Radio Show Hour 1 – 02/28/2025

[00:00:13] Broadcasting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West. You are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. All right, happy to have you along my fellow Americans, Sam Bushman live on your radio. Hard-hitting news that ever should refuse to use, no doubt, kicks off right now. Welcome to the broadcast, ladies and gentlemen. This is the broadcast for February the 28th in the year of our Lord, 2025.

[00:00:39] This is Hour 1 of 2 and the goal always to promote God, family, and country, to protect life, liberty, and property, to do so in the traditions of our founding fathers, using the supreme law of the land, the checks and balances brilliantly put in place by the founding fathers, and more to promote all that we hold dear. Whoa, do we got a culture war on our hands. Welcome to the broadcast. Hope you're all doing absolutely fantastic on this freedom-loving, fantastic, faith-filled. We're taking America back one heart, one mind, one issue at a time, Friday.

[00:01:09] What does that mean, Friday? Well, it means it's a faith-filled, freedom-loving day, but it also means the good doctors in the house. Dr. Scott Bradley's with me. freedomsrisingsun.com is website. He's author of the Collegiate series, DVD lecture series, To Preserve the Nation. Check out To Preserve the Nation at freedomsrisingsun.com. Also check out their weekly Q&As, webinars, and a whole lot more every Thursday evening, 7 p.m.

[00:01:37] Go to freedomsrisingsun.com, sign up, and you can be part of the solutions. Q&As on the Constitution, and a whole lot more. Dr. Bradley, welcome to the broadcast, sir. Thank you very much, Sam. It's good to be here. Got a sunshiny, wintry morning here. I'm hoping it'll warm up a little bit, but not melt all the snow, but I think it is going to be a little warmer today. Yeah, I'm kind of a slow snow melt guy.

[00:02:07] Yeah, I kind of like that. It seems like the watershed seems to kind of retain a little bit more to kind of give it up a little bit later in the year. It also kind of affects the wildland fire issues, you know, depending on how the light fuels grow and all that kind of stuff. So yeah, it's nice, I think, to have kind of the seasonal change, but do it at a reasonable rate. Amen to that.

[00:02:35] Well, change is not happening at a reasonable rate. That's for sure. We'll talk about that as the broadcast unfolds today. How was the webinar last night? Well, it was overly, shall we say, abundant in terms of questions. We had so many left on the table. It wasn't funny. And as I reviewed the questions, and I was 15 minutes over time when I'm going to the questions and going, oh, wow, here's a great one. I wish we could do that.

[00:03:04] Did you just say to people, you ask too many questions? No, no, no, no. I don't want to discourage any of that. I honestly... I don't want to discourage it either, but you find a lot of times when you're going to the questions are slightly different, asked in slightly different ways. And many times you can kind of concatenate the point that, you know, 10 people are making and say, okay, look, here's the topic, here's the subject, here's the drill, right? Well, that was, you know, I, for example, the very first question was a kind of a blending

[00:03:32] together, kind of like the founding fathers did to come down to the Bill of Rights with the same concept in many things. So I had to take... It was about Trump's first cabinet meeting. And there was a lot of interest in that. A lot of people were kind of disappointed. They wanted a little bit of a take on what can we expect in the future, stuff like that. Of course, I don't have a crystal ball.

[00:04:00] But, you know, people were thinking it was kind of almost more of a press release, kind of a dog and pony kind of show that was there for, oh, I don't know, just public display. And getting down to brass tacks and business, people wanted to hear from more of the, you know, go around the table, man. Let's talk to the department heads. And, you know, of course, obviously, you know, Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution, the

[00:04:28] president's able to ascertain and obtain questions from his staff. But I think a lot of people were thinking there was going to be a little bit more, you know, shall we say, executive direction. And it seemed more like a, like I say, a dog and pony show that was there for the press and the impact it was made. I was a little disappointed in it myself, personally. But I guess I should say more than a little bit.

[00:04:57] But the fact is, if you hear from only a couple of them, it seems like an empty vessel almost. If the people sitting around the table are, you know, kind of ignored, if not ignored, at least sit there as dummies on the log, it just seems like it's not as kind of impactful. Doctor, you're supposed to just look pretty and not say anything, okay? I never have had much luck at doing that.

[00:05:26] Especially the not saying anything. Amen to that. All right, look, there's so much going on in the news. And I want to talk about a lot of it because I'm just, I'm not here to attack the administration. I like a lot of what they're doing. A lot of what they're doing concerns me. I've never held back from my beliefs on Trump. He does a lot of good. He brings a lot of concern to the table. And I try to articulate the reasons. Rather than just attacking people, I try to kind of articulate what I believe to be the concerns, et cetera. Let me give you the first one that I think is relevant.

[00:05:55] And you probably brought this stuff up a lot in the webinar last night. We'll see. Headline that I have says this. Welcome to the Department of Justice Hate Crimes Enforcement and Prevention website. Yeah. Welcome to the Department of Justice Hate Crimes Enforcement and Prevention website. Justice.gov slash hate crimes.

[00:06:24] And at first, you know, you can think, well, who on earth, you know, would support a hate crime? Well, I don't think anybody. Here's the problem. What is a hate crime? Where does the government, the general government get authority to define and prosecute and enforce and prevent a hate crime? What is a hate crime? All right. This is a big problem because I don't know what a hate crime is. Okay. Let's say that thou shalt not kill.

