TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles - Could Nancy Pelosi Become Vice President Before End of 2022?

Episode Date: August 4, 2022

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Tokyo today in the last leg of her tour of Asian nations. Before departing South Korea, the San Francisco Democrat visited the Demilitarized Zone that divides the Korean Peninsula.She was seen near the Joint Security Area visitor center where she posed for photographs with US soldiers stationed in South Korea. Following talks with South Korean leaders, Speaker Pelosi flew to Yokota Air Base outside Tokyo where she was welcomed by US Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel. Meanwhile, communist China threw a temper tantrum today by firing rockets over Taiwan, some of them landing in Japan’s exclusive economic zone. Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart. Airdate 8/4/22.It’s the Final Day! The day when Jesus Christ bursts into our dimension of time, space, and matter. You can order the second edition of Rick’s book, Final Day!  https://rickwiles.com/final-day

This is True News, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help us God. I'm Rick Wiles. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Tokyo today in the last leg of her tour of Asian nations. Before departing South Korea, the San Francisco Democrat visited the demilitarized zone that divides the Korean Peninsula. She was seen near the Joint Security Area Visitor Center, where she posed for photographs with U.S. soldiers stationed in South Korea. Following talks with South Korean political leaders, Speaker Pelosi flew to Yokota Air Base outside Tokyo, where she was welcomed by U.S. Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel. Meanwhile, Communist China threw a temper tantrum today by firing rockets over Taiwan, some of them landing in Japan's exclusive

economic zone. Doc Burkhardt and I are ready to give you the details on this story and also on Alex Jones's disastrous day in court yesterday. So let's start with Nancy Pelosi. Doc, we'll put up Chosun Ilbo in South Korea. Yes. This was their headline today. U.S. House leader arrives in Seoul after visit to Taiwan. This was the morning headline today. She has already departed South Korea. And we'll go to Straits Times, Singapore. China fires multiple ballistic missiles around

Taiwan in largest ever drills. Yes, China fired multiple missiles around Taiwan on Thursday, launching unprecedented military drills the day after a visit by U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi to the self-ruled island that Beijing regards as its breakaway province. These exercises, China's largest ever in the Taiwan Strait, began as scheduled at midday and included live firing in the waters to the north, south, and east of Taiwan, bringing tensions in the area to their highest in a quarter century. NHK is reporting that five Chinese ballistic missiles landed within Japan's exclusive economic zone. And so this is, of course, Japan is making China aware of this as well.

And we actually have some video here from the Straits Times giving us, you know, what the people of Taiwan were seeing as they were looking out as the Chinese were performing drills here. So let's watch this. And people just continued on the beach. Right. Assuming it's not a real war. Right. Doc, we got some report from Global Times. Now, Global Times is a Chinese communist news organization.

Headline, PLA drills around Taiwan continue. Now, look at this, to rehearse reunification operation. After Pelosi's visit, exercises blockading island to become routine. Right, so joint military exercises around the island of Taiwan by the Chinese PLA continued Wednesday with a joint blockade, sea assault, and land and air combat training involving the use of advanced weapons including the J-20 stealth fighter and DF-17 hypersonic missiles. After the drill started on Tuesday evening when U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi landed on the island, which seriously violates China's sovereignty. Now, the Chinese outlet here went on to say the exercises are unprecedented as the PLA

conventional missiles are expected to fly over the island of Taiwan for the first time. The PLA forces will enter area within 12 nautical miles of the island and that the so-called median line will cease to exist, experts said, noting that by surrounding Taiwan entirely, the PLA is completely blockading the island, demonstrating the Chinese mainland's absolute control over the Taiwan question. The PLA Eastern Theater Command on Wednesday organized its affiliated Navy, Air Force, Rocket Force, Strategic Support Force, and Joint Logistic Force, and conducted realistic combat-oriented joint exercises in the sea and airspace to the north, southwest, and southeast of the island of Taiwan,

the PLA Eastern Theater Command said in a press release on that day. Joint blockade, sea assault, land attack, and air combat drills were at the core of the operation as the exercises tested the troops' joint operational capabilities, the press release continued. Now, the PLA's drills this time are comprehensive and highly targeted, showing the determination of resolving the Taiwan question once for all. Chinese mainland military expert Song Jinping told the Global Times on Wednesday. The drill should be viewed as a war plan rehearsal, Song said. In the event of a future military conflict, it is likely that the operational plans currently being rehearsed will be directly translated into combat operations. He went on to

say it means that our battle plan has been made clear to the U.S. and the Taiwan authorities, and we are confident enough to inform them of the consequences of further provocation in this way, Song said. So lots of activity going on around Taiwan in response to the Pelosi visit. No serious assaults on Taiwan or no further threats on the Pelosi plane or anything like that? But there were at least three really important things that the Global Times said. Number one, the median line between Taiwan and China no longer exists.

So in the Taiwan Strait the waters were divided and there was some respect between China and Taiwan that has now disappeared what China is saying today is we can come up to the beach of Taiwan all that water is ours we're not going we're not going to hold back okay If we want to move our vessels right up to the beach, that's our choice. That's the first thing that they said. The second thing they said is that they will blockade Taiwan. Yes.

There's going to be blockades. There may be temporary blockades in the future that could last one to two months. And these drills show that they can be positioned to do just that. Yes, and then number three is that they said, we just showed you what we're going to do. And look at what they said. It means that our battle plan has been made clear to the U.S. and Taiwan,

and we are confident enough to made clear to the U.S. and Taiwan, and we are confident enough to inform them of the consequences. So they just said, this is what we're going to do, this is how we're going to invade, this is how we're going to take over, and we are confident enough to show you in advance what this war is going to look like. Why does this sound vaguely familiar to earlier this year? It sounds like what Russia told NATO. Right.

They said, we have a red line, and you're provoking us, and we're going to cross it, and this is how we're going to do it. The next one, we have a video from, this is also from a Chinese communist television network, CGTN. It's a long propaganda video. It's what, maybe four or five minutes? Yes. The reason, I typically, I don't like showing propaganda videos, but the value in watching a propaganda video is you get to see the message that the other side wants you to hear right okay so this was made this video is made

for you to see it not for the Chinese people to see this is made for you and me to see it they want us to understand this is what they plan to do so let's watch it it It has English subtitles.我们圆满完成了在台湾海峡 远程火力实弹射击任务 达到了预期效果 全面检验了部队实战条件下作战能力 坚定了官兵打赢信心

我们坚决做到好听我的话 我听党的话 以昂扬的斗志 精准的火力 捍卫祖国主权和领土完整 Thank you.全力官兵 以做好应对各种复杂困难局面的充分准备 不断锤炼 随时能战

准时发射 有效毁伤核心能力 我们将听令而战 不辱使命 坚决完成作战任务 坚决挫败任何形式的外部势力 和台独分裂企图 Thank you. Well, both sides have propaganda. This is the Chinese propaganda there.

