REAL AF with Andy Frisella - 605. Andy, Timothy Parlatore & DJ CTI: Donald's Gag Order Reinstated, White Lung Pneumonia & Fake Facebook Accounts Shut Down

Episode Date: December 1, 2023

In today's episode, Andy & DJ are joined in the studio by the founder and managing partner of Parlatore Law Group, Timothy Parlatore. They discuss Donald's gag order reinstated by the appeals court in his NY civil fraud trial, Massachusetts saying that it's been hit with a wave of pneumonia in children, and the thousands of fake Facebook accounts that were shut down by Meta.

What is up guys, it's Andy Purcell and this is the show for the realest. Say goodbye to the lies, the fakeness, and delusions of modern society and welcome motherfucking reality you like that didn't you a little dramatic sauce yeah anyway today we have andy and dj cruise the motherfucking internet that's what we're gonna do that's what cti stands for it's cruise the internet uh we put topics up on the screen we talk about what we think is true what we think is not true it is a speculative show We try to figure out what's going on in the world. Then we try to figure out what we, the people, can do to make the situation better. Other times, you tune in. We have Q&AF. That's where you get to submit questions. Questions can be about anything. I am a 25-year entrepreneur.

Most of the questions that we do are personal development, entrepreneurship, business type questions. But if you have questions about what's going on in the world, we're happy to answer those as well or anything else. You can submit your questions for that show, which usually airs every Monday. One of a few different ways. The first way is guys, email those questions in to askandy at andyfrasella.com. Or you can go on YouTube in the comment section of the Q and A F shows and drop your question in the comments and we'll pick some from there as well. Other times we have real talk. Real talk is just five to 20 minutes of me giving you some real talk.

You might call it a rant. I just call it talking. And then we have full length. Full length is where we give you the full length and the girth. It's typically like what you see on most other podcasts where an interesting person comes and joins and we have a conversation. And then we have 75 hard verses and 75 hard verses is where people who have completed 75 hard, who have taken their life from a less than desirable place and rediscovered their own power and taken back their life, come on the show and talked about how they did it and how you could do it as well.

And if you're unfamiliar with 75 hard, where the fuck have you been? Because it's everywhere, right? And the reason it's everywhere is because it's awesome, all right? It changes your life. And if you want to get it, you can get it for free. And the reason it's free is because I'm awesome and I care about getting you awesome without you spending any money. It's hard enough as it is without making you reach in your wallet. Okay. You can get it at episode 208 on the audio feed. 208. It's free. Go get it. Now, if you want to give me some money, I'll take it. You could buy the book. It's at andyfersella.com. It's called 75 Hard. And I do have a new book that's getting ready to drop on January 1st. So keep an eye out for that as well.

Now, we don't take ads on the show. You're going to notice that. I'm not going to talk about a bunch of shit that I don't use so I can get some extra money. I'm a successful entrepreneur. I built real companies myself. I've been at this for 25 years. I don't need their money and I don't want to take their bullshit for what I say. So in exchange for not ruining your day with 47 minutes of ads, I ask very simply that you help us get

the message out. Because of the nature of the things that we talk about, we don't get favorable traffic algorithms. We get fucked with, we get shadow banned, we get traffic throttled, and we need your help to get the message out. So when we say pay the fee, that very simply means share the show. If it makes you laugh, if it makes you think, if it gives you new perspective, if it's something you didn't know before, share the show the message is important which they all are please share the show all right don't be a hoe share the show all right what's up dude hey how's it going good nice hat thanks yeah looks familiar well i know a guy yeah no i mean that looks like the hat oh yeah wait is this like the first one though yeah do

you know no that's not the first one. The first one's in my office at home. It's like all sweated out. Oh, gotcha. But that's definitely the second one. But you felt the power he put on? I felt a little bit more domestic. Yeah.

You know? Yeah. You went up the list a couple notches. Two notches at least. Got it. At least two. Yeah. I agree.

So we have a guest today. We do have a guest. Why don't you introduce our guest? Yeah, guys. We got a great... I've actually been following him for a minute. We got Tim Parlatore, who is in on the studio today. Tim, how's it going? Good.

Good, good. Now, Tim is an attorney. He's a D.O. Why don't you tell us a little bit about what you do and where you came from, Tim, so the audience gets a little scope of your experience so far. Sure. So I started off in the Navy. I was a surface warfare officer. I got out of that and went to law school. I started my career in New

York City doing a lot of organized crime work, working for all of the greats who had been part of the John Gotti trials, really learned how to try cases there. Ultimately, I got involved in a really big case, the Eddie Gallagher Navy SEAL war crimes case a few years back, which we won. Big not guilty verdict there. Yeah. And then that, you know, kind of catapulted me through a whole bunch of other things. You know, I recently represented Donald Trump. I was representing him through the investigative phases for both January 6th as well as the Mar-a-Lago case. Oh, so you're on the list with us too. Oh, yeah.

He's on the list. Shit, man. All right. And I have my own firm, Parlatory Law Group. I have 16 attorneys that work for me. It's an entirely cloud-based platform. So all of my people work remotely. It's very military friendly. I have a few veterans on staff. And then also about a third of my people are actually military spouses because of who they're married to. DOD keeps moving them around

the country. And attorneys are licensed by the state. So they don't always live where they're married to, DOD keeps moving them around the country and attorneys are licensed by the state so they don't always live where they're licensed. And with me they can telecommute and so it gives them good opportunity to continue to work. So my personal specialty, I do civil and criminal cases and I always say I don't specialize in any one type of case. I specialize in weird and big ugly fights And that's where I'm comfortable. The stuff nobody else wants.

Exactly. Yeah. Got it. That's cool, man. What made you get into law? Was there something like, I mean, did you watch, was it a show? Was it Night Court back in the day? I don't know what that is. It was actually my best friend. I went to the Naval Academy undergrad. And my best friend got in trouble when we were juniors. And he was facing separation. He came to me and he said, Tim, I need your help. And so he and I just sat there, went through all the regulations. And I figured out what they were charging him with didn't really match.

But there was something else that matched a lot more. And I said, just go tell him this. And he's like, Tim tim i don't understand what you just said i need you to do it so i went up to the commandant's um you know jag officer explained the whole thing he got dropped down to a battalion level discipline so it saved his career uh he just finished a tour of commanding the newest guided missile destroyer in the Navy. That's cool. Selected for captain. And, you know, he is a real hard charger and a great asset to the Navy who would have been thrown away over 20 years ago but for that. And that experience, you know, really to me kind of lit the fire because I realized this is something I have a passion for. Before that, I was thinking I might want to be a Marine Corps infantry officer, but I realized this is something I have a passion for.

I can help people, and I'm good at this. This is my talent. That's the key to greatness, man. Most people can never get those things aligned. Yeah, and so with that, it shifted to trajectory. I tried to get into the Navy JAG Corps. get those things aligned yeah and so with that it kind of it shifted to trajectory you know i tried to um i tried to get into the navy jag corps they uh they didn't accept me i applied like four times and so instead i came back as a civilian defense counsel and just beat the crap out of all the

jags that's awesome that's cool man that's awesome now now i think so so obviously your most recent i guess biggest notable notable notable case was the Trump case. Can we talk a little bit about the Eddie Gallagher case? Oh, yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, do you, I mean. Yeah, I talked to Eddie. The case is insane.

Yeah. I've talked to Eddie a few times over Instagram. Yeah. We've talked about this. Yeah. So, I mean, because you. I didn't know about it, though. I never knew about it until I talked to him.

Yeah. So. It's an insane case. It is Yeah. It's an insane case. It is insane. It's an insane case. Can we just talk a little about that? Yeah, of course. I mean, was there anything in that case?

Let's give the basics for those that have not heard about this case. Sure. Like, start to finish. So, Eddie was a Navy SEAL, and he was the platoon chief over fighting in the Battle of Mosul in 2017. And they were accompanying the Iraqi forces in retaking Mosul from the ISIS. And about a year later, he was accused of war crimes. They said that he had stabbed an ISIS prisoner in the neck, killing him.

They said that he had, as a sniper, shot at innocent civilians. A child. Yeah, exactly. A child, an old man. And so he was. Serious allegations. Oh, yeah, very serious. Serious war crimes allegations.

He was arrested. He was put in pretrial confinement. And I came into the case several months after being arrested when they they were dissatisfied with their legal representation and wanted to trade up. And so I was honestly only in that case for about three and a half, just less than four months. And in that time, you know, we had him released from jail. We had the prosecutor kicked off the case because of violations. We took it to trial. We got a not guilty verdict. And it was a wild thing.

In the middle of trial, one of the witnesses confessed during my cross-examination to being the actual killer. That's insane. So it was a very wild case. there was a lot of shit that went on there too where he was trying to get help and people were fucking telling them they were helping them and they were actually not helping them they were doing the opposite like very a very famous uh certain political figure was at the head of that there was a lot of politics going on and um and a lot of dirty games going on. At one point I actually discovered that the prosecutors at NCIS had launched an illegal spying operation

surveilling me. And, um, and so I obviously brought that to the judge's attention that created a whole separate fiasco. We had several days of hearings on that, which ultimately resulted in the prosecutor getting removed. Halfway through the hearing, it ended early because the NCIS director sent a letter from Quantico invoking privilege and refusing to allow any of the agents to testify. And the judge is sitting there reading the thing saying, I don't think I've ever seen a law enforcement agency invoke their Fifth Amendment rights, but I'm going to have to interpret this letter as an admission of criminality by NCIS. Shit. That's crazy. looked at me and he said you know tim you read about these things you know some in newspapers some in john grissom novels and you think maybe in my career i'll see one of these things

we just had all of them in one case yeah that's crazy dude that's wow so what's it like to work with trump dude i must say did he call you i was like like, I got to have that guy. That guy's huge. I enjoyed it. It's a different kind of client. I enjoyed it because it's a very consequential case. The issues that we were litigating, I felt, were very important issues and had to be handled right. I got along well with the client. And look, I've been very public about this the reason i left has nothing to do with him or the case it was the people around him that i felt prevented me from being able to defend him to the best of my ability fuck how

many times have we said that bro i talk about that all the time on the show i'm like why is he doing this and and then dude i and then I meet the people around him and I'm like, that's why. Yeah. Oh, yeah, it's crazy. It was, if you want to bring me into a case, you got to, you know, take the handcuffs off and let me win your case.

Yeah. Don't have me saddled with a campaign that, you know, that's going to hold me back. And, I mean, he's not the first person I've represented with a campaign. I mean, I represented, you know, one of our mutual friends, Eric Reitens. Yeah. Yep.

