done before.
It happened in nineteen sixty when John F. Kennedy originally
lost Hawaii to Richard Nixon. He was challenging Hawaii, he

(25:15):
created an alternate slate of electors. Ultimately he was successful,
and that alternate slate of electors was the one that
was actually counted, so there's historic precedent for it. They
followed exactly what Kennedy did in nineteen sixty and according
to Arctic frost, the stuff that came out from Arctic frost,
and what the prosecutors are alleging now, the prosecutors are
alleging that that was fraudulent and forgery. We're all charged

(25:37):
with nine felony accounts of conspiracy to commit forgery.

Speaker 3 (25:41):
Wow, but it's just made up to try to scare
you into not doing it. And they know that. They
just want to create fear. And that's where the not
only should they not be allowed to do this, but
the punishment for using their power to create fear in
others who have a lot less power should be a

(26:02):
higher crime like they should have because because they're using
their power position.

Speaker 4 (26:09):
To haunt others. Yes, that's exactly right, that's what they're doing.
So we filed our anti slab and said, hey, this
is there's nothing even close to being unlawful about any
of this. It's clearly being brought for political purposes. This
case needs to be thrown out. The judge ruled in
favor on the first half. He ruled in favor of
us and then sat on it. I'm sorry the first

(26:32):
judge did not rule in our favor. He didn't rule
at all. He didn't rule. The hearing was in August.
Why I'm about to say so. The election is in November, right,
November fifth this year, I think. And then on November seventh,
a local reporter in Arizona, judge still has not ruled
on it. He wanted to get through the election because
he was trying to create all this turmoil for conservatives.

(26:54):
Then on November seventh, the local reporter in Arizona got
a hold of the judge's emails, and the judge had
email to the entire bench in Maricopa County as well
as the county commissioners, saying Trump supporters are no better
than Nazis. They needed to be treated like Nazis. We
have to get Kamala Harris across the finish line, and
we got to support her. We got to support all
these DEI policies. Basically, he sends out an email telling

(27:16):
all the court to to like stomp on Trump supporters.
This is my judge. He's supposed to give me a
fair and impartial trial. And he emails the whole bench
to say I'm a Nazi and.

Speaker 3 (27:29):
He's behaving like, well, he's behaving like this exactly. There's
no introspection on their own behavior.

Speaker 4 (27:38):
That is well, I think he raised a good point,
Like I think for so long the Democrat Party has
has kind of held the position of if you're a
good person and you're loving and your kind, and you
care about people, and you you know, you just want
world peace and you just love everybody, well then you're
a Democrat and you're morally superior to people who don't
want what you want, and then.

Speaker 3 (27:59):
You're a love in kind and you're morally superior. You
can be as evil and hate period.

Speaker 4 (28:04):
And filled yes, and that's been a bad as you
can for decades.

Speaker 3 (28:08):
Like I'm just loving and kind, so I'm going to
be mean and not kind because I'm loving and kind.
It's like what no, I.

Speaker 4 (28:15):
Had someone tell me. This is totally off topic, but
kind of funny and exactly what you're saying. There was
an event locally here that I had been invited to
and by Democrats, like very liberal Democrats. It was not
a political event, just a local party. They didn't know
my background, they didn't know who I was. They didn't
know I'd work for Presdent Trump or anything. And they
found out a couple of days before the event that

(28:36):
I was conservative. And they told me, they said, oh,
dare you no, I know, And I was gonna go like, yeah, great,
I'd love to hang out with you. Go you know,
I know that I live in Washington, d C. Right,
everybody's liberal. I know everybody's liberal, But I still want
to socialize with you.

Speaker 3 (28:51):
Sure, why yeah, why not?

Speaker 4 (28:53):
Yeah? And so I go, yeah, sure, I'd love to come.
That'd be great. And a few days before the event,
they were like, oh, we just found out your conservative.

Speaker 3 (29:02):
You know.

Speaker 2 (29:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (29:02):
This was not a political event. It was like a party, right,
and they just found out as conservative. And I go, yeah,
I go, but I go, does that bother you? And
they no, no, no, no, no, it doesn't bother us. And I go, okay,
I go, I have I have assumed all of you
are liberal. I knew you were liberal, but I don't care,
like I'm capable of hanging out with liberals. And they go, yeah,
you know, we love everybody. We're very inclusive, very very inclusive.

(29:25):
But we think it'd be a good idea in this case.
They asked me to not come.

