Speaker 1: Cool Zone Media.
Speaker 2: This is it could happen here. Executive Disorder, our weekly
Speaker 2: newscast covering what is happening in the White House, the
Speaker 2: crumbling world, and what it means for you. I'm Garrison
Speaker 2: Davis today I'm joined by Sophie Lecterman, Robert Evans, and
Speaker 2: James Stout. This episode, we are covering the week of
Speaker 2: September fourth to September eleventh.
Speaker 1: Never wait, remember, wait, what never forget whichever one of
Speaker 1: those were supposed to do.
Speaker 2: So we had a very big news week already, and
Speaker 2: then a very big piece of news happened yesterday, when
Speaker 2: we usually record Executive Disorder, but this is Thursday. We
Speaker 2: waited a little bit to get some more information before
Speaker 2: we talk about this story, which'll probably be the biggest
Speaker 2: story of the week, the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 1: So On Wednesday, September tenth, at Utah Valley University at
Speaker 1: around twelve to twenty three pm Mountain time, Charlie kirk
Speaker 1: was shot during a campus event. It was a big
Speaker 1: outdoor event. The crowd, I mean, there's some good footage
Speaker 1: of elevation of the size of the crowd it was.
Speaker 1: It looked like several thousand people who had shown up
Speaker 1: to I think it did all. It seemed like largely supporters,
Speaker 1: but there was certainly a mix of supporters and protesters around.
Speaker 1: And yeah, Kirk was shot once from a distance of
Speaker 1: I think the right now, the best estimate is around
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty yards. I mean, that's precise, not accurate,
Speaker 1: because people are kind of basing it on just sort
Speaker 1: of like looking at the images and doing like maps,
Speaker 1: the satellite estimation, right, right, But that does seem credible
Speaker 1: based on what I've seen, about one hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: yards or so, which is not long range. That's not
Speaker 1: like short range. It's like low medium range for a rifle.
Speaker 1: And they found, or at least the FBI is saying
Speaker 1: they found the rifle, and the pictures show it to
Speaker 1: be an extremely normal looking bolt action rifle. Kirk was
Speaker 1: shot once in the neck. It hit his brain stem.
Speaker 1: You can kind of tell by the way his arms
Speaker 1: moved after he was shot, so he probably lost consciousness immediately,
Speaker 1: and he was declared dead about two hours later at
Speaker 1: the hospital. But that's largely because that tends to be
Speaker 1: how it's handled when somebody has shot like this, they
Speaker 1: don't like to announce their death immediately, even if they
Speaker 1: died immediately, Like that's just kind of it's best pret
Speaker 1: you want to make sure you've contacted the family and
Speaker 1: everything like that. So that's what happened.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and his case of family were present I think
Speaker 3: at at the event.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sure some of them, but there's yeah,
Speaker 1: like not ever, like they would have probably wanted, Like
Speaker 1: I doubt his parents or whatever were all there or whatever,
Speaker 1: like even if his wife and kids were sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah, toty makes sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, Yeah, those are the facts that we can verify,
Speaker 1: and there's actually fairly little besides this other than some
Speaker 1: time stuff that we can verify perfectly. Like they're currently
Speaker 1: saying that about eleven fifty two a mountain time the
Speaker 1: shooter arrived near campus, because they do have some videos
Speaker 1: of the person they think was the shooter. There were
Speaker 1: at least two people who were taken into custody right
Speaker 1: after the shooting who proved not to be the guy,
Speaker 1: and I think they were just grabbing people like it
Speaker 1: did not they did not seem to be any good reason.
Speaker 1: One of them had a pellet rifle.
Speaker 2: The first guy started shouting after the shooting. And I'll
Speaker 2: do it again. And this prompted him to be detained,
Speaker 2: but was later found to not be a legitimate suspect
Speaker 2: in the shooting.
Speaker 1: No, because he was right next to the shooting. Yeah,
Speaker 1: had no weapon, nothing. So I mean, those are the
Speaker 1: facts as they stand right now. The photo that has
Speaker 1: been released of the guy they think did it looks
Speaker 1: like about eighty percent of the male population of Utah
Speaker 1: clean shaven, but otherwise he looked just as nondescriptives like
Speaker 1: this dude takes his hat off, maybe shaves his head,
Speaker 1: like it would not be wildly difficult for him to
Speaker 1: hide because he does not look like pretty greeny.
Speaker 2: Picture is not as clear as something like the United
Speaker 2: Healthcare CEO shooting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and the FBI did offer a reward of up
Speaker 1: to one hundred thousand dollars for information.
Speaker 2: We do know that, Yeah, which points towards the usefulness
Speaker 2: of the tips they have been getting so far. Exactly.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, the rifle is for anyone who's interested. It
Speaker 3: looks they thought it was a Mauser.
Speaker 1: I guess it didn't look like one from the photos
Speaker 1: that they released, but maybe that maybe that was yet again,
Speaker 1: not the gun because the FBI has said a lot
Speaker 1: of things and then backtracked on it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the New York Post has a pit sho of
Speaker 3: a sporterized Spanish mauser with a composite stock. Have you
Speaker 3: seen that one, Robert.
Speaker 1: Yes, that's the one I saw that. It looked like
Speaker 1: a savage to me. But is that is that a
Speaker 1: sportized eight millimeter that was rebarreled the thirty eight six?
Speaker 3: That would be my guest, the Spanish mausers, you anyone
Speaker 3: I'm aware of that the bolt turned down in that way.
Speaker 3: Good idea, but that it's not a great picture. It
Speaker 3: could also be something else.
Speaker 1: Because it just looked like any hunting rifle on a
Speaker 1: store rack the photo that I saw.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, No, I think it's someone who has done
Speaker 3: a sported job on it.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: What's somewhat interesting about that, like, other than just being
Speaker 3: a dweeb, is that potentially one could acquire a gun
Speaker 3: like that without having filled out forty four to seventy
Speaker 3: three form right like an FBI background check. I know
Speaker 3: they will if they have the weapon, they will certainly
Speaker 3: be pursuing trying to trace that as one of the
Speaker 3: ways they're trying to locate the shooter. Yes, so if
Speaker 3: this person's either a relative could have acquired it before
Speaker 3: it was necessary to do a forty four to seventy
Speaker 3: three yes, or I think with curios and relics in
Speaker 3: some states, or antique weapons, you don't have to do
Speaker 3: a background check.
Speaker 1: No, and you don't have to do a background check.
Speaker 1: I mean, face to face sales are I believe legal
Speaker 1: in Utah. Yes, private face to face sales are legal
Speaker 1: in Utah.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: So if this guy bought basically, what that means is
Speaker 1: if this guy just bought a gun in cash from
Speaker 1: a dude, there's not a record of that, although said
Speaker 1: dude might come forward.
Speaker 3: Sure.
Speaker 1: That said, the fact that this is a sportized old
Speaker 1: mouser means this could be a gun that's put in
Speaker 1: the family a while that he's sportized, in which case
Speaker 1: there's absolutely no record of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, definitely, I'm guessing. I've seen people call it
Speaker 3: a high powered rifle and stuff like. Just just be
Speaker 3: aware it's kind of an old gun.
Speaker 1: It's an old gun. I mean, if it's thirty, If
Speaker 1: it is thirty at six, I would say that's a
Speaker 1: high power cartridge. H No, it is, that's a big
Speaker 1: round but yeah.
Speaker 3: It's a full size rifle cartridge for sure.
Speaker 1: People hunt deer with thirty at six all the time.
Speaker 1: It's an extremely normal hunting rifle.
Speaker 3: Yeah, like probably top five most common kinds of rifle
Speaker 3: for someone to have in this country.
Speaker 1: And that was bolt action hunting rifles my assumption as
Speaker 1: soon as I saw the video, because the guy fired
Speaker 1: one shot, and it's relatively uncommon for people who are
Speaker 1: shooting in mass crowded public situations like this to limit
Speaker 1: themselves to a single round, which it just suggests number one,
Speaker 1: like a bolt action, which I also thought was likely
Speaker 1: because they didn't leave any amo behind. And if he
Speaker 1: was firing something like an ar, those can fling brass
Speaker 1: so widely that you can't easily catch it, like if
Speaker 1: you're especially if you're trying to escape immediately after shooting.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I would guess. I'm seeing a lot of
Speaker 1: people online obviously conspiracy start. I'm seeing so many people
Speaker 1: say like this had to have been a hit, This
Speaker 1: was a professional, only a professional hit have done.
Speaker 2: This Trump distracting from Epstein, this was the massage that
Speaker 2: this was any number of unhinged theories around nice.
Speaker 1: Event, And I will say, right now as pertains the
Speaker 1: competence of the shooter. Anyone who had picked up a
Speaker 1: gun for the first time couldn't have easily done this,
Speaker 1: Like I doubt this as someone who was new to firearms,
Speaker 1: but anyone who like shot a deer once or twice
Speaker 1: a year could have made this happen. Anybody who went
Speaker 1: to the range, you know, once or twice a month
Speaker 1: for a while, could have gotten competent enough to make
Speaker 1: a shot like this very easily, very doable for like
Speaker 1: hobbyist shooters, which there are many of in the United
Speaker 1: States and any other in Utah. I would be shocked
Speaker 1: if like less than about eighty percent of the adult
Speaker 1: male population of Utah could have made the shot. Right.
Speaker 2: You do not need like military training, You do not
Speaker 2: need to be a veteran to make this shot.
Speaker 1: Absolutely not.
