The Prepper Broadcasting Network - The Rising Republic - Its a Sham

Episode Date: June 12, 2024

@PBNLinks | Linktree

I don't want to set the world I just don't even know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be. To chase, at least for a moment, Trump and the maggots off the stage. There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's a rest of our lives that's not a proper i think you need to go back and punch him in the face and i thought he should have been sent in the face you like punching him and i'd like to take it behind the camera fire in high school you're in high school i take you behind the gym and beat the hell out of him

i will go and take Trump out tonight. Take him out now. When was the last time an actor assassinated a president? They're still going to have to go out and put a bullet in Donald Trump. Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful. I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House. Please get up in the face of some Congress people. People will do what they do. I want to tell you, George Dutch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. We're going to go in here winning.

This is just a warning to you Trumpers. Be careful. Walk lightly. And for those of you who are soldiers, make them pay. We are your lizard overlords. Stop listening to these preppers. Eat your crickets. Fight in the streets.

Own nothing. And love it. streets. Own nothing and love. We are the Prepper Broadcasting Network. What's up, y'all? It's your boy, L. Douglas Hoganogan coming to you live from my compound deep within the crust of the core of the earth did i say that right deep below the crust of the earth near the core where everything is warm there's no rainbows there's no unicorns any such thing down here

man okay i got my deck done i'm fresh from vacation i got me a nice tan i'm ready to go with this um i come back and i see a world of craziness out there i mean i i mean things were already crazy let me adjust my microphone here the world was already going south like in a handbasket when i went on vacation before i kind of disconnect i came back once i think to do a quick show in the middle of my my deck project my 51 foot deck project yeah yeah that was time consuming and uh went to florida to the gulf coast uh went to fort walden uh destin some of that area and come back and man the uh tds is getting worse out there like the trump drangement syndrome it's swelling and it's driving people crazier and crazier and crazier. And I got to be honest with you, I wasn't watching a lot of the news during all this time, this, well, close to a month, two months almost now,

between the deck project and my vacation coming to an end. A lot happened out there with this Trump trial stuff. And I can't believe, I already knew, I already had no faith at all in the justice system i mean it's completely broken and uh i mean when you got a two-tiered system where the average person and anybody that the left hates they're held to a different standard than the elites and you know like the hollywood elites and the, you know, like the Hollywood elites and the liberal politicians and all those guys, those individuals, like they get away with anything, anything they

can cook anything. And, um, evidence is an important when it's about them, but evidence is important when it's about an opponent, let's say an opponent, uh opponent that's bidding on the White House position, the President of the United States, right? So the letter of the law is important when you're trying to bushwhack a former president and an opponent to the presidential seat. You know, Biden, he cares what the letter of the law is when it's concerning Trump being held accountable for a misdemeanor offense that happened 20 years ago when he paid hush money or when he had sex with a prostitute, Stormy Daniels or whatever her name is, and I guess paid her some hush money to be quiet and i mean who doesn't pay hush money out there i mean all the all the anybody gets anybody gets

into these positions pays people hush money because everybody's got a past that they're not they're not proud of everybody everybody has a past they're not proud of. And so that's all they could dig up on Trump. Really something that happened 20 years ago, a misdemeanor offense. And you want to put it in New York City, one of the most liberal states in this country, in one of the most liberal cities in this country, run by a DA who's one of the most liberal DAs in this country, with one of the most severe cases of TDS in this country, on trumped-up charges from 20 years ago.

And this is a recent development that I found out, that the judge actually told the jury that the verdict doesn't have to be unanimous. I thought that was mind blowing to me. And I'm also hearing that the judge and the DA's office were colluding on this case. And I guess they made the defense, they never told Trump, Trump's defense, what the charges were until the day of when they showed up and they made them go first, like speak first.

In any other court case in the entire United States, the prosecution goes first. The prosecution lays out the crimes. Here's the charges. Here's what you did. And then defense gets to go up then and lay out their alibis, lay out their defense, what have you.

