After Party with Emily Jashinsky - Cowards in Congress, with Rep. Thomas Massie, the TRUTH About Talarico, and Deep State Secrets, with Roger Stone

Episode Date: March 5, 2026

Emily Jashinsky is joined by Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie fresh off his House remarks on his Iran War Powers Resolution. The two discuss why Massie believes it’s important for Congress to reclaim its Constitutional authority, why he believes so many lawmakers won’t go on the record, his upcoming election, and President Trump’s beef with him. Then Emily breaks down one of the most important races in America: the fight for the Senate seat from Texas. She first dives into the failed campaign of Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett and then she looks at some of James Talarico’s more troubling remarks as he prepares to face off with the eventual Republican nominee. Then Emily is joined by Roger Stone, longtime Trump political advisor and host of “The Stone Zone with Roger Stone.” They discuss the newly released JFK files, his claim that Richard Nixon told him who was really behind the assassination, whether the full truth will ever come out, the history of the deep state, and new reporting the FBI continued to probe Trumpworld figures under then-President Biden. Emily wraps up the show with the chilling story of a Virginia woman who was fatally stabbed at a bus stop and explains why it never should have happened.   Joi + Blokes: Go to http://joiandblokes.com/AFTERPARTY and use code AFTERPARTY for 50% off your labs and 20% off all supplements   PDS Debt: You’re 30 seconds away from being debt free with PDS Debt. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you at https://PDSDebt.com/EMILY   ZBiotics: Visit https://zbiotics.com/AFTERPARTY for 15% off Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Well, hello, everyone and welcome to After Party. Happy Wednesday night. Thank you so much for being here. Please do us a favor and subscribe. If you haven't yet, subscribe on YouTube, that helps us so much, wherever you get your podcast. It allows us to keep doing this journalism, because tonight we have quite a lineup, quite a lineup. Representative Thomas Massey is going to be joining in just one moment. This is an interview that we taped literally after he left the house floor from debate on a war power. bill with regard to Iran. We get him to respond to some of the president's criticism that has been leveled that Representative Massey and hear from him what it was like on the floor of the House, why he's doing what he's doing. So that'll be in just one moment. And as you know, I like to jump into the chat anytime we have a pre-recorded. I mean, this was pre-recorded right after the House debate today. So I like to jump in the chat. So if you're watching this live, I'll be in there watching along with the rest of you while we air Thomas Bassie. And we're also going to be joined tonight. This is another pre-tape. We had a busy pre-tape day by Roger Stone. You

might be wondering, huh, what is the occasion for Roger Stone's visit to after party? This is something that I've been trying to arrange for a while, finally worked out. He's at a car. Still an opportunity to talk to Roger Stone about the JFK files, which I am, of course, going to take 10 times out of 10, given that Roger Stone new Nixon, new Howard Hunt's son, for example, new G. Gordon Liddy. And we talk all about Bay of Pigs. I mean, in the midst of everything happening with Cuba right now, we revisit the ties between the Bay of Pigs, between the Kennedy assassination and Watergate. Roger also talks about the Trump assassination attempt. So it's a very interesting interview and I'm excited for everyone to see it. Also, I'll be giving some reaction to

the Democratic primary in Texas, which, as you know, if you've been listening, watching the show, I think has been the most interesting primary in the country, Republican or Democrat. So we have some clips that we're going to get to with Crockett and Tala Rico. We'll hopefully have a good breakdown on that one. So stick around for that as well. Finally, last but not least the horrible story of Stephanie Minter out of Fairfax County, Virginia. I'll be breaking that down. If you haven't heard the story yet, you must. You must. So that'll be towards the end of the show, but the details are just awful and really worth spending some time on. So thank you for being with us tonight. Like I said, please do subscribe. It helps us a lot. And I'm going to come out of the next,

this quick break with Congressman Massey. I'll talk. to him after this break. So first, if you've been feeling exhausted, ladies, maybe anxious, maybe foggy, or like you're gaining weight no matter what and your doctors are shrugging it off saying, that's normal for your age, you're not crazy, you're not, you're just being ignored. The medical establishment has dismissed women's hormonal health for far too long, very true. Joy was created by a woman who lived this frustration firsthand during perimenopause and decided women deserve better than generic advice and symptom checkers. So every Joy Lab includes a real consultation with a licensed clinician specializing in women's hormones. Joy offers real treatment

options, hormone therapy, peptide therapy, personalized supplements, whatever your body actually needs. And for a limited time, you can add a 60-day supply of our estrogen face cream for just $1 with clinician approval, Joy says. So stop guessing and start getting answers. go to joy and blokes.com slash afterparty and use code after party for 50% off your labs and 20% off all supplements. What a great deal.

That's joy and bloke's.com slash after party and code after party for 50% off your labs and 20% off all supplements. That's J-O-I and B-L-O-K-E-S.com after-party. Joy and Bloaks, Health Care, that actually listens to women.

All right, everyone. Like I said, oh, sorry, we'd jump to the gut a little bit. But like I said, Congressman Thomas Massey joined us for an interview shortly after leaving the House floor during a debate about the war powers bill that he introduced with Congressman Democratic Congressman Roe Kana of California. Now, this is a very close vote in the House of Representatives. A vote in the Senate failed. That failed right while we were talking. Actually, while I was talking to Thomas Massey, the war power vote failed in the Senate. Now, if it had cleared both chambers, I talked to him about this in the interview, he would have been able to potentially get that to the president's desk, and the president almost certainly would have vetoed it.

He has said he has no intention of seeking a war power bill from Congress or seeking congressional approval for the war in Iran. There are, of course, two different layers to this, right? The war power question, whether or not this was a constitutional use of. executive authority. You know where I always land on this. Unfortunately, this is the expansive executive power that we have right now. You can cook up an OLC, Office of Legal Counsel opinion, to basically justify any use of military force, as has happened in recent years, many, many times. Now, is it out of step with the spirit of the Constitution and the spirit of Article I powers? Is the way our war powers have expanded over time out of step with that? Yeah. So I talked to the

congressman about that if there are structural powers structural changes needed to be made to the war powers resolution but most importantly we got the congressman fresh off like he walked straight from the house floor to his office to talk to us about what this debate was like as the attacks on iran continue this conflict continues right now literally i'm looking at what's happening as we're sitting here in the middle east it's it's raging so without Further ado, here is Congressman Thomas Massey on our show right now, live for you on this Wednesday evening. It is Congress that must decide war. If American lives are to be risked and American blood is to be shed, that decision must be debated and voted on by the representatives of the American people.

And that debate is meant to be arduous. And that vote is meant to be hard. I have a theory. I think my colleagues don't want to go on record because we have a terrible track record of meddling in the Middle East. They don't want their name associated with this when it doesn't turn out well. But Congress cannot be bothered with its constitutional duty because for many in this chamber, it's easier to simply allow someone else's sons and daughters to be sent to combat without their vote. Well, that was Congressman Thomas Massey of the great state of Kentucky on the floor of the House of Representatives, where because he, along with Democratic Representative Rokana, introduced a war powers resolution in regard to this conflict in Iran. There was a debate on the floor of the House of Representatives this evening, so this afternoon, really.

