Hello and welcome back to my most embarrassing moment of 2023 as you might have heard I walked into a massacre by calling out destiny on Twitter then quickly agreeing to a debate an hour later that I was Completely unprepared for but let's be honest I'm nowhere near destiny's debate skills, and I knew that going in no that is not true Now I'm not conceding that destiny's right about everything I think he was way too dismissive about Ray Epps part and the so-called storming of the capital and way too Accepting of his alleged change of heart just before the riot However, I decided to go ahead and post it anyway because it made me realize I had zero it in on certain facts while ignoring other ones That were inconvenient something I constantly accuse others of so it's a good lesson if you're interested in Ray Epps This is definitely worth checking out if you make it through consider hitting that like button. Thanks a lot So I basically I don't think that Trump incited or planned a riot I don't think there was an insurrection and I have a couple I think factual points that at the very least raised some reasonable suspicion that you know that there were some other Cause for the actual riot than Trump. Okay So first of all just so we can kind of set a standard here. Do you agree with? The you know mostly peaceful narrative that we heard through like 2015 and 2020 as far as like the Democrat riots for like BLM Well, yeah, just I mean it was a mixture of like BLM, you know antifa regular Democrat voters. I think they were mostly peaceful protest Yeah, okay, and So like based on like what criteria would you say that it's mostly peaceful just on the number of people riding versus the number of Peaceful. I just I saw that number a lot 93% of protests where didn't have any violence or like charges or anything Well, that's wrong. I just read that number a lot. Yeah. Yeah, I know I know exactly what you're talking about I'm not really sure. I'm not sure how legitimate that is that sounds a little weird to me, but So, do you know how many people were at the Capitol on January 6th? How many protesters? I don't know 40,000 or 50,000 or something. I'm not sure. No, it was over a hundred and twenty thousand Okay, over 100,000. It was a lot of people there. Okay. Yeah, and so the actual do you know the actual number of people charged with violence?  Do I guess? Well, no, it's actually more than that. It was around I think 372 I want to say is the exact number 372 people Okay, there's a violence that include like breaking and entering and like obstruction stuff or is this like actually attacking? No, that's that's a separate. Yeah, that's a separate thing. So that would be like Abstracting officers attacking officers, you know that sort of thing. Okay. So it's about 372 people All right, so and then then you got another like around 300 who that was like the public or the government Property destruction and then you had the the largest percentage are like trespassing and obstruction of government operations or whatever Okay And so when you look at that it's kind of weird to me that there's such this heavy focus on this Relatively small group of people that got violent compared to the gigantic group of people who didn't right and You go back to the the speech that Trump gave he told people to march peacefully and patriotically Make your voices heard and he also emphasized that hey We're we want to promote voting out these Republicans who go along with this stolen election. Okay, and Like the whole idea being you know used democracy go out there protest peacefully and then vote against these Republicans So there was never any call to like violence or anything people point to you know He talked about fight you got a fight and all this Democrats use that sort of heated political rhetoric all the time So I don't think you can point to that and when you just look at the discrepancy between the number of people who actually got violent compared to the larger group I I don't say you blame Trump number one because what in a much larger amount of people have done something like that If it was actually him telling them to do that What do you think? Maybe I'm waiting for you to do your whole thing and then I'll do my okay. Well, so yeah, I mean That's pretty much it and so then you would have to ask so who's inside of it And or who caused that and I think that's a big question that has to be discussed is what actually set off the violence Okay, and there are a lot of legitimate questions around that having to do with capital police You know we have videos of the police removing barricades letting people waving them in you have and I think this is the biggest The the what should be focused on the most is Ray Epps I think Ray Epps is way more important than what the media and you know, the Democrats want us all to believe because I Mean look at look at some of the charges handed down like the Q and on shaman who was literally just like escorted around Police tried to open doors for him to get in and then led him Into the main hall there and then he got you know later arrested and got a pretty What was he in for like three months or something? And then you got guys like Ray Epps who are on video for multiple days telling people to enter the capital and Literally stormed the capital. He was there the night before and the day of and to me and he was at the front And he admitted to orchestrating it. Okay all of this And yet despite that he gets treated as a victim and a conspiracy theory the Democrats defend him the media Defends him and try to paint him is like this. Oh, he's a poor victim of Trump supporters. It's kind of weird I mean, don't you think that he later got years later. He gets this misdemeanor charge After people like you know people like me and Tucker Carl You know all kinds people are like, what's going on with this guy? So then he gets this slap on the wrist That's not gonna include jail time or anything. It's probably gonna get expunged later It was obviously done for the cameras. And so you got to ask what's that about to me? He could have easily have incited and gathered and orchestrated the number of people who actually got violent and so My whole thing is like the entire predicate that Trump, you know launched an attack and insurrection on the Capitol. It's totally There is more than enough reasonable suspicion to question that especially the fact that the media does not focus on the mostly Peaceful at all. I think I remember when it was happening like maybe the next day I saw an ABC report or something where the guy literally said it was mostly peaceful That was it. I heard it that one time and never since and you got to ask Why are they not focused? Why are they so focused on the small group? But they'd completely ignore all these other people and why do they ignore ray epps? Well, if ray epps inside of them You can't blame Trump, right? Okay So that's that's for now. Yeah, there you go. Gotcha. Okay So Before we start how committed are you to this position on a scale from one to ten?  I like a seven. Okay, like a seven from open to being wrong Okay, gotcha. Um Do these are unanswered questions that nobody addresses. It's weird. I disagree. I think their answers to every single question you asked Okay, cool. Can't wait to hear Here's my macro perspective. This is what I feel like I feel like Trump through his continual undermining of the electoral process for years You even did it when you ran against Hillary But for years leading up to the process was saying the election was going to be stolen mail-in ballots are rigged and then During the actual election and then afterwards leading up to January 6th He was repeating false claims that everybody in his inner circle told him were not true Relating to the Pennsylvania stuff relating to the Georgia stuff You know that there were stacks of ballots that there were boxes brought in that people in his inner circle Telling him over and over again. This isn't true. He kept repeating it and then on the day of on January 6th When he went to give his speech, he told people that they're stealing the election from you. They're stealing your country We need to go march on Capitol Hill and protest about it Any new people in his crowd had guns and weapons and he wanted to go with them to march onto the Capitol for that protest My question, I guess to you for the first part of this. What do you think he wanted them to protest? What was the goal of that protest? Well, he like I said, he actually did specifically go into I want you to go out there protest and Promote this idea that we're gonna vote out these Republicans who go along with the election So you legitimately believe in your heart of hearts that Trump was saying we need to go to the Capitol building today Where they're certifying the election and protest to let you guys know that we're gonna vote you out Right, absolutely. They just to protest what they thought what he believed was a solo election a lot of people believed it They were right if you were president Trump and you just told all of your followers for years that elections are rigged Why would you go into a protest threatening to vote in rigged elections? Right, I mean, but okay fine. That is an irony there, but it's not in an irony without precedent because You know and I heard you guys dip into this and it's another thing I want to get into but Hillary Clinton Okay, Hillary Clinton did the exact same thing She said actually you're right when Trump started doing that. She came out. She's like, oh, that's an attack on democracy He's attacking our institutions Right, he said she said that but then what happened she lost the election And then she said it was illegitimate and she attacked the process and then Democrats went on for the only if you remember But they had hearings for months about the voting machines and they were going on and on about how hackable the voting machines are Implying that that's what happened here that Russians hacked somehow got into the voting machines changed the votes and stole the election Okay, and I heard you say clear real quick Hold on or what I want real quick You said Hillary Clinton during the debate with Rob and you said that she did it one time No, she did it multiple times and just like you said that Trump had this history Hillary Clinton has a history she back in 2000 she made a big deal about the election being illegitimate and stolen She did the same thing in 2005 and then the same thing in 2016 okay, so Hillary Clinton conceded the election the night of number one Okay, yeah, Trump didn't right when you sort of wait He literally yes, so Hillary Clinton officially conceded the election the night of right Donald Trump did not Donald Trump tried to claim that he won before the votes were counted, correct Correct. Yeah, okay. That's a pretty substantial difference, right Well, I would it isn't isn't I would say it's a different self like pretty I would say it's a difference I would say yeah Somebody would try to try to claim that they've won an election before the votes are counted Isn't that pretty anti-democratic? Isn't that probably one of the worst things you could do as president? I don't I want to well I don't know about about anti-democratic. I mean it's just free speech, and I'm not sure that Speech to say I'm gonna win the election We need to stop the count and I don't want all the votes counted. You don't think you think that's just freedom of speech You don't know so anti-democratic Well, I mean yeah, but in principle it's anti-democratic. Yeah, but that obviously never happened though, right? I'm not talking about what happened I'm talking about Trump tried to do or what Trump said what Trump said was anti-democratic. We should stop counting the votes, right? Mm-hmm, okay, and Hillary Clinton conceded the election, so I think that's a pretty substantial She okay, right, but when you say that like she conceded the election, okay officially, but what else did she do? She also launched the whole you know Russian collusion thing which was The campaign Hillary campaign hatched that scheme which the FBI knew about and yet went along with it Anyway, so after she lost she officially concedes and then the whole Russian collusion thing comes on And the lead investigator of that just happens to be the guy that was the lead investigator against her Who was also a supporter who also was also a lifelong Republican as well appointed by a Republican and has been a Republican Continues to be to this day, right? No, no, I don't think so. He's a big Hillary supporter. So I don't know about that. He's not a lifelong Republican I'm not not coming. I'm talking about Peter Strock the lead investigator of Hillary Clinton who went through What did he do? He wouldn't change the wording of her charges To basically so she could dodge any a prosecution that it basically he downgraded the severity of what she was being accused of And so that basically saved her. I don't know if that's true, but also I don't want to do it Every single link that's fine, but I don't know why every single conversation about Donald Trump somehow always leads back to Hillary Clinton's emails Well, I explained it at the beginning Through the lens of consistent standards Sure I'm not well we could get into consistent standards But first we need to even see what Trump's done because I can't get conservatives to admit that Trump's even done a bad thing It's shocking to me that it took you like three tries to even admit that Donald Trump trying to claim He won the election before the votes were counted isn't clearly an anti-democratic thing. That's a really bad thing Right that should be an easy like yeah, that's bad right we should easily be right I did say it I did say it's bad But I also said that this is a bad that Democrats had already set a precedent for doing they already set the standard that this is okay to do no no Democrat has ever not conceded when they've lost immediately and Tried to claim that the election like was rigged that the voting machines and everything else were absolutely they did that in 2016 Okay, they had hearings where they said that for months had hearings. That's different than like You know, I'm gonna just declare myself the winner You're allowed to have your day in court Donald Trump had all of his days in court Everybody's allowed to pursue their thing in court. That's different than trying to circumvent the process Well, he can never circumvent it simply by saying it. I mean it would always end up in a court. We're getting there. Yeah, but okay, so What but I'm not even talking about the charges against them now I'm saying that I'm just trying to establish like some ground level thing of like what is happening So that we're at least in the same world.  