Badlands Media - Devolution Power Hour Ep. 479: Fauci Pleads the Fifth, GOP Enablers Called Out

Episode Date: July 30, 2026

Jon Herold and Burning Bright open with a bit that pokes fun at how fast rumors spin out of control online (spoiler: Fauci was not, in fact, killed at Gitmo), before getting into what actually happened: Anthony Fauci testifying and invoking the Fifth Amendment over and over again. The guys play clip after clip, breaking down just how many times he did it, what it legally does and doesn't protect him from, and why the optics are arguably worse than an outright confession would have been. From there it branches into a wider conversation about accountability, the Republicans who once defended him, and a detour into Zelensky and Netanyahu's shifting reputations among the same political circles. As always, there's plenty of banter mixed in with the substance, so don't expect a strictly serious hour even when the topic is this heavy.

The Badlands, one of the Badlands, explain those badlands. That's a hell of their name. I need the pair three, four, fear. So you got with it, I think you need the same. That would be all for, good afternoon. I got your sentence reduced him. That was a replay of the Fauci trial today. Good evening, everybody.

And welcome to the Wednesday edition of the Devolution Power Hour. As always, and unfortunately, I am joined by Burning Bright. How are you doing today? Today is Anthony Fauci treason? He got killed today because of the treason. No, John, he got killed at Gitmo. God, you're so behind on this stuff. He was killed at Gitmo.

This is the public version of Fauci. Check the neck folds. If he was wearing a V-neck, he would have been able to tell, obviously. I think that they would like publicly, if they already killed them, They would publicly get us to the point where that story is told too, right? No, that's where you're totally wrong, John. The plan is to just do this in perpetuity forever. Okay, and nobody ever...

Only then will we wake the normies. But nobody ever gets held accountable in terms of the story... They already did. ...separately. They got held accountable secretly, John. All the real black hats got held accountable secretly at Gitmo. Now the fake... black hats are secret white hats.

Okay. Okay. You got to get on board with this because now, like, remember, Lindsey Graham, everyone thinks, oh, he's a warmonger just because he was the worst guy in the world. He was constantly trying to get us into Forever Wars for like 20 years. But he's now posthumously a secret white hat, even though originally he was a black hat who was leveraged by white hats. But after his death, he is retroactively recast as a secret.

white hat the whole time. And we know that because... Somebody said it on Twitter. Didn't you see? Yeah, but they do know why they said that? Because of the wrinkles in the flag on his casket. That is the proof. That is all the proof of me.

Well, I'm not at that level. I just, you know, I just assumed that they knew why they were saying that. Yeah, it's what I saw is because it's the dead giveaway. If there's ever a reason, you don't judge a person by his actions. You don't even judge it by the words. You judge them by the wrinkles on the flag that they're buried with. That's it. You got it.

See? I know you understood more than you were letting on of how this stuff works. I'm really a fed. I was just trying to slow play it. But speaking of Blackhats, I'm going to be the Black Hat tonight. Because I do have some news that I know our Rumble audience is going to be really mad at me for. But we have to do it anyway. So every month on Rumble studio, and this is just like a forewarning for about an hour

into the show. Every month on Rumble, we stream through Rumble Studio to take advantage of their, they have like this Rev Sharepot that they give to all the streamers that stream through Rumble Studio. So we go to Stream Yard to Rumble Studio to Rumble. And every month, in order to stay in that program, there's a whole list of criteria that you need. And one of them is Rumble Studio premium hours. You have to stream five hours a month using the premium feature. So that means only premium subscribers to Rumble or a channel or whatever can watch a show. I typically reserve that for gaming every month. And I try to get five hours of gaming in.

And I enjoy doing that. But I haven't had time to get the full five hours in this month. We're about an hour short. And so the plan is, is an hour into this show. We are going to go premium subscribers only here on Rumble. But we will still be live for free on both Twitter and YouTube, which I know some people hate YouTube. Some people hate Twitter.

I know it's an inconvenience. but we have to get the extra hour and it's like this is the only opportunity I'm going to have to do it because we need it before the end of the month. It really is like just a simple thing we can do to just access one of the only pay structures at Rumble for the channel

besides you guys directly. I mean, we appreciate all the support that everybody's always given us and being that we're not like sponsored or funded by any any major anything like we do this ourselves right we need to take advantage on the money where it's at and this is one of those things we have to do so we shouldn't have to do this very often we try not to do very often to play more video games is the lesson here yeah well it's just tough because of the schedule

with my kids plus the gart it just threw things off a little bit but anyway we'll worry about that in about an hour so just stay tuned but i want to spend some time tonight talking about the fouchy situation and there's a lot there's so many different angles we can go with this not just the the retardation that that hearing was because that's it was the expectations going into it the aftermath of it trump's comments on the pardon i mean there's so many different angles we can take there's a lot of great clips out there so we'll probably do that um there's also some potential i mean we we could get into the iran stuff considering the on again off the yeah i don't think it warrants deep analysis but there's uh it's funny we're always game for uh

We're always game for that. Trump with some funny swear words. Allegedly, by the way, he didn't say it on video, but I did find the video of a man on video saying that he said it. You found a video of a man on a video saying he said something that Trump himself is not on video saying. Right. Okay. He's an official news person. That's basically what means he said it. Yeah.

Exactly. Printed anonymous sources. That's how those things go. But yeah, let's start things off with the quick word from the sponsors of today's show. We got a couple of them here. And then we'll get right to it. We're going to start with some cacao bliss from Earth Echo. This episode is brought to you by Cacao Bliss from Earth Echo,

a ceremonial great cacao drink with seven superfoods to keep your heart and artery strong and healthy. What if the reason you feel like your body changed the rules on you isn't your fault? Harvard researchers found the one thing you can drink every morning to almost age in reverse. See, after 50 your body's internal repair crew drops off like flies. I'm talking about the stem cells. maintain your arteries, regulate your metabolism, and support your energy. Diet and exercise helps, but it doesn't bring that repair crew back. Here's what does.

Harvard scientists found this tribe in Panama that drinks five cups of jungle chocolate every day. Their 80-year-olds have the hearts of our 40-year-olds, and their secret is the rock cacao, which is rich in something called flavanols, which can more than double stem cell production and help you start feeling better than you have in 20 years. Cacao Bliss from Earth Echo is the highest-grade rock cacao we've ever seen. Plus, it's only 35 calories and it tastes like hot chocolate. But learn more and get your special discount on free shipping today. Try cacao bliss.com slash badlands.

That's try cacao bliss.com slash badlands. Are you guys cacaoing in the chat? I've been cacaoing for about a month now. I'm a big fan of it. Who hasn't been cacaoing? Once a day, usually in the morning. Mix it with the coffee. I think that's been my move lately.

It's the only move there is. Actually, that's not true. It's good on its own. I liked it on its own, but I've been doing the coffee thing. instead of having two separate drinks of a similar bent. Thank you to the final demand for gifting 10 subs at the start of the show. That is obviously one of the major ways to support Badlands through Rumble, but that is, again, you guys supporting us through Rumble,

so we appreciate that. I also, if I were to give editorial advice on our friends at Kakao, the connotation of using a tribal sort of imagery, with having the hearts of our 40-year-olds is not, I think people think Temple of Doom, you know? Oh, yeah. Like, it wasn't clear. I assume it's because they're very healthy,

and that was the point that's being made. But it's also possible that our hearts are so healthy from drinking cacao. Yeah. That tribal warriors are attacking us to get our cacao-infused hearts. I think the real thing I think the threat is if you don't purchase some cacao bliss then they will come find you and take your heart out

you're at risk for having your heart removed I haven't thought of it that way but okay I mean it's possible I think it's just making a damaged tarts Fauci and the Vax was a bad segue that was a terrible segue especially because of one more sponsor I don't want to do right now so

I mean the worst kind of segue is one that is inappropriately timed like that one was but I'll forgive you this time never do it again no g-gge we can't stop your snacks do we have to deliver all of these soft disclosure gift cards we go by zach hay the lotion detective soft disclosure dot com do yourself a favor go to the website read the reviews on the products you will thank me later products are amazing deodorant lotion beard oil face oil really so i use it all over it's great but all right man let's let's get into some Fauci. And I don't even know where to begin with this because there's so many good clips. Actually, you know what, we could even, we have to get into the Pulte stuff today too.

We can get into that a little bit. Because he's no longer, he's no longer the guy. I guess technically is until the swearing-in ceremony. But Fauci today was testifying on Capitol Hill. I don't know if anybody was aware of that. But he decided to plead the fifth like 6,000 times, or actually the exact number. And the only reason I know is because I saw somebody post a Q drop about it. He pled the fifth 111 times, which perfectly aligns with some drop that explains everything we ever needed to know.

But the reality of what this was, anybody who had expectations going into this that we were going to get some sort of just an accountability and he was actually going to like disclose anything? I mean, come on. Little, I don't know, delusional, but maybe not. I don't know. These hearings, all of them, every of the time, are social media influencer clipping hearings. That's it. All they're going for is the social media clips. This is a perfect example of it. This guy right here. This guy's name is Bernie Moreno. He's a senator. I think he's a newish one. I've heard the name, but I've literally never seen anything from this guy online. Never ran into any of his clips online or anything. But this has been going viral because he says a swear word. And this is the entire point of the hearing for the people putting it off. It was about six years ago today. And by the way, for those who get a little sensitive, he says a bad word here. So if you don't like the swearing, I would just turn the volume down for the next minute 30. I'm going to give up my businesses, sell them all, run for office, run to the United States Senate.

Here I am sitting in front of you six years later saying, who the fuck do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace we did to this country. And if my Democrat colleagues are standing there, sending you, I hope the voters, the United States of America, watch the clips of every one of you, doting on a guy who was more interested in being a celebrity than saving American people. I will make it my mission to make certain

that every single one of those Republicans who did that will see that clip over and over and over again. Because defending, there is no defense of what you did. You may have had a 50-plus year legacy of public service, but it ends in total and complete disgrace. So let me ask you an opportunity to answer one question. Will you apologize? Just apologize to the people who you harmed through your actions.

Will you say, do you have the dignity to just say you're sorry? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. You know, I wonder if next time my girlfriend's like, will you just apologize? Will you just please say you're sorry if I can just plead the fifth and get away with it like Fauci did? I think that's the move. Yep. It is. It can't be stopped unless you have been pardoned

ahead of time, but only by a real president, which is when the rub comes in. We'll get into the pardoning thing here. Because, I mean, my gears have been thoroughly grounded by some of what happened today. And it's not because I was expecting something from the Fauci hearing and it didn't get it. It's just the most important part of this is the op that comes in like on the heels of it, you know, and I see that forming and it's like, I don't like that. Let's just know one more clip, just showing him pleading the fifth a lot more. Let's try something.

What day of the week is it today? On the divisive counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. What color tie you're wearing? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. That's Ableist. He could be colorblind. What?

That's Ableist. He could be colorblind. That's true. Not admissible. Did the vaccines, do they impact colorblindness? We'll never know. I feel like there would be stories of people who once weren't colorblind and then became colorblind. I feel like we would know.