Congressman Massey, you just came off the floor. Thank you so much for joining us. Hey, thanks for having me on. Yeah, absolutely. I want to get your sense of what the mood was. like in the chamber. Such a consequential debate, such a consequential conflict. You know, it does obviously feel sort of doomed to failure. I hate saying that. Senate is voting right now. Seems like it's going to fail in the Senate. But inside the chamber itself, what was the mood? What was it like, Congressman? Well, this is the culmination of an effort that Roe Kana and I undertook this summer. We actually wrote this bill when the first attack on Iran. Incidentally, they said we had destroyed their

capacity to make a nuclear weapon and some people are offering that now as the reason for this recent attack. But in any case, we didn't offer this war powers resolution in the summer because it was over with almost as quickly as it started. But in this case, it looks like we're in for, you know, we've even been told by the Secretary of Defense this could go four, six, eight weeks. And so it, and if they're telling you six or eight weeks, that could become six or eight months and that could become years. We've seen that happen before in these wars in the Middle East. So we thought it was timely to bring this bill up. We were able to force a vote and a debate on it. I really don't think it's doomed to fail. I saw today my colleague Warren Davidson,

Republican, joining me. And the margin is so slim here. If every Democrat, were to vote for this, and Warren Davidson and I vote for it, it could pass, I think. So it's going to come down to attendance, and it's also going to come down to some of the Democrats and whether they're going to go along with the majority of Democrats and vote for this war powers resolution. But it was a very somber tone in there. This is not one of those debates where you crack jokes or make light of things, because we've already lost six soldiers in this war and we've already spent billions of dollars

and people know this is a serious matter. And you know, the president would have to obviously overcome a, the Senate in the House would have to overcome a presidential veto, right? In all likelihood if you manage to pass both chambers, not looking great in the Senate. So it is ultimately probably not going to convince the president, right? Is that the case, Congressman? Yeah, that's the case. Who's been slamming you, as you know, I don't need to remind you of that.

But he has been. You told Real Clear Politics that you were, you know, you're just, you're doing your thing. Well, I'll have to go find that. Every time he attacks me, we raise about $50,000 online. So we, you know, checking my watch. We need an attack here pretty soon. And I, you know, I am half-heartedly saying that, you know, tongue-in-cheek, I would prefer he not attack me.

It makes my reelection harder, but I'm going to do the right thing here in Congress regardless. And you're right. Procedurally, if this were to succeed in the House and the Senate, the president could veto it and go on his way. Constitutionally, the way this should happen is one of my colleagues should come to the floor and offer a declaration of war. Now, I might undertake that myself, hoping that it wouldn't pass, just to do it the constitutional way, because in that case, it requires a positive vote and it's not overriding a veto. We've got that backwards since 1973 in the war powers resolution, which itself is probably constitutionally flawed.

But at least here's what we did. We had a debate today. And I ask, what's the reason? Why are we going to war? And I did elicit some members who are for this war on the Republican side to come up and give some of the reasons. And so at least we got that out of it, and at least we're going to get a record on the vote.

And as you saw in that snippet, I have a theory that my colleagues don't want to go on the record on this. We dragged them kicking and screaming into this debate and into this vote, which will happen tomorrow. They don't want to go on the record because we really have a very poor track record in the Middle East. We can't really point to Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan. or Libya and say that there's, you know, a modern day Thomas Jefferson, you know,

rose to the occasion after we toppled a regime. And you're not going to have that here in Iran either. Look, it's a theocracy. And the president himself said that, you know, his second and third choice got blew up in the attack that it was so successful. Well, I'm going to presume what he meant was he blew up the second and third in line to the Ayatollah. and that he was happy to have another Ayatollah,

as long as he could get one he could deal with. So this also is not about enabling, you know, the advocates for freedom in Iran who don't want to live under a radical theocracy, who would prefer to live under a republic like ours. Do you get the sense for many of your Democratic colleagues who are lining up behind this? I saw Hakeem Jeffries saying,

well, Libya was different because Nancy Pelosi was getting some heat for saying, oh, it's Obama can do what he was doing in Libya back at the time. And Hakeem Jeffries was like, that's different, that's different. Do you get the sense that some Democrats are very glad that you and Congressman Kana are picking this fight so that they probably wouldn't be so happy if you introduced a Declaration of War congressman? They might actually vote for it.

I know that it might put them in a tough spot. Look, I don't like to question the motives of my colleagues, but there are some Democrats who You frankly would probably prefer this war if they had their president in the White House. And there are some Democrats who don't want to have to take this vote. And there are some Democrats while I'm impuging their motives who are just doing this to get in Trump's way. And I want to, you know, okay, now I'll take a pause and I won't return to impugning their motives.

Maybe those were their motives. But I want to let you know when we had the war in Libya or the attack in Libya, I wasn't in Congress at the time, but I was here for the 2013 vote on Syria, which never happened. Obama said that he would come to Congress and get authorization if we were going to have a full-blown war in Syria. And what happened is there was no support among the American people. And when they tried to get a positive vote to authorize a war in Syria, they pulled the vote because it wasn't going to succeed.

Now he undertook some, you know, behind the scenes, covert activities. that weren't even known to Americans for quite a while. But I've been the same, whether it's Syria. I wasn't here for the vote in Afghanistan and Iraq, but let me remind you, they did vote in a positive way. It wasn't one of these war powers resolutions. It was an AUMF, and somebody came to the floor and said, we should do this, and enough people agreed,

and they agreed in the Senate, and that's how that happened. And so I just, you know, we do have some fair weather patriots and fair weather constitutionalists. I don't care how you get to the foot of the cross as long as you get there. If you're anti-war today and we can succeed, then I welcome you to the cause. Well said. Now, Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, of course, has claimed this vote is dangerous, that your resolution wouldn't be dangerous. And it's a frightening prospect because his argument is that the commander-in-chief, president of the United States, needs to have this authority.

So I guess my question is, what should presidential war power look like in this high-tech age? It's not 1973. And distance is less meaningful. Do we need to change the war powers resolution to fit the spirit of the Constitution and article one to begin with, Congressman? Well, let me unpack some of that. So Mike Johnson's arguments today sound like his arguments against the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That, you know, he said it would be too dangerous. And 702.

Don't forget 702. Right. 702, you name it. But the coincidence here is that I teamed up with Roe Kahn on the Epstein-Files Transparency Act as well. I would love to see Mike Johnson make those arguments about presidential power if it weren't our party in power. It's just not going to happen. He would find a reason on that day to say that we need to follow the Constitution. As far as the war powers resolution of 1973, it is fundamentally flawed because there's a Supreme Court decision that happened since then that calls into question whether you can stop a war without the president's signature.

So the war powers resolution says that you can either introduce a concurrent resolution between the House and the Senate or a joint resolution. between the House and the Senate. One of them needs the President's signature. The other one does not. When they passed the 1973 War Powers Resolution, they envisioned that it could be a resolution of the type that I have introduced that only passes the House and the Senate

and then the President has to abide to it. It's not presented to him. But there was a Supreme Court case in 1983, INS versus Chata, that said you have to present everything to the President for it to be legally binding. to be legally binding. And so it changed the structure of the war powers resolution.

If we were to succeed, using the path that I have taken, it would set up a very important constitutional question that may have to go to the courts, whether the president would be able to veto it or whether he would have to be able to sign it or not even. Before I let you run, Congressman, I looked up the quote that I was thinking of from real clear politics. Trump told them, this was the other night. Thomas Massey is now losing his election by 35 points. I wouldn't rely too much on him or any of them.