But that didn't happen this time. They sent Trump's defense up first after just now finding out what the charges were to lay out what what what what his defenses were how fair is that like you go up there and you have to lay it all out no preparation time no details you don't get to talk to the witnesses you don't you know you see what i'm saying this is dirty politics and it's lawfare it's lawfare, a new term I've been hearing lately, lawfare, where the justice system is being rigged against political opponents

because they couldn't bring Trump down the past so many years. They couldn't bring Trump down. And so they're doing everything that they can, digging into the past to find misdemeanors, to rig them into a bogus trial, to make them into felony accounts, because you get something like that and then you stack it, right? You get a misdemeanor offense and then you stack it. And what they're saying is you stack these so many times and then you get a felony charge. stacked these so many times and then you get a felony charge and so that's what their their their whole plan was meanwhile um starting i guess now i guess it's going on um hunter biden's case for the unlawful purchase of a handgun it's getting ready to go down in delaware

which is apparently the state where where biden theens are from. And the rumor is that everybody in Delaware knows the Bidens. And there's a saying there, if you don't know the Bidens, are you even from Delaware? It's just interesting that in a liberal state where the Bidens are like their hometown, their home field. This case is going down. And a couple very interesting points to consider is mom, the first lady of the United States is there with Hunter Biden for the jury selection. And I guess they know some of the people in the jury. It's very interesting. And Biden, President Biden, is having a meeting with one of the key witnesses in this gun charge. Now, in that collusion, in that witness tampering, in that obstruction,

I mean, there's stuff there that would be all over the news. It would be like the left would be going nuts if Donald Trump did this. They'd be going absolutely nuts. And NBC reporting, what I'm about to tell you is coming from, I saw this on Jesse Waters on Fox News on the Jesse Waters show. NBC actually reported that, and again, the majority of all these people in this Hunter Biden case are all supposed to be jury of peers, right? Well, that's apparent in this. Listen to this.

One of the jurors, I'm just going to go through a list of jurors. One of the jurors had a childhood best friend that died from heroin overdose. Very interesting. Another one has a dead alcoholic brother-in-law. Very interesting. Another one's dad was shot dead and the brother was arrested for narcotics. Very interesting. Another one is a young man that was arrested for DUI. Very interesting. Another one is a young man that was arrested for DUI.

Very interesting. Another one's brother is a PCP addict and a heroin addict and believes that no guns should be for addicts. Okay, fair enough. But the next juror says weed is no biggie. Guns and marijuana is okay. Yet another juror says that she worked for the Secret Service and her husband is a current Secret Service member. And Ashley Biden likes that because she smirked and smiled at her when she heard that. And of course, an alternate juror is an Obama donor.

So there you go. There's your jury of peers. Those are the kind of people that Hunter Biden would have been hanging out with. Those are his peers. You see the problem here? See how this is rigged? Every single one of these people are sympathetic to Biden's case. They're all sympathetic to his addictions.

They're all sympathetic to the fact that he purchased a gun. They're all sympathetic to the fact that his dad is the president. And they're donors to liberal cause. There's issues here. And there's people, you know, that are saying, hey, this is not a, you know, this is a closed case. It's open and closed period. This is done. I don't buy it.

I'm very skeptical. I think that this is going to be rigged. I think that it's all a bunch of garbage and I don't really trust in nor do I have any faith in our justice system. But in other news, Kamala Harris has something very interesting to say here. Take a listen to this. And I have been fortunate and blessed during the course of being vice president, have many situations where it becomes clear to me that there are, you know, people of every age and gender, by the way, who see something about being the first that lets them know they don't need to be limited by other people's limited understanding of who can do what.

Do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth? Do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth? Oh, man. It sucks to be limited by other person's limitations of. I can't I can't. I can't even compute what she's trying to say here. And it's so mind boggling that I have trouble repeating what she's trying to say here. And it's so mind-boggling that I have trouble repeating what she's trying to say. But apparently it's noteworthy because she says it every time she speaks.

Limited by other person's limitations or limited by other person's uh thoughts on on limitations of what could be or something she's uh she's crazy and this is the person by the way who during all the riots that were happening not long ago while she was vice president remind you that was putting up bail money. And this is all a matter of fact. You can Google this. You can browse it.

You can pull up the videos on it. Paying bail money to get people who are arrested for street violence out of jail. You know? Apparently what Trump did is all his people, all his followers, all Trumpers, quote unquote Trumpers, should be arrested. Everybody that trespassed upon the Capitol building should be thrown in jail, right? Anybody that says anything anti-agenda,

anti-liberal, anti-Democrat, should be arrested. That's what they think. And here she is, literally, tossing bail money out, or at least abdicating for it, to get people out of jail who have committed crimes, actual crimes.