They're stealing the election from you Why would anybody there think that the protest is that we're gonna threaten to vote even harder when you've told these people that voting doesn't work? Well, I mean well for okay, so Democrats have done the exact same Yeah, they were going there to probably to try to circumvent the electoral process. That was the no no no no no I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying okay, then I just wanted to know what I'm saying No, no, I'm saying the hypocrisy of that the iron What about it? I don't care about that. So you don't so do you but do you agree that when Donald Trump was sending Let's be able to protest it wasn't to go vote harder They were trying to delay the certification of the election. That was the goal That was what Donald Trump wanted them to do. I just he never said to do that You're saying it like subliminally. He wanted them to do that He said mars peace Lee make your voices heard and vote That's what he said. He we he said that Mike Pence was the sole guy that can save us And he said we need to go to the Capitol and make our voices heard and we need a fight to take our democracy back He didn't say we need to go down and circumvent the electoral process to prevent the survey He didn't say that exactly sure right like you said but look but clear It's pretty obvious like what they're going down well So obvious uh-huh if it's so obvious why didn't more than a handful of people actually Attempts to do that if that's actually what occurred and not just like a spark of violence that you know took off I don't know. I can't answer that how big is that I mean what like two thousand some people went into the Capitol I don't know if there was enough room for everybody to participate like like I don't know all the people in the back Can all fit into the Capitol building like how much space is in there? Okay, well what I'm saying like the actual violence that occurred we So then this goes back to my whole thing about it not being looked at honestly and so like we can't even like talk about it honestly because You know the media talks about cherry-picking the footage from that day yet That's all they did and they never showed the footage of the Capitol police We're not even we're not even at that part yet. I just want to establish when Trump sent the people down to the Capitol What do we think you sending them there for? Well, let's just look at that again look at the number of people who are completely peaceful and that suggests that everybody was on the same page To me except the two thousand people that broke in No, two thousand people didn't break in there was or two that's the most likely trespassing inside the Capitol I think right so you could say illegally trespassing I mean when you're looking at trespassing laws just so you know like it is a thing like to be trespassed from a public space You have to be first notified that you've been trespassed then refused to leave and you're They would have to do that with each person like I get that they're gonna get they were trespassing and they're getting charged with that They're getting the book thrown at them. I get that but I'm just saying that the most the people that got in We're just walking in they were either led in or walked in there was at the most around 600 people I I'll give you that were violent or breaking into windows and that sort of thing So you got about 600 people out of more than 120,000. Okay, and to me that doesn't First of all they weren't in this goes back We're gonna have to go back to like the video and everything but the people weren't initially being violent. There were things that happened We're not yet. We're not even sure right right, but you're talking about Trump got them to do it It's Trump sent them to do that, but that's not what they were doing that maybe not all of them did that That's fine. I'm just trying to figure out. What do we think Trump sent them down there to do? Why do you think we're going to protest? What were they protesting? What they thought was a stolen they believe the election was stolen. Thank you. Yes Just like they were there to protest don't say just like Hillary Obama or Pibbit I'm they were down there to protest a stolen election They thought that it was being stolen from them So they were trying to delay the certification of the vote because they thought it was well you saying you know You're just implanting thoughts and motivations to thousands of people. I don't think that that's why they were going there I I think they were going there to protest and to pressure Republicans who are going to certify the vote to not certify that you just said Thank you. I agree. Okay, so we agree that the protesters Were there what to get the Republicans to not certify the vote. Thank you. Oh sure Absolutely, so we're on the same page. I don't think that's an okay. Yeah, and I don't think that's an interaction I don't even think it's against the law. I mean again I've watched Democrats do that every election they've lost since 2000, so okay you haven't But so we're so they go down there to protest because they don't want Republicans to certify the vote Okay, so that's a big part number one of what Trump sent them down there to do Okay, he knew people in the crowd had weapons He knew that he told them the election was rigged and he wanted them to go down there and protest and fight like how We take your country back. Yeah, okay. Go ahead the weapons thing. I mean there were a couple people that had handguns Nobody used any there was no Flag poles were the most numerous weapon. I believe if you want to call that a weapon That's fine. I'm just saying Trump knew that people in his crowd had weapons and he sent them to the Capitol to go and protest anyway I I don't know what that means. I mean, yeah, okay, so some people have Concealed carry and open carry permits.  I don't know if he knew that we're gonna use them out He just knew he was sending his protesters down there to protest the certification. Don't you think this is like so much speculation though? What wait wait wait wait wait wait, what did I just say that was speculation? I Didn't tell you just not gonna use weapons. I said here's what I just said clearly very very clear I said three things I said he told the people that the election had been stolen from them that the machines had been rigged He told the people to go back fight to take your country back pressure them to do the right thing And he knew the people in the crowd that he was sending I had weapons. That's all I said I didn't say he knew they were gonna use them. I'm not That's not it's just a fact. It's a fact of the matter makes you uncomfortable. I'm sorry That's just a fact of it's like saying he knows a couple of the people in the crowd might be in the jobs Like okay, you could take any group of people anytime anywhere and you're gonna have the exact same thing Like I don't know that how that proves anything. I didn't say I just said those three facts. Okay. We can talk about other Sure, so that was yeah, so that was one part of him Sending people down. Okay the second part what I think is one of the most important parts that makes this an attempted Coup or insurrection doesn't even necessarily involve the crowd It was President Trump trying to encourage Pence to unilaterally throw out the votes to unilaterally throw out the electoral college votes To throw it to the House of Representatives to get them to vote to make Trump the president I think that was right and democratic and that was an attempted coup Sure, it was anti-democratic I would not say it was an attempt in coup because didn't the vice president at the time have the ability to do that No And was it didn't they just recently or right after the election passed a law to keep to make sure that they could not again I'm not they clarified some of the language But no the vice president absolutely did not have the power to unilaterally throw out the votes Yeah, well, I mean even if he even if hold on how much do you know about how much do you know about the real stuff a Lot, do you know it? Do you know who Mike Eastman is? I Think so. Yes. Okay. How do you know so much about Ray Epps, but you haven't heard about the main legal guy That's feeding Trump the the bogus legal theory that he tried to use to get our election thrown out Isn't that kind of a weird like I? Guess area of focus like wouldn't this oh, I understand you hold on not doing anything We can get into the rap stuff Max we will but I'm saying like it's kind of strange to me They're like we're not even aware at all of what Trump tried to do to get the election literally thrown out But we're so aware Okay, but then you would have known that Pence does not have the ability the vice president does not have the ability to unilaterally Throw out an election that is not something given to the vice president Okay, well there and he didn't right and even if he would have tried there would have been challenges That would have played out in court possibly yeah But do you agree that if Trump asked him that that would be an attempted coup or insurrection? I don't know if that's an attempted coup. I would say maybe I think president of the United States Let me clearly say this and you can explain yeah if the president of the United States told the vice president. Hey, can you? Throw out the people's vote for who should be president and make me president. You don't think that's an attempted coup What would you call that? Well, first of all, I don't I have to I have to look at it I know I'm that's hypocritical having criticized you for the exact same thing, but I Think that throwing anything against the wall to try and and keep the election in his favor, which is what he's trying to do Is different from actually carry attempting to carry out a coup I mean he didn't actually he what you're saying is he asked Pence. Can you do this? Yes?  Yeah, all of that happened Yeah, so if he so that's not an attempted coup or insurrection or whatever. What would you call that? Well, I would definitely call it an escalation And compared to what Democrats had done up to that point. I would say I'm asking you What you would you call it at the president of the United States is telling the vice president throw out I think you know and I think it was undemocratic. Yeah, okay undemocratic I think it was undemocratic. Okay, what do we call undemocratic attempts to? Entrench your power as leader of a country against the Democratic will of a people in a Democratic system We there's not to be okay. It's not a coup. All right. So all right So this this brings us back to my original thing of we have to have a agreed upon set of standards here And okay, I would agree fine. We'll say that's a coup But okay, then the same point based on those standards that we're now agreeing. It's a coup Okay, I would say what what the FBI and that Hillary Clinton did in 2016 was an attempted coup What part of okay, I'll understand this for a second. Okay What part of what Hillary which one do you want to focus on first Hillary the FBI? Well, it was it was a scheme carried out by both. Okay, I would say they were cohorts What so what part of this was an attempted coup? What made it a coup? Well, so we know that Peter Strock, you know when this text was talking about, you know Don't worry about if Trump gets elected. We have an insurance policy, right? Okay And then Peter Strock just magically like and so we also know from the from the IG report. They came out about this that the FBI knew that Hillary Clinton campaign was kind of was trying to hatch this Russian collusion scheme to use against Trump and Knowing that they still went along with it when when she disseminated it out to the media or I'm sorry She gave it to the FBI FBI leaked it to the media. Comey did remember and so that began that whole thing Peter Strock then who was the lead investigator against Hillary and got her off the hook It's now suddenly the lead investigator against Donald Trump Okay, and so the entire point of that was clearly to one Delegitimize the election and overturn it. What what how else would what else was there? Were they trying to do there? Do you think it's possible that they thought you don't think that that was a coup that they were lying? Do you think they did all of that? Do you think they spied? Do you think it's possible that they legitimately thought that collusion could have been possible? Or do you think that's totally outlandish? I The FBI knew we know that they knew that the information within the dossier that Hillary had was was uncorrelated and came from Russian Disinformation sources they knew that okay, that's not what I asked what I asked was do you think it's possible?  Well, this is like it's a plausible deniability kind of a situation like I It all I know is that this it turned out to be BS and it was we there's all kinds of funny business around the introduction of it in the first place and To me that wasn't I thought it was an attempt to coup when it was going on like So yeah, we just we we don't have this agreed-upon standard of coup And if we're gonna say that what Trump did was a coup then I think that was a coup and it just So the difference thing that I would argue for the Trump coup is that one it came from the president of the United States Which I think is really significant and two he knew that all of this was bullshit the entire time And well three you don't know that I nobody knows that we pretty much know that and we're definitely gonna find out as the federal case against him Begins to go. What are they gonna? I think I read his mind How do you think any criminal investigation and conviction ever works? You understand that for every criminal conviction there is a mens rea a state of mind necessary to commit a crime, right? You do know that right, right, okay, right, so when you say how do you ascertain somebody state of mind? We do this every single day in the United States criminal court system So I don't know why you think it's exceptional here Right, there's plenty of ways that we can try to ascertain somebody state of mind prior to them committing an act, right? Right, but and didn't you just confidently tell me that you know 100% the state of mind of Strock and Hillary Clinton that they? Absolutely knew that they were lying the entire time so you know that 100% but you can't even guess Trump state of mind Isn't that kind of weird? Right. Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. We're we're there. It's double standards and we can't even agree on what the standards are I don't think I'm having any trouble agreeing on what the standards are Well, no, you have your standard, right and you don't really care Like you don't care Democrats set us set these standards in the first place and aren't being held to like for instance Let me just give you an example So those riots that occurred all those years though most all of those I mean except for you can argue the George Floyd ones We're based on lies. They let the Democrats of media literally spread lies got these riots to erupt and cited I'm called death of destruction to me. They did it because they were mad about losing the election But nobody ever paid a price for that. No nobody was ever charged with anything with inciting riots Did anybody get charged with inciting a riot on the J6 stuff? Well, isn't that I mean isn't that what this is about that Donald Trump incited the riot? I thought Donald Trump's charges on the Jack Smith case were like obstruction and stuff I don't think any of it has to do with it isn't well These These getting him removed from the ballot in Maine and Colorado. They're basically saying that he's guilty of insurrection, right? correct But we don't have like a criminal, but that's like a 14th amendment thing. There's like a different thing for right Well, I know but the interaction here doesn't necessarily what? No, that's just very convenient to me that your political opponents can basically Accus you of something without being charged or convicted and thus it is and so his political opponents can now remove him from the ballot Well, I mean that's a standard. I don't I don't think the standard would be entertained for a second if it were Trump and Republicans trying it I mean, I don't know why you would think that when what we're talking about here is an amendment That was literally passed after the Civil War to prevent people from taking office if they'd broken an oath Which I think is pretty reasonable Whereas the Eastman legal theory that Donald Trump was using to unilaterally throughout the election I don't know if they were if they were willing to pursue that I don't know why you think Trump wouldn't also pursue this like that doesn't make any sense The Trump pursuit of vice president Pence to throw out the election is way more radical than this interpretation of the 14th amendment Yeah, I mean So I think Trump would absolutely do that if he thought he could Like wasn't Trump's wasn't Trump literally chanting lock her up lock her up lock her up like telling the FBI to lock up Hillary Clinton Like yeah, but it wasn't Donald Trump's DOJ doing it. I mean it's a little different. I think sure I'm just saying that like well But it was Donald Trump's FBI and DOJ and the special prosecutor Mueller Trump's FBI When he was in office, right?  