Speaker 3: And I think it's very irresponsible to see so many people,
Speaker 3: like including people who are journalists, speculating like that. Like
Speaker 3: I know that generally firearms are not covered well in
Speaker 3: the US media despite being ubiquitous here, but like in
Speaker 3: cases like this, it's okay no to no, but it's
Speaker 3: better to be quiet if you don't know.
Speaker 1: Yes, the other thing I guess we should get into
Speaker 1: is in terms of the escape and what we know.
Speaker 1: This is also not something that necessitates fucking Navy seal training, right, Like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're a white, clean cut guy in fucking Salt Lake City.
Speaker 1: If you have a bag that you could hide your
Speaker 1: gun in and you get down, maybe throw on a
Speaker 1: different jacket or something like that over your shirt or
Speaker 1: change shirt. It's walk away, get to your car, drive off,
Speaker 1: very hard for them to track you. Saltlake said, He's
Speaker 1: not New York. It's not blanketed in cameras, not like
Speaker 1: New York. There's not a massive police presence for this rally,
Speaker 1: and there certainly wasn't a massive police presence doing concentric
Speaker 1: circles around the rally. This was not like a fucking
Speaker 1: the President's in town and the Secret Service is walking
Speaker 1: everything down for two.
Speaker 2: Miles and Charlie's own security tends to stay close to
Speaker 2: him at the event. They're not set up with giant perimeters.
Speaker 1: No, because none of them expected something like this.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm sure that Charlie Kirk has received threats before,
Speaker 3: but yes, I mean, there's only so much a private
Speaker 3: individual can do right in these situations.
Speaker 2: He often wears a bulletproof vest.
Speaker 1: Yes, really yeah, Yeah, There's only so much a private
Speaker 1: individual can do, And there's only so much you can
Speaker 1: do if you're holding an event outside. Yeah, like to
Speaker 1: stop somebody who's got us a scoped rifle from getting
Speaker 1: on top of a roof, right Like. I'm sure his
Speaker 1: family is firing their current secuity right now, obviously, But
Speaker 1: I really don't know what they could have done, like
Speaker 1: what his personal security could realistically have done, other than say,
Speaker 1: don't do an event outside, Charlie.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: A few other notes that we should touch on on
Speaker 2: Thursday morning, some unverified information related to the ongoing investigation
Speaker 2: notes leaked online through fellow campus debater Stephen Crowder. Stephen
Speaker 2: Crowder shared an internal memo which contained unverified information, which reads,
Speaker 2: in part quote atf another law enforcement located an older
Speaker 2: model imported Mouser thirty odd six caliber bolt action rifle
Speaker 2: wrapped in a towel in a wooded area near the campus.
Speaker 2: The location of the fire room appears to match the
Speaker 2: suspect's route of travel. The spent cartridge was still chambered,
Speaker 2: in addition to three unspent rounds in the top fed
Speaker 2: magazine all cartridges have engraved wording on them expressing transgender
Speaker 2: and anti fascist ideology unquote. So this claim linking the
Speaker 2: shooting to transgender and quote unquote anti fascist ideology, whatever
Speaker 2: that means, spread around the internet like wild, as expected,
Speaker 2: though a few hours later, the New York Times reported
Speaker 2: quote according to a preliminary internal report circulated inside the
Speaker 2: Bureau of Alcohol tobacko Firearms and Exposives, federal and local
Speaker 2: officials recovered ammunition with the shooter's rifle that appeared to
Speaker 2: be engraved with statements expressing transgender and anti fascist ideology.
Speaker 2: But a senior law enforcement official with direct knowledge of
Speaker 2: the investigation cautioned that report had not been verified by
Speaker 2: ATF analysts, did not match other summaries of the evidence,
Speaker 2: and might turn out to have been misread or misinterpreted.
Speaker 2: In fast moving investigations, such status reports are not made
Speaker 2: public because they often contain a mixture of accurate and
Speaker 2: inaccurate information unquote.
Speaker 1: Yes and again. When that person with the pellet ride
Speaker 1: was arrested, Cash Betel, director of the FBI, posted on Twitter,
Speaker 1: we have the man who killed Charlie Kirk, and then
Speaker 1: had to post like an hour later, Nope, which is
Speaker 1: not a thing you saw with previous directors of the FBI.
Speaker 3: Yeah, for a good reason. Yeah, like that. The handling
Speaker 3: of this has been pretty unorpthodox.
Speaker 1: No, And I can see why a fucking Stephen Crowder
Speaker 1: fan in the ATF would want to get that out
Speaker 1: immediately totally, especially because he probably knew at some point
Speaker 1: that's going to get corrected. But what matters is it
Speaker 1: gets out for some degree of time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then that bakes into the reality of a
Speaker 2: certain number of people forever.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Right, And that's what matters, whether or not it's true.
Speaker 1: And we don't know yet is it true or not? Right,
Speaker 1: We simply don't know.
Speaker 2: Heysus Garrison. This is just a short update. On Thursday evening,
Speaker 2: law enforcement gave a press conference where Utah Governor Spencer
Speaker 2: Cox cautioned against quote unquote a tremendous amount of disinformation
Speaker 2: circulate online about the killing of Charlie Kirk and specifically
Speaker 2: cited bots from China and Russia which were encouraging violence
Speaker 2: and instilling disinformation into discourse around the shooting. Now, while
Speaker 2: there certainly have been many on the left who have
Speaker 2: been joking or even celebrating this, shooting.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, lots of people.
Speaker 2: Rhetoric from the right has been similarly violent, with calls
Speaker 2: to do mass violence or purge the Democrats or people
Speaker 2: on the left. I'm going to play video of the
Speaker 2: White House released late Wednesday night of Trump giving a
Speaker 2: statement on the shooting.
Speaker 4: It's a long past time for all Americans and the
Speaker 4: media to confront the fact that violence and murder are
Speaker 4: the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree,
Speaker 4: day after day, year after year, in the most hateful
Speaker 4: and despicable way possible. For years, those on the radical
Speaker 4: left have compared one for Americans like Charlie to Nazis
Speaker 4: and the world's worst mass murderers and criminals. This kind
Speaker 4: of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're
Speaker 4: seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.
Speaker 4: My administration will find each and every one of those
Speaker 4: who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence,
Speaker 4: including the organizations that funded and support it, as well
Speaker 4: as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials,
Speaker 4: and everyone else who brings order to our country. From
Speaker 4: the attack on my life in Butler, Pennsylvania last year,
Speaker 4: which killed a husband, and father, to the attacks on
Speaker 4: ICE agents, to the vicious murder of a healthcare executive
Speaker 4: in the streets of New York, to the shooting of
Speaker 4: House Majority leaders Steve Scalise and three others. Radical of
Speaker 4: political violence has hurt too many innocent people and taken
Speaker 4: too many lives.
Speaker 2: The Trump assassin was not left wing.
Speaker 1: No, now, he was a registered Republican.
Speaker 2: There's currently no indication of the political alignment of this
Speaker 2: shooter whatsoever. Just because they killed Charlie Kirk does not
Speaker 2: mean that this was a left wing ANTIFA super soldier.
Speaker 2: Charlie Kirk has had a memafied status on the Internet
Speaker 2: for the past few years, which has encouraged vitriol and
Speaker 2: threats from those on the extreme right as well as
Speaker 2: the far left.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he's particularly disliked by like the hardcore anti Semites
Speaker 3: on their right, and.
Speaker 2: The Gropers have long had fun with making threats against
Speaker 2: Charlie Kirk in the quote unquote groper war, which we
Speaker 2: don't have time to get into. But it's not just
Speaker 2: Trump's worrying statement there promising a degree of crackdown. Jesse
Speaker 2: Waters on Fox has claimed, quote, We're gonna avenge Charlie's death. Yep,
Speaker 2: here's a clip of Jesse Waters on Fox News last night.
Speaker 5: Trump gets hit in the ear, Charlie gets shot dead.
Speaker 5: They came after Kavanaugh with a rifle to his neighborhood.
Speaker 5: They went after Musk's cars. They just shot two Jews
Speaker 5: outside the embassy.
Speaker 1: Think about it.
Speaker 5: Schlice got shot, barely survived.
Speaker 1: It's happening.
Speaker 5: We've got transshooters, we got riots and la They are
Speaker 5: at war with us. Whether we want to accept it
Speaker 5: or not, they are at war with us.
Speaker 1: What are we going to do about it?
Speaker 5: How much political violence are we going to tolerate? And
Speaker 5: that's the question we're just going to have to ask
Speaker 5: ourselves now. Charlie would want us to put as much
Speaker 5: pressure on these people as possible. Dana nailed it. This
Speaker 5: is unacceptable and has to stop, and it has to
Speaker 5: stop now.
Speaker 2: And everybody's accountable.
Speaker 5: And we're watching what they're saying on television and who's
Speaker 5: saying what the politicians and the media and all these
Speaker 5: rats out there. This can never happen again. It ends now.
Speaker 5: Greg's right again, this is a turning point, and we
Speaker 5: know which direction we're going.
Speaker 1: He made a turning point Joe huh.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's Jesse Waters doing a turning point time.
Speaker 3: Well, so the use of rats to refer to other
Speaker 3: people's I know he's giving like radio mil Collan vibes.
Speaker 1: It's also worth noting Republican Representative Clay Higgins from Louisiana
Speaker 1: is saying that he's seeking to have social media companies
Speaker 1: place lifetime bans on users who celebrated the assassination.