But inside propaganda is truth sometimes. Yes. And I think we can conclude that the Chinese Communist Party has decided they're definitely going to invade Taiwan. It's now the question of when. Fox News published this story that China could invade Taiwan before the 2024 U.S. presidential election, quoting various political sources, military sources in the U.S., or I should say national security analysts. You know, the consensus is that China, Xi Jinping, has two years of a very weak U.S. presidency under Joe Biden. And there's no guarantee that Joe Biden will even survive in the White House beyond 2022. Well, that's interesting because do you think this trip by Nancy Pelosi,

do you think it weakened Joe Biden? Yes. It weakened Xi Jinping and Joe Biden. Both of these men came out weak. Now, I want to put a disclaimer here just so that nobody in our audience thinks that I'm suddenly an admirer of Nancy Pelosi. That's not it.

I'm just giving you an impartial political analysis of what I saw. This morning in my home when I was looking at the Asian news and I saw the photographs in the Straits Times in Singapore, in the Korea Times, the Korea Herald the chosen elbow and in Korea South China Morning Post and when I looked at the photographs of Nancy Pelosi meeting with world leaders Asian leaders the the words that popped in my mind is, she looks presidential. You're speaking that just in a political sense, not in a support sense. No, no. I don't want Nancy Pelosi as president of the United States. I'm just saying optics.

Just the optics. She looked presidential. Here she is. She's going to Taiwan. She's standing. She defied. I mean, going up against the Chinese. We can argue, Doc, you know, did she do this deliberately to help China? Look, we can have all those kind of debates and arguments. It doesn't matter. I'm just talking about on the surface what it looks like. Right. On the surface, it looks like Xi stood up to Xi Jinping and that Joe Biden is too weak to do it.

And Kamala Harris is too scattered brain to do it. Right. Would anybody take Kamala Harris seriously if she went to Asia? No, she'd tell them what her pronouns were and what color pantsuit she was wearing. Right.

And she'd be cackling and laughing and she wouldn't have any idea what's going on, what the issues are. And how many times will Joe Biden have COVID? Yes.

You know, hiding out in the White House just like he hid out during the campaign. But, Doc, Nancy Pelosi, her flight into Taipei was the most viewed flight online in the history of the world.

I mean, there were millions of people tracking her flight. Right, on the various flight tracking apps out there. I was, too. I was tracking. And the live cams at the airport watching the jet come in, and there was tension because you're wondering, are they going to blow her out of the sky? Is that jets coming down on the runway? I mean, you felt the tension. Right. But Nancy Pelosi, at what, age 82? She just, she knows that she's leaving as Speaker of the House. Right. And there's going to be a rout this fall.

The Republicans will take control of the House. She will no longer be the Speaker come January. This was her, this was her, her. Swan song. Yes, this was it. She came out, this was her crowning moment. She defied Xi Jinping and she looked more presidential than Joe Biden. If Joe Biden went there, he would be wandering around on the stage. They'd have to point him to, hey, Taiwan's over here. Kamala Harris, nobody takes her seriously. Where am I going with this? This thought came to me this morning that Joe Biden with COVID again, I mean, whatever excuse that they're using, he's tested positive three times.

Hunter Biden, his scandals are so bad that they're working overtime to cover up the scandals. That at some point, the powers that be that run things in this country will remove Joe Biden from the White House. You're going to have a disaster in the November elections for the Democrats. It will be a disaster.

They're going to have to remove Joe Biden because he's an embarrassment. Everybody is laughing at him. I mean, if you don't see the videos that circulate around the world in other countries of Joe Biden, people are laughing at him. And now Democrats are now openly talking about Joe Biden not seeking re-election. Oh, yeah. So what happens? You've got a lame duck president for two years.

I don't see that happening at all. No, no, no. They're going to push him out this year. I think they will. Now, this is where it's going. So Joe Biden resigns. Worst scenario is he becomes ill and passes away. But let's just say he resigns because of dementia.

A 25th Amendment. I don't even think they'll go that far where the cabinet removes him. I think they'll just tell him you need to resign. You made it. You got in the history books. You're the president of the United States. But you need to resign. And they'll lead him away. And his wife, Jill, will do it. She'll make the announcement that the Biden family has come together

and we've decided that it's best for Joe to retire. And the media will give him all the glorious coverage and everything. Kamala Harris goes in to the White House as president. That's a disaster. That's a disaster. Nobody takes her seriously. This thought came to me this morning. Who would she appoint as vice president?

Well, there's a lot of options out there, I would think, but really, when it comes right down to it, there's really only one option. The one that hit me today when I was looking at those news photographs is, oh, my, Nancy Pelosi is positioning herself to become the vice president. At age 82, she's going to say that she is tougher than all the other men. And she's going to say, I can get it done. I stood up to

Xi Jinping. How they get rid of Kamala Harris for two years, get her out of the picture, I don't know. But there may be a path where Nancy Pelosi moves into the presidency for the remainder of Joe Biden's term. Because she's starting to act like a president. Yes.

Okay. It's a scary thought, but I could see that theory working. But understand, you're not going to see a Pelosi button on my, I'm just telling you what I see politically happening. A caretaker president. She's 82 years old. She's not going to seek the nomination. Right. But she would be a caretaker.

To get the Democratic Party to... To get the Democratic Party back on track. And then an even wilder scenario could be the Republicans win the House. The Speaker of the House is not required to be a member of the House. Yes. I see where you're going with this. So Nancy moves into the White House and Donald Trump moves into the Speakership. And he's now the Speaker of the House. And Nancy is now the President in the White House, or at least the speakership. And he's now the Speaker of the House and Nancy is now the President in the White House, or at least the Vice President.

Can you imagine that? Two years? I mean, it would be a battle royal. But then again, President Trump would have to get back out on the campaign trail assuming he wants to. And assuming they don't arrest him

because the plan is right now is for the Justice Department to arrest him. Now, what are the ramifications when you see a photograph, two photographs, one FBI agents handcuffing the former president of the United States, a raid on Mar-a-Lago. Wow. Just think about it. A SWAT team raid on Mar-a-Lago, and they bring the former president of the United States out

at 6 a.m. in his nightclothes, and he's handcuffed. Think about that, the optics of that picture. The second thing is his police mugshot. What is that going to do to his supporters? In my opinion, it's going to ignite them. It will enrage them. And people will look at this and say,

what kind of country are we in? Where are we right now? That the former president of the United States is dragged out of his house and handcuffed. This is like some country out of Africa. But I think this is where we're going. But Donald Trump will fight. He'll get released. And he'll become the Speaker of the House. And he'll campaign for president. And he'll win.

Even if he's in prison, the people will vote for him. He'll win even if he's in prison. That will drive the Democrats even crazier that the people elected a man who's in prison. But this is how crazy this is going to go. I said back in, I think, March of 2017 when Donald Trump went into the White House, the race is on to see who goes to prison first. Because I thought at that time,

it's between Trump and Hillary Clinton. It's now between Trump and Hunter Biden. Right. And they were slowly picking off members of the Trump team, if you will. You had Manafort out. You had, I forget the Greek guy's name. Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos. And so they were going after them one by one, getting closer and closer, but never hitting the mark.