[00:06:55] One of the hate crimes, I guess you could say, defined in the Ten Commandments. Right. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not commit adultery. All right. Now, any of those things that you do, is there a hate factor to that? Right. Right. If you kill someone, does hate drive that killing? Well, who knows? But in my opinion, the second you start talking about hate or love or now you're talking about

[00:07:25] emotions, intentions of the heart, if you will, how do you create a crime around that and or how do you add insult to injury with that quote tag? So if you kill somebody, then they're dead. Right. Well, if they're black and you're white, then, hey, they throw a hate crime. What do you want to call it? In the insurance world, we'd call it a rider. A little extra tweet to the general rule or whatever you want to call it. A little benefit. Okay. Then you killed somebody.

[00:07:55] So, you know, they're dead. But now you're guilty of this so-called intent because you're white, they're black, whatever. Now it's this hate notion that's the problem. Well, I don't even see, Dr. Bradley, first of all, where on earth can they define all this? There's no authority whatsoever. Forget the crimes for a second, if there are. But this hate notion or this defined manipulation, okay?

[00:08:24] So if it's got a racial component, if it's got a sexual component, if it's got a, then we're going to tweak it up and make it way worse than it is. So just the normal killing is bad. But I'm telling you right now, a hate killing is way worse. We're going off the rails on this thing, doctor. There are some major disconnects on this thing, as you all well know, and probably virtually

[00:08:49] all your listeners would know, that the United States Constitution defines the scope and bounds of the power of the general government. And there's not a shred of evidence in there that, you know, like kidnapping or rape or murder or anything like that. I mean, they're heinous crimes. There's no getting around those things. But the general government has absolutely zero authority to create law or to prosecute law,

[00:09:16] if some ever is created, in those areas. In fact, no area outside those specific counterfeiting. Okay, fine. We'll have a law about that. But the fact of the matter is, these things violate a lot more things, not just the constitutional violation. Well, I guess they're all constitutional violations. But the idea that you can have double jeopardy on a given crime.

[00:09:45] Let's say, for example, you get charged with a crime of murder in a state level and you're found not guilty. Well, the guy that got killed was not the same color as you. So we're going to put some kind of a civil rights, hate crime violation. Hate crime rider on there. Yeah. Yeah. Let's do this. And so now you're charged exactly the same crime, same absolute instant in eternity that this happened.

[00:10:11] And now you're being charged again under a federal law that seeks to define that based upon the color of one's skin. Let's say, for example. I mean, there's all sorts of rider things, as you talk about, that get thrown on these things. And it violates at every turn. And we end up with people having double jeopardy, if you will. And let's just say somebody gets charged and convicted of, I don't know, manslaughter, let's say.

[00:10:39] It's a lower level of killing somebody in terms of the law. But the color was wrong. And so, you know, you get a certain sentence based upon the manslaughter thing. But then they added in a color deal. I mean, it's just a real kicker. It's bad. Well, so you have a whole hate crimes division website. You don't believe me.

[00:11:06] Go to justice.gov slash hate crimes. And you'll see there's a whole website on this. And they say their goal is to create enforcement and prevention of a hate crime. Well, the problem is I don't really know what a hate crime is, really, because there's no such thing as a crime for hate. Isn't hate a feeling and emotion? All right. But then they want to get worse.

[00:11:32] So listen, the DOJ, the Department of Justice, offers, quote, grants or funding opportunities to support law enforcement and public safety activities in, quote, state, local and tribal jurisdictions to assist victims of crimes, to provide training, technical assistance, research,

[00:11:59] and to implement programs that improve the criminal, civil and juvenile justice system. So now we're talking about the general government defining a hate crime, creating a whole Justice Department on hate crimes, a whole website for that, grants, money all up and down the chain to the localist of local levels to even if you talk about reservations or whatever

[00:12:28] you want to call them, right? They say it's for tribal jurisdictions. So, you know, you're kind of talking about separate countries in a way if you're tribal. Okay. Well, then it gets worse because you think, okay, well, that's a Biden thing. Joe's out of control. Donald's got this thing, right? But here's the headline.

[00:12:49] Pursuant to President Trump's executive order on additional measures to combat anti-Semitism, the Justice Department announced this executive order on February the 3rd, 2025, a formation of a multitask agency to combat what's called anti-Semitism.

[00:13:18] Now, I don't really know what that is. So we're getting into so much territory that's crazy. What is a hate crime? What is anti-Semitism? What is, and all these terms are going to be what? Defined by your general government where they have no authority to even create or define such law in the first place? Congress doesn't have authority to pass a hate crime law.

[00:13:42] The crimes that are general government delegated are defined, right, Dr. Bradley? They're defined in the Constitution. Absolutely. And layer upon layer of violation is happening now. I kind of understand now a little better where you're going with this because honestly and truthfully, this is a hot button for a very large number of congressional members.

