Badlands Media - Devolution Power Hour Ep. 474: Kirk Trial Fallout and Midterm Maneuvering

Episode Date: July 12, 2026

Jon Herold and Chris Paul open the Saturday show with a livestreamer guest who sat through the entire Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing, breaking down the evidence, the courtroom optics, and why the "case closed" narrative circulating online doesn't hold up the way people think. They dig into the shaky video evidence, draw uncomfortable parallels to a past politically charged trial everyone remembers, and call out the same familiar faces steering the narrative in a suspiciously convenient direction. Second half shifts gears into election territory: redistricting fights breaking out across multiple states, voter ID and mail in ballot battles tied to the Slaughter decision, and whispers about what the midterms could actually look like, including some uncomfortable "what if they just cancel them" talk. Add in a fresh round of Iran and Strait of Hormuz headlines for good measure. Heavy topics, but handled with the show's usual mix of skepticism and dark humor.

The Badlands, one of the Badlands, explain those badlands. That's a hell of their name. Well, good evening, everybody, and welcome to the Saturday edition of the Devolution Power Hour. As always, I am joined by Chris Paul from an undisclosed location. Chris, how are you doing, man? I'm good. All my locations are undisclosed, so it would be weird to disclose my location, don't you think? Are you in a different undisclosed location than your different one?

Oh, no, I'm in the same one as the different. one. I'm just noticing a different setup with the headphones. Oh, well, the headphones thing is weird. Also, this thing should be over for other thing. That's better. No, that's not quite. So I've been trying to send this room up all week. Um, and it's not there. Uh, but that's like, uh, an adhesive sound panel. Oh, yeah. That is, uh, yeah. Oh, dude. I should. I think he's going to be in the shop, but I forget how wide the shot is because I'm on the laptop. Yeah. I have so many leftover adhesive panels of varying different shapes that I can mail to you. It could probably cover your whole room. I'm actually so I we don't need to talk about my sounds unit in here but I have like these much thicker panels that you hang and those are all up and then I'm going to put like framed pictures and artwork around this zone because we're going to have like you know a different setup soon.

Yeah. Well, that's cool. But anyway, I'm very excited for that. Well, actually, first of all, let me do this. I got to say thank you to the final demand who gifted 10 subscriptions right off the bat and totally outed Ash 1776 as not having already been a subscriber. It's my favorite part about the gifted subs is it's basically calling people out who big fans, but not subscribers. So love that part of it. I've been an interesting week with the Tyler Robinson stuff. And we're probably going to start off. conversation day with that and we're going to get into a couple interesting election related items in the second part of the show um before we bring on our guests because we do have a guest to start the show i think we should probably get a quick word from our first sponsor and uh and then we can we can bring our guest on and maybe talk shit about them before we bring them on probably ideal but uh yeah let's start let's start with this earth echo this episode is brought

to you by cacao bliss from earth echo a ceremonial grade cacao drink with seven superfoods that lower appetite boost focus and calm anxiety raise your hand if you start every morning with coffee researchers at johns hopkins found that the theobromian the natural compound in cacao gives you up to six times longer lasting energy than caffeine with no jitters or crash drinking cacao as a morning ritual is over 5 000 years old today sponsor has brought that ancient habit into the modern world and it tastes like hot chocolate. I actually mix mine with coffee. I think that's the best way to do it. But that's just me. Most people have never heard of this. The Kuna people in Panama drink five cups of raw cacao every single day. Harvard researchers discovered their rates of

cardiovascular problems are nine times lower than Americans and cancer rates are 15 times lower. Their energy weight and mental clarity stay remarkably strong into old age. The reason is flavanol's natural compounds in rock a cow that modern chocolate processing almost completely destroys. Research shows high flavanol cacao can increase stem cell counts by up to 220 percent and improve blood vessel function by up to 47 but you need the real ceremonial grade form learn more and get your special discounts and free shipping today at try cacao bliss.com slash badlands that is try cacao bliss.com slash badlands and i do have it it comes in this like sweet box it'd be a great gift for but yeah really cool if you drink it just without mixing it with coffee it doesn't taste like chocolate

i would say it tastes a little more earthy as the natural things do but mix it with the coffee that's the way to do it yeah it's a beautiful package um that's what she said not not like mike johnson's package but beautiful nonetheless um nothing's that beautiful chris i was also going to let the chat know everybody's like am i sick i i don't feel even the least bit sick but i i I've had like this frog in my throat since like Wednesday and I don't know how else to describe it other than that because it's not even sore. I just sound like this now. Maybe it's something with the new place. Could be. It could be. I mean, I don't know. I'm in a different environment.

I mean, I'm in a different city. So like it's a substantial enough difference that maybe there's like different pollens or whatever in the air. I have no idea, but they don't feel even the least bit sick. But nonetheless, I sound different. Well, that is weird. Also, one of my new favorite words to say is cacao. I love saying cacao. I just wanted to put that out there. It's a fun word to say. Okay, all right.

We're going to bring our guest on here shortly. But before I do, I want to preface this with saying, I know he was way off with his gas price prediction for July 4th, but I don't want that to color his other coverage this week of the Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing. you know typically when people are that off in their predictions i kind of write them off i'm trying not to do that with with brian here but brian how you doing man i'm doing good how you guys doing doing pretty good you had a busy week of tyler robinson furries shooting stuff i'm not i'm not totally convinced that that lance twigs is a furry he's definitely gay but i'm not convinced

he's a furry wait why do you say he's definitely gay because he admitted that him and tyler robinson and we're in a relationship in the in the testimony that they allowed in the trial but have you seen having sex with a man no fortunately for myself i have not seen that he doesn't he doesn't come off as gay he does look like scott ruster though he's got the long hair he's got a deep masculine voice if you look at the other pictures outside of that one one z picture that they blasted everywhere he looks like a normal kid from the midwest Yeah. Yeah.

So, Brian, I feel like you probably have a better, more complete understanding of what happened this week in that court hearing than any single person that there is. Yeah. I mean, I streamed the entire thing. Yeah. All, you know, every- smarter than the other people who streamed the entire thing. Yeah.

You know, I went into it. Obviously, I had my preconceived notions about what took place in that event and that, you know, I had my preconceived notion. but I went in their objective trying to look at the evidence that was presented from both sides. And I came away with there's no, there's a lot of evidence that they put forward and they took one little segment of evidence and just crammed everything into that segment. But in the in the long run, they don't have anything placing him on that rooftop. There's there's nothing placing him on that rooftop.

Other than that one video that they claim is. right well no so well yeah that that video they claim is him but like the only video that we saw of tyler robinson on the campus is the video that we've seen for the last year right in just different forms we get him in shorts going down the stairwell through the parking garage his car driving in and and allegedly his car by the way allegedly his car driving in then he changes clothes he comes back three hours later and walks in with jeans and this is when he has the the the rifle in his in his pants and you know i mean the investigator testified on the stand how do you know that's Tyler robinson his shoes that's it issues i mean what what was your preconceived notion going into this

like can you can you let us know what you your thoughts were the whole situation beforehand i never so so i mean i've dabbled in all the conspiracy theories around this you know i've i've dabbled in the exploding lapel mic i've dabbled in the shot from the crowd i don't believe the shot from the crowd at all the the lapel mic is intriguing i don't buy into that the only piece of evidence that has always told me that this was not tyler robinson allegedly from that roof from that rooftop is the 30 odd six with no exit wound and i cannot get away from that and that is the one thing i mean i've i've shot rifles my entire life i've actually shot people with much smaller rifles and I've seen the damage that they do.

A 30-odd-6 is going a four-and-a-half-inch neck. And a lot of people are saying, well, I shot deer and there's no exit wound. Yeah, a deer's also probably, you know, 20 inches across when you shoot the, you know, the shoulder of a deer, when you're aiming for that heart on a deal right behind the shoulder blade. That's 20 inches across. You're talking about four-and-half-inch human neck, right, and for there to be no exit wound. So that was always the one thing that said, there's something fishy here for me. Sure.

Okay. Well, that's good. And then so going into it, I mean, the coverages, we got really pay much attention to it, but I was paying attention to the social media influencing surrounding it. And it doesn't seem like really anybody who went like, because I'm thinking of the Candice Owen side versus the the TPUSA or Kirk side. I didn't see anybody change their opinions of what they thought ahead of time. But it really comes down to for me, especially the last day was the video that like Jack Posobic and. and benny johnson came out and they both did like these emotional like we saw video and it very very clearly is tyler robinson and it was just like the courtroom was a gasping and every like this super dramatic interpretation of what went down but it's a video that just so happens that day we were told no more media stuff showing the exhibit so nobody else gets to see it and i know you have a pretty interesting take on this so i think you should uh maybe start there like what did you see from both sides what are you seen now that you've seen the five days and do you want to talk about that

stuff you found on the video today sure so i i streamed again i streamed the whole trial um going back to day two there was the the 12 it's called exhibit 12.4 and they showed this to everybody the people saw it's the it's the it's a compilation of the rooftop the stairwells him pulling into the parking garage all of that piled into one video then there was another video that was 12.1 exhibit 12.1 And this was an, they called it an enhanced video. And by their own definition, and John, I sent you the video of them defining what enhanced means in telegram. I sent it to you if you won't. It's three minutes.

You don't, I can have it up on your Twitter? Can we just share your screen? No, I don't have it on Twitter. I haven't posted that on Twitter. But I can explain to you. And I mean, I can give you timestamp. It's on day two court TV. I can download it.

Just give me a second. Okay. So they define the enhanced video as they remove the red circles. If it was in the stairwell, they had innocent bystanders that had blurs on their face, they removed the blurs from their face. And on the rooftop, they zoomed in on the rooftop. That is the extent of the enhanced video that they could not show the people on day two or on day five. Now, so they show it on day two, they show it to the judge.

Fast forward to day four. And at the very end of day four, they bring up a motion calling for the public to be able to see Exhibit 12. And they're like, we know it's redundant and that they already showed 12.4, but we think it's important that the people can see 12.1 and see the shot being fired and all of this stuff. And the judge is like, yes, we'll do it. We'll do it on day five. Tomorrow we'll do it. So day five rolls around. And there was the whole controversy about the letter that got leaked, right? The letter that flashed up on the screen for two seconds and they got the screenshot of the letter. And so that letter, that letter changed. everything in the court case today, or yesterday, excuse me. The judge went from, we're going to show 12.1, we're going to show all the exhibits to we can no longer show the exhibits because this is now the second time that the state has leaked something that they weren't supposed to show. So we can no longer show the exhibits and that includes 12.1. So we're no longer going to show 12.1 to the people. We're only going to show it to the people in the courtroom. And that was

the enhanced video. And again, it was the state that leaked stuff. caused them to no longer be able to show things outside the court yes but to be perfectly fair and again this is why you know i'm trying to handle this objectively the defense was actually the one that motioned for the censorship of all these exhibits sure the state leaked it the defense is the one that moated and the defense this whole time has been the one that wanted to keep this out of the media and i think after the op you saw today following you know that video that everybody got to see yesterday I think you can see why the defense wanted all of this kept out of the media, which I don't agree with that, by the way.

Don't explain that. A defense attorney is going to want evidence limited period because their job is not to please the audience at home. Their job is to make sure that their client is protected to the best they can under the law, right? And then not wanting it to go out to the media. I checked in on this a few times throughout the week. And the case they were making was that it would prejudice public opinion against their client, right? Correct. Correct.

So, yeah. So they decide they're going to limit this. They show it to the public. Now, today I was talking to, I think I was talking to Ash about something with the case. And I was like, oh, yeah, all these people are saying this. It's the same video. In fact, Ash, I think they showed this video on. on day two, I think they showed it.

So I went back and looked and I was like, oh, crap, they didn't show it to the public. They only showed it to the judge and the witness that was on the stand, the guy that's on the screen right now, David Null. And so I was like, oh, well, crap, they didn't show it. But then out of the corner of my eye, and I don't know how I didn't catch this earlier, you could see the state attorney's computer with the video,

the enhanced video they were showing the judge playing on it. And so you could see this video that we're not allowed to see, right? the video that was like oh my god it was the toughest thing i ever saw and you could see it on the on on the attorney's screen and it's not at all what these mainstream influencers were telling us it was at all well let me play this video and which one is this now this is tuesday yeah so this is tuesday and this is kind of laying the baseline of what exhibit 12.1 is because a lot of people have been telling me the video on day two is different than the video on day five no it's not it's the the same exact video.