Two impeachments, all this. But the Hunter Biden scandal names the big guy. Who's the big guy? Who got 10%? That's going to lead back to Joe Biden. Right. And they're going to have to get him out the door, which opens the door for Nancy Pelosi to become the vice president of the United States. And then potentially the president of the United States. A caretaker president for two years. That's what I see possibly coming. Okay. Let's move on

one quick story regarding the Ukraine war it's really the impact on European energy this story from Bloomberg that Germany's biggest utility company which had to get bailed out by the government right a few months ago now may have to shut down because the Rhine River is drying up is so low that the utility company will have to just turn off it it's it's generator yes the German energy supplier Uniper SC warned it may have to cut output at two key coal-fired plants in Germany as the company struggles to get fuel supplies along the Rhine River, exacerbating an energy crunch that has threatened to push the continent's largest economies into recession.

Water levels on the Rhine have fallen so low that the river may effectively close soon. There could be a regular operation at Uniper's 510 megawatt starting five plant until early September and at the 1,000 megawatt Datalin 4 because of limited volumes of coal on site. Now, the first thing to note here is they're burning coal. Now they're having problems getting the coal there too. And we talked here- And the water level is low. And none of this had to be happening. None of it had to be happening right now,

but they made the decision. Really, the sanctions that they put on Russia were sanctions on themselves. They sure did. We're going to turn our attention back to the U.S. on politics. Here in Florida today, Governor DeSantis made an announcement. I guess it was late yesterday. Watched for a big announcement Thursday morning. So nobody knew what he was going to do. I mean, there were speculation. Maybe he was announcing a run for office. I knew he wasn't going to do that. He's running for governor this year. But when the governor makes a big deal about coming out and making an announcement, and then they had to come out and say, this is not a political announcement or anything like that. And so. But it got the media there. Yes. And it got got the attention so we will show you from Fox 13 Tampa Bay the governor suspended Hillsborough County state attorney Andrew Warren accused him of neglect of duty about one thing that in the state of Florida I've never lived anywhere where the governor has the power to remove local government officials.

But in the state of Florida, a governor can remove a sheriff. I don't know what offices he's allowed to remove, but the governor can remove locally elected officials. Hallelujah. So he did it. And the state's state attorney in Hillsborough County, it's over in Tampa. Andrew Warren is a George Soros. Yes. State attorney, a leftist attorney. And he announced that he was not going to enforce

Florida's new abortion law that restricts abortion to the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. And so he just said, I'm not going to enforce it. Well, the governor moved in and said, you don't get the choice. It's a state law. Right. And so you're not going to be the state attorney for this county anymore. Right. So surrounded by Bay Area sheriffs, Governor Ron DeSantis suspended the Hillsborough County state attorney, saying he had violated his oath of office and has been solved on crime.

So this morning, Governor Ron DeSantis announced Andrew Warren's suspension will take effect immediately, saying Warren thinks he's above the law and has been picking and choosing what laws to enforce, citing the state's 15-week abortion ban as the most recent example. DeSantis said Warren signed letters saying he would not enforce laws prohibiting sex changes for minors. To take a position that you have veto powers over the laws of the state is untenable and warrants suspension, he said. We actually have a clip from that news conference today. And Governor DeSantis does a great job outlining the problems with these source-funded DAs and county attorneys,

hundreds of them around the country, Rick. So this was a shot at George Soros today over his ship. And so let's watch this clip today, and Governor DeSantis walks us through Andrew Warren's violations here. Our government is a government of laws, not a government of men. And what that means is that we govern ourselves based on a constitutional system and based on the rule of law. But yet we've seen across this country over the last few years, individual prosecutors take it upon themselves to determine which laws they like and will enforce and which laws they don't like and then don't

enforce. And the results of this in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco have been catastrophic. You could go in in San Francisco and steal a certain amount of merchandise and you just would by definition not be prosecuted. That has undermined public safety. It has really hurt these communities and it's been devastating to the rule of law. So as I saw that happening across the country earlier this year I asked my staff in my office to look around the state of Florida and to make sure that that was not going

to happen here, where you would have individual prosecutors nullify laws that were enacted by the people's representatives. They spoke with law enforcement throughout the state. They spoke with line prosecutors throughout the state. And it all came back to this area here in the 13th Judicial Circuit in Hillsborough County. And the response that we got was a lot of frustration on the part of law enforcement for criminals being let go and crimes not being prosecuted. And so we looked into it and we compiled a lot of the record. And I can tell you it's been a very, very troubling record.

So the prosecutor, state attorney for this judicial circuit, Andrew Warren, has put himself publicly above the law. In June of 2021, he signed a letter saying that he would not enforce any prohibitions on sex change operations for minors. And that's a debate that we're having mostly administratively and through medical licensing in Florida, but other states have enacted penalties on the people that would perform those, which are really disfiguring these young kids. And he said, it doesn't matter what the legislature does in the state of Florida. He's going to exercise a veto over that. He's also instituted policies of, quote, presumptive non-enforcement. And this involves an array of different things. And you'll probably

hear Sheriff Chronister and some of the other law enforcement officers talk about it. But that is not consistent with the role of a prosecutor. Yes, you can exercise discretion in an individual case, but that discretion has to be individualized and case specific. You can't just say you're not going to do certain offenses. And then most recently, after the Dobbs decision was rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court, he signed a letter saying he would not enforce any laws relating to protecting the right to life in the state of Florida. And mind you, we have had prohibition on third trimester abortions for a long time. We've had prohibitions on partial birth abortions for a long time. And then most recently, the legislature enacted and I signed protections

for unborn babies at three and a half months. And when they are aborted, it's typically done through a dismemberment procedure, which is really inhumane. Nevertheless, that is what the legislature has enacted. And it's not for him to put himself above that and say that he is not going to enforce the laws. Good. That's exactly the strategy that George Soros has funded here in the United States by putting money into the campaigns of those who are running for district attorney or county attorney in areas, knowing that just if he can change just a few elections around the country, he can change policies over a broad area of people. Hillsborough County, we're talking about a million people living over there, over on the Tampa and Clearwater side.

But if you get control of the prosecutor's office, you can do two things. You can turn a blind eye to political crimes by leftists, like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, rioting, looting, whatever they want to do. And you can also prosecute conservatives. You can find something to go after them and put them in jail. And so George Soros has weaponized the local offices of state attorney, attorneys, prosecutors. And it's really what it is. He's weaponized it.

The good thing, what I'm seeing, Doc, this is hopeful. What we're seeing in 2022 is pushback. Yes. The left went too far. And now there's pushback. We're seeing it with the Supreme Court. There's been multiple decisions in 2022 that are in favor of the Constitution. We're seeing Governor DeSantis lead a pushback against the tech companies, against censorship, against wokeism. And this next story is a group of Republican-dominated states in America are planning an all-out assault on woke banks, saying, we won't do business with you. And what this is about, Doc, is a lot of these big banks have now implemented a social credit score to obtain business loans.