[00:14:11] In fact, they've passed laws, anti-Semitic laws, and Trump obviously is make Israel great again kind of attitude. All of them are misfocused and egregious violations of what their oath of office is. But because it has to do with the Jewish faith. Now, by the way, Semitism, anti-Semitism, whatever you want to call it, everybody that lives in the Middle East

[00:14:40] indigenously qualifies under that. If you're a Palestinian, if you're an Arab, if you're a Jew, if you're, I mean, anybody that's... But what if I don't hate anybody? Well, I know, Sam, but here's the deal. Well, anti-Semitism is something that's taken on a whole new definition from what it truly is. Anybody that, you know, originally, if you descended from Shem, Noah's son, you were Semitic. And so you're probably Semitic. Okay, I'm probably Semitic.

[00:15:09] The fact of the matter is that they are... The Congress is doing these things. And here's the kicker. These laws that they're creating, if you read out of the New Testament sometimes, you know, the sin be upon us and upon our children, for example, that is an egregious violation of anti-Semitic international intent. Those laws that are created for that, that say it's against the law to in any way, shape, or form,

[00:15:38] say, well, you know, this is a, this is something that has to do with Christianity and belief in that. If you quote something out of the New Testament that was, you know, written a thousand, couple thousand years ago, whatever the time was that some of these things were written, you are anti-Semitic. And you can be brought up on charges. I've got a problem with this. I don't understand this.

[00:16:00] So they say anti-Semitic means you have hostility towards or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group. So let me get this right. What if somebody hates me? Are they an anti-Semite? Well, based on your lineal descent, like your like-like lineal descent, yeah. No? No. See, I'm not a Jew, right? Well, how do you know?

[00:16:27] I mean, I know I'm being a little obtuse. No, you can't be logical, doctor, about this. You can't think through history and say, wait, they're all part of the 12 tribes of Israel, so they're all brothers, and they're all really, in fact, we all come from Adam. Or even if you say after the flood, we all come from Noah or whatever. You can't say that because then we're all brothers and sisters. We're all God's children, and all this division goes away. So you can't think logically about this, doctor. Well, I'm sorry.

[00:16:54] I'm kind of out of the argument because, truthfully, this is one of the great lies of our time. That's exactly the point. This is an absolute lie. So look, folks, anti-Semite, they say the Semites are the Jews, and if you're anti-Semite, it means you have this hatred towards the Jews or this whatever, right? But if somebody hates me, then I'm not technically a Jew, and therefore that's not really anti-Semitism. That's only against Jews.

[00:17:21] But the very idea that we're going to define hatred towards one group is a certain term, but if it's a different group, the same action, treatment, crime, behavior, whatever you want to call it, it's not really anti-Semitism. So let's say somebody kills me because I'm blind. Is that an anti-Semite there? You know? What is that? Well, I think it was hateful that they killed you. Well, maybe. They might have just loved me and tried to save me from a life of difficulty. Right?

[00:17:51] If you go back to the Nazis, they want to get rid of all these people with disabilities. It was out of their kind hearts. They just didn't want to have the population with all kinds of, you know, defects and stuff. They were pretty loving, right? Well, you know, they're going to purify the bloodlines. So what I'm saying is, look, where do you go with this, folks? And look, to me, it's very simple. Right is right. Wrong is wrong. Good is good. Evil is evil. Okay?

[00:18:17] Now, if you commit a crime, if you rape someone, if you murder someone, if you, it is evil and wrong, period, end of paragraph. Now, I don't know how you can add hate to that. Well, they killed that person because they were a Jew. Well, by golly, that's an anti-Semitic. They killed that person because he was white. Well, what's that called? Just murder? Or do we put a hate crime on top of that, see?

[00:18:41] I've been in these discussions with attorneys that are saying, oh, we take intent into the discussion at all times. And you say, well, okay, let's say you're driving down the road and accidentally kill somebody in your car, okay? The intent of your heart is taken into that thing there. If you went purposely and ran into a crowd of people and killed people. Yeah, premeditated. This kind of thing, you've got first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, all of those kind of things.

[00:19:05] But the fact of the matter is that they're doing it based upon a racial or even proposed gender nowadays. I mean, a lot of the things that happen are based upon, well, this guy thought he was this gender. Well, okay. So this stuff gets so completely muddied. And when the feds get involved, and particularly I'm vexed when they start adding this Semitic kind of thing to it,

[00:19:35] when truthfully all the people of the Middle East, Arabs, Jews, you know, the Phoenicians, I mean, I don't care the Semitic languages, descendants of Shem, sons of Noah kind of thing. I mean, you can take this back to the beginning of time. And the fact of the matter is that they're defining it based upon an agendized approach to who's going to get favoritism.

[00:19:58] An agendized approach designed to divide and conquer on every fault line imaginable, ladies and gentlemen. And Trump is playing this card right now because of his love for the modern state of Israel, the Zionist perspective. Okay, so here's the question. He's going to back the Jews and back Israel because of his love for Israel. Is he hating on the Palestines and hating on the, and what's that called? Well, they're Semitic people too. I mean, we've been through this thing, Sam.

[00:20:28] I mean, I know you're listening. I know, but hold on. They're not Semitic people in the modern definition though. You're talking about reality and the truth, doctor. This is historic for thousands of years. And suddenly they've redefined this thing. But they're not the Jews, you see. Well, but who is really Jewish? Are they really, are they converts that joined the faith? Well, ask Pocahontas. She'll tell you that she's, you know, and then you do a DNA and you find out it's not even accurate at all, right? Absolutely.