Well, then colors could have just changed. What just happened? You're right, maybe. But I'm going to press play here. I think I broke it. On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. you don't have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because you've been pardoned as you very well know

as a Supreme Court has been clear for a century and more brown versus walker 1896 when he has been pardoned he may not stand upon his privilege you know that your lawyer sitting behind you now shifting nervously in their chairs they know it this isn't about the constitution this isn't about the law this is about contempt contempt for this body and contempt for the american people but i think i know why you're doing it is because you don't want to answer questions it's because you did all kinds of terrible things. It's because during the pandemic, you got rich, didn't you? You got rich while people were dying, hundreds of thousands of Americans over a million in the end, and you were getting rich.

And not only were you doing that, you were using federal employees with taxpayer money to apply for and solicit cash prizes for you personally. Cash prizes totaling over a million dollars. You did. I don't care to listen to the rest of this. But this is like all it was. There were Democrats up there that were. were kind of praising and and you know basically second the D of the Fauci and then the Republicans

were doing this just like every hearing ever so like right off the bat we should never expect the people who have been part of the problem or at least created the system that has led the problem to like persist such as what happened during the COVID and I'm talking about Congress we should never expect them to provide any form of actual solutions or answers so like going into this expecting some sort of resolution silly and maybe we can talk there for a minute and then i can go on to the second point yeah i mean i uh i don't know if this it's the appropriate time for this one i mean my i agree in terms of not going into this with expectations on i guess i would say an actual level or an accountability level i think that is absurd and should have been uh you know

people have been around the block around these parts with how this stuff works how the kangaroo court works and everything should not have expected anything different today. Even if the whole pardon situation and not quote unquote not being able to plead the fifth is true, I still expected him to do this in court, right? Like even if he, even if that ends up getting him on a procedural, quote unquote, crime, he still would have done it because these people are still going to do this, you know, in order to grab any escape valve they can. If somebody knows that they're guilty of something, of whatever it is, they're still going to try to plead the fifth.

If there's any question over the procedure, then that's what's going to happen. So, you know, we can have a different discussion about the pardon and all that. Going into it, for me, I'm definitely not looking for grandstanding Republicans or Democrats. I'm, I was more interested like I usually am in how, this whole episode was being framed leading up to it by the media, by mainstream. That, in and of itself, is a massive phase shift in terms of just the narrative. There's a whole of the Atlantic. I've been a broken record about the Atlantic lately, but they just keep being the ones that I

think are the most signal. They wrote a whole op-ed like two days before this, the unmaking of Anthony Fauci. And they were, the reason they're notable is because not only are they a notable public. publication, but they were like, they were the vanguard of not just Anthony Fauci, but I believe somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Atlantic were the ones that wrote the whole apology. What was that? What was that thing a few years ago? The, uh, oh, um, you know what I'm, yeah, um, basically like, you can find it. They were, they were, they were preemptively asking for forgiveness about the whole COVID era. I think. think it was the Atlantic. Somebody in chat might know what I'm talking about. And I think it was way back in like 2023. I know what you're talking about.

I can't remember the phrasing of it. Yeah. Does anybody in chat remember? Let's remember pandemic amnesty, Ash says. Was that the Atlantic? Let me just. Yes. I've got it here.

Hold on. Let me share this. Yeah, let's declare a pandemic amnesty by Emily Oster. Yeah, so I'll show you that one and then afterwards. So you guys remember this, October 2022. Let's declare a pandemic amnesty. Let's focus on the future and fix the problems we still need to solve. So we all remember this.

This was an infamous thing that a lot of us took as positive signal at that time of saying like, why are you guys so worried about this? This isn't usually something that you'd be like, ah, don't be mean to us. Amnesty is not really a word you throw out there because your neighbors might be upset with you. That might be a word that you throw out there if you feel like there could be actual repercussions to some of the things you did. So, you know, that under that framing, I don't blame people, myself included, for hoping that we will get accountability in a very public fashion down the line. Was this the form it's going to arrive at? No.

But to show you that other headline that was from this week, the unmaking of Anthony Fauci, he built an empire, it did not last. So I won't make anybody else go through this, but I went through that whole thing a couple of days ago. And it's just a, it's pretty brutal considering the source it's coming from. They're not, they're not talking about, they're not admitting all the crimes Fauci did or did not commit, although they leave the door wide open to the weaponization and everything. They basically just say all the things he's being accused of and they don't defend him on those things. But what's really damning about it is they quote all the, former colleagues of Fauci, one of the guys you just played there, actually referenced it

where his former colleagues have all thrown him under the bus. They're talking about how he had paintings of himself at the NIH. They were talking about how he was obsessed with being famous. And again, congressmen were saying this today, but they're getting it from this. They're getting it from all of his colleagues. So that's what I find. Like they're all trying to make viral clips based on this kind of stuff. I just think, you know, it's, it's interesting to see the machine turn on him so thoroughly. The question that remains is, are they simply doing that as a pure narrative play, or are they still, are the people at the Atlantic and beyond still worried that there's actual repercussions coming at some point for any of this stuff? Yeah, that's interesting.

I mean, I see what you're saying. And yeah, it's interesting for them to like have a scapegoat. I mean, it's not all that surprising, though, because while I do blame Fauci for a lot of things, there were so many more people that were involved in putting us through what we went through. And for them to scapego to them over like what we've seen so far, it's not that much and it's not that bad. Like it's stuff that we kind of already knew. It's emails that are, you know, him contradicting himself and basically lying publicly, which we all knew he did that. Like there's so many, I think it's much more nefarious.

I don't think we've seen those conversations yet. And so it'll be interesting to see if they try to see. scapegoat him if it goes that far if we get there and if we do get there I don't expect it to come from Congress or Rand Paul that would be surprising but yeah I do I do see what you're saying I think it's more interesting still the the aftermath of this and let's talk about that a little bit because the I was talking about on my show today there's a couple avenues here that I'm concerned about really just one but this is what Catherine Harage said and this is from Rand Paul and what you know the options moving forward three viable legal strategies to challenge the

preemptive Biden pardon okay because this is really like the meat of it right here this pardon it's why he you know I guess he was told he wasn't supposed to plead the fifth but he did and it almost puts the Republicans and conservative whatever in a in a box where okay do we go after him and try to say that his pardon was legitimate and therefore he was not allowed to plead the fifth or do we keep moving forward and saying Biden's pardon was not legitimate and he could have he could actually plead the fifth like he did. Right.

It's an interesting spot. That's one of the strategies here. Let me read through these really quick. One strategy calls for charging Fauci with a crime with the expectation he would file a motion with the court to dismiss based on the pardon. This could open the door to challenging the sweeping pardon's viability and years of litigation. So this would be, you know, challenging the pardon. Love it. Another strategy, and this is the one that I think is most likely, it involves Congress because Fauci has theoretically been preemptively pardoned against past and future.

criminal charges related to his NIH work. It can be argued that Fauci has no plausible claim to the Fifth Amendment, the right against self-incrimination. Then if Fauci takes a fifth that Senator Paul's hearing, which he has, the committee could seek to compel Fauci's testimony. I mean, I don't think, I don't think we care. Finally, one of his closest associates has been criminally charged with pressure and the right incentives he might be flipped, which, you know, we say that all the time. People will flip it, I still don't think we've seen any evidence of that ever actually having happened. But this is the one that concerns me is we're going to move forward in a scenario where we argue that the pardon was legitimate and he can or he could not have pled the fifth because of it.

Yeah, and go after him for that, right, for contempt. Yes, go after him for contempt. But, and this is how I said on my show. I was like, I don't really care what happens as long as we get to the understanding that Biden's pardon was illegitimate. It's not because the autopen, as we've always said with his pardon's being illegitimate. It's because he himself was illegitimate and he did not win the election. And then Trump comes out tonight and says this, if I can find the clip of it. Yeah, here we go.

This is what Trump said tonight about the pardon. Well, the only thing you can really think about is the auto pen because the most powerful thing the president has, they say, is the power of pardon. So he was pardoned by Biden. And I respect that. I know how powerful it is. It's a very powerful. They say it's literally the most powerful thing a president has. Now, whether or not I sign my things directly,

always, almost everything I signed directly. You know, witness to many of them. He signed very few. The only thing I know that he signed was Hunter Biden's pardon, but I'm not sure that he signed. He probably didn't sign this one. So I can't tell you what the law is. I've heard that you have to have a lot of

You need to have letters. You need to have all sorts of things that the person operating the auto pen has to know exactly what it's all about. He didn't know what it was about because I saw him testify. So maybe there's something on the auto pen. Other than that, the power of pardon is very powerful. So he essentially, you know, he didn't codify the pardon. He just, whenever he talks about the pardon thing, he always talks about the auto pen. And that's why the pardon is illegitimate. I just, I wish we'd go more of the direction of, it's not legitimate because of the elections. And maybe we want Fouchy to testify. Maybe we want him to like get the green light like, hey, you can't plead the fifth because you've been pardoned. So tell us everything. Then he does. And then after the fact, it's like, oh, yeah, by the way.

Yeah, you didn't have to do that. The pardon was illegitimate because of the election actually. So got you. Yeah, the, um, that clip, I hadn't seen that clip. I just had seen the quotes from it, which is why, you know, this is one of those other reminders for myself as well that watching the clips is often different than reading the quotes. For sure. Because reading the quotes, I would have said, yeah, you know, we could argue about why he's saying the things he's saying, oh, it's going to respect Biden's pardon. Is he just trying to preserve

diligent, preserve narrative shielding for himself and say, hey, I'm separate from whatever is going on here, cover up devolution, that kind of thing, not covered up with this one act. I just mean he's never going to acknowledge that unless he's compelled to acknowledge it. So anytime he gets close to kind of acknowledging, why are you saying the pardon's illegitimate? What do you mean about that whole administration? The time may not be right for that. We spend a lot of our shows talking about that when it comes to election fraud, as you just said. But seeing him say that, my reading from it was very much he cast an incredible amount of doubt over what he's saying. I mean, just last week, and we've said this every week pretty much.

But last week in particular, we did a little segment on, you know, Trump has an aside. I can't even remember what the context was. But we were like, there he is telling you exactly what he's saying. So that I would say default discussion when he's like, you're going to have to default. I don't think you'll have to default, like right after each other. So this one, what was the aside? The aside is the most of the quote, which is all about how I heard Biden didn't even sign that. It's interesting that he throws in Hunter.

and says, yeah, the Hunter one, I think is legit, which, you know, it doesn't disavuse people of the notion that Hunter may have flipped. People say that about everybody these days, but I do think it's interesting that Trump, like, goes out of his way to talk about how, yeah, like, Hunter's good. Hunter's in the green, basically. No matter what the mechanism is, I'm not saying it's because Joe Biden pardoned him, but Trump seems to be saying that. Yeah, we had Joe sign that one, so Hunter's good. He definitely did not give Faucian out there. But I don't know what direction this is going to go in, but seeing the grandstanding in Congress in the committee and all that

and then seeing Trump approach it with this kind of cautious, give you both escape routes, it just makes me go back to this whole year, especially leading up to the midterms. It really feels to me like this is less about Fauci. and this is more about Congress. And I just, it's interesting to me anytime Trump is discussing Congress. I know he wasn't directly doing it there, but is he waiting to see what they do?