Right. They call it an ESG score. Yes. Environmental, social, and governmental standards. Basically, it's a social credit score for companies and organizations. Companies have to prove that they are woke, that they accept the agenda. If they don't accept it, they don't get a business loan. And the way they've made a lot of headway in this particular area has been in climate, environmental issues.

I mean, they've really gained a lot of ground there. But now there are states that are pushing back on this, and this is from Fox News. Republican state officials are writing plans to punish woke banks which push anti-fossil fuel policies and adhere to so-called environmental, social, and governance standards. West Virginia announced last week it would bar five major financial institutions, including BlackRock, the biggest pension fund holder in the country, Goldman Sachs, and J.P. Morgan from entering into banking contracts with the state treasurer's office or any state agency. Each of the five corporations had committed to policies limiting commercial engagement with the fossil fuel industry, which paid a whopping $769 million in taxes to West Virginia

state government. And they're saying, we're not going to go along with our own destruction. We're not going to pay for it. We're not going to subsidize that. And that was by West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore. He told Fox Business during an interview we'll share with you in a moment. They have weaponized our tax dollars against the very people and industry that have generated them to begin with, and that is why we're pushing back against this ESG movement. Now, he noted that U.S. Bank Corp backed off on its prohibition of fossil fuel lending and was, as a result, kept off the state's restricted list of financial institutions. Moore's action, a first-of-its-kind response to major banks' ESG push, is likely to be the first of many similar actions nationwide. At least 15 Republican-led

states, which collectively manage tens of billions of dollars in public funds, have proposed laws or policies that would similarly punish anti-fossil fuel banks over the last year, according to the Fox Business analysis. We have a clip of that interview that he did with that. Riley Moore, the state treasurer there in West Virginia, did with Fox Business. So let's watch this. West Virginia treasurer Riley Moore. Riley, you're taking on the monsters, the big titans. What about what is written in their in their rules and regulations ticked you off? Hey, Brian, thanks so much for having me on. Well, you know, it's very clear their policy on this.

They have outright prohibitions on lending to the fossil fuel industry. And for instance, that is thermal coal, where they're very explicit about that. Now, thermal coal obviously is important to West Virginia, but it's important to the country. It is baseload energy. This is what powers the country. And these folks are in this breakneck liberal ideology that is pushing us towards this green energy ideology that is going to just drive inflation even higher. When did it start? When did this movement away from fossil fuels in your estimation start? Oh, I think this has been going on for years. Look here in West Virginia, we went through the war on coal with Obama. We lost tens of thousands of jobs there. Now this is the latest iteration of that.

Certainly, look, they're taking us on with like a religious zealous to move away from the fossil fuel industry. But the fossil fuel industry is so important to the United States and to every American here because, look, it heats your home. It cools your home. it cools your home, it powers your vehicle. I mean, these are critical industries to this country. And look, if they're going to continue to boycott us, then we're not going to do business with them. So here's what they said, Riley. So we asked them all. We reached out for BlackRock, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo. They didn't get back to us. Morgan Stanley says this. They do not boycott fossil fuel energy companies and remain committed to their clients

and employees conducting business in West Virginia. J.P. Morgan called us back and said the decision is short-sighted and disconnected from facts, saying their business practices are not in conflict with this anti-free market law. Take that on. I find that hilarious. Anti-free market. They are the distortion in the market. What we're doing is fighting to keep the free market free. We just want banks to assess risk and capital and make loans based on that, not some left-wing political ideology out there, ESG, that they've been pushing. We're not the distortion in the marketplace. They are. And just to be clear, I'm a market participant. I am not a market regulator. And I'm just stating my preferences in the marketplace on behalf of the people of the state of West Virginia. So

now I think that's a totally false narrative that they're trying to draw there. You're going to cost them millions, right? It will cost millions. That is correct, sir. And look, I mean, this is the way it goes. Sometimes you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. I hope other states do what you had the tenacity to do and the boldness to actually execute. Riley, thanks so much. Appreciate it. Riley Moore. Brian, thanks so much for having me on. Good. The right is pushing back. The left is finally getting opposition and things are not going to go well for the left. There's hope. There's signs of hope. I'm encouraged this year. The last two years, 2021 were pretty rotten years an aggressive move against freedom and liberty. But 2022, the pendulum is swinging back.

You're seeing people now opposing this agenda. And that is an encouraging sign. It's giving me hope. And the 2020s may turn out to be a very conservative decade. Two years ago, it would have been very difficult for me to say that. But right now, I'm starting to think the 2020s may be a very conservative decade in the United States. And it will be the left that's on the defensive. Here's another one.

This is a great story. This broke today. CNBC, Visa, and MasterCard suspend payments for ad purchases on Pornhub and MindGeek. And this is actually an updated headline here, Rick, because earlier today it was just Visa had suspended it. That's what I was thinking. Yes. So MasterCard has joined. That's right. So Visa is

suspending card payments for advertising on Pornhub and its parent company MindGeek after a lawsuit stoked the controversy that the payments giant could be facilitating child pornography. A federal judge in California on Friday denied Visa's motion to dismiss a lawsuit by a woman who accuses the payment processor of knowingly facilitating the distribution of child pornography on Pornhub and other sites operated by parent company MindGeek. Visa CEO and Chairman Al Kelly said in a statement Thursday

that he strongly disagrees with this court and is confident in his position. Visa condemns sex trafficking, sexual exploitation, and child sexual abuse. It is illegal, and Visa does not permit the use of our network for illegal activity. Our rules explicitly and unequivocally prohibit the use of our products to pay for content that depicts nonconsensual sexual behavior or child abuse. We are vigilant in our efforts to deter this and other illegal activity on our network. But Visa does not prohibit advertising on pornography sites, and they don't prohibit people using Visa cards to buy porn. Right. So let's set the record straight. Yes. But this is a good sign today. Visa and

MasterCard starting to back down. Oh, they're quick to de-platform people. Yes. Who have conservative views. Yes. But they won't de-platform pornographers. Yes, you have to fight for that. Kelly said that the court decision created uncertainty about the role of traffic junkie MindGeek's advertising arm, and accordingly the company will suspend its visa acceptance privileges until further notice. It says during this suspension, visa cards will not be able to be used to purchase advertising on any sites, including Pornhub or other MindGeek-affiliated sites, Kelly said. And as Rick said, that does not apply to their ability for people to purchase porn, just limited the ability for people to purchase advertising on the sites.

