Published May 19, 2025, 9:01 a.m.
9am Vicky Davis Technocratic Communism The United Nations as an organization is world communism. The strategy to impose world communism on the people of the United States (and the other countries in this hemisphere) has been economic rather than military as the people were led to believe it would be. It's our own leaders who were the Pied Pipers leading us to this demise of the U.S. I'm working on a timeline that shows the who, when and what. 10am Christina Urso - Christina Urso is the independent journalist who made “Kidnap and Kill”, the documentary based on the FBI entrapment plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Starting all the way back in 2020, Urso breaks down the FBI’s involvement with a group of 13 men who were speaking out against Whitmer’s tyrannical lockdown policies. Beyond just the fishy stuff happening on the surface, the FBI seems to have been pushing this ‘plot’ along much more than we realize. Whitmer Kidnapping plot dominated the news in 2020. Bill and Mike Null, twin brothers, were among 14 men charged in connection to the 2020 plot. In the broader contest of the plot, and allegations of FBI entrapment makes us question the FBI involvement for questionalble purposes. Bill and Mike were not among the 6 charged federally but were part of the seven charged in a state court. They will be recounting their story of entrapment through weaponized FBI informants colluding to produce evidence, funding activities, and ignoring suspects objections to kidnapping. Posts on X reflect public sentiment, with some users calling the plot a "FEDnapping hoax" entirely driven by the FBI, citing the Nulls' acquittals and informant involvement as proof of entrapment. 11am Daniel Richard - Daniel Richard, a constitutional scholar from New Hampshire has brought a case against the state, which claims that N.H. election laws have been illegally altered by the executive and legislative branches of the state government over the years, without the consent of the voters, thereby making the legislature’s actions unconstitutional. On Monday, October 30, 2023, the New Hampshire Supreme Court, on their own initiative, scheduled oral arguments for November 29th, 2023 at 9am, in a highly-anticipated election law case of Daniel Richard vs. Governor Chris Sununu, et al. involving the executive and legislature branches of government repeatedly violating the voting rights of Mr. Richard, and the people of this State, by altering the mandatory election provisions of the Constitution of New Hampshire established by the people by legislative fiat. This case poses the following questions. Who is qualified to voter in New Hampshire? Who is qualified to vote absentee in this State? Who is required to “sort,” “count” and certify the votes in the towns and cities? Are voting machines constitutional in N.H? Can the legislature delegate its law-making power under the State and U.S. Constitutions to an unelected body of bureaucrats (the NH Ballot Law Commission) to make election laws (including voting machine laws), and the ability to suspend State and Federal election laws? The use of vote tabulation equipment to conceal the counting of un-verified and uncertified absentee ballots and the illegal certification of the elections results. X/Twitter: https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1BRJjmyRMQgGw Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/636616148890812/videos/1793855378141411 Rumble: https://rumble.com/v6tks59-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-5192025-davis-nullurso-supreme-court-case-dani.html https://rumble.com/v6tks3j-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-5192025-davis-nullurso-supreme-court-case-dani.html Odysee: https://odysee.com/@BrandenburgNewsNetwork:d/20250519-0901-BNN-_Brandenburg-News-Network_-5_19_2025-Davis_-Null_Urso_-Supreme-Court-Case-Daniel-Richard:8 Guests: Donna Brandenburg, Vicky Davis, Bill Null, Mike Null, Christina Urso, Daniel Richard
Good morning and welcome to Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg and it's the So today we have Vicki Davis on the technocratic tyranny. And after her at nine o'clock, we have Christina Urso with the Null Brothers again, talking about more nonsense going on within our government. Christina is an independent journalist and she was she's been following the fed napping of the fraud that the Null Brothers got caught up in. And then after that, I'm really looking forward to this interview at eleven o'clock with Daniel Richard. He is a gentleman I met at the National Constitution Party Convention. And I really, really they had wonderful speakers. They really did. And he was one of the speakers. He actually has a pro se case that made it to the Supreme Court. of New Hampshire. And it looks like he's winning. And the basis for this case, it's been going on for a while now, it's completely constitutional. It's constitutional issues. And that's where he stayed, which I think was brilliant on his part. But anyway, well-educated, fun to listen to, just totally a firebrand. I mean, just good, good guy. And so anyhow, I'm going to bring Vicki on right now. Hey, Vicki, how are you doing this morning? Hi, just fine. Thank you. Yeah. So we were talking, we actually had some time to talk this morning before we started because we're friends. I mean, if you talk to somebody as much as Vicki and I talk to each other every single week for how long now, you kind of get to know each other a little bit. And we got talking about the DNR, which being my, probably one of my biggest pet peeves besides the election integrity issues or non-integrity, because we have none in the state of Michigan, it's all theft and manipulation. It's all manipulation. All of it is. We live in an illusion, the entire thing. And we're going to have to get real smart as a country to be able to peel off the layers of illusions because it's layers. It's like if I were like Shrek. It's layers, ogres have layers. Well, this whole thing has layers and we need to get them peeled away. So there was a issue with a copper mine that came up this past weekend again, because they're putting it in front of the legislature One of the biggest issues is ruining Lake Superior with a runoff of this copper mine. And I do think that this is a big deal because once again, these idiots keep coming back to jumping onto our state land and and deciding it's all theirs, that they can just take it and do with it what they want. So it's just a face value. This thing is a this thing is a bad idea. OK, we're just trading out the pilfering of our resources for the loss of the resources for the people of Michigan. That's all it is. When I was up at Trout Lake, So I have a really great bit of information for everybody. It's going to make you happy. So I've been working with the people up at Trout Lake a little bit to help in that effort. Many efforts across the state that I've been helping with. I helped the people that defeated the millage up in Midland. And they did defeat it. They got a seventy five or so percent of the votes voted it down. And it was bad. It was such a bad bit of promise that can't be keep nonsense, which is all they do. Everything they do is just telling us what they're going to do. But they never do a damn thing. It's incredible. And anybody buying into their nonsense is as stupid as they are, in my opinion. You know, it's like, look at all the proposals we've passed, the proposals that we passed that were highly manipulative. And I'm going to dive into these next candidates that these these these actor candidates that they're pushing forward and I can substantiate my claims. But let's go back to the Highland Copper Company that plans to develop a four hundred and twenty five million dollar copper mine. Oh, big numbers. We're going to like shock and awe everybody with big numbers. Right. And in Gojabeck County, that will increase three hundred and eighty jobs. Allegedly, what's going to hold them accountable to that? And what kind of jobs are they? That's what I want to