Speaker 3 (29:30):
Oh my god, yeah, that's what everybody's experiencing, right, But
you know what, the people like Nick fuents and and
they're making everybody to be out like that, that's what
they I'm I am more on the right only because
I like small government and free yea and all that,
and I don't buy into some of that other So

(29:53):
I don't. I don't think social issues are the only
reasons why you want someone. I mean, I don't think
social issue to me. I know everybody has different opinions,
but my reasons for being in this is is the
how the justice system operates, how the financial system operates,
how big the government is. You know, all these things
that I think are more or there are very important,

(30:14):
and we've gotten to the point where only the social
issues matter. It's like, come on, that's stupid.

Speaker 4 (30:20):
Well, I think they're just they're just trying to divide
us because they realize that there's more of us, meaning
everyday Americans. There's more of us than the political class,
and so they're trying to divide us by are you
a male, are you a female? Are you a female
who used to be a male, or a male who
used to be a female or are you like and
so they're just trying to break us up into smaller groups.
I agree, so that we can't actually unify to vote

(30:44):
out the people who belong out of office, you know,
because you.

Speaker 3 (30:48):
Would probably have more in common with those liberals who
kicked you out of the party because you're just the
devil incarnate for right.

Speaker 2 (30:55):
You know. I forgot to tell them, well no, but
you you, if we would just sit down, we realized
on a personal level, we probably have a lot more
in common.

Speaker 4 (31:05):
Yeah, we weren't going to talk politics. I wasn't going
to sit there and talk politics at a party that
I know nobody agrees with me on. But I think
I don't know, I don't know what they thought. They
just I think that's too bad. I think they just
genuinely hate people who think differently than them. You know,
the people that hold to put the signs out in
front and they're all over DC, the signs in their

(31:26):
front yard that say hate has no place here. Those people,
they really hate people.

Speaker 3 (31:32):
You know what I wasn't I was in China with
somebody who's I went and did this delegation, and a
group of them were communists, people I wasn't. I was,
you know, and I mean, you're in China, But yeah,
we went there. I went there with Cynthia McKinney, and
she kind of led this coalition and we were a
lot of the people were also libertarian leaning or just

(31:54):
freedom independent minded people too. And I wanted to go
there with my daughter because she was getting she's a
degree in Chinese and computer science, and so she wanted
her to go there and experience it. And I got
to be friends with Cynthia beginning. And so I'm there
and there were some communists. I'm like, wow, I did
not get just this is the extreme. But we got
to sit and talk to these people. And one of them,

(32:15):
I kid you not, in the Nightly Conversations, he did
a presentation and he believed that the boyois a how
do you pronounce it, the wealthy class, entrepreneurial class, they
need to be eliminated so that they could bring in
this communists. And you know, they basically think they need

(32:37):
to take out, murder and slaughter a whole bunch of
people in order to bring in this loving utopia, right,
you know what I mean, It's like, how does that work?
I mean literally, and we had to have some conversations
with me and my kids because they were like, Mom,
I can't. It was jaw dropping to sit through and
listen to this. But some of these internal and you
would never hear it publicly. They never talk about that publicly,

(33:00):
but in behind closed doors they were willing to talk
about it. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (33:05):
No, it's really wild. It's a it's like a weird
mental distortion of like, in order to be loving and
kind and you know, this peaceful utopia, we have to
kill everybody. Everybody thinks differently than us.

Speaker 3 (33:18):
We could be a mass murderer so that we can
be this loving, peaceful person. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (33:24):
No, it's really really bizarre. Yeah, I know it was Okay,
enough of that.

Speaker 3 (33:30):
So you've been seeing so many other things, but you
were also deeply connected to the merry logo rate, Yes,
and saw that firsthand. I mean a lot of people
just saw it and they you know, it just it's
all it's just a political politics. But it was way
more than that, wasn't it.