[00:20:57] So your point's well taken. But my point is if you love on the Jews, does that mean you hate on the Jews' opponents by nature? Generally speaking, generally speaking, I think you have to draw that conclusion. It's as if this, that kind of thing. But see, that's where the problem goes. So if you love the Jewish people, you're not an anti-Semite, but you hate, say, the Palestines because they're the bad guys. They're the ones that are the criminals, right? And so what's it called when you hate on the Palestines?

[00:21:26] Anti-Semitic in my book, but I know you're going down this path. No, that's the facts. I get all that. But in our modern world, what is that called? It doesn't matter, Sam. Well, it's okay to do that, right? Well, yeah, that's the point I think I started to make was that it doesn't matter if some of these other peoples that are maybe underrepresented in some areas or something get hurt. The law does not protect them equally, and that goes against everything in America.

[00:21:56] And that is the whole point I'm bringing up. The laws and the modern manipulation of this is absolutely out of control. Okay? Anytime you murder anyone, unless it's like a self-defense scenario or something like that, it's evil. It's wrong. And I'll give a rip if they're one of the 12 tribes of Israel or the other 11. It's wrong. Right is right and wrong is wrong. And what they've done is they've used this to drive a wedge between all kinds of people. Well, hey, you're a Zionist Jew.

[00:22:25] You're an anti-Semite. You're a hate-filled this or a whatever that. Okay, and people need to understand what you're saying is right, Dr. Bradley. It does not matter. Murder is murder. It's against God's law, and it's against man's law, and it's wrong. And I don't care who you murder. And now there can be a difference between accidental or intentional maybe. I get that. But other than that, I think we're grasping at straws here and playing games.

[00:22:51] And the only outcome will be continued division and hatred fostered by this dishonest agenda. Yeah, we're getting involved in religious wars here, and we're taking sides. And, you know, this concept of if you read some of the New Testament scriptures, that's considered blood libel. I mean, them's fighting words, baby. And this idea that this is a prosecutable kind of issue.

[00:23:21] You've got—we're moving in the wrong direction in the United States because we've got this hate crimes thing. But in Europe, in some places, if you post a Facebook thing that is, you know, has got this definitional blood libel in it that says, Well, the Jews killed Jesus. I mean, you know, oh, there you go. You know, now you go to jail. And this—we're on the wrong path right now. And this covers so many different areas. We've talked a few times, I think. And sadly, Trump's falling for this hook, line, and sinker.

[00:23:50] Trump is a—he's a proponent and a participant. It's not just falling for it. This guy is all in, baby. That's really a problem. Doge isn't touching this hate crimes division. In fact, they're expanding it based on the latest executive order by President Trump. And they want to combat anti-Semitism.

[00:24:14] Well, let me explain the best way to combat anti-Semitism and all hate crimes. I'll do it in seconds. This is very, very simple. This is not complex. This is not rocket science. This is very, very simple. I'll give you the answer on the other side of the pause and then let Dr. Bradley respond. And then we'll dig into the Phase 1 of the Epstein files, shall we? The DOJ's involved in that, too. It's going to be lackluster results, I'll tell you that. Hang tight. God save the republic.

[00:24:44] You're listening to Liberty News Radio. News this hour from townhall.com. I'm Rich Thomason. Government's latest inflation report just out this morning. Money inflation edging a tenth of a point lower last month compared to December.

[00:25:12] Two and a half percent in January, getting closer to the Fed's two percent target rate. The same time, consumer spending fell two tenths of one percent last month from December. Ukrainian President Zelensky is in Washington today for a critical meeting with President Trump. The meeting comes as the Trump administration is pushing for an end to Russia's war in Ukraine. I think we've come a long way. I believe we're going to get it done. Yesterday, the president twice downplayed any animosity toward Zelensky,

[00:25:41] even though he previously called the Ukrainian leader a dictator. We're going to get along really well. Zelensky comes to Washington seeking security guarantees from the U.S. Greg Clugston, the White House. Zelensky is also expected to sign a profit-sharing agreement granting the U.S. long-term access to mine and develop Ukraine's substantial rare-earth mineral resources. President Trump says it's a win-win for both countries. And the president's defending his aggressive imposition of tariffs on American trading partners.

[00:26:10] We're going to bring our car industry back. We're going to bring our chips back. We're going to bring so many things back to our country, including pharmaceuticals and drugs. And the thing that's going to get us there is tariffs. While ruling that the Trump administration's firing of probationary federal workers was probably illegal, a San Francisco federal judge has not ordered the reinstatement of the thousands who have been let go, nor did he specifically block future firings.

[00:26:37] The death of an unvaccinated child in West Texas. It is the first confirmed measles death in the U.S. in a decade. On Wall Street this hour, stocks are mixed. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 86 points. The NASDAQ Composite Index down 33 points. More on these stories at townhall.com. Do you owe $10,000 or more in credit card debt or personal loans? With credit card debt at all-time highs,

[00:27:05] Debt Relief Advocates is urgently notifying consumers of debt relief now being made available designed to aid consumers with out-of-control credit card debt. Those who qualify and enroll for this relief program will only have to pay back a fraction of what they owe. This is not bankruptcy or a debt consolidation loan. This is a relief program that credit card companies would rather you not know about as it ends your debt nightmare and saves you lots of money. Consumers owing at least $10,000 in credit card debt or personal loans

[00:27:34] can now take advantage of this debt relief as the cost of living skyrockets. Debt Relief Advocates has established a relief hotline for you to call to learn what debt reduction you may qualify for. So don't wait. For this free information, call the relief hotline at 800-606-4110. 800-606-4110. Again, that's 800-606-4110. This is a battle. A battle between truth and deceit.