Speaker 2: It's not just Jesse Waters calling for war. Other commentators
Speaker 2: are employing very similar rhetoric, including Alex Jones and Steve Bannon.
Speaker 1: We're in a war.
Speaker 4: The Latins was saying, put a bullsa on trumpet bulls
Speaker 4: on his supporters.
Speaker 1: Charlie Kirk's a casualty of war.
Speaker 3: We're in this country.
Speaker 2: Chaia Wricheck tweeted on the lips of TikTok account quote
Speaker 2: this is war. The oas Keep founder Stuart Rhodes announced
Speaker 2: on Info Wars that his militia would be reforming to
Speaker 2: help with security at right wing events.
Speaker 1: Mat oh gosh.
Speaker 2: It was a good Wired article Wednesday night, which collected
Speaker 2: various calls to violence among the right in the aftermath
Speaker 2: of the shooting. Quote Ed Martin US pardon attorney and
Speaker 2: former acting with Stornay for DC wrote on Twitter, quote
Speaker 2: for it is written, vengeance is mine. I will repay,
Speaker 2: says the Lord. Citing Romans. Twelve nineteen, Elon Musk posted
Speaker 2: the left is the party of murder, then quoted a
Speaker 2: post blaming the left wing and mainstream media, as well
Speaker 2: as figures like Gavin Newsom for radicalizing people against right
Speaker 2: wing figures like Kirk Kitty Miller, who works with Musquet
Speaker 2: Doge and is the wife of Stephen Miller, wrote on
Speaker 2: x that even liberals condemning violence quote have blood on
Speaker 2: their hands. You could be. Next. Influencer and unofficial Trump
Speaker 2: advisor Laura Lumer posted on Twitter, the left are terrorists.
Speaker 2: Christopher Ruffo, a conservative activist who popularized the demonization of
Speaker 2: critical race theory, suggested in a Twitter post that the
Speaker 2: radical left responsible for the shooting and urged the US
Speaker 2: government to quote infiltrate, disrupt, arrest, and incars rate all
Speaker 2: those who are responsible for this chaos unquote. There's many,
Speaker 2: many more. This is after the right has long celebrated
Speaker 2: certain types of political violence.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, constantly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, like that old guy in Panama who shot a
Speaker 2: protester blocking the street. The entire right rallied behind that man.
Speaker 2: Kirk himself has embraced Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot and killed
Speaker 2: two people after a plastic bag was thrown in the
Speaker 2: direction of Kyle Rittenhouse. Kirk was vocally supportive of the
Speaker 2: man who tried to attack Nancy Pelosi in her home
Speaker 2: and did attack pol Pelosi.
Speaker 1: Yes, specifically specifically urged his audience to bail him out.
Speaker 2: It was like not even two months ago that Minnesota
Speaker 2: state senator and her husband were killed. Political violence exists
Speaker 2: across the spectrum. This is not a left wing problem.
Speaker 2: This is an American problem.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean the vast majority of political of like terrorist
Speaker 1: attacks that are politically motivated in the US are right
Speaker 1: wing like and have been for the last several decades.
Speaker 1: Per the FBI, in.
Speaker 2: The twenty twelve to twenty twenty one, fifty five percent
Speaker 2: of murders tied to political extremism came from white supremacy
Speaker 2: fourteen percent, anti government six percent to other right wing
Speaker 2: twenty percent, Islamist four percent left wing, and the white
Speaker 2: supremacy fifty five percent are far right Nazis.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: In terms of like, who did this? Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: we touched on Grouper's a little bit. We should probably
Speaker 1: talk a bit more about the kind of online feud
Speaker 1: between a chunk of Nick fuintes Is fan base and
Speaker 1: Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2: It was certainly more prominent a few years ago. As
Speaker 2: Kirk has himself has moved further to right, has adopted
Speaker 2: great replacement theory, the feud kind of dissipated, but it
Speaker 2: certainly was like a legitimate thing in the right for years.
Speaker 1: Yes, to the extent that that a number of folks
Speaker 1: are kind of have suspected that like maybe that's who
Speaker 1: did it again, we really have no idea. I'm just
Speaker 1: bringing this up to make the point that there's a
Speaker 1: variety of reasons why this guy could have done this,
Speaker 1: why this person could have done this, including could be
Speaker 1: an Epstein related thing. Right, there's a lot of anger
Speaker 1: at figures who kind of bought into the Trump line
Speaker 1: that we're done now with the Epstein stuff. There's no
Speaker 1: way to know, and I think that's kind of where
Speaker 1: we have to end that part of our discussion here
Speaker 1: is we don't know why this was done, and to extent,
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter if it comes out tomorrow that this
Speaker 1: guy was like a White House staffer working for Donald
Speaker 1: Trump who did it because he thought Charlie Kirk could
Speaker 1: disre Like if some crazy shit like that happened, it
Speaker 1: wouldn't change at all the way that they're talking about
Speaker 1: this shooting, like it just doesn't matter, Like we are
Speaker 1: where we are with them, and they're saying a lot
Speaker 1: of the same stuff like that. This is an escalation
Speaker 1: in rhetoric, but it's not a massive escalation in rhetoric
Speaker 1: over the way they've been talking about fucking the people changing, like.
Speaker 2: The cracker barrel logo logo, we have to go to war.
Speaker 1: We have to go to war, We're at war.
Speaker 3: I was thinking about that when you said that, like
Speaker 3: the lips of TikTok had tweeted that we were at war,
Speaker 3: Like you could probably go back and see dozens of
Speaker 3: other instances almost exactly the same statement.
Speaker 1: Right, And is this something that could lead to mass
Speaker 1: Could this be because I've seen people comparing this guy
Speaker 1: like Charlie Kirk to Horst Wessel, who was a Nazi
Speaker 1: literally a PEMP that was a member of the Nazi
Speaker 1: brown Shirts who was murdered, and it became a huge
Speaker 1: rallying cry for the Nazi Party, right, they made a
Speaker 1: song about him. It was a big deal. I think
Speaker 1: that's kind of a very silly comparison. For one thing,
Speaker 1: Horse Wessel is meaningful because he was killed before the
Speaker 1: Nazis came to power, and they used his death in
Speaker 1: order to get to power, and Trump is in power.
Speaker 1: If you're not aware, they.
Speaker 2: Don't need to invent excuses either to like crack down
Speaker 2: on the left or no, or carry out their policies.
Speaker 2: They're already doing that. I've seen people go into complete
Speaker 2: panic modecause they're gonna be like, they're gonna use this,
Speaker 2: this this shooting to to now do terrible things, as
Speaker 2: if they're not already doing terrible things, Like they don't
Speaker 2: need to wait for events to happen. They are more
Speaker 2: than willing just to do whatever they want when they
Speaker 2: want to.
Speaker 1: Yes, that is that is exactly like the the That's
Speaker 1: exactly what I would tell you. And in terms of
Speaker 1: like comparisons, I don't even think it's super useful to
Speaker 1: try to compare this to specific figures from fucking German history,
Speaker 1: because there's.
Speaker 2: Really that's America in twenty twenty five. Yeah, there's a
Speaker 2: viral TikTok of a man talking about the Book of Mormon,
Speaker 2: like like seconds after the shooting.
Speaker 1: Standing next to where Kirk died, and we now know
Speaker 1: that he stole a bunch of shit from the booth
Speaker 1: that was covered in blood to sell it online. Like
Speaker 1: this is this is all of the books the American Germany.
Speaker 1: You won't find anything like that in it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, like I better historical comparison we will see, right,
Speaker 3: might be Jose Carvo Sotelo Leku, whose death did immediately
Speaker 3: sort of was one of the things that accelerated the
Speaker 3: start of the Spanish Civil War, I guess, yeah, But
Speaker 3: even then, like no one was tiktoking and grabbing much
Speaker 3: that was stained by his blood.
Speaker 1: No, And there's no you can like say, like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: this figure's assassination preceded this kind of violence, but like, okay,
Speaker 1: was that figure a guy who did what Charlie Kirk
Speaker 1: did and was connected in the way Like no, Like
Speaker 1: this is an American thing, this is new ya, this
Speaker 1: is a novel, his moment in history, and we don't
Speaker 1: know what's going to happen. I'm not saying, don't you
Speaker 1: know if you were if you're the kind of person
Speaker 1: who has been worried about right wing violence accelerating. You
Speaker 1: shouldn't be less worried right now, and I think that's
Speaker 1: a good thing to be worried about. There's been a
Speaker 1: spree of bomb threats called into like historically black colleges
Speaker 1: today and BNC headquarters last I checked. I don't think
Speaker 1: anything actually has been done, but it makes sense. It's
Speaker 1: an angry from the right. You know, you've got some
Speaker 1: people who woke up piste off this morning and decided
Speaker 1: to call in some bomb threats. Apparently we'll see you
Speaker 1: know who the culprits were there. But I didn't want
Speaker 1: to touch on something else that I've seen in the
Speaker 1: wake of all this that is pretty novel. But we
Speaker 1: should do an AD break first, all right, coming back,
Speaker 1: I wanted to talk briefly about the way AI is
Speaker 1: being used by civilian investigators to try and crack this caper.
Speaker 1: People have been using AI to enhance the images that
Speaker 1: the FBI released of the maybe shooter. Again, we don't
Speaker 1: even know that that guy's a shooter because they fucked
Speaker 1: up very badly on this initially, but people have been
Speaker 1: using to like clarify and we know that the AI
Speaker 1: is doing a bad job because again he's wearing a
Speaker 1: distinctive shirt. People found the shirt online and when the
Speaker 1: AI was like solidifying the image on the shirt, it
Speaker 1: did it wrong, Like it put like a silhouette of
Speaker 1: a man on there that wasn't on there, like it like.