They just showed it only to the judge on day two, and they motioned on day four to show it to everybody. Okay, here we go. Let's return again to a spin mark stakes exhibit 12.1. Again, you've reviewed that video. Yes. And the difference between 12.1, there was been marked to states exhibit 12.1 and 12.4,

if I understand you correctly, are these enhancements that we've been talking about. Yes. And specifically what, Would be specific about the enhancements and let's go one at the time. Okay. I think there's a reference to either red circles or red highlights. Correct.

That's how Mr. Olson described it, red highlights. Yes. Do you know what he's, what is he referencing by the red highlights or what do you believe he's referencing? I believe he's referring to red ovals or circles that were placed over the image to identify specific individuals of note. And these red circles, are they permanent red circles, are they temporary? I'm different. I would assume they are temporary. I'm not very technological, but I believe they would be overlaid over the image.

And that is a bad question. What I mean by that is, is do they appear and disappear quickly or do they linger or last for a period of time? They're there for a notable period, but I believe they come off the very video. All right. And other than, well, and you said that the circles, what do the circles do? They identify an area or a person of interest within the video. And other than do that, do the circles or the highlights, do they do anything with regards

to the video itself as far as its accuracy? Not to my knowledge now. Okay. I think the next enhancement that has been mentioned that we've talked about is there's some blurring. Yes. Do you know what that? Tell us what that is.

What blurring do you see in state was been marked to state's exhibit 12.1 that you now don't see in 12.4? If I recall there were some individuals in the parking garage footage and their faces were blurred. Excuse me. Is anything other than faces being blurred? blurred? Not that I recall now. And how often do you see the blurring throughout the video? I believe it's just in the in the original sequence in the parking garage. The other than the blurring, does well does the blurring other than obviously blur out part of the image does it change or impact the accuracy in

your mind of that part of the compilation video. Not to my knowledge now. And then the last thing is, I believe, is there's some zooming in and zooming out, that's in 12.1 that has been removed. Yes. What can you tell us about the zooming in and the zooming out? Predominantly, it's in the area that was referred to as viewing the Losey building rooftop. I believe it focuses on the area where Mr. Robinson comes up the stairs and onto the rooftop.

those portions of that particular footage was zoomed in for clarity. Okay. Other than zooming in and zooming out, does at least that enhancement to the video, does it change the content of the video? No. The accuracy of the video in your mind? No. Okay.

Okay, so this is just discussing the video, like it's zooming in, the circles on it, the red dots, the decoded video, essentially? Yeah, it's mainly to show people, because one of the one of the of the biggest pushbacks I've gotten on my post so far is that that's not the video they showed on day five. It's exactly the video they showed on day five. The exhibit was titled 12.1. The judge announced it before he played the video for the whole court. They pointed the camera up at the Great Seal of Utah for 10 minutes, not 20 minutes like Benny Johnson said, for 10 minutes while the video played. And that right there was the special agent for the State Bureau of Investigation in charge of the

investigation that is outlining what the enhancements were. No red circles, no blurs on the faces, and they zoomed in on the low C building. And that was it. That was it. Okay. So now this next video, should I play that? I don't think you need to play that one. I don't think you need to.

I mean, if you want to play like maybe a minute of the section where I show the day two when they're actually showing where you can see the computer screen. so that you get and again it is it is showing a recording of a computer screen of a camera so there is a lot of compression you know it's it's going to be you know degraded video but my point is is that this is not anything the FBI had this exact video with the zoomed in quality you know zoom in uh zooming of this video back in September of 2025 okay I think good I think what I want to do first is play Jack Posobics video and Benny Johnson's because ultimately the whole reason I really don't care about this trial. I couldn't get into it this week.

But as I said, I'm watching like the social media influencing around it, the siops going on around it. And this is a definite sciop. They are trying to influence the outcome of this trial. There is no, you know, everybody's the right to a fair trial, right? And whether Tyler Robinson is guilty or not, that is supposed to be determined in the trial. And I don't know if you can say that he's going to get a fair trial with what's going on here, with what POSO is doing and what Benny Johnson are doing. Doesn't it say something strange about this whole sordid affair that the people supposedly

closest to Charlie Kirk are the ones running this coordinated messaging up about this ridiculous hearing? It does say something. The whole thing just weird. The whole thing has been a mess and a clown show since the first moment of it. And yeah, anyway, we can continue forward with the hearing from this week. Well, one thing I did do today is I went through a whole bunch of Jack Masovit's timeline. Just looking for stuff like when he was covering the Derek Chauvin trial, like he was all in on like the media bias.

He'll never get a fair trial here because of what the politicians in Minnesota have said about it, which is funny. because J.D. Vance came out and was like, Tyler Robinson is super guilty. Jack Pacific had this post back in 2021. Innocent before proven guilty is bullshit for any case. The media gets involved in and it's been that way for years. And here he is doing the same exact thing. We can show the video.

I think everything's proven. I think it's, I think it's proven. I would say beyond problem because at this point, I think that the question for me is, is how do you even get reasoned with that for so much evidence? But the thing that I do just have to say is that I know that, you know, you guys watching on a live stream couldn't see the last video that was shown. Well, it wasn't edited.

It was it was zoomed in. It was zoomed in from the surveillance video off campus and specifically the part of the Losey Center, the roof. And you see everything. You see everything. Except his face. He assembles the run, you know, gets down in a prone position, and you see the time. And we all know what time. And it just, it's, it was like so slow just watching those seconds, click, click, click,

and then he see him take a shot. And he takes a shot and then immediately runs. We've seen that video already, but I wasn't, I didn't. I knew we were going to watch that, but I wasn't prepared to see this side of what happened because we've never seen it before. We saw the other end of the shot, obviously, but this was a whole other level of just evil. And I got very upset watching it. And obviously the family was very hard for them to watch. and I looked over and I saw Tyler wasn't even looking.

He wasn't even looking. See what he did. And I would just say that I do wish, I wish the public could see that. I hope that that video was made public. Yeah, because I want it to happen. I didn't want any of this to happen. I hate all of this. I hate being here.

But people need to see what happened. People need to see the other side of this, because this is a case. We need to see the truth. We need to see the facts. And this is, it's, it's the video of the sniper taking a shot. It is exactly what you think it would look like,

but it's, it's one of the hardest things about Rappriarch, probably since the initial thing. It's happened to look at the first video. Very strange. Okay, so to be fair, while I think that is very dramatic, and I can, look, that was his friend.

So I get that. There's a lot of emotion behind it. He actually, he actually he actually was not off on his description of it right the the benny johnson one is the one that's awful the benny johnson one is awful he wasn't too far off on it and then we could get into the tatum thumbnail okay well let me find the benny johnson one oh man i've had to show more benny johnson clips last like three days than i've had in a while and it's been it's brutal okay yeah We're outside of the 4th District courth

District courthouse here in Utah, the Charlie Kirk, preliminary murder trial just wrapped when we were there and witnessed everything, and you have to hear this because it was devastating what we watched. And the judge ruled that you can't see the high-definition quality video 4K of Tyler Robinson committing the murder of Charlie Kirk. But we saw it.

Was there a great-ploid on giant screens. There is no high-quality, high-definition, 4-K video of Tyler Robinson shooting, committing the murder of Charlie Kirk. Period. Period. There is, that, that was my, that statement right there from Ben, Benny Johnson is categorically false. Even, even if, even if that video is, is, is, is, is in 4K, it's just zoomed in. You can see from the video that we have leaked.

It's still pixelated. It's still crap quality. He's still a little black spec. There's no possible way you could even tell his hair color, nonetheless, whether it's a man or a woman. You know what's, you know what that makes. me think of Brian is how Trump keeps tweeting, uh, truthing out that he has space force satellites that can see like your fingerprints from space or whatever.

That's so funny. I wonder if that's going to come into play at any point. Um, so wait, let me just, let me just make sure that I'm understanding this properly. The video of the, the little spec running across the top of the building that has been out on the internet for 10 months. They have the high-deaf version of that. And that is the evidence that we are told is the damning evidence. It's not the high-deaf version. We've already seen the zoomed-in version of him running from the building to where he jumps off. The only difference now, the only difference now is we have the video of him even further away by quite a bit, right?

Because the corner of the building where he jumps down is the exact opposite corner where he's alleged to take the shot. So it's even further away, more disturbances in the way, and that zoomed in. And we have that photo now. And it does not contain his face. Not at all. Not even, dude, he's a, you couldn't even tell if it was an aunt or a person. If it was an a screen or a person. So in addition to the, the lack of conclusive evidence in this video, we also have to concern ourselves with the provenance of the video, why the video was never made public when all the others were for these 10 months, and then any number of other variables concerning the validity and truthfulness

and, you know, the kind of chain of custody and everything else about this piece of evidence, right? Correct. Yeah. Okay. All right. Not to mention these siops right here that these people are pushing. Right. Went along with it. In coordinated fashion, using the same phrasing. It's been going on all week. Yeah.

Let me play the, should I play the rest of this, Brian? You get with that? Yeah, because I think Ash is in the chat. I really want to piss her off with him invoking Christianity for a speedy trial. Yeah, I think that's a good idea. Outside of the house, you can see clearly Tyler Robinson's face. You can see crystal clear the license plate number on his vehicle, his movements on the rooftop. You can time it up to when Charlie Kirk was murdered.

And what you also couldn't see was what happened inside of the courthouse. Erica Kirk was sobbing in the arms of her mother-in-law, Charlie's mother, Mrs. Kirk. Feet away is Tyler Robinson, pale, sallow, bony, emaciated, staring at the floor the whole time. Twitching and looking straight ahead refuses to watch the video, refused to make eye contact with the family. Emotional day.

The judge played all 20 minutes of the high-definition security. And the whole courthouse gasped when it was over. It was really tough to watch. The prosecution has a demonstrable, overwhelming case. They said that multiple times. The defense has nothing. they asked minutia questions about DNA evidence, but the judge was just chewing them along

as we get to this 4K video reveal that will eventually be made public. It's already a case that is overwhelming against Tyler Robinson, but once you see this video, you will cast out all of the demons that have been attacking the Kirk family. It has been one of the most grotesque, demonic evils

that have been visited upon innocent people to happen to this beautiful family. Once you see all of the evidence that we saw today, it's over, and that's what the lawyers said today. Please pray. Erica Kirk asked us to do this. pray for a speedy trial. We have a right to a speedy trial here. It's in our Constitution.

We don't have to wait years in order to get to a trial phase here. We want justice to be done. Justice has to be done in this case and done immediately. So please pray for the Kirks. They've been through enough. Time for justice for the widow. And just a word to all of Christians out there. The Bible calls us in the Old Testament, the New Testament, to defend the widow, to defend the orphans, to provide for her and to stand up for her. And so be a Christian today, be upright. Please pray for justice in this case and speedy trial. Thank you.

God bless you. We're outside of before. How long do they start like quoting the Bible as saying like the Bible calls you to defend Erica Kirk specifically by name? It's crazy. So a couple things you got wrong there. The video's only 10 minutes. It's not 20 minutes. When they played it in the courtroom, the cameras were still rolling.

They just zoomed up at the seal. And you can time when they started to when they came back in session and it was 10 minutes, not 20 minutes. He's said that twice now and I don't know where that's coming from. The license plate thing is interesting. I would like to see that because there's a bunch of photos on now online of the car in the parking garage and the car that was towed impounded from his house. And the front splitter on the car is totally different. It's a much different splitter. Now, again, I don't know whether that's one thing or the other. But the point is, is the video of him shooting is not at all what he described. It's not high-deaf. It's not 4K. It's not up close. It's not something that you see. I don't even know if you'd be able to see the smoke from the rifle. You know, there's people saying you can see the muzzle flash.