And he, right from day one, said, Tim, you're here to help me out with this thing, campaign. You're here to get me elected. You guys stay out of his way. Tim, if you need anything, you guys give it to him. Yeah. And that worked great. But here it was kind of the reverse where the campaign is trying to dictate strategy in a way that they, in my opinion, were trying to use these criminal cases and investigations as more of a campaign tool than an actual litigation thing. And, I mean, look, I love the biggest case out there, but at the same time, I don't want to be used for campaign purposes.

Right. Yep. And also, you don't want to be making your strategic moves based around how the public's going to perceive it when you're trying to actually win something. Or how they think the public's going to perceive it. No, I already know the conversations. These dudes are telling him, oh, you can't do that because this is how it'll look.

You can't do this because this is how it'll look. And as I always say, in a criminal trial, there are only 12 opinions that matter, and yours is not one of them. Yeah, no shit. If you're not a juror, I don't care. So what do you think about what's going on in the world, man? It's crazy. Yeah, I agree. It's crazy.

I mean, I kind of have a unique perspective on things because I get to see a lot of stuff behind the curtain. Um, it's a situation where legitimate problems have overreactions and overreaching solutions being implemented, which causes bigger problems. And I think that a lot of this, you know, people, you know, they love to overreact and they love to take advantage of any tragedy for their own political gain. And if we were to take a step back and look at these things a little bit more, you know, carefully, analytically, focusing more on the facts, the evidence, and the law, you come to a different conclusion.

What do you think it is? Now, I want to note, first of all, it seems to me that the law is being heavily twisted and manipulated by a certain political party you know what i'm saying like we're very we're very much so applying the law to people there's a there's a double standard it's a double standard when i observe what's happening and how the law is being applied to let's say conservatives but not being applied to let's say people who are left of center what do you how do you correct that over the course of time because i've never witnessed that in my life before or maybe it's always been that way and i didn't notice it but it's become heavily weaponized at this point in time and it's very obvious and one of the things you know that

i struggle with is like when i think about how we can rebuild the country and sort of restore what needs to happen i mean what do we do with people who are willing to take the law and basically make it applicable in certain cases where it doesn't apply blatantly without regard for for what they're supposed to do because i feel like things like what latisha latisha james is doing and like this what's what's this dude up here in uh the skeletor that fucking that old no that old white dude that looks like a skeleton old white no bro he's he's the judge. Oh, yeah. And Goran. Yeah, that guy. I actually got that as headline. Oh, do you?

We can dive into it. What is it going to take to correct this problem? In my opinion, this is not something that's recent. We have always had a weaponization of the criminal justice system. I see it a little bit differently. Not so much that it's being weaponized against one party or, as other people would argue, is being weaponized against certain ethnic groups and things like that. I see it personally as the criminal justice system is weaponized against everybody. The difference is who's in charge and the political figures that will protect their own

and protect their favorite group. And so, you know, that's that's the problem. And I think that a lot of it is a lot more public now and people are starting to see, you know, things that things that were obvious to me years ago, you know, just in the New York City criminal system of how it is weaponized against people. It's now much more public. And, you know, the years of where, you know, we thought the federal prosecutors were these, you know, knights in white shining armor and, you know, like, you know, the things you see on TV, you know, Jack McCoy type characters, That's all a fiction. And to me, the way that you fix this is to change the career path of these prosecutors, to make it something where they're incentivized to do justice as opposed to racking up their stats or to racking up the biggest names, the biggest scalps on their wall, and also to remove the

politics from the process. I mean, to me, an elected prosecutor is a recipe for disaster. I'd agree. Letitia James, and I'm going to address both of the names you brought up. Letitia James is an elected Democrat attorney general who campaigned on a platform of, I'm going to get Donald Trump. And because she is in a largely one-party jurisdiction, they bought into that. Because really all you have to do as a prosecutor in a single-party jurisdiction, red or blue, is you have to win your, to get or keep your job. And so,

because you're going to run essentially unelected in general. So that's what she did. She campaigned on that. And now she's doing what she needs to do to win the next primary election to keep her job. The judge, and not a lot of people know this, but in New York, judges are elected. And when you have a one-party jurisdiction like that, New York City judges are all, for the most part, elected unopposed. The way that they get on the ballot is they go over to the Democratic Party and they, you know, they do the beauty pageant there and the party selects who they want on the ballot. And so just about every judge in the state system in New York is selected by the political party, you know, to that position and then rubber stamped by the electorate because

they don't really have another choice. And they do serve, you know, like a 10 year term. And so if they want to keep their judgeship, they're going to keep the party serve, you know, like a 10 year term. And so if they want to keep their judgeship, they're going to keep the party happy. You know, federal judges aren't like that. You know, federal judges are appointed for life and it is a not a perfect system, but it's a more a more perfect system where they're appointed by the president, but with the advice and consent of the Senate. And ordinarily, they don't even get advanced to the president's desk without the senator from that jurisdiction. So really, any federal judge in New York doesn't get to that position without, for the ones that were elected,

that were appointed during Trump's era. They don't get to that position unless both Chuck Schumer and Donald Trump agree that this person should be a federal judge. And then they're appointed for life and they don't have to worry about reelection. So that's one of the many reasons why I prefer to be in federal court. But when you have a state system like that and everything I just described also applies to Georgia. You know, if you have a situation like Fulton County where it's a one-party jurisdiction, certainly the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. All of those are politics infecting the criminal justice system. And then on the federal side, the attorney general is appointed by the president, and when they are given their marching orders of these are what your priorities are going to be, when that trickles down, the prosecutors, even if nobody says, you know, even if Joe Biden never actually calls up Merrick Garland and says, I would like you to prosecute my political opponents.

Merrick Garland and the people under him and Jack Smith, they all know I want to please my boss. And the best way that I'm going to please my boss is by bringing the cases that they like to see. Which is now in today's day and age, things that get attention. Right. And one question I have is- Not necessarily what's wrong or what's unjust. But an interesting thing is you have a situation like Bob Menendez getting indicted right in the middle of all this.

Well, what do you think that was? Because I feel like that was like a, you know, because we talk about it in terms of like, you know, when you when you are in these positions, you're you're Bob Menendez, you're a Democrat senator. Right. You got to play ball because the committee chairs that you sit on, like that's all that's all pay for play. You got you know, there's things there's rules and regulations that you got to play by and it may not be a direct conversation but you know the rules and if you want to stay in this game you're going to play them now i'm i'm to the opinion that i feel like that was just one of those situations where bob either did something that they didn't want him to do or didn't do something that they wanted him to do and he got shit-canned. Or he took it a little bit too far.

I mean, once you get to the stage of having stacks of gold bars in your house, one problem that— What about having a tank in your house? Well, that's a different issue. We might need to talk about that. We can talk about that later. But, yeah, once you get to that point, you know, one problem that the DOJ has in keeping things politically aligned is that they do have agents that go out there and bring cases. And then if the agents, you know, try to bring a case, you know, they now have to worry about whistleblowers of, oh, we're going to all of a sudden get all these IRS agents that, you know, go talk to Congress about how, you know, we wouldn't let them prosecute Hunter Biden and things like that. So there is an element of that where, you know, the line agents are out there trying

to do the right thing. And that's one thing. If you look at the FBI, the line agents, by and large, are out there trying to do the right thing. I've noticed that we have a lot of we have. Well, they tell us. Yes. And and like even, you know, you know, the FBI does have a large cadre of people that are not agents. And, you know, those are the more of the political appointees. I mean, one of the things that drives me out of my mind, you know, one of my good clients and close friends is Bernie Carrick, the former police commissioner of NYPD. Yeah. I love Bernie. Yeah. Yeah. But and he and I are

always talking about like, look at the FBI director. When is the last time we've had an FBI director who has personal experience carrying a badge and a gun it's been probably decades right yeah right hoover well the fbi directors hoover wouldn't oh dude look yeah but this is look how do you this is the same problem in business this is when businesses get too big they end up hiring people who are fucking they come from harvard and yale as opposed to people that actually pack boxes and went through the whole system right you know what i'm saying you can't get the same outcome so i don't know yes i mean going back to your question what's the best way

to fix it rip the politics out of it literally yeah literally find a way to fix it? Rip the politics out of it. Literally. Yeah. Literally find a way to depoliticize the criminal justice system and whether it's having some kind of a bipartisan oversight commission or something. Yeah. If you rip the politics out of it and then you start to actually hold prosecutors accountable for misconduct, because that's the other thing is they have they have immunity. And so when a prosecutor goes andconduct because that's the other thing is they have they have immunity and so when a prosecutor goes and does something that's outright illegal and unethical to try to put somebody innocent in jail nothing happens to him yep that's insane like Kim Gardner she

got she got what a $500 fine exactly yeah that's insane bro kim gardner literally i mean got people fucking murdered in st louis legitimately like there are families right now without loved ones because of decisions that she made right intentionally intentional decisions she made gridens wouldn't still dude exactly. Exactly. Yeah. She prioritized, she used taxpayer dollars to go after removing a popular and effective governor from an opposite political party as opposed to focusing on murders. Who do you think gave her her marching orders? Soros. I know that.

Yeah. I mean, that is what it seems to be because who funds it. Right. Again, as a lawyer, I don't like to speculate too much. I'd rather get her under oath than have her admit it. Yeah. Yeah. This is a speculative show.

It is a speculative show, so it's fine here. Anyway. I'm normally objecting to speculation. Sustained. Andy's pulling me out of my comfort zone. That's right. Sustained, was that the right choice? Yes, that is.

Okay, sustained. All right. Well, we got some good stuff, man. I want to bring this up. I think if there is any proof that someone listens to this show i found it all right because someone well i'm gonna show you because you guys remember this was probably like maybe two ctis ago um andy had a famous line he said you know it's time to get back to just saying fuck you oh yeah and then you got elon out the next day

saying the shit boom a week later yeah have you seen that video let's just watch it for those bro why doesn't elon just have like why doesn't he just come on the show man elon just hit us up bro just come on in we'll got you yeah we say fuck you with you it makes it even more impactful yeah i'm saying this was great dude it was fucking awesome so this was uh so elon musk did this this live i got tagged in this a gazillion times and i'm just like bro he listens to the show i don't know what he does but he's on the right path i'm just saying that show comes out you tell people to get back to it and here he is what What'd I say? We need more Kid Rock and less Dylan Mulvaney? Yeah. All right. Let's see it.