And remember when the fires were burning? It was mostly peaceful fire burning. Those are mostly peaceful here. Okay. If you say so, but don't worry. She's got a strong president that's backing her. And here's some liberal counterparts

sharing with us their view on president biden's intellect because remember he's very very sharp joe biden has vision he has knowledge he has a strategic thinker this is a very sharp president he is sharp uh He is on top of things. President Biden is strong. He exercises. He rides his bike. He's sharp mentally. He's pretty sharp. I know he's got a very good grasp of the issues. He is sharp, intensely probing and detail oriented and focused. Here's here's biden i guess i should clear my mind here a little bit and not say what i'm really thinking because he's not really thinking anything he's got a blank look on his face at every point of any question when somebody asks him it's like there's two or three different bidens actually and i don't know if you guys have noticed this. I do talk about conspiracy here and there.

There is videos out there of him pulling on mic cords and stuff that are in his ear. And when he does, he accidentally pulls on what looks like a mask or fake skin or something on the back of his neck or behind his ear around that area. And I don't know if this is a doppelganger a different person that's standing in for him or a cyborg uh you know i if it's if it's something to hide his his wrinkles uh his his goose gullet or whatever he's got going on down there but it's weird everything about this guy is weird you can have one person speaking um quite quite good charismatically one day and then the next day you got this blethering idiot that can't say can't put together one intelligible sentence it's like are we dealing with the same person here i know there's folks out there that think

he's already been set in a tribunal and he's already gone through the whole, he's already been tried and he's been put to death, all this other stuff. I don't buy all that craziness. If you do, fine. You do you, I do me, live and let live. I don't see the cause for all this stuff that's going on. If that were the case, then what's going on now with our country i don't think would be the case there's no reason to have him tried and have a fake person out there still destroying the country i mean why are you going to replace him with another with another bad person replace a

bad person the bad person and and continue to drive the country down so what so trump can come up and say look what uh the first bad joe biden So I had to put a second Joe Biden in there to play. It don't make sense. It doesn't make sense. So I don't really buy that. But, you know, it is what it is. Let's get back, sidetrack a little bit. Let's get back to this Trump case thing.

Because I think what we've done here is set a precedent. Because now that, and what we're talking about conspiracy is also, now that you have framed or talking about conspiracies also now that you have framed or not framed i don't care legitimate i don't care how you look at it you once you've prosecuted a former president for crimes or alleged crimes or or whatever remember he's he's still you may think that he's guilty you're not guilty that point doesn't matter right now what i'm trying to the point i'm trying to make is once you set the precedent that you can, that you can, that you can try and convict a former president, now you've opened a Pandora's box

because now you see, we have a treasonous president and keep in mind that the Democrats brought this on themselves and i have said in other shows i don't think there's ever going to be another republican president but if there is another republican president they have opened the the pandora's box now we can go back and we can get rid of we can we can drain the swamp so to speak, to quote a former president. Get rid of all the liberal and Democrat cabinet members. Replace them all with conservatives. We can write executive orders that's been happening.

It's unconstitutional, I know, but we've been doing it forever. To steamroll over some of these liberal activist judges, some of these liberal activist persons in the FBI and the Justice Department who a lot of them are not appointed, but to wash them out, perhaps. And then set up in the way that the Biden administration has and in the way that the Obama administration has, to put all your people in place to get whatever laws you want in place to enforce them. Because right now, what I'm seeing is potentially a red wave, right?

Because everybody is sick and tired of everything that's been going on. We have Democrats switching parties. I'm talking about, look at Mitch McConnell, for example. He's not a Democrat. Not Mitch McConnell, I'm sorry. Ah, brain fart. The rhino Republican is, by all means, definitely not right wing, but more moderate. And he's an anti-Trump person, actually, is talking about how this is a blow

to the political system. We have some big name politicians who are switching parties from Democrats to Republicans. We have a lot of people who have never been pro-Trumpers are now voting for Trump because of what's been going on here. It's been four days since the verdict, and Trump has already raised, what is it, $500 million or something like that? I'm going to have to double-check that. It might be $200 million. It's still a large sum in its record-breaking amount, whatever it was that was reported. And I saw that also on Jesse Waters when I was watching his show.

But yes, I want to say it's $500 million. That's a lot of money in his record-breaking amount of money to say that because of this, because what this Briggs character did, this da in new york city did he technically won trump the next election if i'm wrong and i hope i'm wrong about there never being another republican president ever again i hope i'm wrong about that if that if that's case then then this this briggs character you can thank him for doing this to trump and winning him the case. Because of that verdict, because of this bogus lawsuit, this sham trial, Trump broke record deals. He is now way, way ahead fiscally than the Democrats in this campaign.

And he's also been in a box, unable to campaign because they've had him tied up with a gag order, not able to talk because of this trial. But now this is over. He's going to be cut loose with $500 million just to get him started. And you've got very rich people joining forces to contribute to his cause. Elon Musk, one of them. And there's others who are, there's one lady, one billionaire who pledged $100 million to Trump by herself, just $100 million.