No way. No way. In broad daylight, could you see the muzzle flash from a rifle from a camera, 400 yards away, zoomed in and all pixelated like that. Now, to further the op at the end of the video that I put out, I'd called out somebody if you want to go to the very end of that video. So, well, first tell us this is the video we're seeing here, right? that they're claiming is the one that's the original no that's the original okay so that is the one

that we all have access to that's the computer science building it's the building right behind the low c building and that is the original that we were shown in court on day two it's exhibit 12.4 and if you go like maybe towards the middle of that click you can see the computer screen that the woman has there yeah that is literally the top left quadrant or excuse me the yeah the top left quadrant of the first video just zoomed in a little bit. Okay. Maybe like 2x.

Yeah, you can see the top of the building. Yeah, and if you keep going, I actually make it bigger. There you go. So now this right here is, this is where he's allegedly laying in the prone. That's what they're looking at to tell that he's laying in the prone. Okay. And if you go one more step forward, when it changes, when the screen changes, one more, oh, maybe too far.

Oh, maybe too far. Oh, wait, maybe it is that one. Okay, so go, yeah, right there. Yeah, there you can see. That's him running across. That's how clear it is. Wait. Yes.

Oh, wow. That's the identifying exhibit 12.1 that they showed everybody in court that the judge forbid to allow after he allowed it on day four. So, so Pesovic said a couple of things. He said that this is overwhelming evidence for probable cause. and that that means that this should go to trial. Now that's an entirely different standard than proving guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, of course,

but then he immediately mentioned reasonable doubt as well. And so, you know, I understand that for a lot of people who believe that the Patsy story is the story of a real killer and that the stories about his relationship are all valid and important and suggestive of his guilt and all the rest, they've accepted the story. that's been given to them from the authoritative sources and the official sources and then repeated by acquaintances

and friends of Charlie Kirk. So they have this story, they're already committed to that story. They've probably argued about it online for a really long time. And then we get to this hearing this week that Steve Benin, as we discussed yesterday on Daily, has presented as like a public grand jury, We are meant to watch this thing and really try to focus in on what it is that we are being presented and then determine for ourselves whether or not we believe this person should be put on trial for murder or assassination or whatever different charges they've they've handed out to him. And the standard of evidence we're using is a series of videos where you can't see this person's face.

And there's not a single piece of evidence that would convince anybody who's just coming to this for the first time that they have definitely got their man. The only thing that convinces people of this is the confirmation bias of having already accepted the conclusion before. And now believing that your conclusion is confirmed because the evidence you already saw is being presented in front of an official body. And there's a coordinated mass marketing messaging campaign to support the conclusion you already have. That's what we're dealing with here. Yes. This is incredible.

And I think, Chris, the effort behind that is to push them into, I think we're gonna see a plea deal offered here with the death penalty off the table. And I think they're trying to push him into taking that because to be honest with you, and again, this is not a trial. I think, I know for certain that this, that this is risen to probable cause. And that's mainly because of Lance Twiggs testimony, which they were not able to cross-examine. The text messages, which there's a lot of discrepancy about whether those are legit,

because of some issues like spacing in the text messages and stuff. Like the text messages, the two bubbles are like touching. And on iPhones, when you text like consecutively, there's a space between them. But if you look on their text message, they're clearly the bubbles are touching. And it's like, wait, no cell, no iPhone has touching bubbles in them. Plus, he has his own name and his phone as Tyler. No, that's in Lance's phone. Oh, are you sure?

Yeah, that's Lance's phone that they're showing with that confession. But so another thing that's interesting, like, so in this testimony that Lance Twiggs is giving and he's not able to be cross-examined, he says that him and Charlie rarely talked about politics. They never talked about Charlie Kirk. they never really talked about transgender and gay LGBTQ things politically, but they did talk about from time to time Trump and policies that he was trying to implement. So how do you like this would be the first gay 20 something year old couple with maybe trans,

maybe furry ties that is talking about Trump policies, but not LGBT. And Tyler Robinson was so weapon. that he said, I had a chance to take out Charlie Kirk and I took it, but you've never talked to your boyfriend about Charlie Kirk, ever. Like, that was his words. We'd never talked about Charlie Kirk. So explain that to me. There was another really interesting thing, and I, this is the first time I've actually, I'm going to say this publicly that I caught in the trial that I didn't realize until now. The, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, expert that testified about the round they recovered from Charlie Kirk said that the bullet

they got the bullet that had fragmented the pedals pulled back you know and she took a you know diameter reading of the base of the bullet and said that the base of the bullet was between I'm going to fuck up the first number but the second number excuse me screw up the first number I think she said it was 0.287 it was in a range of 0.287 to 0.301 now here's the problem A 30-odd-6 round is 0.308. So a 30-odd-6 round, the diameter of the base of that bullet is outside the scope of what ATF produced in that ballistic examination. So what's the implication of that? It wasn't a 30-odd-6.

I mean, the margin of error that she gives there, 0.287 to 0.301 is supposed to account for any damage to the bottom of that round. Is that this clip? The bullets with engravings that were recovered? No, no. That's the one where he wrote on the casings, like the trans quotes and all that. I don't have that clip. Isn't it crazy how you see all those pictures of like IDF soldiers having engraved their, their missiles and whatnot?

Bombs, yeah. Isn't that part of the, it was Israel conspiracy? Well, I mean, I'm not, again, I'm trying to stay objective here, so I'm not getting it. I know. I just, I've followed this kind of passively over the last 10 months because you can see it's just like a battle between these two info ops. And, you know, the it was Israel thing is the fact that Israel is like a base and center point for the global regime is undeniable, which means that they are going to, it's like a control space for the global entity. they're going to be involved in everything, just like the United States is involved in everything. And so to then say, oh, it was Israel. Oh, it was the United States. Oh, it was whoever. That's always insufficient because it's actually something much bigger than that.

And you know, that's you don't go far enough if you say it was Israel or it was the Jews. There's more to it than that. And the more to it is where we ultimately need to get because they like it when you are. operate on these lower levels if you're not able to get to that last level. And so what we've seen is two totally insufficient explanations at war over what happened when both of them are wrong. It's been so dumb to witness it this entire time. And I guess maybe hopefully it's coming to a head because it doesn't seem like all that many people are buying into this. But and of course that's the situation because all the money and all the coordinated messaging goes exactly in the opposite direction.

And none of that would be required if what we were seeing was actually convincing on its own. These are all social incentives that people are responding to. It's incredible. Yeah, this entire thing boils down to what side of the tribe are you on?

Which tribe are you with? Are you with the Candace Owens and the Ian Carrolls? Are you with them? Or are you with the Posobics and the Benny Johnsons and the Andrew Colvettes? Or are you with them? I've been called on both sides, right? Mainly on the Candace side.

because I'm questioning the narrative that's being put forward. And I'm like, I have nothing to do with Candace Owens at all whatsoever. But, right, that's also because that's also because the conversation on Twitter, you have to be one or the other. They don't even understand that there are people who don't believe in either of those stories. It's this thing, except in such as Black Pillars, it's like your team Candace or Team TPSA. Exactly. Like, like, I called out, you know, I called out the ammunition, the AT,

have received four bullet fragments then in questioning they said well the medical examiner had seven bullet fragments where are those other three fragments don't know and it's like so there's so many holes in this case that i don't know and again this was a prelim hearing so there's a lot more evidence that could come out in in a in a full-blown trial cross-examinations they're going to cross-examine cross-examine Tyler Lance Twigs. They're going to cross-examine. They're going to get the metadata on the confession note. Like there's a ton more stuff that's going to come out. But there's fundamental things that you're like, this makes no sense. ATF got four fragments. There's seven. We were told Charlie Kirk did not have an exit wound. That means every fragment of that bullet

should have been in Charlie Kirk's body. So they didn't find it all. We don't have it all. And if we had it all, that's weird. If we had it all, we could. If we had it all, we could, tell exactly the weight of the bullet. We would be able to take all those fragments, weigh them out, and be like, yep, this is 150 grain bullet, which matches the other four Remington's core locked ammunition that was in his magazine. But we don't have it. It's gone. I would suggest that there's not a single stable fact of this entire event. There's nothing that you can actually say, we know this for sure about the Charlie Kirk trauma event, including even the most basic stuff. And that's a damn shame because it's an emotional issue for a lot of

people. But the idea that you can parse this and get to reasonable doubt on the evidence that we've been shown online, is there any evidence that people weren't already aware of from some story or some leak or some post online, Brian? Were they showing stuff that people are like, wow, I've never seen this before? think the the bullet fragments the the diameter of the bullets the the DNA the STR mix being inconclusive the one one thing that was really interesting they had a phone call or excuse me phone data that tracked Charlie Kirk to this woman's or Charlie God I keep saying Charlie Kirk Tyler Robinson to this woman's

house and you know they said well Tyler Robinson was it within the vicinity of this woman's house at 1230 on September 11th so the day after at mid night essentially and then they completely neglected to mention that the woman whose ring cam caught that told the police in the statement it was a bald guy driving the car with three other people in it in charlie in tyler robinson i keep saying that man in tyler robinson's car was a was a bald guy driving with three other people in it but the the investigator said his phone was in that area and and so again that's just another one of those w tf questions i think they don't want this thing going to trial because i think there is a possibility that they

They can, and I think there's absolutely a possibility that they can prove this beyond a reasonable doubt. And they don't want that to happen. Because if this gets proven beyond a reasonable doubt, they're back at square one. And there's no accountability for Charlie Kirk's murder. And what do you mean if it gets, if it gets proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that would mean Tyler Robinson. If it doesn't get proven, excuse me. If it doesn't get proven beyond a reasonable doubt and he's found innocent or found not guilty, then we're back at square one. and these people don't have accountability for the loss of their friend.

And, you know, I'd say, well, you know, I know Charlie Kirk, when he was alive, he would want due process. He would want the Constitution upheld, Sixth Amendment, Fifth Amendment. He would want everybody's rights upheld in a fair trial. And he would want justice for anybody that did something like this. And the fact that people are saying, this guy's so guilty that as a Christian, you have to prosecute them now. speedy trial do it now is insane because that's the exact opposite of what we should stand for in this country so five six years ago we had um the the mirrored version of this which as john mentioned before or maybe it was you brian the uh the george floyd incident and the yeah the derrick showvin

trial was a farce uh though that entire thing was a of farce. The cases are actually very similar in the total lack of stable facts about absolutely all of it. And what we had at the end of that trial, I think there was like a pink-haired chick who, wasn't there something about the jury, the tainted juror at the end of the Derek Chauvin trial? She was like some pink-haired girl that was like responsible for being the final voice in the verdict. Yep. Again, a total farce, and we don't have to try to pick that apart.

But these things are mirrors of one another. I mean, we're dealing with the same thing all over again. And these people, again, we're at the forefront of pushing the controlled opposition reverse version of the George Floyd and Derek Chauvin thing. It's the same people running the same info op, every damn. time which is like why it's so annoying to still have to battle through that last layer of people being like no these people are allies this time no they're not these people are hoodwinking you perpetually the same people too that were participating in the binder gate up right and like what did

everybody think of that and then now they're on the same side of the of the argument here it's just it's also stupid they're all hypocrites it's just annoying i i also i i heavily promoted they're also heavily promoted on uh on ex formerly twitter and they're doing all the the widespread breaking news posts whenever we get new war stories which we have tonight with more bombing and the straight of her moves closed once again for the 600th time sorry Brian I cut you off no no so I was going to say I think maybe uh now I can take I I wear this I'm going to pat myself on the back a little bit for this one because I think this was me. If you pull my video back up at the end of the video that I had at the very end,

maybe like the last like 10 seconds. Yeah, right there. So I called out this. Can I just play the video? Yeah, you can play it. You can play it. You do. But I want to show you guys what Officer Tatum, who saw the video, was in the courtroom.