The Hillary Clinton one was Barack Obama's DOJ wasn't it no I meant for the Russia collusion stuff Right. Yeah, I mean, yeah, Trump definitely wasn't very good at appointing people because I mean There's all kinds of questionable crap that Ray has done and said so I mean the fact that he's a Republican doesn't really mean anything to me. Of course Okay, what does it matter?  Did he try to power at all costs even though you say Well, they all do that. I mean the Democrats of every election they've lost. They've tried to hold on at all costs Okay, why why did Hillary Clinton concede then why didn't she say I'm not conceding until the Russia collusion probe finishes Why didn't Gore throw out the votes from Florida over the hanging Chad stuck in 2000 Well, that's why that's why I said that Trump escalated it But it was also the first time Republicans have denied election results, but it was an escalation for sure an escalation of Of election denial like I don't know like subverting the actual process is an escalation of just people in the media You know sulking about like oh Russia helped him. No, I'm not even talking about that. No Democrats actively tried to get Ohio arms, right for the votes dissertified in 2000 They tried to get Ohio dissertified in 2005 and in 2016. I believe they tried to get Something dissertified. I have to look that up. They they tried in Florida and it went through the courts and then they gave up right Trump Trump is not going to Trump just suggested things like it didn't even get to the court process Well, he lost it. I agree. It's like when you say Trump just suggested things He was trying to suggest to his vice president to make him the president Subverting the vote that he lost that I knew he lost that's not just suggesting things. That's an attempted coup Well, no, there was no attempt though. I mean there was an attempt when he asked Pence Can you please help me do the go past did it go past a question? What do you mean did it go wait? So okay, so question. Is it only a coup if it works? And then if it's not what do you call it? Well, no, there was not an attempt. It was a question asked. It wasn't a question He was like telling him to like like you can do this to throw out the vote to keep me as president Why do you think he was tweeting out like Pence needs to do the right thing which was throw out No, I don't remember that president right right and Pence is like I can't do that and it's so it went nowhere You're right. Yeah, because it would be cooing the government But Trump attempted to get him like when you talk about Russian right But when you talk about like the Russian collusion thing that was actually in action actually taking place So it went way beyond a hypothetical question it but the the process for that is It's way easier to give you 50 other scenarios or even just one where people legitimately thought Russia collusion existed That was probably that's way more believe only thought That's way more believable than Trump thinking that like election machines and ballot boxes and all these other crazy things They were saying were rigged and then vice and the Prince could make him the dictator See when you say that though, and you're like when when he says it's it's crazy thing when Trump says that the voting machines Were hacked or rigged when I just told you that Democrats spent months Repeating that over and over and over and over again for months saying that exact same thing about the 2016 election Have you seen that video? Are you aware of that? There's a mash-up of like 10 minutes of it You can throw it to me if you want but again like the like bar went through the Dominion machines I believe the DOJ Authored by bar literally made a statement saying hey, we investigated these machines. They're fine. That's his own DOJ That's his own Attorney General and that's his own intelligence analyzing these machines He had no reason to believe any of these machines were rigged everybody in his campaign was telling him the exact same thing Right. Yeah, and I've heard that every single person was telling the same thing I'm not sure how accurate that is but if you like if I'm Donald Trump, right? And I'm aware the Democrats during my when I was elected spent all this time Saying the election was stolen and the voting machines were hacked and all this Why would he not think that he could then do the exact same thing in response because the Democrats didn't try to subvert the election process? Like Donald Trump was saying mail-in voting was rigged before like years before we even had mail-in voting Like Hillary Clinton literally just like last year said that the 2024 election was gonna be stolen by Donald Trump and Republicans How? She just is I don't know. She she Was she talking about this because this would be stealing the election? Yes telling the vice president to unilaterally like she said Donald Trump and Republicans she said Donald Trump and Republicans literally have a plan to steal the next election Okay, here. I got this here. I got the ceiling quarry here real quick. This one's 20 minutes long. It's even longer, but Again my point my point is you were talking about state of mind, right? and I'm trying to explain what Trump's state of mind and probably a lot of ours at the time was and We you gotta under Understand that we've sitting here and witnessed all these things happen up to this point and with nothing no kind of real backlash And then suddenly it's so Hillary Clinton is here's her statement because I'm looking for the source of this I'm curious Hillary Clinton has claimed Republicans already have a plan to steal the 2024 election at the latest in a series of wild Charges by the former first lady senator from New York and Secretary of State She says quote right wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election And they're not making a secret of it the right wing controlled Supreme Court may be poised to rule on giving state Legislatures the power to overturn presidential elections She adds she adds referring to a case for the High Court involving the invalidation of North Carolina's congressional map by a state court But in we got to take I don't know I can send you another clip of Hillary literally You got to take it in the context that Hillary Clinton has going back to to the year 2000 Or I'm sorry 2001 Even when I look at even when I look at like the more questions are go He knows he's an illegitimate president. I know you guys bring this one up a lot I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used from voter suppression and voter purging To hacking to the false stories He knows that there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did now I might not like her use of illegitimate president here I think it's a dumb term, but clearly she's talking about something different than saying like voter boxes or ballot boxes She said hacking. Yeah, her her hacking. You literally just read it. Her campaign was hacked. Do you remember the election? Right her yeah, I do. Do you remember what was hacked by the way? I always ask people this wasn't like all the Podesta emails and all that bullshit that came out of the DNC everything Right it basically it showed that the media and the Hillary campaign were coordinating That's great pivot but what she said was true then her campaign was hacked So I don't know why you're yeah, so so what she was saying was true You just proved that it was true So she's making true statements was this at all comparable to Donald Trump saying ballot boxes were stuffed We just found 200,000 dead voters in Pennsylvania or all that do you think these are comparable statements? I think they are Yeah, I think they are comparable. Absolutely and Hillary Clinton She was Hillary Clinton statement is true. The Republican statements are Waiting for more info. How do you think these are comparable statements? They they are literally the saying the exact same things when you're just saying that when Hillary did it is legitimate And when her opponents do it, it's not well because there's an underlying fact of the matter Hillary Clinton's campaign was hacked Donald Trump's campaign does not produce any evidence that votes were rigged Correct when you say the hacked Right, but they the Democrats still said that the voting machines were hacked at the time is what I'm saying That was that was an overall narrative at the time So when oh that might be a different narrative, okay? That might be a different thing that's been said so that's some part of Hillary Clinton I'm curious when you're saying there were hacked the voting machine her party her supporters She's echoing the things they're saying.  I'm willing to give up Conceit some things here, but like you're not there Hold on you haven't conceded even the most basic points number one. I did I did and I conceded the Trump I conceded No, anti-democratic and ignorant are weak Claims the reality is is that he attempted to coup the government and that's like plainly obvious. Okay. Yeah, I I Cannot agree on that based on the standard that we've already set so then what do you think is what do you think is a coup? You define a coup Right, it's it's a you're you super in your you're supering You're surpring the election and the governing you're taking power against the wishes of the country of the Democratic vote, but So how is what he asked me to do not an attempted coup, right? But you just said it again. He asked Pence to do it. That's why it's an attempt Okay, but what what Democrats the FBI and Hillary Clinton did was an actual attempt that actually went forward I don't think investigating somebody for something is the same as saying we need to throw out the election results But that was the whole point the whole point was to say that Trump was a Russian agent He stole the election with Russia's help and he's not legitimate Let's let's say that I grant you all of that if that was the whole point then why did it fail?  Why were Republicans in the house able to like review and investigate and allege and show pretty truthfully that the FBI had issues? Relating to political bias there was a guy that was literally convicted for faking information on a feisty war Why did all of this happen if it's all controlled by the deep state and all of it is illegitimate and all of it is highly biased And all of it was an attempted coup. How did it fail? Well, look at it like a drive-by, okay? They they sped by they did their damage and then they were gone So I mean they did their damage Trump was president for the his whole term What was the damage done? That's a he did get in sure. Okay. Yeah, he did but You won't I mean you're not going to admit that they were trying and everything they could possibly do to get rid of the guy I think that's possible. They're doing this investigation, but my question was don't you think it's possible They thought there was some like actual collusion here. Is that not possible? Hold on real quick. Yeah, okay Well, I'll answer that but one second. Do you remember literally from the the day? before he took office they started talking impeachment and the narrative that the walls were closing in and soon We are gonna be rid of Donald Trump was Like that drumbeat was pumped out daily for years Okay, so that was clearly their intention was to get him out of the office I mean they really thought that he did Russia collusion. Yeah, sure. Okay. Well, we really think the election was stolen Yeah, but I'm not I'm saying I do I'm saying I understand that people think that but there's a difference on the strength of those claims Right, okay. Well the stolen election narrative was tried and failed in every single court where it was brought up There's no reason that Donald Trump should have thought the election was stolen. Nobody near him was saying that Nobody near him was agreeing with him on that. He knew that he lost the election Yeah, I will say this that I while I don't necessarily agree with the stolen a narrative I definitely agree with the rigged narrative I definitely think the election in a lot of ways was rigged and I would say most of all would be the fact that Joe Biden and The other guy I can't think of his name they hatched that plan they emailed all these intelligence experts said We need you guys to come in and defend us and back us up on these stories coming out about Hunter They did they lied it was used as justification to suppress real news that was damaging to Biden and You know, I don't know if that helped to sway the election in his favor Maybe it did but that's a pretty big interference in the election in my wasn't that story like Wasn't that story suppressed for literally 24 hours before they allowed it back on Twitter? Um, I'm not sure how long it was. I remember pretty wasn't like one day But no, it was actually several days that that narrative and that narrative continued despite the story being allowed back on Social media that narrative that it was Russian this info continued Which do you think was more damaging to the electoral chances? Do you think it was that New York post thing getting censored for one? I say censored getting the Twitter decided to delist it was one day Well, there's no proof that anybody in the White House ever made a request to censor that particular story. No, no, no They did a hundred percent coordinate the intelligence experts. No, they didn't Joe Biden literally started at Joe Biden and Let me find this real quick.  