And there's others who are joining forces to do the same. So this is going to be very interesting. Very, very interesting. But I want to share with you this. This was on, Megyn Kelly rips apart the prosecution on this Trump case in New York City. And some very interesting points are brought out. She is not a Trumper by any stretch of the imagination. She does not like Trump.

She's never liked Trump. She's been very outspoken against Trump. But like other people who are against Trump, understands that this whole thing has been a sham. It's bogus. It's trumped up. It's all unfair. And it's a lawfare. So listen to this. And it's war. It's a lawfare.

So listen to this. This is, again, the Megyn Kelly show. This was Alvin Bragg right after he indicted Donald Trump. He came out and said, I'm indicting him for falsification of business records. People said that's a misdemeanor and the statute of limitations is expired. How can you bring that? He said, well, it becomes aemeanor and the statute of limitations is expired. How can you bring that? He said, well, it becomes a felony with a longer statute of limitations if it was done, the falsification, to cover up an underlying crime. Then the press asked the question we all had on our minds. What was the underlying crime? What was he?

What was he trying to cover up? And here is that moment. 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. 34 false statements made to cover up other crimes. And they were done to conceal another crime, but indictment does not specify what those crimes were, what laws were also used.

Indictment doesn't specify that because the law does not so require. I don't have to tell you. I don't have to tell you. It wasn't until closing arguments yesterday when the prosecution got up second, because under New York law, unlike in most places, the defense has to go first and the prosecution goes second. And after the defense attorney had already sat down, that's when we finally learned what the underlying crime was. He got up there and while he cast a wide net still saying it could have been a tax violation, it could have been falsification of other records, like double falsifications, but really they're hanging their hats on the violation of federal election campaign law, campaign finance law, federal election law.

It's called FECA, F-E-C-A. That's what the prosecution drove home. That's the principal basis for this entire case. He didn't want us to know because that's a federal statute. And Alvin Bragg, this DA, doesn't have the jurisdiction to enforce federal election law. The federal DOJ had already said there's no case here. The Federal Election Commission had already said there is no case here. Only Alvin Bragg resurrected this alleged violation as the underlying basis for this

entire criminal case. And I'll ask you, Mark Eiglarsch, what kind of a position that puts the defense in in a New York courtroom when they've already had to sit through the entire case without ever being told what the underlying offense is and only when they're no longer allowed to speak does Bragg lift the dress up for the first time. It nauseates me. And not because I'm a Trump lover, but I'm a lover of the criminal justice arena where like cases should be treated alike.

I have never heard in 32 years of litigating cases, not knowing what the theory of prosecution is until after we rest our closing arguments. It's absolutely insane. Now that said, and I'll take some heat for this anytime I ever try to keep it fair and balanced, I always get the ugly male. I don't blame the judge for this. It sounded like you were blaming the judge and even the prosecution. It sounds like the law is the problem.

The law in that jurisdiction, which allows them not to specify what specific crime, the to wit part, which we see all day long here in Florida and in federal court. We know what exactly we're mitigating. I'm pausing that right there because I agree with Megyn Kelly on this. It's the judge's fault because the judge being, this is state court, right? This is state.

They run state law, not federal law. They, he should not, this judge should not have ran a federal law in a state court. That's what Meg Kelly's trying to say here, that this should not have been done. The federal, the feds have already said there's no case here. We're not running with this. Bragg says, fine, I will. And they're doing this. That's why this is a sham. This technically won't even count. So I don't understand. It's very interesting how this is going to play out because there's so many problems with how this is going down right now

that it's sickening. On all counts, this is sickening. Here, I'm continuing. All allows that to occur. It doesn't matter. I don't give a shit what was written in the New York statute. There's this thing called the U.S. Constitution that requires due process, and the Constitution

reigns supreme. The Constitution requires that a defendant has due process reported to him before we throw him in jail, take away his liberty, or convict him of a crime, and there is zero chance any statute that allows the prosecutor to play hide the felony all the way through closing would ever

be upheld you hold on i'm with you i told you i think it stinks but here's my question did the judge do anything unlawful did the prosecutors do anything that the law did not allow them to do by not revealing what specific crime it was. Yeah, they do. They did because they're there. As you know, their obligation is the pursuit of justice. That's their obligation. It's not to get a conviction. And they did everything within their means to prevent Arthur Donald Trump from knowing exactly what he was defending against so that they could surprise him, so that they could keep him off balance and so that they could surprise him, so that they could keep him off balance, and so that they could surprise when no one else could stand up on behalf of Donald Trump, say this is a federal case.