Speaker 2: You can also submit the same image to like five
Speaker 2: different AI imaging programs and get five wildly different results
Speaker 2: for what the face quote unquote looks like.
Speaker 1: And I just brought that up because I haven't seen
Speaker 1: that happen before with one of these things. And it
Speaker 1: was like, oh, okay, cool, that's a fun new.
Speaker 2: This is going to be something we'd have to deal
Speaker 2: with now for every single right preceding event in absolutely, yes,
Speaker 2: whatever this hellscape of the American Century of humiliation looks like.
Speaker 1: Yes. The other thing I wanted to bring up is
Speaker 1: within about like two to three hours after Kirk was killed,
Speaker 1: and after again it had been announced that he was dead,
Speaker 1: people were asking Grock is this video? Because the video
Speaker 1: was spreading wildly of him dying on everywhere. Really, but
Speaker 1: people asked on Twitter, they asked groc elon Musk's AI,
Speaker 1: is this real? And the response that was posted initially
Speaker 1: was Charlie Kirk takes the roast in stride with a laugh.
Speaker 1: He's faced tougher crowds. Yes, he survives this one easily.
Speaker 1: And then someone responded, Groc, he got shot through the neck.
Speaker 1: What are you talking about? And Grok responded, it's a
Speaker 1: meme video with edited effects to look like a dramatic shot,
Speaker 1: not a real event. Charlie Kirk is fine, he handles
Speaker 1: roasts like a pro. So again, I bring this up
Speaker 1: just because this is going to only become more of
Speaker 1: a factor in the immediate wake of shootings and terrorist
Speaker 1: attacks and disasters. Is people going to AI's for information
Speaker 1: about the validity of videos, about the validity of threats.
Speaker 1: And what scares me is not this didn't do any damage, right, Like,
Speaker 1: this doesn't didn't hurt the man hunt for the killer.
Speaker 1: It didn't like do anything. It's just ridiculous. But let's
Speaker 1: say you've got videos of a disaster ongoing, I mean,
Speaker 1: like a fucking natural disaster coming or whatever, and people
Speaker 1: are being told to leave their homes and somebody asks,
Speaker 1: fucking Groc, hey do I need to hear I'll plug
Speaker 1: this video and it'll tell me if the storm's going
Speaker 1: to hit my house or if I can stay here,
Speaker 1: people are gonna do shit like that, like that's gonna happen. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're right anyway, just his heads up.
Speaker 3: Ah, that's bleak. Yeah, that's pretty terrible.
Speaker 6: All right.
Speaker 1: Well that's I think all we got to say on this.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we'll keep updating you is we learn more. I'm
Speaker 3: sure this will developing over the weekend.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is going to keep being a major story. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm sure we'll do a dedicated episode on it next week.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Something else that happened on Wednesday, the same day as
Speaker 2: the Charlie Kirk assassination, was a school shooting in Colorado.
Speaker 2: Two students were shot before the shooter killed himself. Police
Speaker 2: have said, quote, we are looking at him mode if
Speaker 2: we don't have one yet. He was radicalized by some
Speaker 2: extremist network and the details of that will be down
Speaker 2: the road, And we wanted to give you that much
Speaker 2: about maybe a mindset for him. Unquote.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I mean, I guess it's just a marking
Speaker 1: of what kind of shootings Americans are adneured to, and
Speaker 1: not school shootings that's business as.
Speaker 2: Usual, especially if it's just a regular white male teenager.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, We'll be kind of following that one as
Speaker 3: well to see what it's online radicalization was that they Yeah,
Speaker 3: they've already found so early. But yeah, it's pretty tragic
Speaker 3: that two school shootings happened in a day.
Speaker 2: It was reported in multiple outlets last week that the
Speaker 2: Department of Justice was considering restricting gun ownership rights for
Speaker 2: transgender Americans in the wake of the Minneapolist Catholic school
Speaker 2: shooting last month. This was first reported by the Diggity Wire,
Speaker 2: who quoted the source inside the Justice Department saying quote,
Speaker 2: Individuals within the DOJ are reviewing ways to ensure that
Speaker 2: mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria are unable to
Speaker 2: obtain firearms while they are unstable and unwell unquote. CNN
Speaker 2: said that their sources described the proposal for a transgun
Speaker 2: ban as quote prelimin in nature, and since then, the
Speaker 2: DOJ and the Trump administration have not made any clear
Speaker 2: statements confirming or denying this reporting. A DOJ spokesperson acknowledg
Speaker 2: THEES reports with the statement, reading, quote, the DOJ is
Speaker 2: actively evaluating options to prevent the pattern of violence we
Speaker 2: have seen from individuals with specific mental health challenges and
Speaker 2: substance abuse disorders. No specific criminal justice proposals have been
Speaker 2: advanced at this time. Unquote. Trump declined to answer a
Speaker 2: question about a possible transgun ban last Friday. This is
Speaker 2: something right wing influencers have been advocating for years now.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 2: On September fifth, the NRA made a statement reading, the
Speaker 2: Second Amendment isn't up for debate. The NRA supports the
Speaker 2: Second Amendment rights for all law abiding Americans to purchase, possess,
Speaker 2: and use firearms. The energy does not and will not
Speaker 2: support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bands that
Speaker 2: arbitrarily strict law abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights
Speaker 2: without due process.
Speaker 1: Yep, which is consistent with the NRA messaging four years
Speaker 1: because the.
Speaker 2: Lion is the recent messaging. Definitely.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean the line has been for as long
Speaker 1: as I have been a gun owner, which is twenty
Speaker 1: years now from the NRA that after the.
Speaker 2: Civil Rights movement.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, registration and like laws forcing people to register
Speaker 1: their guns, and like gun control laws in general are
Speaker 1: that restrict at all access to firearms are a prelude
Speaker 1: inevitably to mass confiscation. Right, Like that has been the
Speaker 1: that has been the line for a long time.
Speaker 2: This does not surprise me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, the stance doesn't. The fact that they said
Speaker 1: something publicly during this does because the NRA has been
Speaker 1: quiet a lot when there's an issue, like, for example,
Speaker 1: that the shooting the Filando Castile right, who was legally
Speaker 1: carrying a concealed firearm when the police murdered him in
Speaker 1: his car. They kept pretty fucking quiet about that. So
Speaker 1: I am a little surprised that they said something. But
Speaker 1: what they're saying is is very consistent with other shit
Speaker 1: they've been saying.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's no current legal mechanism that exists for them
Speaker 2: to do this. They would have to invent or heavily
Speaker 2: alter the current way that gun rights can be taken away,
Speaker 2: which is right now through individual court cases where a
Speaker 2: judge finds an individual person quote unquote mentally deficient. And
Speaker 2: it's highly unlikely that the gun lobby will support any
Speaker 2: policy proposals that start adding certain diagnoses to a list
Speaker 2: that excludes you from gun ownership, because sure, if you
Speaker 2: add gender dysphoria, now that might not be a huge
Speaker 2: problem to many on the right. But let's say a
Speaker 2: Democrat administration and Democrat House and Senate come into power.
Speaker 2: Now there was this precedent that you can add diagnoses
Speaker 2: to take away gun rights, which would enable adding things
Speaker 2: like depression or PTSD, which a lot of veterans have.
Speaker 2: And this is like the slippery slope that the NRA
Speaker 2: warns about, So it makes sense that they would be
Speaker 2: taking this stance. Similarly, I don't necessarily see a very
Speaker 2: clear path for them to like rest strict HRT through
Speaker 2: this mechanism. SIS people, including a lot of men who
Speaker 2: own guns, take testosterone and CIS women take estrogen, so
Speaker 2: that would be a very tricky way to handle this.
Speaker 1: I think the only way they could again would be
Speaker 1: if they try to restrict en mass like the prescription
Speaker 1: of hormones specifically to people with gender dysphoria or trans people,
Speaker 1: which is difficult for a lot of reasons, but would
Speaker 1: provide it like a pretext for Okay, these people are
Speaker 1: now taking stuff an illegal substance, and you can go
Speaker 1: after people with guns for that. But I feel like
Speaker 1: I don't know how you would judicate that how you
Speaker 1: like force Like the federal government does not theoretically have
Speaker 1: the ability to force the medical community to say nobody
Speaker 1: who's got gender dysfoia gets hormones.
Speaker 3: Ever again, Yeah, I mean, you could maybe do something
Speaker 3: through the FDA, but I don't see how you could
Speaker 3: do it just to trans people and.
Speaker 1: How right, like, how would you keep it legal for
Speaker 1: all of Joe Rogan's friends, and that's just like through
Speaker 1: the FDA, right, I don't I literally just don't know.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm not super familiar with that.
Speaker 2: But this is obviously something that we will keep an
Speaker 2: eye on. This is this is like a possibility that
Speaker 2: we've discussed the right wanting to enact for years now,
Speaker 2: and the fact that the DOJ might even have some
Speaker 2: people in there who are doing preliminary considerations. It obviously
Speaker 2: is a worrying sign of the general position on trans
Speaker 2: rights and transgun rights.