know. for the region and generate allegedly one hundred and twenty one million dollars in tax revenue over an eleven year lifespan. Now, I'm going to say right now that if you had a bull shit meter going, this is about at approximately ninety eight percent bull. OK, and the reason why I say that is because they're going to throw one hundred twenty one million dollars into the general fund or somewhere else. Where do we see the benefit for this? Zero. Zero. Zero benefit will go to the people on this. And the legislature needs to be held accountable for their choices on this. This is a theft from the people to put it into a fund that they can money launder to every idiot thing across the planet that they can put it into or things that are part of a Koretsu that they're part of in a supply line that they get paid back on the backside or that they get dark money to fund their campaign. That's what we're seeing. When you and I, the slave class here gets nada, zero, nothing, strike it right off the books. And then they're going to do the same thing they did up at Trout Lake. And that would be keeping us off our own land and clear cutting and take, they're not just going to go in the copper mine. You let them take one inch of that land and it's going to be all of a sudden a public private partnership. They own, you will never sit foot on that land again, nor will your children or grandchildren for any reason whatsoever. And not only that guaranteed, it's going to pollute the purity of, of, uh, of, uh, Lake Superior. And this is in the Porcupine Mountains. They're going after all of these sites which encourage tourism in the state of Michigan. Michigan's number one industry, number one and number two, it vacillated back and forth, but generally it's number one. for the state of Michigan is tourism. Trout Lake, by draining and getting rid of all of these dams, which control the water supply, controls droughts as well as flooding, gives us the ability to fish them. They've already destroyed all the fisheries in the state. We used to have one in every single county. We don't anymore. They're destroying our food supply. And so now with this, are we just going to let these idiots walk in that are part of the big corporations and steal everything in our state land and all of a sudden make it be, it's a great thing. And how come Eagle, here's another question. How come they came up with Eagle, which is energy, all about energy partnership on our public land? Screw them. The DNR and Eagle, Eagle has no right to exist. And the DNR completely went off the rails. So, I mean, I could go on on this for a while. I'm telling you, it's just like ax my tax nonsense. They're trying to fix bad legislation and bad protocols with more legislation. The only way to fix this is nullification. You don't just layer more nonsense on top of each other to fix situation. Yeah. That's why I've spent so much time on... the President's Council on Sustainable Development during the Clinton administration because they redesigned our government to be the protectors, allegedly, the protectors of the environment and screw the people. Oh, they don't care about us. And they use that. Oh, we're doing this for your security, your safety. Don't you feel like it's like the child catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang that offers a lollipop? Lollipop? Come with me and I'll give you a lollipop. It's what we want to hear. It's a headline nonsense. It's absolutely astounding. The internet was new, of course, in nineteen ninety three. So the Clinton administration was the first administration to have a website. And I'm so grateful that that they took advantage of that and posted all of these reports that were produced. I mean, they had a big twenty five member advisory committee that included environmentalists, business and citizen groups and government. And they completely redesigned the making the the basis of policy in the United States about protecting and preserving the environment. allegedly okay and so I've posted a website I I think I gave you the link to it last week but I'll give it to you again because I've been working on it and I'm going to continue to work on it until I get all of those reports pace put on the website along with summaries so that you can see what they did. The one I'm working on now is the first one in the first phase that they had this council operating. And the report that they produced was, let me find it here. The first, Sustainable America, a new consensus for the prosperity opportunity and a healthy environment for the future. That was in nineteen ninety six when they published it. And what what their actions, they were focused on business at that time and they were convening groups of businesses that were related. And that essentially was the beginning of establishing supply chain management systems with corporations colluding with each other working together um supposedly on environmental issues to preserve the environment well really what they were doing was building business cartels and you know, when you've got cartels are all about power, right? Yeah. It's like a union. The unions are run by the bankers and you know, it's like, it's just, it's, it is an insidious grab for money and power. And these people will never have their appetites satisfied for it. Oh, absolutely not. Because no matter how much social messaging people, a corporation does, it is simply that, just corporate messaging. Their objective is to make money, period, end of story. And so the money that they give to foundations and different groups, that's buy-off money. That's bribe money. You bet it is. It's silencing people as well as buying their favor when they back the candidates in office. That is precisely why I would not take the dark money or the dark money or the PAC money. I wouldn't have accepted it. If somebody else wanted to run a PAC, I don't really care, but I don't want to be involved in it because fundamentally it is absolutely a lack of integrity and it is wrong. Yeah, well, and that's one thing that the Department of Justice should be looking at is these concentrations of power. And the supply chains obviously are concentrations of power. These organizations of foundations, where you've got one foundation, like the Tides Foundation and all of the groups that belong to that, all feeding money into the system. Well, that is a concentration of power. And the fact that they're nonprofits means nothing Their objective is to raise money, to get money. Their corporate contributions are buy-off money. And basically, they're working together, corporations and foundations, working against we the people. And so that's really what they need to look at is all of this concentration of power, regardless of what group it is. Well, that's one of the problems that I have with when you look at, say, like the DeVosses just gave five million dollars to John James. The DeVosses are very much part of establishing the connections with China. That's exactly what they're. So when when they gave John James and the candidates that they support immediately, I look at that and I'm like, no, we're done with that. We're done with this and that. And then I don't know. It's like I'm not I'm not buying into any of this nonsense. Yeah. Well, if you understand, I mean, you know, you never think about it because we just live in the environment. But if you think what we have is a government for protecting the environment, who are they protecting? They're protecting it from us. Yeah. Well, and when you go and see where they have, here, I'm trying to get a good spot here. When you see where, and you get on the state land and see how they're denying entry, to the state land unless there's an area that's the largest field drug trial area in the United States up by Gladwin. And I was up there. They've got the paths blocked off. So the areas that they've determined that this organization can be on denies all the rest of the people of Michigan the right to be there. And I don't get this. It's like, how do they have the right to