We're having a big victory, and we are taking the nuclear weapon concept away from Iran. Your response, Congressman. Well, I'm doing better in the polls than he said last time. Like, he said I was at 9% the last time he tweeted. Obviously, I'm not at 9% if I'm losing by 35, but I'm not losing by 35. in spite of having $5 million spent against me by the Republican Jewish Coalition and then another million dollars funneled by APEC to my opponent's coffers, I'm still on top.

I have the grassroots support in Kentucky. And what's ironic, it's not even ironic, it should just be apparent to everybody now that these donors, the Republican Jewish Coalition and APEC, they don't really. represent Jewish people. They represent the military industrial complex and sort of banking and rich billionaires. And they are opposed to me for two reasons. It's not because I voted against a big beautiful bill. It's because I pushed the Epstein Files Transparency Act through and threatened a lot of their friends, exposed a lot of their friends. I mean, these guys are even in the in the files themselves. an implication of guilt. I'm just saying they travel among these people in the Epstein files, the Epstein classes, Rokane calls them, and I like to call it that as well. But they're also

very much for war in the Middle East. And I say that APEC isn't really even an Israeli lobby. It's a military industrial complex lobby. And the only people who are winning right now in this war with Iran, look, it's ignited the region. It hasn't brought stability. it's brought instability. You've got what were nations that sort of get along with each other, you know, they're like, what the hell, bro?

You just blew up my refinery. Things are burning, ships are burning, people who were in commerce are no longer in commerce. And the only people that are benefiting from any of this are folks like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin and the people making those drones

and the anti-missile batteries. Thomas Massey, of the great state of Kentucky, one of the good ones. Thank you so much for taking the time on a very busy day, sir. Thank you very much for having me on and for covering this very important topic. What the hell, bro, you just blew up my refinery. This is Thomas Massey's impression of the Gulf States and her interview today. Great to talk to Thomas Massey. I have a policy with, you know, as every journalist should, with politicians that you have to always be skeptical of people in positions of power. I've interviewed Thomas Massey going back almost 10 years at this point.

And you could probably tell from that interview, I am pretty impressed with Massey's consistency across the board. He's obviously very polarizing and controversial to many people in Maga World right now who believe he's subjectating the party's interests to his pet causes. Maybe some people would say to his own interests. But again, having, I think the first time I interviewed him was probably 2017. So having covered him for a while, this is his, these are all his sincerely held beliefs. And we are wildly out of step with the framers intention for war powers. I don't care who is president of the United States. It's also become much, much easier to launch a war. And that's, I was glad to talk to him a little bit about that, because it is

true that it's different now than it was in 1973, than it wasn't the, in 1789, than it was. 1812 because obviously technology has shrunk the globe and made borders less and less, or made distance, I should say, less and less salient in this concept because you can fly drones, you can launch missiles, nuclear technology, and the like. So interesting, interesting conversation with Congressman Massey. So glad to have him on the program. I want to talk now about this Texas Democratic Senate primary. If you have been watching the show, you know that I believe this is the most important primary in the country. The most important primary in the country, period. So I'm going to get into that in just one second. First, a fresh start is possible. Debt can feel like it's getting worse every

month, but that only continues if nothing changes. PDS debt has already helped hundreds of thousands of people rewrite their financial story and take back control, and your turn can start right now. If you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, or medical bills, PDS debt creates personalized options to help get you out of debt. They're A plus rated by the Better Business Bureau, have thousands of five-star Google reviews and hold a five-star rating on Trust Pilot because their approach works. And the longer you wait, the more interest and fees pile up. If I had needed this product, it is what I would use. So don't wait another month. Change your story in 30 seconds. Get your free personalized assessment and the best option for you at PDSdebt.com slash

Emily. That's PDSdebt.com slash Emily. Again, PDSdebt.com slash Emily. Check them out. All right. The Texas Democratic Senate primary is the most important in the country, I believe, because it pitted two fascinating experiments on the left against each other, different than what you're seeing in just about any other race. And it's not just relevant to the left. Now that, you know, it looks like James Tolerico is the nominee for the general election, and he will be going up against either Ken Paxton or John Cornyn. This is a really, There's really a conversation about labels in general. So I'm going to focus on Jasmine Crockett, and then I'm going to focus on James Talleyco,

but just a little bit here at the top about what ended up happening in the race. So a Politico analysis last night actually found that Tala Rico was the recipient of more K-Straget than Jasmine Crockett. This was interesting to me because Jasmine Crockett was running as a stylistic populist. If you saw Jasmine Crockett on television, you might have thought that's the populist in this race, because she was running on this aggression towards Donald Trump. And I should say, this anti-norm post-Trump style, which is interesting. Democrats want someone who they feel can go toe to toe with Trump in the TikTok era. It's definitely a medium Jasmine Crockett uses more. than other members or maybe it's a more viral success than other members for better or worse.

And they thought, well, hmm, interesting. I mean, Kamala Harris got behind Jasmine Crockett in the closing days of this race. There was some hope that Jasmine Crockett, who ended up losing by a pretty healthy margin. Let me pull up the final results. Obviously, votes have been getting tallied all day. But right now, as of this very moment, we have. most of the votes counted, so 98% of the votes counted, and Talley Rico's at 52.5%. Crockett is at 46.2%. That's a pretty healthy six-point margin of defeat, despite Kamala Harris

stepping in to try and boost Jasmine Crockett. But she was, I mean, just openly campaigning as an influencer, basically. I think that's probably a good way to explain the way Jasmine Crockett was campaigning. Now, policy-wise, you could describe her as like a Kamala Harris Democrat. She's a pretty normal establishment-friendly Democrat. Dare I say even corporate Democrat, which is interesting because she got less K Street cash than Talleyco did at the end of the day. She's been friendly to crypto and the like. And Tala Riko's really tried to walk away from some of that stuff in his own past. He took money from Miriam Adelson for casino-related issues. I'm going to talk about Calerico's faith in just one moment, but that tells you a little bit. So Crockett is running as

the stylistic populist, but a substantive anti-populist. Style and substance, there's an overlap. There's the middle of the Venn diagram, but, you know, style is substance. Don't get me wrong. But in terms of her ideological persuasion, Jasmine Crockett was not running as like a Bernie-aligned person. Really, James Salarico has gone, tried to swerve pretty fully into the Bernie Lane, and it's about to test a very interesting theory that I share with a lot of my friends on the lap, which is, you have a better chance if you look at the Ronald Reagan model. Ronald Reagan talked about bold colors, not pale pastels. This was in a speech he gave because of one of the early C-PACs. Run on bold colors.

not pale pastels. And the meaning of that, it's basically Reagan, who was seen as the symptom of a deeply sick, quote, television-based epistemology by Neil Postman, who was building on Marshall McLuhan and thought in the television era, Reagan was a symptom of our lowering standards when it comes to political life, that the print-based epistemology, lent itself to much more substance and thoughtfulness. So in that sense, Ronald Reagan as an actor had signified to Postman in the mid-1980s that we were just all about style now. But Reagan himself understood that on television, people were looking for someone they believed in.