[00:28:04] A battle between forces that would enslave this country in darkness and between a media that wants to present you with the truth. We are being censored. America's news outlets no longer provide the truth. 90% of news outlets in the United States are controlled by six corporations. The mission of The Epoch Times is to chase the truth. To ground all statements and facts. TheEpochTimes.com Looking for an IT partner that truly understands your needs?

[00:28:33] Managed IT services is the answer. We meet with you regularly to discuss your goals and form a tailored technology plan. Our customers have called us a trusted advisor who delivers. When it comes to IT, we do it all. Firewalls, cloud storage, server migration, and more. Say goodbye to long-term contracts and hello to a team that earns your business month after month. Call 801-706-6980 now and let managed IT services transform your IT experience. You know where the solution can be found, Mr. President?

[00:29:03] In churches. In wedding chapels. In maternity wards across the country and around the world. More babies will mean forward-looking adults. The sort we need to tackle long-term, large-scale problems. American babies in particular are likely going to be wealthier, better educated, and more conservation-minded than children raised in still industrializing countries. As economist Tyler Cowen recently wrote,

[00:29:30] Quote, by having more children, you're making your nation more populous, thus boosting its capacity to solve climate change. The planet does not need for us to think globally and act locally so much as it needs us to think family and act personally. The solution to so many of our problems, at all times and in all places, is to fall in love, get married, and have some kids.

[00:30:13] Live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West, you are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. Back with you live, ladies and gentlemen, Sam Bushman, Dr. Scott Bradley, talking about this hate crime department at the Department of Justice. Donald Trump is expanding it. Shame on the Donald for that. The bottom line is hate crimes have no place at the general government level at all, first of all. Secondly, the debate of what a hate crime is, is the problem.

[00:30:43] You see, when you start to say hate, you're talking about emotions, feelings, beliefs. Thought police come to mind in a hurry. You know, I understand if you say this crime was intentional or this crime is made worse by the premeditated. I understand the reason they go down those roads. It relates to the severity of the crime. But when you start to talk about motivations or intentions, black guy kills white guy. Racially motivated hate crime.

[00:31:13] Well, hardly ever. White guy kills black guy. Racially motivated every single time. Okay. But what if the crime was committed and there wasn't a racial component, even though there's a racial element? Now you got. Okay. So we're becoming the thought police and we're literally picking sides and we're crafting laws that divide. Let me make it very simple. God created the Ten Commandments. And when he said thou shalt not kill. Well, he didn't say, and it's way worse if it's a hate crime.

[00:31:43] He didn't say thou shalt not kill, but hey, it's fine to kill the Jews or it's fine to kill the Palestinians or it's fine to kill the white people. After all, it's payback time. He didn't say any of those things. God Almighty said thou shalt not kill. It's really simple.

[00:31:59] And I don't want government creating these division motivated terms that divide people, that make crimes supposedly worse because of a what we're going to determine your motivations, your intentions now and determine we know what they really are or were. Folks, we're all God's children. We need to behave that way.

[00:32:23] So my whole point for speaking out about this and having a big old conversation about this, Dr. Bradley, and I know we've talked about this several times, but it's primarily to say we have got to stop this. Where's Doge to dig into the hate crimes division and shut it down? Okay. Now, you got an executive order by President Trump to expand this and say, hey, we're going to stamp out anti-Semitism.

[00:32:49] So what if I say, Dr. Bradley, I don't support Israel and I don't support the deep state of Israel that has been literally fighting forever. And I don't support them in their warmongering mentality, their military industrial complex. They're relying on the American people to fund their shenanigans. I don't support that at all. Period. End of paragraph.

[00:33:16] Now, I do believe they have the right of self-defense just like everybody else. Now, is that an anti-Semitic statement, doctor? Well, it certainly would be presented in that light, I believe, in so many circles around the world and particularly, sadly, our U.S. Congress is adopting that perspective. Yeah, but I'm not saying do anything harm to them or that I hate them or that I'm just saying I don't want to fund them and back them. I want to stay out of it. I think they're wrong. I think they're killing and their needless killing. Acting as a victim is wrong.

[00:33:45] Now, they'll spin that web. I mean, honestly, you can hear them now. You know, the anti-defamation type league people, the southern poverty law type people are going to say, you know, your heart is filled with hate because of the way you're saying that. The actual application of U.S. intent is equal protection before the law.

[00:34:08] And this idea of trying to ascertain some racial or religious or gender or some other Bravo Sierra in there is truly Marxist in its origins because it is, you know, Marxism is a doctrine of conflict. Divide and conquer. Divide and conquer and destabilize. And let's make it so that nobody can get along until finally society unravels.