And this is the thumbnail for his YouTube video about what he saw. saw and tell me if you think that's an accurate representation. Tell me if that's an accurate representation. Tatum with this bewildered look on his face, horrifyingly sad, this zoomed in. I mean, I can see the rifle. I can see the bipods. I can see the hat. I can see everything. That is not at all. That is not at all what was presented in this video. That is a gross misrepresentation. Just thought you guys should know that. Follow me. rumble.com slash cancon. Oh, should have cut it off before you said.

Oh, you could put, wait, just finish it. Finish it. I was kidding. Badlands Media. That TV. I was joking. There you go. See,

Badlands props too. And then he changed it, uh? He changed it. He changed his thumbnail after I don't, and now I go, again, I don't know that this was because of what I said, but he changed his thumbnail to that. And that's much more accurate. That is much more accurate. What I saw and then what I saw.

And it's the guy. running on the rooftop, a little blur, a pixel running on the rooftop. Well, that's interesting there because that, I mean, you could look at that in a way, or in a sense that that's like tacit confirmation that these people are misrepresenting the entire thing and they're doing it deliberately. Maybe he's like, oh, shit, maybe I'm getting in trouble if, you know, people are catching on or whatever. I should probably, you know, keep some of my audience from finding out I'm a total fraud.

You know what I mean? Like, do you view that as an admission that they're running a sigh up here? I don't know that it's an admission. I think it's an admission that they put something out there that was pure, utter propaganda and not in any way, shape, or form indicative of what they saw. And it was clickbait, and they got called out for posting clickbait. And that's what it was. It was clickbait.

And, you know, we saw, I think Posobic came out and put a post up. So you're telling me that Tyler Robinson just drove to Orum, Utah for Chick-fil-A and Dairy Queen. And it's like, there's a pivot. you know you went from he's definitely guilty to beyond a reasonable doubt to so he just drove there for dairy queen like this is when you get in a fight a red herring too exactly that's exactly what it is and and it's a pivot now i don't know if this was a result of this or not benny johnson still got his stuff up you know and i don't think benny johnson's going to be using any of my ex post anytime soon in his videos which he's done many times i'm probably blocked now but i don't be

proud of that that's i am very very proud truth man and that that's what it's what it's it boils down to and you know i had this conversation with ash uh earlier today and i'm gonna look at this objective and i'm not going to take sides on one side or the other i'm just gonna tell it how it is and i might be wrong on some things me and alph have had some pretty intense debates off air so you guys think it's intense on air it's more intense off air and i'm i'm standing my ground man i i don't what's alpha's take on it i mean we could we could have them on some time to give his piece but he was supposed to be on only lands last night he backed out last minute and i feel like it's because we were probably going to have this conversation.

It's probably like CanConn's going to be there. I don't want to talk to CanCon about this. You know, to talk to each other, by the way, guys. Does he believe the official narrative? Which is fine. I know a lot of people do. For the most part.

He thinks he's 100% guilty. Well, I don't want to say 100% because only cysts deal on absolutes. Imagine the standard of evidence to convict someone for murder if this counts. Agreed. It's like you you do not care about any of the principles, the foundational principles of our system of justice or natural law if you support that position. And I'm told that he used to be a cop. Yeah, we should probably like have this discussion with him. Yeah, I don't want to. Yeah, I want to include him in this if we're going to do this. Because I think it's fair. Because I love Alpha to death, man. He's my brother from another mother of another color. And it's only fair that he had the voice of this. But we do this.

Another mother from another color. My brother from another mother of another color because he's, he's Mexican. So he's, well, he's Mexican, he's American, but he's of Mexican origin. Your foster children. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we're boys. We're brothers from another mother of another color. Anyway.

Well, Brian, we're probably going to say about you here unless there's anything else you want to to say. Nope. All right. Thanks for having me. I appreciate you guys, let me, because I've been getting a lot of stuff on X about this and it's good to get this out there. Yeah. And I think it's good to have your perspective in the conversation because I can't imagine that these people watch this second by second this week as you did, particularly not with an open mind and not with direct financial and social incentives powering your point of view. Yes, I've made zero dollars from what I actually I did. I got a $100 rumble rant on Friday for a video stream. So I got like 80 bucks from

Rumble. So for four days of streaming, like 30 hours worth of streaming, I made like 80 bucks. So that is my final. Total sellout. I knew it. Anyway, thanks, man. We'll we'll catch up with you again maybe next week, if anything changed. Well, I guess the trial doesn't start until September 1st if the judge allows it to go forward. So no, no, no, no. The decision on whether this probable cause or not will be September 1st. And they will be permitted to submit briefs, like essentially closing arguments. And there will be a four hour, I think they said four hour hearing on September 1st. And I will stream that as well. Okay.

Sounds good, man. We'll catch you later. See you guys. Hey there. I think I want to get to our next sponsor real quick. And maybe our next two sponsors. And then we'll get into the second half of the show, which will probably be pretty election focused.

Brian joining us. And those who've left rants and stuff, we'll get to those at the end. I've seen quite a few of those roll in. But let's us start with a little bit of soft disclosure because you've got to go get that soft disclosure. Soft disclosure.com. No, gee, Gigi.

We can't stop for snacks. Do we have to deliver all of these soft disclosure gift cards? He goes by Zach Hay. The lotion detective. The beer brush. Softdisclosure.com. The current promo code is muffin hit it. And if you guys go to soft disclosure.com and check out the reviews on the products,

it will probably blow your mind. And I highly encourage you to do so. We also have an ad from Rumble Wallet. Let me do this quick. If I can find, there we go. All right. This is a paid ad from Rumble Wallet. And quick question, how much control do you have over your money right now?

technology has changed everything and now it's changing how money works crypto started as a niche but now it's going mainstream with faster payments more control fewer middlemen and this isn't just hype it's where things are going and getting started today is easier than you think with rumble wallet you can buy bitcoin hold dollar back stable coins even own digital gold backed by real gold all in one place it's a non-custodial crypto wallet which means you not a bank or platform control access to your funds set up as simple connects with moon pay so you can use your debit card credit card or bank account and be up and run in minutes. You can even use your Rumble Wallet to support your favorite Rumble creators

like those of us here at Badlands directly. So take control of your money now, scan the QR code, or click the link in the description of this video. You can even go to wallet.rumbull.com slash DPH and get started with Rumble Wallet today. All right, man. Do you want to start with, if we start with the EAC story, or should we get into some of those election stories maybe and then lead into that? I so the new york times one goes right into the e a c story so maybe we can start there because that was you know a little over a week ago now yeah and i think that that'll lead us into the e a cc thing and then we can go to the cnn article okay so these are three separate stories

but they all kind of connect together and i think i've gone i've gone over the eac thing on my show and i've gone over this new york times story on my show haven't gone over the cnn one because that just came out today i believe um but there's a lot of concern and i I think this is very interesting leading into this upcoming election because there's been talk about what Trump might do. And it's kind of this back and forth between both sides of like how they're going to approach the midterms. When the left is like or the establishment is freaking out over Trump's potential options, one of them being, you know, even canceling the midterms, it's notable. Because it gives me that vibe of like back when Trump was, was leaving office for the first time and Biden was coming in. After J6, before the inauguration, everybody's still freaking out rushing to like, Nancy Pelosi was calling generals being like, don't let Trump do anything with the codes or, you know, whatever, be ready to, you know, wheel Trump out of there.

And then they rush to impeach them. They've always been worried about what Trump might do. And this is like another one of those instances where I think they're worried about what Trump has the authority and we'll try to do when it comes to the election stuff. And so this story from July 2nd, the many ways Trump is trying to tip the scale. for the midterms. John, before we start, yeah. Just in the last couple of days, I'm sure that you've seen these headlines. I haven't paid much attention to this story.

I don't think it's something that's necessarily worth going deep on it. We can just watch how it evolves. But they're talking about Trump wanting to lock down DC again and put up fences and the rest of it. Did you see that? Yeah, I think that it has to do with the Iran assassination situation. Okay. And so these things will all tie together eventually, which is, you know, which is really interesting.

But we've heard claims like this in years past what Trump is going to do to threaten the elections. And so the fact that it's coming around again, I think, is interesting. And just to kind of preview where my head's up for the audience, and I don't know if we talked about this before or not, but I posted about it on my substack, you got to wonder if they are trying to shut down, like to get the elections canceled.

and then lay it at the feet of Trump as though he did it. And so... Love that idea. Yeah, man. So by the time I think we're done with the CNN article, I think that'll make more sense. And maybe that sounds a little outlandish right now. And it sounds like the opposite of the thing I was saying a few days ago,

which is that I thought I want elections canceled because I think that that will bring us to some sort of resolution. And I thought that Trump was headed in that direction, but maybe he was only kind of hinting in that direction. to bring the full force of this. I don't know, obviously. Well, I think that's an interesting thought. And we could get into more later,

but just my initial response to that is, if Trump does do something to fix our elections, if that's a possible thing. Like, we don't know what he has up his sleeve. We don't know what's next. But let's say he does something. He interdicts. He has the National Guard there.

Which is one of the options they talk about. And like it's one day, paper only, only voter ID all the stuff that we've always dreamed of i could see the the establishment wanting to cancel the elections if that's what the elections end up being you know what i mean so i can do that but right now they're at the other way but yeah we've been well certainly and we've talked about this a number of times if they were to like pass the save act what would happen immediately would be a series of court challenges to that and they would of course find federal judges judges to do to either allow things to go forward or to stop them in their tracks depending on

the situation but whatever they whatever outcome they wanted they would achieve that for long enough to push it through i mean we're not even four months away at this point yeah yeah it ain't happening but who knows we'll see we'll see but let's get through some of this article here and i'm probably not going to read the entire thing i'm going to give some top line stuff from each section i think unless you have something specific you want to go through my first highlight was right below the uh those symbols right there okay well let me let me read read the intro paragraphs here president trump is trying to use the levers of the federal government along with personal influence over state and local lawmakers to reshape the rules governing the 2026 midterms and future elections in extraordinary

ways this is exactly how they framed and actually built cases against him in 2020 like the the stuff that they persecuted him for was these things with the electors the fake electors case and him trying to you know use the federal government to interfere in the election it's everything they went after him for they're accusing him of still doing now many of these efforts have been blocked by courts stymied by the constitution or stopped in congress but the relentless assault by the president on the electoral process both administratively and rhetorically is likely to so doubt and lay ground groundwork for extensive challenges to election results. Agencies and officials across the federal government have at the direction of Mr. Trump

undertaken dozens of actions grounded in novel strategies and aimed at insulating Republicans from potential losses in November. Those actions fall into six major categories and some fall into more than one. And the categories are, do you want to say something? It's just incredible that it's taken as a given now that the nation would vote for Democrats if everything was fair and equal and done according to law. It's kind of funny too because the left that's what they present the establishment that's what they present but then everybody on the right thinks the exact opposite they're like

well if we had free and fair elections already would vote Republican or vote conservative they're totally polarized but it's important for them to establish like and everybody knows about who the popular party is at a given moment Yeah, I think they want us to know that everybody knows that the Democrats would win. Sure. I think they mentioned that in the CNN article as well. Yeah. Like it's going to be a bloodbath for.

Yeah. David Axelot, I think is the one. Yeah. Yeah. So the six categories are taking steps to nationalize elections, trying to tighten voting restrictions, pushing for mid-decade redistricting, cutting election security, undermining faith in the electoral system by questioning the previous results. And just to note, that is exactly what we got indicted for in our fake

mock jury trial thing at Deadwood. And then punishing those who have worked against election denialism. And so which one was the first highlight of yours? Just the following right there. Yeah. The way it talks about the U.S. Constitution. So it says the Constitution puts control over elections in the hands of states and grants Congress the ability to pass federal election legislation. It gives no explicit authority to the executive branch. But in early February, Mr. Trump said he wanted the Republican-led federal government to nationalize or take over the running of elections. A state is an agent for the federal government in elections, he said.