Is he waiting to see what Congress does? Are they going to try to prove themselves legitimate? Because we can go even beyond the plead the fifth thing with Joe Biden, as you mentioned, and we can go to something else we talk about, which is. is if Fauci had perjured himself, can you perjure yourself before an unelected and entirely illegitimate House of Representatives or Senate? I'm not sure you can't. There's so many layers to this, which is why even though usually when people are using the term, ironically, when people are using the term kangaroo court these days, they're like using it metaphorically. but to say, oh, it's stupid, it's ridiculous, it's embarrassing, it's grandstanding.

When I use that term or when we do, I'm suggesting it is an illegitimate body. So that's like the approach I would actually take of whether or not Fauci can do what he wants to do in there. Is Fauci well aware that he can just go in there and say whatever he wants or not say whatever he wants? Because what are they going to do about it if they're not even? even legitimately elected representatives. That might not be what Fauci is thinking about, but that's certainly what I'm thinking about. Yeah, Ash sent over a clip here that I want to play about him pleading the fifth,

which I think is a good one. I have seen this one. And I also, you know, I want to get into, let me play this clip first. And then we'll talk. 112 times to invoke the Fifth Amendment. I mean, you can't even string all that together. that obviously it sends a message.

Will that strategy work? He says, well, I had to do that because, you know, they're looking for perjury traps. Or does that just make it worse? And is he in real trouble? I think it makes it worse. It's even a curious way in which you wonder what his legal advice was, why they decided to do that. Because he does not face criminal jeopardy for the pardon in all likelihood. He's pardon for all actions before January 2025.

But that also means that you're forced to testify. That's how prosecutors use immunity or pardons. And they say now you're forced to testify because you don't have any criminal liability. What we're going to ask you about. So then to plead the fifth is actually he could then be held in contempt. There could be theoretically at least a justice department that goes after him for not answering when he is not really facing that criminal charge. Yeah.

And also when the reason put out his perjury traps, then of course, again, to the layperson, it's saying, well, why wouldn't you just say the truth? What would be the problem in that? So, you know, I understand that's a layperson thing, but it doesn't sound good. Yeah. A lay person thing. I have heard people say that potentially he pled the fifth because there are still state charges that could be brought against him. I don't know if there's any merit to that, but that's one of the excuses I heard floating around.

But so the point I wanted to bring up after what you said was, you know, we talk about Congress and all these public-facing exposure ops that we're getting. and we call them exposure ops, but in reality, like, if we were expecting some sort of accountability and justice for Anthony Fauci, which I think is well warranted, do we expect that to, like, where do we expect that to come? I personally, that's got to be something that's involved with the RICO case down in Florida, if anything, or it's something that's even like further outside of our scope that we aren't even aware of. I don't know what that could be. I'm just throwing this out there. But it's not going to come, like I said, from Congress or any of these things. And maybe we maybe we maybe our expectations aren't nearly tempered enough. Like this is all just sideshow stuff.

These people are doing it on their own, not realizing that Trump has something else going on in the works elsewhere to, to bring us the kind of injustice. And if that's not happening, that's a whole other conversation. We need to be ready to have. But I just, I don't expect it and haven't expected to come.

And maybe that's not true. I feel like a couple of things, couple times have been like, man, hopefully we get the juice. But we never do. I don't know. I just, I feel like with him, it's all just theater.

Kabuki theater, is that what they call it? Yeah. Yeah, I gotta split my mind in two or three ways with that line of thinking. The most uncomfortable one that I don't like to believe, or that I don't believe, I should say, is that we are wrong about what Fauci and his ilk did, knowingly. Right? Like, I mean, that's just, you have to have that in your mind as one of the many possibilities. The entire leftoid and centrist parts of the collective mind and media and all that say that there's no crimes here. There's no knowing crimes here. There's no intentional effort to weaponize a virus, et cetera.

It gets into especially tricky territory for somebody like me, for somebody like Chris Paul. I don't know where you stand in this, but a lot of people in our eyes, audience. I don't believe there was a weaponized virus released. Some people even in our audience think that's an insane stance. And I don't begrudge you. I mean, we don't know. I don't know if there was a real virus. I don't know if there was a fake virus. So it's kind of, there are a lot of people in our audience that have that stance of there wasn't a real virus. If that is true, you start to get into some squirly territory about what you want Anthony Fauci to be answered. for because most of the commentary about what he should be answering for relies on the weaponization

or the gain of function research of a virus that then inflicted damages. Keep in mind, it, to my knowledge, would not have been illegal to be doing the research in the first place or funding it depending on the timeline in which it was being done. So that's actually not true. If he was doing it outside the scope of the Obama order, then it would be illegal. But I'm just saying it puts you in some squirly territory if you don't believe the virus was real. I still would like accountability, even if I don't believe the virus was real for two reasons. Number one, I still think they were trying to weaponize viruses. And I sort of look at this whole thing as a narrative war about what was planned to go on.

And that essentially the deep state ran with the narrative of a pandemic going on. even though it wasn't going on. But I absolutely believe that they would engineer one and would release one if they could. And that's kind of where, you know, I'm one of those people that thinks about the 2016 election that we've argued about for years of like, impossible to prove the negative. I can't ever prove that Patriots stopped the weaponization of a real bio weapon. And they just ran with the narrative anyway. I still think even if there was no virus that people like Fauci,

if they knew there was no virus, or if they knew that the dangers were incredibly oversaw. stated, then I am sympathetic to the argument that the lockdowns and advocating for the lockdowns and all the damages that that did do to people, financial and otherwise, and not even to get into the vaccines, which is another major thing, they should be held accountable for that, as essentially war criminals and enemies of the state. But the other angle I go to in terms of accountability is, you know, another uncomfortable one is what people talk about of the choice to no refrain in the truth community. One way. of looking at it is it's like has trump and them gamed out these scenarios and they're like yeah we're

not going to do uh nuremberg trials of anthony fauchy for whatever reason again i would not support that i'm just saying you got to consider it if we don't get the accountability we want why would that be it's either because patriots quote unquote and the trump doj can't deliver that justice and accountability or they won't deliver it and if they won't why the third possibility is my my favorite and is a complete shot in the dark. Because I talk about the sovereign alliance and think about it in those framing so often, one of the things that I hear almost nobody in the tooth community talk about is that if Fauci is guilty of all these things, and if this was illegal, essentially weaponized research being conducted in a foreign laboratory in China, and if it then

was released, I hear a lot of Republicans talking about China attack. us and I hear none of them talking about us attacking China, which is what would be the fact in that scenario. And it's completely retarded to think that it's not. So if we found out that Chinese intelligence was funding weaponized viral research in Virginia and it escaped from Virginia, would we think that the U.S. did it or do we think that China did it? So when the virus escapes in China that we are funding, why would we think that China did it instead of the U.S. doing it, given all the damages did to their economy and supposedly their people? So the reason I bring that up through the lens of accountability is I've always had this sort of wet dream scenario of this

major reconciliation narrative between the U.S., Russia, and China, and that the narrative, between the U.S. and China, particularly Trump and Xi, the bridge narrative would be COVID. Because that's what so many normies are like, China attacked us. And what if, you know, if, if you could get a narrative to compel Trump to act in some way on this accountability phase, if you have a second most powerful country in the world saying, you attacked us, you attacked our people, and then you hit us with a trade war for the last 10 years, et cetera, and you, You're war criminals. You can, you violated every convention that you've had to sign on to over the last 10 years.

And then you basically give Trump the shielding to say, hey, in the interest of accountability and accounting for our own as Americans, we have to hold these people accountable. Yeah. Then tans over Fauci. No, those are some great points. I saw a comment in the chat. And I think this is to me, like your scenario would be a great story. Yeah, I mean, it's highly unlikely. Yeah.

But to bring in more, and I don't know if I want to say reality base, because this may not be based in reality, but Snapcake in the chat said something like there's a quote from Trump and it's that are using COVID to steal an election. That's the one sliver of hope of where Fauci could be tied into what is supposedly going on down in Rico, the Rico Grande case in Florida, because that is very true. They use the narrative, whether it was real or not, who knows. I know some people they got weirdly sick. Maybe it was just the flu. It doesn't matter. But just the election aspect of it, I think, is where it could tie into some other things, especially if they could find some communication.

Because what we got from Fauci was just his, like, diary or whatever. It's a, it's not quite a burnbag story, but it's very similar. Just Kennedy, RFK Jr. happened to find all of Fauci's, like, personal, you know, notes on his computer after eight months of searching. It's just quite, quite the story. fit for a Netflix series of how he found that. But we have that now, but we don't have any of his communications as far as I know.

We have some of his emails, but not all of them. What if they find communications with him and other leaders talking about doing this for the specific purpose of election things? Like, there's so many different angles you can look at with it. By the way, guys, because I see stuff in chat, when I'm talking about this narrative, I am talking about a narrative translation of the things we know, a public translation of the things we think we know. I don't believe that China attacked us. I don't believe that us, that the U.S. attacked China. I'm talking about that's what the narrative would be, just like so many people in our

audience still talk about China attacking us or this country attacking us when, as Rise of Tyre in the chat said, if it's the deep state, the deep state is in all every country. Chris Paul always talks about good twin-eval twin. That would be the reality. I'm just saying on the world stage, you would, as we've talked about a million times from the U.S. angle, especially when it comes to election fraud, how does Trump always frame the narrative? You think Donald Trump doesn't know it was the deep state that stole the election? Why does he always talk about how it was foreign interference in an election then? Because one of our theories is because that greases the rails for a legal reckoning, a legal and constitutional executive reckoning for what happened. So I'm just saying you could

apply that same framing to China. If China is saying this was a foreign attack on us, so you Donald Trump need to make good on this through an international means. I also think it's kind of funny on my note that the international criminal court is basically being like dismantled in real time. So are we going to get, are we going to end up with no international court or are we paving the way toward like a real one? no, there shouldn't be one. Well, I mean, it wouldn't have any, uh, wreck. I mean, I don't know.