Speaker 4 (33:47):
Oh for sure? And I just have a book out
about it. It's called Defiant Inside the Marlagua Rate and
the Left Ongoing Law Fair. President Trump did the forward
for it, so I'm really excited about it. I love
everybody to get it, and I've got text messages and
email and all of that. I was the custodian of
record for mar A Lago at the time. I was
the staff attorney and asked to to join this case

(34:09):
as a basically as a witness, to be the custodian
of record. And so I was one of two people,
two attorneys that met with the Department of Justice and
the FBI at mar A Lago about two months prior
to to respond to this grand jersipoena. We met with them.
Everything you saw in them press is completely wrong. The

(34:30):
left press is just they're flat out lying about what
happened with all of that. We were incredibly cooperative. President
Trump came to the meeting for a few you know,
he popped in and popped out briefly, but he he
made it a point to meet with them himself and say,
you can see whatever you want if you want to see.
You know, if you want a tour of mar A Lago,
we'll give you a tour of mar A Lago. You know,
whatever you want, We'll show you. We'll show you whatever
we want, whatever you want. And they asked to see

(34:52):
the storageroom. We took them down to the storage room
and let them look through the storage room and see,
you know, see where it is. We turned over some
documents that we believed were responsive to the subpoena. The
subpoena that they never should have had in the first place,
and they never should have gotten a warrant to raid
mar A Lago. There was no probable cause. There was
absolutely no probable cause of any criminal activity. But they somehow,

(35:15):
I say, somehow, as if it's a surprise at a
Washington d C. Grand jury. Oh, I'm sorry. That was
the other thing that I think the media has not reported. Well,
the whole case about mar A Lago was in was
here in Washington, d C. The subpoena to look and
see what President trumpad that came out of Washington, d C.
This was a grand jury in Washington, d C. That
they created, and the media doesn't report on that because

(35:38):
the case was actually brought in Florida, and the reason
they had to bring the case of Florida. No, they
didn't want to prosecute Donald Trump of Florida. They wanted
to prosecute Donald Trump here in DC. Because they could
get a conviction here. There's not a chance and you
know where that they're going to get any conviction out
of Florida. But the reason they had to switch the
grand jury down to Florida was because they could not
get an indictment in Washington, d C. They did not

(36:00):
have any evidence of a crime that would suffice in
Washington DC, So they had to move it to Florida
and create a stupid obstruction of justice charge. I mean
thirty four of them or thirty nine of them, whatever
it is, obstruction of justice. Yeah, basically saying, hey, you
tried to interfere with our investigation. They forgot to mention
that the investigation never should have been opened in the

(36:22):
first place. But the whole thing if Jacksmith had okay, okay.

Speaker 3 (36:26):
Hold on a second, what possibly could have been in
your interference? You guys were all saying they lied. Who
operate with you? They lied? They just made it up
at that point, where is but why not make stuff
up if there's never consequences? Right?

Speaker 4 (36:41):
Well, well, and that goes back to what we said originally, right,
is that the Department of Justice is getting braver and
braver and braver with how extreme. They're willing to be
using that department to their own devices, and every time
something like this happens, there are no consequences, and so
they just keep getting bolder and bolder, and that's the concern,
is Okay, So now they've rated mar A Lago. What's

(37:05):
worse than that? You know, what are they going to
do after that? Start creating goolags? You know, for everybody, I.

Speaker 3 (37:11):
Create fear in you a little bit to watch people
abuse their power to such an extreme. I mean, whoa
a lot.

Speaker 4 (37:17):
I thought I was going to prison both with the
mariologue ocase because I was the one that signed for
all the documents, right, I was the one that was
signing my name to because you were.

Speaker 3 (37:26):
Like the person there, You're like, holy shit, I'm literally
dealing with yeah, with these people that are deranged.

Speaker 4 (37:33):
Yes, yeah, And they thankfully I kept very good records.
I kept very good emails, I kept all my text messages.
I had everything, you know, straight and arrow, which you
can see in the book. So they didn't indict me
because I had recorded everything that I had done and
why I had done it. And they tried in the press,
they tried to make it look like I had intentionally

(37:54):
tried to deceive the Department of Justice. That was never true.
They know it was never true. I've got the emails
to show it. And I told them to their face
when we met exactly what was happening. And when they
interrogated me on it, I said that to them. I
was honest with you. I told you to your face
what happened. And they were like, yeah, like they acknowledged it.
And so they just wanted to smear me in the

(38:15):
press to lead the American people to believe that we
were hiding something from them or that we were deceiving them.
None of that was ever true.

Speaker 3 (38:23):
So where is it at now? I mean, is this
I obviously Trump being president, he knows all this stuff.
He watched all this stuff.

Speaker 4 (38:33):
That's why he was raging about them because he's like,
it's all fake.