And then it mentioned Trump's executive order seeking broad authority over elections. in March 2025, the order required documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote and mandated the return of ballots by Election Day. Those were almost universally blocked by courts, which found that the order clearly violated the separation of powers and exceeded the president's authority. Okay. So I went back and looked at that executive order, and this executive order deals mostly, well, maybe mostly is overstating the case, but I don't think. think so with the election assistance commission which is what they call um in independent agency that the congress set up in 2002 after the uh post bush v gore and post 9-11 yep while they're

installing the security state they explicitly wants to uh standardize and this is something that's happened cyclically throughout our history since 1842. They're trying to create some standards and regularity for the election processes from state to state. So they are centralizing the state's authority over elections and moving it into the federal government. And so they set up the election assistance commission. And they say, this is bipartisan.

There are four members on the board. There's two on each side. So we don't have to worry everybody. It's bipartisan. They're like cats and dogs. the only time that anything will ever get past is when your needs are represented and your needs are represented. So don't worry, this is perfect. Now, last week we talked about the slaughter decision.

So the mail and ballots go against Trump and the mail and ballots have to be received by Election Day, I should say, goes against Trump, but he gets the slaughter decision. And what do we see him do this week? Fire board members on the election. Assistance Commission. So now they can't do or now they can't do anything. I thought I said it wrong for a second. Um, they're not going to be able to do their jobs. They're not going to be able to make decisions. This agency shouldn't exist in the first place. 100%. And I, I commented to one of General Flynn's posts on substack today because he suggested that Seth Keschel run the election assistance commission. And I love said. And he's a great dude. But there shouldn't be an election assistance commission. What did you say to the state? That's basically exactly. what I said and I said elections are not rigged and stolen they're fake and we need to like be focused on this thing and shrinking the federal government we don't need independent agencies running elections I'll pause well that's I said the same thing yeah four hours ago I probably sent

that about the same time yeah I said Seth is great but we should be seeking the dissolution of the EAC entirely not seeking new leadership for it leaving any of these corrupt agencies intact even if it's with different leadership for now will only allow the possibility for the bad guys to get back in later that's funny nicely done yeah you as well you should pull up yours i'm sure well let me see if i can find it um but what what i think is interesting about the eac and you're absolutely right about this is executive order it calls on them to um establish guidelines for a voter ID. It also talks about them withholding funds for states that aren't implementing like the right or adapting to the voter ID registry and stuff. Then it also talks about them updating their voluntary voting system guidelines to prevent any of these voting systems from using a QR code ballot.

And none of this stuff was ever done. Like they didn't do any of this stuff. They're supposed to recertify voting systems under new standards. They haven't done any of it as far as I'm concerned. And if you think back to 2020, it was actually in 2022. They came out with a report. Do you remember the CARES Act and all the funds that came with it? And the EAC got $400 million to divvy up to states for COVID stuff to help with the elections.

And the EAC spent a majority of that on helping states boost their mail-in ballot voting apparatus all across the country. $400 million for it. You had the Zuckerbox. That was a separate thing. This is the EAC using tax dollars to boost the fraud. I wonder when it's specifically the mail and ballot thing because I feel like there's something going on with the post office actually tracking these. And obviously, I'm not breaking news here. Trump has talked about this before.

But, you know, if you wanted to increase your ability to do that effectively, you might encourage them to, you might say, hey, go ahead, improve these systems. and then use those systems against them. But so the and if you want to respond to that by all means, go ahead. No, because I want to go back to what we were just talking about a minute ago. So Trump's executive order, they may not have done everything or even anything in the EAC, which is fine because the EAC shouldn't have any authority. Agreed. But Trump's executive order was him directing an executive branch agency.

Yes. And they like to pretend that that's not true, that that's an independent agency doing its work independently. Well, there cannot be independent agencies because it like is a violation of separation of powers. You have the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive, and an independent agency does not exist in any one of those. And that's the problem with it.

So Congress sets it up and they say, well, here's this independent agency under the executive. because they can't have it under the legislature and they can't have it under the judiciary. They can only set it up under the executive. But then they say the executive is not allowed to run it. That means that the executive, the chief executive, the chief magistrate of the country, the head of the executive branch, cannot tell his own agencies what they're supposed to be doing. So the president can't set the agenda of the executive.

And so again, these court decisions make it clear that you can't. can't have the situation I just described and that he actually can get rid of those people. So he directed them to do something. They didn't do it. And now he's gotten rid of them. And he knows that they're not supposed to do anything in the first place. But what the media is trying to obscure in the way that they are, or Obisket, I should say, in their presentation of this is they're trying to.

They're trying to make it seem like Trump doesn't have the authority to do this and that him directing the EAC or firing members of the EAC is itself election interference. He's just running the executive bench. They're mad that he wants people to work in alignment with his agenda. It's crazy. Yeah. No, I agree. The media freak out over this.

It's actually been kind of quiet in terms of the, I guess I haven't seen any of the level freaking out over Trump's firing these people I thought there would be more like freak out but I haven't seen it yet maybe it exists and I just haven't seen it but it's kind of flown under the radar which I think is interesting but for this to be the first move that Trump's makes after the slaughter decision came down I think that's very interesting that's that's it right there yeah and I don't I think maybe their work is done sufficiently for what they expected I think that they're probably concerned with the immediate effect on the process for the fake midterms and if they're planning on getting them canceled anyway,

of course they're not going to care that much about the EAC's effect and the fact that board members are fired. And then as long as the agency doesn't go away and it sticks around, if they're able to seize power back, well, they can just start it right up and use it again. But I think we're seeing something much deeper going on from the Trump side. And I think like I agree with you, that's the interesting part of it well i wonder if this could get to a situation where the the midterm result everything is just so like muddy and mucky if we have them that everybody who's been calling us election deniers or whatever ends up being like oh there's there's there's foreign interference there's no eac or cissa protecting our elections anymore of course there's interference in

these elections like that'd be an interesting timeline to be on as well i don't know i'm just i hope we don't I don't hope we don't freaking have them. Man, today was the first day in a while that I was like, well, the rug is thinking that elections are going to be canceled. So we were on the rug that everybody got mad at us for being on ahead of time? That they were going to be canceled. Yeah, because we were the first one that was talking about elections being canceled. You were the first one, I think, to bring it up a year ago. And we've been talking about it ever since.

Well, Trump said it himself a couple of times, to be fair. that's like why i actually paid attention to yeah that's very true but now you think it might be i don't know we'll we'll talk about when we get to the cnnette article he's going to do whatever he needs to do and he i hope he does um back to this let's yeah this is the wrong one i'm going to skip through some of it uh trying to tighten voting restrictions his attempts to use executive orders to change elections have been largely blocked by the courts and he has issued a lot of executive orders none of them have been codified by Congress, but as we've been saying,

we can't expect the people who benefit from the fraudulent elections to fix the fraudulent elections by codifying any of Trump's executive orders. Pushing for the mid-decade redistricting, that wasn't interesting back and forth that took place, like what, six a months ago? The left was trying to redistrict, and then so we were trying to redistrict, and then there was that ruling that came in where,

was it Louisiana's redistricting, was too racist or not racist enough or something? I don't remember what it was. And so that got switched and then that caused a whole other fallout from the redistricting. And then everybody's just kind of stopped talking about it after that. Yeah, they said I think that racism actually does go in the other direction too. Yeah. And then this goes towards like the firing of the EAC people.

I might read a little bit of this because I think this is where it could get interesting. The Trump administration has gutted key elements of the nation's election security infrastructure. Experts warn that the changes could reduce visibility into nationwide cyber attacks and foreign influence campaigns while making it more difficult for state and local election officials to coordinate defensive operations. Early in his second term, Mr. Trump signed two directives that administration officials have used to justify the dismantling of these programs. The administration has weakened the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency,

terminated an FBI task force aimed at combating foreign influence in U.S. elections, and ended a program responsible for sharing threat intelligence with state and local officials. and keep in mind, the Center for Internet Security and CrowdStrike coordinate all of the local elections. They provide cybersecurity for all these local elections anyway. So that's ridiculous. So he's talking about the intelligence or this is talking about the intelligence side of things, not the private sector side of things. The actions are rooted in a longstanding grievances from Mr. Trump and his allies who have argued that under the guise of fighting misinformation and disinformation, the Biden administration, infringed on free speech. I would take that further and say that they actually participated or at least turned a blind eye to the election theft that took place in 2020.

In his first budget request to Congress, Mr. Trump proposed eliminating SISA's disinformation offices, accusing them of conspiring against the First Amendment rights of President Trump and his supporters. Mr. Trump attacks on Sisa also reflect his animosity towards Christopher Krebs, the agency's former director who oversaw efforts to secure the 2020 election. One of my favorite executive orders of Trump's is the one that has to do with. Chris Krebs Addressing the risks from Chris Krebs and government censorship Which is so funny

Oh man, I'm so glad you remember all these It's hilarious. I love it when he calls one person out specifically and they're putting the federal register as like a security Oh, I love it. I wish I can do that Addressing the risks and threats of of STDs from Scott Russell and Benny Johnson. Oh, wow. Undermining faith in the electoral system by questioning previous results.

This is hilarious because they've gone after Trump. They got after us. We got booted off of all platforms because of this. We haven't stopped doing it. But here, Mr. Trump also ordered Tulsi Gabbard, then the director of national intelligence to help manage an FBI investigation of his baseless claims of voting irregularities in Fulton County, Georgia. The move came after a team led by Ms. Gabbard seized voting machines

from Puerto Rico to examine them for vulnerabilities, even though I'm pretty sure they were asked to do it. And yeah, there's a shout-out to Clay Perican here. Nice. Yeah, I think, and then punishing those who have worked against election denialism. Ridiculous. Yeah, that might be all. Let me just read the closing paragraphs here,

and then we can go to the CNN article. Well, many of Mr. Trump's directives have been blocked or delayed by the courts. Election experts say that they're particular. potential harm remains significant and that some of the efforts have already eroded faith in the process The point of so much of this campaign is not actually to change policy because they know they don't actually have the authority to change policy Said Sean Morales Doyle director of the Brennan Center's voting rights and elections programs It is to inject distrust and confusion into our elections both to discourage people from participating and to lay the groundwork for calling elections into question after the fact You were going from the New York Times article right there, right?

Yep. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So I would say as we pull the CNN article up, you can see that what he was just spreading about is exactly what the left side of the establishment is doing right now. And both sides of the Unip Party establishment are freaking out about elections. The Unip Party right wants the Save Act passed immediately. They were upset about Spencer Pratt. They're doing these kinds of rallies and whatever.

Spencer Pratt actually said something interesting. Just a couple of days ago, Brian and I talked about it on daily yesterday. He was actually mentioning the fact that the that a widely held belief in the potential of fraud in our elections and the fact that no one trusts them is by itself enough to influence. validate the results and that is 100% correct. But yeah, let's let's just get into the beginning of the CNN article that we can come back to it, I guess. The point is that the things they are saying right now are the things we got censored for saying five years ago. Yep. Isn't that funny? It's a great point. Democrats warn of a Trump election takeover.

What's really happening? Democrats are reaching defecon-one levels of alarm about President Donald Trump's efforts to influence the coming election. All the signals are flashing red, wrote Democratic strategist and CNN political analyst David Axelrod in the next post. On the square, the GOP would take a beating this fall, really, largely because of Trump's unpopularity. Axelrod said, so he's setting up a plan B to do whatever you need to do to win.

Anything, anyone who says, well, he wouldn't do that, hasn't paid attention. Use your imagination, in other words, and don't be surprised at anything Trump does in the four months until election day. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she's the one with, what's the hair? Oh, what's that noodle ramen? Ramen, ramen here, yep. Told CNN's John Berman on Friday that people in her overwhelmingly Democratic district are frightened about what might happen. in November for the first time in my whole career John I have voters telling me that they're worried that the president's going to cancel elections that he's going to declare martial law there are

people who are actually have said to me that they're worried that they're not even going to have elections in November she says she tries to reassure constituents about their moral alarmist fears I call bullshit I don't think there are hardly anybody out there besides like us here that have ever talked about canceling the elections maybe other than Trump mentioned in So that's made up story. The comment from Axelrod about how the GOP would take a beating largely as a result of Trump's unpopularity, the GOP besides Trump has done absolutely nothing. The establishment GOP has, at least in an optical sense and in the public consciousness, done nothing to help Trump pass his agenda. to put his agenda into law, they're always like, why don't you codify this for Trump?