just take something that is mine, that I own as a resident of Michigan and just say, well, you can't do this anymore because we're going to give it to the field trial guys. And I want to know how many days out of the year Are they on that property? I'm going to say probably not a lot of them, not a lot. And so how come it's, it's now denied in the trails are blocked off for the entire year. How come you can't go out there with say like, like, um, horses or bikes, but you can with snowmobiles in the winter. What worse that, where is the, the, um, the, um, rationale to this? And how much is this field trial organization lobbying or paying to have that right? Well, yeah, I was telling you before we started that there's a congresswoman, and I believe she's from Montana, called Harriet Hagman. And she did an interview recently, and she was talking about the roadless act and I think it was passed either in the sixties or the seventies somewhere around there um but basically they wanted to to have all of our forest area all of our recreation areas be roadless so that you can't get to them oh that makes sense I've seen it yeah out here In the West, we have these parks that are hundreds, tens of thousands of acres. And the Forest Service, it even prevents the Forest Service from getting in there to fight fires. So it was just, it was an insane thing to do. And they were told that apparently at the time the legislation was passed, but they didn't care. They wanted one rule for the entire country. Collectivism. Yeah, and that's exactly what the Clinton administration did. They converted our country to a communist country under the guise of environmentalism. And that's why I'm spending so much time on these reports from the President's Council on Sustainable Development. Because that's where it started. And that's where the dirty deeds are in the reports. All you got to do is read the reports. And you'll see the corruption of our government for what they were doing. I mean, think about that. A government for protecting the environment from the people. Yeah, I'm pretty extra sure that we're not wrecking it. It's just sort of like when they say that they want to get everything out of the hands of the fishermen, the sportsmen, and the hunters. So I think that this is one of the best examples that I can put out there of their complete and utter stupidity and idiocy. so we had a problem with moose up north okay and so what did they do they decided to drop wolves in to take care of the moose population well then because there's no predators for wolves we had a wolf problem so then they had to hire more people in the government to shoot the wolves to get rid of the wolf problem now a thinking person you know it's like a thinking person might want to go to eliminating steps two and three and letting the hunters take care of the moose. If there really was a problem, which I don't even believe there was actually that big of a problem. I think they're there to destroy the natural resources that they would let the hunters come and harvest it and use it for food. But it's about starving us out. And I think there's one Island up, up North. And I think it, I'm not sure if it's Isle Royal or what is that they dropped wolves on. There's nothing alive on that thing. They've got that. They've got that Island and, completely devoid of wildlife as in rabbits or anything smaller than a freaking wolf because the wolf's gonna bring it down so so what now now what now what do you got you got nothing you got these idiots dropping cougars into michigan oh great No, no, I'm serious. You know what? And the funny thing is, is that I knew a guy who's a Native American guy, a friend of mine years ago. I haven't talked to him in many, many years. And it was he was telling me he's a horse guy. Right. And he was telling me that his neighbor, he was funny. He grew up on the border of Mexico in the United States. And his parents put him out in a little shack on the border on their farm and gave him a shotgun and said, said, protect this at twelve years old. Okay. That's the way it used to be. And he was, he's a tough kid. He was a tough kid. He was a tough, tough man. Right. And so he's a horse guy and he had a neighbor that called and this is probably, I'm going to say when, when he first told me the story, I'm going to say it was better than twenty years ago. So they've been here. We just didn't see them. And this was over in Port Huron. He said his neighbor called. And showed him, he said, man, something attacked one of my horses. He went over there and looked at him. He said, only thing that does that to a horse, that's a cougar. He said, that's a cougar attack. We have them in Michigan. They're pretty stealthy. I was up in Idaho years ago, too. And it was really funny because when we walked away from a center, I was up by visiting friends who pastored a church up there. And then we went up to Sun Valley was pretty cool, really pretty. We went to a nature and interpretive center. We talked to some people there and they said, just remember, if you're out on the trail, it doesn't matter where you are. There's a cougar that can see you. That's got its eyes on you up here. And that's just the way it is. So but you're not going to see them. They don't like come out. They're not going to say, hey, I'm here. come and pet me, right? That's not what they do. They're not as interested in people as they would be in other types of prey. We're a little bit more, unless they're really hungry. It's like the coyotes in Michigan. We have coyotes all over the place down here. Coyotes are not a problem unless they're really super hungry. They will go after, they'll go after, oh, mostly rabbits, you know, anything that's, that's, you know, easy food source and or mice, chipmunks, squirrels, that sort of thing. But they'll go after, they'll go after bigger prey if they don't, if they're hungry. Yeah, that makes sense. Well, that's the way it was when I was a kid. They, we had the forest service that managed the forest and they did a good job at, And the state also would, they paid bounties on, well, we didn't have wolves. They transplanted wolves back into Idaho and they're Canadian timber wolves that were never native here. But they would put bounties on the predators. you know, that were dangerous for people. If the predators stayed out, you know, out in the wilderness area, they were fine. But if they came into populated areas, you just shoot them, collect a bounty on it. Yep. Well, and I tell you, I've got another I have really funny friends. OK, I like I like unusual people and funny friends. So I had a friend once again years ago when before the world changed a little bit. he was driving out in an area. It's pretty close to an urban area. And he sees this mom and he was, he was a varmint hunter. Okay. He actually went to Purdue to learn how to trap and get rid of pests, you know? So that's what he did. So he's, he's driving down the road and he saw this mom with a kid in a stroller and a child following her on a bike. She wouldn't pay attention to anything. So he pulled up, he had, he had a, he had a firearm in the car. And he pulled up next to her and he had the firearm affixed or attached or pointed to the coyote that was following the child on the bike. And it was stalking the child on the bike. And so he pulled up next to her. So this is kind of a freaky, freaky thing. And he's pulled up and he's got this firearm out the window and she had to be just absolutely freaking out. I'm like, are you out of your mind? you know? And, but what he ended up doing is he pulled up and he said, lady, you got a coyote and he's stalking your, he's stalking your child. And, and he's like, you, you, you can't be out here unless you have some protection. Cause he said, I'm going to tell you what that coyote is going to do. It's going to grab your kid by the throat and disappear down in the ditch and you'll never see him again. So, and, and it was, so he just, he just kept, he got him out of harm's way and I'm pretty sure he took care of the