I can go, I can go of two minds on that because I don't think there should be an the ICC, I think is illegitimate. But the question is why is it illegitimate? And, you know, if we're talking about if you had like the U.S., Russia and China come together and say, hey, there was an international conspiracy to attack all three of our nations, then I could see them basically coming up with an international, military tribunal again Nuremberg style uh and doing what they want none of these things can't happen that's different than an that's different than an international criminal court which we

currently have yeah that's fair i just meant are we going to get something real to replace what that was supposed to be what the narrative about the iCC is supposed to be yeah i mean the iCC is supposed to be this like global body that moderates everything it's so stupid it's so stupid but what i love is like we just had venezuela leave it last was it last week and then this week we had Chad of all places I still love it there's a country called Chad awesome but um they left and I think it's it's just interesting like when these other nations these you know supposedly sovereign nations see something that is illegitimate that they no longer want to take part of they're like they opt out they

step away from you like I am no longer participating in you because I can see that you're illegitimate and not doing what you're built and designed to do and it's just a nice little micro lesson that we can incorporate into our own when you recognize an illegitimate body that you are that you should not be beholden to that you can also opt out that's fair but let me devil's advocate again that's what that's my role tonight because again i think people are i don't know either i'm not explaining myself well or people in chat or you're half-returned maybe why is the icc illegitimate is it illegitimate because they're international like that's one argument i would say that

i agree that they're illegitimate but i go to a different why why is the i cc see illegitimate because they have no they have no power they literally cannot enforce anything they say so the only counter i would give is not in the legal realm it's that there's plenty of people including ourselves that talk about illegitimate courts in the united states oh it's illegitimate's illegitimate okay well can they drain your bank account can they put you in a box with bars on it both of those things can be true that does not make something legitimate either i'm not saying it's legitimate, I'm saying, though, that the question of legitimacy is less important than the question of power projection. So just like quote-unquote legitimate courts or illegitimate courts supposedly

all over the place have power projection capabilities, the ICC has none. So it's illegitimate on legal terms and on actual terms, where I think there are apparatus in the United States, for example, that are, we would consider them illegitimate from a legal or constitutional framework, but from an actual framework, they're entirely legitimate because they can do stuff. So that's where it's just, it's two different conversations. And again, my point about an international body, I'm saying in a good scenario of a tribunal type of scenario, what do you think all the bad guys would say? They'd say that's illegitimate on a legal realm.

But what the good guys would say is, it doesn't. matter because we have armed guards and we're going to bring you into a building, we're going to put you on trial, and then we're going to put you in a box. So it doesn't really matter that you said it's illegitimate. It matters what we can and can't do to you and what people will and won't allow a body to do to you, which is the same thing as Congress. It's the same thing as any of these bodies. I'm so confused by your point here. Like, I don't understand. I think I, my point is that I think we spend too much time talking about whether or not a specific body is legitimate from a legal perspective and not enough time talking about whether or not they have any power

because I think the second point is way more important because we've been dealing with illegitimate bodies our whole lives that still enforce power over us. I think we need to move on. I thought you were the one who brought up their legitimacy in the first place. I thought or did I do that? I know. I'm saying my point is I'm saying I think they're illegitimate like the more the more important thing to discuss of their illegitimacy is that they don't have any power to enforce

anything that's actually why a lot of these countries are leaving some of them are leaving because they think they have no legal authority a lot of them are leaving because they're not actually doing the thing that they said they were there to do because they can't yeah that's what's you're saying um i think we should we have to get to uh the part of the show where the rumbull chat is going to hate us but we are going to be switching over to youtube very shortly so this is like your five minute warning and we're going to go one more sponsor in and then we are going to go premium only

on Rumble. You can still watch us on YouTube or Twitter. So maybe now's the time to make that switch. And for those in the chat wondering, yes, Ghost did get a full-time job. He's still going to be part of Badlands and doing quite a few shows just might not be it as regularly scheduled times. So we'll update you and we know more. It's going to work. Yeah. Yeah. So he's still sticking around. But okay, let's do this real quick, a quick Rumble Studio spot.

And then we'll get everybody headed over to YouTube. We'll hang out there for a little bit. Okay, 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 and fewer middlemen.

This isn't just hype. It's where things are going. And getting started today is easier than you think. 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-custodio crypto wallet which means you not a bank or a platform control access to your funds set up a simple it connects with moon pace you can use your debit card credit card or bank account and be up and running in minutes and for a limited time you can start your wallet with $10 in u.s stable coins just by downloading the rumble wallet and

entering the exclusive promo code dph 10 when you sign up you can even use your rumble wallet to support your Roma creators like us here at Badlands directly. So do this now. Scan the QR code. Click the link in the description or go to wallet.rubble.com slash DPH and download rumble wallet today. Again, free $10. Terms and conditions may apply and go to rumble.com slash promo official rules for details. All right. Okay, guys, we are going to switch over to YouTube and Twitter. If you're a premium subscriber you can still watch here the average three says for $50 if my calculations are correct there are and there are 21 unnumbered DPHs congratulations on 500 devilish power hours is that accurate? Didn't you just start numbering them one time with a no that I did that always

bothered me yeah it bothered me too but I didn't want to take the time and go back through and like actually count how many there were but when I started numbering I was like I think I'm about 50 in so we'll just do this as episode 50 yeah that's whoops that's tough for OCD I'm going to post the Twitter and Rumble links in the chat

you guys can pick your poison and this is probably going to be a little more casual like we'll talk about stuff but I would like to engage with you guys in the chat I just did I've already insult them multiple times did you okay good and let me see if I can find the Twitter

Twitter there you go okay we are going exclusive on rumble so we'll see you guys over there and i think that works of course there's brand new accounts going wait got to have premium to watch dpa to now it's like yeah i'm sure explained that we explained that quite a bit oh my gosh everybody see and this the thing too people don't pay attention to what we say in the chat and they're just like saying they do chat with each other they do pay attention and these are certain accounts that my own girlfriend in here is i'm sorry what is happening

Wait, and the Gateway Maga, wait, what WTF is this? Got to have premium to listen to it. It's just one time, guys. Just one time. So we can get the full hours. Otherwise, we lose out on a good portion of what we pay out to our creators. You can't do that. Can't afford not to.

John slacked by not gaming enough is what this is all about. It's totally my fault. And I do apologize, but it is what it is. It is what it is. So we are going to move forward. And what else you want to talk about tonight, man? unless something interesting comes out of the chat. I don't know.

We can talk about Trump's swear wording. Allegedly. Allegedly swear wording. So this was the source I could find. I don't believe he's on video saying this, but we can trust it. It's from Fox. It's from Fox. I'm speaking to Fox just moments ago about the U.S.

Iran conflict. Trey Yank says the information, Trey, what did the president tell you? Yeah, guys, good morning. President Trump reacting to that Iranian attack. on U.S. forces overnight in Jordan. President Trump tells Fox News about Iran, we are going to beat the effing S out of them. He went on to say, we'll be hitting them hard, they're going to get a beating. So clearly the United States is going to respond to what the president described as a

surprise attack. He says U.S. forces had just minutes to shoot down these incoming Iranian ballistic missiles. The president says he has reviewed video of the shootdown, and it was U.S. forces conducting this operation to defend that area. He said it was real time. They were calling out coordinates and ensuring that none of this incoming Iranian fire got through. President Trump speaking to Fox just moments ago about the effing S. Can I get an interpretation or decode of that?

As a professional swear word person, he's saying, I'm going to beat the fucking shit out of him. Never would guess that. It's very common in the northeast anywhere. I don't know if it's common everywhere. But, uh, but yeah, he just brought out the new. York and I just I find this hilarious I mean I believe that he said that I don't think that if you questioned Trump he would claim he didn't say that he's probably

telling the truth but I just I find it hilarious because this is one of those moments when it comes to the Iran war situation or narrative that you know if you're operating on the normie layers whether you like Trump or hate him you're looking at that quote and it is reinforcing whatever you believe on the normie layers, right? If you're a lefty who is terrified of what Trump is doing and you hear say about a foreign nation, I'm going to beat the effing shit out of them. They're going to catch a beating like WW-style Trumpomania, as Ghost would say, then you're like, this is crazy. This is insane. That this is how after yesterday he was like, yeah, we're pretty close to another, we're pretty

close to re-implementing the understanding of the framework to reach a deal. He said that yesterday, the MOU. And then today,

it's we're going to beat the eff and shit out of them. If you're a Trump maxi, normie, you're thinking, that's my guy. This is what we should be

doing to them Arabs, them terrorists over there. We should be beating the crap out of them. Now, we started the war, but, you know, Can't tell right Normie Maga that. But for us in the InfoWore segment sector, fifth gen warfare, psychological warfare,

I personally look at the more bombastic statements out of Trump as comedy and of the choice to know. And that's my choice of how I read these things. But I, every time he does something like this and is just like, he's usually responding to a question. like, hey, there are a report, for example, here, there are reports that Iranian missiles hit such and such U.S. base in the region. And then you get Trump going, they did what? We're going to beat that and shit out of those guys,

bunch of jerks over there. So I kind of take it as the comedy, and it's the ongoing sort of perpetuation of this forever war narrative. Yeah. And I think it's interesting. Speaking of the Atlantic again, they wrote this this week. Sounds like we could have written this. Trump crashes into reality.

The president is learning that limits to his power and soon his relevancy do exist. What is fascinating about that article, they're talking about his narrative power. The whole article is about how Trump is truthing and tweeting things that have no basis in reality at all. Can we read some of it? Let's read it. Go ahead. Let me go ahead. You have the article.

Fine. Go ahead of me. Let me see here. President Trump, oh, I got to archive it. Oh, my gosh. Gosh, dang it. This is a disaster. I'm going to beat the Fing S out of you.

Archives going slow these days. Yeah, it is. All right, here we go. President Trump has mused about being the most powerful man in history. He has started wars and remade his nation's economic, and strategic relationships with the world. He has demanded and largely received total obedience from his party. He has dominated the national discourse like no president has before, and he's tried to recast his nation's capital, and even its history to his liking. He's everywhere. He's said he

believes there are no limits to his power. But if that was ever truly the case, it certainly isn't now. Recent months have delivered a reckoning for Trump, who has crashed hard against some real limits. The worn around a conflict he once thought he would take only a few weeks hit the five month mark today. The U.S. casualty count is growing, blah, blah, blah. They have all this kind of stuff. Trump is flailing domestically. They're talking about approval numbers, the Save Act, et cetera. Once the midterms are over, Trump could face his worst fear irrelevance. He'll be a lame duck. Where is he said? Where are they talking about the article about like his prominence and then he's going to be. become irrelevant after the midterms that's that's what the big threat is to Trump but

there was great article choice BV yeah word sergeant do they say truth over here say Trump a man who has spent his life in pursuit of attention is beginning to contemplate the limits of his relevancy the former celebrity developer blah blah blah has declared he'd rather receive bad publicity the no publicity at times he even faked being his own publicist to plant some news i didn't i don't know if that you didn't you ever heard about that he called into like he called into a radio station one time as a publicist but it was really him oh my god that's hilarious one of his superpowers his ability to command attention to change the news cycle or move markets with a stray comment or tweet this is what i was talking about his ubiquity some of his advisors

believe is a strength because Trump is everywhere all the time. He's hard to pin down and controversies slide away. With loud volume and relentless repetition, he can shape the national conversation. But even those in Trump's inner circle aren't sure what to expect if people start talking about him less. Anyway, okay, here we go. I'm going to play, play this. Take your thing off screen. The story of Donald Trump's old spokesman is the, the real. The real. A real amazing story of Donald Trump's old spokesman as the Washington Post headline writes, maybe that it's been such an open secret for so long, it's hard to believe that anyone is still questioning it. It was back in the 1980s, and when the flashy New York real estate mogul needed

to get a bit of news out, the newspaper reports it was common knowledge among New York reporters that Trump just assumed a different name and handled the media calls himself. like this call from reporter Sue Carswell at People magazine concerning Trump's breakup with girlfriend Marla Maples. If that John Miller sounds like Trump, it's because audio forensic expert Tom Owen said... You get the idea. Forensic expert.