And they don't do anything. Now, I would just say they can't do anything. And Trump doesn't need their help at all. But that's not the story out there in public. And again, you're talking about mainstream media who is at the lowest point of trustworthiness, according to public sentiment, that they ever have been. And they are still virtually 100% anti-Trump. all the time and even Fox News and the New York Post and these outlets that are supposed to be

Trump friendly and you can go even into some of the quote unquote all media like Daily Weimar and the Blaze and Tucker Carlson and the rest are still plenty anti-Trump there's anti-Trump sentiment coming from all media sources except for like us and maybe like eight other guys and we're still get accused of it I know it's crazy Trump's unpopularity is entirely a result of the media and the GOP losing because of Trump and not the fact that they've done nothing to help Trump enact the agenda that the country overwhelmingly supported just two years ago. That is nonsense.

It is. But they're obviously trying to frame that a different way because the GOP that's in there that's not helping him is part of the UNIP party and they want to be protected. They want to protect them and obviously pin it on Trump. You can see what they do with a controlled opposition dynamic here and what they do with election storytelling because that's all it is. It is a battle of narratives. They are trying to set a narrative so they can tell the story of the election results that they already have.

Yep. I'm just going to, we should read this whole article. I think it'd be worth it. It's not that long. So let me come back up to here. Republicans already drew themselves an advantage. It's going to hints back to the, that New York Times article. Wasserman Schultz is running a congressional district redrawn as part of the

GOP's larger effort to adjust maps to their benefit before November. Democrats countered with their own new maps in states including California, but Republicans were more successful in courts and could net as many as 10 seats in November from new maps drawn during the redistricting war, according to C&N's most recent assessment. Do you know, and I didn't look this up, and maybe the machine knows, did Democrats, did they start the redistricting in California and those states first? Or did we start it in the other states first? Like who started the redistricting?

Because every story I've read, they've said that the Republicans started that war and it was just the Democrats responding. But I feel it would be accurate. Man, I guess the truth is I don't remember, but I feel like I was hearing it from Texas first. Who started the redistricting war? Let's see if the machine has an answer.

And I know that Ron was planning on doing it. it in Florida or did it in Florida well i mean definitely did it in florida because it says it right here wasserman shultz is running in a congressional district redrawn as part of the GOP's larger effort yeah i guess i really repeated for no reason um what else is the white house doing to help republicans in november the u.s states are tasked with running their own elections but axelrod ticked off a litany of actions that the trump administration has undertaken into influence them The most recent example is Trump's firing on Thursday of three of four commissioners on the EAC, an agency Congress set up in 2002 as an independent bipartisan resource to dole out federal money

to help states conduct secure elections. It's not only the only election-related entity to be hobbled. The Federal Election Commission, which handles campaign finance issues, also lacks a quorum of commissioners to operate. Isn't that funny? The EAC firings are just one piece of evidence acts were offered. I've added context to each of his points below. Put that together with political hack,

Pulte's odious appointment as DNI. Trump temporarily installed Bill Pulte, a wealthy businessman turned housing official as D&I. Overseen Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, he controversially targeted Trump's political opponents with accusations of mortgage fraud. Pulte lacks intelligence experience, but does have deep ties to the GOP.

CNN has reported that Trump wants Pulte to focus on election security issues, a non-traditional mandate for the spy chief i don't think that's necessarily true but uh yeah they are seemingly seemingly more maybe concerned about what pulte could do in the context of elections than they ever were about tulsie like she had a couple big major stories but i don't know it seems like they're more concerned about pulte in my opinion i don't know if you have any thoughts on that no i 100% agree with that um election deniers in the most sensitive oversight positions and election denier is president after all and he has appointed people who share his views of the 2020

election which he refuses to admit he lost throughout the u.s government it is funny every time you see a senate confirmation hearing they always ask like what are your thoughts on the 2020 election and they're always like well joe biden was was inaugurated yeah but do you think it was stolen well joe biden was inaugurated but they never like actually answer the question that's hilarious and good for them. Yeah. Trump's executive order on mail-in voting and potential use of postal service as a weapon of subversion. Trump has tried to seize control over mail-in voting from states in some key ways, including by creating a national database of voter registrations. States on the right and the left have fought the effort, however, and a court this month rejected his attempt to order the U.S.

Postal Service to only send mail-in ballots in states that had complied. The court battle will continue on multiple fronts before election day. Is this what you're talking about about the U.S.PS earlier? Yes. Yeah, this is one of one of the elements for sure. Can we go back to the electionist, the election assistance commission for a second? So I went and was digging on where their authority came from. Whenever I do search on this kind of stuff, I try to find out what the justifications were for the, for initiating this agency in the first place. and then what the congressional authority is for their existence and what they're supposed to be doing. And so I ended up back with the elections clause in the Constitution and trying to figure out what the framers actually intended when they said that the Congress could pass legislation on the, I think, time, manner and place of elections. Is it placed? And so what they intended to do there was leave the states to run the elections, but they wanted the ability for the federal government to be able to step in if the states were doing something untoward to make their influence outsized over the other states or to somehow to exert undue influence in the federal government by holding elections.

or canceling elections or doing whatever they might with elections that would subvert or undermine the federal government's ability to exist and continue to govern. And so as an, so the Election Assistance Commission is then an extension of that. So they've taken a broad understanding about what the elections clause means and now they have created this federal agency that gives itself on the basis of the elections clause the ability to the ability to like handle the minutia in the centralization of these of these election policies and processes and so with the court case as i mentioned and then um i can't i'm going to just space on which of the court cases from the last few years it was that i think it's chevron that makes it so that congress can't develop or can't delegate sorry it's the decision making its rulemaking capabilities to this independent agency because they're basically

exporting their legislative ability and responsibility to the executive branch and so again we've got a separation of powers problem and so trump is basically directing the election assistance commission from his position as executive congress gave them the authority to centralize the election and control the minutia of election processes and trump saying well this agency is in the executive branch so therefore congress you have taken your broad understanding of the elections clause in the constitution and you have delegated it to me and because the founders and framers only intended this federal the the the insertion of the federal government into the process above and beyond the states in the instance where the states were doing something untoward that would

undermine and subvert the federal government. Trump even has that argument going for him. We talked about the two ways you can look at his constitutional operation last week. This would be one of those instances where it's like, okay, the founders and the framers, they intended this for this purpose. Congress took it for a much broader purpose, then distorted that purpose and broke, separation of powers by delegating it to an independent agency. But you see, the thing is that independent agency is actually under the executive branch. So Congress has delegated its power to me. And I think that that chain of events and how he's operating with this is pretty

incredible. I mean, this is the funny thing about when people think we're black pilling. Like, I think that this thing that he's doing, I think I'm right about this. Maybe I'm not, but I think I am. And if I am, that is absolutely just. genius on a level that is not being discussed in the public conversation about our elections at all. And it's actually way more important than whether or not Democrats or Republicans are controlling the Election Assistance Commission. And that's what the conversation is reduced to. No, I think you're absolutely right.

Has Trump commented about that at all about him having the authority to do this stuff? I don't think so. And I don't know that he needs to. And I think there's probably going to be a few steps between now and then. challenges and whatnot coming from all over the place. But that's ultimately what we're dealing with here. They have nationalized power over elections and placed it under the control of a few of these different agencies that they call independent but aren't independent at all.

And so Trump is seizing back all that power for the executive branch because that's where it's been placed. And so if Congress wants to rescind all that, they're more than welcome to. But I don't think that they're going to do that because what they're hoping they can do is seize back power and then go right back to using their system. Yeah. That's another interesting one is SISA because for the longest time, everybody, including myself for a period of time, but a lot of people in the community were like, oh, Trump set

up Sisa, this is how we caught the election theft. Yeah. And then it turns out Sisa is actually one of those agencies. It was putting a lot, Trump did sign into law, but that was a loss Congress created the agency. And they were participating in stealing that election. Like they were a major part of it, like disturbingly major part of how. that election was stolen and how elections are stolen generally.

And Trump has like slowly dismantled that thing and called for it dismantling altogether throughout this term. I think you're right. That's an astute observation, I must say. I hope that I'm right. And I think that there are going to be proofs on that in the future. And like, if I am, I hope people take that as a signal that there is something much deeper going on here than Trump just trying to take down the deep state by sending the FBI out and

fraud marching these people like that's not what's going on there's also bigger than just happening it's also bigger than us winning the midterms yes the uniparty candidates that have been placed through the primary system which has used the fraudulent election system to this point yes so anyway um let's keep going here i think i just i read that one did i read this one the trump sees i don't think i read this one at trump's the got of order on mail-in voting and potential use of pills to as a weapon of subversion. Trump has tried to seize control over mail-in voting from states in some key ways, including by creating a national database of voter registrations. States on the right and left have fought the effort, however, and to court this month rejected his attempt to order the U.S.

Postal Service to only send in mail-in ballots in states that had complied. The court battle will continue on multiple fronts before Election Day. A lot of interesting things with this, because it reminds me of Trump's executive order from March of, either March or May of 2017, the federal election, Commission that Trump set up with Mike Pence leading the way and like they were going to look into all the voter databases and the mail and ballots and all the different ways that they cheat in 2017. Have we ever talked about this? Yeah, that was back in my, that was in my part 21. I talk about this.

But I mean, have you and I talked about this? And like, I don't remember us discussing this in a while. Anyway, I can you know, we may not have. I can bring it up here. A May 11th, yeah, 2017, he issued executive board of 13799. the establishment of Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The mission is, they consist of the applicable law. They will study the registration and voting processes used in federal elections.

The commission shall be solely advisory and shall submit a report to the president that identifies the laws and rules, policies, activity, strategies, and practices that enhance the Americans' people's confidence in the integrity of voting processes used in federal elections. I don't know if that's even possible. Those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that undermine the American people's confidence in the integrity of the voting process is used in federal elections. And then the vulnerabilities in voting systems and practices used for federal elections that could lead to improper voter registrations and improper voting, including fraudulent voter registrations

and fraudulent voting. And then they talk about the definitions. And then there was a whole bunch of legal challenges, which ended up leading to him disbanding the whole thing. President Trump shut down his presidential advisory election commission, whatever, also called the Vote Fraud Commission. some Democrats and the allies in the liberal election administration community are cheering as if they won a war. In a sense, they did nuke the field of bipartisanship.

There's a whole bunch of lawsuits and stuff. But eventually, he ended up handing off the entire info that they did gather to the DHS. Despite substantial evidence of voter fraud, many states have refused to provide the presidential advisor commission on election integrity with basic information relevant to its inquiry, rather than engage in. endless legal battles at taxpayer expense. President Trump signed an executive order to dissolve the commission, and he asked the DHS to review its initial findings and determine next courses of action. So, yeah, I'm surprised we haven't talked about that.

Yeah. So that's an old one. But anyway, that's what made me think of here is like the states are all fighting it and some states are compliant and some states aren't. Same thing that would happen then. But then he just disbanded it. Here, still plug it away, still fighting those battles. Yeah, I think just a broad general point to make is, you know, people's frustration with Donald Trump, because many people are frustrated with him, because a lot of people believe they put a lot of faith in him to do certain things, and he's not doing those things.

Well, I think that one of the big patterns we've seen over these years, again, as discussed last week with the different ways he's approaching the Constitution, if the states are supposed to handle something, then he leaves it to the states to handle those things. and we leave we want him to do that if the states are doing a terrible job and it's the state's responsibility to do a good or bad job and it's not Donald Trump's responsibility to force them to do what he wants them to do well then our issues with the states like if we're getting mad at Trump because he's not accomplishing things that the state must accomplish then we are missing the boat and that's highly encouraged by the influencer set we were discussing before and by the mainstream media. They want to make Trump the center of absolutely everything so that he catches all the

responsibility for our disappointments. And whenever something good happens, they give the responsibility to someone else or they reframe it as though it was the worst thing that has ever happened. And so it's, you know, it's one of those broad things with Trump. Like if we want him to be doing the job of presidents, according to the original, Constitution. He's not making COVID policy for states. You know, and that's so many people still blame him for that sort of thing. He did stuff at the federal level and then the governors handled the states, you know, and if they have like federal agencies telling the states what to do

and the states don't challenge that because the federal agency has no constitutional authority in that domain, well, then the states are complicit in the problem. And again, the responsibility goes back to a more decentralized source. And I think if we apply that broadly, the things that people are disappointed with Trump for start diminishing really quickly. I would agree with that. Every time we bring up COVID and people are being mad at Trump Ford, I always think of Tracy Beans.