coyote. but this is the way the real world kind of works that city people do not understand when when we're out on the trails you there's there's a shocking amount of wildlife that that you come against and uh you see that people would be pretty uh pretty uh taken back by let's put it that way yeah well After I graduated high school, my friends and I, it used to be a tradition in Idaho that a lot of kids would go up to Yellowstone Park and work at the park, you know, in the summertime. And my girlfriend and I, after we graduated high school, we went up to West Yellowstone, which is right the entrance of the park there. And we rented a cabin to live in so we could work there, you know, and just have fun at the park and around the park. And this one night we heard some rattling of garbage cans and our cabin had just kind of like a slat door with like a hook chain. I mean, it was really cheesy, really cheesy. But so we peeked outside and there was this grizzly bear getting in the garbage. And my friend had a fifty seven Chevy with that had air shocks. And so it was taller than most cars, you know, because it pumped it up. This grizzly bear was taller. His back was taller than her car. And talk about messing your drawers, you know. We just quietly, you know, closed the door, hooked the hook, and just sat in the house and, you know, prayed that he wouldn't, you know, let him find good garbage tonight. Yeah, well, you know, and it's just like this wolf thing, okay? You know, you're not going to argue with a pack of wolves, right? You're not going to you're not going to negotiate with them. They don't negotiate. This is not this is not this peaceful. Oh, we're going to live with a wolf situation. You know, I'm sure it's probably happened. But let's just say a normal situation. That's just not how they think. Yeah. Well, every year for as long as I can remember, I haven't kept track, you know, over the last ten years or so because I've been busy. But every year. people got killed in Yellowstone by bears because they, they couldn't, apparently couldn't absorb the idea that a wild animal would actually kill them. You know, Moose are like, man, you hit a moose on the road. It's not like a white tail deer. You're going to cancel Christmas. Yeah. I didn't know about it, but I also lived up in Alaska and my son had to cross a field you know, to get to his school. He was fifteen, I think. And I didn't know about it, but he told me that there were moose out in that field, and I about missed my drawers, you know, because they will attack people, you know. Do you ever watch the videos on YouTube videos or something like that where people decide it's a good idea to see if they can get a good picture with the wildlife that's out there? And almost every single time they get handed their tail. It's like when I was up in Gladwin, it was real interesting because bears are starting to come out of hibernation up there. This is only like, this is not that far north from where we live. In fact, my mom and dad's house is about, oh, twenty-five minutes from, this is twenty-five minutes from where I currently live. We had bears out there in the orchards, and people would be shocked at that. I didn't see them often. They didn't come down south that often, but they're there, and the potential is there. Now, the black bears we have in Michigan are like a freaking like a big lab. Okay. It's not like, it's not, it's like a large size raccoon. You know, it's not like they're the big grizzly bears, but you get a mom that's coming out of hibernation that, you know, your chances for survival, if you're out there and you, and she gets threatened or whatever, it's probably not very good. Yeah. Well, They have big teeth and big claws, even if they're small. And like most people, if they're hangry, guess what? You're the snack. Yeah. Yeah, no, I've never been crazy about going out into the wilderness. Not only because of the animals, but human predators as well. Okay, that brings us up to another great subject here with the DNR and the Forestry Services and everything. I'm completely convinced. So tonight, just so everybody knows, I've got a special show on tonight at nine o'clock. It's another story, yet another story of CPS, the largest human trafficking organization in North America, maybe the world because they're connected in with other ones. and how much they get paid for kidnapping kids. There was a family that decided not to get their newborn vaccinated, and they called CPS on them, ran them down, and took all five of their kids. Yeah, oh, I've heard lots of horror stories. I despise these people. It's just like the DNR. I despise these godless, wretched things that are walking around pretending to be human beings when they're not. They're child predators. It's disgusting. So I've got that on at nine o'clock. But I'm going to go back to the fact that that I completely believe that these organizations are using the state land not just for resources but they can they can slither around like the like the gutless snakes they are and disappear people and people they're using this to traffic that's why they're in charge of the waterways and such I'm completely convinced of this Yeah, well, that's why I spend so much time on the President's Council for Sustainable Development is because they turned our government around on us. It became a government to protect the environment, natural resources and whatever. At least this is the marketing of what they did. And to hell with the people. Now, who would pay for government to protect the environment when they say, screw the people? You know, that's not what our government is supposed to be about. It's organized crime. And what they're after is the resources as well as being able to manipulate the people. And when you look at how many kids have disappeared, they're not protecting anything. Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, I... Well, that brings up an interesting point about the United Nations. You know, what we found out during that COVID scandemic was that they put people, animals, and plants all in the same category. Because they farm us. We're just all equals, you know, under the WHO system. And everything is so distorted, so demented, so twisted that people really, and I'm like you, you know, I believe in going back to the beginning. Where did this start? What did they do? How can we roll it back and fix it? Because if you just patch on bad legislation or bad laws, if you just patch, patch, patch, then you'll never fix your government. You never will because they went off on a wrong path. And it's that path that must be corrected. Well, you know, and And I think it comes down to relearning critical thinking and analysis. I just don't see that many people that have that skill. The ones that they allow in front of us, they're only mouthpieces. They're puppets. They're mouthpieces. And the legislation that we're passing, I'm going to go back to the poster child for idiocy, which is ask my tax. right this whole thing is such a bunch of nonsense and I've got so much research done on this at this point in time oh you should see my report on why the fundamentals of this are so backwards you do not fix situation by more legislation you fix it by nullification you've got to go back To the basic premise, go back to the Constitution instead of layering it on. Every time we see something like this where people buy into the headlines, they're buying in the people that are pushing it. They're all in bed together because you see them continue to pop up again. They're always popping up together. Always. on new stuff but anyhow you you've got to go back to the constitution and not layer it on and if you can't do that then god forbid you know do an analysis on that to see who stands the most to gain okay I'm gonna I'm gonna say it right here I own a lot of real estate okay I stand to win more than the average person if property tax goes away OK, this is where real integrity comes forward. I don't really care about my personal wins because I'm I can make what I need