Speaker 3 (38:37):
It is all fake. It was all fake. And now
they're walking this lawfair tightrope of wanting to do what's
right and clean this up. But while you're cleaning this up,
they're making you. They're trying to smear you as a tyrant,
while they were the ones acting like you know, and
so there's this balancing act of not being a tyrant,
but actually cleaning things up because it's important for the

(38:59):
American people and for this country.

Speaker 4 (39:01):
One hundred percent. I think it's great that Lindsay Halligan
has indicted both call Me and Latisha James. I think
Brennan's probably next. Bolton was indicted, I think in Maryland,
so all of these people belong in prison. They need
to understand that you cannot abuse your power, you cannot
abuse your authority and get away with it.

Speaker 3 (39:19):
How about like Victoria Newland, who would I mean, did
she do anything that would because I mean she'd go
into a country next year. You know, there's a flip
in civil war. There was means about her. Watch all
for this woman. Your country is ready to have a
civil war.

Speaker 4 (39:34):
That's scary. Yeah, No, I mean I think all of
that's fair game. I think the Department, in my opinion,
the Department of Justice being way too conservative right now,
you know they're conservative. I think more people, more people
need to be at the very least investigated. And I'm
not you know, I have been prosecuted. I've been targeted

(39:56):
by my government. I'm not a fan of the government
doing it. I don't like it. The the problem that we
have is there's only two ways for America to navigate this,
for America to get out of this crazy law fair cycle.
The first way is that the people who started the
process and the people who started the abuse can acknowledge
their faults and say, you know what, we went way
too far.

Speaker 3 (40:15):
Happened.

Speaker 4 (40:16):
That's the problem, right, I mean, that's the easiest way.
That's the easiest way for America if everybody just says, Okay,
we've gone too far, let's everybody stop doing this. But
to your point one, it's not going to happen too.
It hasn't happened. They haven't done that. They've never acknowledged
that they did anything wrong. They've never even pretended to say,
you know, we should back up a little bit. So

(40:36):
then the only other way to do it is through prosecution.
So okay, well, if you're not going to agree to say,
set your arms down and agree to not prosecute us
all in the future, the only other option is to
then prosecute you, and that that's the game DJ is
playing right now.

Speaker 3 (40:52):
And put together, maybe Congress put together some things on
standards that if you violate these standards, it doesn't part.
They already exist.

Speaker 4 (41:01):
Those standards are.

Speaker 3 (41:03):
So it's your obligation. Here's the deal. It's the obligation
if someone didn't. They push back and say, this is
political interference where you know what, you actually broke the law.
It's not like you know so many other things, the
lawfair stuff where they make stuff up if it's if
they really did and it's undermining the entire system. You

(41:24):
have to do this because that's your duty in office
to clean this up.

Speaker 4 (41:30):
On dred percent. And the difference between law fair and
true justice is the focus on the outcome of the case.
In true justice, the outcome of the case matters. You
you know, if you're prosecuting someone for committing a crime,
you're punishing them, you're deterring you know, future future crime.
The outcome matters for justice. With all of this law fair,

(41:51):
the outcome doesn't matter. What they want out of it
is they want to take Donald Trump off the campaign trail.
They want to drain his resources, they want to defame him.
They want to give the media talking points to tell
the public why they shouldn't be voting for him. They
want to scare other conservatives out of supporting him. The
goal of the law fair is anything other than the
outcome of the case. And unfortunately we're just seeing a

(42:14):
lot of that.

Speaker 3 (42:15):
When is it that the people say, you know what,
this is the politics isn't so important and winning isn't
so important that we're willing to trade the future of
this country just so we can win at a political game.
Are people capable of being mature enough to get to
that point?

Speaker 4 (42:35):
I think the American people are there. I mean, we
might be on different sides of it, but I think
for the most part where there, even on the left.
I don't think the majority of the left I agree
with is constant like they don't like it either. It's just,
you know, the radicals whatever. You're always going to have radicals.
The problem is, I don't think the people in power
have gotten there because it's never affected them, right, And

(42:57):
that's always the problem is once you get into power,
it doesn't touch you, and so you're now you know,
inoculated from it. And until and I hate to that
I love Pambondy, but until Pambondy and Todd Blanche and
Stanley Woodward, until they care about the little people, you know, I.

Speaker 3 (43:16):
Love people will suffer until until they care about it.
But that's why power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely
because you're so distant from what it is that you're
actually implementing. And a republic, a representative republic, is supposed
to represent the people at the lowest possible place, so
that you get away from that. And now we've gotten

(43:38):
to the point where they're so disconnected from the people.
But then the people have no other Uh, they can't
resort to anything. It's almost like they're trying to fuel
a revolution almost because you know, the media, because people
don't have any recourse.

