TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles - FBI, DOJ, and News Media Ignore Joe Biden Bribery Scandals

Episode Date: June 13, 2023

Donald Trump was arrested today. Joe Biden was protected today. The news world could not become more surreal. News networks, newspapers, and online news websites are having a feeding frenzy on today��s arrest in Miami of former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the same news organizations are ignoring shocking reports that a Ukrainian business executive recorded numerous conversations with Joe and Hunter Biden about a $5 million bribe. How long will this dual standard of justice be allowed to continue in America. Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart. Airdate 6/13/23 You can partner with us by visiting TruNews.com/donate, calling 1-800-576-2116, or by mail at PO Box 690069 Vero Beach, FL 32969. It’s the Final Day! The day Jesus Christ bursts into our dimension of time, space, and matter. Now available in eBook and audio formats! Order Final Day from Amazon today! https://www.amazon.com/Final-Day-Characteristics-Second-Coming/dp/0578260816/ Apple users, you can download the audio version on Apple Books! https://books.apple.com/us/audiobook/final-day-10-characteristics-of-the-second-coming/id1687129858 The Fauci Elf is a hilarious gift guaranteed to make your friends laugh! Order yours today! https://tru.news/faucielf

You are listening to True News with Rick Wiles. We appreciate you tuning in. To find out more information regarding the broadcast, including prayer and financial support, please visit our website at truenews.com. Our mailing address for all correspondence is True News. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help us God. I'm Rick Wiles.

Donald Trump was arrested today and Joe Biden was protected today. The news world could not become more surreal. News networks, newspapers, and online news websites are having a feeding frenzy on today's arrest in Miami of former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the same news organizations are ignoring shocking reports that a Ukrainian business executive recorded numerous conversations with Joe and Hunter Biden about a $5 million bribe. How long will this dual standard of justice be allowed to continue in the United States of America?

Let's start with the arrest of President Trump today here in Florida. Doc Burkhart has this story from Miami Herald. Yes, headline there, Trump pleads not guilty in classified documents case in Miami federal court. The Miami Herald is reporting that former President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty to a 37-count indictment in Miami federal court, which accuses him of deliberately keeping government documents containing highly sensitive defense, weapons, and nuclear information at his Palm Beach estate in Mar-a-Lago. The indictment also accuses him of obstructing efforts by U.S. authorities to reclaim them. This marks the first federal prosecution of a former president and a potential hurdle in his renewed quest for the presidency in the 2024 election. A former presidential aide was also charged in the indictment as well.

So in a packed Miami courtroom today, President Trump entered his plea in a historic case marking that first federal prosecution. President Trump appeared before a magistrate judge on the 13th floor of the Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. Courthouse in downtown Miami. We most certainly enter a plea of not guilty. That's coming from Mr. Trump's attorney, Todd Blanche. And the response, the classified documents stored in the boxes included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the U.S. and foreign countries, United States nuclear programs, potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack, and plans for possible retaliation to a foreign attack. That's according to the indictment. So as Rick mentioned, it was a media feeding frenzy. We have some video here. This is President Trump approaching the courthouse earlier today and, of course, the motorcade pulling up.

Several protesters tried to approach the motorcade both as it advanced to the courthouse and after it left, but there was no indication of who the protesterscade, both as it advanced to the courthouse and after it left, but there was no indication of who the protesters were, whether they were identifying with President Trump or as opponents of President Trump. And so we have this report. This is also from the Miami Herald. This is President Trump responding to supporters

after he left the motorcade and was approaching the courthouse. Watch this. Love you! Woo! We love you! Thank you! We love you! Thank you. Thank you. And we also have this report. This is from Fox News.

This is one of President Trump's team, his attorney, Alina Haba. And she's blasting the indictment here in the statement outside the Miami courthouse. Joe Biden himself retained possession of classified documents that have not been prosecuted. And none of them came into possession of those documents while they were president. None of them were president who, as the head and sole member of the executive branch, has the power to summarily declassify documents. The decision to pursue charges against President Trump

while turning a blind eye to others is emblematic of the corruption that we have here. We are at a turning point in our nation's history. The targeting prosecution of a leading political opponent is the type of thing you see in dictatorships like Cuba and Venezuela. It is commonplace there for rival candidates to be prosecuted, persecuted, and put into jail. What is being done to the President Trump should terrify all citizens of this country. These are not the ideals that our democracy

is founded upon. This is not our America. Well, and as Rick said yesterday, though, the fact of the matter is that the ball is in the court of the Bidens. I mean, they control the narrative right now. The Bidens aren't going to be prosecuted. They're not going to go to jail. Nothing's going to happen to them. The fact of the matter is that the media and the administration are both playing on the same team. They're going after Donald Trump. They're going to take him out no matter what. They want him to die in prison, Rick. That's exactly what they want. And what I was saying yesterday, to the best of my ability, to explain how serious this is for President Trump. And I want to reiterate, I don't want to see President Trump in prison.

It's a horrible thing that's happening to him. I don't want to see that man convicted and sent to prison. What I was saying yesterday was, just looking at, from an unbiased position, just looking at the facts, it is not looking good for Donald Trump. There are two words I love in the Bible, but God. Yes.

But God. This is one of those times that God has to intervene, but Donald Trump needs to call upon the name of the Lord. You know, you can't rule out that some miraculous thing won't happen. That's a possibility. Everything's possible. But just on the surface,

just looking at it from a legal perspective, he's in deep trouble. And as I said yesterday, they gave him 37 counts. All they have to do is get a conviction on one. On the 37, he's facing over 500 years in prison. He could be found not guilty on 36 and found guilty on one and get 10 to 20 years prison. He's 78 years old. 20 years, he'll be 98 years old. That's all they need, Doc.

They just need one conviction. They don't care if the jury finds him not guilty on 36 counts. They just want one. Just enough to lock him up for 10, 15, 20 years. That's all they're looking for. And notice Professor Jonathan Turley is saying the same thing. I have a lot of respect for Professor Turley. I think he's one of the most outstanding constitutional experts in the country. Should have been on the Supreme Court years ago.