to make and be happy because I'm not necessarily wanting to rule or own the world. OK, and but I do like things done correctly. So if I backed X my tax, I would have a huge and I mean, it's a huge amount of money that I would benefit from. But I can't do that because what they're doing is they're reassigning taxes. They're not getting rid of taxes. at all. They're going to reassign them, and they admitted this, that they're going to reassign taxes to the population at large, and they're using people who are property owners to go, oh, of course I want to get rid of this tax. Well, guess what? You're still going to pay it. They're just going to reassign it into other areas and be able to include more people into their tax theft that do not own properties. Yeah, that's all it is. That's all it is. And they're giving the total advantage to the corporations. How do you think that's going to work out? There's, there's a loophole there that allows them to benefit from it. They haven't addressed any of this. We've asked them to address this. They can't and they won't. And the only argument I got up, I ran into a guy named Fred that's connected, collected a thousand signatures. I'm like going, I can't even, I can't believe this. And And he's like, man, Carla Wanger doesn't like you. I'm like, well, I don't care if she likes me or not. You know, it's like I can actually back this up and say that I would gain if I back this. I'm not going to do it. It's wrong. And so the whole thing with the corporate loophole on this is that the corporations are picking up single family homes and That's what they're doing, and they're working alongside of the developers and city counselors and Fresh Coast and all of these other people that are city planners in order to self-enrich. They don't have any long-term plans or parasites. They pick up what's in front of them. But there's no long-term plan here. Well, there is. They just haven't articulated it. They're trying to get people out of homeownership into stack them and pack them. Keep talking, please. Stack them and pack them apartment complexes. They do not want you to own anything. It's exactly like Klaus Schwab says, you will own nothing and you'll be happy. Oh, that was fun. A fun. Too funny. I don't get I get harassment calls once in a while. I kind of figured this was one of them, but I was going to see what they said if I picked up. Oh, yeah. The whole deal with the tax system back in two thousand five. there was a really big to-do about the taxes that the government wasn't receiving. I mean, they destroyed our economy with globalization. And so in, I think it was, the tax revenues were the same as they were in nineteen fifty. So they were really desperate to do something about it. And they came up with the idea of the fair tax system, you know, eliminating income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax. Well, you know, and people always jump on that. Oh, yeah, great idea. Great freaking idea. But the catch is that because the tax base is so big, It would be a sales tax on everything, including your mortgage interest on your house. Oh, I'm so glad you brought this up. It's like people do not understand how they're using every mechanism that they have at their disposal to constantly just kick us in the face. Well, and they market things with clever labels that sound good and people jump on it without even knowing what the details are. Well, I posted that link to the story that I wrote on that. I listened to that hearing probably five times and I have recordings of the hearing because I wanted to make sure that I got it Because it's so, so important. Well, and this kind of analysis and listening to it, just like going back to all the proposals that they've come back to us with. If you think they're doing a damn thing for us, I got a bridge to sell you. Because if you're going to go on Stupidville, you know, it's like, let's just push this to the logical conclusion here, right? They have no interest. And they've all committed treason, the ones that are in office. Look at how they violated their oaths of office from top to bottom. They're only there because they were allowed to be there. And I got to tell you. Okay, can I go somewhere? There was a group of three of them that got up on stage this weekend, and I'm going to absolutely fry the three of them. In Michigan, ex-governor candidates that decided they're now going to come out together, and now they're going to be the force that's going to come out and talk about this. Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys. don't make me gut this whole thing and and then look at me going oh she's being mean again no no no no no I'm sorry I cannot I cannot sit here and watch people take the state and say all the right things that agnes and millie want to hear Well, they flirt with them and watch their state go away. Do you think that these people are there for no reason? I'm going to ask you some questions. Do you think that there was a real arrest or was it an arraignment? Why was the FBI changing clothes at a church parking lot across the street? Was it real? Were they in on it? Are they feds? Why? I'm going to ask these questions and make people have to answer them for themselves. I'm not going to spoof people because they wouldn't believe me if I told them anyway. I know somebody that had pictures that said that she saw pictures of one set J-Six insurrectionist coming from Michigan who was an ex-governor candidate that was supposedly incarcerated. She said the pictures looked like he was at a summer camp for kids. That's not a jail. How come that happened that way? Why was it that the police changed their clothes at a church? Why was it that he encouraged people to bring firearms into polling locations and schools and such, knowing he was encouraging people to be in harm's way? I'm done. And why was it that that person didn't stand for contesting the election when he had more Donors in one area, then he had boats. It's ridiculous. Now tell me, who are you following? A smile, a flirt, a fed? I know, people seem so easily manipulated. Oh my gosh. It's like I said, you know, the child catcher, candy, candy, you want a lollipop? And that's what these people are doing. Mm-hmm. Yeah, and it just, of course, you know, I've gotten so cynical. I wonder when people get together in a group, are they real people or are they paid shills? Or are they just, you know, shills for favors or whatever? I really question everything at this point. Because it's hard, but okay, I want to go back to the schools for a second. You were just talking about the schools. Sorry, I got off on a tangent here. I'm going to continue on these tangents. I mean, I can see connections. Oh, I mean, we could keep doing this for days, but... We could do this for days, maybe weeks and find all these connections. And the cool thing is, is you're one of the few people that I've talked to over the years that has literally the brain power to actually process this. And not only have you processed it, you've investigated it, documented and written it all down. Yeah, because that's the way I work. As a systems analyst, that was my job. You're freaking brilliant as much are. I mean, I'm going to tell you right now, you are brilliant. Well, I don't know. But anyway, when they reinvented our government, flipping it over to be protectors of the environment, They included the whole green agenda in our schools. And at that point, they stopped teaching logic and critical thinking and things like that. And they moved to a model that is emotional, based on emotion. And that's why you see all these young people that are just so, so ridiculous. They don't have the ability to think logically about anything. They throw these tantrums and everything is based on emotion. Well, I'm an emotional person, but I am a logical and analytical person first. So we need to go back to having the schools be academic, to teach them academics, math, reading, logic, comprehension. You know, the language, the structure of the language, so they can