And that's where the political advice of bold colors, not pale pastels is really smart. You want people to believe that you believe what you believe. you're saying. Some people are masters of that, by the way, and they don't believe what they're saying. But if voters believe that you believe what you're saying, you're better off than trying to bullshit your way into some story about, well, maybe I walked this back, or maybe I changed this. You should level of voters say, I have a different position than many of you on this, and here's why I do. Or instead of trying to walk away from a position, just saying, I'm, I'm, I'm making the argument for it, affirmatively. Here's my argument for it. And this is where a lot of people

on the left, that's where I think Trump does very well in the 2016 Republican primary, despite the fact that some of his views were unpopular with Republican voters at the time. Some of them continued to be unpopular with Republican voters. People fundamentally trusted him. Many people fundamentally trusted him more than they trusted the others. Doesn't mean they would trust him babysitting or whatever, but it means that they trust that he believes what he says. more than the other candidates. So my friends on the left, my populist friends on the left, have always believed that if people swerve fully into the Bernie Sanders lane, they'll be better off. Because if you're able to say I have this consistent, coherent worldview, and it's democratic socialism,

it's basically left-wing populism. Here's what I believe in. It puts you in a position where you don't have to keep hedging and you don't have to suck up to them leadership and the like. So this is kind of going to test that theory. And I guess Talarico, Telerico's victory over Crockett kind of tests that theory. But in him, you have this stylistic populist, someone who swerved really into the Bernie lane, but was, I'm sorry, the substantive populist,

but who stylistically was like Biden, right? He was like, we just need to bring back norms and decency and civility and respect. So you pitted, you know, usually that's packaged with, usually that kind of Bidenism is packaged with Crockett's politics. And usually Crockett's style is packaged with Tala Rico's politics. And so this was a very fascinating clash of all of these things meeting at the same time. And Tala Rico pretty comfortably came out ahead with a monster turnout, by the way, monster turnout in this race, like double

turnout in other Democratic Senate primaries. So there's a lot happening here. Speaking of Crockett's stylistic populism, watch this clip of her. I mean, this puts it all together, like exactly what we're explaining here. This puts it all together perfectly. This is the woman that Kamala Harris endorsed her president of the United States. Last night, as the results were coming in, showing she pretty clearly lost to Tala Rico. Pretty definitively, there wasn't a lot of debate about this. S5.

We encourage each and every one of you to remain resilient. We cannot allow this type of behavior to be rewarded because so long as they know that they can win, even if it means cheating, then they will continue to do it. So I am asking you, I am begging you to make sure that you go ahead and figure out where it is that you are supposed to vote, stand in line, wait in line. During her speech last night, which was not a concession speech, she went out and addressed voters and said the same thing. She said, hey, listen, looks like cheating in Dallas County. She said something to the extent of Republicans are going to do. What Republicans are going to do, of course, is a Democratic primary, but that was Crockett's line. And within like 12 hours, we can put F10 up on the screen.

She conceded. She said this morning, I called James and congratulated him on becoming the same. Senate nominee. Texas is primed to turn blue and we must remain united because this is bigger than anyone person. This is about the future of all 30 million Texans and getting America back in track with the primary behind us, Democrats must rally around our nominee and win. I'm committed to doing my part and we'll continue working to elect Democrats and down the ballot. Some consultant language there pretty obviously, but this woman went literally from being in the election was stolen territory to, oh, I'm behind James. In like 12.

hours. That is incredibly cynical behavior. And I don't want to let that pass at all. Whoever is playing with people's trust in elections, I think we're going to see more and more of it. I think since, I mean, honestly, you could probably go back to 2000 and then to 2016 when Hillary Clinton herself was flirting with some really dangerous language. Then obviously, of course, to 2020, I still think Ben Sass put it best at the time when he said that Trump, been others Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, I don't know if he named them, but I would include them in this, had been, quote, playing with fire by how they talked about the election in 2020. Jasmine Crockett was doing all of that on election night, talking about how it looked like there

was cheating and then flipped on a dime. So it's good that she flipped on a dime because there is no evidence of widespread cheating in the Texas Democratic Senate primary. And there wasn't when she said it. Is she so self-involved to believe whatever? Maybe somebody told her and she trusted whoever told her, but she's a congresswoman. She's the candidate. It's a reckless thing to say without having significant evidence. So this isn't even to score a partisan, this isn't even for partisan score suddenly, I should say. This is like a bleak sign of the future, I think, that we're starting to see politicians play. so casually with people's trust in literally like a primary. We're not even talking about a

presidential election, but a Democratic Senate primary. So let's roll this compilation put together by Western Lensman of Jasmine Crockett. Changing vibe, like her accent changing throughout her political career. It's interesting, and it gives you a glimpse again into the cynical political career of Jasmine Crockett. These people, they are crazy because they always talk about how Christian they is. You don't know how many them on that side are getting divorced because they getting caught up, sleeping with their co-workers, staffers, interns, all the things. On campus mailboxes.

And at that time, my school hired the Cochran firm. And there was a lawyer who graduated from University of Houston who was assigned to me. You're not. You're not. We're done picking cut. We are. That was about immigration, by the way. But at the end of the day, I am who I am and I am authentic.

That we're done picking cotton line was about immigration. She was saying, we want Hispanics to pick cotton now. Just a gift to the Republican Party, of course. But also very, very cynical. And there's no way we were ever going to. to avoid the quote, television-based epistemology, Neil Postman wrote about. I mean, we're so, we are careening down the slippery slope

technologically, and it changes our politics in ways that we haven't been well equipped to handle. I think Brett Weinstein and Heather Heing would call it hyper-novelty. I think that's a great word for it, actually, is that when technology changes the environment around us so quickly that as human beings, we can't adapt. But also you see that just downstream of evolutionary biology and politics. Humans are

having a hard time adapting. Human politics are having a hard time adapting to the TikTok-based epistemology, which really is more the social media, the algorithmic social media-based epistemology, which prizes extremism in one direction or the other. And maybe Tala Rico's win is something of a rebuke of that or maybe it's just a sign that we're kind of in the middle. It's weird because I'm not a in the cult of the movie idiocry as so many other people are, but it is generally true that that movie was like deeply prescient. I mean, it has some incredibly funny moments too, but the idiocacy element of it is of the, of the social media based epistemology is just you're, you're rewarded if you say things that are extreme in one direction or the other. So I condemn this or I love

this. And that's how you go viral. And so the more powerful virality is, the more extreme, you're going to see candidates being. I think Crockett was a good example of that. But it seems like Tala Rico has the confidence that people are more confident that Tala RICO would have a chance against Paxton or Cornyn, whoever ends up winning the Senate primary. And for Texas Democrats who have been burned a couple of times. They've gotten pretty close, but they've also had a lot, their hopes are pretty high.

They want someone who they think is in a position to win statewide. And Crockett is pretty obviously not the best choice for that. So let's move on then to James Tala Rico. Can James Tala Rico win statewide? He's now, of course, a state representative down in Texas, and already, already, Talariko's old social media posts, clips that have been ping-ponging around,

really ever since he went on Joe Rogan. You may remember Rogan said something to the effect of, like, you should run for president. Rogan was very swayed, was moved by Talariko. Tala Rico, I'm excited to play some of these clips. We actually have a montage

because this is the Democrats' hope in the Texas Democratic, I'm sorry, in the Texas Senate race, after the runoff, we'll know who the Republican nominee is in late May, so May 26th. I just want to start with a compilation of some of the things that Tala Rico himself has said on cultural issues. So none of this is about economics, which he basically tried to run on. What he was talking about is kind of the middle of the Venn diagram between culture and economics. He's trying to run on how this is a race about. not about left and right, but about top versus bottom, which was interesting against Crockett.