Speaker 3: Yeah, for our immigration update this week, I want to
Speaker 3: start by talking about the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
Speaker 3: confirmed in its case that CBP and more permanently ICE
Speaker 3: can continue their policy of racial profiling. This overturned a
Speaker 3: lower court judges ordered that prohibits them from stopping someone
Speaker 3: in Los Angeles based on ethnicity alone. It didn't just
Speaker 3: look at ethnicity. It said that it prohibits them from
Speaker 3: using either one or a combination of four factors, which
Speaker 3: were apparent race, the accent or they use for non
Speaker 3: English language, their job, Their jobs that tend to have
Speaker 3: a higher proportion of undocumented people. Right, they get construction
Speaker 3: and some agricultural jobs. And their presence at a certain
Speaker 3: place again right, places like a home depot or a
Speaker 3: farm garrison. Smiling at how I correctly pronounce the word depot. There,
Speaker 3: CBP has always been able to profile you at the border. Right,
Speaker 3: that's kind of what they do. There was a nineteen
Speaker 3: seventy five Supreme Court decision that one's called USA versus Brignion.
Speaker 3: I think it's BRIDNIONI like Italian Brigni ponce. That decision
Speaker 3: looked a roving traffic stop uppearing lives in San Clemente,
Speaker 3: And in that case, the CBP had stopped someone not
Speaker 3: a checkpoint, but while sitting by the side of the
Speaker 3: highway in their vehicle, and they had done so solely
Speaker 3: based on the apparent ethnicity of the driver. That was
Speaker 3: ruled unconstitutional, and the standard that offices needed to have
Speaker 3: was quite reasonable. Suspicion that pertains to roving stops, which
Speaker 3: is kind of what ICE is doing in la right.
Speaker 3: CBP officers have also previously been sued, more recently for
Speaker 3: using a language as to sol basis for detention, like
Speaker 3: if you're speaking Spanish, yeah, exactly, that was the case, right,
Speaker 3: it's pudo and Hernandez versus US Customs and Border Protection.
Speaker 3: That one was in Montana. The ACLU of Montana sued
Speaker 3: them to Spanish speaking ladies were speaking Spanish in a store.
Speaker 3: They actually said hello to a border drill agent in
Speaker 3: the English who proceeded to detain them on the basis
Speaker 3: that not many people speak Spanish in Montana. I think
Speaker 3: the name is from Spanish, like Montagna, but maybe I'm wrong.
Speaker 3: The State Department has also issued guidance that non immigrant
Speaker 3: visa applicants can now only schedule interviews in their own country.
Speaker 3: So this is a further burden for people seeking visas
Speaker 3: to come to the United States. Right previously, you could
Speaker 3: do it at another US embassy or consulate. For instance.
Speaker 3: You know, if you were let's say French but resident
Speaker 3: in Spain, you could apply at the consulate or embassy there.
Speaker 3: Right now you have to go to your country's embassy.
Speaker 3: In some cases, there are designated embassies or consular places
Speaker 3: for for national states where the US has no embassy
Speaker 3: or similar presence, like a US hasn't got an embassy
Speaker 3: in Afghanistan right now for pretty obvious reasons, right, So
Speaker 3: I believe it's such Lama bad for those people, for example. Finally,
Speaker 3: I want to get onto the case of the dozens
Speaker 3: of watermelon children who came to the US and accompanied
Speaker 3: by adults they are related to, and who the Trump
Speaker 3: admin attempted to deport over the Labor Day weekend. Sometimes
Speaker 3: I don't like the phrase unaccompanied miners because maybe they
Speaker 3: are accompanied by someone who's just not in their family,
Speaker 3: right that people have taken care of them on the journey,
Speaker 3: almost certainly, and I've seen this myself, and so I
Speaker 3: don't know the idea that then they're not just walking alone,
Speaker 3: but they are not with their relatives, right if undertaking
Speaker 3: this journey themselves. So Judge Sparkle supn Nan temporarily halted
Speaker 3: their removal in the early hours of Sunday morning of
Speaker 3: Labor Day weekend. This is an extremely unusual decision, right,
Speaker 3: but the judge decided it was warranted because not doing
Speaker 3: so would put the children in potential extreme danger. The
Speaker 3: government categorically attempted to remove these children, like very quickly
Speaker 3: and literally got them out of bed, right. We got
Speaker 3: these little children out of beds in their foster homes
Speaker 3: and attempted to shove them on a plane to Guatemala.
Speaker 3: Their attorney literally ran onto the tarmac at the airport
Speaker 3: to tell flight control personnel that they were likely in
Speaker 3: violation of a court order. They allowed the plane to
Speaker 3: take off like it couldn't be more last minute than this, right,
Speaker 3: they were literally working all night. Judge Tim Kelly now
Speaker 3: has to rule on the legitimacy of the government's claims.
Speaker 3: The claim the government makes here is that it was
Speaker 3: quote reuniting children with parents abroad, not deporting them, and
Speaker 3: that would mean the children don't have the statutory protections
Speaker 3: that they do if it were being as quote unquote
Speaker 3: unaccompanied miners. Right. Previously, the government had made the claim
Speaker 3: that the children's parents wanted them to be returned. It's
Speaker 3: dropped that claim after Reuter's published a watermelon government document
Speaker 3: which completely refutes that none of the children's parents seem
Speaker 3: to want them to come home. So what the government
Speaker 3: is claiming here is that the Office of Refugee Resettlement,
Speaker 3: which is under HHS is moving the children, not the
Speaker 3: Department of Homeland Security. So they're not being deported, they're
Speaker 3: being reunified with their families. Yeah, that's a pretty sketchy claim. Meanwhile,
Speaker 3: the kids are in shelters. Many of them were in
Speaker 3: long term foster care and have been now removed from
Speaker 3: that environment and they're in shelters. Law Fare, which is
Speaker 3: an online publication, has a pretty good account of the
Speaker 3: courtroom exchange that I've linked in the notes. I also
Speaker 3: several people have asked about this, so I should talk
Speaker 3: about it. I wanted to talk about the Hyundai plant
Speaker 3: in Georgia. I don't know what to call this raid. Yeah,
Speaker 3: in Georgia. I guess raid is the right word. Yeah, absolutely, Yeah,
Speaker 3: Like more than three hundred South Korean workers were attained
Speaker 3: at the plant. They should be going home today. They
Speaker 3: were supposed to go home yesterday, but there were some delays.
Speaker 1: So far.
Speaker 3: IS has claimed that these people were working without proper
Speaker 3: authorization and slash or but not in the US with
Speaker 3: proper authorization, their lawyers have claimed, and The Guardian has
Speaker 3: foundly documents that confirm that many of them had B
Speaker 3: one visa status. B one is like you can do
Speaker 3: some work on a B one. It also can be
Speaker 3: just some extended term tourist visa and you can do
Speaker 3: certain jobs but not other jobs, and you still get
Speaker 3: paid at home where you were on a B one,
Speaker 3: which seems to be what these people were doing. Right.
Speaker 3: They can supervise construction on a B one, but you
Speaker 3: can't do construction, and it would make sense for people
Speaker 3: who are very expert in the construction of these highly
Speaker 3: technical buildings to supervise their construction.
Speaker 2: It seems that they were in the country to supervise
Speaker 2: the setting up of this car plant.
Speaker 6: Correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, most South Koreans can also get est visa waivers,
Speaker 3: which like it's not exactly the same, but it's kind
Speaker 3: of a ninety day be one visa. So there are
Speaker 3: some people who cannot, right, like if they have been
Speaker 3: cremated of crimes in such that they'd have to go
Speaker 3: through to be one process. But it seems very unlikely
Speaker 3: at least that that they were not in the country
Speaker 3: without any documentation, because like that would be a stranging
Speaker 3: to do when they can get a est visa waiver.
Speaker 3: What's really weird about this is the state of Georgia
Speaker 3: has invested millions, if not billions in bringing this plant
Speaker 3: to Georgia. Right, it has created a significant economic boost.
Speaker 3: Something like ninety percent of the products that go into
Speaker 3: the car come from there. So there are lots of
Speaker 3: small businesses and local businesses that have started up to
Speaker 3: provide this factory with the goods it needs. You know,
Speaker 3: there are all the other services that come with that, right,
Speaker 3: Like it's economic benefit to the region. I know the
Speaker 3: state has spent more than three hundred million on improving
Speaker 3: the roads. Apparently they've deepened ports in some regions to
Speaker 3: allow larger, larger ships to arrive. It's bought in over
Speaker 3: twelve billion investment, more than eight thousand jobs, It's received
Speaker 3: massive tax breaks. It's going to total over two billion
Speaker 3: dollars according to reporting the arling to in the notes. Yet,
Speaker 3: Georgia State Police blocked off roads as part of the raid,
Speaker 3: and it was Georgia Department of Corrections buses that took
Speaker 3: people away. This seems an odd choice for Kemp. Brian
Speaker 3: Kemp right, Georgia governor. He's not Trump's favorite. Maybe he's
Speaker 3: trying to become Trump's favorite. But previously even Republicans in
Speaker 3: Georgia have been very behind this, I mean, Garrison, you
Speaker 3: lived in Georgia for a bit, right, This was a
Speaker 3: thing that the Republicans has support. Is a way to
Speaker 3: revitalize a place where there wasn't much economic opportunity before.
Speaker 2: Well, and this follows the whole point of Trump's tariffs.
Speaker 2: If you're trying to bring, yeah, manufacturing to the United States,
Speaker 2: you have these specialized workers to help supervise the construction
Speaker 2: and managing of equipment. They get this plant up and running.
Speaker 2: And even if you're even if you're doing that, even
Speaker 2: if you're bringing manufacturing back to the States, somehow you
Speaker 2: still get bitten. Yeah, big time bitten by the Trump horse.