dissect a sentence and know what the sentence is saying. Our children are not being taught these essentials, the building blocks of being a functional adult in the society. And so I think that's why we have so much turmoil in our country. because it's all based on emotion. Yes. And, and you can't, when you're emotionally engaged, you cannot think. Exactly. And it's like, it's like, you can't, you, you, you're blown around. The Bible talks about it being blown around like a leaf being blown around here and there based on your surrounding. A stable person sits there and looks at surroundings and goes, well, well, well, you know, like a, like many, many things that come our way on a daily basis. You can sit there and look at them and go, well, well, well, guess what? I just let you own your own idiocy. I'm not going to get sucked into this nonsense. Yeah, the problem is, though, that they outnumber us. And it's such a shame, you know. Yeah, but, you know, if you have like, I don't know, this low IQ nonsense going on, they only outnumber us in things that don't matter. Yeah. You can outthink them. It's like, you know, you go up against a bunch of cavemen, you're still probably going to have the higher road. Well, The problem is they're controlling everything. So they are part of a society that is destroying people. If you don't have the ability to think something through, and I've met a lot of people, it's like their thinking is truncated. They hear the slogan, they absorb the slogan, and that's as far as it goes. They don't go beyond that. I tell you what, what I wish that my dad and my uncle Wayne were still here. They were built like fricking gladiators. I mean, my uncle Wayne was six foot seven solid muscle front to the day he died. And, you know, just like very, very tall, very, very, very, very smart. And I don't mean to say that just because they were smart. It was like both of them had minds like a fricking encyclopedia. And my uncle was a chemical engineer. He put up plants and, in the textile industries and such, but incredibly smart. And if they were still here, you know what? I probably wouldn't be doing anything because I know that they would have taken care of it. But you know what? There's just, if any of you out there, and I know that my audience is way more educated than most of the audiences out there, they wouldn't stick with us because we have way too much fact that comes into the discussion rather than headlines. We will actually go in, dissect it, look at why it's happening, and bring things forward to actually talk about and research. Most people that are in headlines, they're not going to stick with you that long. They're going to be like, oh, yeah, I want that candy. I want my property taxes gone. Come on, Millie, let's go make our orange yarn cats for the bake sale. You know, that sort of thing. And it's like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Research this and see how they're taking us captive. This is what they've been doing for decades and decades. They don't want us to question anything. Yeah, they don't. They just want you to swallow their propaganda campaign and don't think, just get out your wallet and pay. And I guarantee everybody, if you're buying into the consumption, their national sales tax system, please listen to the hearing that they held. back in two thousand and five because that and the um the numbers and the dates might change but the very essence of what they're talking about has not changed and the consumption tax it won't hurt people you know like you or me or whatever because we've basically purchased everything that that we need but young couples uh the elderly that are on fixed income um uh it it will kill them it will prevent them from ever buying a house because if you've got to pay sales tax on a mortgage payment which in a mortgage payment the majority of it is just interest you know in the beginning and that's what that's what you'd have to pay sales tax on double your payment or more just as a tax that's replacing the income tax. Unless we get somebody in there that's going to rip this cancer out by the roots, in the state of Michigan and federally, it has to be ripped out by the roots. And there's got to be a plan to shift it back to taking care of we the people. You know, there's got to be a plan there. And I'm not hearing anything that has any type of logical intelligence out of anyone. They go after issues so people buy the free candy. And here, here's another thing that I had a great conversation with, with Dan Cummings. I love this guy. He's, he's so interesting to talk to. He's like a, he's like an old professor. That's, that's, he's a doctor, but, but he's like that. And it takes a while, you know, when you talk to him because he's so detail oriented and he knows exactly what he's talking about. It's amazing how much information that, that you come in. It's very thoughtful. He's very thoughtful. I had him on before. I think I'm going to have Dan on again. But I really think we need to think about the fact that what they've done to create boogeymen in our system is you've got those spending the taxes over here and the ones that are taxing over here. So you don't see them as one entity, but they are. The IRS, they can demonize the, let's see, I don't remember which hand I had now. They can demonize the tax, the ones that are taxing the IRS tax. And then making the saviors the ones who are spending the money. But guess what? These guys are the lapdogs of these guys. And they're all the lapdogs of the banksters. And so if you separate them, the emotional response is to see one is good and one is bad. We're back to the Hegelian dialect again. of good and bad, giving you two choices and making it pretty clear which one's the bad one, propaganda all over the place, and who you should run to as the savior when they're both working against everyone. Yeah. Well, one thing that I think should happen is that the entire Environmental Protection Agency should be shut down. Gone. Absolutely. They're one of the biggest polluters in North America. Look at the big spill they had out there on the Colorado River. Remember that? Oh, yeah. Because there was some idiot from India who used to work for the UN and I think probably still did work for the UN. They blew open a mine shaft and dumped decades old mine tailings into the river. And guess what's going to happen in Lake Superior with this copper mine. If you people out there, you people, that's a bad way to put it. I love you guys. But if the people of Michigan don't jump on board with this and contact the legislators and stand together instead of allowing them to divide us, we're going to lose everything. Well, I think actually that's the nature of asymmetric warfare. They are waging, the United Nations and their tools that are embedded in our government, operating in our government, are waging asymmetric warfare on us. And the destruction of the environment, all the while they're saying they're protecting the environment, is one of the ways they were making war on us. I remember, I don't know how many years ago it was, but the EPA was going to cut off the water to the farmers. They were going to give the farmers their entire allocation of water for the whole season in the spring. And then they wouldn't have any water for the summer. Well, how freaking stupid is that? They use the water to irrigate the crops that are growing in the summertime. Well, look at what is it, the wonderful company out there in California. They own, have you ever looked into this? This is like freaky weird. How much of the water supply in California that they own And all the products that they have, they basically own the majority of the water in California. That's why they have a problem with it. Well, when they passed the nineteen ninety five legislation that created the World Trade Organization, part of that deal was that national treatment, foreign corporations would be treated exactly as American corporations. And if they weren't treated like American corporations, they could sue and