Speaker 4 (43:56):
Yeah, well, the common ground that we all have now
is we don't have recourse, right, is that's what we're
all being oppressed by a government. And so I think
that's why they're working really hard to divide us. They're
working hard to so hate and discontent, you know. I
I think that's that's what they're doing. I don't think

(44:16):
it's the majority of Americans, even on the left. I
don't think the majority of Americans on the left want
to hate everybody, you know, want to want to hate
the right. I think everybody just wants peace and quiet
and wants to get on. I think everybody wants to,
you know, run their business, do their job, focus on
their career, focus on their family, raise a family, go
to church. What They don't want to be paying attention

(44:37):
to the government, but they have to because the government
is so horribly impacting everybody's lives right now it is.

Speaker 3 (44:44):
Yeah, well, and we have this economic reset that's lingering,
or actually maybe it's already in place, that's fundamentally affecting people.
We have inflation. People aren't able to actually pay their mortgage,
eat get jobs. I mean, yeah, people are are struggling.

Speaker 4 (45:01):
Yeah, no, I think they are. And I think there's
an element of wait, we fought so hard for President Trump,
why isn't it better? And unfortunately it's not. And I
would go further than that and say, I don't think
it's entirely President Trump or his administration. I think the
biggest obstacle President Trump has to his agenda is Republicans.

(45:23):
I don't think it's Democrats. I mean, you have a
Republican House, you have a Republican Senate, you have a
Republican Supreme Court. A majority of governors in the US
a Republican, A majority of attorney generals in the United
States are Republican. And yet Republicans are blaming democrats. Republicans
are the problem.

Speaker 3 (45:42):
So how do we get past it? Because that was
the issue of his first presidency. Now it's the same thing. Well,
are they the problem when they have the power right
now because they have it for two years, they're going
to get voted out.

Speaker 4 (45:55):
Well they I don't think they like I think most
of them think they won't get vote because.

Speaker 3 (46:00):
I mean they have the majority. The majority usually foils.

Speaker 4 (46:03):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I think that's right. Unfortunately,
Republicans are so conservative they've learned that if I do nothing,
doing nothing is better than doing something and getting you know,
bad press, getting targeted for primary whatever in the left
right now is so crazy. The left, like the things

(46:25):
that the left wants to do is so bananas and
so extreme that all Republicans have to do is go, well,
we're better than that. And people are like, yeah, okay,
and they're voting Republican.

Speaker 3 (46:35):
We don't have a choice. I mean, when they know,
like an art, when they want to take young people
and do.

Speaker 4 (46:41):
That straight then without yeah, without parents.

Speaker 3 (46:43):
Like in my state, they they're sinctuaries, So parents can
lose their parental rights if they don't allow their sixteen
year old to get some kind of surgery without I mean,
they used to go through these strict, multi year process
and be really responsible to make sure that this is
really what the person wants, right, Yeah, and then ninety

(47:04):
nine percent plus we're happy with it. Now they don't
do anything. I mean there's none of that.

Speaker 4 (47:09):
They do nothing. They do nothing, and that and.

Speaker 3 (47:11):
That somehow is okay. I mean we've they lost our minds.

Speaker 4 (47:17):
No, they care more about keeping their seat than they
do serving the people who elected them. I mean, I
would love to be wrong on that, don't I don't
know any other explanation as to why Republicans consistently get
nothing done. And it's because they don't want to do anything,
because it's one it's easier. Doing nothing is easier than
doing something, and two, they don't want to do anything

(47:38):
that could cause them to get challenged in an election.
And then they can sit in their seats and go,
look it, we're not as crazy as those guys.

Speaker 3 (47:45):
Well, they can roll up their sleeves and they could
talk a big talk and.

Speaker 4 (47:48):
Then yeah, yeah, I mean that's that's what we're seeing.
Please tell me how I'm wrong, and please tell me
you know another way to fix this. But I think
until we primary Republicans that are doing nothing, this is
what we're gonna get.

Speaker 3 (48:02):
Buddy, we ever were going to get out of this cycle.
If that's what they always do, nothing.