We're here. We're wolves in sheep's clothing. We're actually the feds trying to enforce this completely amorphous, difficult to understand statute after we've already kept out through all of our arguments, any federal election law expert from testifying. So this jury or any of us could understand the fundamental foundation of the entire criminal case. I can't wait to hear what Arthur has to say on this. And Arthur, keep it. Listen to what I said. OK, it does suck, but go ahead, Arthur. Here we go, Arthur. I am going to I'm going to rely on my supreme leader when it comes to the law.

Last night on a phone call with me under the same words that just came out of Megyn Kelly's mouth. And a prosecutor's job. My father, your supreme leader. My father, your dad. OK, he was a lawyer in in the frank hogan's in the manhattan da's office in the 60s and the 70s and his practice there for decades literally he's been a lawyer over 60 years he said what you just the exact words you just said megan that the job of any prosecutor is justice it's not just to obtain a conviction. And Mark, I will tell you what is

standard operating procedure here in New York is there is a bill of particulars. And for those people who don't know what that is, is after a defendant gets charged with a crime, you request a bill of particulars. And what you're asking for is what are the particulars? What are you saying my client actually did? I just give you the elements of the crime. Tell me what my client actually did. And Mark, they give those the crime tell me what my client actually did and mark they give those out like cotton candy in state court our friends in federal court are like oh that never happens you're right in federal court it doesn't happen but in new york state court it happens all the time and i'm going to give you the example that everyone here is using

it's burglary so burglary is basically a trespass with the intent to cause a crime therein and Burglary is basically a trespass with the intent to cause a crime therein. And the people, the prosecutors don't have to prove the crime therein beyond a reasonable doubt. However, they almost always tell you what the crime is therein. A trespass to commit a larceny, to steal something. A trespass to commit sexual assault inside the property. A trespass to commit a physical assault. Here, they did not do that. And look, I don't want to say... Do they have to, Arthur?

It sucks. They should do it in the name of justice. I agree with you, Megan. I agree with you, Arthur. I'd be livid as a defense attorney. The question is, why didn't the defense lawyers seek a bill of particulars to find out what theory the prosecution is relying upon? They did. And in a very unlikely move or an unconventional move, judge said, no, by law, they don't have to do it. So I'm not having them do it. Supposed to. If I was the judge, I would say, listen to me. We've done it in every other case with some Tom, Dick and Harry. You got the United States here. The bill of particulars. But Judge Rashad did not do that. We've done it in every other case with some Tom, Dick, and Harry. You've got the ties in the United States here. A little bit of particulars.

But Judge Rashawn did not do that. Why didn't the defense? Let me ask you this. Let me ask you this, Mark. Let me ask you this, Mark. You're Todd Blanche, Trump's defense attorney. You tried this whole case to the best of your abilities. He made some mistakes, for sure.

But to the best of your ability. Then it's time to do closings. Yeah. You're told you have to go first. You're like, what am I arguing? What's like? Can you say to the judge, judge, you got to make him go first. I'm going to reserve my time for a rebuttal. Like, what do you do to preserve the record for an appeal? Right. To start laying the foundation for my client's been deprived of his due process rights. There's a U.S. Constitution at play here. I don't give a shit what the statute says.

This is wrong. I've never seen a prosecutor do this to a defendant. And I'm not getting up there and defending a case. I have no idea, even on closings, what it's about. OK, so you don't say all of that, but you say to the jury, look what they've done here. Add to the list of things that they've done, like getting into the detail of Stormy Daniels and all the things that they did throughout this trial where it's win at all costs. They're not here to seek the truth. The worst thing is that I'm up here. We've all been here for weeks. We've been listening. And we don't know

what this other crime is. They're going to wait until after I sit down to get up here to tell you objections to state. I'm not saying that they have an obligation. But folks, if they're here to seek the truth, if they're here, if this is really about due process and the truth, they would have told us and not wait until I sat down. It's because they don't feel comfortable with this case. Put it out there and I'd be able to tell you they didn't prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt. I like that. Go ahead, Arthur. Logistically speaking, the defense did know what the prosecution's theory is because there was a charge conference last week and in that charge conference they requested and the judge gave the three theories either violation of

federal election campaign law falsification of spaghetti against the wall i have that i have that we're going to go through that in detail but that is a spaghetti against the wall approach like it could be one of 20 felonies i was saying yesterday you know it could be new york law could be federal law could be murphy's law have no idea we're just gonna say like any possible law like the the and by the way he also ruled that they don't have to find the jury doesn't have to agree on which law was violated three could think it was federal law two could think it was new york state law the others could think it was i don't know irish law i have no idea what they might think