be paid for not being able to be in business. Well, that goes back to Citizens United. Yeah, well, that kind of system allowed foreign corporations to come in and buy up our resources. Like the communist Chinese, they own Smithfield. You know, pork producers, one of the biggest pork producers in the country. And we have a lot of foreign ownership in this country, including in our electric transmission grid. Oh, man, there's another one we could go down for days. That whole thing is just incredible. Last week I went down the DTE thing, and DTE is proposing to these idiots in our legislature an eleven point one percent increase in energy costs through DTE. And you want to know why? Why? To upgrade their electric. Oh. Now I want to bring this to everybody's attention. I'm pretty extra sure that DTE's major product would be say, oh, I don't know, like gas, natural gas and such. Well, let me tell you what happened with that. We used to have the Public Utilities Holding Company Act, which prevented the utility companies from having holding companies that they would draw off electric dollars and invest in other businesses. The Utilities Holding Company Act put a stop to that. And the way the regulation of the utilities worked is that they were allowed costs of maintenance and upgrading the system, their operating expenses, and a fixed profit margin on top of that. And so it made utility companies safe for our country, good for the economy, good for people, and good investments that were basically secure because of the fixed profit margin. They overturned that. And that started in the nineteen seventies. What the Environmental Defense Fund did, I think it was Environmental Defense Fund. They worked with Pacific Gas and Electric, and they they said, if you implement technology, you can you can Gain profit margins through that rather than, you know, so basically to break you out of the electric monopoly regulatory system. I'm not explaining that very well, but I do have it documented. Let's go back and look at that next week because I think that this is something. I've got our next guest going on. I'm going to try to hold the schedule because I've got three interviews today. I've got Bill and Mike Null and then Christina Urso. And then at eleven o'clock, Daniel Richard on today. So there's more people that wanted to get on recently because there's some more problems going on. And but I want to keep going on this because we I think that. you know going through the background of how we got here instead of this this idiocy of layering more legislation on and thinking we're going to fix this how many how many proposals has michigan passed and they didn't even follow the constitution and getting the proposals in place and or any of the uh they didn't follow any of them and it was all headline marketing And people bought it. And, you know, it's not just the Democrat side. It's both sides are buying these political operatives. Nonsense and propaganda they're putting out there. And that's part of the reason why we're losing the state is lack of information. And history to how we got here, analysis, actual analysis, actual discourse, and that sort of thing. It's like, I got to tell you, people start talking about being able to protest. You know what? The Constitution doesn't really allow you to protest. It does, but the redress of grievances should be done with a pen. Not out there because they're laughing at everybody that's doing these protests. The people that are behind this sitting in the legislature are literally looking out their windows, sipping whiskey and wine, laughing at the people on the grass, realizing that half the people standing out there are either feds or political operatives because they put them there. Yeah. And and look at look at the Fed's erection. Look at the Fed napping. Look at Oklahoma City. Look at all this stuff that they've set up our nation as, you know, for years. And then draw in unwitting people that don't maybe see what's happening, which is unfortunate. They shouldn't be taking advantage of people. They shouldn't be doing the setups. But I digress. Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, we'll talk about it again. I'll be ready with an article for you. Yeah, that'd be great. Well, I just love you to pieces. And I've got so much respect for you. I really do. Vicki, I'm going to go ahead and post all the articles that you put up there today. And I'm going to take a short break, everybody. And I'll be back in one minute with the Nulls and Christina. Good morning and welcome to the second hour of Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg. It is the nineteenth day of May twenty twenty five and welcome to our show. Well, I'm going to go right into bringing everybody in this morning, Bill, and I'm assuming Mike's there with you and Christina. How are you guys doing? We've got all kinds of people here today. I'm driving to work. Oh, that's fantastic. Well, welcome, everybody. I'm so glad you're here today. And I think it's so important to get these stories out. Tonight at nine o'clock, I've got a special episode where we're going to be covering basically a kidnapping by CPS story because a mom and a dad decided to decline to have the vax on their newborn baby. They called CPS on them. And they came and took not just that baby, but all five of their kids away. And this week is going to be the first time that the husband and wife will have seen each other because they denied them after they got out of jail. They denied them to even see each other. They split up the marriage and they took the kids for denying the vaccine. This is something that we should all be so furious about. that it's not even funny just like standing with the feds setting up people in america I'm disgusted with these people yeah that's disturbing I will just say you know you can always do a home birth you don't have to give birth in the hospital just putting that out there for did you did you do that I did not um I did I my My birth was unplanned. My daughter came very early. She was born. Gosh, it was I think it's seven months. So and it was unexpected. I was traveling for a baby shower to visit like my dad. And it just happened. She just decided she was ready. Oh, that's fine. Well, I tell you what, I home birthed my kids. And yeah, I am truly one of these, you know, like, like, how do I say it? Tough old girls that have been around for a while. And I tell you what, it was a wonderful experience for me. In fact, my daughter was born in the bathtub underwater. It was fantastic. That's awesome. You know, screaming like a banshee and she's still that savage to this day. Yeah, there are alternatives. You don't have to rely on these big hospitals. You can get a, what do they call it? Like a doula. You know, you can have like a midwife. Yeah, exactly. You don't need to have the hospital deliver your baby. And this is a good example of like, why not to do that? Especially these big corporate hospital chains. I mean, my goodness, some of the people working there are completely incompetent. If you've ever been in emergency room, I think you'd understand that. I think they're death camps. Yeah, yeah. And there's just there's a lot of germs there. There's a lot of sick people. So why you would want to give birth there is odd. But I think people are just this is what they're taught. That's what they know. They're told to trust the experts. And schools, it's like the schools, their indoctrination camps. at this point it's like why why would why would we do this I mean god gave us the responsibility as parents to the state doesn't own our kids contrary to their their arrogant belief they don't own our kids you know it's like our kids are the responsibility given by god for parents to raise them and they can just go shut the hell up how's that Definitely. Okay. Well, where are we going to go today, guys? I've got another interview coming on at eleven that I'm really excited about, too. So and that's with a Supreme Court case that made the Supreme Court of of of New Hampshire. And