Speaker 4 (48:06):
It's gonna break. I mean something has to break. It can't.
This is unsustainable. So yeah, something's gonna break. And I
do think Republicans are in for reckoning because I think
I am the Republican base, right, like I am Maga.
I've worked for President Trump like I worked. I worked
at the rn C. I was Senior Election Council at
the rn C, Like I am the Republican base. And

(48:27):
I'm looking at the Republican Party going, you guys need
to fix something or America will come for you next.
They've already come for the Democrats, right, they already spank
the Democrats in twenty twenty four. I think Republicans are
in for a root awakening if they don't start to
actually serve the people who elected them.

Speaker 3 (48:43):
Well, I think that Trump is being put into that box.
He's it like to the to the average person, it
looks like this is what you always meant to do.
He was a big you know politicians I never trust politicians,
so now it looks like he just came in, he
was playing a big game, and he never meant to
do any of the things he said he was going

(49:03):
to do. Anyways, that's how the media or that's how
the operation is.

Speaker 4 (49:09):
And who's heelching that. It's Republicans because they're not doing
what they're not fulfilling his agenda.

Speaker 3 (49:18):
They're just not I can't I can't imagine. It'd be
very frustrating. But that's how they're spinning him.

Speaker 4 (49:23):
Yeah, and the Republicans are letting him do it, letting
it happen.

Speaker 3 (49:27):
Yep. And they they are squandering their ability to do
anything right now. And if people start questioning, then are
they blackmail? Do they care? Are they really?

Speaker 1 (49:36):
Well?

Speaker 4 (49:37):
I think those are great questions. Yeah, I mean who knows.
All we know is they're not doing anything. And it's weird.
You look at our government right now and it looks weird,
like that's right. Why aren't you doing anything? Why is
Congress out?

Speaker 3 (49:51):
Why?

Speaker 4 (49:51):
Why is the House out? The House has already passed,
the House has already passed the CR. Why is the
Senate not passing the CR?

Speaker 3 (50:00):
Why are how people what the CR?

Speaker 4 (50:02):
Is so continuing resolution to open the government because we've
got because i mean, the government shut down. The Senate's
refusing to fund it. Why like why?

Speaker 3 (50:12):
Well? And the other thing is this, this is getting
to the point where it's so long as the government's
ever been shut down, and people are saying in a
lot of people are like, well, it's great the government's
shut down, But there's a point where it starts to
not be great.

Speaker 4 (50:25):
Right where it gets dangerous.

Speaker 3 (50:27):
It gets really dangerous, and if you aren't funding certain operations,
it's it starts it can really hurt the country.

Speaker 4 (50:36):
Yeah, we'll look at the airports right now, right before Thanksgiving,
we're having all of these airports shut down because TSA
agents are walking off the job because they're not being paid.
And then you can't get on your flight. I mean
you can look up Houston, Atlanta. I mean we're seeing
it all over the place where people just can't get
their flights because airport operations is shutting down because the
federal aspect of it's not funded.

Speaker 3 (50:57):
Well, so how do we okay? So, but it makes
it look like the Republicans are at fault because and
you're saying they probably aren't because they're the ones that
have the majority.

Speaker 4 (51:08):
So the Republicans have pasted it. The Republicans are the
ones voting for it. So I think it's even like
CNN and maybe a little bit MSNBC. At least CNN
is acknowledging, Hey, the Democrats are the ones that are
keeping the government shut down. They're the ones voting no
to not fund the government. Every Republican has been voting
to fund the government.

Speaker 3 (51:26):
So it's like, so it is it becoming obvious to
the average person because when I listen to my NPR,
I promise you guys, I'm doing it because I want
to understand from their perspective, even though they're not it
to their people, they think it's the Republicans.

Speaker 4 (51:43):
Well, let's probably truth. I'm sure they're lying to their audience.

Speaker 3 (51:46):
Of course they are. That's why I'm just saying it
is a for them.

Speaker 4 (51:50):
It is a feat of mental gymnastics to blame Republicans
for this. The Democrats are the ones voting no. Every
single Republican is voting yes.

Speaker 3 (51:59):
So are they. The theory is that they are trying
to create riots and civil unrest, that the Republicans are
The Democrats are oh.

Speaker 4 (52:10):
Very possible, very very possible. Yeah, because Democrats, I mean,
they thrive in chaos, right, They're like they manufacture a
crisis and then they solve it, right, So I wouldn't
be surprised. But I think people are sick of the riots,
sick of it, like.