It was very deferential to Crockett throughout the race. It was kind of an interesting campaign, but she didn't really go after him on a lot of this stuff. He really left a lot of this cultural stuff alone. But he was trying to say, this is like an anti-elite campaign. Well, he has just about every elite opinion conveniently for, as he was referred to in one headline, a theologian, he conveniently has just about every single thing. elite opinion on culture war questions. Take a look at this. Our southern border should be like our front porch. There should be a giant welcome, Matt.

I want to acknowledge that our trans community needs abortion care too. So when I use the word woman, it should not be understood as an exhaustive term, but rather as a as a lens. This guy couldn't even win in Brooklyn anymore. Examined and interrogate patriarchy. Similar to how we specify anti-black racism. God is both masculine and feminine and everything in between. God is non-binary. But I feel all this in terms of, in context of abortion, because before God comes over Mary and we have the incarnation,

God asks for Mary's consent. No. Which is remarkable. I mean, go back and read this in Luke. So to me, that is. is an affirmation in one of our most central stories that creation has to be done with consent. I was joking during the montage that he couldn't even win an election in Brooklyn anymore because that is such a cringe performance of millennial progressivism,

like peak millennial progressive BuzzFeed era cultural politics from Tala Rico where he's, I mean, I could watch him earnestly say God is non-binary all day. earnestly deadpan about trans abortion rights and interrogating what he say interrogating the patriarchy again that would have gotten you like an automatic a plus at Oberlin 10 years ago but now I mean these are things he said like in the last five years now it is so pathetic I think we all understand that it comes from this very banal and uninteresting again, well of conformist politics, like conformist elite politics. And Tau Rico's not exactly elite.

He is in seminary, clearly progressive, theologically progressive seminary. But it's not, I mean, it's the politics of somebody who's trying to signal that they are with the good side, with the right side of history, with the, honestly, with elites over and over again on these cultural politics. And now he's trying to run a campaign

about how this is about top versus bottom, not left versus right. John Cornyn and Ken Paxton are both far from perfect Republican candidates. So don't take this as me acting as though this is going to be a cakewalk for Republicans. I do not think that's the case. Nor do I think either Cornyn or Paxton

are particularly good conservatives in their own right. They're, they're very, like, moral stand-up conservatives. They're, they're very flawed politicians. Both of them are very flawed politicians. So I'm not saying anything to that degree. I'm just saying, you know, Dave Weigel of Semaphore pointed out, Tala Rico handled in South Texas, where he seems to have done very well. He handled the border a bit differently than immigration policy should be like a front porch, Tala Rico, that version of Tala Rico, at least in that forum and that performance, maybe did. He was a little bit more careful about it. So I think he's a smart politician. I think his politics are fundamentally boring

millennial progressivism that puts him on cultural issues much more in line with elites than, for example, working class Hispanics, then I think a lot of like suburban Texas voters are going to want to see. His line is going to be that we are being divided on the culture war by the tech elites, that we are being divided on the culture war when, in order to distract from, uh, the like robbery of robber barons. That's going to be how he tries to frame this. It's interesting. It's much better than anything Jasmine Crockett would have done. Um, interesting as it would have been. But, um, it's, that's where he's going to have to fight against Corn and or Paxton. And again, better than Jasmine Crockett.

it, but when you are out there talking about trans abortion rights, can we put the Tim Miller post up on the screen? I think we have it. I have it here too in the box. Yeah, okay, so let me put this up. This is Tim, who's a horseback on the show. He posted all the magas I follow are our teen Tala Rico tweets from five years ago. We'll see what the impact is, but it does reinforce my belief that the Dems would really benefit from finding an upstart in 2028, who emerged in 2022 and didn't really post during peak woke. Maybe in Texas, maybe in Texas, but where I disagree with Tim, I mean, I think it's obviously true that if you were posting during peak woke, it was, again, bland, cringe millennial progressivism. If you're James Tala Rico's

generation, yes, I think that's true. I think it's harmful in statewide races, all of the above. I think if Joe Rogan had gone down that list with Tala Rico, he would have had a really hard time defending those positions to Joe Rogan's face. But, I mean, like, look at this one. Look at this one. This is Tala Rico saying, I got the coolest action figure for Christmas. Thank you to all the healthcare superheroes working today. Let's help by getting baxed and boosted. This is December 25th, 2021. It's a Fauci action figure. Fun for the whole family. What little boy wouldn't want to wake up on Christmas morning to a Fauci action figure under his tree? so excited to have to post about it on social media, nothing better. Here's March 3rd, 2021. James

Talleyco, why I'm still wearing a mask. Big grin on his face. The mask says, love thy neighbor, which is a wonderful message, of course. But again, March 3rd, 2021, James Tallerico. So, obviously, Republicans are going to have a field day with Talariko because he did post during peak woke. Yes, I think that's the case. But I also think one of the biggest problems for Democrats is that there is a not insignificant portion of the electorate that actually does still demand things like trans abortion rights. It's not the average voter. But if you want to have a good relationship with the grassroots left, Tala Rico is trying to get the grassroots left. wants to hear on foreign policy and on economic policy and hopefully just not have to talk about,

you know, where does he stand on these things now? But you bet your ass, John Cornyn and Ken Paxson are going to force him to talk about trans abortion rights. All of these, it's talking about the front porch being a having a welcome mat on your front porch. they're going to they're going to go hard in on that especially in a state like Texas on Talarico and he is going to then be between a rock and a hard place look at the trouble that Kat Abu Ghazale has had in Illinois when hardcore leftist voters who thought they had found a champion in Abu Ghazale who was like blocking ice vehicles and really rose to prominence as a candidate because of that they found out she had a more normy establishment foreign policy and it's been a struggle for her. So when Tala Rico has to talk about some of this stuff and either disavow

those extreme left cultural positions or embrace them, he will find himself between a rock and a hard place. And I would just say to people on the left not to dismiss how some of this is going to land with working class black and Hispanic voters. The notion for a long time was that on the left, You know, they had to use phrases like Latinx and they had to talk about intersectionality, which he literally did in that clip I just played. They had to do all of that because it's what black and Hispanic voters wanted. And then they kind of realized, well, no. I mean, we'll see.

But there's been a kind of consensus that, not really. That's probably not the best way to appeal to black and Hispanic voters. In fact, many of them actually reject it because they're Christians or because they are cultural conservatives. And this clocks to them as elite bullshit. In the same way, you know, cutting social programs clocks to people as elite bullshit. They're like, this is what corporations were pushing. So the line that Tala Rico is going to argue about how it was, it's elites who are pushing the culture war is not exactly true. Because the way he's trying to say it is the elites are trying to divide us in favor of the billionaires and the culture war by pushing, forcing us to talk about these things.