I've often wondered why Jonathan Turley was never appointed to the Supreme Court. I've got a lot of respect for him, but this is what he said today. He was being reported by the Hill. Yeah, it's calling a terminal sentence for President Trump, even if he's convicted on a single one of those 37 charges. According to the Hill, legal scholar Jonathan Turley has suggested that former President Trump could face what's being called a terminal sentence if the Department of Justice proves even one count against him in the ongoing investigations. Mr. Turley's comments come as the DOJ has reportedly ramped up its investigation into the Trump Organization's finances,

with prosecutors reportedly considering criminal charges against the company and its executives as well. Now, Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley says former President Trump could die in prison if convicted on just one count after being indicted by the Justice Department last week on dozens of charges related to his handling of classified documents. The problem is he's got to run the table. He's 76 years old, said Turley. He's speaking to The Hill. He spoke about Trump during the appearance on Fox News.

All the government has to do is stick the landing on one count, and you could have a terminal sentence. And you're talking about crimes that have a 10- or 20-year period as a maximum. So as Rick was saying, even if just one of these counts stick, let's say one count sticks and they go for a minimum of 10 years. Well, that's going to put President Trump in his 80s at this point. I said he was 70, 80, 76. So still 10, 10 years in prison. He's 86 years old when he's released from prison. It's not good, Doc.

But as we've seen in the past, don't count Donald Trump out on anything. I mean, he survived two impeachments and multiple charges against his organizations and companies. And so this is one that they are really betting the house on, aren't they? Yes, they have to. They got to lock him up. Let's go back to that first impeachment, 2019. Do you recall why he was impeached? It was over a phone call to Ukraine, wasn't it? To Ukraine, to Zelensky. Right. Of all people, he called Zelensky. And what did he want to know? What was he talking to Zelensky about? Where's the money, basically? Which money? It was about Biden. Right. He wanted Zelensky to tell him what he knew about Joe and Hunter Biden doing business in Ukraine. Specifically as related to Burisma.

Yes. Now, a staff member of the National Security Council, Colonel Vindman, was in the room and overheard an illegal phone call by the President of the United States demanding that a foreign leader interfere in the U.S. election. That was Vindman's claim. Do you know who else was involved in that episode? A guy named Jake Sullivan. And what was his connection inside? Well, he was involved in the Biden campaign,

as was Blinken. And he, at one point, was in charge of the Penn Center, the Biden Center for the University of Pennsylvania. So all the crooks involved with Biden in Ukraine are now in the Biden White House. That's true. Okay. So maybe we should reopen the Trump impeachment, revisit it.

I mean, thank God he was impeached, but thank God the Senate did not convict him. But maybe the House Republicans should reopen the impeachment, not to re-impeach President Trump, but to unimpeach him based on what we know now about the Bidens and Ukraine. Right. So what were they doing then, Doc? The Democrats were terrified that the truth about Biden in Ukraine was going to come out. And fast forward to this very week where the Senate is finally getting access to that 1023 document.

And in that document, according to Senator Grassley and other senators, this is the big deal. Not only did Hunter Biden get bribed for five million, so did Joe Biden. Yes. That's what the document claims. So the FBI has been sitting on this. We have this other whistleblower that went to the FBI and said that he was aware that there was evidence

implicating Joe Biden and Hunter Biden in a multi-million dollar bribe scandal. The FBI has been sitting on that information for years. They've kept it buried, kept it hidden. When it came out in recent months, members of the House and Senate, Republicans, told FBI Director Wray, we want to see the document. Not classified. Not classified. Mr. Wray said, sorry, can't do that.

Not going to let you see it. They were going to House, the House investigators were going to cite FBI Director Wray for contempt of Congress. Right.

So he gave a little bit. They cut a deal. He said the Republicans could come over to the FBI building, go into a secure room, and look at the document. They couldn't touch it. They couldn't take pictures of it. They could look at it. He would let them do that.

He would let them. Think about it. The FBI director is telling members of the House and Senate who are investigating the FBI, investigating the president, we will let you look at this document. We will set the rules. We'll tell you how much time you can spend in the room looking at the document.

But they agreed to it. And so, the House Republicans and the House, or the Senate Republicans who went there came back with the knowledge, yes, there is a document from a whistleblower alleging corruption against Biden. But what we learned today

is something else. And we're going to get to that in just a minute. So, Senator Chuck Grassley, you know, Doc, he's how old is Senator Grassley? He's in his mid-80s, late 80s.

As old as corn's been growing in Iowa. I mean, wow. He's been around for a while. Here's the thing about Chuck Grassley. He's a 33rd degree Freemason. But he's one of the best U.S. Senators. For a Freemason, he's not bad, huh?

He is an excellent U.S. Senator. But he is a 33rd degree Freemason. But he's an excellent U.S. Senator, but he is a 33rd degree Freemason. But he's an excellent U.S. Senator. And I got a lot of respect for him. I mean, he doesn't give up. He goes after things. And so he made a statement on the floor of the Senate. And so this video is from C-SPAN.

We broke it up into two segments. We want you to hear what Senator Grassley said. Was this yesterday or today? Yesterday. Yesterday. Yes. This is yesterday. Listen, here's part one. Time on the Senate floor. I think I told my fellow senators that what's so unusual about an unclassified document being given to the public, when, I think it was May the 18th of this year, there was leaked to the New York Times a classified document and even the name of a confidential human source.

So we're kind of in a strange situation here. Classified document can be leaked to the New York Times, but a non-classified document can't be made public to 300 million Americans if they're interested in reading it. Now, accordingly, Congress still lacks a full and complete picture with respect to what that document really says. That's why it's important that the document be made public without unnecessary redactions for the American people to see. Can you believe redacting an unclassified document? So now, let me assist for the purposes of more transparency on this subject. The 1023 produced to the House Committee's redacted reference that the foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden

allegedly has audio recordings of his conversation with them. 17 such recordings. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses 15 audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then Vice President Joe Biden. And the FBI has been sitting on it for years.

It means raised in on this. This corruption. The FBI is rotten to the bone, Doc. I mean, it is corrupt and rotten. Well, we could talk another time about what has to be done to straighten out the justice system in this country, but you can't continue with the agencies that you have.

So there is a foreign national that we now know is a Burisma Energy executive who recorded 17 conversations, 15 conversations with Hunter Biden, two directly with Joe Biden when he was vice president. Right. Regarding bribes. And you're saying it's five million each. Five million to Joe, five million to Hunter. That's what the various reports out there are saying today.