Yeah, let's watch the clip. So he was doing a live interview. I believe it was on CNBC. He was doing a live interview. And the interviewer is asking him about the advertisers on X coming off and leaving the program, leaving the platform. This was Elon Musk's response. You don't want them to advertise

no what do you mean if somebody's gonna try to blackmail me with advertising blackmail me with money go fuck yourself yeah i love the awkwardness go fuck yourself is clear? I hope it is. I hope it is. I love it. One more time? Yes. This is fucking great. You don't want them to advertise? No. What do you mean?

If somebody's going to try to blackmail me with advertising, blackmail me with money, go fuck yourself. me with advertising blackmail me with money go yourself go yourself i hope it is i think he really did listen that's exactly the same i was saying just like that it's verbatim bro this is the we're living in a fucking simulation dude bro i mean the solo tweet he tweeted out yeah he treated out the solo tweet after i talked about that listen yeah he's fucking listening look dude elon real talk bro i've been saying fuck you to advertisers before they even try to advertise on my show i've been funding my own show i won't even take a dollar from these motherfuckers

because I'm not going to listen to shit. So I'm with you. No. But feel free. You could advertise. No. He should advertise some X dollars on the show. Yeah.

Yeah. We don't do that. I don't really do that platform, but I take some free money from somebody that thinks, fuck you. I like X. Yeah. I'll sponsor you back. I'll buy a Tesla. platform, but I take some free money from somebody that thinks, fuck you. I like X. Yeah. I'll sponsor you back.

I'll buy a Tesla. No, you won't. I'll buy a Tesla. I won't drive it. I'll buy one. You'll buy one, though? Yeah. I'll do something with it.

I'm just saying. It's just not my cup of tea, bro. What's your take on Elon? I like him a lot. He's an interesting guy. That's one way to describe him. These social media networks

that try to shadow ban and censor people, as much as people don't like it, the reality is they're allowed to do it. Because when you try to sue them for it, the Constitution, First Amendment, that only applies to the government.

And to restrict their ability to censor actually implicates their First Amendment rights. What I like about him is that he went in and he kind of made a business decision of, hey, you know what? People don't like censorship. Maybe we can increase usership by getting rid of it. And I think that he's done a lot of great things you know with that and also i love that attitude where he's not going to just cater to everybody um you know the way that you know zuckerberg and these other people do let me ask you a question about regarding like the internet right yeah so i hear what you're saying and i know it's technically correct right like it

infringes on their right by telling them they cannot censor right so we have section 230 right so at some point in time right when we talk about the public conversation when the first amendment was created there was no technology like this it probably was could not even be thought of like not even fathomed but what we have and this is real is we have moved public conversation from in person to a digital format that is privately owned. And so if public conversation moves from here to onto this electronic device, this electronic platform where they can censor, shouldn't we reconsider if people like that are allowed to censor since they now own

the public conversation and that technology was never considered when we First came up with the First Amendment rights of people in this country, you know, it's It's similar to AI right? Yeah, like AI is this new thing and everybody's hyped about it, right? But nobody's thinking like oh, maybe we should Not do these certain things. Put some safeguards in place. And when you're old enough to know, when the internet started, nobody thought about these things. Right.

So that's what I'm, what do you think on that? The issue becomes when you have become so large as Facebook has become to where it's essentially a monopoly. Right. And they dominate, they own the entire space. And so there is where you may want to, you know, say, if you have become that big that you are a monopoly, you know, then some of these protections should apply. But as far as, you know, these types of entities, you know, that'll only put out one, you know, one point of view that actually did exist back when they wrote the constitution. In what way? Because newspapers at the time,

most newspapers were actually for one or the other of the parties. And so, yeah. So, but that's how it was from the beginning. Alexander Hamilton started the New York post. It was, it was called something different, but it was specifically, you know federalist propaganda. And then there was the Democratic Republican newspaper. And so people would write these essays attacking the other side but the people had access to multiple papers so they could read the one that they want or they could read them all and get all sides out of it. thing, you know, like Meta, then at that point it does become almost a quasi-governmental agency where they really do control the public conversation of everybody. I actually kind of look at it from a slightly different perspective of it's kind of a fraud when you build a platform like this and say that it's going to be all about, you know, free speech and public discourse and everything, and then you have people that go on there and they build a huge following,

they build this whole community, all based in justifiable reliance upon the promises that were made by Zuckerberg back when they started, and they pour all of their money and effort into this thing, and then all of a sudden Facebook turns and says, okay, well, guess what? Now, even though we promised you this, we have decided now we're going to exercise our first amendment rights to only have people that we agree with, um, have those kinds of platforms. And I'm going to start suspending all these accounts. And I, and so I think for me, you know, from a, essentially a fraudulent inducement perspective there's there's a different legal argument to be made as to why they can't do it rather than just simply a first amendment should apply to meta see i'm okay i'm okay if that was the case i'm fine with that

because guess like there are other options you can go to right like that's fine but i think the dangerous thing and what's come to light you know within the last year or two years were you know like the metaphiles or i'm sorry the twitter files which exposed that it was not these private companies just acting on their own right these directives of censorship and shadow banning and the use of bots, it was all at the direction of the federal government. And that's when you get into being even more so government action. Right. Because if the government is directing you to do something or you're doing something

at the government's behest, even though it's, you know, if it's a request or otherwise, it is initiated by the government. And so then, yeah, then that is a violation. Absolutely. Yeah. What do you think about the idea? So something that we never hear, and Eric Schmidt's a good buddy of mine. It's funny because I was friends with Schmidt and Greitens.

So it was a little bit weird. You endorsed Eric too? Yeah. Actually, the truth was, and I have no problem saying this i've been friends with eric gritens i supported him first and then when they snowballed him in the in the primary with those fucking false allegations um i agreed to meet with eric schmidt because eric schmidt asked to reach out and i'm actually friends with his cousin so eric Schmidt and I met, and I ended up really liking him. And we've become friends after the fact.

So now I'm friends with both of them. And it's a little awkward, but they don't like, you know, I don't think. Just don't invite them together. No, I don't even know that's what it is. You know, I think Eric Greitens feels very sour about what happened, and I think he deserves to feel that way. But in reality, I think he also knows that Schmidt's a team player and he's up there trying to do good work.

And he wasn't behind it. No, he wasn't. And that's been a really cool friendship. But Schmidt and I, Eric's starting to lead the charge on what we're talking about here. And one of the things him and I were talking about was how they, you know, traffic throttling. People don't talk about that in terms of censorship, the algorithm, right? Like, it's not just getting your platform taken away or getting your post deleted or getting fact-checked.

It's the way that they naturally. That stuff comes later. Yeah. it's the way that they naturally that stuff comes later yeah it's the way they naturally change the flow of the algorithm when you start to talk about things that they don't want you talking about and that's censorship as well and that's something that you know i've encouraged those guys to really start to talk about some more and i've seen them say some things about it but i hopefully you know we get some resolution on that as well, because the truth of the matter is if these guys wanted if they look, this is how I look at it. Look at TikTok.

All right. TikTok is crushing everybody. The reason it's crushing everybody is because it's pretty open algorithm. All right. So if these guys were operating in good faith, like they say they do, saying we're a business, we're here to build a business. They would open the algorithm because it would create more money for their business but that's not what's happening what's happening is they have a big business that's making a lot of money and they're using that business to curtail and craft public discourse in the way that they want it to be and we see this from the donations

of the people who run these operations and the money where the money goes that they want it to be and we see this from the donations of the people who run these operations and the money where the money goes that they donate and so my argument when when i think of like what's actually happening is that they're not even operating in good faith as a business in the first place they're operating as a literal conversation uh manipulator of public discourse and so you know what do you think no i think that that's true i you know i i don't know that i would be so kind to tiktok on this um because obviously i think that they are well they're pushing the the harmful cultural shit correct but for everybody else yeah they're not like like my shit that gets posted there they're not censoring it because i'm saying stuff they don't like but they are pushing out the the mentally damaging things for the youth right right we can

agree on that i'm not being kind but what i am saying is they're not trying to suppress everybody else which is why they've gotten so popular and it goes back to you know to me it's it's a fraud if you are holding yourself out to be one thing and you're actually engaging in something else. Right. If you want to make everybody think, hey, we're a free speech platform, and then you are throttling the content so that people are led to believe that the free speech platform shows that such the majority of people think this one way and that you don't get to hear the other side of things, then that is a fraud because you've induced people into the space with the promise of free space. Well, it goes further than that. Look at what DJ brought up in the Twitter files.

They have millions of accounts that are not even real accounts that they use to put traffic on uh political narratives that they believe in right and then they use those same fake accounts those bot accounts to attack the political narratives they disagree within inside the corporation like dude what the fuck like that's these are not even real people and they're using their internal resources to prop up and then suppress and and create confusion in that this is why so many people that have regular common sense views feel so alone this is why people think like well there's real damage there too and how many people died because ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine was censored a lot how many people didn't take those therapeutics because they were told that they were, you know, horse stuff?

Like, how many people, like, there's real, like, there's physical damage there. Yeah. And they're trying to create as much distance between then and now as they can so that people forget what they actually did. And so they can do it again. What they actually did was they fucking killed people by propping up truths that were not true and suppressing the actually true shit. Bro, it's crimes against humanity, dude. It is, it is, man. Anyway.

Yeah, let's get into it, because we got some good headlines here. So let's get into it. We kind of touched a little bit of some stuff. We touched some stuff. You touched some stuff? I didn't know you guys touched some stuff. I'm not doing it now we got some good headlines guys remember if you want to see any of these

pictures articles links videos go to andy forsella.com you can find them linked there if you're watching it on youtube check down in the description below you can find them there as well so with that being said man let's get into our first headline. Headline number one. Headline number one reads, Trump gag order reinstated by appeals court in New York civil fraud trial. So this just came out today. This is a new development. There's a couple of new developments in this case. So let's dive.