We could listen to him if you want to. No, I mean, that's fine. What's more notable to me about that is that they think Trump doesn't know that they know it's him. It's like that's my favorite, you know, just he was trolling before it was a thing before we had a word for it. That's so funny. He makes no attempts. Yeah, I had never heard that.

That's hilarious. Yeah, but I just think, I think just the media framing of Trump crashing into reality is really interesting in light of what, basically what our commentary has been about the forever war narrative this whole year is that Trump, you know, in the morning says it's on and the night says it's off. He does the opposite the next day. and on and on back and forth. And what's weird about that headline of Trump crashing into reality is I think they're right in a sense. And I talked about this months ago on the show when it comes to markets, that markets are starting to not react as much to the headlines, which I think is kind of funny because I think what we want is quote unquote real markets.

So don't we want markets that are divorced? from what people say are happening and instead are operating based on what is happening and what is verifiable. That be the goal. But also is Trump helping us get there? Well, I don't know. Maybe. Me and Chris talked about this Saturday.

Did you see the story of the TMTG is selling like early access to Trump's posts? Like so these all these, oh, all these financial groups out there, they've created AI programs just to monitor Trump's true social. And depending on what he says, they will. manipulate the market or like do the trading or whatever. And we used to always say like Trump is the market maker, right? Like just with a single post, he can make the economy go up or down. Then he calls out how fake it is. Well, TMTG started this new thing.

And let me pull it up. Let me pull up the story of it first. This is the story from the other day. Trump media launches paid data service to help Wall Street track Trump's post. Company behind social media network, true social is launching a service that will give paying customers interested in market moving information, licensed real-time access to post from President Donald Trump and other top accounts, the company said Thursday. Trump's family's largest shareholder, blah, blah, blah.

To me, this reads, and it's hard not to read it this way, that this is like somehow early access compared to what everybody else is getting because everybody following Trump's posts can get it all the same time with a notification. So the left is hitting on this, and I think rightfully so, because it's a lot. sounds a little fishy. Warren Schiff, urge SEC to probe Trump media's paid service, giving faster access to Trump's post. So maybe you're right. And this is how it gets called out for being BS. You know, something like that's what. And, you know, sometimes we go too far down the game theory rabbit hole. But I don't know, that's what we do.

We, we go where others do not in this audience. And, uh, yeah, I absolutely like nobody here, nobody thinks that Trump doesn't set traps. We all think he sets traps. We all think he, is engaged in game theory and fifth generation warfare, right? We all know that that's true. I mean, he says it himself. I guess the suspension of disbelief comes in regarding how good you think he is at it and what his end goals are. These things often end up as crazy as they sound in the moment. Like, oh, 5D chess.

You know, how many, how many memes does the other side use against us by saying everything Trump does is 5D chess? But it kind of is a lot of the time. And all you need to do is look at the end results of a lot of these things. And yeah, I was saying months ago, I think Trump is trying to bifurcate reality from markets and get markets priced on reality and not on the narratives about it. I didn't see that. But that's, man, if you wanted, I don't know, if you like to game out what would be the end state there, is he trying to get a legal precedent set?

against this kind of behavior. I mean, I don't know how widespread it's really been before somebody like him that can literally move markets with a statement. But it does happen with other famous people, whether you're a politician or a CEO. You know, I actually look at this a different way. And I think I talked about this Saturday. I talked about again on my show today when I saw that story about them asking for the SEC to probe. you know not only does trump conduct siops and 5G warfare all the time

but there are also people embedded within not just his own administration but certainly also his business side of things that are not doing things in trump's best interest in order to derail him essentially like that's what the judas goat thing is all about and i've looked at the absin op as being one of those anti-Trump ops we've went over that a million times i look at the irs

settlement with Trump and his own DOJ and how that all went down with Todd Blanche, ironically, in both the Epstein op and that op. That's an op against Trump, in my opinion. I could see a world where this is also an op against the Trump administration by his own TMTG, because I think there's legitimate concerns here. Like, if everybody has access to social media and you can even game the system a little bit using AI, what could you possibly be paying $100,000, month for to get real time act like what does real time access mean if you are somehow getting a leveraged opportunity that everybody else isn't getting that's like kind of little scummy scammy and if that can be used against trump i could totally see somebody within the tmptu you doing that to

help push that narrative that trump is just remission himself or whatever yeah i mean it's entirely possible um i just think it's it's interesting timing given that the media is talking about i mean on the on just a macro level, they're talking about the, again, the bifurcation, not just markets, but reality itself. They're kind of talking about what we've been talking about for years, but not with the same framing. You know, we're talking about, hey, there's a there's a mind war going on, a macro mind war that Trump acknowledges and that we think he's engaging in. There's the stories, as Chris would say, about reality. And then there's whatever reality is that is often impossible for us to discern. You finally basically have the media saying that. The irony

getting away from markets, the irony in what the Atlantic, for example, is saying with that headline, Trump is finally crashing into reality. I think they're de facto acknowledging their own irrelevance, right? What is the media? It's a narrative apparatus that can't emphatically prove anything it says to its readership. And I'm saying that as somebody who's saying, even when they are telling you the truth, they can't prove that truth to you. How is a Foxx? news article going to emphatically prove whatever they are saying to the person reading the Fox News article. So that's basically what they're saying Trump is doing. Trump is telling everybody that the economy is good and it's not. He's telling everybody that the Iran war is basically over and it's

not unless it is and it's fake. And I think that I don't think this is the main reason Trump is doing this by the way. I don't think it's just to own the media. I think the media is essentially destroyed compared to what they were 10 years ago. But I think a happy byproduct or a side effect of Trump's game he's playing with Iran and that whole narrative is that it is basically forcing the media to admit that there is an entire layer of reality that most people are living their lives in accordance to, even if they're downstream of it. All the normies in our day-to-day lives that don't actively watch the news, which is a lot of them, they are still living their lives partly in accordance with a reality that's being dictated to people making decisions above them because they're watching the news or paying attention to the news or paying attention to markets, right?

So it's kind of this weird thing where market makers and media types are saying, you guys can't listen to what Trump says anymore. It's like, well, can we listen to what you say anymore? Because you're reporting on what Trump is saying and you don't know what's going on in Iran. So who does know what's going on in Iran Atlantic? You're telling us the commander in chief is lying about it. And we're supposed to know, which is fine. So who knows? Who knows the truth?

Because they admit that they don't know because all their sources are coming out of the administration or their unnamed sources on the ground. So I don't know. I think it's a great thing. If all this does is just completely breaks people's trust in what a president, a government, or a media is telling them about a war, I will take that trade. Yeah, I agree with you, man.

And I think the point is to get to a point where everybody just admits that they don't know what the hell is going on. And that is a okay. You do not have to be an expert on everything. It's so annoying when people try to do that. It's okay to not know anything at all and be retardedly,

listfully retarded like we are. I do have a nice special little announcement for everybody who's stuck around and watched on Rumble and YouTube and whatnot, but we might have our guard tickets on sale for Vegas. This current moment. They are. They're up on the website.

If you go to badlandsmedia.TV slash events, click on the little picture here for Vegas and click buy in person or virtual tickets. Virtual tickets are $25 right now. And then sometime in August, I think, probably. We're going to switch them to, I think, $30. I guess what we were the last time. We were 25 and 35 maybe. I don't remember.

But yeah, the in-person tickets are on sale, and I have a feeling they're going to go pretty well. So I would encourage you guys to get your ticket and get it early. I know a lot of people were asking when we were going to put these up. It took us a little while on this one. But the venue is great for anybody that came to the Ahern last time around. And honestly, I was surprised because I'm not, like on paper. I'm not really a Vegas person.

so I just didn't know what to expect. Yeah. But the thing I liked the most about that Gart is like you don't have to leave that hotel to feel like you've got everything you want. If you want to gamble, you gamble. Well, there's no gambling in the hotel. Well, it's connected, though, right across. Yeah. But there's, they got a great bar in there, karaoke bar.

That was fun. And just, yeah, the venue's great. It's in a good spot. Yeah. So get your tickets, guys. It's going to be a fun one. We are also switching up the format slightly. Like, we'll still do some panels.

But we're trying to gear it more, even more so towards the social aspect of things. So we'll have more announcements on that to come. But it's going to be a good one. So get those tickets, badlandsmedia. com. And also just real quick reminder for those who weren't aware, this coming August 9th, I am going to be down in Florida. We're going to be visiting my girlfriend's family for a few days.

And we decided to throw in a little stop with the badlanders down in Jupiter. So if you are in the Jupiter area, make sure you RSVP to join us on the afternoon of August 9th. Email badlands meetups at gmail.com. And we will give you details on the location and the exact time. We're not going to post about that publicly. We just don't get infiltrators, especially. you down in Florida. We'll be careful. So we'll get to the details through email for those who are SVP. So I hope to see you guys down there. It'll be free wherever we go. So make sure you guys

RSVP. Well, according to that poster, it's literally in a lighthouse. We may not. I cannot confirm or deny that it'll be in a lighthouse. Pretty small on those. So many people are SVP. If nobody RSVPs, then we'll definitely do it a live. else will just be me and me and my girlfriend that'd be romantic probably oh what else you want to talk about what does the chat want us to talk about they want to talk about how you promised Vegas tickets weeks ago yeah the thing that took so long it was totally my fault I just couldn't decide it's such a struggle between like providing good content and pricing it to break even yeah right and it's just so hard

And so, yeah, but they're out now. Yeah. So if anything we gave people, oh, we also are going to have an option. I think it's available. Don't say it's not. I don't want to say if I know, but we were talking about doing this where you could actually get your ticket with like, I remember what the program is called, but it's essentially like you can pay for it in installments. Yeah, I don't know if we're able to do that or not. Well, we just talked to Cheryl about it the other day.

Handler. Okay. It just might not be on the site yet. Maybe that'll come next. But we are going to have, once we have that option available, I'll let you guys know for sure. But anyway, there we go. John Parsons says, I'm going to F the S out of my lawn tomorrow. It doesn't know what's coming. I think we need to start saying that all the time now.

F the S. See, when you try to make swearing cute, it's just worse than if you just didn't swear at all when you just try to pussyfoot around it. No, I totally agree with that. Oh, we could talk about this a little bit. So Bill Pulte has now been remove. Where's my post on this? Over processing. I always go over my tabs on accident.

So here we go. Yesterday, the Senate confirmed Jay Clayton as the new director of the national intelligence succeeding Tulsi Gabbard, but technically Pulte, excuse temporary, in a 51 to 47 party line vote. So I go out there and I post this, I say, and just like that, as mysteriously as he arrived, Pulte was gone. Do you know what that's from? Are you right? It's a spoiler. I already heard. Oh, that's right. I already told you. Yeah. Okay. Well, it's an office quote, a great one. But then Eelad Martin, this is the pardon guy, speaking of pardons today.