But Donald Trump was at the courthouse today in Miami being arrested. That's right, Rick. I don't know if these guys, this regime, I don't know if they understand or care about how much anger is building up in a significant portion of the American public about the

corruption, the double standards, the brazen, boastful, proud, arrogant attitude of these people that we can do anything we want to do. You can't do anything about it. And so far, they've been right. Yes, that's what I was going to say. So far, they've got a good track record on it. Senator Grassley, you know, made the comparison between what's happening with President Trump and the lack of what's happening to the Bidens. And, you know, this is hypocrisy. This is, you know, an injustice. And so we have a little bit more of that video with Senator Grassley addressing the Senate floor yesterday evening. Here is Senator Grassley.

These recordings were allegedly kept as a sort of insurance policy for the foreign national in case that he got into a tight spot. The 1023 also indicates that then-Vice President Joe Biden may have been involved in Berugement employing Hunter Biden. Based on the facts known to the Congress and the public, it's clear that the Justice Department and the FBI haven't nearly had the same laser focus on the Biden family. Special Counsel Jack Smith has used a recording against former President Trump. Well, what is U.S. Attorney Weiss doing with respect to these alleged Joe and Hunter Biden recordings that are apparently relevant to the high-stakes bribery scheme. Getting a full and complete 1023 is critical for the American people to know and understand the true nature of the document and to hold the Justice Department and the FBI accountable. It's also important for asserting constitutional and congressional oversight powers against an out-of-control executive branch obviously drunk with political infection.

Remember, Congress has received 1023s in the past, and they've been made public. So asking for this 1023 to be turned over to the American people to read is not an unusual thing that goes on with 1023s. Congress owes it to the American people and the brave and heroic whistleblowers to continue to fight for transparency in this matter and make this document public without unnecessary redactions. And I want everybody to remember that I have read the unredacted version, except for a couple or three half-inch redactions, I'd say. Thank you very much.

I was just thinking, Doc, $5 million to Joe, $5 million to Hunter. But actually, the actual numbers is $7.5 million to Joe Biden, $2.5 million to Hunter. Here's how you get the math. They each got $5 million. But according to Hunter Biden's emails on his laptop, he was required to give 50% of his take to his dad. So that means of Hunter Biden's $5 million bribe money, he only got to keep $2.5 million.

He had to give the other $2.5 million to his dad. So Joe Biden walked off with $7.5 million. If you just go by their own words. This is just one, one bribe. That's not counting the China bribes. $10 million in China money. Where's the money? Where is the money now?

Where do they hide this money? Once they get their hands on it, where does it go? Nobody's asking the question. Where's the money trail? If we can find where the money is going, we'll find the other scandals. And it's going to be a lot bigger than Burisma in China. Joe was doing this for decades. It's the only skill he's got.

Yeah, because what is the Biden family business? They don't make widgets. Shakedowns. Well, they've got some real estate. Shakedowns. James Biden swoops in and does reconstruction of things we blow up. But you remember in that first indictment, a couple things that came up in it. First, it was the connection.

President Trump was asking about connections with Hunter Biden and Burisma, but he also was talking to Zelensky about the DNC server. Remember that? That was part of the narrative that everybody says to this day is a conspiracy theory. I think that they were flying over the target at that point. But President Trump trusted two people to assist him in this. One was Rudy Giuliani, who was actually making headway, it seemed like, and William Barr, who I think was running interference on it. And so it's interesting that all this now is now coming up to today, to this very week with that 1023

forum now really being revealed that it turns out that all these things that we were talking about back then now i wouldn't be surprised in the next week or so to say hey we there is a server over here uh yeah it wouldn't shock me at all at this point and they'll just come out and say they'll just admit it nothing will happen that's right nothing will happen. Remember when Attorney General Barr came into the Trump administration directly after the funeral of former President George Herbert Walker Bush? Right. When those mysterious envelopes were handed out in the funeral. And Jeb Bush almost passed out when he received his envelope. I mean, when he read, he almost passed out.

You could see it on camera. He turned white, so. And you can only imagine. I mean, I'm not even going to speculate because it would be wrong to speculate what was in the envelope. But we all have imaginations. My personal thought, I'm not going to go beyond saying one thing.

I think, I think the envelope contained a photograph of George Herbert Walker Bush at his funeral. I mean, something, I think there was a photograph in the envelope. I think that's why his son almost passed out. The Bush family, what I was told then was the Bush family cut a peace treaty, a deal with the Trumps. The Bushes were running the operation to remove Trump. And suddenly there was a deal. And the next thing you know, William Barr is appointed

Attorney General. And what I was told from a source was the deal, the peace treaty deal between the Trumps and the Bushes required Barr to be appointed Attorney General to

implement for Barr to be appointed Attorney General to implement the terms of the agreement. So Barr was never loyal to Trump. He was always loyal to the Bushes, but he was there to make sure that whatever they agreed to, those terms would be kept. Now that's what I was told. It's hard to prove something like that. Because Mr. Barr was never a true friend of Donald Trump at all. Never really defended him in any of the attacks.

And Mr. Barr knew about these scandals when he was Attorney General. Of course he did. He knew about these scandals when he was Attorney General. Of course he did. He knew about these things. And he didn't press the FBI to investigate. He didn't tell the news media, hey, the FBI has, they've got a whistleblower that heard Joe Biden

has recorded 17 phone calls with the Bidens on but Mr. Barr knew these things. He was the attorney general at that time. Where we're at is, Doc, this arrest of Donald Trump today, his arrest, his arraignment today was timed to cover up from the public's eyes this explosive revelation about the 17 phone calls. It was timed. this explosive revelation about the 17 phone calls. It was timed. The Bidens knew this was coming out. They orchestrated the arrest of Donald Trump to happen in the same week that the revelations about the phone calls came out

so that the attention was on Donald Trump and nobody's looking at the Bidens. That's what's going on today. It's not about so much putting Trump in prison as it is keeping Biden out of prison. Okay, that makes sense. That's what's taking place. The former attorney general,

this was, what was his name? After Mr. Barr. I forget his name. He was on Fox News. And he made some comments in response to Senator Grassley, his statements in the in the U.S. Senate. We'll watch this together and remember his name. I apologize. I don't recall his name. Here it is. Let's bring in former acting attorney general Matt Whitaker.