[00:34:33] And now, oh, they get their little entree into the, you know, the marketplace, if you will. So, so this really is Marxist in its origins. And I'm very disappointed to see what what Trump's doing. Listen, the recent Supreme Court decisions, the Supreme Court has been as doubled down on the idea that you can't do reverse discrimination. You know, for a long time you had these things, well, we're going to give special status to people because of the color of their skin to get into college or whatever, you know.

[00:35:02] And the Supreme Court saying, no, that that isn't the way it's supposed to be. And they just made it more kind of a more direct path, if you will, for a white Anglo-Saxon male to be able to sue for not getting a job that he was more qualified for than the person that got it. And this has been going on for so many decades now. It's going to take some time to unravel. I mean. It's going on since Cain killed Abel, my friend. Well, that may be true. I mean, but hate stuff.

[00:35:31] I mean, the Prince of Peace. Didn't Cain hate Abel because Abel was more successful than Cain was and all this kind of stuff? And so he hated him and wanted to take what he had? Well, it could, you know, it could be a socioeconomical kind of definition if you want to. But I think more than anything, Cain was just envious. Confirmed by the devil. And covetous and so on. And he just wanted. So he violated all the Ten Commandments, including murdering somebody? Sure. Now, was that a hate crime?

[00:36:01] Well, they probably wouldn't say so in the racial kinds of things that they have. I mean, they have the linear heritage and everything. Yeah, their linear heritage was the same. But it was still directed. I mean, it still was a violation of this thou shalt not kill. It violated the Prince of Peace's law, not man's law. Whoa. It violated the Prince of Peace law. Amen to that. That's called the Ten Commandments.

[00:36:31] That's God's law, not man's law. And that's my whole point is, look, any crime somebody commits is not committed out of kindness and love and peace and tranquility and safety and prosperity and stability and kindness and service. And all crimes are committed out of some kind of malice by nature of the crime, right? So really, any crime is a hate crime if you want to get that way about it.

[00:36:55] The problem that I have is when we slice and dice who, how, where, what, when, and then we slice and dice all the details surrounding and we go into the judgment of someone's heart. Look, every crime is a hate crime. What we're doing with all of these laws is giving special status or standing before the law for people that have been selected by government agencies as such. And we can go back to 2015. As, quote, protected.

[00:37:24] Special privilege groups, right? And we go back, for example, 10 years in Utah to an anti-discrimination law that they passed that was a total, they call it anti-discrimination, but it created discrimination. It created special classes of people and gave them special standing before the law based upon intimate behavior and upon status of, there were two groups that got created special status on one side.

[00:37:53] And then gender or sexual intimacy kind of thing on the other. The one side was churches and Boy Scouts got special standing before the law. They got special protection. That's right. And on the other side, these gender bender things happened. So they got special status before the law. And the people that have to fulfill that now have an obligation to fulfill a quote unquote right that they have. You know, you and I have a responsibility now.

[00:38:22] And that is not a right. That is not what God granted unto people. It is a special government created right that someone else now has the responsibility. Yeah. Okay. But somebody else has to fulfill it. Yes. And furthermore, somebody else has to decide where those quote special, that special privilege list, if you will. And then that we're against you list. So the favored and the people who are not favored.

[00:38:51] Both of those lists now have to be prioritized. So if you kill a gay person, is it worse than killing a black person, doctor? According to the law, it's kind of fuzzy right now because they're both special classes. Yeah. But to me, see, here's the deal. It's simple. You killed a gay person. You killed a black person. You killed a white person. All those things are coming lack of murder. And they have penalties as they should. And it's wrong. It's evil.

[00:39:20] And that's all there is to it. I don't know how to categorize those, doctor. Those three killings are wrong is all I'm telling you. The equal protection before the law or equal standing before the law. You know, see, that's the problem is we're trying to create a, shall we say, a spectrum. Now, just for a second, just humor me for a second. Sure. Let's say we, you don't need to humor me, but let me just suppose a case.

[00:39:47] Let's suppose a law was created that says if you kill someone of Anglo-Saxon descent that's middle-aged or older, that has this socioeconomic status is a worse crime than if you killed, you know, pick any of the other definitional terms that you might want to. The public would be up in arms. What do you mean this white guy gets to be treated with more respect or his privilege his whole life?

[00:40:15] He's a racist, and now he's got special protection. See, that's the thing. People would just come up in arms. Is that a status forever, especially since, quote, World War II? Well, that's what's created and facilitated the creation of the modern state of Israel. Again, this has nothing to do with somebody's genetic and lineal descent stuff. What it has to do with is a philosophy called Zionism with the modern state of Israel.

[00:40:44] And Zionism is a militaristic organization. It's a propaganda philosophy, right? It is, absolutely. And the fact of the matter is that I guess I will say without my knowledgeable exception, I mean, I can't think of an exception to this, where any of the early Zionist leaders, you know, the David Ben-Gurians, the Golda Meyers, the Menachem Bagans of the world, those guys that are considered the founding fathers of the modern state of Israel, were anything but rabid socialists.

[00:41:13] Now, David Ben-Gurian wanted to be the Lenin of the Middle East. I mean, these people came in with a political philosophy that was tyrannical in its basis. And the modern state of Israel is a socialist state that's humanist in its perspective in terms of its belief system. And it's full of hate crimes for the Palestines. Man alive. Man alive.