He put history will record the Pulti or Pult, however you say his name, as an epoch figure. God bless him. And I was kind of having a little debate with Ash today on my show. Like she was just in the chat doing her thing where she shit talks without providing any real like substance. And I just think it's interesting. Like the amount of excuses that we give for people like, first it was Tulsi, she was going to do all the things. She was going to give us the class. She's going to arrest everybody.

And it was all part of this big plan. But then she had to leave. But it was that wasn't planned. That part wasn't. Everything is full control. But that part wasn't in her husband got cancer. Unfortunately, she had to leave. So Pulte was coming in.

Pulte's the guy. Now Pulte did fire like 30% of the workforce, which is great. But then that makes the question, why didn't Tulsi do that? Why was she not allowed to do that or not able to do that? And then the excuse was like Pulte is just the Hatcher man. That's his thing. I just don't understand the argument. Tulsi was on her way out the door.

Like there's literally no reason. Who cares if you burn bridges when you're leaving, right? Why can she fire everybody? They also try to pin the D class on Pulte because it came out when he was here. But we were told that was in the works for a long time. It didn't start with him. We were also told it was being done by the D&I, but other people behind the scenes are saying it was more the PIAB,

the president's intelligence advisory board. These are so much about it we don't know. I don't give Pulte full credit for that either. I have nothing against Pulte by any means. But if they were so quick to rush in this Jay Clayton guy, because they were so worried about Pulte, what does that tell you about Jay Clayton? And originally also last thing, and then I'll pass it.

Trump said at one point that he was going to slow walk the nomination of Jake Clayton until they passed the Save America Act. He said, we are not going to allow him to go through a Senate for confirmation hearing until the Save Act's packs. And that was like a month ago. And then here we are. He got confirmed today.

So Trump didn't stick to that. But I don't know, there's just so many thoughts on this. But either way, Pulte's off. the chessboard at least here we have j clayton coming in now well i mean there i'm not i'm not going to dismiss any game theory going on again the whole last segment i'm saying this is what we're this is what we do and what we think trump does on a much more actual level obviously is engage in this game theory um the the thing that i think can can uh get tiresome is i and i don't understand it i don't understand where it comes from but the same community and it's of course not everybody but

big subsets of the truth community that believes there's an info war going on in fifth gen warfare, they feel this weird need to anchor themselves to the public figures in the administration, even though by their own admission, they'll say that they think basically Trump is part of a military intelligence plan, a counterinsurgency, as we were discussing a couple of weeks ago. So if you believe that, why are you worried about who, the acting DNI is or the acting this or the acting that last month last month on this show we talked about the about current intel officers in in the CIA themselves say that they don't pay attention to the public facing figures they pay attention to Ratcliffe and some of those

guys I know he's public but I just mean they don't pay attention to they literally said we don't care about Pulte. Like he's not somebody that real. And when I say real Intel assets, I'm saying good guys and bad guys. Good spy, bad spy. None of them care about Pulte. None of them probably care about Clayton either. And the weird thing is people anchor themselves in the truth of me like this person must be part of the plan. Okay, or they could just be another public figure or as Chris would say, a TV character or whatever. And yeah, on some level, they serve some purpose. But to pin all your hopes and dreams on that, this is the irony of people. that accuse you and accuse us sometimes of like of uh of being negative on some of these appointments

and everything when it's like who's more negative the ones who told you that bill palti was going to deliver like the scales of justice or the ones who said he was not and he was just an acting position that was serving some optical purpose or some distraction purpose in the meantime whether or not that was trump's design when the actual shit is going on and being handled by people very close to Trump. And as we said, again, last month on the show, I think we did a whole basically episode on this. People that were involved in Trump's first administration are a lot of the people in his intelligence community, in the military, et cetera, that we tend to look at and follow what moves they're making. Those are the people we look at. So, you know, it's not

a doomer take to say that Bill Pulte doesn't fucking matter. It's a much more realistic reading of the game theory and the fifth-gen warfare and the military intelligence plan that most people in the truth community claim they believe is going on. So if you believe that stuff is going on, there's a shadow war going on, why are you pinning all your hopes and dreams to people who's 10 years last 22 days? Like on average, I'm just making that up. Boom, Diggity sent over just kind of adjacent to this topic. Thank you for the $50. By the way, boom, but sent over, I'm tired of the party. Did y'all ever cover Tulsi's post about Fauci around 1030? And, you know, I'm not going to shit on that, but I just along the same lines.

This is a Tulsi, Tulsi tweet of a video talking about Anthony Fauci. Fauci's performance today made me sick. Mug arrogant, zero remorse. He used your tax dollars to fund the coronavirus lab research in Wuhan and worked with the IC to cover it up. We deserve truth and accountability. If you want to say that that's good that she's saying that, fine. That's okay. I have no problem with that.

I don't think it's bad that she's saying that. But if you cross over then into thinking that we are going to get that accountability from Tulsi Gabbard, it's not a good path to go down, which is not the same thing as saying we're not going to get accountability. It's just that when you think the accountability is going to come through these public figures that even the media knows when they're appointed are not going to deliver that. it makes you look desperate and it makes you reach on to things and grab onto things that have no basis in reality yeah i don't know man it's just it's tiresome it really is because we feel like we have these arguments we say these things because we think it's the right approach to take in the info war and we get so many people that just get mad at us for it but it's just the stuff that makes me think of like when pulte's gone and this is after weeks if not months of reading

all these grifters online, people farming for attention online, telling you, you know, just look at this decode. Of course, Pulte is going to do all these things. And yeah, granted, there's plenty of things he did behind the scenes we have no idea about. And maybe the firing of 30% is like bigger than, I mean, I understand it's a big thing,

but I mean, it's not 100%, which would be great. And we didn't need Bill Pulte. We didn't have anybody do that. That was my point earlier. So like it says so many things about, again, I've said this repeatedly. It's just, that's, Duff gets frustrating sometimes, okay?

We also missed a couple rants earlier, but we can save these for the end, I suppose. Since we got the untarted at the party thing. There was another comment I saw earlier. Ash did try to say that she didn't say she believes in full control. But she just said, Caleb is dooming out because Youhoo and Hague Seth were snuggling today. I'm curious what he was dooming out about. like why does he not believe in our boy yuhoo does not believe bb's gay yeah all bbs are gay wait till he's out of the central narrative been besmirching the name it was interesting that both him

i mean it's not all that interesting because it was uh lindsay graham's funeral but they were at the white house on the same day yes both ukraine and israel yeah and that's perfect i mean perfect convergence early on all the way back in the Righteous Russia series. I was calling Ukraine the Prussian proxy and Zelensky the Prussian proxy prince. That was way back in the day. I'm still old enough to remember when even not mostly not the truth community, but the MAGA community was definitely pro-Zelensky. Most of them were very pro-Zelensky in the early days of 2022. to. I'd say it took MAGA a year to turn on him. And it took the so-called left, three years, four years to turn on him. The left turned on Netanyahu very quick. And we've almost had the opposite, actually. And that's what I was writing about on my substack this week, that Zelensky and Netanyahu, I think, represent two sides of the same coin. They're both proxies. They're the the proxies. I absolutely.

think that it's signal that they were I consider that a humiliation ritual this week on them that Trump has them at Lindsey Graham's funeral who is like the representative of the Forever War industrial complex. Yeah, for sure. So like to to think this is what I would say to Caleb. First of all, stop being a bitch Caleb. Second of all, I would say honestly, if you think that Trump or the administration is trying to make Zelensky and Netanyahu look good by the optics this week, by having them at Lindsay Graham's funeral. That is not the net effect to the Normie Hive mind, anybody who knows about this stuff. Lindsay Graham is known, is ubiquitous in the people who know him in the American mind

as the bad guy in the U.S. Senate, like the worst one in terms of his public stance. It's a neocon, yes. He is an absolute neocon from his public. I know now he's a secret white hat and he was always a secret white hat and all that kind of stuff. But besides that, you have Trump presiding over his funeral and you have those two international names locked right into that narrative right in front of Donald Trump. And if you think, like, to me, I took that as that's your boy right there. That is your boy right there in that coffin, supposedly. Yeah.

And, you know, the central narrative. was not missing how obvious the convergence there. They actually used the term convergence. Several of the articles I read this week used the term convergence in terms of the wars with Israel and Ukraine because they're the same war because Israel and Ukraine are part of the same invisible enemy. Ghost and I have been talking about this for years. I saw an article this week where I think it was Ukraine bombed some Iranian ship or something, which was like bringing the two groups closer together.

But I'm also curious, you know, you do have a like what you call your Normie Twitter feed or a date. Did you see anything on there about like Zelensky? I did not. I did not see it didn't cross over into my world there. More what I saw, though, is in the media escape at large. People who, again, I don't think the media is the most important thing in the world. I use them as like signal setters for positive and negative.

But what I think is interesting is both Zelensky and Netanyahu, by and large, 2022 and 2023, they kind of each got their moment in the sun, were lionized by the media industrial complex, right? There was just propaganda campaign. I would, in fairness, I would say that right-wing media was friendly to Zelensky in 22, but they maybe weren't lionizing him. Left-wing media, he was Luke Skywalker. Yeah.

The opposite was the case. like Fauci. Yeah, there you go. The opposite was the case with Netanyahu. Left-wing media, they didn't demonize Netanyahu after October 7th and 2023, but they were not stumping for forever war on the back of it. Right-wing media was. Fox News, this is our greatest ally, all this kind of stuff, right? So to me, when you talk about the controlled opposition dynamic, what better encapsulation of the controlled opposition dynamic can you get than right-wing media turning on BB Netanyahu and left-wing media

turning on Volodomir Zelensky are they actually like full-scale turning on him though? Are they just like not? I would say so. I have, let me see if I have the headlines here. Yeah, I think I do.

There's the Nanjahoo one. I can find that in a second. But I haven't seen any like mainstream media really turning, turning on on Zelensky like I think you're saying they are. Well, this, This is not proof of that, but this is, it's interesting what they're printing this week.

Ukraine is embracing Maga. It's not clear if Maga is hugging back. So that's obviously not the media turning on them. But I can't remember the headlines off the top of my head. But going back, the last every few months, we're getting an op-ed from either the New York Times or the Washington Post talking about Zelensky's corruption purchase. And that, I would say, is them turning on him. In fact, one happened last week where Zelensky's sack. you know, a bunch of, like, I think his Minister of Defense.

Yeah. And then, you know, two, three main people there. And the media was highly critical of what he was doing. They were basically like he's going to lose all his international support. But, you know, they're probably going easier on him. Right-wing media is all over Zelensky. Right-wing media is basically called. Yeah.

And, yeah, they're calling him a beggar and all that kind of stuff. So, by the way, don't take this as a week to do. No, no, Laura Lumer just went to Ukraine. Oh, yeah. And, like, gave him a redemption narc. Right. Yeah. Which I'd say it's a good reverse indicator.