Speaker 2: I guess yeah, I mean it does.
Speaker 3: It does sort of line up with this working closer
Speaker 3: to the Feurer hypothesis, right that you have these counter
Speaker 3: valent impulses and everyone's just trying to do things that
Speaker 3: they think Trump will like, and kind of sometimes those
Speaker 3: can directly contradict each other, as is happening here. There's
Speaker 3: not really a coherent policy platform.
Speaker 2: No, they're they're just so focused on trying to get
Speaker 2: like the base numbers up, like going to get the
Speaker 2: number of deportations higher than it's ever been.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and therefore, and you have this this sort of
Speaker 3: series of impulses which motivate Trump is and one of
Speaker 3: which is deport as many people as possible.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Another is broadly written, bring manufacturing jobs back to America,
Speaker 3: but not if foreign people are helping supervise the construction.
Speaker 3: I guess understandably, South Careera is very upset. More so
Speaker 3: I think because these are like middle class professionals who
Speaker 3: have been detained. Right, they appear to have negotiated a
Speaker 3: voluntary departure for these people, which it's not like a
Speaker 3: voluntary departure like you came on told they disneylanded, you're
Speaker 3: going home on the plane. It can still have long
Speaker 3: term consequences. But the hope there is that it won't
Speaker 3: make it harder for these people to get US visas
Speaker 3: in the future. They have to come back, because obviously
Speaker 3: it's going to be very hard for this company to
Speaker 3: build a plant in Georgia if they can't bring any
Speaker 3: of their staff to Georgia. Yeah, that is about all
Speaker 3: I have. I'm going to keep looking, especially this Georgia story,
Speaker 3: see if it develops any further, and if it's worthy
Speaker 3: of a whole episode, we'll do a whole episode on that.
Speaker 2: Speaking of Georgia, the long delayed copp City reco case
Speaker 2: has finally made some progress in the court. I have
Speaker 2: been working on the final scripted piece of my Coppa
Speaker 2: City coverage for basically this whole summer. I've been slowly
Speaker 2: chipping away at it. Part of the reason why I
Speaker 2: have not finished that yet is because essentially the whole
Speaker 2: court case, like the sixty one defendant reco case, got
Speaker 2: reset in May. They changed judges, and that has delayed
Speaker 2: an already long delayed case even further. So I was
Speaker 2: waiting to see a little bit of the results of
Speaker 2: the court case, or at least get a better indication
Speaker 2: where the court case is going to go before I
Speaker 2: finish that final piece. And we're going to get that
Speaker 2: final piece out probably in the next six month or
Speaker 2: two here, but I will give this small update because
Speaker 2: it's pretty substantial. This past Tuesday, September ninth, the defense
Speaker 2: successfully argued that the State Attorney General's office did not
Speaker 2: have the jurisdictional authority to prosecute the sixty one defendants
Speaker 2: under the state's reco statute. This was due to simple
Speaker 2: procedural error in neglecting to first ask Governor Brian Kemp
Speaker 2: if the AG's office could prosecute the case. Judge Farmer
Speaker 2: found that the AG does not have the authority to
Speaker 2: prosecute Count one of the Rico indictment, which is the
Speaker 2: racketeering and conspiracy charges affecting sixty one people. So without
Speaker 2: the sweeping Rico charges in golfing the sixty one defendants,
Speaker 2: just five defendants would be left with Count two of
Speaker 2: the indictment, the domestic terrorism charges, which the AG does
Speaker 2: have the authority to prosecute, and Count three, which is
Speaker 2: the arson charge, which Judge Farmer indicated could be thrown
Speaker 2: out on a similar technicality as the racketeering and conspiracy charges.
Speaker 2: This is still heavily in flux. The prosecution is going
Speaker 2: to appeal this decision, and it's unclear how this ruling
Speaker 2: will affect how the rest of the cop City case
Speaker 2: will unfold, as removal of the Rico charges kind of
Speaker 2: undermines the rest of the indictment. On Wednesday, they were
Speaker 2: arguing about the constitutionality of George's domestic terrorisms, which has
Speaker 2: never been tested in courtse before, so a lot of
Speaker 2: this case is currently up in the air. But this
Speaker 2: is a positive sign for the defendants at this point.
Speaker 2: One brief RFK Junior update. I guess r f K
Speaker 2: Junior is soon to be released. Autism report from HHS
Speaker 2: is reportedly going to include the claim that use of
Speaker 2: tailanol during pregnancy could cause autism in children. Jesus, this
Speaker 2: is not believed to be true by reputable medical authorities.
Speaker 2: But the report is set to release sometime in September.
Speaker 2: It was announced like months ago when r f K
Speaker 2: Junior said that by September we will finally know the
Speaker 2: cause of autism quote unquote, And it seems the report
Speaker 2: is still churning away but set to be released this month,
Speaker 2: and it will include a few other claims, which we
Speaker 2: will report on in more detail once the report is
Speaker 2: actually out. But the Wall Street Journal got this little
Speaker 2: heads up about the hilan all inclusion in the report.
Speaker 3: Fantastic. So I heard from somebody who is waiting on
Speaker 3: their work permit, a Kurdish woman who came to the
Speaker 3: United States to claim asylum from Turkey from Northern Kurdistan.
Speaker 3: And because she doesn't have a work permit yet and
Speaker 3: she's gonna be waiting for her work permit sometime, she's
Speaker 3: asking for help to cover her basic sort of day
Speaker 3: to day expenses. And this is a thing that people
Speaker 3: often find themselves in a situation. Right, they have come here,
Speaker 3: done all the documentation, but it can take a long
Speaker 3: time to get their work permit, and without friends or family,
Speaker 3: it can be very hard for them. The website is
Speaker 3: gofund dot me slash DA thirty nine F seven D
Speaker 3: zero B. Will have that link in the show notes
Speaker 3: as well. If you'd like to email us, you can
Speaker 3: do so. The way to do it is to reach
Speaker 3: out to cool Zone tips at proton dot me. That
Speaker 3: is an encrypted email address. All that means is that
Speaker 3: you will have to all so you use an encrypted
Speaker 3: email adress if you'd like it to be to end encrypted.
Speaker 1: All right, and here's some ads. We're back and uh,
Speaker 1: I guess it's time to drop some bars about Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 2: Somehow Epstein has returned.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that joke. It always gets old. So one
Speaker 1: of the big pieces of news this week before the
Speaker 1: thing that we started the episode with, I mean, this
Speaker 1: was the story before that happened, is that as a
Speaker 1: result of the ongoing investigation into Epstein and whether or
Speaker 1: not you know how involved was Trump? How involved were Democrats?
Speaker 1: What do we care that the book, the first fifty
Speaker 1: years birthday book, that that drawing that Trump is accused
Speaker 1: of having done where he signed his name as the
Speaker 1: p Big Care of a very obviously young girl with
Speaker 1: a poem that seemed to hint at child molestation. That
Speaker 1: the whole book that Epstein had has has been released
Speaker 1: to Congress and is now public. Right, Yeah, I did.
Speaker 2: Democrats on the House Oversight Committee subpoena the Epstein birthday
Speaker 2: Book from Jeffrey Epstein's estate once the estate made a
Speaker 2: statement saying that they have the book and wouldn't cooperate
Speaker 2: with a subpoena.
Speaker 1: And there's a bunch of news articles summarizing it. If
Speaker 1: you want to read the thing for yourself, just google
Speaker 1: document cloud Jeffrey Epstein fiftieth Birthday Book, and the whole
Speaker 1: thing isn't there?
Speaker 3: Yah?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 3: I would say, like just that kind of slight devotion.
Speaker 3: I guess between this and Charlie kirk shooting, maybe you
Speaker 3: don't need to give yourself a break.
Speaker 1: You don't saying you should. I just wanted to let
Speaker 1: people know where they can get to the original source
Speaker 1: if they don't want to have it mediated by.
Speaker 3: A media, right, It's always good to do that.
Speaker 1: We're going to mediate it for you now. Yeah. So
Speaker 1: it opens, as far as I can tell, the first well,
Speaker 1: I mean, there's there's a list of contents. The prologue
Speaker 1: is written by Gailand Maxwell. Then there's letters from the family,
Speaker 1: Paula Seymour and Marco I guess you're relatives. Then it's
Speaker 1: split into Brooklyn. So there's friends of his from Brooklyn
Speaker 1: who are Warren Eisenstein, neutral, I don't know who that is,
Speaker 1: Terry Kofka. Very funny that there's a Kafka involved, doctor
Speaker 1: Stephen Levy, and Michael Buekols. The next section is all girlfriends.
Speaker 1: They're letters from girlfriends. All of those names have been
Speaker 1: blacked out for reasons that should be obvious. The section
Speaker 1: after that is children. God almighty, I don't know whose
Speaker 1: kids because this is blacked out too, but oh boy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and then we get to the section that is friends.
Speaker 1: That is all the letters from friends, and the friends
Speaker 1: are Leon Black is on there, Bill Clinton is on there,
Speaker 1: Alan Dershowitz is on there. The dersh himself.
Speaker 2: Is the letter is really unsettling.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Donald Trump is in there. We'll get to that
Speaker 1: in a second. Donald Trump is in there, obviously these
Speaker 1: are not. Morton Zuckerman is on there, Leslie Wexner is
Speaker 1: on there. So a number of like very prominent people.
Speaker 1: Unknown is at the very end. I don't know like that.