I think we have an attorney who actually represented Trump. Not in that case. Yeah, not in that case yeah not in that case but what do we see in here so let's dive into this a little bit so a new york appeals court thursday reinstated a gag order that barred former president donald trump from commenting about court personnel after he disparaged a law clerk in his new york civil fraud trial the decision from a four judge panel came two weeks after an individual appellate judge had put the order on hold while the appeals process played

out. The trial judge, Arthur and Gorin imposed the gag order October 3rd after Trump posted a derogatory comment about the judge's law clerk to social media. The post, which included a baseless allegation about the clerk's personal life, came on the second day of the trial in the New York Attorney General Letitia James lawsuit. James alleges Trump exaggerated his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans

and make deals. Trump, a Republican, denies any wrongdoing. And there's a couple of other big losses, I guess, that are happening right now. This headline also comes out the same day. Judge Chutkin denies Trump motions to subpoena for missing J6 records. So Judge Tanya Chutkin, who is presiding over special counsel Jack Smith's case against former President Donald Trump for 2020 election interference. This week denied a motion by the former president to seek materials. He said the House committee investigating January 6th, 2021, had not turned over to the National Archives.

On Monday, Chuck rejected Trump's motion, accusing him of going on a, quote, fishing expedition. She says, quote, the broad scope of the records that defendant seeks and his vague description of their potential relevance resembles less a good faith effort to obtain identified evidence than they do a general quote unquote fishing expedition that attempts to use the rule 17C subpoena as discovery evidence she wrote in her denial. A lot of interesting things happening.

But there are some wins and some interesting things that are happening inside the courtroom. So they put this banker from Deutsche Bank to testify in this court case. And he kind of blows the whole thing wide open of how baseless this claim is when it comes to exaggerating wealth. He, he's a banker. He was at the bank of one of the banks that loaned Trump money. Right. Um, so, and he's an executive there.

He gave testimony that could bolster Donald Trump's defense in a civil fraud trial, telling a New York judge that prospective clients can get loans even after reporting a net worth far higher than the lender's own calculations. So David Williams, who worked on at least one of three loans Deutsche Bank made to Trump in the years before he was elected president, testified Tuesday that it's, quote, a typical but not entirely unusual for the bank to cut a client's stated asset value by 50 percent and approve a loan anyway as it did with trump i don't believe that's even atypical that feels pretty standard that's pretty fucking standard if you've ever had to actually get a loan for anything just saying yeah every bank does that and what people don't understand because they've never

filed any personal financial statements or done anything financially in their fucking lives but they have a fucking viewpoint on this is that the net worth stated is up for debate it's a there's no certification process of what you say your net worth is and what they say your net worth is it's it's what the market will pay so if i think my house is worth 15 million but the market says it's only worth five it's worth five even though i think it's 15 and just because i put 15 on a fucking financial statement doesn't mean that i'm committing fraud it means i'm doing math that doesn't agree with what that math says right so and i'm not even saying that he did that because the reality is they're saying marlago is worth 18 million dollars when it's worth a fucking billion dollars okay so there's a whole bunch to this don't fuck yourself yeah this is they're playing on people's

ignorance and their own financial ignorance this is why the same reason they don't teach people basic finance in high school yeah so well let's listen to his response so so quote is the bank capable of reaching its own judgment based on the evaluation it makes of the guarantor's financial condition? Trump attorney Jesus Suarez asked Williams, a managing director at the German bank. Quote, certainly yes, Williams said. Under questioning by Suarez, Williams said the bank always reviews a prospective client's stated net worth and adjust it as needed. Quote, as part of- He's saying what I just said.

Yeah. He's saying always. Yeah. Always. Yes. Quote, as part of our due diligence, we subject a client's asset value to adjustments, Williams said. Quote, it's part of our underwriting process.

We apply it to every client regardless of what's reported. All right. He says, quote, is a difference of opinion and asset values between the client and the bank, a disqualifying factor to extend credit. Suarez asked Williams. Williams said no. Suarez said, why not? Williams said, quote, it's just a difference of opinion. Williams testified, quote, I think we expect clients to provide information to be accurate. But Williams added that such financial statements are made, quote, largely relying on the use of estimates. It's almost like I've done this before. Yeah, almost. But here's where it gets weird, right?

This is this is where it gets fucked up, okay? So the documents show that Trump cured the breaches, and Williams testified that there was nothing particularly unusual about the way Trump's company got back into compliance. Deutsche Bank, quote, was satisfied with the resolution. They got their money, everything's fine, everything's good. Now, after Williams, the article says, was excused as a witness. Trump attorney Christopher Keyes asked the judge to issue an immediate verdict in favor of the former president,

arguing the testimony from the Deutsche Bank executive had refuted the state's claim that any asset inflation was material to the lender's decision. Quote, The bank had no problem with a two billion dollar difference, a three billion dollar difference. Large changes to net worth are not unusual, Kais said. Quote, there's been no demonstration of any materiality issues at all. In Gorin, the judge said he'd rule on Kies' request at a later time, but suggested he wasn't convinced by the argument. Quote, the mere fact that lenders were happy doesn't mean the statute wasn't violated. Yeah, so I get that, but you still broke the law. That's a technicality.

What do you think there? Well, first of all, Chris Geis is making a motion at a time when he doesn't have a mechanism to make it. So the idea that the judge wouldn't rule on it at that point means that in this case, the judge is actually following the law and Chris Geis is just showing that he doesn't know what he's doing. By the way, he and I did not get along. You guys must be best friends. You know, I mean, this testimony really does kind of go to the heart of of what this case is. And, you know, should the it's interesting in a fraud case that you would have the defense put the victim on the stand to say that the victim was aware of all this and that the victim and that the victim doesn't not only doesn't care. It's not about whether they care.

What happens is, did they do it anyway? Because fraud requires that you make a false statement, and through your false statement, you actually induce something. You gain from it. Right. Right. So, you know, if I'm going to sell you a car, and I tell you, you know, this car has an eight-cylinder engine in it and you say, okay, great, I'm going to buy it and you pay me and then I give you the car and you look under the hood and it only has six cylinders, I've committed fraud. If I tell you it has eight cylinders, you look under the hood and you say, well, it's got six cylinders but I still like the car and then knowing that you buy the car from me anyway it's not fraud yeah it's just bullshit right yeah exactly and you've accepted the bullshit right it's it's not

how i would sell a car personally but you know that's that's the thing is that there has to be there has to be a plausibility uh element to the fraud and it has to be something that somebody relies upon and if the bank didn't rely upon it you know maybe at best you could get an attempted fraud um you wouldn't get the substantive fraud you get an attempted fraud my question is if why like bro listen you couldn't they're trying to find them like hundreds of millions of dollars hold on dude listen this this case could apply to any single fucking human being that's ever even applied to a mortgage yeah like every single person out here listening to this show who has written their net worth down on a personal financial statement to get a mortgage and has miscalculated by a dollar yep could be

found guilty with the argument that they're making. I'll give you another example about one of our mutual friends who made a mortgage application. On it, he wrote that he had received a gift from a friend, a cash gift. He later came into a lot more money and decided to pay that cash gift back. Paid the mortgage on time, no issues like that. He went to jail because doj said when you said that that was a gift we think it was really a loan because you ultimately did pay the guy back that's crazy that's bernie carrick that's fucking crazy that

was one of the things that he was convicted of holy shit that's insane that's like saying that's like tim that's like you that's like me being in a spot right like a financial pinch yeah which fucking happens to everybody at some point probably multiple points in their life no matter how donald trump almost lost all of his money like seven times like like bro this it happens yes so that would be like one of donald trump's rich buddies saying hey bro here's fucking 30 million bucks don't worry about it don't worry about it we're billionaires you're gonna get back no big deal i love you man i love everything you've done for me and then donald trump later saying i'm back on my feet hey bro thanks for the 30 i appreciate i gave it back to you and then

then putting him in fucking jail for it that's insane that's wild it's one of the reasons why to me the government shouldn't be shouldn't be getting involved in these things now if deutsche bank called leticia james and says we've been wronged you know that's a different he defrauded us he that's what i'm saying where's the victim right if if i'm happy bro he inflated his income he claimed he owned three buildings that we found out later he didn't even own. If it's something like that and then they didn't get paid back. Yeah. And he defaulted on it and ran away from it. Then, OK, yeah. Now it makes sense to go to the federal government or to this AG and say, hey, we're a victim of a crime. But if the AG goes hunting for a crime and they start going through financial statements and they decide this is a crime and they don't, the victim hasn't come to them saying, hey,

we've been defrauded. Why are you even getting involved? Because it's a political hit job. Right. Dude, here's what people don't understand. Listen, you know this. Yeah. The political, what they're doing is they're creating cases that people do not have the capacity to understand the intricacies of because they're financially illiterate.

Right. Okay? So they're creating these things that are naturally confusing for people so that they can convince people that this guy's a fucking liar and a piece of shit and a fraud here. Let's take that one step further. Had Donald Trump said, I own these three buildings and he hadn't owned them and they still loaned him the money and he paid the money back and they said everything was satisfied. It's still not fucking fraud because they would have done a due diligence to know that he didn't own the fucking buildings. Yes. This is not me offering to sell you a car that you don't bother to look under. Yeah. They looked. Especially with that kind of dollar value.

Yes. They do due diligence. Bro, they go all the way up your ass. Yeah. Like all the way. Like with a fucking big ass spotlight. I know what you're having, bro. Yes.

Bro. From the bottom. Like, dude. And so what they're doing, that's what people don't understand. the way like with a fucking big-ass spot i know what you have bro from the bottom like dude and so what they're doing that's what people don't understand like that you know in the internet culture everything's a fraud everybody's a fraud everything's a fraud everybody's a fucking scammer but the reality is is people don't know the reality of the law right and and when we talk when we talk about the specifics of the law would it be okay for him? Is it ethically okay for him to say that he owns things that he doesn't know? But the reality is is they did their due diligence and they knew that he didn't own the buildings and he had just stated

He owned the buildings and they said you know what by the way, he's worth X amount. He qualifies for the loan Let's give him the loan. He pays it back. There's no fucking crime It was a was so does that make sense no it makes sense yeah i didn't was the building thing like is that a real thing like you said so he did say he owned no no no no that was an example i made that up as an example you know i'll give you another example i i have a case right now it's a securities fraud case where it's a 300 million dollars um you know publicly traded company that was taken private. And during the go private, the due diligence revealed that half of the subsidy or a portion of the subsidiaries didn't

really exist. And the buyer used that in a negotiation to get an advantage and get a much better price on the thing to take it private. And then as soon as he took it private, he pretended to all of a sudden find these things to try and get the guy out. On recourse, right. And so now we're going to go through a federal criminal trial over this thing for a go private that was sold for under fair market value

because they knew that there were certain subsidiaries that were empty. And it's one of those things of like, why are we doing this? The victim knew, but the federal government still gets involved in these things. It is an over-criminalization. That kind of thing, fine, deal with it in a civil suit. Deal with it in a bankruptcy proceeding. We don't need to put people in jail for that.

Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, look, there's a difference between a fraud and a bullshitter. Right. There's a fucking difference. Sure. Yeah. And due diligence by banks like Deutsche Bank.

It identifies the difference. Yeah. Yeah, dude. You got to be really good to get past that. Yeah. It's like saying like bro you listen man we've been through due diligence in our companies because like you know we we deal with financial institutions and things like that and like bro they fucking go through your credit cards

oh yeah like like people don't understand they go through your credit cards like what's that four dollar and 72 cent quick trip charge that you have every morning? What's that about? Fuck, that's my tequila. Yeah, right. Dude, listen. They know. They know. Yeah.

And this whole case is based upon the idea, all these smart, intelligent people in this courtroom know exactly what the fuck is going on, and then they take it to the media, and the media makes it into something. Because they don't know what the fuck is going on and then they take it to the media and the media makes it into something because they don't know what the correct the average person is not taught any kind of financial literacy for the reason that our debt is their asset so they want financially illiterate people out in the world making stupid financial decisions because the more money that you owe the more profitable they are and this is this is the game and so they weaponize

this ignorance to make this man look like he's done some highly criminal shit. When in reality, and this is where the fucking rub is here. This is the thing that should concern you, is that if they're doing it to him, they can do it to you.

Because if you filled out a loan for a car and you overstated your income by two grand, or you put on a mortgage statement that- Even though you overstated your income by two grand or you figured uh you put on a mortgage statement that even though you made all your payments you calculated your net worth or bro this is what i'm saying dangerous shit and people don't understand this so if you guys get behind and so many people are like fuck look he's a criminal he's a this he's a that like dude they could do that to you okay they can do the same thing to you. Final thoughts on this topic real quick because we do got to move on, but I want to ask, what

do you think... I know you don't like to speculate, but what do you think is the outcome of this, of this one specific case? Because there's three others, but what do you think happens in this case? Oh, this case, the judge is going to rule against him. He's going to have a verdict against him and then it will go up on appeal. And I think just about all of these are going to be trial losses and appellate wins. Got it. Okay.

Well, you heard it here first on Real AF, so we'll stay tuned on that, man. Yeah, it's funny. And, guys, if you want to jump in on this conversation, hashtag bring them down because I agree with you. And I think they're going to try to gel them in some of these cases yeah you know so uh yeah guys tell us what you guys think hashtag bring them down down in the comments let us know what you guys think the harder they push on this dude the big this is what these guys are failing to understand because they live in an echo chamber

do they not understand it or do they not care well i think they don't care anytime you have a political candidate that's not planning on debating or campaigning and i'm not talking about trump talking about biden yeah that should scare you it should scare you that this highly unpopular elderly man who most people fucking hate because he's ruining their lives legitimately is literally not planning on campaigning why do you think that is it were for him last time sit in the basement that should worry people that should be highly concerning anyway no it's real shit man but uh before we get to our second headline guys as always let's cruise the comments so uh we had a big day yesterday we uh we dropped episode number two episode number two of day of the life and we had a lot of really really great comments guys first of all i mean the community you guys are

amazing you guys really are yeah it's super cool it's really really awesome you know what i like about the like people people let us do our own thing without fucking make trying to make us to be like yeah everybody else you guys should do this yeah motherfucker we're trying to entertain you and make you laugh if you laugh you laugh yeah right if you don't something's wrong with you yeah fuck you yeah how about that you don't like it fuck off but uh no i you know we had a lot of really really great comments but i like this one the best it was very very simple right to the point um so today's cruise the comment uh comes from uh no rarigas yeah okay i didn't know if there was something different there okay all right

no rarigas 78 72 the american dream will not die because of you andy thank you for leading no it will not die because of you that's what you you for leading. No, it will not die because of you. That's what you have to understand. Just because I'm out here, I've been doing this for 25 years. The reason I come on here and talk this shit is so that you have the opportunity to go live your dream. And this is the other thing. I saw a few comments like, oh, Andy's just trying to show off his lifestyle. Yeah, motherfucker, you're right about that. I've earned it. I've been at this for 25 fucking years. And I want to show the young men and women out there that are out there grinding that there's a fucking reward for that grind.

At some point. Yeah. And it's an obligation if you're winning, if you're a winner, if you built something, to let people see some of the spoils, share some of that reward, let them know that on the other side

of this fucking bullshit that they're working through, there's something to actually be had had and we don't see that enough because we got all these knuckleheads on the internet Crying about people showing the fuck off. I'm not showing up, bro Do you know how hard I dim my shine so that you guys don't fucking die? Like if I'm being real if I went around here and I showed off and flexed you'd fucking know Yeah, okay, Colin Let fucking know. Yeah. Okay. You got to be calling Leticia James. Yeah, bro.

Like, I'm legitimately being considerate. I'm being considerate of your fragile little feelings. Okay. So you know if I was flexing and it isn't showing 20 minutes of my life. There's not a place I can point this motherfucking phone that ain't a flex for most people. And I've earned that. And I've done it for 25 years.

And you can too. So when I show you some of the coolest shit in my life, it's not bragging. It's inspiration for you. And if you see it as hate or whatever, get the fuck off my page. Go be a fucking loser. Eat your Hot Pocket with your fucking mom.

Give a shit. What? I love it. Bro, I'm dead serious. I know you are. a shit what i love it bro i'm dead serious i know you are that's why i love it i love it man but guys we do appreciate you guys the ones that are real not being the hoes we appreciate you guys all we know they're hot pocket mom now i know this time now i know the defense i'll tell deutsche bank that andy has underestimated his lowered it down for people bro i love it man guys keep being real ass fans we appreciate bro i try not to demoralize people like i don't want people to look at shit and be like fuck i could never have like have it no you can't do it yes exactly you know, winners are inspired by that shit. Losers become haters. That's reality.

People who hate, bro, they hate themselves. That's what we're mad at. No, it's a literal statement. If you hate on someone else, you're hating yourself. Because what you're telling God and what you're telling the world is, I don't like winning. And that means you're never going to get it. So remember, when you hate on someone and you talk shit on someone if you even think bullshit about someone that's winning that's just hating on yourself because you'll never win you'll know you're putting out the wrong energy you're

putting out the wrong vibes and what you're saying is i don't like winning i don't want winning and winning will never come to you it's real shit man so when you hate you're hating yourself bro love it love it man well guys let's get back into our headlines headline number two now uh we're not beating dead horses here all right but there's some developments here we got to cover it um and there's also some interesting backstory on why this story is coming out so we covered last show i believe about uh what's going on in china right kids are getting sick i don't know have you been seeing that? Well, this headline reads mystery wave of pneumonia hits America. They're saying that it's here. Ohio County records one hundred and forty two cases of white lung syndrome,

which says which it says meets the definition of an outbreak as China and Europe grapple with crisis. Like I said, we cover this. We also covered, you know, if you guys do some research, you will go back to October, I believe, 23rd of 2022, where they ran a second tabletop experiment where they planned out something just like this. Now, I was like, why did this headline come out? Why this article, right? Why now, right?

And it took me a couple of minutes. And then I found this headline. Fauci set to be grilled by House GOP majority for first time. Oh, that's why. What's the distraction? And I think that's the important thing to remember here, guys. There's always this shale game they try to play. Look over here. Don't look over here. And we like to expose it here. Here we lay up. So let's dive into this.

So Dr. Anthony Fauci is facing the House GOP majority for the first time in a marathon two day session behind closed doors to discuss the U.S. government's handling of COVID-19. Fauci, the former long-term director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, will be interviewed by the House Oversight Committee's select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic. It is taking place across two days on January 8th and 9th, which each day set to last seven hours without accounting for breaks. The committee announced on Thursday. Fauci also agreed to public to testify in a public hearing at a later date. The community said the immunologist was the most public facing federal health official during the COVID-19 pandemic under both the Trump and Biden administrations. President Biden ended up elevating Fauci to his top medical advisor position

he left when he left his other role at the end of 2022. He ended up taking a large share of blame for the negative impact on the public health measure at the time, with his endorsement of lockdowns and school closures since being blamed for significant learning loss among students across the United States. And that's just, that's not. That's being easy.

That's being very, very nice. Chairman Brad Winstrup out of Ohio said Fauci's testimony was critical to his panel's investigation on the origin of COVID-19, coercive mandates, gain-of-function type research, scientific censorship and more. Quote, It is time for Dr. Fauci to confront the facts and address the numerous controversies that have arisen during and after the pandemic. Winstrup said in a statement, quote, Americans deserve trusted public health leaders who prioritize the well-being of our people over any personal or political gains. And at the same time, they're trying to run this fear tactic of this new outbreak. As we were just talking about, our good buddy Eric Schmidt, he's back in it. Republican Senator Eric Schmidt vows to end COVID tyranny of CDC and NIH. So he's getting a bill together that he's about to get passed. Senator Eric Schmidt introduced a bill Thursday that would give Congress

greater oversight of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the CDC, and the National Institutes of Health following the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a copy of the measure exclusively obtained by the Post. The bill, known as the, quote, End COVID Tyranny Act, would mandate congressional appointment and term limits for the directors of both agencies, as well as require a majority vote by both chambers to approve a public health emergency lasting longer than 90 days. Guys, Andy, what do we got on this?

Look, man, I think we need to be a lot more aggressive. I think these people ruined lives aggressive i think these people ruin lives i think these people cause deaths i think these people coordinated things that you know created the destruction of many american families not just their family uh businesses but also their lives have ruined uh you know they've ruined the lives of millions of people and they did it in my opinion, for reasons that had nothing to do with health and everything to do with control.

And I think anybody who's been paying attention for the last few years can see that. And so to like continue to, you know, pretend like these guys were acting in any regard with the health of the general public in mind is an absurdity. And I think we need politicians, including Eric Schmidt, to get a little bit more aggressive, maybe a lot more aggressive,

and actually holding people accountable that committed these crimes. There were real consequences to them. People actually died. As you noted a minute ago, there were people, many people, who didn't take ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine. Strictly on the base of the narrative that they were spinning. Our own federal agencies, the FDA put out a tweet with a picture of a horse that made fun of anybody that actually took this. Okay. And we have now come to realize that guess

what? It is actually effective. And what's happening is no one has actually tied together the idea that the reason that they wouldn't allow discussion of effective therapeutics is because they actually would have had to end their emergency order. So if they would have had to end their emergency order, they would have lost control and lost their ability to do a lot of the things that they did. And so when we think about why they did what they did, it had nothing to do with health. It had everything to do with control, manipulation of an election, and the manipulation and wealth transfer from the middle class to the upper class. And that's reality. They need a very dependent population to create a universal basic income type society where people are dependent on the government, where they continue to vote.