On the sites, right. But still, I'll take a win, even if it's a small win. The two things that contributed to this big victory today, one, the lawsuit from the young woman who said that there are images on Pornhub of her at age 13 that she had been photographed as a child. And she's now an adult woman and that those photographs are circulating on Pornhub. And so she sued. And then the other thing is that the billionaire bill ackman last week made a public statement condemning visa for you know allowing visa credit cards to be used on pornhub and i i think i think bill ackman may be having a Christian conversion experience

because last year he talked about, it seems like he said something about he had a disturbing dream. Do you remember that, Doc? Yes. On a television interview, they never really questioned him about the disturbing dream, but there was something that, some dream about world events that really questioned him about the disturbing dream, but there was something that some dream about world events that really bothered him. And when he said it, I thought,

oh, the Holy Spirit is dealing with this man. We've got a short clip from a CNBC interview that he did a few days ago about Visa. Let's watch it. Bill, I want to start with you because you've been very vocal online about this and you've also been working behind the scenes related to it. Where does your interest in this come from? And tell us about how it began. I guess my interest comes from the fact I have four daughters. And I read this article that Nick Kristof had written in the Times describing how MindGeek and its companion sites, Pornhub, operates and the harm it's caused and the horror of it all. And one of the centerpieces of the article is how the business persists because it's funded or the payments are funded through

the Visa and MasterCard network. And what shocked me was the network is one of the greatest businesses in the world, owning the pipes that convey commerce and taking a little royalty on every payment that goes through. But a key part of their business is Visa's job, if you think about it, is maintaining brand integrity. This is one of the most important brands in the world. When people put a Visa card or a MasterCard or American Express card out of their wallet, what drives them is the power and the quality of the brand. You think about the most important risks to that brand, reputational risk, regulatory risk. But remarkably, the company, despite being entirely aware that

there's child pornography on these sites, and it's littered with child pornography, they continue to provide payment services until the Kristof article, and then they shut down the sites overnight, which would have bankrupted them. And then within a matter of weeks, they reauthorized the merchants and they started accepting payments again. And the crime continues. And, you know, there've been, you know, political, there've been hearings in Canada, around the world, people doing their best to shut down these companies. And the ultimate regulator is actually Visa. Right. Visa tomorrow could shut down MindGate. We had a court decision that came down on Friday where it's very, very clear that the judge is extremely concerned with the behavior of Visa. And yet Visa continues to provide payment services to Pornhub and, you know, advertising that takes place on Pornhub, premium services, you know, the wheels of commerce of child trafficking are being, I'm not making up the language,

look at the judge's decisions. Really remarkable. Well, we congratulate Bill Ackman for taking a stand. The next story, this Fox News, California Governor Newsom is asking Hollywood to stop filming in conservative American states like Georgia and Oklahoma. Unbelievable. So they're going to impose political correctness on where you can do business in America. They're going to ban entire states. If you're a business person in California you've got the governor saying

we want you to never do business in a Republican state. Doesn't that sound like a Nazi? Like a Nazi. Okay, the next story I'm going to do for the rest of the program. Doc, this will get me, I'll get criticized however I do this, but it's a big story and it needs to be covered.

And some of you watching will get very upset with me because I even talked about it. But it is a big story and it needs to be discussed. And it needs to be discussed exactly as it has happened, not in an imaginary make-believe world, but exactly how it happened. And I'm referring to the Alex Jones lawsuit. He's got multiple lawsuits regarding Sandy Hook. But the one that we're going to be talking about today is a trial that he was in yesterday. Now, this is not a criminal trial. It's a civil lawsuit. And the decision has already been made that he is liable, that he defamed the parents. And so the purpose right now was to determine the amount to be paid.

And you just found out the judge just issued a ruling. Right. The jury has issued an award. We actually have the clip. We can share it later if you like or now. But the jury, the Texas jury there in Austin, awarded out the parents $4.1 million from Alex Jones and Infowars regarding the Sandy Hook suit. $4.1 million from Alex Jones and Infowars regarding the Sandy Hook suit.

$4.1 million? Yes. But keep in mind, that's one set of parents, one child. There are multiple lawsuits that are in the pipeline that are going to be still fought out and everything. But this was the first one. Does that amount surprise you? Yes, it does. But this was the first one. Does that amount surprise you? Yes, it does. I thought it would be higher. Now, he did say yesterday in the courtroom

that anything over $2 million would destroy him. But as you point out, this is just one of multiple lawsuits. Collectively, the families are asking for nearly two, well, it's $150 million. Right. Right. So that's what he's facing, demands for $150 million. So we're going to put up the first one. This is number 32. Alex Jones reacts after his legal team accidentally sent years' worth of text messages to the lawyers of the Sandy Hook families who were suing him. This was a, Doc, I watched this several times last night, trying to figure out what, how did this happen?

But it is, it was a huge development because he testified under oath that he did not have any text messages on his phone about Sandy Hook. And then what they learned yesterday, and he was shocked, he was shocked. He was shocked when the plaintiff's lawyer said,

your lawyers gave us several years worth of text messages that you sent. And we now have them. And you testified under oath that you never had them. And if you haven't seen this particular clip and everything, and once again, it's not trying to knock down Alex Jones or anything like that. It's just, this happened in real time in a courtroom where the attorney for the plaintiff's attorney, Mark Bankston, you see him grilling Alex Jones. And then did you know your lawyers messed up? Do you know what perjury is?

And so let's watch this clip. It was pretty dramatic in the courtroom. Mr. Jones, you know how an iPhone works, right? You've had an iPhone text messaging for several years now. Yeah. What does it mean if the messages are in blue? Whose messages are those? Whose phone is this taken from?

I don't know whose phone is this taken from? I don't know whose phone it's taken from. I mean, I just I turned the phone over and said take your stuff off. Can I have you look in the very bottom below the

very bottom left corner? Is that your phone number? Yes. So you did get my text messages. And it said you didn't. Nice trick. Yes, Mr. Jones. Indeed.

You didn't give this text message to me. You don't know where this came from. Do you know where I got this? No. Mr. Jones, did you know that 12 days ago, 12 days ago, your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone with every text message you've sent for the past two years and when informed, did not take any steps to identify it as privileged or protect it in any way.

And as of two days ago, it fell free and clear into my possession. And that is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have a text message about saying you were okay. Did you know that? See, I told you the truth. This is your Perry Mason moment. I gave them my phone. Mr. Jones, you need to answer the question.

Did you know this happened? No, I didn't know this happened. But I mean, I told you. I gave them the phone. And you said in your deposition Did you know this happened? No, I didn't know this happened. But, I mean, I told you. I gave him the phone number. And you said in your deposition you searched your phone. You said you pulled down the text, did the search function for Sandy Hook. That's what you said, Mr. Jones, correct? And I had several different phones with this number, but I did, yeah.

Of course, I mean, that's why you got it. No, Mr. Jones, that's not what happened. My lawyer sent it to you, but I'm hiding it. Okay. Mr. Jones? Mr. Jones, that's... Please just answer questions. There's no question. Mr. Bankston also only asks questions.