Speaker 1: That's like literally how the book listed it. So they
Speaker 1: just have a letter from someone who's presumably his friend
Speaker 1: but didn't put a name.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's a smart move if you're doing things
Speaker 3: you have federal crimes.
Speaker 1: And then after that you've got the letters from scientists
Speaker 1: friends of his, which include people we brought up on
Speaker 1: my episode about a bioscience company who pretends that they're
Speaker 1: cloning dire wolves and Martin Noak are both on here,
Speaker 1: so that's great, Oh good. And then after that I
Speaker 1: just noted girlfriends is like the third group of people
Speaker 1: who had letters, and all those names were blacked out.
Speaker 1: But then under science there's another section that's girl dash
Speaker 1: friends that's longer, and all of those names are blacked out.
Speaker 1: No fucking idea what that is supposed to meet? Yeah,
Speaker 1: but upsetting, it's no good whatever it is. Yeah, Anyway,
Speaker 1: there's some more names on there, but they're not super relevant,
Speaker 1: Gilan Maxwell's prologue is handwritten, or at least the note
Speaker 1: in front of it is handwritten. I know you will
Speaker 1: enjoy looking through the book, and I hope you will
Speaker 1: derive as much pleasure looking through it as I did
Speaker 1: putting it together for you. Happy birthday, Love, Gilan Maxwell.
Speaker 1: So that's the prologue. One of the first pictures, I mean,
Speaker 1: the first picture in the book is Jeffrey Epstein's standing
Speaker 1: around with a bunch of soldiers. They look like, I mean,
Speaker 1: I would guess from some African country. They're all in
Speaker 1: a camo pattern that's not immediately familiar to me. And yeah,
Speaker 1: I can't fully read what it says down here. Some
Speaker 1: of the line say something about a president and the
Speaker 1: Secret Service to greet you. I don't know who these
Speaker 1: soldiers were that Jeffrey's standing around. I kind of want
Speaker 1: to know, but it's a weird photo to start. And
Speaker 1: then immediately after that is Jeffrey Epstein's cub scout graduation photo.
Speaker 1: They've got that in. There's a bunch of like pictures
Speaker 1: of Epstein throughout his life, Like that's kind of how
Speaker 1: this thing opens before we get down to the letters. Yeah,
Speaker 1: one thing I wanted to get at there. So there's
Speaker 1: on page fifty seven there's a photo of Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 1: wearing a weird shirt with a bunch of handprints on
Speaker 1: it when he was younger. That's just titled girls on
Speaker 1: My Boat. We picked up girls on beach, went out
Speaker 1: on boat. I tell them with knife in my hand
Speaker 1: to take suits off, but Warren tells me, don't worry.
Speaker 1: His name is Jahann. He's just joking. He lives at
Speaker 1: so and So. I tell Mark to throw him into water.
Speaker 1: He did no idea what the fuck that's about. But
Speaker 1: like a lot of it's like that is like very
Speaker 1: upsetting stories that are handwritten crudely, I think, and often
Speaker 1: by Gillan. But yeah, it's it's like pretty deeply upsetting stuff. Okay,
Speaker 1: I do kind of want to read this Bill Elks letter.
Speaker 1: It just starts with it's no secret that Jeffrey appreciates
Speaker 1: beautiful women that not many people know. He can create
Speaker 1: them in a thin whay air, as he did in
Speaker 1: Iowa in nineteen eighty eight.
Speaker 3: Good to give a play time discuss fixings that are illegal.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this guy says that he was managing the money
Speaker 1: of a family who lived in Fairfield, Iowa. Hog farming
Speaker 1: is a serious industry there, and many people feel there
Speaker 1: is more than a little truth in the saying that
Speaker 1: it's hard to tell the difference between the girls and
Speaker 1: the hogs in southeast Iowa. Jeffrey came to Fairfield to
Speaker 1: check in on their investigation on their investment opportunities. He
Speaker 1: asked about the night life and we could only laugh
Speaker 1: as we dropped him off at the local motel. The
Speaker 1: next morning or before of us picked up Jeffrey to
Speaker 1: give him a tour of the area. At our first stop,
Speaker 1: we parked in front of a bookstore. As we were
Speaker 1: getting out of the car, a spectacular, tall, blonde woman
Speaker 1: suddenly came out of the store, walked directly up to
Speaker 1: Jeffrey and announced, I am new to this area. What's
Speaker 1: going on? It turns out she was a sales representative
Speaker 1: for a firm solling academic brand and athletic clothing. She
Speaker 1: was literally driving through Iowa visiting local campuses. Jeffrey invited
Speaker 1: her to join us and did his magic. Within a
Speaker 1: few hours, he had invited her to return to New
Speaker 1: York with him for the weekend. Yeah, a lot of
Speaker 1: stuff like that. We should probably read Dershowitz's letter.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, we sack, Yeah, you can do that.
Speaker 1: Okay, here's Dershowitz's Who was that man with Epstein? Is
Speaker 1: the title of the letter. Inquiring minds are asking, who
Speaker 1: is that man with Epstein? Jeffrey Epstein is, of course,
Speaker 1: one of the world's most famous men, a household name
Speaker 1: throughout the planet. His picture has appeared on the cover
Speaker 1: of every magazine in the world. Everyone knows his story,
Speaker 1: from his humble roots on Coney Island to his rise
Speaker 1: to one of the most envied public figures in the
Speaker 1: Western world. But what is he doing flying to Africa
Speaker 1: with an obscure former politician from Hope, Arkansas? Who is
Speaker 1: that politician? And why would Epstein have picked him for
Speaker 1: the coveted seat on his private jet. Vanity Unfair was
Speaker 1: determined to get to the bottom of this mystery man
Speaker 1: and to reveal the story behind the story. Normally, we
Speaker 1: would not pry into the private life of an obscure
Speaker 1: Arkansas politician, particularly when he has tried so hard up
Speaker 1: to now, so successfully to keep his private life to himself.
Speaker 1: But the moment this scire man stepped under the Epstein jet,
Speaker 1: he became fair game for probing inquiry. Why would a
Speaker 1: man like Epstein, who can pick and choose his companions
Speaker 1: from princes to professors, select a flying companion from the
Speaker 1: Ozark Mountains. To be sure, he was a Rhodes scholar,
Speaker 1: but we all know how easy it is to get
Speaker 1: a roads if you're from Arkansas. There must be something else.
Speaker 1: Vanity Unfair decided to snoop around as obscure politician reluctantly
Speaker 1: agreed to be to an interview on the express condition
Speaker 1: that it was completely off the record. This is what
Speaker 1: he told us, and then it's blank. The letter ends.
Speaker 2: It comes with a note yes, reading dear Jeffrey. As
Speaker 2: a birthday gift to you, I managed to obtain an
Speaker 2: early version of the Vanity Unfair article. I talked them
Speaker 2: into changing the focus from you to Bill Clinton, as
Speaker 2: you will see from the enclosed excerpt. Halfy birthday in
Speaker 2: best regards.
Speaker 1: And then there's a fake Vanity Unfair article. Yeah or cover? Yeah?
Speaker 1: That who is Jack the Repper?
Speaker 3: Was it?
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein? Al Qaeda in South America financed by Epstein.
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein stole my heart in another courtroom dispatches it's
Speaker 1: like really crudely animated. But yeah, yeah, I mean it's
Speaker 1: what do you even say? Oh, there is a quote
Speaker 1: on the Vanity Fair cover attributed to Epstein that says
Speaker 1: life is a pure flame and we live by an
Speaker 1: invisible sun within us. So I guess that's a Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein original.
Speaker 3: Wow, how profound.
Speaker 2: Before we talk about the Trump letter, there's this one
Speaker 2: other image I didn't like to discuss. This what I
Speaker 2: can only described as a grooming themed drawing Oh God,
Speaker 2: yeah to him as part of its birthday card, depicting
Speaker 2: Jeffrey Epstein in nineteen eighty three giving balloons in a
Speaker 2: lolly pomp to three young children girls like children, children.
Speaker 1: And importantly, his pockets are turned out out and the
Speaker 1: pants he's wearing are like patched and old. He's clearly
Speaker 1: poor in this. In nineteen eighty three, by the way,
Speaker 1: he was working as a tutor and a teacher, like
Speaker 1: he was teaching kids at private schools. Like, so that's
Speaker 1: what's represented here.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The other section of the drawing is in two thousand
Speaker 2: and three and has Jeffrey Epstein sitting on the beach
Speaker 2: with four women touching his body.
Speaker 1: One woman is very clearly touching his genitals and has
Speaker 1: Je tattooed on her ass.
Speaker 2: Jeffrey Epstein's jet is flying a.
Speaker 1: You know it's his jet because the actual in number
Speaker 1: of his real jet is written on the side of
Speaker 1: the jet.
Speaker 2: And on the beach he is on a lawn chair
Speaker 2: outside of what sort of resembles Trump's mar Lago resort
Speaker 2: in terms of the architectural style, the arched doorways, the
Speaker 2: tiered structure and lay out of the palm trees, and
Speaker 2: the beach. This building does not match his house in Florida,
Speaker 2: or his house in the Southwest, or his house on
Speaker 2: the island, which appears very different with blue roofing. I'm
Speaker 2: not saying this necessarily is mar A Lago, but if
Speaker 2: I were to try to draw mar A Lago from memory,
Speaker 2: it might look something like this. There's certainly a resemblance
Speaker 2: which is notable.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we should talk about literally. The next photo from
Speaker 1: this is a picture of Jeffrey Epstein holding a check
Speaker 1: for twenty two thousand dollars to him from Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: There's three people posing next to him. One of them
Speaker 1: is a woman whose face is blacked out. There's also
Speaker 1: another woman with her face blacked out behind them. But
Speaker 1: the man who's sitting next to the woman at what
Speaker 1: looks like a dinner table does not have his face
Speaker 1: blacked out. I don't know why. And it says on
Speaker 1: this Jeffrey is showing early talents with money and women
Speaker 1: sells fully depreciated. And then the name of the woman
Speaker 1: who is being sold is blacked out to Donald Trump
Speaker 1: for twenty two five hundred dollars. Showed early people skills too.