These guys have figured out that people will vote for the free shit. It started back with Obama with his free cell phone. Okay. Obama campaigned on giving a free cell phone out to a whole bunch of people and it fucking worked. All right. So we have a society that is literally willing to give up their fucking freedoms for a guaranteed check from the government.

And they're forcing the hand of businesses by creating scenarios where people have to close their businesses or people actually get fired and when we talk about you know all these people that got fired for not taking the shot that was part of that you know like we're this happened a lot of military bro this is this is part this is all a play to create a dependency class and to get people, enough of those people on one side of the situation where they continue to vote for these people. This is their play. And we're in a situation now where, you know, these people are not being held accountable and we're in danger of them doing it again. So until these people are literally fucking hung they will continue to do

the shit over it again and i'm tired of politicians pussyfooting around the issue that's my opinion what should i take on the code dude this dude should be on the end of a fucking spike you know there's a couple of things this to me is you look at throughout our history, the government is always growing. And it's always finding ways to creep more and more into our lives. And what was intended to originally be as a relatively limited government has instead become very overwhelming. And every time that there is a situation like this, that they can use that to further their own power, they do that. You know, one thing that when you talk about how bad all these measures were, you know, something that I deal with, you know, relatively frequently

is in DOD. When they had the COVID vax mandate, which was clearly erroneous, and they kicked out all these people. They did terrible things to their records to try and get rid of anybody who wouldn't comply. And I don't know if you saw this, but not only are we now, they're now opening up, reversing all of those bad discharges. But the Army's actually sent out letters saying, we missed our recruiting goals, so here's the process to reverse your discharge

and please see a recruiter because we'd like you back. Why do they like you back? Why do they want you back? Because they lost so many people and they've missed all their recruiting goals. Now they can't get the mission done. It's not the mission, bro. They, they're going to send me,

listen, they don't have enough warriors anymore. Yeah. They fucking kicked out all the warriors. Warriors have a mentality and it has a certain level of fuck you to it. Right. Right. Okay.

And they went, I'm musking there. Yeah, exactly. And so they took all their fucking warriors, bro. And, and,

and send them out of the military because they wanted a compliant military okay and now we're in danger of actually being in a real war and they need them back and that's the problem so and most of these dudes aren't going back so well that's the problem is you kick them out and they have to find a way to you know to restart their lives in a different way. And so they get into business and they get new jobs. And so how many of them are going to say, okay, yeah. Bro, if you really want them back, take some of this money that you're sending over to fucking Ukraine and offer them a year extra salary as a bonus to rejoin.

They won't do that shit, though. I mean, so much of it. Three years of fucking salary. Something. Yeah, so much of it for veterans, you know, our relationship with the military is kind of like, you know, a romantic relationship where it's, you know, battered wife syndrome, and no matter how bad they abuse you, you keep going back

because the Navy really does love me. Yeah. And, you know, but the reality is here, you know, the DOD broke up with them, you know, broke their heart and said, you know, we don't want you anymore. And now it's like, you know, I know I abused you, but please come back. Yeah. Well, see how I see that and I see this from a different perspective than most people. I look at it as, okay, if I'm trying to do some very evil shit as a government, I can't have my people in the military not going along with what I'm doing. So how do I get the people who would be the least compliant out of my system so that I

can now do what I need to do and get the full support of our military behind it? Yeah. And that's how I see what's been going on. No, that is. I don't see it. The problem is they took it too far because now they have people who are compliant but are not capable to do the correct and guess who guess where all the capable warriors are oh they're on the side of the fucking people where they should be they fucked up with that i think they did too man yeah bad

chess move because they're stupid i don't think they expected that many people to hold firm i think that they expected everybody to well, you guys are welcome for that. Yeah. I feel like a very common response was like, hey man, listen, I took the anthrax stuff. We're guinea pigs. Everybody's got it. No big deal, right? But it's just like, yeah, I get that, but this is different.

And there was a lot of people that stood up and was like, yeah, no, we're not doing it. I'm not doing it. It's it's unfortunate i just feel like too there's so much time has passed since those discharges because that was what 2020 2021 is mostly 21 yeah 21 when it got going like heavy like bro you told me it was all it was all 21 because the mandates didn't come in until after trump left exactly exactly so it was all 21, 22. Yeah, but I mean, so we're talking two years? Yeah.

I mean, fuck. Again, like you said, the business has been started. They've moved on with their lives, and now you're trying to, now I got to stop all of this shit to come back and do what? I can see a lot of people saying, all right, I'll come back in the reserves, but I can't give up my job.

I've restarted my life over here. Yeah, I don't think they wanted people in the... Look, dude, I fully believe, I fully believe in my heart that these people planned, like you said, Tim, on very little resistance, very little. And I believe that their plan for the very little resistance

was to remove those people from society completely. And if you look at what they did with the Vax mandates, the pressure they put on private institutions, you know, they were threatening to sue companies like mine who wouldn't enforce and make, I'm not making my employees take this shit. There's no fucking way. And they were threatening companies like mine with fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars per employee. So like when we're talking about what they were trying to do they i totally agree they did not count on the level of resistance that actually occurred and i

think their plan their plan was to take the people who resisted the small amount and put them into fucking fema camps or dispose of them in some way and they needed a compliant military to do the orders and enough of the military said no. Like, bro, why was the state of Washington building COVID camps? Why were they building camps in Australia? You know, like, dude, we were this close. Like, had there not been the resistance that actually occurred, we were fucking this close to a large part of the most,

the strongest, most resistant citizens in every single country on the planet being killed, being killed. And that would make slaves out of everybody else. So that's how I see it. And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty good at recognizing patterns. And why would you want a more compliant military? Why would you need a more compliant military to blindly follow orders? The only reason you would need that is if you were going to do something that required blind obedience. And what kind of thing would require blind obedience? Doing something that was inherently evil that everybody had disagreed with. And so I think the fact that there was resistance literally saved the world.

Because, dude, if they would have eliminated the people who were resisting those are your fighters those are your warriors those are people with backbone the rest of you motherfuckers would have been slaves forever and i think they're going to try it again that's my opinion that's what it looks like man it's looking like it that's my opinion but i got tinfoil hat right here real nice one so maybe i'm fucking wrong i always think, if I were the enemy, what would I do? If I were them, what would I do? If I wanted total control, how would I do it? If I wanted to create a situation where I wasn't having resistance, how would I remove the resistors? Right? How would you do it? Well, if you were only planning on 1% of the people saying, no, I'm not doing it, you could get

everybody else to go along with that. Remember the language they were using? Remember Trudeau saying on TV, I don't know what we're going to do with these people. What do we do with these people? That's genocidal language. That's saying, we have no other way. This is the way.

Lori Lightfoot, Chicago. Yes. Like, bro, this is, the plan they had was much worse than what actually unrolled, in my opinion. Yeah. Guys, tell us what you guys think. Jump in on this conversation, down in the comments, hashtag Finding Fauci. Let us know what you guys think.

With that being said, let's get to our third and final headline, guys. Headline number three. Again, we touched on it a little bit, but new information has come out. Let's talk about it. The headline reads, thousands of fake Facebook accounts shut down by Meta were primed to polarize voters ahead of 2024. This is a big deal. This is a big, big, big deal.

And nobody's talking about it. So let's talk about it. This is an big, big, big deal. And nobody's talking about it. So let's talk about it. This is an AP News article. It reads, someone in China created thousands of fake social media accounts designed to appear to be from Americans and used them to spread polarizing political content in an apparent effort to divide the U.S. ahead of its next year's elections. Meta said Thursday. The network of nearly 4,800 fake accounts was attempting to build an audience when it was identified and eliminated by the tech company which owns Facebook and Instagram. The accounts sported fake photos, names, and locations as a way to appear like everyday American Facebook users weighing in on political issues. Instead of spreading fake content as other networks have done,

the accounts were used to reshare posts from X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, that were created by politicians, news outlets, and others. The interconnected accounts pulled content from both liberal and conservative sources, an indication that its goal was not to support one side or the other, but to exaggerate partisan divisions and further inflame polarization. The newly identified network shows how Americans' foreign adversaries exploit U.S.-based tech platforms to sow discord and distrust, and it hints at the serious threats posed by online disinformation next year

when national elections will occur in the U.S., India, Mexico, Ukraine, Pakistan, Taiwan. They're not going to exist in Ukraine. They've already canceled their elections. No, Ukraine's done. Yeah. And other nations. Quote, these networks still struggle to build audiences, but they're a warning, said Ben Nemo, who leads investigations into inauthentic behavior on Meta's platforms. Quote, foreign threat actors are attempting to reach people across the Internet network to the Chinese government, but it did determine the network originated in that country.

The content spread by the accounts broadly complements other Chinese government propaganda and disinformation that has sought to inflate partisan and ideological divisions within the United States. And while this is happening, right, it's all about what's happening in the background. And I think the important, the reason I have these articles here is because people should be aware, America is weak right now, right? We're weak fundamentally, physically, financially. America's military is weak. Yeah, we're weak right now, right? I mean, we got citizens that are demoralized. And the thing is, is that we see it internally, but other people see it. Other countries are seeing that and they're acting on those weaknesses. Right. So the second context headline I have in here as well, as this is all coming out, this headline comes out.

Federal government investigating multiple hacks of U.S. water utilities. So this just came out out the federal government is investigating multiple hacks suspected to have been launched by an Iranian government linked cyber group against US water facilities that were using Israeli made technology year ago they would say Russia linked government like yeah right with you Ukrainian water facility yes according to the two individuals familiar with the probes, one of the branches made headlines Saturday after the Tehran-linked Cyber Avengers group claimed responsibility for hitting a water authority in Pennsylvania.

In total, the government is aware of and examining, quote, single-digit number of facilities that have been affected across the country, according to the two people who were granted anonymity to discuss details, they had not yet been made public. None of the hacks cause significant disruption. According to the individuals, while cyber experts familiar with the Pennsylvania incident say the activity appears designed to stoke fears about using Israeli devices.

What do we got on this, guys? Okay. Here's what I got. Their fucking billboard says, One Hacker Away. That's meta, yeah. All right. So let's talk this through.