None of this is true. None of what you're saying is true You're not gonna find a substantiate anywhere You're gonna find conjecture where people guess but no There's no proof of any of this. No, we have the email. We have the actual emails That went out to these intelligence experts about this There were emails went out saying to like be on the lookout for some attempted like disinformation campaigns Sure, but Joe Biden wasn't even in the White House at the time that this happened So it would be impossible. He was running. Sure. He was running. Yes, but this was Trump's White House This was Trump's intelligence agency. This was Trump's FBI. This was Trump's DOJ. Well, these weren't and no These were former Intel agents Former Intel agents were sending emails to look out. I thought wasn't this our current intelligence was saying that there could be Russian Disinformation on the way. No, no, it was it was literally Joe Biden and I Got to find this they they basically sent out emails saying hey We need you guys to back us up and come out and basically say this is Russia this info We have reason to believe it is they all agreed and we got the we got the story Let me hear. I'm trying to find it right now What do you think did more damage to the campaigns this story being censored for one day on Twitter or comey making his public announcements about Hilary Clinton's Like investigation being closed and opened and the statements that he made about our conduct Well, what did he well in your answer that question before you ask a question before you? I will always do this. You'd never answer any question What do you think was more damaging the New York Post story about Hunter Biden being censored for one day? Or comey's public all of his public announcements about Hilary Clinton's investigation well The investigation announcements may have been more damaging May have but I would say so here me so they maybe they were I don't you know We don't really have any way of knowing this right so it's all speculation, but I would say that comey's announcement Was actually, you know, it was it was a softball announcement because remember what he said He said that no reasonable prosecutor would go after this case And we know now because that's because the head lead investigator changed the wording of the charges so she could avoid it That was a gave a scathing review of their investigation for Hilary. He said that she was very right. He said that she was very What I can't remember everything but he basically just said that she shouldn't have done it And it was very bad and smack her hand bad, but she didn't she never got charged She didn't get charged but ordinarily we wouldn't have heard any of the details in that investigation Just because comey made them public that we did Right, but the fact that he said no reasonable prosecutor would go after having that to me that he was saving her That's great that you feel that way. I don't know if you're 19 or you're just a child I don't know but for everybody that was lighting the difference. No, no hold on for everybody That was alive at the time comey's declaration of what Hilary had done was scathing Maybe he didn't recommend charges at the end But everybody thought that she fucked up huge when he made that announcement at the end I don't know why you're trying to gloss over like oh, well, he said they didn't recommend charges everybody thought Oh, I'm not glossing they glossed over they didn't gloss over my definition No, he went over all he went over that what did he say like Hillary Clinton State Department of these engaged in egregiously horrible behaviors that were severely reckless and blah blah blah blah blah like right he read he He literally was reading the edited wording by the lead investigator who was investigating her That's fine that ordinarily we wouldn't have heard any of that comey made the decision to go public with it I think that was way more damaging to Hillary's campaign than the New York Post story about hunter-biden's cock being censored for one day Well, well, that's your deflection is the cock thing But obviously there was more damaging information on there Especially like when it relates to the big guy and all that stuff But let me just say that the thing with Hilary that's legitimately some she did and quite frankly people deserved to know about that That's and hold on first hold on and then the hunter story. They're literally trying to cover it up So I mean they're completely different motivations there and one in one instance They're trying to give the American public more information and then the other they're literally trying to suppress information because it's damaging to the guy They want to win okay, so firstly when you say they we're talking about different parties here So number one for the deserve to know about Hillary Clinton. That's not true policy at the FBI is you don't usually comment on ongoing Investigations or any investigation. There's no reason why anybody needs to know the results of an investigation ever That's not generally what intelligence agencies do ever so number one so the idea that people deserve to know That's your opinion, but that stands in contrast to how these agencies normally operate number one number two for the hunter-biden thing That wasn't the government that was Twitter that made a decision to censor that for one day And then they rolled back on it and I'm pretty sure we've talked more about hunter-biden as a result of Twitter's choice there I'm pretty sure they amplified that more than it ever would have been otherwise Right, you know Biden put a lot of layers in between them these 51 intelligence experts were meant to bolster the case being made To Twitter suggesting to them from the FBI who were suggesting to them that Information that was rushed into simpho was going to be dropping. So yeah, you can again They left room for plausible deniability here, but we both know what they were trying to do Like how can you not be honest about that? They both what? I'm saying we know what they were trying to do I'm saying that they yes They left enough room there and I left for possible deniability, but do you think it's Joe Biden? Do you think it's possible that Twitter censored it because they were worried that it was a disinformation campaign? Do you think that's possible? Right, but why were they why did they think that did it have anything to do with the fake? Intelligence experts letter. Do you think it might be that the story on its face actually sounds? unbelievably incredible that a blind laptop repair guy ended up taking a Laptop from Hunter Biden that Giuliani got his hands on and then mail take you don't think that story sounds incredible You don't think it's incredible you answer that question before you pivot to another thing Maybe slightly but not any less incredible than the than Donald Trump is a Russian agent who slowly election Okay You think that the you think that the credibility that Trump might be communicating with people in Russia Okay, that to help him win an election You think that that's less credible than the on its face story of the blind guy with a laptop They got picked up and Giuliani found out about it. You think that that story is like oh, that's pretty believable right off But yeah, I believe that immediately. No, I'm saying they're both. They're both kind of fantastic Almost unbelievable stories. Yeah, okay. Let's say that they're both fantastic unbelievable stories for Twitter I'm asking specifically for Twitter. Could it be that Twitter sensitive because initially they were worried that it was a disinformation thing? I mean, so I'll give you that that is a possibility. Okay, although, excuse me. I just burped into the mic. Sorry But at the same time, what do we we do know a lot of things about these groups that they were using to? to filter like filter this information and figure out what Was but what should be banned and these groups are I can't remember the name of it They were using the the dashboard. I can you remember what that was called that Twitter was using I can't remember what's on my head, but something for the analytics or whatever It wasn't that one. It was like I'll look it up here in a second But that group that they were using is like clearly partisan it's like made up of like Democrat and Clinton people and so, you know, you can't really I Don't know the whole Twitter thing. You I actually will give Twitter some credit because The one guy Noah Roth or whatever he pushed back against a lot of stuff that the government was saying to him So there was that but the thing the thing with the Twitter you keep saying it's one day that they suppress it Okay, but that's kind of unprecedented for one. It's you know, it kind of to be clear That's not unprecedented Twitter was banning Twitter was going through a whole whole if you actually read any of the Twitter files Twitter was going through a whole host of internal deliberation of stories that they should answer Yeah, well, so when you say unprecedented I mean like they had been involved in doing this type of stuff like over and over no No, no, I mean just like suppress it like they remember remember They actually banned New York Post and they suppress that story and it's right before an election to me That's that's kind of crazy, especially when we find out that it literally started at the Joe Biden campaign I don't wait wait started at the Joe Biden campaign. Yeah, that's where the entire 51 intelligence experts thing came from Hold on when that story was posted on the New York Post, okay Their decision you can read you can see all the emails that they have where they deliberate on banning that or not None of them mentioned no Biden's campaign No, no, I'm not talking about no, so that's separate. I'm saying that the 51 intelligence experts Claim that these intelligence experts were saying that this story was rushed into simple which got widely put out there And that was the justification for suppressing that story That's that's what led to that. So maybe it was I don't even I don't think that they cited that in the emails ever the 51 Intelligence people means we need to suppress this story There was a big debate within Twitter in emails. You can read it where they're trying to figure out They should do it or not eventually they end up censoring under the hack materials policy And then the next day I think they roll that back because they think that it's not for them to censor basically or whatever Right and that's that would be one thing. Okay, so that is one thing, but then even after It was allowed they the media still spent the rest of the election saying that all that stuff was rushed into simple So, I don't know that's just another example to me We're just looking at the specific actions that Twitter took I'm just trying to say like I'm just trying to see if we can at all like if we are capable whatsoever of imagining other people's states of mind that story on its face looked insane any fair person that's not so Lost in political bias would obviously admit that that story seems insane on its face It turned out to be true though, right? It did sometimes life is stranger than fiction, right?  Do you acknowledge that happen? Right, I do acknowledge I let me can I just add something to it though Sure one none of those people were ever brought in in front of a quarter convicted and two wait Why would they never brought a quarter convicted? Well, they never they never ever extradited or came out of Russia obviously wait So wait, so yeah, hold on. Do you think Russia's gonna hold on people for election interference Why you bring this up like it's a point at all for anything relating to what you're saying Well, it's not much of a point But the second the second thing I'm gonna say is is that we now know that those Twitter the Twitter and Facebook campaigns had no Effect no measurable effect. I don't know if we know that at all, but um, yeah, absolutely I'll get you those links to second. I don't know how we could that's an incredibly difficult thing to study I agree I agree Which is what I was saying when they first when that whole thing first start after the election and they're like Oh, well all these Pokemon go ads and Twitter ads that Russia and influence the election It's like to what extent how many votes did they change it for all we know none And it turns out that that is likely the case, but I will show you those links one second Here we go. So we have this and There is no evidence that Russian Twitter bots had any meaningful effect pushing voters to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election I can I can agree that there's probably no evidence of it I don't but like that just goes against it before I don't know how you would even measure something like this, right? Right. I mean, yeah, exactly. I mean Right and I there really is no way to measure it or it so it shouldn't even really be brought up, but I In But would you say that there was a measurable impact that censoring that new york time or new york post story for one day Had to help the democrats The only proof I would have of that and and actually now that I've read I think there was some poll supposedly that showed that maybe people or people would have changed their votes had they And known that was a legitimate story But I've also seen some stories that say that poll's not real So that I'm not a hundred percent sure of if that were true I would say that there is at least some chance that yes, it could have it could have been an october surprise, right? Um I mean it was right that's why they held on to that story for months until the election and then they tried to I know but the media Right, but the media circled the wagons did everything they could to discredit that story Uh, sure. I mean they people tried to investigate it But I mean also like I mean it juliani wasn't juliani not giving out like any part of this to anybody else Wasn't juliani holding on to the copies himself so nobody could verify or vet or get any information about yeah Yeah, I I still am like, why did they give it to juliani of all people? But yeah Well, so even it sounds like even you have weird questions about it. It was kind of strange, right?  I get what you're saying, but we but we do know But we do at least know from that ig report that the fbi knew that the allegations in that dossier were crap and they knew that the That the allegations that hillary had already planned to make those allegations after the election if she lost And they still went along with it. Anyway, they still well, they investigated it But they knew that it was like weak info, right? Sure, right. Yeah, but It took it was like pulling teeth to get that information out for years to get to because the media was not You know forthright about that pulling teeth to get information out about what? To get out that to people to the public that this dossier and a lot of this information was based on Actual Russian disinformation that had been acquired from a rush because the fbi is not going to make a statement on an ongoing investigation Why would they do that? How convenient? Yes. Yes. How convenient as opposed to what they should be leaking information about their ongoing investigation What do you mean? How convenient? That's the policy of the fbi and it always has been. What do you mean? How convenient? Well, I don't know I we just hear that a lot, you know from rea and and especially in fbi Agents who have been in hearings as a pertains to January 6th and stuff like that. I just I hear that so often now. It just seems like an excuse to get out of answering a question I mean, I understand. Wait, do you think that it's true that the fbi doesn't comment on ongoing investigations? Do you think that's a good policy or do you think it's a bad policy? I think I can see the the need for but I can can you also not see how it could be used to Not give up information that could be damaging to the fbi Sure, then you do closed hearings or you do internal audits or investigations Or you have an inspector general or a special counselor where there's like a million different ways you're gonna We have investigated these things But like I mean aren't we like Like we believe like in law and order and if we think that you know Processes are important for investigating crimes like it's pretty standard that the cia the nsa the fbi aren't going to comment on Like ongoing matters. That's just like department policy norms Well, I'm just saying that worked out very conveniently well for what I'm saying is possibly a coup attempt you know that All these parties all these institutional powers playing along in the scheme to unseat trump after He legitimately won. I think that when we talk about coup attempt I think the intention is important and I think that it's very believable that people thought that trump was some Especially with people like manifold working so closely with them I think it's possible that people would look at trump and go like, you know This motherfucker might be it and they investigate the fuck out of it Um, but when I look at didn't trump fire manifold like immediately as soon as that came out I think trump was I think in a lot of ways like I said, he was very Dumb about who he put around him and I think people that he put around him could see his naivete and used him And I think that a lot of people did not want him in power Okay, do you understand that what you're saying right there? That is like the main thrust of the russia collusion conspiracy That donald trump is dumb and that if putin or some unregistered russian agent showed up to offer him information He would take it right, but I mean Anything like that ever I mean there was never any proof anything like that ever happened outside of the Correct.  