Oh, me too. Yeah, that whole thing. Like all of a sudden, just the biggest fan and then hates him because of the vaccine that people chose to take. Yep. Continuing here, his pathological prioritization of the SAVE Act, which would be the most powerful voter suppression tool in generations, which is funny because I was told just talking about election fraud

is the most powerful voter suppression tool, according to Tim Poole. But anyway, and Mike Thurnevich. Trump has loudly complained about Republicans' inability to pass an election security bill that voter integrity groups largely say is unnecessary. He has demanded that senators nix the filibuster to pass the bill, but Republican senators have refused. This week, Trump refuses to sign a bipartisan housing bill out of a peak of lawyers, failure to pass the election bill, which he calls the Save America Act. The election bill will continue to languish and the housing bill will become law without a signature. Yeah, that's funny because if it just sits there for like 10 days, I'm pretty sure it just becomes a law if he doesn't do anything with it.

Yeah. But the interesting part of that, again, is if you have an illegitimate Congress and Senate and. he doesn't sign that and the people one day learn the congress and the senator are illegitimate is that housing bill law i mean i would argue no but i feel like we have so if we can barely get people to i don't even know what to say like we keep talking about waking up the normies we have to cross all these bridges first if that's the argument we're going to make they are never going to get to the point of acknowledging oh well they were illegitimate so wait what about the laws like that is such a far leap well in my opinion i mean getting people to accept that elections are uh are our our fake is is a far leap too

but we're closer now than we were five years ago are we don't you think man i think we're at a tipping point i think that both sides know that elections are fake inside and do not admit that outside because all the incentives are against doing that they don't want to be called conspiracy theorists they don't want to think about what it means if their vote actually is not the source of their power. I would agree with you. So I agree with that. And I've said this for a while. Like everybody knows elections are regular. It's just they only care when it's affecting their side. Right. Most people are just apathetic to it where I think we're further away now than we were before is like the next logical step once you recognize the illegitimacy of your elections is to, you know, probably not participate. Okay. And that's up to people in the, but like there's so many people who get so mad about that.

that while acknowledging the elections being fake. We've had this argument so many times. That's where I feel like. I feel like we were closer to the non-participation aspect, or at least opting out of these things. Prior to the 2024 election, I feel like we're closer than than we are now. I feel like there has been a regression,

at least in the truth community. But I don't know, maybe we just need one more cycle of fraud to get them on board with that kind of thing, you know? Whatever. It's really difficult when people remain addicted to the soap opera of it all and get all their information from social media apps. Yeah. Is what it is, man.

His persistent, unfounded claims of election fraud, which he uses to justify extraordinary federal interventions, there's no evidence of widespread election fraud. It's one of my favorite quotes ever used these last few years. But there is indeed fear that Trump will use claims of fraud, perhaps errated by a polter. at DNI to do something extraordinary before November. Mullen was asked at his

confirmation hearing about the possibility of dispatching ICE agents to polling places and did not reject it out of hand. But there is no publicly reported concrete plan to do anything like this. I absolutely hate this quote because one, there is evidence of that. Two, there's probably more coming, or at least that's

the evidence they're waiting for to acknowledge it is whatever's in the reports or the court cases or whatever. And yet we're still sitting here waiting. I mean, It also reverses, sorry. I was just saying, when do we see those damn diamonds returned, right? Like, how long were you waiting for that shit? Five and, oh, almost six years, I guess.

It also reverses the burden of proof. There is no evidence of widespread election legitimacy. There is zero evidence whatsoever anywhere that our elections are legitimate. It is actually a worse, or it's basically the same evidentiary case as the Tyler Robinson thing. Yeah, and a lot of fatty's in this picture. I did not see that coming. Sorry, just an observation. The rally against the Save America Act.

There are things other things Axel did not mention. Last year, CNN reported about how the Trump administration as part of supposed government efficiency efforts had worked to starve or dismantle election security networks by which the federal government helps states, slated effort firing commissions at the EAC likely won't have much of an impact in the coming election according to the watchdog and good government groups but it is alarming to some of them nonetheless well that's good the watchdog and good government groups are concerned so we shouldn't be either

warnings of a slow moving takeover although the EAC doesn't play a direct role in running elections we must view this as part of a broader pattern of efforts to centralize control over election administration and tilt the playing field wrote Michael McNulty director of policy at issue one which describes itself as a cross-partisan political reform group. McNulty's background is in working in elections overseas.

That's a weird thing to do. Has warned that Trump's efforts amount to a slow-moving election takeover playbook about which everyone should be on guard. Trump's efforts to exert influence in the coming election have been clear, but they have also been faulty. The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of states that count mail-in ballots postmarked on time but received after election day, for instance, the most high-profile election-related loss for Trump.

Trump and his allies in court. There have been multiple other obstacles put in front of Trump by lower courts. Thoughts on that? No, just keep moving. Senz Frederica Schueton, however you say that, recently wrote about the efforts in blue states to pass laws shielding their elections from federal meddling, either by barring the sharing of voter registration data or barring the presence of federal law enforcement.

Votes will be cast. Votes will be counted. For all of Trump's efforts, Americans should be confident that the coming election will be sound, according to David Becker, founder of this Center for Election Innovation and Research. David Becker, what a douchebag. By that, he means that people will be able to vote and those votes will be counted accurately. I'm not even sure that, I'm not even sure the dismissals rank in the top five election-related stories this week, he said, of the EAC firings. A Trump appointed judge quashing the DOJ subpoena attempting to collect sensitive personal information on poll workers was far

more impactful, for instance. That's interesting. Yeah, read CNN. story on that Corloss for the department that was in Fulton county the EAC firings becker wrote are indeed overreach but we shouldn't make too much about the effect this will have on the elections this year and going forward he must not be concerned about going forward because I bet once the midterms happened they're planning to impeach Trump that's my guess elections are still run by states as a constitutional requires he argued and they are executing that mission exceptionally well just going up to the the barring the sharing of voter registration data like I'm pretty sure

that the EAC was that that was like one of their initial purposes and also like doesn't I think it's North Dakota that doesn't have voter registration at all right it's like same day you just show up and like register and good to go yeah just raw dog it up here man what a strange thing that they it's it's all so hypocritical and so in consistent the way that they cover this stuff. Like they put these processes in place. Yeah. And they're angry that they're being used against them.

Like, no, you're not supposed to use them this way. We put these rules in place so that we could determine the election outcomes. Yeah, well, that's just the need to steal it. Right. Yeah. The system's changing one way or another, man. And I think that for the people, again, for the people out there who have like lost than Trump and think that he's just like part and parcel with the enemy. He's actually helping them implement their plans.

I mean, this is, if I'm right about this stuff, this is the first person who has ever challenged them from that position. The rest of the time, every other president would always have to bow to the administration. They would never challenge their own administration. But under the executive branches, where the deep state lives, that that's what the deep state is, you know, and there might be, there might be judges and legislators who are controlled by the deep state, but the deep state lives in the executive branch. And so to have someone who's actually using original constitutional power of the executive, the unitary executive theory, to control the executive branch in full, well, that's a real threat, whereas any other

president is no threat. The deep state lives in the executive. executive branch this is trump dismantling the deep state and again people are always just waiting for handcuffs and the handcuffs are i'm not saying the handcuffs are not deserved okay and that we shouldn't want to see people held accountable we definitely should but if you want to remove the deep state you actually have to remove the deep state from the government not just fill it up with different people giving them the same powers and responsibilities totally agree with you um i want to point out one more random thing aside because kendulay and had an article up.

But the Georgia case, the Fulton County thing, that Tulsa Gabbard and all that, I think it was last week or two weeks ago, Cash Patel ordered a whole bunch of analysts from all over the country to come in and help analyze stuff with the case. And they're writing stories about people who are being fired for not wanting to participate.

And I think there's an interesting info up here. To Atlanta-based FBI intelligence analysts were fired last week after refusing to participate in the Trump administration's, investigation of Georgia's 2020 presidential election. The analyst, a husband and wife, told colleagues they did not believe the investigation was justified under FBI and Justice Department policies. The people said, I think that the couple was escorted out of their office.

FBI will always investigate credible allegations, blah, blah, blah. So there's some, there's a weird op here. They're trying to delegitimize this investigation using like, you know, some deep state people that you were just talking about within these intel communities. I think it's terrible. Yeah, I'm not sure that that whole Tulsi Gabbard photo op and the rest of this stuff that's coming from agencies within the executive branch and the federal government that shouldn't exist.

I'm not sure that those are not enemy sciops. So I'm open to see, yeah, yeah, I'm open to seeing where this goes and not prejudging it. Well, think of the effect it would have on everybody who's like put all their weight. Like they've gone all in on the rug of like, say, the fold and county stuff or the Florida grand jury or the DNI or PIAB report or whatever it is, if those are not the White Hat Syops, if those are not the method of delivery of the exposure or whatever and they are an enemy sciop, the best thing they could do is like get everybody

bought in and then come out and be like, oh yeah, I guess we didn't find anything. There was there, I guess there is no evidence of widespread fraud in our elections. Yeah. The effect that would have. Yeah, yeah. And if you are working for an agency and you believe the agency is doing things that they shouldn't be doing, you can voice your concern if the concern is not dealt with your choices to resign. Yeah, that's a great point. I mean, Ken Delaney is writing the article, I'm assuming, they're not the greatest of people. They're speaking in the abstract.

Yes, absolutely. But all right, man, I think I'm good. Is there anything else you wanted to discuss? I mean, more is back on the table. There's the war thing and then Trump's been hammering the New York Times with the concerns about the Qatari plane and then he sent it last week to Milden Hall rather than riding at home. They got the second Air Force one. It sounds like he is kind of trying to take the air out of a plane-related assassination attempts. Well, maybe.

By talking about this stuff so heavy in advance. I mean. Yeah, there is an interesting like timeline here. So I think it was it was Tuesday night or whatever. He said that he's sending the plane to wherever. And then I think it was Wednesday during the NATO stuff. He starts like bombing again in Iran or whatever. And then Wednesday also he gets asked questions about the plane. Like, hey, why did you take a different plane? Why did you take a different plane? And he like gave, you know, some random excuse. And there was also a question during that same exchange or same, you know, press conference, whatever it was. where he's like, I'm number one on the list. I'm the hitless guy. Like, you know, I'm the top guy. And then it came out that there was reports of credible threats against him, according to Israel, like they gave him intelligence. And his like rhetoric towards Iran is completely shifted.

The ceasefire is done, but we'll still negotiate. The MOU is done. We're on round three of bombing them and it's Operation Bitch Slap or whatever. That's what they're calling it internally. The whole thing's weird. But he's leaning into the story of there being some sort. it seems anyway, of there being some sort of like credible threat against his life. But I think it's weird because that's always been the case.