Speaker 3 (52:27):
You're thick of it, do you think? But people will
they I mean, can they instigate that because it seems
the pattern is such, you know, it's the when people
don't have food, they've driven fear, you know. And so
is it possible that the food stamps. I think they
carved out an exception where they're going to allow make
sure that people get their food.

Speaker 4 (52:48):
They were talking about it. I don't think that was approved.
I'd have to check recently.

Speaker 2 (52:55):
Well.

Speaker 4 (52:55):
The problem the problem that I actually agree with not
passing that just because it alleviates the pain of opening
the government, right, like, like just you either fund the
government or you don't, and Republicans want to fund it.
Republicans are voting to have the snap benefits and all that,
and if you just pick and choose the little pieces

(53:17):
that can be funded, then there's no there's no reason
to reopen the government, you know, And it does beg
the question that it's like, if we can function without
all of this government activity, why why are we funding
that activity?

Speaker 3 (53:34):
Anything that's right. I think there's there's a certain amount
of that, and then there's a certain amount of underlying
things that are really suffering that you're going to have
to It's it's there are infrastructure that needs to be
funded otherwise things. It's that's a conservative principle too. You
have to fund the things that keep a healthy system going.

Speaker 4 (53:55):
We need to be funding whether it's TSA or some
functioning secureecurity within the airports. There's basic law enforcement functions
obviously the military that yeah, Democrats the ones voting.

Speaker 3 (54:09):
No, oh gosh, okay, Well, what are people What are
insiders saying since you get to talk to them, and
what is the judicial watching? What are people saying? What
are they fearful of behind closed doors as to where
things are going? Or are they not? I mean, are
they so disconnected they're not? Or are they?

Speaker 2 (54:30):
Well?

Speaker 4 (54:30):
I think Republicans want the government open, so like anybody
that I talked to was like, yeah, we're trying to
open it. Like we're voting yes every day to reopen
the government, and Democrats are voting No, I don't know
what the Democrat endgame is. I don't know what they
they think they get out of it. What they say
they want out of it is they want, you know,
millions of dollars of funding for LGBTQ stuff in Nigeria

(54:53):
and dance lessons in you know, Laos, Like, really weird,
are they really adding all that up to the thing.
And they say those are all condition there, Yeah, those
are all conditions. Those are all conditions of the CR. Yes,
just the continuing resolution. We're not talking about negotiating the budget.
We're just talking about the continuing resolutions.

Speaker 3 (55:12):
The lessons in another country is seriously one of the conditions. Yeah,
and they're not willing even when they said, can we
at least move this, they won't do it.

Speaker 4 (55:21):
No, they want to do it.

Speaker 3 (55:22):
And they want is that a cover for an opera
CIA operation or something? Probably an that because it doesn't
make sense, okay, right.

Speaker 4 (55:30):
Probably, And then they want medical care for all illegal aliens,
and they want food, like free food and medical care
for all illegal aliens, which is weird because we don't
give that to American citizens, but anyway, that's what they want.
And then they say they want to extend some of
the Obamacare like programs are set to end, i think

(55:50):
at the end of this year, and they want those extended.
And so the Republican's position has been, that's all stuff
that needs to be negotiated in the budget right now.
We just want to either and Republicans, they say, oh,
Republicans aren't conceding. Republicans have conceded by keeping the Biden
era financial policies going because when they when Republicans vote
yes to keep the government open, they're voting for Biden's budget,

(56:15):
Like this was all stuff from the previous administration. It's
stuff that Republicans don't want, but they're conceding it to
keep the government open. And Democrats are saying, no, we
want more, we want more.

Speaker 3 (56:25):
And Democrats are always going to win if the Republicans
are weak, if they're three to do something, and the
Democrats know it, they smell weakness, Yeah, they're going to
take advantage of it every time. And this is what's happening.

Speaker 4 (56:39):
So that's the thing I think republic as long as
Republicans don't cave, If Republicans cave and give them anything
and open the government, they will end up owning this
whole thing. So I think Republicans just need to stay
strong and say no, it's a clean It's called a
clean CR, a clean resolution meaning no changes, just continue
the current budget, you know, for another ninety days or

(57:00):
whatever the next deadline is. And Democrats aren't willing to
pass that. If Republicans back off on that, I think
they're going to end up owning the whole thing and
it's going to look really bad. So Republicans just need
to stick to their guns and say nope, we're passing
a clean CR. Nothing else. Nobody's negotiating anything either way.
And I don't know how long Democrats are going to
hold out.