I'm sorry, but the left is one that's forced every single one of these conversations. The right has responded. Don't get me wrong. The right has responded. And there are lots of billionaires who love talking about culture war issues so that we are distracted from economic issues and those divisions. Don't get me wrong. I think that's absolutely true. But let's not act like the culture war wasn't pushed by the culture war.

wasn't pushed by people who were out there saying we care about trans abortions and give Fauci action figures and post about wonderful Fauci action figures. And just like, again, down the line of him talking about, he's the one who started talking about Mary and consent, incorrectly, by the way. That is not what Luke says unless you have, unless you are trying to see it that way, like actively trying to see it that way and block out any of the evidence to the contrary. This is the angel Gabriel in the book of Luke. Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. Notice, you will conceive and give birth to a son, not consent as Tala Rico is framing this, because

Mary accepts that that is God asking for consent in the book of Luke. I needn't go down this rabbit hole because, frankly, it's so ridiculous. We see actually, really, baby. John and baby Jesus, baby John the Baptist, and baby Jesus leaping for joy in the mother's wounds. We see them having lives when they are still in utero that are worth mentioning in scripture. So it's all silly, but it's going to be fascinating to watch this race evolve. We will obviously continue to follow it. I've got Roger Stone coming up in just one moment, and I'm excited to get to him. I'm going to jump back into the chat. First, though, I've been planning ahead so I can responsibly enjoy a few drinks with friends after a long week or a long day.

I've got my course light right here now. Actually, it's the, oh, it's the old school can, the old school bottles. I love those. But anyway, my trick for staying balanced is zbiotics pre-alcohol. It's the world's first genetically engineered probiotic created by PhD scientists to help you avoid rough mornings after drinking. When we drink, alcohol turns into a toxic byproduct in the gut. And it's the buildup, actually not the dehydration. interestingly enough, that leaves you feeling lousy the next day. Zbiotics pre-alcohol produces an

enzyme that helps break this byproduct down so you can wake up feeling more like yourself. Just make it your first drink of the night. Enjoy responsibly and you'll set yourself up to feel your best tomorrow. I actually tried zibiotics before a dinner recently. It was a work dinner, but it was like an open bar work dinner. And you notice a real difference the next day. You actually do. I made it up the next morning without feeling sluggish.

So let's be real. usually a Friday night out, or in my case, maybe a work dinner, means a Saturday morning spent canceling workout classes and the like. But since I started incorporating pre-alcohol, my glasses of wine don't disrupt my morning flow. So remember to head to zbiotics.com slash afterparty and use the code after party at checkout for 15% off. All right, everyone, I'm going to bring in Roger Stone, the Man, The Man, Myth, the Legend in just one moment, want to set the table a little bit first. JFK files have been coming out since the Trump administration. demanded transparency, induced this season of heightened transparency.

Anna Paulina Luna, Republican in the House of Representatives, has been spearheading this, and we are learning more. JFX, the substack, tracks this very well. They even have an AI integration. Anna Paulina Luna and Jefferson Morley have had very helpful conversations. Jeff Morley runs JFX. He is rigorous investigator in this space and has found some documents in the recent releases. that are very much game-changing.

Again, he's somebody who's followed this for a really long time. But Roger Stone has as well. Roger Stone says he had a conversation with Richard Nixon himself, where Richard Nixon told Roger Stone that it was LBJ behind the Kennedy assassination. And this matters right now as people are doing these excavations of Watergate history, of Kennedy history, and of what's happened to Donald Trump. Roger actually brings that up in our interview. So this is an interview I've wanted to do for a very long time.

Roger Stone knew or knows Howard Hunt. If you haven't read Howard Hunt's memoir, it's called American Spy. It's one of those that's really hard to get. But his like Forrest Gump style life in the CIA and intelligence worlds, I think he actually even goes back to the OSS, is fascinating. And Roger wrote the forward to Hunt's son, St. John, Hunt's memoir. And in that forward, Roger wrote, before the elder hunt passed away in 2007, he outlined to St. John, the CIA's role. And St. John, by the way, in Hunt's memoir,

he talks about St. John being part of unknowingly throwing like Watergate evidence into a river. So this is people who know a lot. So he writes, the CIA's role in toppling governments. Hunt passed away. He outlined to St. John, the CIA's role in toppling governments, plotting against Fidel Castro, confirming the involvement of CIA agents in a plot to kill JFK and noted that Vice President Lyndon Johnson was, quote, running the show. So, with all of that in mind, I really wanted to talk for months. We've been trying to make this work with Roger Stone. He's in a car for this interview. We might try to get him back on to have like a really long, big picture conversation. I'd love to do that at some point because of everything that he knows and he says has happened.

but in the second Trump presidency where we see so much, hmm, we see some parallels. There's clearly a fight happening within the intelligence community right now over JFK documents, over disclosures and other cases, the January 6 pipe bomb investigation, for example, even Trump world was torn apart over some of this. So I wanted to bring in Roger, and I hope you enjoyed this interview with him. Well, I'm very excited to be joined now by the man, the myth, the legend. Roger Stone. He's, of course, host of the Stone Zone Zone, of the Stone Zone Zone, and he writes over at Stone Cold Truth on Substack.

Roger, thank you for being here. I am delighted and honored to be here. Well, there's so much going on that you have insight into right now in the world. And I wanted to start with JFK files. This is an interesting moment, very interesting moment, because a lot of Kennedy files have been released, not all. researchers are in the process of pouring over them, trying to figure out what's new, continue putting the pieces of the puzzle together. There's also something weird going on in pop culture.

The Wall Street Journal just this week pointed out that Gen Z is obsessed with the Kennedys. We've got the Ryan Murphy series airing. We have historical analyses of Watergate with the new James Rosen book being reconsidered. And we're talking about regime change in Cuba again. So, Roger. Let's start on a question. question about the Kennedy files. You knew many of people, many of the people in this case, Richard Nixon, G. Gordon Liddy. I know you know St. John Hunt, who's the son of Howard Hunt. So, Roger, from the new information, you've always looked right at Lyndon Bange Johnson, of course, because you posted this very recently just a couple weeks ago. You said, Nixon told me who killed JFK. Nixon called the Warren Commission the biggest goddamn hoax

in American history. Lyndon and I both wanted to be president. The difference was, I wasn't willing to kill for it. The president muttered to me over Martini's at his Saddle River home. Nixon knew the CIA and the mob were both in on it. So with documents that have been recently released, do you feel they're vindicating what you've been writing about and speaking from your own experience about for the last several decades? Yes, I think it's important to see the entire context.

So what I am saying is that Lyndon Johnson, as the vice president, was at the helm of a plot that included the Central Intelligence Agency, that included organized crime, that included certain foreign and financial interests, that included Big Texas Oil, all of whom had their own individual reason to replace John F. Kennedy. No one's interest is more acute than Lyndon Johnson.

He's under investigation in two massive corruption scandals, the Billy Sal Estes scandal. Billy Sal Estes was a flamboyant Texas wheelie dealer and con man. Johnson has obtained multi-million dollar agricultural contracts for non-existent properties for Estes, who is kicking back hundreds of thousands of dollars of Johnson. And also the Bobby Baker scandal. Bobby Baker is the sergeant of arms of the U.S. Senate. He is Johnson's right-hand man.

and nothing in the U.S. Senate moves without payoffs to Lyndon Baines Johnson through Bobby Baker. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., then the Attorney General, had already begun telling people that Johnson would be prosecuted, that Johnson would be dropped from the 1964 ticket. So Johnson is a man staring into the abyss. Johnson has a number of allies. He knows that the, that the, that the, Central Intelligence Agency blames Kennedy for the failure of the Bay of Pigs

invasion. Although I think that argument is wrong, the original plan as presented to President Kennedy for the Bay of Pigs invasion included 29 Panamanian

flagged bombers, supposed to be flown out of Panama to provide air cover for the Cuban exile storming the beaches. The CIA cancels that air cover at the very last minute, but the invasion goes ahead. That allows the head of the Joint Chiefs

and the head of the Air Force, Curtis LeMay, to tell the president, well, Mr. President, there's only one way to save the day. Send in the U.S. Air Force. That, of course, might have led to World War III, and Kennedy wisely refused. But that is largely the CIA's motive for the murder of Kennedy. Oliver Stone, who's not related to me, but who made a great movie,

makes a case that Vietnam was also a factor. It was a lesser factor, although there is some evidence that Kennedy was prepared to begin withdrawal from Vietnam. And of course, we do know, almost immediately upon becoming president, Johnson reverses those orders to begin returbing men. So I think that is also a factor. Yeah, no, let's ask. Oh, go ahead, Roger. Organized crimes motive is very simple. They elected John Kennedy. They twisted arms for him in the Wisconsin primary. They twisted arms for him and engaged in both. intimidation in both Illinois and Texas.