And it's always going to be the case. So for him to have this like harsh reaction, I don't know, there's something, there's something more there probably. But it is an interesting timeline. He's leaning into it extra hard too. And you have to wonder if he's, if he's trying to preempt something, if he's trying to do like one of the false starts on this, you know, he puts the narrative out there so that they can't use it.

effectively later because the one thing that would convince Americans potentially to support a war effort with Iran is the assassination of Donald Trump because then J.D. Vance would be the guy that gets to prosecute that war presumably. And is he going to say no to the establishment? I don't think so. I don't have any reason to believe that he would stand up to those. people considering that they have supported him for all this time yeah so um yeah i from coming out and saying if that happens we're gonna bomb the shit out of you you know we're going to destroy your whole civilization all these things that he said before and we'll say harder versions of again and again and again well that makes it very clear that uh that makes it very

clear that trump is he is overstating the case that they would have to make very clear to me i say he's overstating the case that they would have to make in that instance and the fact that so it's like a i think about the stuff like in symbolic logic it's like a conditional statement it's like if then right so if trump is assassinated then there's going to be a huge war but one side of this equation wants there to be a huge war and so trump is kind of pushing for that huge war and and pushing the stories about his assassination so that by the time the inciting event here would have to occur the air is already out of that balloon and this is again something we've discussed a number of times you know that is interesting and i want to pose a question this is his um true social post i'm

going to read it this is from last night at 10 18 p.m he was one in it off like a what would have been just a stellar delta i'm sure with a 17 there a 1,000 missiles are locked and loaded and aimed at the Islamic Republic of Iran with thousands of more to immediately follow should the Iranian government act on its threats pronounced in many corners of the globe to assassinate or attempt to assassinate the sitting president of the United States of America in this case me which is funny because like why do you need to clarify that with the sitting president anyway orders have already been given and the US military is ready willing to enable for a one-year period of time

subject to extension to completely decimate and destroy all areas of Iran. Praise be to Allah, President Donald Trump. I mean, there's so much in this post. The praise me to all is hilarious. But what does it mean if he's telling us, and maybe he's just

talking out of his ass, running a sigh up in and of itself. But if you take it a face value, he is saying that if I get assassinated, the military has orders which are going to be good for a year, subject to extension, it could be even longer where they will just continue

to bomb you and destroy you. What does it say about whoever would take over after Trump and their authority to do anything? Like, you know what I mean? Like technically a commander-in-chief could come in immediately and be like, no, I'm not, we're not doing that. We're going to be done.

But he's implying that he has the authority even posthumously to carry out the bombing of another civilization. I just think that's an interesting concept for him to be posted. about yeah that would mean they have a lot of ammo too that too the um the new york time stuff that he's been writing about i think that that's directly related because he's he's saying that maggie haberman is a horrid haberman yeah that she's making it up in one of the posts yeah 90% of it is fake news he's

talking about her book they're just making up stories and so they told the story about the catari plane and that being a security threat. And Trump is just putting all this stuff right out in front, making sure that the world knows. They're saying this is the case. This is not true, just like the rest of their book is not true. And that story, it's important for that story to be true because that is a building block for another story

that they may well tell in the future. And I think that he knows where they're going with all these things. Like we've talked about these other scripts that are running right now. And assuming that he has some ability to know these scripts, I mean, I would suggest that we and our audience, by the way, I'm not trying to separate us, we have a pretty good read on where some of these scripts are going, generally speaking. There are certainly people much more in tune with this stuff who have the time and the resources and the energy to spend far more time on this than we could possibly with the rest of our lives that we have to. conduct people devoted totally to these subjects and figuring out what those scripts are probably have a pretty good idea of what's coming and what these little building block stories are meant to achieve in the future and so if trump then attacks each one of those building blocks when it

comes out by the time they tell the big story there's nothing for them to stand on yeah yeah that does make you wonder what is coming because i mean i know they've been doing their book tour with the their book has it come out yet i don't even know if their new books come out but it makes you wonder what is actually coming out. There's also been some stories on the New York Times about, you know, Cash Patel and whatnot, and he was called in this week, and now they're investigating the New York Times supposedly. I think there's potential, potentially some leaks that took place earlier this week or last week. I don't remember what it was. There was a story that it made it seem like there was a leak. I don't know. Anyway, yeah, interesting things to tune in on for sure. Yeah, let's go through

the rants and see what happens. If you have any good outro videos, that would be, I hadn't even thought of that, but I really, I'll see what I can find. All right. We got a good amount of rants, good amount of subscriptions to you guys. It's been awesome. The final demand, like I said at the beginning, gifted 10 subscriptions right off the rip. Thank you so much, final demand. And those of you who got called out, we love you, but you should still probably be ashamed for not already being subscribers. Salbish says Mid-Atlantic bad laners, mini-gart vibes in historic Havre de Grace, Maryland, waterfront, patriot energy, great food, and a private historical ghost tour. August 29th, info, telegram at Southwest underscore Girl 2021, or Southwest Girl MD at Yahoo.com.

Thank you, Salbish, for the rant, and that sounds amazing. You know what, I think, me and my girlfriend might, might be going to Maryland at some point. I don't remember when it is, though. She got like some baby shower or something to go to. How dare she? Yeah. I mean, she technically did give me the option not to go. But I haven't decided, but I feel like I'm probably going.

So I wonder if it's around that weekend. I'll let you know. Cairo's 5, 3, 2, 6. My first foray into AI, I sing a lullaby I wrote for my grandson. when he was an infant, AI changed some of the words and the melody out with the second verse.

Not impressed. It's a Sunno link. I will check that out. Not right now, but later. I don't know. Sunno has been awesome for the... Have you seen the AI or the new Onlylands intro

with the YouTube-friendly music? Because it's like an Onlyland song. It's like a club song. It's awesome. I don't know. I don't think I have. I'll post in the chat later. By the way, we did get to A.

new member over on YouTube. Thank you, CATRN 1938. We are back on our main YouTube again. So make sure you guys do his favor and go hit thumbs up over there as well. I'll share the link

for you guys in in the Rumble because it is really helpful when you guys go and do that. We appreciate that. Back to the rants here. Mack, Southwest Patriot, Cancon, Charlie Kirk, and the 306 is not evidence.

It's hearsay. Yes, John, I was hoping to join the last show to share my thoughts. Your response was rude. I can take it. You're missing the sigh up. It was rude to assume you could just join Onlylands. That's what was rude. But thank you, Max.

Southwood's Patriot. Lone Wolf Fan Club has rated the stream. Thank you so much. Kairos 5326. just because Chris is still my unvaxed hero, $5. That's very awesome. And nice meeting Cairo's at Guard Deadwood. Yeah, that was awesome.

We're probably going to get Gart Vegas tickets on sale this week. Oh, wow. So keep that in mind. Everybody, 12-Indy boys for $5. Good to see you, Ty. I miss you, man. I wish him and Jayce who were still here, but life had to go on. appreciate brian's take on it all john punishing himself by going through poseovic's timeline and

chris slain the vaccine in the d p hs chat tonight this is why we continue to support bad lines were you engaging by slaying people in the chat tonight was i no oh there was a dude earlier who was like who was like these people must think that like the neck exploding mic and kandos owens and blah blah blah blah and you know then we discussed how there's really only these two choices if we don't if we're questioning the official story about the hearing that means we must be huge Candice owens fans and believe in exploding neck microphones i hate candace owens and i've said that repeatedly on the show maybe hates a strong word i don't know if i truly hate anybody outside of a few a few but but yeah that i don't believe in it's also it's also such a stupid time

normies still think that like people can just form their own thoughts and not be affected by one side or the other of the central narrative they just don't think it's possible which is so silly that's like what we've been doing for how long has bad ones been been since 2022 we're almost four We're pushing for that. Yeah, that's like been our whole thing. It's absurd. It's what we strive for. Highly frictional.

Keith O'Higgins, two parts here. Benning Johnson and Poso takes are guilty of jury influence, not jury interference. It's like tax evasion versus avoidance. One is illegal and one is not. Election influence versus election interference. That's a very insightful take. We need to put accountability behind the laws and make shenanigans versus fuckery punishment, one that stings.

All righty. Well, thank you, Keith. That's a good take. N-V-O-H for $50 says, have a great show, gents. Thank you so much. It's very generous. We appreciate the support. 12-80 boy for $5. Is it possible Charlie is just watching the sci-op in an undisclosed location? Maybe Valhalla too soon. Yes.

We all just want the truth and no more si-ups. I mean, technically it's possible. And I always joke that anytime anybody dies ever, they go to Witzek. all dogs go to Wittzac or whatever Mac South has Patriot again says Chris is correct there is no evidence Kencon you're you're searching for the stars I don't get that

Simple Sam 1779 I started a drinking game for when Chris mentions the one book he once read it sent me to rehab Chris has a lot of wrong that means Chris has read a lot of books and you do based on your comments in the chat simple Sam you do seem like you belong in some sort of rehab facility. So not surprising. T. Minzi rated the stream.

Thank you very much. Counterinsurgent, for $10, I must interrupt your discussion. Something very strange just happened about two blocks from my house. People lit off a batch of fireworks. Then I heard the group yelling USA. I'm in Oregon. It's funny. I heard people popping off their leftovers yesterday.

Yeah. There's a couple days in a row after the fourth where people were driving down street and then like you'd see one of those loud snappers just go off because they're like unfired ones out in the street still that was pretty funny um did did i tell you i think i told people on only lands this and i had the fire department show of my house yesterday oh geez because of there's a fire alarm going off in my house it was just like beeping you know like because it needed batteries replaced and so i go upstairs i was trying to find i was playing the game where you wait like for the minute that it takes for it to beep again then you go find it then you wait and like

until you narrowed down and there were these three detectors like right next to each other and that's where the beep was coming from so i grabbed one and it turned out it was the carbon monoxide detector and so like my security system alarm went off um i got a phone call from the security system my parents were calling me because they're like the first alert or whatever on that and then um they're like yeah so we see that there's a carbon monoxide problem are you okay i was like yeah i just took off the thing on accident and whatever it obviously killed the signal or trip the alarm so you can send the fire department they don't have to come because he said that they were coming and he's like well it's they have to and so they came and they like tests and everything and they left

i was worried if the north i was worried that the north dakota authorities were were concerned that you might have have some of them blacks on the property with the fire alarm beeping that's what somebody said last night is like you should have done your stream with that thing beeping in the background the whole time to everybody yeah yeah exactly smoke alarm sorry yeah that's funny um the miry cat gifted a subscription to salting cracker very much gen hud georgia rhino governor kemp said he was going to redistrict during primaries but drop it after the primaries now it has been pushed out to 2028 sounds sounds um sounds like someone's not committed to winning fake elections that is very true the final demand gifted another 10 subscriptions

incredibly generous of you thank you so much final demand few names in there wedged gravy boom diggedy adam chester my nuts some familiar names getting subs hammer guy 35 please check your home for mold it's bad this time of year thank you's talking to you chris yes yes they've decided that they've decided that my voice sounds like this because i'm in a basement and my basement is moldy that's true i don't know what to tell you i'm not in a basement yeah there's no there's no mold in my presence um hammer got 35 i notice is never wrong so you you probably should check yeah maybe i do well he also then started uh charity fund for for me to deal with my mold problem i have plenty of other problems but mold is not one of them as far as i know i got 99 problems and some mold ain't one

Should we start a charity fund for your other 99 problems, though? We can't. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'll cry on a stream and maybe people will give me money. I hear that works. I hear that works. Let's see that going around. Babbage 3.

Katrin 1938 is now a badlands media member on YouTube. We did get that. So thank you, Babbage. Then Jason Holm, sorry if this is rude to ask, but could I ask for a shout-out? I'm trying to grow my channel and form a community. Also, thank you for all that hard work you guys do. at least someone who is ranting in order to attract attention to their own platform is being entirely honest about it for a change that is true because we've had that issue in the past

where people just come and leave rants and try to steal our audience and then later participate in the lawsuits against us so yeah as long as you promise not to sue you can get that shout out the recontorous reports yeah yeah you just rant and rant and then we inadvertently like will advertise and make it seem like everybody's all like friends and things are on the up and up and then all of a sudden boom lawsuit whom lawsuit to degenerate heroin users um did you find an outro video shit no man i i got distracted with the things that you were saying and doing and uh i do have that effect on people you guys ladies ladies though not the not the guys but whatever apparently there's a comp that's lame see if we can find anything interesting on Twitter

apparently some bison some bison like tossed the guy about eight feet in the air what oh no way some bison attacked a person there's captured on video this could be a great outro just random enough it might work so thank you everybody for tuning in hit that thumbs up here and on YouTube. Hopefully nobody's injured in the making of this video, but I'll be back on tomorrow. I might do bad gaming tomorrow, Chris, if you want to join

in. All righty then. Yeah, maybe. Otherwise, we'll catch you all later, Chris. As always, it's been a pleasure. Good times.