Yeah, I'll concede. I'll concede the state of mind thing, but I'm I'm just saying that You know what we what we watched was If if what the FBI was was doing was completely legitimate even though I you know We know they lied to get fives warrants. We know that they knew that This narrative was created by his political opponents, right? And that it wasn't didn't really have any legitimacy to it yet They went along with it anyway, you know, and everything can put, you know with Peter Strzok I just can't see it as legitimate I I see what you're saying. It's a valid excuse that it was a state of mind thing, but You know, it was used by the media for the years, you know to say he's a russian agent and you know our our Country was was just completely enveloped in that for years I mean, I and I'm still to this day hearing about hillary's emails. I mean, yeah, the media likes to talk about Do you understand why that is do you understand why that is though?  Uh, I don't see how that would work excuse Huh? Oh, no here. Listen No, no, listen, so trump You can't just be an authoritarian. You can't just be like, oh, I'm authoritarian How could you do that? You couldn't carry it out because literally every institution's aligned against you, but Joe biden democrat not necessarily joe biden, but yak could be joe biden democrats in general Have all the institutional power to the point right now. They're trying to imprison their main opponent ahead of the election They're trying they're removing him from ballots, which very undemocratic action I want to do this we can go point by point. So number one, um, biden does not have all the institutions Okay, the house's republican dominated and the supreme court is six three conservative So we're wrong on that point number one number two You're saying biden is trying to jail him biden does not tell the doj what investigations to do or conduct any of those investigations Wait, if biden controls the doj, then why didn't trump control his doj? Right it that goes back to His ability his abilities, but hold on not his abilities bar was a fan and friend of donald trump So if you're telling me that biden has direct control over his doj Why didn't trump have direct control over william bar and that's what i'm no you're making you're making my argument Trump has not the ability to do the things that democrats are now doing and getting away with Biden's doj is charging and our biden's doj is going after him these hardcore anti trump democrat da's that ran on imprisoning them are Throwing this cartoonish amount of indictments at him clearly to see what will stick Jack smith is clearly trying to get this these Trials done before the election. I mean it's pretty clear and joe biden himself said that oh, we're going to use constitutional methods To make sure trump can't get in office again, which is what we're seeing play out right now quote constitutional Suddenly suddenly attacking democracy taking away americans ability to vote for who they want is pro democracy Do you think that there's a chance that maybe trump did wrong things? Do you think that's possible that trump actually committed crimes? Sure sure it's possible, but okay, so of all the indictments on everything we've talked about up to this point I'm very i it's very hard for for people to to agree with it and Okay, you can okay. Yeah, let's see if we can get through this section without bringing up uh hillary clinton barack obama or joe biden Okay, let's see if we can do this. No, but okay, do you think it's but you understand why that is because i understand Anyways, it's because trump is indefensible. It's because trump is indefensible. No. No. No. No. It's because it's because you guys You don't you call it. What aboutism when it's really just us pointing to the fact that the standard had been set You and it was treated completely differently than now. That's the only reason people bring it up Okay, so which of trump's indictments. Okay. Do you think are unfair? What are the charges that you think like this is bullshit? Well, um, I mean Again, I'm not a constitutional Constitutional scholar. I'm not a lawyer. So it's hard for me to say, you know To me it just looks like they're just trying to keep them from running. I I mean, go down. Let's go down the list of charges. Okay. Wait just real quick. Are you familiar with crossfire hurricane? Yes, okay So, you know the names of the specific fbi operations and the names of specific stories that were censored in the media about hunter biden Um, do you know what barisma is? Of course. Okay, of course, you know all these I know you don't know about you're really getting me on this because this is my twitter post Well, no, no, no, I'm not I'm just I'm not I'm not trying to twitter for I'm just saying that like the selection Of what you're interested in is very wild to me given that these are probably some of the most historic indictments of us history You have indictments against a former president who's going to run again And it was like the frontrunner for the republican party, but you don't know any of the indictments Why like how are you so against the indictments? You don't know anything about them. No, I do I I'm familiar But I'm just on the spot here and so okay, that's fine. Okay, then maybe you've read stories about them And I can grant that okay. I haven't personally read all of the indictments. So that's fair. Okay, but okay Like I said, there's a lot of them. Sure. Okay. So let's just well, there's four major cases. Okay, then I'm aware of Okay, so let's look at one of them. Okay the Florida classified documents case Do you think there's a chance here that Donald Trump did knowingly? retain classified material and then lie and not return it to when requested by the Archive records and the FBI is that possible that they Well, so Sure, it's possible But just knowing for one how you know Biden had I know you don't want me to go back to buying But I how can I not because we've already set the standard. So I'm just trying to judge it by the same standard So, you know Biden had these documents for decades had no right to them as a senator In his garage for years So right and it gets a crime. Hillary Clinton the same thing gets off the hook for the crime The crime is that you have to knowingly retain these classified materials In a in a why are you laughing? Wait, do you not care about the crime? Because it's like knowingly. It's like Okay, yeah, yeah knowingly wait, what's so funny about that? So how do you prove that joe biden didn't know that he had those documents or that hillary clinton didn't know That she had these top secret documents or the intent she didn't have the intent well I know that it's crazy, but believe it or not in u.s. Criminal courts We make these determinations all the time So you might look for her saying something to somebody Saying like I know I have classified material there. You might have somebody saying something like can you move those documents to my house? They're not supposed to be there. You might have record destroy these blackberries and something like that Well, that's a really bad example because destroying cell phones was policy of anybody that kept Any type of electronic device at the time everybody destroys material like that afterwards So for donald trump in the indictments, I believe that the as part of the charging statements They're looking at specific statements that donald trump made to move what he knew was classified documents around his house Him making statements to other people saying I know this is classified. I could have declassified it, but I didn't right I'm aware of that Yeah, and then him refusing to cooperate with investigators when they gave him over a year to turn the material back in That might be a way refusing. Yeah The refusing to cooperate thing seems a little specious to me just because his lawyers were in contact and were In the involved in negotiations and all that hold on. I'm sorry Didn't he specifically tell his lawyers to hide boxes or have the lawyers specifically instruct people to move things around So federal investigators couldn't find them. Isn't that part of the indictment? Trump literally ignored or ordered subpoenas to return stuff like right. Yeah Yeah, I I do remember there were some things like that where he just blatantly said things like when he was Talking about having the secret documents that weren't signed and all that Okay, and he told the aid to live and even lied. I think to his own lawyers that part So this is probably a crime that trump committed. Yeah Well, so here's what I would say about that. Yeah, maybe yeah, maybe and I would say that the only difference there would be the trump was Too dumb to say those things on video or into people whereas, you know, biden and hillary were probably much smarter about it But you have no evidence whatsoever of any of that. That's just your guess Well, I mean hillary clinton. I know for I know you're saying that oh, it's it's just common practice destroy these devices But you know you're talking about intent and these devices get destroyed while I'm sorry, can I be clear? Do you think that it's not common practice to destroy those devices? Again, yeah, but this is possible She was the uh server that I showed you a federal I'm pretty sure somebody even linked me like the standards for destruction of devices Like one year after or as your part like this was like department standard Shit like everybody that practices maintaining information on uh devices like this will always destroy these You don't think they throw them in a trash can't do you if you work for the state department Yeah, I'm fully aware. Okay, so we can't just say that like You might want to keep devices that might be uh part of this investigation, right? But no, they were destroyed. So evidence gone Sure, then you if you think that somebody's destroying a device after knowing an investigation is being Performed then you have to prove that they did that that was something they knowingly did in contravention of the investigation It's called obstruction of justice. Yeah All right. Well, that happened though. They were destroyed while the investigation was going on I don't think the investigation had begun yet when they were destroying blackberries The story was out the story was out. I don't know about a story I'm just saying the investigation the big the big question over the hillary investigation was the wiping of the server because that happened After the investigation to be gone. That was the big one. Not the destroying of the devices Yeah, right. That's that is another thing. That is another piece of evidence that goes towards intent. But yeah Well, but the intent was whether it was hillary clinton's intention or the guy that ran the servers Which is what the FBI had to prove and they weren't able to prove it Who knows maybe hillary did order that and they were just never found evidence for it And they shouldn't have given that guy immunity and you know, maybe but we don't have evidence for it But we do have evidence that trump assuming everything in the indictment and everything that's been released is true We know that trump almost certainly broke these laws relating to mishandling of classified information We don't we can speculate on hillary. We have no evidence of biden Do you have any evidence that biden knowingly and intentionally was mishandling these classified documents in his house? Well, I mean, I don't know how we would ever know that but yeah Well, it could be him saying hey, can you deliver this like classified document in my house? Right? That's what I'm saying though Yeah, that's what I'm saying like had trump not blabbed his mouth. You you know, you wouldn't have anything But yeah, I'll give you that one for sure. Okay. So then one set of indictments is probably credible um There is the uh the jack smith case the federal one saying that trump was knowingly disseminating lies to the american public about Um voter fraud seems like trump made a lot. I totally disagree with that Okay, so do you think trump even though everybody in his inner circle was telling him? Hey, the georgia thing. This isn't true. Hey, the pennsylvania thing. This isn't true. Hey the ballot boxes. We investigated That's not true You don't think that him hearing that from his inner circle and then repeating those same claims over and over again Was showing that he was repeating statements. Okay, so All right, so let's saying that this is actually happening everybody's telling him this That doesn't mean that he agrees with them for one and number two We're talking about state of mind and there were a lot of weird things going on with that election You deny that you deny like the pipes bursting that the the putting the boards up across the windows where they're counting All these videos of you know boxes coming out And i'm not saying that every one of those things was you know in a farious action But the state of mind at the time also everything that we've talked about before Leading up to this about you know, the democrats going off about voting machines after he won And so yeah, I can see And even me as somebody who didn't think the election was stolen Even I was sort of like questioning it, you know, like just think that might have been because there was like an Unprecedented like microscope put under every single ballot counting area in the entire united states Fine, but like we're talking about him knowingly lying and I just so are we gonna say that the president of the united states can be so Like intellectually mentally disabled that maybe he believes something that is standing and start contrast to every single person around him And in his administration and he can have a reasonable reason to believe that that's donald He can literally be the only person that believes these things Does that sound like a reasonable person to you? Yeah, he can have his own beliefs and thoughts. Yeah, absolutely So trump so trump can believe things that everybody around him is saying is not true in that case Like then trump could literally believe I don't know that everybody Where are you getting that that everybody around him was saying this? Well, if you go through the january 6 select committee and you look at all the statements They at least like I think 30 different things where different people were telling him like hey This statement and the a lot of these are all those like second hand weren't a lot of those like second hand like Reported from people saying that they heard that this was told to him or something like that Nope, these are first hand statements that were literally made. You've got the then deputy eternal generally jeffrey rosen You've got the active deputy Attorney general richard donahue. You've got the georgia secretary of state Brad raffensperger. You've got attorney general bar making tons of statements You've got georgia state general counsel ryan germany You've got the white house press secretary kailey Mcmcannony. I don't pronounce his names trump campaign senior advisor jason miller talked to him a lot You've got national security advisor robert o bryan Yeah, and i'm pretty sure they're more. I think these are just some of the ones they listed I think they've got like a full list of these If you click another thing but like tons of people are basically every single person around him was saying the same thing There's why people are getting mad when he was bringing in people like sydney palin. Shit or Eastman like trump had to like get these weird people from the outside to support his claims because literally nobody that was working in His campaign that was working in the white house that was working the republican party the rnt Nobody was supporting anything it was saying nobody credible was saying what's supporting anything it was saying And mostly people are republican So it's in their interest to keep him in power. Sorry, right. I know but I don't see Right. I get that I understand But I still think that he could hear all this from all these people and still look at everything and be like No, it was stolen from me and and really believe it What would he have to hear to to change his mind then or is he delusional at this point? Well, I mean Maybe nothing. Maybe it is but so he can be delusional. You're comfortable with a president It is actually delusional. You said nothing can change his mind. That's a definition of a delusion Hey There was after the muller report and they said there was no collusion Everybody and the democrats still believed there was russian collusion really because I feel like after them I feel like by the time the muller report came out that talk had died down and after the muller report died down I'm pretty sure that almost completely died out. It did. It did. No, no In fact, they came after muller. They were coming after muller after that. They all it was muller time up until that And then they kind of came after them Yeah, uh, because remember it was like It's muller time, but then the report came out and He basically said there was no collusion And uh, yeah, and then everybody hated muller after that They might have hated muller, but I'm pretty sure that talking point basically fell off after the muller report. No, that's not true Okay, I disagree. Um, so you're saying that nothing trump can hear Um, whatever can ever change his mind here. He has to believe that nothing no amount of physical world evidence can ever change his mind on it That's why I don't like this particular thing because I don't think that I don't really think that you could prove that he knowingly Like, oh, I definitely know I lie that I lost the election. Now I'm lying I mean, so Can you ever improve any crime with intent ever in the united states? We just dropped all of that from the criminal code like first degree murder Like that goes away because we can't ever know. It was premeditated.  