And in return, they were supposed to get an agreement to end the deportation proceedings of Santo Traficante and Carlos Marcello to the most powerful gangsters of the day. So basically, Robert Kennedy double-crosses the mob, and he goes after Santo Traficante and Carlos Marcello. In fact, he successfully deport Marcello to Guatemala since the documents of citizenship that Marcello is using show him as a Guatemalan resident. So I give huge credit, particularly to Congresswoman Anna Polina Luna. She's done an amazing job of forcing the Central Intelligence Agency to spit up the documents, many of the documents. they've been hiding for years.

If I have any criticism, the president ordered the National Archives to turn over all documents pertaining to the Kennedy assassination, also the assassination of Robert Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy, also the assassination of Dr. King. However, not all of the necessary documents are in the hands of the National Archives. The CIA has held a number of those key documents back in a police. Aluna has been relentless about getting those documents. And she's proven, for example, that the CIA has been telling us for over 50 years, they had no prior knowledge of Oswald.

They didn't know who was. They didn't know what he was doing. They not only knew everything about him, but he had a handler. And we now have that handler's records. So I think that I have been vindicated. I think that there was, I hate this word, a conspiracy. to kill Kennedy, and I've named those who I think were deeply involved. Why do you think President Nixon did not? I mean, he actually kind of talked about this on one of the tapes.

He said, I'm, you know, I get it. I get the dirty tricks. I think it's important. But he never exposed it to anyone, I mean, he told you, but he didn't go public with it. And why do you think Donald Trump, who I know you're still in contact with? Why doesn't he just go public with it? Why is the Trump CIA still stonewalling or attempting to? Well, from the minute he was elected, Nixon sought to get the documents from the CIA. He sent John Ehrlichman, who was then his legal counsel to the CIA, and Richard Holmes flatly refused to give President Nixon the documents that he believed would have proved that the agency had been involved.

in the murder of Kennedy. There's a very specific Ordergate era tape. Tucker Carlson played it in one of his last goes on Fox. I wrote about it very extensively in which President Nixon confronts the CIA director, Richard Helms,

in his office, and he says to him flatly, look, I know who shot John, his exact words. Roger, I really wanted to ask you, because you personally knew people who have knowledge of this and you certainly were around at the time you yourself worked for Richard Nixon. Bay of Pigs, Kennedy assassination, Watergate. There's the Howard Hunt element of all that. And again, I know you know Hunt's son, St. John Hunt. I know you know G. Gordon-Liddy. And as we're learning or new G. Gordon-Liddy, RIP, but as we're learning more about Watergate

and about everything that happened, how do you make sense of all three of those events? having, you know, some knowledge of that world. Because I think these are all connected events. I think it's not incidental that four of the Watergate burglars are not only on the payroll of the CIA at the time of the break-in, but those four men are on the ground in Daly Plaza in 1963 when John Kennedy is killed. That's not a coincidence. I believe that there is a straight line from the murder of JFK

to the silent coup under which Richard Nixon was out for the Watergate burglars were still on the active payroll of the CIA still reporting to their handlers. The Watergate Special Prosecutor knew this. They knew of the CIA's involvement. They said did nothing. The Senate Watergate Committee, including the Republicans, Senator Howard Baker knew about the CIA's involvement, did nothing about it.

So I think those who killed Kennedy also effectively removed Nixon. And now we have news that the deep state, specifically the joint chiefs, were actively spying on Nixon from the very beginning of his administration. Why? They didn't want to end the war in Vietnam. They didn't want a strategic arms limitation agreement with the Soviets. They did not want to open the door to China and play China off against Russia in order to get that arms agreement. And they knew that Nixon planned to restructure the national security apparatus in a way to take power away from the unelected Deep Street, referred to by Dwight Eisenhower as the military industrial complex. They go a step further.

These are the same forces who attempted to kill President Ronald Reagan in the first year of his term and a failed assassination. I believe they are the same forces who try twice, perhaps now three times, to kill President Donald Trump. This is the deep stay. They do operate, as Jack Smith's investigation shows us, extra caught outside the parameters of the law. So I think this is one history, one continued history, not the same people, obviously, but the same entities and the same network of those inside our military, inside our national security apparatus, inside the think tanks, inside the defense contractors. those are the black hats of history, if you will. Well, and lastly, Roger, Donald Trump, as you said, was the target of an assassination attempt

and a very odd one at that with some obvious parallels. Does that mean, you know, Chuck Schumer has his famous quote about, if you mess with the intelligence agencies, they have seven ways back to Sunday to get, they have seven ways to Sunday to get back at you directed at Donald Trump. Does that mean that we should, you know, maybe expect full transparency by the end of the Trump second term because he doesn't have to be reelected,

and he has motivation to get everything out there. Someone who knows him. What do you think about that, Roger? Look, I'm hopeful because we learned recently, for example, that the FBI prior to the election was surveilling a phone conversation between President Trump's campaign manager, Susie Wiles, and her attorney.

That's spying on your opponent in a presidential election. Isn't that what they removed? Theoretically, at least. Now, in that same time period, the FBI contacted me to tell me that my email had been compromised. My email specifically with some of those in the Trump campaign, including Susie Wiles. But the FBI insisted to my lawyers that this hacking was done by the Iranians. How do we know that? How do we know that that hacking wasn't done by, well, the FBI themselves?

So, yes, look how long it's taken us to get answers about Lee R.V. Oswald and whether he was indeed the real shooter of John F. Kennedy, which I sincerely based on my own book and my own research doubt. I still don't think we know everything about Thomas Matthew Brooks. I'm not even sure. He is the man who tried to kill President Trump, who did unfortunately kill Corey Compentory, the fireman, who was. unfortunately standing when the president shot out. I'm still not convinced that Brian Routh, the man who was convicted of President West Palm Beach, is not a CIA operative. There's a lot of evidence to me. To me, that would indicate that he is.

Roger Stone, the host of the Stone Zone Zone, and was such interesting writings on this over at Stone Cold Truth. Thank you for being so generous with your time this afternoon. I really appreciate it. All right, that was Roger Stone. the one and only you can probably tell from that interview how eager I was to pick his brain. So maybe we'll go along with him at some point and can really, really go deep into the people he knows and hear his Nixon story. He's told it many times, but it's one that you hear it,

and you still have a lot of questions. You could hear it 10 times. You still have a lot of questions about why Richard Nixon was sipping a martini and telling young Roger Stone that he knew So LBJ was the one who killed John F. Kennedy. The CIA elements of this are just essential. So very, very good to hear from Roger Stone. Before we wrap the show for the evening, I want to tell you about the case, the tragic case, of Stephanie Nicole Minter, who's a 41-year-old mother, killed at a bus stop in Northern Virginia on February 23rd. This is the People Magazine article headline here. Mom was fatally stabbed allegedly by a parent stranger while waiting at Virginia bus stop.