What do you make of it, Doc? Well, it was a pretty dramatic scene. Now, just following this immediately after Alex Jones' lawyer came up and asked a couple questions. Do you trust your lawyer? And yes. Do you think that we're working in your best interest? Yes. This was his lawyer asking these questions. And I thought that was really unusual. His lawyer asked Alex Jones, do you trust us? Yes, do you trust that we've got your best interest at this? And so the only thing I can conclude, Rick, is that, and they actually did file a motion for a mistrial.

Maybe that's what they were going for. But it won't work, Doc. Right. And I talked to an attorney today and I asked him about this. I showed him the video and I said, is this a ploy for Alex Jones' attorneys to ask for a mistrial? Right. And he said, that's not going to work.

Here's why. In the deposition, I'm just going by what I know from following this, okay? In the deposition, Alex Jones was asked if he had text messages on his phone about Sandy Hook. And he said, no. Okay, that's under oath. Twelve or fourteen days ago, his lawyers accidentally sent a digital file to the plaintiff's lawyers containing two years' worth of text messages of Alex Jones talking about Sandy Hook. That means Alex Jones committed perjury. Now, if you argue, well, they did turn it in, but it was done by accident.

Right. So what I was told by an attorney this morning was, when Alex Jones's attorneys knew that they were in possession of evidence that the other attorneys were demanding, ethically as attorneys, they're obligated to do one of two things. Either submit the information, the evidence that is being requested, or withdraw from the case and refuse to represent Alex Jones. Because Alex Jones would have been saying, don't give it to them. They have been requesting it. They did not voluntarily give it.

It was accidentally given. So he, Alex, see Alex tried to make it like, well, hey, my attorneys gave it to you and you're accusing me of hiding it. Yes, you were hiding it and you lied about it. He lied under oath and said he didn't have it. They concealed it and then accidentally

it was transferred. So his lawyers were in a situation where they had to do one of two things. Now, they could not, his lawyers could not deliberately give that evidence, those text messages, without Alex Jones' permission. Therefore, they would have to withdraw from the case because they would be knowingly defying the court. Right. So the question is, did his attorneys deliberately send the text messages over and claim it was

an accident, but that would be in violation of their ethics, their ethical standards as a lawyer. But they could not withhold it. They would have to withdraw from the case and say, our client is refusing to comply with the court's order. Alex is in trouble now. This just went from civil to criminal. If Travis County decides to pursue it as perjury.

Yes. So they haven't said whether they're going to or not. No, but this is a high-profile case. But this is complicated because there was an email exchange that was going back and forth between the plaintiffs and Jones' attorneys too. And the plaintiffs said to Jones' attorneys, hey, I think we got the wrong link. We've got, like, you know, two years' worth of stuff here. Did you mean to send this?

And then Jones' attorneys said, no, disregard that link. We'll send you another one. And they had to know at some point, but they never, like the plaintiff's attorney, Bankston said, at no point did they ever claim privilege on that original link. They could have, but they never did. Yes, but they would also be admitting that they were in knowledge. They had knowledge that Jones had the documents the court was demanding. And then they would have to quit as his lawyer. So it's a complicated situation, but at the heart of it, it's perjury.

Okay, this is what's going to make some people mad. When you lie, it comes back to bite you. Okay? Don't lie. He's under oath. And they were concealing information. Yes. And it came back to bite him. Now let's take a look. This is the Daily Mail in London. Okay. So this is a London newspaper reporting on this. So this is what I'm saying. This is a big story. Alex Jones could go to jail. Infowars hosts facing up to 10 years in prison

if perjury charges are brought after his lawyers mistakenly sent emails and texts to Sandy Hook parents' attorneys showing he lied to the court. And so Alex Jones may have more than civil penalties to worry about after he finishes his $150 million defamation case brought by the parents of a six-year-old slain at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He could be looking at prison time for perjury. Jones, who was sued for defamation by the family of Jesse Lewis for spreading false theories that the massacre was a hoax, claimed he had turned over all text and cell phone information

pertinent to the case. But Mark Bankston, the lawyer for the parents, revealed Jones' lawyers accidentally sent two years of the, what they say, conspiracy theorist text messages that appear to directly contradict his sworn testimony. We saw some of this in the video there. Marks Bankston, the lawyer for the parents, revealed Jones' lawyer accidentally sent

two years of the conspiracy theorist's text messages that appeared to directly contradict his sworn testimony. You were ordered to turn over any text messages regarding Sandy Hook, right? Bankston asked. Jones said, yes, Joan, and you said that you didn't have any, right? Not that we could find, Jones said. Bankston, in turn, you in fact told me in your sworn testimony that you had searched, right?

And legal experts said Wednesday that it's a pretty clear case of perjury. Dallas Attorney William Dippel said, I'd be very concerned if I were Mr. Jones's lawyers. There are two kinds of perjury in Texas, misdemeanor perjury, which involved making a false statement under oath, and aggravated perjury, a felony that must happen during an official proceeding. It must involve an issue that would affect the outcome of the case. And Dippel goes on to say, clearly, this is an official proceeding. It must involve an issue that would affect the outcome of the case. And Dippel goes on to say, clearly, this is an official proceeding. Any courtroom is an official proceeding. It sounded to me like it could be aggravated perjury because it had to do with

whether or not he turned over discovery. The Dallas lawyer said, there seems to be very little wiggle room, according to him. It's hard for him to say they didn't know he wasn't telling the truth because he had the judge reminding him throughout his testimony. So it's difficult for him to say that he accidentally perjured himself. The case could be referred to the Travis County District Attorney,

Jose Garza in Austin, where the trial is being held or the prosecutor could take up the case himself. And now proceedings in the courtroom, they were kind of unusual the way they were because there was a lot of back and forth between Jones and the judge. Judge Maya Garrett Gamble seemed to barely tolerate the internet host, shaking her head once at a printout of a composite image on InfoWars of her engulfed in flames. At one point, the judge sent the jury out of the courtroom and strongly scolded Jones for telling the jury he had complied with pretrial evidence gathering, even though he didn't, and that he is

bankrupt, which has not been determined. It seems absurd to instruct you again that you must tell the truth while you testify, she said. Yet, here I am. So, Doc, I saw this video. I thought we had it. We don't have it here on the page. I wanted to show it. Infowars produced a, I guess it was a meme. It was a graphic image that they used on their show.

Right. With the judge who's presiding over that case, Judge Gamble. It had her on fire. Right. Who in their right mind? Seriously, in your right mind, you're facing financial ruin, and on your show,

you produce an image of the judge who holds your fate in your hand, and you show her on fire. Right. Who would do something like that? Yeah, I believe we actually have that in that clip there, number 41. Well, no, this is the one on,

is this the whole, is this the entire, because this one is on pedophilia. Well, there was the question that they were running a segment that connected the judge, the current judge, Judge Gamble, to Child Protective Services and everything. And then it showed a brief clip of that judge and another judge on fire.