fine so he had some knowledge hence it doesn't have to be unanimous so disgusting so here's defense attorney martin garagas um he was on the pierce morgan show which pierce morgan has never been a pro-trumper he's very uh down the middle very moderate i would say at times he's been anti-trump but uh his views even you know are very pro-trump in this because he sees the sham that's going on here with this but here's martin gregas and his opinion on it well look i don't disagree with you you can have these two thoughts in your head if you're going to bring a criminal case against one of the most reviled people in Manhattan and pick a jury in Manhattan and expect them to do anything but convict him, then I know nothing about the criminal law that I've been trying cases about. That was a slam dunk for the prosecution from the get go. At the same time, I can tell you that it was in to my mind, it was reprehensible that you take a case that is

basically misdemeanors and with that with an expired statute of limitations and you do the mental gymnastics to contort this into a target crime that's not defined until closing argument and make those into felonies, basically reviving an expired statute of limitations. I could go on and on about the legal nonsense that this is, but I'm not criticizing the jury. I criticize, number one, the prosecutor for bringing this case. Part of what makes the system work is prosecutors have to make hard decisions when to bring a case. The jury did what they were given. That is that's on the judge. The judge, you know, there's no such thing as directed verdicts in criminal cases. This was basically a directed verdict based on the jury instructions.

I as to the political, I'll just end it with this. I said 30 years ago when I was defending Susan McDougal, who was Bill Clinton's business partner in the Whitewater case, and when she was being prosecuted by then independent counsel Ken Starr, be careful what you wish for, Republicans, because the chickens are going to come home and roost. Sure enough, that's where we are right now. And those chickens are going to keep coming home to roost. So that show goes on. There's four people that are guests on the Pierce Morgan show on this particular episode. Kevin O'Leary, the billionaire from Shark Tank. Martin Garagas, the defense

attorney that you just heard from, Michael Knowles, who's one of my favorite conservative thinkers. And then there's a very liberal, Francesca Farron, who has the mindset of a juvenile, mean girls, teenage vibe. That's what I'm getting from her. While she's a great thinker, she's very black and white, lacking any kind of contrast in her thought processes, very non-abstract. But she's asked by Pierce Morgan, why do you think this is going to hurt Donald Trump rather than help him? And her answer to me is very peculiar because she goes on to talk about how the president or rather what a better example than the president United States holding his feet

to the fire because the same standard that is held to people the United States this is the United States should be held also to the president United States which I thought that was or the people United States that same standard should be held also the president United the United States, which I thought that was, or the people of the United States, that same standard should be held also to the president of the United States. So that to me, I find interesting because that is one of those two-tiered system, double forked tongue type analogies that I referenced earlier, because Democrats don't think that crime should apply to them. They don't think the rules apply to them. They don't think that laws should apply to them. They don't care about the evidence when it's against them. They only care about the evidence when it's against their opponents. But listen to her answer because it's striking. Keeping in the

back of your mind that in the future, we're hoping to see that Joe Biden is going to be tried for treason, but also keeping in the back of your mind that we had a president, Bill Clinton, who is guilty of many crimes. And I'm not completely unconvinced that Obama was behind a lot of this stuff that's been going on with COVID in the past. Because Fauci was there, Obama went to this, and Biden went to the Wuhan lab. And there's all this study of gain research been going on for some time. So I think Obama should be tried for many reasons for treason also. So think about her words here and think about those three men that should be tried for treason, Fauci including. I happen to believe, Piers, that it's good for America when you hold the person who has the highest office in the land

to the standards of the American law. And in this case, New York state law, where he committed these crimes. I happen to believe that it is a telltale sign of coming totalitarianism, fascism, skirting of the law, when you allow a president to simply do whatever he wants and actually never hold him accountable. But look, the reality is this, is that these aren't crimes that were on the books in every single state. These are crimes that are on the books in New York State, as we talked about, all right? And so he knew exactly what he was doing.

In fact, this is... Pausing because she's not right about that point. This was a federal law, not a New York City law, not a Manhattan law. This was a federal law that the feds were not going to prosecute. But Alvin Braggs, the Twinkie eater, thought it would be a good idea to go ahead and run with this anyway. So she has clearly not done her research. She's just a juvenile thinker and she's not very abstract. She don't understand that what she's saying, it could come back and bite her in the future. And also some of her beloved presidents from the past.