Matt, if verified, these phone calls that were recorded, could they bring down Joe Biden? Well, good morning. It's good to be with you both. Todd, to your point, yes, I mean, this is this is explosive. And, you know, there's so many issues surrounding this. But remember what my home state Senator Chuck Grassley said. This was redacted from the document they looked at, the 1023 that was Chris Wray finally provided to the House and the Senate, that this information, that there were recordings of the president of the United States talking to a foreign national about bribes, was redacted from that 1023. That's extraordinary in and of itself. Now, the contents, if true, I mean,

obviously, this is a cataclysmic event because you just don't have these types of recordings usually available. And if, you know, it will prove essentially what Joe Biden knew and what his scheme was to abuse his power as vice president. Apologize to Mr. Whitaker. I couldn't recall his name, Matt Whitaker. And he wasn't a replacement to Mr. Barr. He was the man who replaced Jeff Sessions. Right.

So he was between Jeff Sessions and William Barr. He should have been attorney general. He was the only person in that position who was loyal to Donald Trump. But he never got the job. He was an acting Attorney General.

Now, I want to go to World War III. Wall Street Journal reporting today that the Biden administration is going to send depleted uranium ammo for tanks to the Ukrainian army. After they said they weren't going to do it.

But we know the way it works. Zelensky demands it. The NATO team says we can't do it. And then later they say, okay, we'll do it, but nothing else. Yes. But don't use it against Russia. Don't use it against Russia. And don't ask for anything else. Do a pinky swear. You're not going to use it against in Russia. This is serious. U.S. is sending depleted uranium. Same type of shells the U.S. Army used against the Iraqi people. And they're still suffering to this day. Right.

They were accused of human rights abuse. The U.S. was accused of human rights abuses for using depleted uranium shells in the Iraqi war. The U.S. war regime wrongly accused Saddam Hussein of having weapons of mass destruction. We invaded Iraq and we used weapons of mass destruction. You got it. That's the way they work. Well, now, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the U.S. is planning to approve the sale of depleted uranium tank rounds to Ukraine, a move that is planning to approve the sale of depleted uranium tank rounds to Ukraine, a move that is

likely to provoke Russia. The sale of the ammunition is part of a $46 million military aid package, which is yet to be officially announced. Now, depleted uranium rounds are controversial due to their potential long-term health and environmental effects. The U.S. previously used such ammunition in Iraq and has faced criticism for its use, as Rick has mentioned. I have a few quotes from this article. The projectile hits like a freight train, said Scott Boston, a defense analyst at the RAND Corporation and a former Army artillery officer. It is very long and very dense, so it puts a great deal of kinetic energy on a specific point on an enemy armor array. Basically, it's a tank killer. And so,

while depleted uranium is a byproduct of the uranium enrichment process, it doesn't generate a nuclear reaction. The United Nations Environment Program said in a report last year that the metal's chemical toxicity presents the greatest potential danger, and it can cause skin irritation, kidney failure, and increase the risk of cancer. Now, Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused Britain of proliferating weapons with a nuclear component, an assertion that has led to British complaints that Moscow was engaging in disinformation. John Kirby, the National Security Coordinator for Strategic Communications, said in March that the Russian argument was disingenuous and that Moscow's principal concern was the heightened threat to its tanks.

This kind of ammunition is fairly commonplace, Kirby said, adding that studies indicate it isn't a radioactive threat, but at the time the U.S. wasn't providing Ukraine with any depleted uranium rounds. So as we like to do here occasionally on True News, let's flip the script. All right. Let's say that Russia announced that it was going to start using depleted uranium rounds. What would be the U.S. reaction to that, Rick? What would be the U.K.'s reaction to that? What would they be accusing Russia of doing with depleted uranium rounds? Well, we're going to find out very soon.

That's right. Very soon. Look at this next article. This is Interfax. So President Putin announces the right to use depleted uranium in response to use by Kiev. Okay? So turnabout is fair play. Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia has the right also to use depleted uranium shells in response to their use by Ukraine. Mr. Putin made the comments during a meeting with military correspondents, and this is according to a report from Interfax, he said, quote, there is no need

to act proactively here, but if Ukraine uses them, shells with depleted uranium, then we also reserve the right to use this ammunition. We have them in stock. We do not use them simple, Mr. Putin said at a meeting with war correspondents. Now, according to the president, there is nothing good in the use of this type of shells. There is nothing good here. But if necessary, we are able to do it, Mr. Putin added. So, all right, now the West is going to start giving Ukraine depleted uranium shells. Now Russia is going to start using depleted uranium shells. We're just stepping this up one step at a time. Now we've got,

you can say it's not a nuclear component, Mr. Kirby, but let's face it, it's uranium. They make uranium bombs with uranium. Would Mr. Kirby let his, I assume he has grandchildren, would he let his grandchildren play in a playground with depleted uranium residue? Of course not. Of course you wouldn't. And that's what Iraq is dealing with right now to this day. Yeah, why not? Because it's dangerous, Rick.

Yes, because the children will end up with cancer. He knows what to do. So Biden is increasing the U.S. involvement in the war, and we're just getting closer and closer to a big confrontation. Over next door from Russia, Belarus, which is an ally of Russia, the president of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko. He said today he had no hesitation whatsoever to use Russian nuclear weapons in response to aggression on his country, Belarus. Russia is deploying nuclear weapons in the next several weeks in Belarus. That's right. So according to Belton News, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has stated that there will be no hesitation in using nuclear weapons

in response to any aggression on Belarus. Now, President Lukashenko emphasized that the weapons would only be used in response to aggression and that his country would like to avoid situations where nuclear weapons would have to be used. The president also highlighted the significant power of the nuclear weapons that will be deployed in Belarus, stating that they are a deterrent weapon. So speaking about the reasons for the deployment of Russian tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, the president explained, why do we need them? Listen to this statement. To make sure not a single foreign soldier sets their foot on