[00:41:40] Anyway, I know this sounds like we're going around in circles, folks, but we're hoping to make some valuable points. Let's bring it now to the Jeffrey Epstein scenario. Oh, there's a hate crime. Is Epstein a Jewish name there, doctor? I do believe that he has an alignment with the modern state of Israel, perhaps even to the Mossad, and some of the underhanded things that he's doing for what they would call intelligence gathering to be leveraged against people. I don't know that for a fact. Yeah, but there you have it.

[00:42:10] So that's interesting in and of itself. But here's the deal. The DOJ now released, quote, phase one of, quote, the Epstein files to a, quote, group of conservative influencers, they say. And the documents reportedly contain few new revelations. Oh, wow. The release, they say, will be over 100 pages.

[00:42:38] Includes a list of, quote, contacts. But listen to this. But the initial release will not include a client list. So I don't really know what including contacts without a client list means. But that's what they're saying. The initial reveal, they say, will be a disappointment for those waiting for evidence about convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's ties to incredibly high profile individuals, the source told the outlet.

[00:43:09] I don't know how to respond to this, and I'll tell you why. So we get a big old nothing burger. It reminds me of the 40,000 hours of J6 video we were supposed to get. Hey, we're going to release it all. We're going to double down. We're going to get it done. You know, Mike Johnson was in whatever was before Mike. What was that guy's name? Devin? Whatever. Oh, yeah. Okay. But I thought you were talking about Pelosi. Mike, what's his name? Devin?

[00:43:38] Who was the speaker before Mike Johnson? Do you remember? Yeah. I'll have to look it up. Anyway, I think his name is Devin. Something. But anyway, here's my point. What does this mean now? We were promised this big release. We were promised the release of the JFK files. We're promised the release of this. Now they say, hey, we had this big old dump of over 100 pages. But there's nothing in it. Oh, yeah. Kevin. Not Devin.

[00:44:08] Kevin McCarthy. Yes, yes, yes, yes. Thank you. Appreciate that, Jay. Producer Jay is doing a great job looking up things because I'm getting old and my mind's not going very well, comparatively speaking. Right? Anyway, but here's what I'm saying. We don't have anything. Now let me read the headline again to you with some context now that I've built the context for it. The DOJ released phase one of the Epstein files to a group of conservative influencers.

[00:44:37] Now, wait a minute. I was told that it was going to be released. But if you release it to a group of people, you released the hours of J6 video to a very limited group of people. So first off, when you say we've released phase one, why only phase one? Well, Sam, we got to look through phase two to see what you can see.

[00:45:03] You know, we got to redact and we got to at the end of the day, doctor, it's a game. They're not releasing anything. You know, nothing more than you knew yesterday. It's a clown show. This guy's a criminal. This guy's a pervert. This guy's a convicted sex offender. He supposedly died by suicide in his cell, which I don't believe for a second. And now we're supposed to get all the ties to this guy. We're supposed to get big pay dirt. And they say, well, we released the first version to a few specially hand-selected influencers.

[00:45:33] It'll be over 100 pages. It includes contacts, but not a, let's see, not a client list. What does contacts, but not a client list mean? And then the initial reveal will be a disappointment for those waiting for evidence. And I just go, I don't even understand it now. It's just nothing but a dog and pony show, a clown show. Why phase one? Why not just release it? If you're going to go through and redact it all and we don't see anything, then what's the point of releasing it? Same thing with the JFK files.

[00:46:02] Have you seen a single thing that you didn't know before Trump took office or RFKJR got, let's see, advice and consent got approval from the Senate? Okay. What have we seen on this stuff? They haven't released anything, doctor. You know, this idea of redacting the victims, the girls and boys, I mean, I'm sure there was a sexual predator kind of activity that was going on against both boys and girls.

[00:46:31] I can see protecting those victims' names and not releasing them for, you know, whatever is going to hurt them. But the fact of the matter is this probably is a high- And I get that, but that's not what we're talking about. No, I know. High profile. I think they have high-profile clients, everything from the royalty and the British crown, if you will, clear through very, very, very, shall we say, well-known individuals in the United States.

[00:46:58] I mean, let's say some people that might have run the COVID scam, for example, that had a big impact on that. These people impacted all of America's lives, and by the way, they were predators of young people or old people, whomever got involved in the thing. But I think that what's happening is a protection scam that's going on. I mean, so far we got the madam. What's her name? Giselle Maxwell? Is that her name? Anyway. Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine, whatever.

[00:47:28] Sounds like some kind of African creature. I don't know. The animals that are out there running around on the plains. Anyway. Anyway. Ghislaine? Yeah, Ghislaine. Ghislaine, huh? Yeah. So anyway, we have one conviction, and we have probably... What do you mean we have one conviction of Ghislaine? Yeah, she got sent to jail. Yeah, but is she really convicted of what? I think she was procuring or some silly thing like that. Yeah. I mean, she was the madam.

[00:47:58] Yeah. But here's the deal. I mean, we get Epstein. He gets eliminated while he's in jail. Did she get convicted of a hate crime doctor? Well, no. They don't know the race of the girls that were... I mean, come on. It doesn't matter. If you literally procure little girls to destroy what God calls most precious, meaning their virginity or their... Virtue. Virtue. Virtue. And you destroy that, and you're the procurer.