Yes, all right. So that's the other thing. We'll show it all together here. The other thing that InfoWars did is that they produced a promotional video that had the image of the judge, Judge Gamble, the woman sitting right beside Alex Jones. And it implied that she was part of a pedophilia network.

Right. With no evidence. Just a wild accusation, which is what, this is why, folks, those of you who are Alex Jones cult fanatics, I have watched this man for over 20, I guess 23, 24, 25 years, going back to the late 90s when I was in Texas. And there was a pattern of lying, exaggeration, wild accusations with no evidence.

I watched this for years, and it has finally caught up with him, and it's going to be his ruin. So they produced a video that implied that because the judge worked with child protective services, she automatically was involved in pedophilia and the sex trafficking of children. Right. That is such a wild, crazy accusation to destroy another person's reputation with no evidence whatsoever.

And you're sitting in her courtroom. Yes. That's what's even crazier. And then for Alex Jones to act like he was not aware of it. Yeah. And so... I just worked there at InfoWars.

I don't know who made that video. Let's watch it. It's pretty wild. For the purposes of video from InfoWars on Friday, July 29th. All right. Let's go ahead and set it up. So that's why the judge is ringing the court proceeding

to make sure that the script, this is literally a script, a script gets told in a certain way for future audiences. That man's name is Robert Barnes? Yes. That's InfoWars? Yes. He was hosting your show on the 29th? Yes. Well, you were on the show for part of the 29th, right? You were in the courtroom part of it, on your show part of it?

I believe so. Okay. And Mr. Barnes, he's a frequent anchor on the force? He's been a frequent guest for about six years or so. He's also represented you in this case as an attorney? Yes. Okay. You say, Mr. Jones, that you're taking these court proceedings seriously. You're approaching them in good faith. But the truth of the matter is you've been broadcasting repeatedly a picture of our judge on fire.

Have you? Objection compound, Your Honor. No. You have to wait until the court rules. Oh. Overruled. There was a statement and then a question. Mr. Jones, I'm going to hand you what I've marked as plans to exhibit 129.

That's from your show, isn't it? That's justice on fire. Huh, okay. That's from your show, isn't it? Yes, I haven't seen this. And you've been running this video repeatedly, haven't you? No, I've not been there all the time. You haven't been there a lot of the time. You've been there every day this last repeatedly, haven't you? No, I've not been there all the time. You haven't been there a lot of the time. You've been there every day this last week, haven't you?

Every single day. No, I tape some of the shows. No, I've been there today. Your Honor, I'd like to move 132-129 into evidence. Is this impeachment evidence? I'm not exactly sure what Mr. Bankston wants to do with it. I think he wants to impeach Mr. Jones with it. Is it just the show to the jury, or does he want to control it?

No, I think he's moving that it be accepted into evidence. Do you have an objection? Yes, Your Honor. What is the legal objection? 401403. can I see it please yes you may Plaintiff's 129 is admitted. Thank you, Your Honor. Can you display 129?

Do you have the ability? The person on the left of this image is our judge, correct? Yes. The person on the right is another judge you don't like, right? Yes. Okay. One of the things you can take that down. One of the things you've been talking about

a lot recently on your show, even within the past couple months, is your allegation that government officials are aiding in pedophilia, child trafficking, and the grooming of children, right? You mean like what Jeffrey Epstein did with the clones? Sure, if that's a yes, is that a yes?

Yes. Okay. And on Thursday, you and Infowars started connecting those allegations to our judge, didn't you? No. In fact, Mr. Jones, you're telling the world not to believe what happens in this courtroom because the judge worked with Child Protective Services, who you say is involved with pedophilia and child trafficking, correct? Not all of it, but the Texas Youth Commission got caught doing it. There's been a lot of that here. I'm not asking you that, Mr. Jones. I'm asking you, you're telling the world not to believe what's happening in this trial because this judge is involved with CPS, who is working with child traffickers in pedophilia. Correct?

No, that's not what I'm saying. Okay. Your Honor, at this time, we would like to show a clip from Mr. Jones' show on Thursday where those words are said. For impeachment purposes? For impeachment purposes, yes, Your Honor. I'd like to hear it. All right.

Do we have a system or just a... Okay. We argue this is impeachment on a collateral matter. Not appropriate to get into improper impeachment. Well, those are two different objections and a statement. So is it impeachment on a collateral matter or an improper impeachment? It is an improper impeachment because it is on a collateral matter. And the collateral matter is what he's saying about me? Correct. And the question is about whether he's taking

this seriously? Correct. Overruled. Judge Maya Gamble comes from CPS, who has been exposed for human trafficking and working with pedophiles. That's what you mean when you say you're taking this seriously. I take this as serious as cancer. And, I mean, I don't know. You show somebody else's clip that they're always a few seconds long. Why don't you play the whole thing? Mr. Jones, that's not someone else's clip, is it?

Well, I didn't direct it or produce it, is what I'm saying. You certainly published it. I'm not standing behind it. I have to see the full thing. So you don't stand by the things you publish about our judge on your show repeatedly? No, I said I don't not stand behind it. I need to see not just five second clips Well, we can talk about what you said before that. How long is the clip? Can you play the whole clip?

Mr. Jones, you're not asking questions today You understand that sir? Oh, I thought I could ask to see a full document somebody showed me something I could see what it was This is a question from the lawyer answer from the witness. Okay, not the other way around The only thing I want to ask you about is not all the other weird stuff you said in that video. I just wanted to ask you about the question that I asked you, which you said, no, I'm not saying the judge is connected to pedophile and child trafficking. This is you taking this trial seriously and even good thing?

That's what this is? It's a five-second clip. I don't know what you've cut off or on. Does it matter? Is there anything before and after that that would make it great to show pictures of our judge on fire and tell me the world she's involved in pedophilia? Can you tell me the context

that would occur before or after that makes that happen? I believe if you're only wanting to go off five seconds, I believe the thing is the judge is the fire burning Lady Liberty. It's not the judge is the fire burning Lady Liberty. It's not the judge.

The judge is consuming freedom. Wouldn't you agree with me, Mr. Jones, that I sure hope some of your viewers are able to make that distinction that you just stood on that hair, don't you? All I know is is that I take this very seriously. I don't know what to say.

You're sitting in a courtroom and you're producing a video show that shows two things, the judge on fire and you're telling your audience that the judge presiding over your trial is involved in a child trafficking pedophilia network based on the fact that she's a judge who worked with Child Protective Services. So automatically, he's making two assumptions, that all Child Protective Service agents are pedophiles, and that all judges are pedophiles. All judges that work with Child Protective Services are pedophiles. That's the message he's putting out there in that video. And look, the hardcore Jones cult followers, you need to be deprogrammed from this stuff. I've been warning people for two decades to get away from it.

Because I've seen this pattern of exaggeration, lying, false claims, half-truths. Doc, you know, in this organization, I fired a key member of my team for prolific lying. Right.