Belarusian land again. That's the reason right there. It's the same reason we have nuclear weapons, the very same one. And he went on in a second article, he went on and elaborated why, under what circumstances he would use nuclear weapons in this war. And this is also from Belta News, which is the news agency of Belarus. Right. So Belta News also reports that Belarus and President Alexander Lukashenko has outlined the circumstances that might lead to the use of nuclear weapons from the country's territory, stating that the weapons would be deployed at his personal request to Russia to guarantee the security of the country. President Lukashenko stressed that the request

was not an attempt at nuclear blackmail and that the weapons would be used only in response to aggression against the land area of Belarus. The president also revealed that Belarus is preparing sites for strategic nuclear weapons. There's a difference there, but currently only has tactical nuclear weapons at its disposal. So he explains the difference here. Says it's not about Russia at all. First, I asked the Russian president, then insisted in a friendly manner that they give me back these weapons, tactical, not strategic. They'd be enough, but he says for the time being he says according to the president there is currently no need to deploy

strategic nuclear weapons for example the russian topal missiles in belarus why should i need strategic total missiles well we are preparing sites for these weapons they are all operational except one therefore if the need arises we are preparing sites for these weapons they are all operational except one therefore if the need arises we are ready to deploy these weapons at any time he goes on to say topal is an intercontinental missile am i going to fight the united states no i'm not these nuclear weapons these tactical nuclear weapons are enough for me for now, the head of state said. That was my request. It was not Russia that imposed the decision on me. Why? Because as you all say, no one has even fought with a nuclear power. I do not want anybody to fight with us. Is there

such a threat? Yes, there is. I must prevent this threat, the president explained. So he's making the difference between tactical nuclear weapons and strategic nuclear weapons. Now, notice what he says here, though. He's already requested for Russia to supply tactical nuclear weapons, but he's left the door open for the preparation of tactical nuclear weapons on Belarusian soil. They've prepared the sites. He has tactical nukes now. He's leaving the door open for intercontinental ballistic missiles. Well, that's what I'm saying. For strategic nuclear weapons.

He's saying, we already have the silos and they're all operational but one. We just haven't put the ICBM. Which one yet? We haven't loaded the silos yet with the ICBMs. But I could do it. That's what he's saying.

And then he said, do I want to fight with the United States? No. But if we have to, we're going to have the missiles. And, you know, there are other targets besides the United States. There are targets a lot closer. That's right. Doc, last week I saw a story out of the London newspapers, and we never got around to talking about it here on True News last week,

but it is important, and I wanted to bring it out for our audience. This version is from the Guardian newspaper. NATO members may send troops to Ukraine. Did you see the story anywhere? Anywhere at all? Shake your head again. Look at this. Members of NATO may deploy troops to Ukraine,

warns former alliance chief. We've been saying this for many, many months. It was a Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orban, who said, look, I've been in the meetings. They're talking about sending troops to Ukraine. Now, they're not talking about sending NATO troops, but individual NATO member states could send troops, which is the doublespeak that they use. So the Guardian is reporting that former NATO Secretary General Anders Rasmussen has warned that a group of NATO countries may be willing to send troops to Ukraine if member states, including the U.S., do not provide tangible security guarantees to Kyiv at the upcoming NATO summit in Vilnius. General Rasmussen has been touring Europe and Washington to gauge the shifting mood before the critical summit starts on July 11th. He also warned that even if a group of states did provide Ukraine with security guarantees. Others would not allow the issue

of Ukraine's future NATO membership to be kept off the agenda at Vilnius as well. So Rasmussen made his remarks as the current NATO chief, Ian Stoltenberg, said the issue of security guarantees would be on the agenda at the upcoming meeting, but added that NATO, under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, only provided full-fledged security guarantees to full members. Rasmussen said, if NATO cannot agree on a clear path forward for Ukraine, there is the possibility that some countries individually might take action. Now, we know that Poland is very engaged in providing concrete assistance to Ukraine. And I wouldn't exclude the possibility that Poland would engage even stronger in this context Poland is very engaged in providing concrete assistance to Ukraine.

And I wouldn't exclude the possibility that Poland would engage even stronger in this context on a national basis and then be followed by the Baltic states, maybe including the possibility of troops on the ground. Let me talk. This is, I mean, Anders Rosemason was the commander. He was secretary General of NATO. He had the same job that Stoltenberg has now. He is telling us, when he says, I wouldn't be surprised, I wouldn't rule out the possibility

that Poland may send troops, he already knows Poland's going to send troops. Right. He probably suggested to Poland that they send troops. He already knows Poland's going to send troops. He probably suggested to Poland that they send troops. He was probably in the meetings where they had discussions. How can we get troops into Ukraine without NATO officially invading and attacking Russia? What if an individual NATO nation goes into Ukraine?

That's the discussion, in particular, Poland. Okay, so if Poland sends troops into Ukraine and fights the Russians, then the Russians are going to bomb Poland. But Poland is a member of NATO, and now they trigger Article 5, and NATO must, as an alliance, attack Russia. So is this a sneaky way to start the war?

I mean, when I say start, it's already started. But I mean, to take it to the next level? Because they're just itching for this nuclear war with Russia. These guys are bloodthirsty idiots. They want this nuclear war with Russia. These guys are bloodthirsty idiots. They want this nuclear war with Russia and they don't want to just come out and say, we're declaring war on Russia. They have to get Russia to do something that justifies NATO bombing Russia. Well, now, if you recall here, I guess it was two or three months back where we were talking about what the plans are for the end of the war when it's all said and done.

And that most of Western Ukraine would likely end up where? In Poland. And there'd just be a little bitty tiny piece of Ukraine, a Kiev Republic or, you know, in the eastern provinces would be under the control of Russia. Maybe this is that, quote, sneaky way for Poland to get involved in all of this, occupy Western Ukraine, and then the war draws to a close at that point. Does Russia want to get into a full engagement with Poland? Or do they both see where this is heading at the end of the line? I guess it would come down to whether Polish troops are occupying Western Ukraine or Polish troops are engaging Russian troops. If the Polish troops occupy Western Ukraine, I don't think Russia is going to do anything.

I agree with you. I could see that scenario playing out. And Russia might just say, okay. You get what you wanted. But the moment you kill a Russian troop, one Russian soldier, we're coming after you. So this, I think, is a real possibility that we're going to see Poland and other countries.