A year ago, it was Russia that was doing all this shit. Okay? Now who is it? China. Oh, no, it's Iran. Oh doing all this shit. Okay? Now who is it? China. Oh, no, it's Iran. Oh, yeah, Iran. It's China. And it's always the people that they tell us are our mortal enemies.

And I'm just saying, I'm not sure I believe that shit at all. Okay? That's where I'm coming from. I think there's a high probability that members of our own government who want to create support for certain situations are willing to literally damage the infrastructure of the United States or do certain things to create that support. And so I don't think that's out of the realm of possibilities. I don't think that's unreasonable to consider after what we've witnessed. So when I see news like this, I always look at it from, okay, yeah, it could be Iran. It could be Russia.

It could be this. It could be that. It could also be our own people doing it to gain support, to create a war so that they make a lot of money and get what they're trying to get. And it's hard to tell because these people are all fucking lying and they've lied so much that we can't figure out what's truth and what's actually not truth. So when I look at what's going on,

I see multiple scenarios of what the truth could be, and I don't think any of them are in that article. That's what I think. Tim, what do you got? You know, a lot of this, you know, I look at the time that I spent doing the January 6th investigations know, thinks that that there was fraud to help Joe Biden. And really, if you take a step back from it and look at it, you know, what do our enemies want? They want destabilization. And by the way, the Chinese wrote this down.

They wrote it down hundreds of years ago. Sun Tzu's The Art of War. And it says it right in there about destabilizing the enemy to win the fight before you have to enter the battlefield. And the ideal thing would be for one election to think that it had been destabilized with one political party complicit with a foreign government to commit fraud and steal the election one way, and then four years later to do it the exact opposite way. And so, you know, it was interesting to me where it talks about how this Chinese group, you know, wasn't really necessarily supporting one party or the other, that the goal is simply destabilization, because that's what I see. And when I look at a lot of the things, you know, in 2020,

I have no idea whether there was fraud in that election, whether the outcome was real or not. And the reason for that is because I've never seen a full and complete investigation either direction on that. What I have seen is that the people that were doing this at the time saw indicators that they believed would show that there was fraud and that they pursued those leads and that they were stymied from being able to fully investigate those because of time, resources. And so they went to DOJ and they asked them and the state agencies to take it over and they refused. And so there wasn't really that full investigation of whether there was fraud or not, of course, leading up to, you know, then January 6th.

But if you're a foreign government, if I'm China, I don't actually have to swing the election for Joe Biden. All I have to do is manipulate some of the public data so the people on the right think that there's been fraud. And in fact, the most brilliant thing China could have done in 2020 was to make the Trump side believe that fraud had been committed without Chinese fingerprints on it and instead so that they start blaming the Democrats. And so you have both sides, you know, continuing to fight one another, which causes that destabilization, which makes us much easier to, you know, to conquer from the outside.

And then when you add on top of that what we were just talking about with DOD getting rid of all the best warriors with, you know, with COVID vax mandates. Doesn't this all really fit perfectly into the Chinese playbook that they've been following for hundreds of years? Well, doesn't it fit perfectly that we have a commander in chief that is under investigation for taking funds on behalf of China for certain political favors, and the fact that since that man has been in office, he has drained our strategic oil reserves, he has left a large percentage of our military equipment in Europe, he has created an invasion crisis at our southern border, and he's instigated crime to run rapid in the inner cities of this country,

et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, etc etc etc we could go down the list so isn't it convenient that we also have a president who has you know allegedly by the data that's been been shown that he is taking money from other countries and pay-for-play schemes doing these things that make our country weaker, what does that actually mean? Well, that means is the people who are at the top of our country are actually fucking traitors, okay? And they're selling the American people down the drain by making us literally setting us up on a platter for us to be conquered.

So, like, doesn't that make sense with that same strategy? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, so like- Because that's also part of the Chinese strategy is if they can then infiltrate our people and have some of our high government officials, Eric Swalwell is a good example. Zhang Feng.

Yeah, exactly. She was killed in a plane crash. I saw that. It went unreported. I saw that. It went unreported. I saw that. Interesting. Very interesting. You know, it's, all of this is consistent with what their playbook is.

And it's all about creating division. And then if you can also bribe some government officials and get some, you know, get some people at the top that are beholden to them then it just makes it all the much easier so you know to to me yeah i i certainly respect how you look at it and you say this looks like it could be our own people well that's that's what i look at it and i say this all very clearly it could be our own people doing it for the benefit of money that they've been paid yeah absolutely so we're both kind of agreeing oh yeah i agree with you i mean the division that's been created is is insanity yeah like and i can remember saying many times three four years ago like hey other countries don't look at us as black and white and asian and american indian and all these things they look at us as the united states of america right and we're over here arguing over the color of the pigment in our fucking skin when they're licking their chops to come over and kill all of us that doesn't make

any fucking sense yeah because that's how brother opportunists that's how i see it no i mean dude we're giving all the opportunities tip what tim is saying is correct like this has been a thousand year plan for them and they this we're not the first country this has happened to no we just happen to have the most important people in our office in our media and some of the most powerful discourse platforms going along with it to create it for money which bro think about that what is that what is that called what is that called when someone takes money and sells out their countrymen what is that called that used to be punishable by death.

Sedition? Treason. Yeah, that's treason, dude. Well, it's a group. Back in the day. Back in the day. Individuals can commit treason. Benedict Arnold.

No, I'm saying, but if it's a group, it's called sedition, right? Sedition is when you're trying to overthrow your own government. Gotcha. I mean, they saw the fucking election. It might be. Yeah, treason is where you're trying to get. Well well how do you have sedition okay here's a question i have yeah so how do you have sedition wait are these billable hours no no this is a real question so where is the line with sedition when our own constitution says that our citizens have a duty to remove corrupt officials from office due process in what way the due process would be the issue is that we where the law sees the difference is in removing those corrupt public officials through

impeachment indictment etc versus you know the the armed mob with uh you know with tiki torches yeah but if the armed mob wins then there's nobody to accuse you of sedition yeah see that was all my always my problem it's absurd who defines corruption the people who win that's what i'm saying yeah but the problem that's the only reason they were able to say j6 was wrong dude history. History is always written by the winners. Yeah. How different is that from what we did to the British? Right.

You know? Right. The difference is we won. They say we did a coup. Right. Look, bro. We say fucking two. Here's the problem I see with it.

This is amazing. When I saw that, you probably saw all the release footage that just came out for January 6th where the guys were fist bumping and all that stuff. Undercover agents taking their badges out. What's your take on that? January 6th was such a politicized event that we've lost sight of a lot of the facts. You know, there was a lot of bad behavior on that day, but at the same time, there were a lot of people that are in jail right now that I don't think, you know, were really engaged in bad behavior. You know, when I saw some of these videos, people look like they were, you know, they were tourists, you know, the cops are

opening the doors, they're walking in, they're looking around. And I personally believe that a large percentage of those people probably thought, you know what? I just watched a whole bunch of people disrupt the Kavanaugh hearings. They go into the hearing, they make their voices heard, the Capitol Police drags them out, puts them back out on the street, and they have exercised their First Amendment rights and they move on. And I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of those people walk up, see the cops opening the doors, and think that they're going to do the exact same thing. They're going to go in. They're going to make their voices heard. They're going to say, you know, we don't agree with you certifying this election unless you investigate the fraud. The Capitol Police will escort them out. And then that's going to

be the end of the day. Not that they're going to be charged with all this stuff and go to jail for 10 years. Yes, there were some bad actors there. There were definitely a smaller group that had had darker designs. But to try to take that same brush and paint them all with it is not accurate. And it always drives me nuts when they call it an insurrection because insurrection is in the U.S. criminal code. And nobody's been charged with it. And so how can you possibly call that an insurrection

how can you call it an insurrection when we have literally more guns in the citizenship of the united states than almost every other military has in their fucking armies combined and nobody brought them to the insurrection right the fuck out of here yeah okay combine that with the fact that they wanted to disrupt they wanted to disrupt the proceeding because they did not believe that the elected officials were taking into account the the will of their electorate correct of their constituencies and so they wanted to make their voices heard you know that i understand, you know, but that's not a crime. Oh, dude. Also, let's be fucking real. Okay.

What better way? And this is my own opinion. But what better way if you actually did manipulate an election to deflect the attention from the manipulated election than to create an insurrection that wasn't actually an insurrection and then take the insurrection and prosecute the former president for the insurrection that was actually created by bad actors inside the fact that there were any three-letter agents or any sort of police dressed up as that should mean everybody is fucking out of jail it's in trouble and here's the other piece of it i don't know what it is legally but dude it's wrong it's entrapment here's the other piece of it is when you come down so hard on these people let's say that there is claims of fraud in the next election

who's gonna go down to the capitol and protest like dude we're talking about real shit okay like these guys are making that i agree with you. The entire part of prosecuting all these people was to create a situation where people are intimidated to show public disapproval of what's actually going on. So how many protests, where are the patriotic Americans? Where are the fucking red, white, and blue, 4th of July, hot dog grill and beer drinking motherfucking men Americans? They're there. They didn't disappear.

They're all out there. They all listen to this show. They fucking, they know what's going on, but they're quiet and they're under the fucking ripples of the water. Why? Because they want that people to be quiet because they know that those voices matter. So they don't want people speaking up or standing up or going out and protesting that are patriotic Americans because it shows the amount of fucking fraud and where the public actually stands. Okay.

When you see, I don't know how many people were at J6, bro. It was a million people, wasn't it? There were a lot. Yeah. wasn't it there were a lot yeah when you see a million people with american flags like that look like regular everyday americans who are all and by the way they're some of the coolest people on the planet they're not domestic terrorists these are just fucking people that love america man and they're all out there together and everything like they don't want that because when you see that it inspires more people to join that to do that yes so dude this is a societal cultural manipulation and and here's the problem

that i have with it now they're using this insurrection quote unquote that they planted people in to create a scenario where they're prosecuting Donald Trump on a situation they created. So what better way to get what they're trying to get, which is the maintain power, than to rig an election, run a fake fucking insurrection, then prosecute the dude who they say is responsible for it. You see what I'm saying? And then, by by the way scare everybody who has any thread of patriotic blood in their system from saying shit or doing shit and then

bro remember no dude and use that to have states take him off the ballot so we can't run again the next that's all being rejected from that's being but yeah as you just put up earlier, they are denying him the ability to subpoena for the full files. Exactly. So it'll never be found. It'll never be found. No, it will be found. It just won't be found until these people are out. Dude, this is insane what's happening.