As the facts are emerging about what actually happened, they're absolutely disgusting. So let me go to this WJLA. This is the local ABC affiliate. Fairfax County is right outside of Washington, D.C. It is one of the wealthiest counties in the country. It is a very blue county. The headline from Nick Minok, who has been on this beat, is email show Fairfax Police warned prosecutor about suspect in Heibla Valley killing. Now, Stephanie Minok was the mother of a son.

She survived by her grandmother, her mother, brothers. She was at a bus stop in northern Virginia and was stabbed to death by, allegedly, this man. Abdul Jaloh, who's a native of Sierra Leone, he's a national of Sierra Leone. DHS says he was in the country illegally that he came in 2012, and now Nick Minok has obtained emails showing, quote, Fairfax County Police warned the county's attorney about the undocumented immigrant accused of killing a woman at a Hybila Valley bus stop email correspondent shows. Mynock did a FOIA request to the local government and found emails that, quote, show the Fairfax County Police Department warning Fairfax County Commonwealth Attorney Steve Descano's office about Abdul Jalow, a Sierra, a Sierra Leone National who DHS said is in the country illegally. He is now charged with murdering Stephanie Minter at that Fairfax County bus stop. Now, the email said, this was from a county police major to the county chief deputy commonwealth attorney. attorney, Jenna Sands, who said, I wanted to bring Mr. Jello's release to your attention because Mr. Jello is one of the repeat and violent offenders we discussed when we met. I wanted to get your background on why he is out so soon and ask if his prior suspended sentence of, I believe, five years was pursued by your office, unfortunately based on MTV stations, numerous dealings with him. It is not a question of if, but rather when he will maliciously wound or worse again. My role of keeping the public safe prompts me to follow up on his status. I cannot. not believe what that is like reading if you are the family or the loved ones of Stephanie Minter, where you have a warning here in writing from the local police to the deputy commonwealth attorney, it's in writing a police chief or a police major saying it's not a

question of if, but rather when he will maliciously wound and then chillingly in parentheses or worse again. Now, my not goes on to report, this is insane. Quote, Jalow has more than 40 past charges in Fairfax County, ranging from rape to assault. And in almost every case, Descano's office dropped the charges. You couldn't write a story this damaging, or this damning, for the left's combination of immigration policies and criminal justice reform. Steve Descano is not a super well name like some other prosecutor. have been. I want to put this one up on the screen. This is from Tim Carney, who is far from a fringe person. Tim is one of the best reporters in Washington. He is on the right. But Tim is just

absolutely rigorous, and he's been writing about Steve Descano because Tim lives in Northern Virginia for a long time. Descano is described by Tim as a quote, George Soros-funded common law attorney for the suburban county of one million who has openly stated he won't enforce the law when it clashes with his ideology. The results have been ugly. Richard Cox was already a serial offender when he exposed himself in a women's locker room in Fairfax, but Descano let him go, and he proceeded to expose himself in a high school girl's locker room. Abdul Jalow was arrested more than 30 times, including for malicious wounding, but was repeatedly set free. He is now accused of stabbing Stephanie Minter to death on February 23rd. Grette Glyer was

executed in his bed in a calculated assassination. Disconno let the killer go with an insanity plea. And a Chinese pimp, Tim continues, ran a brothel in a residential neighborhood across the street from a school bus stop while police did everything they could to shut it down. Disconno's office dropped the prostitution charges and let the place continue operating until the Republican Attorney General got it shuttered. People who live in these communities, deep blue communities, I'm talking about Democrats who live in these communities feel utterly helpless because all of the money was and all of the money and the momentum consequently was with these Soros type prosecutors who are criminal justice reformers but of a very particular persuasion on the left. They're far left criminal justice

reformers and these experiments have played out in many communities around the country over the last 10 years, and voters, including Democratic voters, in places like San Francisco, have rejected them. People like Larry Krasner have hung on amidst recall elections, to be sure. But that's a great example of another place where people just feel utterly helpless because of where the money has lined up on criminal justice reform in Democratic races. I mean, in these places where it's blue, you're not going to be able to get a Republican prosecutor elected. So your choice is a far-left Democrat who is sort of a far-left Democrat who is far left, they're able to attract Soros funding and attention from those big ideological donors,

or a moderate who is probably not even on the radar of a lot of people, because again, we're talking about county-level prosecutors. Soros is the one who, again, for his ideological goals, you can give him some credit for this, pioneered the model of being a billionaire with a nonprofit that's going to suddenly focus tons of energy on these large. local prosecutor racist. And that's where, again, people in these areas who are even, not even Republicans, I mean, there are Republicans and not insignificant numbers and even blue cities, but people just feel helpless. It's like the stuff is happening despite logic and despite the politics. It's like people feel they can't do anything about it. So the case of Stephanie

Minter, a man who has been arrested 30 times, he has no permanent address, sounds like he was homeless and he was praying on other homeless people. They say a lot of times they couldn't find witnesses to corroborate and bring evidence. When you have 30 cases of arrest on charges ranging from rape to other violence and this guy is out on the streets, you have a warning from the police, a warning from the police. And he's out on the streets at the point where he stabs someone. It's completely ridiculous. Finally, this is a new video from Nick Minok, who was trying to ask the Virginia lieutenant governor about the case. Here's what happened. ...Ghazala Hashmi about the case. I'm Nick Monach with seven news. Just want to get your reaction

to the murder of a woman in Fairfax County at the hands of allegedly an illegal immigrant. What is your reaction? It gets handled by the bodyguard. Lieutenant Governor, what's your reaction to this murder in Fairfax County? No response? That was just three hours ago. Proper response, of course, would be. It's a horrible case. I'm so sorry.

That was a little bit too much at the moment for Lieutenant Governor Kasala Hashmi. Again, I'd try not to be depressing and bleak, but it does feel like these cases just keep happening and just keep happening and happening. a reminder that 100% of crime committed by people who should not be in this country, let alone on the streets. I mean, we have seen cases of Native-born Americans, not even Sierra Leone nationals, who have had rap sheets like this, who are allowed to victimize other Americans on the streets. Not right in either case, but 100% of crime committed by non-citizens is preventable. insane that you have a non-citizen with a rap sheet like that who is on the streets. Virginia Democrats are going to have to answer for this one. This case is really starting to get traction.

I was worried when I first saw it that it would be just another drop in the bucket, but it's not. Stephanie Minter is not just a statistic. And it's time to wake up. Time to wake up. All right. I'll leave it there for tonight. I could keep going on, as you know, but appreciate everybody tuning in. Please do us a favor and subscribe.

You have like 24 hours roughly to get an email in for this week's happy hour over at Emily at devil make hair media.com. I usually record those on Thursday afternoons. So I will look forward to reading your comments and your questions over there tomorrow. The episode will drop Friday around 5 p.m. Make sure to subscribe on your podcast feed if you want to see that. Thanks so much for tuning in. We will be back here with more after party on Monday.