But he said, was it he or was it Mr. Lukashenko that said about the Baltic countries? It was Rasmussen. Rasmussen? Yes. Yes. So he has some awareness that other countries are going to follow Poland, which would be, what, Latvia? Estonia. Estonia.

Right. And, of course, the big drills are going on in Latvia this week, I mean, and Estonia this week. And so one more quote from General Rasmussen, I think the Poles would seriously consider going in and assemble a coalition of the willing if Ukraine doesn't get anything in Vilnius. We shouldn't underestimate the Polish feelings. The Poles feel that for too long, Western Europe did not listen to their warnings against the true Russian mentality.

I think General Rasmussen is telegraphing to us what the plan is, and that is for Poland to make their advance. Hey, Poland's going to be the new European superpower if they don't get blown up. What I hear is that this thing's not winding down soon. If you have any hopes, maybe this war is going to stop soon. It's not. It's going to go all the way through 2023.

Their problem is 24. It's an election year in America. And they've already said, we know that the American public doesn't have a stomach for war. And when we get into the election season, there's going to be pressure for

the United States to get out of the war. So they've got to make, they've got to finish this war in 2023. So there's very little hope that this summer we're going to see an end to the war. This is going to go into the fall. End of November, December. Unless somebody blows up something big.

Yeah, so. Speaking of blowing things up, the Russian military released some video today. They claim that they have been blowing up Bradley tanks. Leopard tanks, yes. Yeah, leopard tanks, and they've been capturing them. This is a little video that the Russian military put out today of their troops capturing some Bradley tanks. РПГ-22, да? А вот он, фрисовский, нахваленный леопард.

О, их две техники работают. Это Бретли. Ну вот. Не так уж и страшна эта техника. Вот так вот. Слава России! Победа будет для нас! The engine was still running. Yeah. Where were the Ukrainian soldiers?

Were they dead or did they run? We don't know. I've been seeing a lot of videos of dead Ukrainian soldiers, though, lately. There's more to the war that's going. Remember back in wars in the past, at least for the past 34 years, I always had the press embedded with military, right? Not this time. Not this war. They don't want you seeing what's really going on this war. I mean, that's a good point, doc. We don't have any CNN or Fox news reporters. Nope. Nope. They, I mean, they were doing that in Vietnam.

I mean, they were doing it every war. But they're not here on this one. Not here. No CNN crew hiding out in the bushes with the Ukrainian heroes, right? Mm-hmm. So. You know, going back to the story of the Nord Stream pipeline, you remember the story of the yacht? Yes.

And at first, I think we were, you know, you and I were both saying, oh, yeah, sure. Okay, the yacht story. Here's a new propaganda story. But that yacht story has legs. And you know where that yacht takes you to? Poland. That's right.

Because there were those connections there at the time, if I recall. There is a growing group of people who believe that Poland was in the center of the operation

to blow up the pipeline. It's possible that the U.S. military outsourced it to Poland. This next story, this was a Wall Street Journal. U.S. warned Ukraine not to attack Nord Stream. Now, isn't this an odd article to pop up now? It came out today. So according to the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. I thought Russia blew it off. Yes. According to the Wall Street Journal, the U.S.

warned Ukraine not to take any action against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, that Russian gas pipeline project, as it could damage relations with Germany and other European allies. Now, the warning came as Ukraine considered plans to send troops to retake control of the Crimean Peninsula, which was annexed by Russia in 2014. The Nord Stream 2 pipeline had been a source of tension between the U.S. and Germany with the U.S. imposing sanctions on the project. Now, can I just stop right there? Sure. The pipeline was not a source of tension between. Oh, I take that back. Yes, it was a tension between the u.s and germany i thought it said russia and germany so um yes the u.s was very upset about the pipeline and the

germans wanted the pipeline they helped pay for it so so the u.s cia uh warned the ukrainian government not to attack the nord stream gas pipelines last summer after it obtained detailed information about a Ukrainian plot to destroy a main energy connection between Russia and Europe, officials familiar with the exchange said. Who put out the story that Russia blew it up? We heard that propaganda for months. And now we're being told,

no, no, no, the CIA, they said, Ukraine, do not blow up that pipeline. So the message delivered by CIA officials back in June followed a tip the CIA received from the Military Intelligence Service of the Netherlands.

In a recent interview with the German newspaper Bild, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said, I believe that our military, our intelligence did not do it. And when anyone claims the opposite, I would like them to show us the evidence. Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that German investigators were examining evidence that suggested a Ukrainian sabotage team had used Poland, a European Union neighbor and NATO ally, as a hub for the logistics and financing of last year's attack. So investigators haven't accused Poland's government or any Polish individuals of involvement. So there's where you have the Poland connection to all of this. One thing's for sure.

Poland has a massive financial claim in from World War II against Germany. They want billions of dollars. Trillions. Trillions. 1.3 trillion. Trillions of dollars in reparations for World War II. Germany's going to come back and say, well, we're going to counter sue you for blowing up our pipeline that we helped the Russians build.

And that we know that you helped Ukraine or did it on behalf of Ukraine. One thing's for sure. Russia did not blow up the Russian pipeline. We know Russia didn't do it. Okay, let's move into the financial realm, because the Russian pipeline. We know Russia didn't do it. Okay. Let's move into

the financial realm because this is all tied together. World War III, the sanctions on Russia, the BRICS nations, new currency, all this is tied together. Bloomberg News.

Emmanuel Macron to host Saudi crown Prince for Mideast talks this Friday. Okay, so listen to this story because it kind of sets the context for several stories following here. So French President Emmanuel Macron will host Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Paris on Friday. Now the two leaders will discuss bilateral relations as well as Middle Eastern and international topics. That's according to Bloomberg. This will be Prince Mohammed's second visit to France since last July following the 2018 killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi,

which damaged the kingdom's ties with the West. Macron has strengthened France's ties with the Gulf Arab countries, particularly in defense. And France is also involved in the development of the kingdom's Al-Ula region. That's where the line is going to be. So Macron has strengthened France's ties, especially in defense, as Houthi fighters in Yemen attack the United Arab Emirates in Saudi Arabia, targeting their energy infrastructure.