The Netanyahu, how net. There we go. I got, I found it. This was this week how the media was painting Nanjahou. Yeah, this is what ghost in the chat says. He says, Laura Lumer interviewing the founder of the Azov Battalion with some of the most shameless chilling we've seen. The CIA and Mossad doing years. Yeah.

And then Ash says, go, just go write your takes. Okay, go ahead, BB. Yeah, speaking of BB. So the Atlantic again, How Netanyahu, that's this week. How Netanyahu lost America. The Prime Minister,

a self-styled expert on the U.S. has shattered his country's standing. That one's pretty direct. Axios, a diminished BB, arrives for his moment with Trump. Netanyahu will meet Trump in the Oval Office Tuesday for the eighth time, but the Israeli Prime Minister,

arrives weaker. Well, who's the guy, and I know in the chat, Ghost will know, but I can't remember the guy who's potentially running against him and it might be the next prime minister, Naftali. Is that Ben Givir? Ben Givir, maybe? I don't know. Ghost will say it. But what I think is potentially interesting, like if the powers that be in Israel, like, let's

say the deep state part of Israel, the evil twin, good twin, evil twin, whatever, if they see that, you know, maybe, maybe Beavin that in Yahoo doesn't have any more, you know, utility to them. They used him for a long time. He's been pretty successful in terms of pushing their agenda. Now they see that it's much more difficult for them to move forward with him at the helm. Maybe they're kind of getting the media to write these kind of stories because they want to transition onto the next one. I totally believe. I totally agree with that. And that fits into the that fits into the our boy, as Chris would say, our boy you who. The first our boy template, was Joe Biden.

Our boy blue. The second Our Boy template that I came up with was Our Boy Z. And then Chris was saying Our Boy, Youhoo, because I do think he fits the pattern. To remind people, when we say our boy, we are not saying they are good. We are saying that they are caught or they are leveraged by Trump. and that their own deep state wants them gone. And with, as you just said with Netanyahu and his ghost has been reporting most at Badlands, that is, that is provable. It's not provable that we have leverage over him.

It's not provable that he's marching according to Trump's orders, right? That's conjecture. That's where the Arboy conjecture comes in. What is provable is that Israel wants Netanyahu out and they just are not getting it. What's also provable is that all the other power players in Ukraine, including the military, want Zelensky out. So you're going to tell me that you believe that if his cabinet, his defense ministers, and the Yazov battalion want Volodymyr Zelensky out and have wanted him out for four years, they can't get him out? How do you guys think it works over there? How do you think they can't get him out? Who's protecting...

elections. Yeah, right. Yeah, he canceled the elections. How is who is protecting Zelensky? When his own military wants him removed from office, including the only special forces that he has, you have the mayor of Kiev, Battali Klitsko, who has been wanting him out publicly since 23. It took him a year to catch on to Arboisee. But you're getting the same thing in Netanyahu, and I think it took them longer to catch on there. But that's what both of these. things can be true. I totally agree with you that the deep states in these countries want these guys out, but the media, I think, has been baited into burning all this capital on these guys. And ironically, it's burning media capital at the same time because they lionized these guys. So they went all in

in defense of these guys. And I think, you know, it's the choice to know type of thing where if you think it's a good thing that they're being paraded around Lindsey Graham's casket, I don't know. And like, that's not the image they want to be remembered by. Yeah. Better than his chambers, I suppose. Goes to base Patrick Henry in the chat says, in order to go after BB, they will have to turn against Trump. Then he puts, they will. And then he also says, everybody thinks getting rid of Netanyahu will end the conflict.

Huge misread. They all want war. There are no peace parties in Israel. That's why we want BB because he's the best villain and is exposing the villainy of our government. Yeah, I mean, I think I'd, I think I'd, I basically pin Netanyahu and Zelensky as walking humiliation rituals and translation layers for these proxies. Even in Europe, Europe has not turned on Netanyahu yet publicly. They haven't supported them, but they're being, I think, cautious like that because of the whole Jew thing.

Where's the clip, John? Oh, I'm sorry. I was reading a post on Twitter that I was thinking about showing on the stream. thing. Hold on. Let me find it. Where's the Jews? Because of the whole.

Hold on. Wait. Who moved my stuff? Here we go. Say it again now. Because of the whole Jew thing. The Jews. That's it.

That's the one. You know, the Europeans are a little sensitive about. You want to do it again? A little sensitive about it. We'll usually do it like eight times. Well, now I'm looking for a bunch of other ones I can do. That's what she said. Ha!

Ha! They're sensitive about the Jews. This went up my ass. Don't clip that. How dare you. They're sensitive about the Jews, but they're not sensitive about the Nazis, the Europeans. So they've been quick to demonize. Remember, we've been looking at headlines going back to 23, 24 about Zelensky basically showing up to NATO and G7 summits and begging.

Like with EU leaders, EU politicians. using that terminology on him and shunning him in the corner. We had all the pictures of him in his like cute little fatigues. So Zelensky, I think the turn is complete on Zelensky. Nobody's defending him anymore. The turn on Netanyahu is slower. And I don't think it's because the deep state doesn't know what's going on. I think it's because they're trapped by the Jew thing.

I think they don't quite know how to turn on Israel publicly. And to ghost point, it sounds like the media would have a really hard time and media is less relevant. These European politicians would have a harder time endorsing what's coming behind Netanyahu because they're very publicly extremists. So it's kind of a tough. Same with Zelensky. Like, who do you replace? If you're the seventh UK prime minister in the last 10 years, whatever this guy's name is, how do you endorse whatever's coming behind those guys?

Because they've been publicly talking about some pretty crazy shit. Yeah, unless it's just Putin. When they hold another election, he runs. Or is the right in winner? It'd be hilarious. I'll be president in the Ukraine. I don't mind. Yeah, I don't mind it either.

Or we can have Trump be the president there. He's president of the world anyway. I want to play this clip real quick. And that's kind of going back to the Fauci thing. But it's just the same guy we're waiting to end the filibuster or whatever. to do a bunch of stuff we can do. This is his comments on the Fouchy trial today, or hearing. First off, it would be a question for Senator Paul's,

the chairman of the Hizgat committee and the members of that committee, but certainly his answers today were completely inadequate, and I think that's certainly not a option. I think that's option that ought to be available to us. What he did today in front of that committee was inexcusable. We're all in on that op. What a dumb show today was. Just annoying.

You don't have faith in John Thune? I weirdly don't have faith in any of those people whatsoever, and I don't know how anybody could. Times I wonder if you even know what the plan is, John. Of course, I don't know what the plan is, because nobody's actually told me what the plan is, because nobody actually knows. Final Demand just sent in $50. Thanks. Thank you so much. And says Tulsi Gabbard is a close second.

to Connie Barrett in the biggest disappointments of Trump appointments expected her to declass at all and we got an I spy Bornesque photo in Fulton County Mahalo MFers. That's really funny. Well obviously if the photo hadn't been taken she could have snuck in To full account she was clearly sneaking like she was in the act of sneaking and somebody snapped a photo of her. What's she supposed to do? Did you see okay speaking to Gabbard and um you said something earlier about John Ratcliffe and I should have segue to this then but did you see Tucker Carlson's latest interview with that former CIA guy no aren't all of them former CIA guys that Tucker talks to great great point but there is I kind of want to play a clip on this a self-described open CIA oh my gosh he just interviewed John Caracow as well that's hilarious but that's not the one that I was

talking about I'm talking about By the way, I feel better about Tucker the more Trump goes after him because if we're going to play the reverse indicator game, he goes after him a lot lately. Yeah. Why can I find his interview? And he praises Laura Lumer on the regular, so. It's not this interview, but it's another recent one. That's not it. Well, now what the hell?

Now I'm not going to be able to find it. Jeez, it's embarrassing. Oh, no, this is that. The whole class. Here we go. Is the head of the CIA? compromise to that in some detail in just a second. But first, I just want to go back to John Ratcliffe, former congressman who runs CIA. Why hasn't he pursued reform of CIA?

That's a very tough question because I'm not in his inner circle. But as far as I can tell, is because he doesn't want to. He's perfectly happy to let the people that are running the agency who are those people, those managers who matriculated upwards, who were confused for good leaders, Yeah, they're running the place. I don't know why he's letting that happen. Everybody I know in that world says that he's just a pure mouthpiece for Mossad. Everybody says that about John Radcliffe. I don't know about that.

I can't speak to that, but what I will say is he's not getting it done. He's not reforming anything. I mean, they're still, and I don't remember what they're called, and I'm not even sure I'm allowed to say what they were. But, you know, right before the administration changed, the DA came up with three new ways to write products that only stay inside the CIA. They don't get propagated out. So what good is that?

And so the CIA continues to create products that have no oversight and can be held on to, especially if they're writing things up that they want to wait. You're not talking about a new kind of toothpaste. Right. Right. No. So, you know, analysts will write a paper, finished intelligence on some topic. And there's different types of papers. They've got different names.

But there's a new type of analytical product that they can write up now, which that is supposed to be shared with the community. That's the whole point. You write something up, you share it with the community. No. They decided they're going to keep it inside the CIA. and not propagated outwards. If oversight wants to look at something, look at those papers that are being written

that are meant to stay inside the CIA and not go anywhere. My gut tells me they're just going to hang on to them until they can make them go somewhere, maybe the next administration. Who knows? Right. I mean, you're describing the ability

to create dossiers on people. Dossiers on all sorts of stuff. So here's the reform that I would institute if I had the power to do it. The President of the United States asks for information that is held by one of his agencies that he oversees because it's almost like Two more minutes of this. I want to listen to it.

Then we can talk about what he's saying here. He's one of only two elected officials in the entire executive presidential government. And the CIA does not produce that information. And then that's the point in which you call John Radcliffe and you say, listen, bitch, you've got 24 hours to do this or I'm having Cash Patel have you arrested. But there's none of that. It's like the president's proxies ask for information from CIA and they're like, we can't find it.

Yeah. When everyone knows that's a lie. Well, election security. Here's a good one. Kurt Olson is the guy. Would that work? Why couldn't you do that? You could in theory.

What do you in theory? The president, this is the president's agency. He was elected by the public to run CIA. Like I'm missing something. Sorry, don't. You are 100% right. It's a foreign power that he has to negotiate with. I don't, I can't understand why.

It's the craziest thing I've ever seen. It should work like that, but it's not. It's not working like that. There are negotiating, like frankly, Director Gabbard shouldn't have to negotiate with, with Director Radcliffe over some of the stuff. She had people in her team that have all the intelligence background to handle the type of products that were coming on a CIA.

Operational traffic, those sort of things, and had to negotiate. Everybody's got to negotiate. Why do we have to negotiate? Why would President Trump? Where's the president in this? The president issues an executive order January 23rd saying, I want all available documentation on these number of historical incidents,

including the assassinations of the 60s, but not limited to those. He doesn't get it. He does not. And, you know, so why doesn't Trump say, where? Okay, it's been a month. I want it by this afternoon. Where is it? Or you're under arrest.