The most important part is that David Pecker of the National Enquirer refused to keep on paying his. She said Pecker. Rush money payments because the dude was tired of getting paid back in expired Trump stakes. And he was like, no, I'm not going to do it this time, especially not with a porn star. And so Michael Cohen had to do the payments on behalf of Donald Trump. Michael Cohen already spent three years mostly on house arrest, but he was already sentenced to three years over this. This is squarely Trump's making. This has nothing to do with his base. It has nothing to do with protecting American democracy like happened on January 6th, according to them. This has to do with Trump

making his bronze bronzer stained bed with a porn star trying to cover it up and then getting caught doing it. And out of interest, before I go to Michael, out of interest, why is Bill Clinton able to have sex with an intern in the Oval Office when he's president and lie to the American people about it? Beavis, did he say sex? Bill Clinton has sex with a lady in the Oval Office? On national television. And why is he able to pay off Paula Jones $850,000, four times as much, five times as much as the Trump payment to Stormy Daniels, to get rid of a sexual harassment claim, again, while he's president.

And he has no criminal court recourse for that. Why is that deemed to be better than what happened with Trump and Stormy? I don't think anyone is making that case, Piers. No, I'm asking you. What's the difference? What's the difference? Or any predator. The difference is that he didn't cook the books financially using back channels in order to pay that person off.

So paying somebody off who says you sexually harassed her, paying nearly a million dollars while you're the president of the United States, and then having sex with an intern in the Oval Office and lying about it, that's fine because he's a Democrat. Piers, only the leftists in your mind are making

that argument. This is typical. Typical freaking liberal lunacy. Always trying to skirt. They hate the facts. They hate when you throw this stuff back at them. They are blind to their own sins. Liberals, Democrats literally cannot see their own sins. They don't see them because they're so judgmental. Remember, this is the party of progressiveness. This is the party of love and exception, and they cannot see their own faults. They only see your faults, the party of exception. They only see your faults and you have to think and see the way that they think and see.

And if you don't accept the way that they think and see and believe what they believe, then you're wrong and you should be arrested and you should be thrown in jail because you're a race baiter you're homophobic this and that that's how they believe they if they had their way they would have a cat dirt a cat box cat litter in every single school with children walking around pretending that they're cats pooping in cat boxes and boys dressed up as girls girls dressed up as boys and a gender affirming uh education in the schools and books in the children's libraries about little boys touching girls, little girls touching boys.

This stuff has actually happened, and these books have actually turned up in libraries. And that's the way the liberals want this to play out, that everything is fluid. There's no right and wrong. There's no good and evil. Everything is just fluid. And if you're not on that, on board with that, then you're a fascist. I mean, that's the very definition of fascism, not being accepting. They're actually guilty of what they're claiming you're guilty of. It's truly disgusting. But I

like the Pierce Morgan show and I want to share more of this, but it's just a long show, and I'm strapped for time. I'm not going to – you can go there and listen to that show. This is a soundbite show. But Kevin O'Leary was on that, Martin Garagas, Francesca Freer, which I don't even like listening to her because she spews liberal garbage, and Michael Knowles, one of my favorite conservative thinkers. But before I go, I want to share with you one more piece of soundbite because I think it's interesting there's a liberal garbage in Mississippi a congressperson U.S. representative out of Mississippi by the name of Benny Thompson whose work on legislation he thinks that presidents who are convicted of crimes have to go to jail, should be stripped of secret service.

So basically they want him to be shivved, is what I'm gathering. Like send him to prison so he can get shanked. That's what they're thinking. They just want him to go to prison and get killed, to get murderized. I'm saying these people are disgusting. Comey, have you guys, do you guys see the way, like Comey? Comey's fantasizing about President Trump going and having a separate cell out in the yard somewhere

where people can kind of mock him. You know, he can do his exercise out there, outside. He can eat and poop and shave, do everything outside. He fantasizes about this, and he's on record doing it. Then you got idiots like this guy, this Benny Thompson out of Mississippi, U.S. Rep, fantasizing about the president going to prison and being stripped of secret being stripped of protection why would you want him to be stripped of protection if not to have him killed that's the point these guys are disgusting you guys hear my my uh my on beginning of the show, my intro into the show, those are the liberal left.

They're crazy. They're nuts. Every single one of them have TDS. They all suffer from Trump derangement syndrome. And the, the, the, the more hate they throw at this guy, the more votes he gets, the more money he gets and their heads swell up, but they'd never reach the point of explosion because they're so fluid. Yeah, that's the left for you.