Saudi Arabia and France also have ties in the cultural sector. France has then evolved in the development of the kingdom's historic Al-Ula region, which Prince Mohammed wants to turn to a global tourism destination. Now, tie this together with the next article that follows. This is from First Post reporting from Egypt. Egypt drubs dollar in trade with BRICS nations. So according to a report by First Post, there's a growing trend among countries to abandon the use of the U.S. dollar in international trade. So recently, Egypt has joined this movement by opting to use other currencies in trade with several member states of the BRICS economic bloc.

So this decision is in line with the trend of de-dollarization, which has been gaining momentum in recent years. So the move is seen as a way to reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar and to increase economic ties with other countries. It's also a reflection of the growing global shift towards a multipolar world order, where the dominance of the U.S. dollar may no longer be guaranteed. So the article states, Egypt now seeks to use local currencies to pay for its imports from India, China, and Russia, key members of the BRICS. Brazil and South Africa are also members of this group. Nothing of the sort has been implemented.

This is coming from Egypt, but there are discussions so that we can trade in local currencies of countries like India, Russia, or China, said Egyptian Supply Minister Ali Morsali. Now, next story. Get ready, because we're going to go back to Macron. This is from the French outlet L'Opinion. Why Emmanuel Macron wants to go to the BRICS summit. The BRICS nations are meeting in South Africa in August. There's actually talk, Doc, it's out in today's press that they may, there's talk that they may move the summit meeting from South Africa. Right. Because

of President Putin. President Putin wants to attend and South Africa is a signatory to the International Criminal Court Treaty and they would be obligated to arrest him when he arrives. Right. And several provincial governors have said they would do it too in South Africa.

I wouldn't be surprised if the BRICS meeting moves to China. Or Paris. No. BRICS meeting moves to China. Or Paris. No. Macron would be obligated to arrest Putin. Oh, because he's ICC there, too. Yes.

So nobody's going to go into China and arrest Putin. So what's Mr. Macron's play here, Rick? What's happening here? Well, this is really interesting. Is Emmanuel Macron getting ready to jump ship, leave the European Union, leave the Euro, join the BRICS nation? Is France going to join the BRICS?

Is he the first rat off this burning ship? Well, he did have an interesting trip to China here not too long ago. Recall those meetings? Remember, he went over to lecture Xi Jinping and Xi Jinping lectured him. Right.

And he came back with a whole different attitude about China. There's something afoot here. And tie this with an article, this is from last week, about two weeks ago. This is from the Daily Star. BRICS ministers urge a rebalancing of the global order. So you have some of the primary members of the BRICS alliance there. So back on June 1st, the Daily Star reported that foreign ministers from Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa have called for a rebalancing of the

global order during a two-day conference in Cape Town. The ministers discussed opportunities to strengthen and transform global governance systems with a focus on providing global leadership in a world fractioned by competition, geopolitical tension, inequality, and deteriorating global security. Now, the talks preceded a heads of state summit in August, which is proving problematic for a host South Africa due to the possible attendance of Russian President Vladimir Putin, as Rick pointed out. A couple of statements from that particular article, which issues the strong opinions of some of these ministers that attend it. Our gathering must send out a strong message that the world is multipolar, that it is rebalancing, and that old ways cannot address new situations.

This is coming from India's foreign minister, Jashankar, speaking during the opening remarks. We are a symbol of change and must act accordingly. And then the South African foreign minister, our vision of BRICS is for our partnership to provide global leadership in a world fractured by competition, tension, inequality, and deteriorating global security. That's coming from South African Foreign Minister Nalali Pandor at the meeting. So what is really going to happen this summer at that BRICS summit? BRICS to this point has been more basically an economic alliance with the five major countries. But we're looking at adding anywhere at the upcoming BRICS Summit,

14 to 30 nations to the BRICS Alliance. That's for sure. That's happening. But is BRICS now about to become something new? Yes, yes. Is it going to become a competitor, let's say, to the United Nations? Yes.

I believe the United Nations is dying. It will be replaced. Most likely there will be two global organizations for represent nations. The West will have their own and I have lived under all our lives. For roughly 75 years, since the end of World War II, basically 75 years, this new world order has been in control it's dying it's dying before our eyes the old dying new world order is like a it's like a you know a like a large animal dangerous animal that's wounded, bleeding, trapped, and knows it's about to go down. But still dangerous. It's still very, very dangerous. And that's why we have this war taking place right now.

There's a new world order rising. The old world, new world order, is going to try to remake itself. They're going to try to rebrand. That group I would put Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum, the European Union,

the Bilderberg Boys, Council on Foreign Relations, you know, the Western elite. That's in the old world order. They're trying to rebrand. They're trying to get back on top. This war is about them regaining control. To maintain their status as king of the hill.

Yes. But we are witnessing a profound change in the world. And I'm not afraid of it. As an American, would I like my country to be the dominant nation in the world? Yes, but not dominating. Not at the expense of other people, other nations. I would like America to be the leading country. There's a difference between leading and dominating.

The rulers of America and the West have become arrogant, proud, cocky, and I think they border on lunatic at this point. They're corrupt. They don't think they're responsible. They don't think they're accountable for anything and that they can do anything. Nobody can do anything about them. And that includes the American people.

We can't hold them accountable. So we're witnessing, they'll even put a former president in prison. But that world order's dying. And we're watching it. And so as an American, you know, I wish my country, America, was

still the number one country in the world. But we as a nation have forfeited that right because we became arrogant and proud. And most of all, we're in defiance of Almighty God. That's our worst sin, Doc. We have become a defiant nation. And so our power is being taken away. God is stripping away our power, our prestige, our wealth. And that doesn't mean the United States is going to disappear unless there's an all-out war.

But we're not going to disappear as a nation. But we're not going to be the same nation you and I have known our entire lives. Right. And empires have risen in the past. And there are still countries of previous empires that exist to this day. Italy, I mean, Rome, Greece, France dominated the world for a while. Spain dominated the world for a while. Great Britain.