I don't know how we're going back to russian collusion I'm asking can we ever have a state of mind crime ever or does every single all mens re all crimes relating to state of mind All have to be tossed it's just like statutory offenses. Like if you do it, you're guilty and that's it And no no state of mind's ever ascertained. I guess if you have no, no, uh I mean again, I'm not it's hard for me to answer this because I don't really know the standard for that But I would say that there are probably ways of knowing for a fact that somebody knowingly lied like Maybe written something that they wrote or something that recorded saying that it's like oh look you just said there that you lost the election Sure, how about trump saying in 2019 that the mail-in ballots were going to be rigged even though there was no evidence of that How about him saying in 2016 that it's possible that they're rigging the election before he knew that he won And then him continuing the same thing in 2021 when the evidence changes or the setting is different He still repeats the exact same claims Even after he loses court case after court case even if everyone in the center What would it take to convince you that trump knew he was lying? I mean, I don't see how any of those things proves he was lying again I pointed back to the democrats knew that they lost but they still rail against democrats I'm asking you specifically what would it take to show you that trump was lying I just said uh, I recorded something recorded saying that yes I know I lost or something written something showing that yes He definitely saw and knew that he lost admitted acknowledged it and yet still went out and said this Okay, so would say then yeah, you probably got him on lying But other than that like okay, so then if trump ends up pleading guilty then to any of these charges You're gonna say like, oh, okay. Well, I guess he did um, well It's hard to argue against that if you plead guilty, however I will say this uh-huh when that when the government the government can get you to plead guilty the things you're not guilty of Okay, so I know that wouldn't work. I'm guessing no confession then at this point would work Um, it would have to be a prior written. Well, because now you would just say it's part of a guilty plea, right? Well, well look look at flin. He pled guilty, but he only pled guilty because Uh, they were pressuring to go after his son and stuff And he was also probably guilty of what they accused him of he would he had been communicating with people that he wasn't supposed to Lied to the fbi about that It I'll tell you a quick story here. And this is why I had my thinking on this so I when I was like 18, I went with a friend through a drive-through I had a bb gun in my back seat and while I we had gone to this Arby's because his girlfriend was working we ordered pull up and I'm paying for my food I look back and he has grabbed my gun my bb gun. It's pointing it at the thing.  You know it? Yelled at him paid for our food. We left. Well, I got pulled over later that night Rested at gunpoint accused of robbing the Arby's and they came after me Uh with three felony and I'm not even the one who did it was the other guy And uh, you know, I told him what happened. They never believed me They came after me for all with all these felony charges trying to put me away. We fought it fought it Um, eventually it got down to where they couldn't deny I didn't do anything and they offered me Uh, uh, disturbing the peace which I played guilty to just because I couldn't fight it anymore I didn't want you know to go to jail for something. I was completely innocent of so I said, yeah I went along with it, but I wasn't guilty of anything Do you think Trump the billionaire is going to get bullied because it doesn't want to fight?  I don't know why this has nothing No, I didn't say trump. I'm saying no. I'm saying well, okay, so I don't I'm just saying no and no they could right no no no no He could plead guilty something He has no way of getting out of as a way of avoiding bigger trouble I think yeah, you didn't plead guilty because you had no way of getting out of it You said you plead guilty because you just didn't want to fight it anymore Do you think that trump doesn't want to fight do you think trump can't afford to? Yeah, I think that's probably he's probably running out of money I mean he's begging people to send him money so he can All this money he's getting for the campaign he's using isn't trump like one of the largest fundraisers in all of US history like I don't think yeah, but from what I've read he's using the money He's using is all from like his campaign, which doesn't which suggests he's doesn't have a lot of money Okay, so he's not a billionaire or did he lie about all the money that he had to or I mean Could be okay So for donald trump to have been lying deliberately about the election Even though he's repeating things that people have told are not true Even though he was making the same exact claims before having any evidence And he's made the same exact same exact claims after And even after he repeats lies that have been shot down in federal courts with his own appointed federal judges None of that is enough to convince you he's lying. Why are you convinced again that the fbi was trying to coup? Hillary clinton when none of them or why are you convinced the fba was trying to coup donald trump when none of them have explicitly said We are trying to coup donald trump I Why do I think because the actions they took they the insurance policy? Why can't I why can't I say the actions donald trump took? I'm sorry. I'm confused what you're saying here If you're saying that the action so it seems like now you can ascertain a state of mind for the fbi when it's the actions They took why can't I ascertain trump state of mind with the actions that he took? Well for one so you're talking about the lie you have I said what I would Something an example of some things that I could get that would convince me that he's lying We have those things when it comes to the coup attempt on trump We have peter strucks text messages that talk about literally talk about an insurance policy of trump wins Could he have been talking about how like even if trump wins he's going to be indicted on this russia collusion stuff I mean he's going to be gone afterwards. Why does the insurance policy have to be a coup? But maybe he thinks he actually committed those crimes But Well, first of all, I don't know if they knew about the russia collusion thing at that moment But it's a little more than a little odd to me that the guy who says he's got an insurance policy Ends up being the lead investigator of this scheme, which the fbi knew was not legitimate I don't understand. What are you implying? Are you implying that the fbi knowingly put a biased agent biased agent in charge of this investigation? Is that what you're I'm just asking you're implying here. I'm not trying to say I'm just here's what you're implying Yes, absolutely Okay, what if the fbi is that you don't think it's weird at all. You don't think it's weird at all We're not asking if it was weird. We're not asking if it was weird.  Why didn't they just indict him with some bullshit? I mean, I feel like that's what's happening now But I just asked you about the classified materials charge and you seem to agree that he probably broke the law Well, he might have there. Maybe he did I I even told you for the offset that there's possibility that he did do something here and that I don't Okay, for the racket charges in Georgia Do you think it's possible that him making phone calls to the general secretary and asking for certain votes that he had no reason to believe We're there. You don't think any of that is illegal. No, no because that that's really Uh, that's like a context thing and no, I don't I bet you that goes nowhere. Yeah, I don't I don't I think there's nothing there like saying find the votes that's like You know get out there recount find, you know where these votes are He's not saying like literally manufacture votes Or at least I didn't georgia do like two or three full Recounts like an audit and like two full recounts and none of these came up with like anything Hey, I mean, uh, what's her face in georgia? There was recounts. She lost and she continued to claim the election was stolen from her Who?  What's her name stacey abrams or whatever stacey abrams. Yeah.  It's always different I mean, it just always is that you you cannot you cannot believe that it's just always different And then when democrats do this thing, it's always right and if republicans do the same thing There's some reason and it's wrong. I didn't say it was always right or always different I'm saying there's a difference between somebody saying like I think that an acting voter idea in this state It's an attempt to discriminate against poor people to make you win the election That's different than saying the machines were printing off different ballots than what the people were pushing the button for Those are two, okay, and I pointed different claims Okay, and fine, and I pointed you to and I gave you the link to the video of democrats making that claim for years After which was the video on this Uh, if you scroll up, I need to use I need to take a quick break here, but uh, if you Okay, the voting machine thing. Yeah, go. Yeah, just yeah, I'll be right back Using touch screen Virginia just stopped using touch screen computer voting because it's so vulnerable We need to look at all the voting machines every secretary of state needs to be You know assisted in making sure that they are not being Hacked and and attacked I continue to think that our voting machines are too vulnerable for researchers have repeatedly Demonstrated that ballot recording machines and other voting systems are susceptible to tempering even hackers with limited prior knowledge Tools and resources are able to breach voting machines in a matter of minutes in 2018 electronic voting machines in georgia and texas deleted votes for certain candidates Or switch votes from one candidate to another the biggest seller of voting machines is doing something that violates cybersecurity 101 directing that you install remote access software, which would make a machine like that You know a magnet for fraudsters and hackers these voting machines can be hacked quite easily You could easily hack into them It makes it seem like all these states are doing different things But in fact three companies are controlling that it is the individual voting machines that some pose that pose some of the greatest risks There are a lot of states that are dealing with antiquated machines Right, which are vulnerable to being hacked workers were able to easily hack into an electronic voting machine It was possible to switch votes 43 percent Of american voters use voting machines That researchers have found have serious security flaws Including back doors. We know okay. I'm at one minute and 30 seconds through this video Maybe it gets more severe later on But these people are just expressing concerns about vulnerabilities in the in these machines of which there were a lot of legitimate concerns My understanding is that was one of the big reasons why a lot of these states took explicit measures Like for instance requiring every electronic machine to put to print a paper ballot trail That a lot of these concerns were addressed prior to the 2020 election But so far i'm only a minute and a half through this none of these people are saying that any election was hacked or rigged or stolen They're expressing concerns over vulnerabilities in these machines. That's right. And this is right And you got a in context again. This is right after the election This is after they've said the election like Nancy Pelosi's, you know said the election has been hacked Um, Nancy Pelosi said the election has been hacked Yeah, yeah, you don't remember that Nancy Pelosi My friend has been hacked You mean election was hijacked Is that what it is hijacked or no, no, no, no, no, hold on um It's a tweet i believe in that this yeah, i see tweets In 2017 saying our election was hijacked. There is no question congress has a duty to hashtag protect our democracy and hashtag follow the facts Well, hi jack. I mean Who somebody said hacked hold on. I'm maybe it wasn't Pelosi. Okay. I would say this is a dumb tweet from Pelosi I don't agree with it. I don't think you should tweet stuff like this. I think it's bad And and this I'm just trying to like make the case for like the environment at the time I don't care what case you're making. I'm saying that you're wrong on the facts Donald trump's legal team took 61 cases to court alleging voter fraud vote rigging like all like Hiding ballot boxes their claims were not that there were vulnerabilities in the machines or that russian interference was like influencing the voter They were making explicit. This is why juliana is getting disbarred Like they were making explicit claims about voter fraud about like electioneering about like people The 2000 mules video like all this dumb shit like they were not even on the same level as these types of claims Okay, well There is something else I wanted to ask you about sure If we can I'm just really curious on your take on this. Okay. Just because I mean we're going to kind of run around on this one But um But I am interested to hear those points. Those are all good points. Um, oh wait real quick Just one more final question What do you think about like the text that leaked from people at fox news?  How did they know that but but donald trump didn't I don't understand How you know it's fake like well because they know that because one there was no good source for the claims They were coming from lunatics that were approaching trump saying that venezuela had some hand in it number one and number two Remember the fbi themselves Deconstructed one of these voting machines at the doj's request and william bar. I don't know if we can still find it on a Dot gov website william bar himself put out a statement saying we tore down one of these machines We looked through it.  