They're so fluid. They just get crazier and crazier and crazier, and they up the ante. But remember, the law never applies to them. Their fear never held to the fire because the left is so fluid. They're progressive, right? The law's standards don't apply to them because they're nuts and that's why they they decided that that president biden they know he's guilty of treason they know he's done all this stuff he's a subsidiary of china they know all this stuff

but they can't do nothing about like the secret the the confidential documents he did the same exact thing that trump did but they decided not to not to try him for it why well because he's uh he's suffering from mental cognitive uh uh inabilities his cognition is low he's senile but this is epic epic times epic tv uh just listen to this little clip right here you had congressman benny thompson he's a democrat from the state of mississippi and he filed this bill right here, H.R. 8081, or as he titled it, the quote, denying infinite security and government resources allocated toward convicted and extremely dishonorable former protectees act, otherwise known as the disgraced former protectees act. And as the title pretty much makes clear, this new bill would quote, strip secret service

protection from former presidents upon sentencing following conviction for a federal or state offense that is punishable for a term of imprisonment for at least one year. Now, given the fact that this bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, whose current chairman is Mr. Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, well, as well as the added layer of fact that the Republicans control the House as a whole, meaning that this bill is probably not going anywhere. But it does show that there's at least a strain of thought within Congress looking to strip President Trump of his Secret Service protection if he were to get thrown into jail. And a bit along that line, President Trump gave an interview to Fox News just yesterday

wherein he said that he's okay with the prospect of jail time, and he added the following. You could decide to say, hey, house arrest or even jail. It could. I'm okay with it. I saw one of my lawyers the other day on television saying, oh, no, you don't want to do that to the president. I said, you don't beg for anything. You just, the way it is. Think of it.

They have all my books. You know, they went to, for five years, they sued me getting my tax returns, right? At the end of five years, they got them. The Supreme Court actually gave it to them. That was the end of it. That was it. They never found anything. They are the best accounting firms.

I had a pure gold firm. They call it a gold-rated firm. I don't know. It's supposed to be. Who knows? But with all that stuff, for years you heard about my tax. They never looked into the Clinton Foundation. And they never found it.

They never went all the way with the Clinton Foundation. They never went all the way with the Clinton Foundation, which is sort of interesting, isn't it? But so that could happen. I don't know that the public would stand it, you know. I'm not sure the public would stand for it. With a house arrest? I think it I'm not sure the public would stand for it with a house arrest. I think I think it would be tough for the public to take, you know, at a certain point is a breaking

point. And that general sentiment about things reaching a boiling point was actually echoed by Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who said the following over on Fox Business. You know, a sad day in America. And what I worry about is something even bigger than Donald Trump. I worry about strife. I worry about war in the streets. I worry about 50 percent of the public believing that the court system will be used against them. You know, once upon a time is because of the color of your skin. Now, because of the shade of your ideology, I worry about that. And I worry when half the country thinks they won't be treated fairly, what happens and how people react. And so that is where we currently stand. President Trump was found guilty of all 34 counts against them in the Stormy

Daniels New York case. His fundraising, as a result, went through the roof after the verdict was handed down. And then in terms of the next step, well, we'll have to wait a month and a half until July 11th, which is when Judge Merchant will actually hand down the punishment. It'll be up to the judge to decide whether or not President Trump gets sentenced to jail, probation, a fine, or a combination of all three. So, yeah, and I heard a rumor, I don't know how true it is, that actually the Democrats now seeing the fallout of all this are talking about possibly pardoning Trump after all this, after all this witch hunt, they're just going to pardon Trump.

I'm telling you guys, it's going to be very interesting to see how all this plays out. And we have a long future ahead of us. We're going to be able to kind of watch it play out together. And we'll all get there together. In the meantime, I am L. Douglas Hogan. Thank you for listening, and I'll see you next time. Who wants free ammo?

Our new sponsor, AmmoSquared.com, is a truly automated, set-it-and-forget-it ammo purchasing program. Pick your calibers, set your budget, select a shipping trigger, and ammo's coming to you. There's no minimum to buy, no memberships, no extra fees. Ammo Squared was started in Idaho in 2015, and today has over 30,000 customers across the country. Start stockpiling ammo at AmmoSquared.com slash PBN and get 75 rounds of 9mm for free. That's AmmoSquared.com slash pbn What if I told you you could own land for $200 down and highly affordable monthly payments?

Yourcheapland.com is your answer to bug out land, hunting, recreation, and whatever else your prepper mind can dream up. Yourcheapland.com has properties in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arizona, Utah. Go to yourcheapland.com, check out the properties, use the promo code PBN and get $100 off your purchase.