Yeah, and the United States. So we're about to join that club of former empires. Now, could it be that the United States might be a smaller nation? It might even be a shadow of its former self. We might be, we might be balkanized ourselves. Yeah. America may break up into three or four nations. And right now I wouldn't oppose it. It would be better than the misery we're all living in right now. If there was a peaceful divorce among the American people. Okay. all of you people that are against god and and and you want your your wicked immorality you want that kind of a lifestyle

go over there in that part of the country and stay away from us right right now i'd be happy i just want to live my life in peace. I don't want this stuff going on. This is what Russia's saying. Get out of our face. Get away from our border. Leave us alone. So we're watching this thing die right now. So actually, we ought to be grateful. We ought to be relieved because God is answering our prayers. That's right. And whatever the empire is, God's going to use that empire. He used the Roman roads to circulate the gospel. He used British ships to get missionaries all over the world. He's used the United States to fund missionaries all over the world.

I mean, God will use whatever empire is available to him for his purpose, his plans. My ways are not your ways. Your thoughts are not my thoughts. They're far above yours. I've got a bigger plan than you do. And so we as Christians, we need to be looking at the big picture. God has a plan, the kingdom. That's right.

The kingdom. The kingdom above kingdoms of this world. That's right. And the gospel is going to be preached in all the world. And that's my commitment is to the Great Commission. Am I sorry? I mean, do I feel bad that America is going to be in this diminished role? Yeah.

It sickens me as a patriot to see what's happened to this country. It's really sickening, but it's not going to, it's not going to talk. It's not going to hold me back from being a joyful, happy Christian in the kingdom of God. I'm going to continue to be happy and joyful and absolutely committed to the kingdom of God and advancing the gospel. I want to end one more story while we're on this topic. This is a Bitcoin.com story. I'm going to, Doc, let's go down to 59 and we'll wrap it up at number 59.

This involves a, this involves a, did we put the headline back up? I didn't know if we saw that. Did we see it? Okay. Economist Jim Rickards predicts unveiling of new BRICS currency, says the world is unprepared for this geopolitical shockwave. He is absolutely right.

Now we'll go into the story. Right. So number 59 for control. Jim Rickards explained that there are currently eight nations that have formally applied to join the economic bloc, and 17 others have expressed interest in joining. The eight are Algeria, Argentina, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Adding that the 17 countries are, to be added to this potentially, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. That is a global footprint of a new currency.

Yes, that's the new alliance. And I want to capture number 58 also. I want Dr. Reid to read this one. So on August 22nd, about two and a half months from today, the most significant development in international finance since 1971 will be unveiled. Jim Rickards wrote,

elaborating, it involves the rollout of a major new currency that could weaken the role of the dollar in global payments and ultimately displace the U.S. dollar as the leading payment currency and reserve currency. It could happen in just a few years. The process by which this will happen is unprecedented and the world is unprepared for this geopolitical shock wave, as Jim Rickards opined.

I couldn't say it better. He summed it up. And the world is not prepared. The U.S. The U.S. is not prepared. The rest of the world is prepared for it, Doc. They're moving in that direction. They want it.

They're moving there. And this has been underway since 2008. I mean, they've already got an alternative to SWIFT. Iran's rolled that out, and it's already working with several countries on that. Tie that in with the BRICS summit coming up. Basically, you have 25 to 30 countries that could become disengaged from the current financial system

in just a matter of months. Dr. Harkin, I started talking about this new economic system, I guess, going back to around 2008, at the time of the banking crisis. And we knew that there was going to be a movement to replace the dollar. I thought it would happen a long time ago. It seemed like this thing was moving like frozen molasses until the war. The West warmongers overplayed their hand. They knew that Russia was moving forward on the system.

They were baiting Russia into war to financially cripple Russia. It made them stronger. And it made Russia determined to get this new system off the ground. And it opened the eyes of all those countries. You just read that list. All their eyes opened up and they said, Dear Lord, the United States is a bully.

NATO is a bully. If you don't submit to them, they'll destroy you. We've got to align with Russia and oppose them. We actually are bringing about our own demise. Our pride and arrogance and foolishness is bringing about our own demise. How do we turn it around? Repentance.

As a nation, repent of our sin, our arrogance, our pride. Repent of the things that we're doing against God. Ask Him to forgive us and to restore us as a great nation again. That's what it will take. But we're not there yet because we're not hurting it. The American people aren't hurting it.

And not to dismiss that possibility, but empires rarely repent. That's right. Name one that did. Name one that did. Name one that did. Nineveh repented. But 50 years later they were right back

to their old sin. And what happened to them? They were destroyed. God gave them a chance. He gave them a reprieve. Nineveh, the king repented. The whole city repented.

The cows repented. Everybody repented. Yeah, the cows were in sackcloth and ashes. But 40 years later they returned to their sin, and God didn't give them a second chance. That's the history of empires. And so there's not much to look back on and say,

there's a good likelihood the United States as a nation is going to repent and humble itself. Most likely, we're going to be deeply humbled as a nation is going to repent and humble itself. Most likely, we're going to be deeply humbled as a nation and crippled. We'll be reduced in power, prestige, lifestyles will change. Life won't end. Unless there's an all-out nuclear war, life's not going to end. They'll still be in America. There might be three or four or five Americas. You might need a passport to go to the other side of the country. Borders have changed a lot over the past 500 years. And so, and there'll probably be more borders that change again if the Lord delays

His coming. I know this, this ministry is going to be here as long as the Lord gives us the strength and the will to do his will. We pray that we do his will on earth as it is in heaven. And we are absolutely committed to preaching the gospel of the kingdom in all the world. That's what this is all about. It's not about politics, not about elections. It's not about national empires. It's about the kingdom. And if you're not a member of the kingdom, you can join the kingdom now. How do you join? You believe into the name of the King, Jesus Christ. You believe his name, that he is the King, and you get baptized. That's where you get your passport. When you come up out of the baptismal water, they stamp your passport.

You're a citizen of the kingdom of God. Confession of sin, I mean, repentance, confession of the name of the king, Jesus Christ, water baptism, and you've been naturalized as a new citizen. And transported through the vehicle of baptism. Amen. From one kingdom to another. Water baptism, and you've been naturalized as a new citizen. And transported through the vehicle of baptism. Amen. From one kingdom to another.

That's how you do it. Hey, we'll be back here tomorrow. Love you very much. Take care. God bless you. You have been listening to True News with Rick Wiles. Thank you for listening. To find out more information regarding the broadcast, including prayer and financial support,

please visit our website at truenews.com. Our mailing address for all correspondence is True News, PO Box 690069, Vero Beach, Florida 32969.