I don't think they were legit. I for instance, I agree largely with what the derm report said I think there was a very toxic culture in the fbi and I think political bias Causes people to do maybe irreparable damage to all of our institutions If not at least all the intelligence is indefinitely to the fbi I think there was a lot of improper way that fake vice warren is a really fucking big deal I think that the general culture in the fbi of not having people not having red teams Whatever testing them to make sure that they're staying honest or whatever and securing them from political bias and the Dropping the ball on the anthony wiener laptop or whatever.  That's possible. You're the one that wants to jump to conspiracy I don't think there's any proof of that Um, well What do you think about ray epps if there's no conspiracy because that's if there's one area where I think there's definitely Definitely a legitimate question to try out. So I'm just curious what you think about that because I think that ties in I I think I said at the beginning that if ray epps is the guy who incited those people You can't blame trump but sure I've been I've just started digging into the ray epps stuff today And my guess is going to be there's absolutely nothing There's no proof for evidence of the ray epps is probably one of the silliest conspiracy there even the q and on stuff really Yeah, really So what part do you think is silly? Literally all of it. First of all, is there any what is I don't think I've gotten to this part of the article yet What is the evidence that ray epps was an fbi informant? well, so It's funny and when you read these articles you you see them latch on to that specific Like term or very specific terms like that. I don't know if he was working for the fbi I don't know if he's an informant or what capacity he was working with somebody in the government But the only reason that I think that he was and there's only one reason is because Despite him being on video telling people For the night before in the day of telling people to enter and literally storm the capital And being at the front when the riot began and admitting to orchestrate to get into text message Okay, hold on. Hold on. Hold on He was treated as a victim about like half of that so for one. I don't I don't remember him here I remember him saying we need to take out. He also said though peacefully like you said donald trump said right So Every single time he said peacefully just to be clear. No, no, no, no There's one there's one video during the night footage where he's like We need and we need to go down to the capital and everyone's like fed fed fed He's like peacefully peacefully, but then later He's like, hey, i'm probably gonna go to jail for this But we need to get into the capital and then later he's talking to bake delaska and he's like You know, they're arguing. He's like, no, we're here for something serious and he whispers to him He goes we're here to storm the capital, which is Interesting to me since that is the like literal wording that was used afterwards immediately But so you got that guy that's on video doing that. Okay. He's at the front. He did text his nephew and said that I Uh orchestrated it and then yet he gets treated as a victim. He gets treated as a conspiracy theory He's never charged until much much later with a slap on the wrist misdemeanor While grandma's with cancer who were just walking around got like actual prison sentences He gets off and yet they treat him like that doesn't make any sense What is it? I haven't gotten to this part of the story yet. Where is the ray epps? Uh, what did he text his nephew? Um, he texted him, uh, uh, I orchestrated it and it is funny. Have you seen the 60 minutes interview with raps? There's a 60 minutes interview. I haven't watched it yet. No Okay, well they specifically bring that up and it's funny because the whole The whole segment is done as if they're debunking a conspiracy theory And they even the guy even says before he mentions it. He's like all the conspiracists Believe that this is a smoking gun your text message to your nephew that you orchestrated it and his explanation is like Oh, yeah, uh, my wife scolded me for saying that That's literally his response.   So I think he did orchestrate and I think that okay, you have any actual So firstly, let's go back to the first thing you said hold on real quick He has to be working for or with the FBI, right? Because if he's not then Well, I didn't say no, no, I didn't say the FBI said and the only reason I think he might have been working with somebody in the government Or something is because of how it's treated because of how he's treated and Comparison to everybody else. Okay. So we had so then to be clear then we have no smoking gun No, hard proof whatsoever that he's working for any part of the government at all then number one, right? Right, right. Absolutely. Okay. Then number two for evidence that he quote unquote orchestrated it Are we relying on this one text he sent to his nephew? Well, no and all the video of him literally orchestrating it You mean of him saying we're gonna peacefully Storm the capital or we're gonna storm the capital tomorrow. We're here to storm the capital There's that when he when they call him out as a fed is the one time he says peacefully Peacefully, but then after that there's a lot of we need to enter the capital I'll probably go to prison for this. He's like he He keeps telling people to stay focused How many people that night how many people that night we're telling people we're gonna storm the capital let's storm the capital Him that was it. That's the only proof. We haven't you think he's the only guy in all of the january fifth people Saying that tomorrow we're gonna storm the capital tomorrow. We're gonna think he's the only one He is the one Organizing people. Yeah, he's the one you say organizing people if you say organizing then we should have more proof than just Bake the laska's live stream. What is the organization? No, wait? No, no, no. Okay. Go ahead Well, first of all, what more evidence do you need than actual video of him doing it? Well, I don't know how about like what we had for the oath breakers where people were sending text messages in advance Where people were bringing weapons where people were coordinating what's up like I orchestrated it Text messages like actually orchestrating it and not making a bragging claim to a nephew No, but he did actually orchestrate it in fact When the right I'm asking for evidence of that. Yeah, right when the riot first starts He is at the front. So I don't know if you've seen this video, but there's a video of him at the very front Okay, where he whispers into the guys ear their explanation for that because the riot starts right after he does that and his explanation Supposedly him and the guy he whist were to were interviewed separately and both said the same story So that debunks it even though they could have just coordinated But he whispers to him it starts he says that he told the guy not to riot He's like, oh, no, I was telling him don't do it Don't go into the Capitol and that's very interesting to me because This is the guy that spent several days telling people to enter the Capitol And then just before the riot starts he tells one guy not to do it And that if you look at if you look at the video and if you look at all the other video footage of him Isn't he literally running around the entire days and like hey stop fighting. Hey be peaceful. Hey, these are cops No, he's literally running around all day telling people to enter the Capitol. Oh, okay You're just wrong on that. You're not even familiar with the conspiracy. Um, because I'm literally I am very I'm familiar with like dude. This is probably one topic. I know the most about so yeah Show me the video. Show me video if I'm telling people not to do it Here's an article. I know he has claimed here's the revolver. Here's the revolver article And then This says Reed Reyev's the fed protective bravaka to her appears to have led the very first one My understanding is that this is the uh, this is like the first big article that like exposed reyev So I'm going to go because I'm trying to read it from your guys's stories to see what you guys are saying I've never read this one So you've seen the video of him talking to the one guy where I don't know if he's talking about a dude's microphone Or in this article says a bear spray, but the guy's like, hey like don't take that in you don't want to get shot Right don't take that in okay. Don't take that in you don't want to go in Oh, maybe but he's not telling him that he's just saying it seems like if you look at all the videos on the Seems like he's protecting the officers Who we might be working with Wait, he's working. Wait. So now you think he is working with the officers No, I didn't what I wait the guy that's inciting the riot is also working with the officers Or what I don't yeah, listen listen you specified fbi and I said it's not necessarily the fbi It could be any government agency could just be loosely working with uh an element of the capital police I don't know It all I know is that there's a lot of these strange questions that don't have good answers I don't think these are strange questions at all Okay, so if you control ask if you control wait control up and look for Hurt that afternoon. Okay. There's a 31 second video. Okay.  I don't know what he's doing Well, okay. Well here. Let's play it at the same time. I will listen. Okay, it but hold on This is the guy that okay. Go ahead. Okay. Three two one play I would have came locked and loaded if I knew this was happening Take a step back. Take a step back. We're holding ground. We're not trying to get people hurt They don't want to get hurt. You don't want to get hurt Hey, we're with you guys we're with you guys We again I can keep scrolling because there's other videos here It seems like all he was doing on the day of January 6 was telling people like hey like Stop even that guy that he whispered into his ear initially. Wait, there's actually a statement of what he actually said What did he actually say to him? Um, he well he claims well, okay So the guy he whispered to and him both apparently told the fbi that he told him not to get involved and not to Not to riot. Oh, that makes sense. Yeah, because I think they I feel like there's one other video I'm pretty sure we some maybe it's one of those larger ones All right, but you understand. Yeah, do you understand the absurdity of that though? Like he's literally getting people whipped up for two days literally to storm the capital Okay, and then he whispers to one guy one single guy whispers to him.  It looks like oh, I feel like you're doing that Oh, okay. Well, that's funny because none of my claims require evidence that I can't substantiate and all of it seems to Like be pretty reasonable and it's supported by all of the evidence and if you want to make a counter claim That's fine. But we go through here's my narrative. This is what it looks like to me. This is what I had written down Okay, I wrote down two points boomer guy who believed that trump genuinely thought the election was stolen So he showed up to protest in the capital But he wanted things to remain peaceful and the second point is he probably didn't have any major connections And probably wasn't involved in any violent coordination And when I look at all of the videos and all of the narratives and everything about this guy That seems to be true seems like he was some old dude.  I don't think anything about is there anything that I just said in that story that's completely and totally unbelievable or wild or crazy Well, yeah, I mean because he he was literally telling people to storm the capital How can that how can you storm the capital without being violent? But he literally is saying okay How can you tell your people to fight like hell and take your country back but not be violent? Because that's what donald trump said january 6th. Can you please make these three points reasonable to me? Absolutely. I can't because fight like uh political language telling people to fight is very common Really telling people to storm the capital is very very specific So storm the capital do you deny that democrats don't always talk about fighting don't we're not going to the democrats right now On this point. I'm trying to figure out said that this okay. I'm trying to figure out that this guy when things were getting violent Okay, he obviously was uncomfortable. What was happening? It seems like he's walking around trying to de-escalate people He didn't even go into the capital He's trying to tell people hey calm down right here to fight these guys the police officers on our that's interesting too, right? No, not really. Um, and then you compare that with the behavior of say like donald trump Who told people to fight like hell who sat and watched on tv as all the violence unfolded as aid after aid after family member after family member after Uh security advisor security advisor came in and talked to him and he didn't say anything All they did was tweet to to rile them up even more saying that pence failed us Seems like one of these guys wants to be violent. They're guys pretty obviously doesn't The the guy that told people to storm the capital doesn't want to be violent Doesn't it doesn't seem like it and so and so here's and so here's the the other question that I have about this You know did epps even say storm the capital did he actually say the word storm the capital? He did he did Let me go find the original video which is here. I'll I'll find you the actual clip of that But I always found that strange just because that's the exact wording that Are you know our medium? The same wording that what? That's the same like Boarding that our media used after is that the the capital was stormed. What are you implying? I don't it just seems odd to me that no no what seems odd about that Because he's the first one we here to use that language and then that's the exact language our media used You think so let me just try to figure out your state of mind You think that he was the first person that night on january 5th to use the phrase storm the capital He was the first person to talk about Right, that's that's who we have on video the guy that's whipping the crowd up He's using that language. Yeah, and here here's here's my other thing. Okay How do you explain How he's treated by democrats by the media compared to Literally anybody else associated with january 6th Well, right now people are probably sympathetic because he became like the lead of a conspiracy to pin the entire Like we're talking about you got like the whole narrative is that it was an attack on the capital And here's a guy telling people to enter the capital and storm the capital. He's on video doing it and yet Why do you think hold on wait? Why do you think people are sympathetic charges? He gets no charges. He did get really He got charged years later with a misdemeanor with not even not not even any jail time While other people while other people who were just standing around the capital got jail time Who was just standing around the capital got jail time?  I'm curious. Also. Let me listen to this video real quick. Hold on So on video I hear him say we need to go into the capital Into the capital hold on tomorrow We need to we need to go in to the capital Oh, oh wait, hold on real quick. Wait, is there a video of him saying we need to storm the capital? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I'll get it I'll get it for you. I'm sorry. Okay Let me look for it ray epps Storm I got right here. I got it right here. You're my neighbor Then he leaned in and okay. We're not here to fight man. We're here to storm the capital I'm not kidding. We're here to storm the capital. Isn't he still doing literally the call for peace right up here We're not here to fight. No No, he's saying amongst each other Think he apparently because those two are arguing because it's make the last Remember he called him a fed when he started telling people to go to the capital. He's like no no fed fed everyone starts calling And then that's when he says peacefully Peacefully, that's that's literally the way that happened that one moment change. All right now. We have video of anyway Okay Here's another just a random question. I'm curious what your opinion is on this, okay If he was obviously a fed in a glowy and he was telling people to storm the capital Why is it that baked alaska actually did it? Right. Hey, hey, that's what i'm asking.  I'm like, you knew it You knew he was or you suspect he's a fed you knew what he was saying was going to get people in trouble And yet you took part anyway, although doesn't that show that he probably didn't incite it also to be clear This storm the capital line. That's not something he shouted at a crowd. That's something he whispered to Um, well, we don't know how many we don't know how many other people he said that to but So you think he was walking around all night? That's the only video. That's the only video We have him saying storm the capital. Okay, but every other video where you're shouting He's saying we need to go into the capital and be peaceful. We need to go into the capital though And hold real quick when you're talking about like, oh, well, he did that and then he wanted people to be peaceful Um, why did they then brag to his nephew about it?  What do you mean? I don't know man like that that's just weird to me All these things are weird to me and I just don't have any When you say that's weird to me what you're saying is I know for a fact that he did something illegal No, no evidence for it. No, no, I'm saying I have not heard a I've not heard a good explanation Do you know any old people in your life ever?  Yeah Just let's let's look at the charge he got compared to other people He literally incited a riot to storm the capital. No, it's a mystery incitement to riot. I don't think you have that here What What is that? That's an incitement to riot and and look at the amount of people that he got to do it If if he in fact what do you mean the amount of people he got to do it? Why do you even think he's the one that's getting people to do it? Donald trump's speech ended and he told people to go to the capital Right and right and that's how I started out this whole argument. Remember 120 over 120,000 people marched peacefully Just like he said it was this small group that got violent and then I got a wonder what made them violent We got guys like ray epps Literally acting like a leader the whole time like you said pacing up and down the line We and what about people like the oath breakers who are texting and coordinating beforehand to like set up and the people That were actually breaking into the capital building Right. So and we talked about that there was around 300 people that were charged with breaking and and around Don't you think they might have done something to make it violent? What about the people that were actually fighting with cops that were brawling with cops and throwing that you think ray epps Talked to each and single every one of those people ray epps can well know here's what no Here's what I think when you watch the video It was relatively calm up until the point where uh, the tear gas and concussion grenades and stuff start going into the crowd Then it started getting super rowdy and You know, I don't know. I don't know what started it. It's that's a question I think should be asked and it's odd to me that it's not it's odd to me that The it seemed like it started it was it was there was a crowd of people They were all there to protest. They started to get rowdy and as riots do they just kind of spawn usually there There's not always like an inciting moment or whatever, but I mean except for what we have on video The inciting that's on video What do you mean the inciting the guy that he talks to isn't even the guy that breaks into the into the fence Right. I know but How is he excited? He's not he's not even talking to the guy that ends up and also the people are already Basically like trying to break in before that they're all getting rowdy back and forth Right. How many of these people did he did he whip up the night before in the day of? I I don't know that I don't know what do you mean? How many you think he talked to every single one of the people Are in frame there they all know who he is Um, no, I'm not saying they all do but I'm saying that he was taking he took this position as sort of a Leader trying to organize it there.  He's trying to keep everybody focused on this idea.  You want to be able to be there protesting the politicians That's well.  No, no it was stay focused was after there was that other girl the microphone or the megaphone Where she was screaming and he was trying to say no stay focused. It's not about antifa Be alone we can find the video on this too if you want. Well, right. No, no, you're right But I know what part you're talking about right, but Again, man, I feel like you're kind of playing dumb here. Like I'm not playing hold on to be clear Let me just give you the macro summary my version of events is there's a boomer dude He likes trump. Uh, he believes that the election was stolen and he wants to go down and he wants to protest And he's on video saying we're gonna go into the capital but be peaceful We're gonna go into the capital be peaceful telling people the night before and then the next day when things are getting rowdy He's walking around saying on the capital. Hold on Stop laughing because you're laughing at trump's speech when everybody in the world and this year leader is about to go Down in federal prison. Okay, deservedly. So I wish you guys would too. Okay, but this guy.  Where's the pivot? Donald trump is the one that said he wants to suspend the constitution to investigate voter fraud that he couldn't find for Four years. Donald trump is the one that says he wants to revoke citizenship from americans that burn the flag Which is the first man, right? Donald trump is the one that said i want to open the libel and defamation law so i can sue the Donald trump is the one that says uh, the media is the enemy of the people Donald trump is the one that asked me like i don't know what what comparison you're trying to make Okay, i know that's all true by the way. That's i know of course because you're an authoritarian. I understand. Okay I'm regardless, but you i'm an authoritarian. Yeah, of course, obviously Trump says he's gonna do but when you're the ones actually doing those things you convince yourselves that Oh, no, it's different and the reasons we're doing it for is justified. That's how you get authority Because there are reasons for why people do things.  Who do you think he didn't he did not he did not really Who do you think got more people? How do you storm the capital peacefully by walking it? Wait? Okay, hold on wait. So you're telling me every you're telling me every single person in the capital wasn't being peaceful then I'm sorry. Is that gonna be your new claim? We can go with that if you want What you said earlier the grandma that was walking through the capital She wasn't doing anything Do you think most of the people that were quote-unquote storming the capital most people the capital You think all of them were not peaceful then are you gonna tell me those people didn't storm they walked in They those people walked in there was definitely a group that stormed and I have no hard I don't have a hard time believing that ray ups was able to incite that amount of people You think ray ups and nobody else has video proof of this just the seven same grainy videos Nobody else has good proof of him. There was no grainy video Yeah, what we've got like it's not real. I didn't say it's not real I'm just saying that we've got we've got some live streamers video Nobody else has anything to say about him.  I can't give you I said So I started this out by saying that I was gonna raise a reasonable suspicion What do you there's no there is no reasonable suspicion? Well, there might be the fba might have investigated him and they let him off because there was no reason To think that he was actually inside.   Yes, that is insane So this is how this is how we get authoritarianism because you guys have all the Institutional support you have the media you can create these narratives and repeat them endlessly until they become real Even though they're not and then you use that as your justification for the authoritarian takeover and Criminalization of your opponents, which is what we're watching. That make no mistake. That's what we're watching You've already by the way that could be your narrative now, but you already admitted earlier that donald trump broke At least one law in one set of indictments. So you're that law by the way is totally morally bankrupt broke laws And the law doesn't apply to her because she's a democrat. Okay, which law did she break? She she uh, uh, uh criminally mishandled sensitive, uh top secret data on that server But oh because there was there because her her her investigator literally changed the wording so she could avoid prosecution No, the fbi was not able to prove that she had intentionally Hidden classified information on the server intentionally mishandled it That's part of the criminal statute if you don't like it go to congress and change the law You have to intentionally mishandle data for it to be a crime Well, I that's why you bringing up biden as a comparison when biden found the documents or his lawyer did and said Hey, by the way, we've got classified documents come here and get it is a lot different than the fbi giving donald trump a year A year to return it if he didn't that isn't oopsies welcome to intend. I didn't have them for decades It doesn't matter stuff could be retroactively classified Right Do you understand how the law works? You know any part of the law or do you just have opinions about it?  I'm not a It's not about you.  It's about you You're trying to sell me a story that the 60 year old fucking boomer guy Whipped up more people to break into the capital than the president of the united states Donald trump who has spent the last four years winding people up to believe the election was going to be rigged and stolen New people in his crowd had weapons sent them to march on the capital to protest Your first argument was well, he was telling them to go that they were going to vote them out Even though he was setting there because he said all the elections were rigged, which doesn't make any sense You're trying to tell me that this guy had a greater responsibility for the invasion of the capital than donald trump Yeah, absolutely, and I missed it with the number. I proved it. I at least re I raised a reasonable suspicion by saying There's a it was literally mostly peaceful which I we started this out with me asking you if you thought Those riots for multiple years democrat riots were mostly peaceful. You said yes, suddenly that doesn't apply in this state Wait, what doesn't apply here? What do you mean? This was one right? It was a mostly peaceful protest most of the people at this riot were peaceful. Sure. I agree with that What does that have to do with anything? Well, if if donald trump was telling this massive crowd You know to go and and and stop the process Wouldn't a lot more than a handful a relative handful of people have taken part in that I don't know In blm riot in blm riots. Do you think the majority of the people are rioting? How many what percentage in a blm riot you think are the people actually rioting and my guess in those riots? Probably like one percent.  So I don't know a lot of them. Okay, you know Well, I've also watched like the videos of all the people going through the Capitol building and that looked like a riot to me They were breaking windows. They were breaking through the ray ups convinced them to do that Some people some people. Yeah, he said storm the Capitol. How do you storm the Capitol? You got that's how you got to do it, right? Well, he did he said storm the Capitol It's weird to me. It's weird how dismissive you are of it It's weird how the media is dismissive of it in the democrats all these same people Literally who who would be totally fine with trump supporters getting rounded up like you just said suddenly this guy It's like you're like you're rounded up. What do you think? Hold on. What do you think I'm being dismissive of? Of his role and and the fact that he gets a slap on the wrist.  That's wild Well, when you say instigate the entire riot again, we're talking about a Relatively small handful of people compared to the larger protests, right? You can call it really small but 2,000 people were in our Capitol building looking for the lawmakers No, no, no, no, that's not true. There was there was I'll give you a 300 or so Maybe maybe a little bit more than that 400 500. Maybe people were doing that No, I'm not saying I'm not saying charge. I'm saying I think at the end I think the estimate was about 2,000 people had made their way through the Capitol correct. Yeah, it's about that Well, yeah, close to that it was around 900 just short of a thousand that were charged with trespassing But again, you you you do realize there's tons of video of the police like leading these people in No, there's not no, there's not removing barricades.  I did this two years ago I can walk through the same thing with you.   No, you're just believing because you've seen select videos if you want we can do this right now I've got what do you think the media has been pumping out for the last few years You don't think that's select video then let's go over what video do you want to look at right now? Explain to me why the the 120,000 peaceful people never come up in this It's first of all, I don't even know if 120,000 people were there and that's you're now you're pivoting to a total of your argument I want you to what are videos where you think the police are escorting people in or showing people around All right. Well, okay. I will uh, let's see like the Q and on shaman. That's a good one Oh did my My uh headphones when I just died one second Oh man, my headphones are breaking as we speak one second Can somebody link me these the grandma versions chargers by speakers here Okay, is what she was like actually charged with There we go. I should really oh wait All right, I had bluetooth headphones on and they died. There we go. I should be able to hear you now test. Uh-huh Yeah, I should be able to hear you, but I can't are you talking? Hello. Hello. Okay. I can hear you now. Okay All right, um Yeah, I'm fine. Oh, here we go. I got it. Here we go So this is this video is interesting to me just because you do see a lot of videos like this where they're just kind of walking around with people And especially it's odd that they're like trying to open doors for them and they eventually lead them right into the the main hall of congress there Or Yeah, okay. Glad we've got tucker carlson footage on this. Thank god.  Why would you prefer that this is being hidden? Didn't everybody live stream this what do you mean it was being hidden? This footage was part of the footage that was not initially released What do you mean released? That's why it was wasn't it all of this posted on the internet? Like wasn't it all live streamed Not not the one. I just linked you This was p