I just don't, I don't, what is going on? I wish I knew. wish I knew because we expected we we and I you know when I say we I mean the American public voted for the greatest disruptor in American history. It's not hard is it but he's not for some reason he's not being the greatest finisher in my opinion he's a colluder with the system I don't I don't get it I don't understand because we okay I think you guys get the gist here but I thought it was interesting because they brought up the CIA Rackcliffe director Rackleff and they

make him out to be the bad guy and they come out almost defending Tulsi a little bit when that is more so I don't know that's not in my in my mind where where the defense and attack should be placed in that situation but obviously we don't know as much as these two current CIA agents do and they're probably not trying to mislead us or run it up against us or anything so and Tucker was definitely not leading the interview or the witness there no he was like man we briefed we briefed on what you're supposed to say you're the CIA guy I'm the not CIA guy You're supposed to say these things about

John Rackcliffe And he kept being like, where's the president? Where's the phrase? Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I totally agree with you. Man, all the like guys who are self-described CIA And I think this is accurate, by the way, They're so soft.

They're so soft. Before you even get into the CIA being bad, it's like, look at that guy. Yeah. Come on. And just... He was so soft. running foreign ops a ledger like he was overseas doing spy BS isn't look like the type yeah

they throw people like him off buildings in Iran but you know besides that the not that they should they should I disavowed the throwing of people off buildings even gay ones but you know they you can see why Hollywood aka the CIA lionizes like they're it's not just propaganda that they make they cast john krasinski you know put them on t rt and do jack ryan and they all their intel guys uh it's it's because these are the guys that are actually at the CIA and have been the whole time they are soft they're low tea they don't they've never been inside of a gym like so but they like to say that it's probably not all of them but i mean it's probably ones to come out and do interviews afterwards.

Yeah, it's probably a lot of. I bet if you go to a restaurant in D.C., you're going to hear one of those, you know, Politico restaurants. You're going to hear a lot of CIA guys talking about how they're CIA very publicly, which is definitely something that operatives do. But anyway, it's, yeah, in terms of the substance there, there's no substance to it. But it's interesting. Anytime you see these attacks on somebody like Ratcliffe, you know, anytime,

somebody that seems like they're closer to the center of Trump gravity, they seem to be the ones being, you know, in the crosshairs. Yeah. I mean, I thought it was interesting to because like if we're playing this as if Tucker and the CIA agent guy are like, I'm assuming they are not pushing a Trump op here. I'm assuming they're pushing an anti-Trump op here. And so with all the stuff that came out about the intel agencies the last couple weeks, right? the D-classes story that's being told. Now we have these two people out here that are coming out, like, we need to reform it,

but the reason we can't reform it is because of, of John Rackcliffe. It's like, what is the logical conclusion of this up there? They want to defend and protect the CIA and how they do things. It just needs to be fixed. You know, they can fix.

We call the wrap-up smear. Yeah. And so they are trying to throw Rackcliffe, the guy who I think not only is trying to reform it, but potentially even lead to the dismantling of it, That should be our logical conclusion to all of this. It's just interesting to throwing that guy under the bus, the unassuming name. Yeah.

Anytime you hear that, I mean, we spent the previous segment talking about Bill Pulte and Tulsi Gabbard and the public figures. The public, I know, I know Ratcliffe is a public figure, but he's not out in public. He's not, he doesn't talk about stuff. He is in front of the cameras. He isn't somebody who's talked about by Trump on a regular basis. And I think that signal in a good way. Yeah. We could be wrong. I mean, we could be wrong about any of these people. I don't know John Recliffe. Like, we don't know if he's a white hat or not. But signs point to yes. Science point to, and I think the gravitational pull there is going back to a lot of the research that, you know, you dug into and that a lot of people in this audience dug into years ago that just these people in Intel and in the military that were around Trump leading up to and during his first term. There's just always going to be signal there until proven other. it was yeah i agree with you um how about we start trucking away through the boosts and the rants

and whatever we got on youtube thank you for everybody who went over to youtube by the way i know it's quite a few people um again this is kind of a one-time thing likely a one-time thing we won't do this very often but i think we've reached our our quota but we have over like 500 people watching on youtube which is this record for for this show anyway. Ghost of Base Patrick Henry in the chat says there's a high concentration of gay bars in DC for a reason. Yeah, ghost sampled them all for the cause.

Yeah, maybe you're right. You know, he still has a good amount of people in the chat on a Rumble too. So thank you for those who stuck around in the chat over there. Do you want to check if we got any boosts? I can guess who it's going to be. $1027.20. thank you and thank you you Joe my fellow North Dakota we appreciate you

the final man gifted 10 subs thank you so much final a man he also left a rant earlier Nevada Runner gifted five subs I don't see any 10 subs is 50 bucks right I think so it's very generous might even be is it 100 is it 10 bucks I think it's five bucks

I think it's five bucks can somebody in chat Let me try to do this. How do I give? I want to give subs. So, okay, 10 subs is 50 bucks. You're right. Nice.

Thank you. Yeah, very generous. All you people are generous. We appreciate this. Keitho Higgins said, speaking of diaries, what's brown and stinks in the addict? The diarrhea of Annefrey.

It's the dumbest joke. I think I'm better. This is the dumbest joke you ever said, Keith. It somehow kind of made me giggle. I like it. the average three left the $50 earlier saying if my calculations are correct and there are 21 a number DBHs congratulations on 500 DPAHs again thank you you're probably right but we'll still probably celebrate the 500th whenever the number reaches it 521st episode yeah snowcat operator gifted man that's a lot of episodes that's a lot of episodes because they're once they're twice a week I wonder how many daily heralds I've done. I wonder how many times I've streamed

altogether ever. I would love that. It's I mean 10 times a week for four years. How much life have you lost while on a stream? Yeah. I mean, I kind of want to know, but then at the same time, I'm like, I hope I never find out. I hope I never know. I did do like a little calculation of that. I did a calculation of that though

for like the lawsuit part of things just to like show the disparity of streaming time and it was like wow um yeah dedicated my life to you guys and i love it but i'm curious uh the boom diggedy says i'm tired of the party did y'all cover tulsi's post about foucher around 1030 and we did chill down the screen so thank you for sending that in keitha higgins with another one john i have the perfect outro video for tonight and it's on youtube it defends the limited honor of the bbys in our world it's called i'm not gay by odis spreading i appreciate that but I have a different outro. I want to play for you guys. Thank you for the suggestion.

I'll defend Beebe's honor by not playing that video, I think. It's the best way to do it. By the way, my big AI take last Wednesday night, aged as well as anything has ever aged immediately, like the next day. Yeah, that was a good one. That was, yeah, that was pretty great. You guys should rewatch that section.

Yeah, that was a good episode. Good discussion. The final man, I read this one, I'll read it again real quick. Average is a close second to Connie Barrett as the biggest disappointments of the Trump appointments expected her to declass at all. And we got an I spy-born-esque photo in Fulton County. Mahalo MFERS. Thank you for the $50.

And that's, I agree with you, man. Keith O'Higgins, maybe these Intel women like Gina Hassett and Tulsi, I think she meant Haspel, get infatuated with well-funded and hung black ops. Oh, Keith, you're killing me. Anyway, guys, that's all we got for tonight. Make sure you hit the thumbs up. What's the movie tomorrow? The movie is, I think you've seen this, Chris Paul selection, Mercy from 2026 starring Chris Pratt.

This is the, I thought you were talking about this couple months ago. This is the movie where Chris Pratt wakes up in the Mercy Court. He's strapped to a chair. He's being judged by a Rebecca Ferguson AI. Pretty nice AI to be, I would say. Who, and he is being charged with the murder of his wife. It's a pretty interesting premise and it's a pretty interesting format where the whole movie is basically going through files and documents, which is actually more compelling than you would think it would be. And basically it's, can you trust the AI?

Can you trust the humans? How do the humans and the AIs work together? And, you know, it was a fun one. That's cool. What did you think of the movie? Like brief? I thought the movie was fine, but it's one of those ones that the concept is great in terms of discussion. Yeah, the concept was awesome.

The movie was the execution of it could have been better, but I did enjoy the movie. My cynical-like movie brain was just thinking how much they spent on this. because what did Chris Pratt come in for a day? Yeah, right? Like, they have to spend anything on this thing. And Rebecca Ferguson probably zoomed in her performance. So, like, that, you know, it's fine. It worked for what it was.

But I'm like, they had, like, one filmed on location scene in a hotel lobby. And other than that, it was just Chris Pratt sitting in a chair and Rebecca Ferguson on a screen. So I'm like, you guys, whatever you made, on this. Good job. Yeah, good job. Movies like that make up for like the failing aspect of Hollywood.

They can make millions and millions and millions of dollars to fund whatever. I'll be back on tomorrow, the Daily Herald, 1 p.m. Eastern. And then I don't think I'm on Only Lans this Friday. I have to check the schedule again. But otherwise I'll be back Saturday with Chris for the power hour. So we're going to get out of here with this video. In light of the Fauci hearing today, I want this video to serve as a reminder of how Trump did try to save lives during COVID.

And it was all the mainstream media, the people in government, everybody, the experts, they all turned against them. They ridicule them. And it turns out Trump was right about everything, as typically ends up being the case. So thank you, everybody. Hit the thumbs up. I will, besides story hour tomorrow night, I will be on the Badlands Blitz, badlands.substack.com. that comes out straight to your inbox on Saturday morning. Sunday night, I'll be joined by General Quast on the narrative.

So that should be a fun one. Awesome. That'll be a great one. Cool. Thanks, BB. We'll catch you later. See you later, everybody. And a lot of good things have come out about the hydroxy. A lot of good things have come out. I happen to be taking it. Hydroxy chloroquium. I'm taking it. Hydroxy chloroquine. I found it to be highly irresponsible for the president to have come out and make that statement.

workers take it, a lot of doctors take it. He's our president, and I would rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists, especially in his age group and in his, shall we say, weight group, what is morbidly obese, they say. To be clear, no evidence that it works to treat this disease, there's no evidence that it works to prevent this disease, and there are some potential side effects. And if you look at that phony report that was put in, that report on the hydroxy, we was given to people that were an extraordinarily bad condition.

Extraordinary bad. People that were dying. He shouldn't be taking it. I mean, you know, his own FDA has said that this is still something under investigation. It should not be taken outside of a clinical trial, taken out of hospitalized, only hospitalized patients should be getting it. There's no reason to listen to people really who have no medical knowledge whatsoever, pontificate about if it's useful or not.

People said, oh, maybe he owns the company. No, I don't know the company. You know what? I want the people of this nation to feel good. I don't want them being sick and There's a very good chance that this has an impact especially early on it will kill you. I cannot stress enough This will kill you However the documents we obtained refute that the documents in question stem from a report of the defense advanced research projects agency better known as DARPA which were hidden in the top secret share drive. Major Murphy's report goes on to detail great concern over the COVID-19

gain of function program, the concealment of documents, the suppression of potential curatives like ibermectin and hydroxychloroquine and the MRNA vaccines. Why not just let the science speak for itself? Why are you promoting this drug? I'm not. I'm not. I'm just saying very simply, I'm not at all. You know what I'm trying to do? Wait, you come out here.