This is historic times. This is real. And I agree with you, man. The biggest part of J6 was to intimidate the patriotic American into silence. They did it peacefully with the branding of silent majority before that, right? Like, that's a cultural movement that they intentionally create. It's not, like, they want people to say, oh, man, I'm part of the silent majority. Bro, there's no nobility in that.

Like, that means you're a fucking pussy, okay? Silence equals we don't get what we want ever that's what it equals and they know that so they branded this p this this big swath of americans as the silent majority okay i don't have to speak up i don't have because i'm in the majority and we're gonna win anyway you know it's funny because i see that regularly the you know the silent majority where you know people come up to me in the gym and you know i live right outside of washington dc people come up to me in the gym look around i love what you're doing yeah exactly i know exactly they do it all the time i know bro i get it everywhere i can't do what you do but man it's awesome what you're doing yeah i'm looking at this motherfucker i'm like bro you got no fucking backbone where's your fucking dick and balls you know i'm saying you're wearing. And I'm looking at this motherfucker. I'm like, bro, you got no fucking backbone.

Where's your fucking dick and balls? You know what I'm saying? Are you wearing your wife's tampon right now? Like, real talk. Like, are you fucking, what the fuck is wrong with you? What do you mean you can't speak up? What do you mean you can't join in? What do you mean you can't share the message?

What do you mean? That's why we're losing. You'll know when an insurrection happens, bro, because a million people will show up with weapons and kid it out and like it'll be Real shit. That'll be a real insurrection. No that's a real insurrection an insurrection is not a bunch of patriotic people who feel like Something bad is happening in their country and they get invited into a fucking Building with the police standing right there. So hey, come on in man. Yeah, but the thing is the people that will

the freedom-loving Americans aren't going to want to do that because the reality is they want the constitutional system that we have. Right. They just want to be enforced. Right. The people that want to overthrow our constitutional system are not going to be the ones showing up with guns. Yeah. But they're going to be the ones scattering the moment that there's a counteroffensive. Yeah. Listen, dude, here's my opinion,

and Greitens is of the same opinion. There's no going back. You guys think we're going to go back to 2019 or 2018 or 2005. It ain't fucking happening. We're going to have to look at what's happening we're gonna have to rebuild forward it has to be new creation there has to be and by the way that could be just creating a system that enforces the rules that were laid out 247 years ago okay but the reality is is those rules have been highly diluted and highly compromised and we are way far away

from what our founding fathers and what this country was supposed to be about and for us to get back to that it's going to take something there's no magic to this like it's going to take action and when i mean action i don't mean violence what i mean though is everybody participating in the public rally to push us back into the boundaries of what this country is supposed to be and that's something that not enough people understand that they have a role in that every single day. They have a role in that and what they say, how they live, what their standards are, how they behave in their community, how they behave at their job, how they run their companies.

It's the personal excellence is the ultimate rebellion. Because when we, from a cultural standpoint, demand that the government get back in the rails of the constitution through through our voices it will eventually happen if the voices are strong enough it won't require violence like a lot of people want but the reality is is if people don't join in what we'll get is violence and it won't be us bringing it to them it'll be them bringing it to us and that's what people should be afraid of you know what they fear more than a violent insurrection is that the next primary will get rid of every incumbent yeah well it should happen every single one that right both sides yeah absolutely yeah that would be a a much more effective revolution yes is if both sides

vote out every incumbent and we put new blood in bingo yeah you do that that's that's a but the problem becomes and legal revolution the problem becomes brother is that a lot of people don't believe the elections are real anymore so a lot of people are like well fuck we can vote our way to what you know what i'm saying yeah i agree with you though that is what needs to happen along with the realignment of culture to a to a higher standard of living citizens understanding that hey man we have an obligation to live a certain way here certain things happen here certain things are not okay here it's not okay for a grown man to dress up as a woman to shake his dick in front

of kids we're not going to tolerate that okay it's not okay for our own government to send uh all of our military equipment to europe and. Okay. It's not okay for our own government to send all of our military equipment to Europe and leave it there. It's not okay for our government to send our grown men to war every generation because they want to thin out the herd of strong, capable, independent, free thinking warriors. It's not okay for them to leave the border open where millions and millions and millions of people who shouldn't be here come here. Like these things are not acceptable. Crime's not acceptable. And that's a cultural non-acceptance. That's you as a listener and you as a citizen saying this is unacceptable to me in open, in front of your friends, and not fucking apologizing for it.

And then living the way that you think an american is supposed to live like when they're when i was a kid dude and when you were a kid there was things where like you just knew what you could and couldn't do like bro if you did if you behaved a certain way bro your neighbor might come out of his house smack the shit out of you you know what i'm saying like bro you you you stomp on an american flag like when i was a kid, bro, your neighbor who served Vietnam come kick your fucking ass. You're 12 years old. Real talk. And nobody said shit because everybody said you deserved it.

I'll tell you another way at the risk of opening a real can of worms, another way to fix it is just to break up the two political parties. If you got rid of those political parties and allowed Americans to realign based on their actual values instead of what the parties demand. I mean, people always, you know, they call me, you know, I love it when they say, oh, you're a Republican lawyer. I'm like, oh, no, no. Yeah. I don't identify with any. I don't either. I don't either. I think it's dangerous. Right. I don't agree with everything that either party says, you know, and some things I agree with. On some things I agree with one, on some things I agree with another. And so therefore, I refuse to identify with either party. And I think that the best way to resolve a lot of these things

would be to break up those two parties and realign based on what Americans' actual values are. And I mean, the idea that these two parties are monoliths, that they can never be broken, is silly. I mean, how many different political parties have we had throughout the history of this country? Lots. Exactly.

It has not always been these two. What about this? It's always been two major, but it's not always been these two. What about part of the responsibility of a responsible citizen of this country being not to make their identity with a political party? That's the cultural side of it that's right these the media and these people have been so good at convincing

people you have to be this or that right you're either on that team or you're on this team and the real team is us the people versus them the fucking tyrants right that's the teams okay and and and we have to get to a point where we as citizens cannot say i'm a republican because that's saying i blindly agree with what the republicans do and i don't love it yeah and you don't and most people don't either most people are actually in the middle right most people are in the middle they have some more liberal views and they have some more conservative views and those those vary amongst where people come from or what they've been around or their social environment or where they're geographically

located or their life experience and we have to get back to as individuals voting for people who represent what it is that we believe and not saying oh well that guy's an r or that guy's a d and that's why we vote. Part of the problem is people go in, and they go right down one side of the ticket, and they walk the fuck out. They have no idea what those people stand for, and that's a majority of voters.

That's a problem. Yeah, it's a big problem. I think that's a valid point, dude. Guys, jump in on this conversation. Let us know down in the comments what you guys think. Hashtag shaking the jar. Let us know um so that was our third and final headline it's time for our final segment of the show as always we have thumbs up or dumb as fuck this is where we bring a headline up it'll get one of those two uh options uh so with that being said our thumbs up or dumb as

fuck headline reads cardinals linebacker jesse lakita scores ride to Sunday's game with Phoenix family after blowing a tire. And he's rewarding them with tickets. I thought this was a cool little story. So the Arizona Cardinals' Jesse Laquita got a free ride to his Week 12 game against the Los Angeles Rams and made a few friends along the way on what could have been disastrous Sunday for the special teams player. Lakita, a 24 year old Canadian had only 30 minutes remaining in his drive to state farm stadium in Glendale. When he blew a tire,

he told azfamily.com. He stopped at a North Phoenix gas station and tried to pump air back into it. But when that failed, he started considering his options pressed to make it in time for pregame warmups. Lakita approached the family, all dressed in Cardinals jerseys and asked for a ride. Here's the video.

That's awesome. So, honestly, I left the team hotel reasonably early. I think I'm going to make it to the stadium, get there, warm up. And I'm hitting the highway. All of a sudden, I get a notification, tire issue. So, I'm like, all right, cool. I think it's a situation where I can put some air, make it to the gas station. It wasn't working.

So as I'm sitting there, I look to my right. I see a family. They're in Cardinals gear. It looks like they're going to the stadium. So I'm like, I have absolutely nothing to lose. I pull my window down. I just yell out, you guys going to the stadium? He looks at me a little crazy.

I'm like, he's like, yeah. I'm like, I'm a player. I got a flat tire can you guys help me out i need a ride to the stadium walks back to the car talks to his wife he's like heck yeah come on and uh they got me there on time had a blast talking talking to his kids the whole the whole way there and he got me there on time and you know that's all she wrote that's awesome yeah so uh the article continues it, although large at 6'3 and 252 pounds, LaKeita did not initially come off as an NFL player.

Quote, at first they didn't believe I was a player, and I was like, yeah, I'm a player. I need to get to the stadium. The Phillips family made room in its car for him. The Phillipses were able to watch their new friend make a tackle and recover a fumble during their 37-14 loss to the Rams. And to show his appreciation, Laquita's giving the family tickets to the Cardinals' December 17th home

game against the San Francisco 49ers. What we got on this, guys? This thumbs up? It's dumb as fuck. What we got? I love it. I do, too. My wife would have Googled them first to make sure it was real. I'll guarantee you that's what they did. I was like, nah, I'm trying to ride me.

I guarantee you,'s what they did. I was like, no, I'm trying to ride me. I guarantee you, bro, they checked him out. That's awesome, though. I thought that was pretty cool. I thought it was real cool. Yeah, good people still exist. Yeah, dude, most people are good people. That's the point. Most people are like that.

Most people are great people that actually give a fuck about other people and want to do the right thing. And we've been made to believe and conditioned to believe and propagated to believe that's not the truth, and that is the truth. And we have to remember that. Yeah, absolutely. I love this, dude.

Yeah, absolutely. You got thumbs up around the room? Yeah, for sure. All right, sweet, man. Well, guys, Andy, too, that's all I got. Yeah, Tim, thanks for coming on the show, man. Thank you. It's been great.

I really enjoyed your insights. I think you provide a more reasonable take than I might have. But I appreciate it because I know you're a very, very, very intelligent, experienced man. So thanks for bringing that perspective to the show. Thank you for having me. Really cool, man. All right, guys. That's the show.

Don't be a hoe. Share the show. Yeah. Went from sleeping on the floor. Now my jewelry box froze. Fuck a pole. Fuck a stove. Counted millions in the cold. Bad bitch. Booted swole. Got her on the floor. Now my jewelry box froze. Fuck a bowl, fuck a stove. Counted millions

in the cold. Bad bitch, booted swole. Got her on bankroll. Can't fold, that's a no. Headshot, case closed.