Speaker 3 (57:20):
Wow, their own people have to push them and the
truth has to get out that they're the ones not
voting for it. It's pretty amazing. But your book is incredible.
There's so many behind the scenes things that people had
no idea. Give us another little tidbit that's in your
book that people are going to get if they go
and get it.

Speaker 4 (57:38):
Oh gosh, I'm trying to think real fast of I
think the behind the scenes stuff on what's happening in
these state cases I think is really important. What we
talked about earlier and then oh, the dominion case. I
was sued by Dominion for one point six billion dollars.

Speaker 3 (57:59):
And personal were sued for one point six billions. I
was personally sued super somebody, somebody. If you're not even
worth let's say you're worth two million, I don't know what. Yeah,
well they're claiming about how can they Yeah, how can
they claim to sue? How can they claim you for
one point six billion?

Speaker 4 (58:13):
Well, they were just claiming that that's how much I
damaged them, and you know what, they what they were
claiming that I did, and I actually never. So there
were three aspects to the complaint against me. One was
I interviewed Rudy. I was a reporter at the time.
I interviewed Rudy Giuliani and was asking him about updates
on their process, and he's he was talking about the machines.

(58:34):
They didn't like that I never made the statements, which
it's not defamation if I don't make the statements.

Speaker 3 (58:39):
Well, and they're intimidating a journalist. Yes.

Speaker 4 (58:42):
And then the second one was I interviewed a lesser
known guy like it's basically like a social media influencer.
I interviewed him. He said some things they didn't like. Again,
I didn't make the statements, but that was that. And
then the third thing was I did mention dominion, but
I was able to cite my source because the Merco
but County supervisors had written a letter to the Arizona

(59:05):
Senate saying, we can't give you the administrative passwords to
the machines. We don't have them. Only dominion controls the machines.
And they put that in a letter, and so I
reported that and I was sued for that, and then
I produced the letter and they were like, oh, we
don't know it's true.

Speaker 3 (59:21):
And it's like they can just sue. That's lawfair though
they just drugg medation. It's a total intimidation of a
journalist because they can. And it's not any different than
in other countries where they take them out. You know,
they just killed journalists. It's very dangerous profession, and in
this country they're doing it through this right. It's one

(59:44):
step away from that next act. Yes, we don't stop them,
they they'll take that next step.

Speaker 4 (59:49):
I think one hundred percent. And I went through hell
for four years. They were to fame me, CNN, MSNBC,
everybody was reporting saying I'm a liar, I can't be trusted.
I'm not a trustworthy news source. Like just absolutely tried
to destroy my reputation. Four years later, you know, you
would get tell me the truth and they go, oh,
she was telling truth, and they just dismissed me. There's
no settlement, there was nothing. They were just like, oh,

(01:00:11):
we'll dismiss her after four years of like trying to
destroy me.

Speaker 3 (01:00:15):
Yeah, I get that. Holy crap. Okay, where can people
buy your book?

Speaker 4 (01:00:22):
It's available on Amazon, Barnes, and Noble wherever books are sold.
It's called Defiant Inside the mar Alago Raid and the
Left's ongoing lawfare Forward by Donald TRUMPA and do you
have a website for it? Yes, christinabob dot com bobb.

Speaker 3 (01:00:34):
Awesome, that can get your book there. Thank you so much.
This was a wonderful conversation. I really appreciate it. Yeah,
thank you so much.

Speaker 4 (01:00:40):
And I appreciate you using your platform to talk about it.

Speaker 5 (01:00:57):
Kjeler's early Black Friday sale is happy. Get up to
fifty percent off Black Ready deals and up to forty
percent off everything else. Don't miss this sale. Start your
season with savings. Only a k exclusions apply. Ck dot
com slash exclusions for details.

Speaker 1 (01:01:16):
Hi everybody, it's me Cinderella. As you are listening to
the Fringe Radio Network. I know I was gonna tell them, Hey,
do you have the app? It's the best way to
listen to the Fringe radio network. It's safe and you
don't have to log in to use it, and it
doesn't track you or trace you, and it sounds beautiful.

(01:01:40):
I know I was gonna tell them.

Speaker 3 (01:01:41):
How do you get the app?

Speaker 1 (01:01:43):
Just go to fringe radionetwork dot com right at the
top of the page.

Speaker 4 (01:01:49):
Hi, know, slippers, we gotta keep cleaning these chimneys.