Speaker 1: Even though I handled the deal, I didn't get any
Speaker 1: of the money for the girl.
Speaker 2: So pretty sickening joke.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, genuinely like nauseating literally, yeah, like him holding
Speaker 3: up a check Donald Trump gave him for a girl.
Speaker 2: Like a fake novelty check signed by someone's not Trump,
Speaker 2: just someone signing Donald Trump, not Donald Trump's signature. But
Speaker 2: people joking. It's a bit about Jeffrey selling a woman
Speaker 2: to Trump for twenty two five hundred dollars? Was this
Speaker 2: a fully depreciated?
Speaker 3: Is that the phrasing us it's a phrase, yes, yes, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's fucking disgusting.
Speaker 1: And then we get down to the original Trump letter,
Speaker 1: which we've talked about on the show. We've read it
Speaker 1: to you. This is the one where Donald says it's
Speaker 1: framed as a conversation between them, and Donald says, enigmas
Speaker 1: never age. Have you noticed that anyway? The only thing
Speaker 1: noteworthy about this is now we have the drawing of
Speaker 1: the woman. It's drawn around the script, and it's i
Speaker 1: would say, pretty clearly a pubescent girl. Like there's breasts
Speaker 1: drawn on.
Speaker 2: Their breasts do not look fully developed, and they do
Speaker 2: not look they're not large like no, and the position
Speaker 2: of them is higher. They look like underdeveloped breasts.
Speaker 1: Yes, it looks like a drawing of a young girl,
Speaker 1: like of a child.
Speaker 2: It's so much more creepy than anyone who like tried
Speaker 2: to draw what this might have looked like, has like
Speaker 2: previously imagined like they were all drawing you know, like
Speaker 2: conventionally attractive like adult female bodies. This is much more creepy.
Speaker 1: Now, I will say, it doesn't look like his signature
Speaker 1: is meant to be pubic care here.
Speaker 2: It's in a similar position. But you know, this is
Speaker 2: a very abstract drawing. His signature is just his first name, Donald,
Speaker 2: which he signs a lot of personal notes with, not
Speaker 2: his full Donald Trump's signature. Trump is maintaining that he
Speaker 2: did not sign this, that this is a forgery. He
Speaker 2: is unaware of this letter, even though the signature matches
Speaker 2: other signatures from him around this time. And this just
Speaker 2: feels like a very Donald Trump thing to do. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and is worded similarly to how he talked about women
Speaker 2: in this era. He now makes statements being like I
Speaker 2: don't talk this way all my everyone who knows me
Speaker 2: knows I don't talk this way. And if you watch
Speaker 2: like clips from Donald Trump in the early two thousands
Speaker 2: talking about women, it is this type of language. Is
Speaker 2: it is very gross. Yeah, Like everyone remembers the Howard
Speaker 2: Stern clip, like come on.
Speaker 1: Right, oh yeah, No. It's also worth noting one of
Speaker 1: the last things in the book is recipe for like
Speaker 1: chuck chip cookies. I tried to figure out who put
Speaker 1: the recipe in there, but their name is blacked out.
Speaker 1: They're right under Henry Rossofski and right above Les Wexner.
Speaker 1: I don't know who put that chocolate chip cookie recipe
Speaker 1: in here, but I might try to make those cookies
Speaker 1: the Epstein biscuit.
Speaker 3: I wouldn't eat this.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: A few other things before we close this episode related
Speaker 2: to Epstein. On September, fifth House Speaker Mike Johnson told
Speaker 2: reporters that Trump was actually a secret to FBI informant
Speaker 2: tasked with taking down Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 3: I hadn't heard it did a great job.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'm saying that what Epstein did as a hoax.
Speaker 7: It's a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes in himself when
Speaker 7: he first heard the room where kicked them out of Milvago.
Speaker 7: He was an FBI informant to try to take this
Speaker 7: stuff down. The President knows and has great sympathy for
Speaker 7: the women who suffered these unspeakable arms. It's detestable to them.
Speaker 7: And I've spoken about this as recently as twenty hours ago.
Speaker 3: This should be documents that could that could corroborate that.
Speaker 3: One would I one thing Detember eighth.
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson walked back his FBI informant comments, telling reporters
Speaker 2: he was referring to what Epstein victims attorneys has said
Speaker 2: that Trump was quote willing to help law enforcement to
Speaker 2: go after the guy who was a disgusting child abusers
Speaker 2: at trafficker, all the allegations. That's what they heard. I
Speaker 2: don't know if I use the right terminology, but that's
Speaker 2: common knowledge and everybody knows that I was repeating what
Speaker 2: has been common knowledge for a long time. The President
Speaker 2: was helpful in trying to get Epstein for the law
Speaker 2: enforcement to go after Epstein. Unquote, great stuff from Mike Johnson.
Speaker 1: Sure.
Speaker 2: A day later, White House Press Secretary Carolyn Levitt confirmed
Speaker 2: that Trump was not, in fact an FBI informant. One
Speaker 2: other weird Epstein story from this week is how the
Speaker 2: DOJ has been beefing with James O'Keefe's Project Veritas.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Project Veritas did a operation against a DOJ employee in
Speaker 2: which they recorded him say this, and those files do exist.
Speaker 6: Yeah, thousands and thousands of page of five Jill Redact
Speaker 6: that every Republican or conservative person in those files leave
Speaker 6: on the liberal Democratic people in those files.
Speaker 2: I mean they visited that Maxwell person.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and also.
Speaker 8: Involved got transferred to a minimum security person series, which
Speaker 8: is against bop Posey because she's she's a committed sex mner.
Speaker 8: The offering or something to keep about.
Speaker 9: Se That was the acting Deputy Chief of the Office
Speaker 9: of Enforcement Operations, Joseph Schnitt, telling a stranger about the
Speaker 9: FBI and DOJ's handling of the Epstein files.
Speaker 2: The DOJ responded to O'Keefe saying, quote, Joseph Schnid had
Speaker 2: no role in the department's internal review of Epstein materials.
Speaker 2: He has confirmed as much to leadership, and we plan
Speaker 2: on publishing his written statements to that effect when we
Speaker 2: have it. In his words, the comments he made were
Speaker 2: based on quote what he learned in the media, and
Speaker 2: he has quote no knowledge of the circumstances surrounding Miss
Speaker 2: Maxwell other than what was reported in the news unquote.
Speaker 2: And then Schnid used the Department of Justice X account
Speaker 2: to post a what it could be described as like
Speaker 2: an Apple Notes apology statement with thirty percent battery displayed
Speaker 2: on his phone. When he talks about he talks about
Speaker 2: meeting a quote woman named Skyler on Hinge, a dating
Speaker 2: app in July twenty twenty five. Her profile is no
Speaker 2: longer findable. We had two dates. She gave no clues
Speaker 2: that she was a reporter or recording car dates. Had
Speaker 2: I clue, the first date would have ended immediately and
Speaker 2: there would have never been a second one. My profile
Speaker 2: indicated I did quote unquote government work, but did not
Speaker 2: specify for which agency. I never discussed what I do
Speaker 2: at DOJ. The comments I made were my own personal
Speaker 2: comments on what I've learned in the media and not
Speaker 2: from anything I've done or learned via work. Incredible the
Speaker 2: United States government, everybody. Yeah, and James O'Keeffe out there
Speaker 2: with the journalism first trap. I guess I wonder if
Speaker 2: it's I is it a one party consent?
Speaker 3: This is in d C, right, I.
Speaker 1: Don't believe DC is one party consent.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that I would be shocked.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure how o'keef pulls all this stuff off legally.
Speaker 1: He could get in trouble for this one.
Speaker 3: Yeah. My understanding would be just to be clear for
Speaker 3: people who aren't in on the jargon. Like in most
Speaker 3: states of the Union, I think you need both people's
Speaker 3: consent to record a conversation. You could argue, I guess
Speaker 3: he didn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy sitting out there,
Speaker 3: But I think this is very clearly a clandestine recording.
Speaker 1: Oh no, no, no, sorry, d DC is a one
Speaker 1: party consents area. Dan, Okay, well there you go.
Speaker 3: Wow, Okay, I did ye. I did not know that, yep,
Speaker 3: So well he's safe. Yeah, I guess if that date
Speaker 3: was in DC, you got to look. If the date
Speaker 3: was in DCT of jurisdictions around there bumping up. But yeah,
Speaker 3: that's surprising. No, he's good.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that's all we have for this week,
Speaker 2: which is a lot. This was a massive news week.
Speaker 2: This is an extra long episode, but sometimes that happens.
Speaker 3: Congratulations on making it this far.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and may every day be a new wonderful secret.
Speaker 1: As you know, Donald Trump told Jeffrey Epstein stop him
Speaker 1: to send off. We reported the news. We reported the news.
Speaker 1: It could happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 1: coolzonmedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can
Speaker 1: now find sources where it could happen here listed directly
Speaker 1: in episode descriptions. Thanks for listening.