I won't tolerate it. It's too risky to have somebody out here with me who lies, who exaggerates, who doesn't bring the facts. And I fired that person for lying. Not just lying once. It was a history of lying. A history of not bringing the facts out here to the studio. I fired that person. See,

there'll be people who will say, Rick, are you defending Child Protective Service? Look, I have been in the battle for missing children since the mid-1980s. Some of you were in diapers when I was working to help find missing children. You know, I've been at this for a long, long time. I am very aware that some Child Protective Service employees are corrupt and involved in child trafficking. Yes, absolutely. Twelve years ago, 2010, early 2010, I interviewed Georgia State Senator Nancy Schaefer, who had published a report, The Corrupt Business

of Child Protective Services. She was a state senator in the Georgia legislature. She came on True News. She revealed the findings of her investigation in the state of Georgia on missing children. It was about 2010, 2011. Early 2010. Doc, shortly after her appearance on True News, and I don't remember if it was one month, two months, three months,

shortly after she was on True News, she was murdered. She was murdered. She and her husband were found dead in their bedroom. The official story was husband killed her and then killed himself. That's the official story. Murder and suicide. All right.

So don't write to me and say, Rick, you don't know the truth. I know more than what you think I know. I've earned my stripes. I've been in this battle for a long, long time. But the difference between me and Alex Jones is I bring facts and I don't bring wild accusations

that I can't back up. And I don't like destroying people's reputations and making, just making wild claims about people without backing up the claim. Look, the biggest one is Jeffrey Epstein. And I was on that case for a long, long time. And I am absolutely convinced Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli spy.

And we took a lot of heat, a lot of heat. But I won't back down on that. But I'm not going to go out here and accuse some judge that I don't know and just say, well, because she's presiding

in a trial over me and she's presided over child protective services cases. Oh, she's a pedophile. Doc, that is outrageous. It is indefensible. And this is why he's in the mess that he's in today. And another aspect of Mr. Jones's testimony there where he's shown that material and said, I've never seen this. I don't know what this is. I don't know what this is about. This is his show. And I guarantee you, Rick is aware of everything

about the production of what we do on a day-to-day basis. And if something gets out here on the set, on the show that I don't see, you know what happens after the show. I want accountability. Who produced that? Who okayed it? Who did that?

So it's a tough job running these kind of organizations. Especially when you're dealing with news. News is extremely dangerous. And that's why we work so hard to go back to the sources of our material. Other people, they'll use any source whatsoever. You know, just, oh, I found this link on YouTube. Or this is a, you know, I found this on this particular site. And don't go back to original sources.

Right. We strive every day when we present news items to go back to the original source and just tell the story as it's told, but mainly by the media outlets that attack us. And so it's a sad day for Mr. Jones. It didn't have to end this way. No, but here's what Alex Jones has done. He became the poster boy for deplatforming

everybody. And because of Alex Jones, because of his irresponsible behavior, a lot of other people have suffered because of his wild accusations, of his half-truths, of his lies, of him exaggerating things for the purpose of what? Making money. This is a guy that was making, by his own claims, $60 to $70 million a year, which I have serious questions about it. But that's for somebody else to find out because the court can't even get his financial records. He won't even turn his financial records over to the court. And there'll be people right now sending me emails saying, you're lying, Rick. Alex gave them everything. No, he didn't. Read the transcripts.

He will not turn over the financial records just like he didn't turn over the text messages. And now he got caught at it and he could go to prison for 10 years for perjury. So, look, I think the Lord wants to deliver a lot of you from delusions. You know, a lot of people believed QAnon was real. They believed it. Okay? QAnon was real. They believed it. No matter how hard you try to tell people there's no such person as Q.

You're being fooled. You're being played. A lot of you need to be delivered from delusions because you're falling for some stuff. And personally, I think InfoWars is over. And it's a warning to everybody else in the media leaning on the right side. This is what we'll do to you too. Yes.

Okay, so we're coming for you. You're in line somewhere down the road. Yes. But we're giving you a heads up now. So change your ways, get right. That's right. But, you know, that's really what it's about. That's right. So you have to be squeaky clean in what you present.

The reason I get in trouble with people is not the facts that I present. It's my conclusions. It's my view on those facts. But they can't, they've never hit us on, oh, you're putting out falsehoods. You're putting out information that you can't substantiate. But that truth. No, we can substantiate it. You don't like my conclusion.

That's right. And we put the truth out there. They get mad about the truth we put out. Oh, yeah. They really get mad. Show them your own headlines here or your own bylines and everything or your own quotes out of stories.

That's what really... How dare you quote us? How dare you tell the truth? How dare you quote us? How dare you show people our articles? That's what I get in trouble for. But that's not the case with Alex. He's had a 25-year pattern of exaggeration. And some of you, again, you get really mad, but I'm telling you, I was there in Texas in the 90s. I know what he was doing. And he exaggerating things he was making up statements claims that

weren't real all right I still remember December 31st 1999 Y2K and he was on live radio telling people that Russian ICBMs had misfired and were in the air. Doc, it was so reckless to tell people that nuclear warheads were in the air. But those are the kind of things that he's done and gotten away with it because he milks the money out of people with sensationalism. That's all this is about. It's sensationalism to make money. And that's what this lawsuit is about. They're showing that, hey, you promoted a false story, knowingly did it, knowing that it was false, and you did it to get your sales up. And sometimes what they showed was $800,000 a day coming in.

Right. And we've seen those records that were provided to the court. Do you know what you have to do to get $800,000 a day in sales? Well, first of all, you need a warehouse for all the products you sold in one day. Just one day. Yes. Well, and I know there will be people who will say, well, he, he, he does drop shipping. Okay. Who's doing the drop shipping. Show me, where's the, where's the infrastructure inside to handle the orders. Okay.

Yeah. I know how to do drop shipping. That that's not a new concept, but you have to receive the orders, right? You have to have employees that receive the orders. There's so much infrastructure that has to be there to run a business that's doing $800,000 a day. And it's not there. That's another story. And I'm not going to touch that one. Somebody else will touch that story.

That's it for today. I'll be here tomorrow, and I'll read all your angry emails. But I'm telling you, it's the end of InfoWars. It's coming to an end very, very soon. He's in bankruptcy. He's met his waterloo. This is it for him. I want to serve the king of truth,

Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ does not want his servants lying. It's just that simple. There'll be people right, Rick, you can't say these. Jesus Christ does not want his servants lying.

That's all there is to it. Lying is from the devil. Satan is the father of lies. And all liars shall have their part in the lake of fire. It's just that simple.

There are standards in the Bible that you must adhere to and you can't bend the rules. And lying is absolutely prohibited and we can't lie. And that's all I'm trying to say. And so don't make excuses. Don't cover it up. You have to deal with it and say, yeah, you're right. He's lying. And now he's paying the consequences for it. And you ought to take it as a lesson in each of our own personal lives to be truthful and to be honest and not end up in that situation. That was a very sad, pathetic situation to be in. That's it for today.

I'll see you tomorrow. God bless. God bless you. you