[00:48:25] You're the lead agent to create that forced eventuality. That's premeditated as it gets. Isn't that a hate crime doctor? Well, it sounds as hateful as anything you can think about, but we're on board with this. But no, it's not a hate crime, ladies and gentlemen, because there's not a Jew involved, right? Well, Epstein probably is, and she... I don't know. Wait a minute. So now a Jew has an agent that procures women for him, and we're not going to call any of this hate crimes against anybody that's not a Jew?

[00:48:56] Well, her family's ties into the Mossad and the apparatchik, if you will. Those guys aren't Jewish, are they? I've heard there's some involved. But the fact of the matter is that those people that were perpetrating this, basically it's rape of a child. You know, you think about it. That's right. But I have a whole bunch of other problems about this.

[00:49:20] I mean, going to a special interest group, some kind of, you know, these guys are MAGA supporters. I don't know what you're calling them, but these guys that got this stuff. What happens about bringing it to light and allowing prosecutorial activity to begin? And, yeah, let's protect these young people, these old people, whoever it was, the girls and boys that were victims.

[00:49:48] Let's protect their names and put them, you know, this is Doe or John or whoever. But the fact of the matter is, where's the prosecution on this? And if Bill Clinton... Well, so here's, let me tell you the deal. White House counselor. By the way, I think they need to change the name of the White House, though. That's pretty anti-Semitic, that White House. I'm just saying. No, it's not anti-Semitic. It's racist. Oh, yeah. Isn't racist anti-Semitic, too? All right.

[00:50:15] But they changed the master bedroom concept to a primary suite. Yeah, you can't be having those slave bedrooms, you know. Okay. Anyway, so White House counselor, her name is Alina Hava. She's the attorney for President Trump. Says criminal charges are absolutely coming in wake of Epstein-less release. Jack Davis over at WesternJournal.com with this piece. Now, I appreciate that.

[00:50:45] Do you have any confidence, doctor? Little or none, slim or none, whatever you want to call it. Here's the deal. These people are in high places. And Jeffrey Epstein, Stein, however he said his name, he had his place wired for sound and video, guys. I mean, everything that went on in that house has been documented electronically. And if that stuff can be- Well, we lost the moon landings and the Epstein records, doctor.

[00:51:14] We're sorry to tell you that, you know. Well, they can't even figure out how to get back to the moon because the science has been lost, right? Those beach blitz glitches are a problem, you know? And Building 7 fell down on its own, too, right? Well, of course it did. I mean, holy cow. I mean, how dare you even question that? What are you, some kind of a psycho conspiracy- A conspiracy theorist. Okay. So my problem with this, folks, is I understand.

[00:51:40] But, man, we never got the 40,000 hours of J6 video. We got a few leaked stuff or whatever you want to say, controlled permission stuff. They let Tucker Carlson and a few people go in and conduct a search or two or gave them what they wanted them to see or whatever else. We haven't had that released at all. Kevin. Transparency. McCarthy lied. McCarthy. McCarthy lied. Mike Johnson didn't carry it out. He lied.

[00:52:08] Now they say, oh, you're going to get the Jeffrey Epstein files. Everybody looked forward to yesterday. Boom. Now they come back and they say, well, it's a big old nothing burger. But don't worry. People are going to jail over it. I'm telling you right now. What? What? And then we all come back and say, well, we can't dare call that a hate crime because Jeffrey Epstein, hey, that guy's Jewish. And I don't know what, you know, nationalities Ghislaine is or whatever. But I look at that whole thing and I go, man, if there were of any hate crimes, Ghislaine and Jeffrey Epstein were at the center of those.

[00:52:37] And all the people that are on that quote, I don't know what list you want to call it, contact list. What do you call it? A contact list, but not a client list. I'm not really sure what that means. But, okay, so none of the clients then of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, clients would be perpetrators, I guess, if you, you know. Okay, we're not really going to, you know, drill into who those are. We already know Bill Clinton was on the list.

[00:53:07] So, Elena Hava, have you arrested Bill? See, I believe this is all just smoke and mirrors. I think we're just being played like a fiddle with misdirection, doctor. I'm just looking at a posed picture of the people coming out with their little binders. You know, this is phase one binder and they're called, you know, influencers. What the heck is that? Is that like a TikTok influencer or they're conservative influencers?

[00:53:37] It's a new media. They call them influencers because they have followers and they, you know, they influence society. Okay. But who got on the influencer list? Well, I'm not on that list. I mean, obviously. How do you get on that list? I literally went to whitehouse.gov slash new media and signed up. Well, you ought to be closer to me. How do you get on the list, buddy? Well, you see, you're not a big enough influencer.

[00:54:01] Well, then I'm saying if you're dividing influencers like that, I'm saying you've now abused me in a hate crime denouncing me as an influencer. I'm not as worthy of an influencer as the next guy. Folks, I'm telling you right now, this smacks of propaganda at the least. And I'm not here to attack Trump. I am here to say, hey, are we really going to get to the bottom of this stuff or not? And I submit to you that we're not. How much of the JFK release have you seen?

[00:54:29] I've been looking for that for like 62 years. I know, but you're supposed to get that, you know, right? When Trump rolled in, he's been there for like, you know, what, over a month? I may have more information on the JFK thing than they've got. I mean, based on my investigation. God save the Republic, people. Thank you.