I love Daniel Richard. He's cool. Very cool. And he's doing the same thing I'm doing with the pro se cases. So this is going to be fun to listen to. But anyhow, let's talk about what you guys got going on here. And what what what do you want to talk about today? Well, I've got tons of stuff going on. I just got back from traveling to interview some of the J Sixers. And that was a really cool experience having interviewed you guys for my documentary on the Whitmer case, just to get the J Sixers story and to see like the similarities where it differs, I thought was very interesting. But it was also one of those things that was like very eye opening to the fact that It wasn't just the Whitmer guys who have experienced the harsh hand of the state. The J-Sixers did, too. Now, obviously, there's a difference, right? It was more personal for the Whitmer case because they had informants and undercovers following them for a year prior. to their arrest, befriending them, getting close to them. January six was like this big event where they inserted these people, but it wasn't necessarily that individual J-sixers were being surveilled to that extent and everything they were doing online. However, The way that they had been dealt with is very similar to you guys. The same kinds of raids on their home, breaking up their families, taking their children from them in some cases, from their mother, from the home that they know for really no reason. And so I'm interested in that kind of the crossover between J-Six and the Whitmer case. It's something we didn't really touch on last time. I'd like to do that now, which is sort of the fact that Now that the January Sixers have been pardoned, people kind of have moved on from that. And we can't let that happen. Same with the Whitmer guys. I've talked to people, just random people online or what have you at events who think that all of the Whitmer guys were acquitted, which is not true. They don't even know five of them are still incarcerated. And so people need to understand this. And then there's the fact that We need to have an investigation into both of these events. And the Whitmer case really needs to be understood as the dry run for January six. January six could not have happened had they not practiced with the Michigan guys first. Can I interject something here a minute? Because I'm going to say right now is like, look at the losers that we have in office right now in both Republican and the Democrat side, that none of them in the J six, the J six or situation did a thing. They haven't done a thing in the elections to make sure that the elections are honest. They abdicated the responsibility and they're nothing more than talking sock puppets at this point. somebody's telling them what to do and they don't have the guts to do what needs to be done. And it's not the Democrats from all the conservatives out there to say that I really want you to just knock it off. It is not the Republicans. It's not even the grassroots, because if you start going through the grassroots organizations, you're going to find so many political operatives in there that have infiltrated that, that you couldn't shake it, that you couldn't shake a stick at. I'm telling you, there's so many of them that are out there that, um, that you can't go by titles or labels anymore. You've got to know who you're talking to and what they actually stand for and trash the rest of it. These organizations are criminally backed. They're being funded by someone. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. And you've got to come to terms with this. This isn't the same world that you thought that it was. Yeah, the Republicans don't even like to win because their entire thing is fundraising off of being oppositional to the left. So they don't want to win. When they get power, they do nothing. And then they grandstand once they lose power, they abdicate power. So they're very different. The left, when they come to power, they actually use their power to go after their political enemies, to do all of these things, to push through their agenda. And not that I'm saying we should be going after our political enemies or something when we get into power. However, we should be using laws that are already on the books to prosecute crimes. We know these people committed. Hello. When you look at how Whitmer got put in place, Whitmer was put in place by DeVos because as soon as they, they pulled their funding on Tudor Dixon, when she won the fight, the primary, they, they formed, they had a meeting and they formed an organization called Republicans for Whitmer and And they put Whitmer in office. And so now you look at these idiots out there and they just gave a five million dollars to a pack for John James, the supply line guy, Mr. Koretsu there to run him. And then you see the formation of the old flirt squad out there that ran in the last governor election. The flirt squad has decided to reform and and go out and start talking to people again. You better start asking some questions. Big ones. Yeah, it is disturbing, and I think that this is perhaps the reason that we really haven't gotten an investigation into this case. I would also like to add that I don't have confidence in the current FBI. Kash Patel and Dan Bongino just came out and said that Jeffrey Epstein self-deleted, nothing to see here. We've reviewed the current case file, and I'm just sitting here thinking, do you think that we're stupid? Do you think that we were born yesterday? The current case file was the emphasis of Dan Boncino's statement on Twitter about it, in addition to the interview they did with Maria Bartiromo. And I'm just sitting here thinking, yeah, you think the FBI is gonna put evidence, real evidence of what happened into their case file? It's not saying, we've investigated this, we wanted to get to the truth. No, they're saying we reviewed the case file and this is what happened. And I'm thinking, did it not occur to you that the case file was inaccurate? and incomplete. What does this mean? So, yeah, the guards happen to fall asleep, the security cameras malfunction, like, get real, okay? Nobody believes this stuff, and so when I see this coming out of the mouths of Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, I instantly know that That we have been played by these people who pretended they were going to do something. They've just changed the face of the FBI. It's still the same agents, the same organization who have committed all of these crimes, orchestrated all of these hoaxes. They just did another one with a ISIS supporter. Another hoax fabricated thing that the FBI claimed they foiled. And Kash Patel bragged about this. This is a kid who as a teenager was groomed by federal informants that he was talking to online. And then once he turns eighteen, they arrest him. And it's just so insulting to people like myself who've been covering this for so long, to people like the Nulls who experienced what the FBI is willing to do to regular people. And really nothing has changed in that organization. That's my opinion. They just changed the figurehead at the top and put in these two people who now go back on things they said when they were social media influencers. Like Dan Bongino did many shows talking about the suspicious circumstances of Jeffrey Epstein. Now he gets in power and he says, oh, no, nothing to see here. We've reviewed the file. Everything's fine. I don't think so. I got a curious curiosity here because I know there's a lot of people who have been threatened And like seriously threatened. So I have some very deep concerns when I see people go back on what they say. But the criminal organization that is going on is going to only be fixed by we the people stepping up and doing something. Because look at how many people they get to once they get in there. So I have to wonder if somebody is holding a gun to their heads, if they're going back on something or if they're allowing a few more people to commit some more crimes in order to throw them out and expose them. President Trump's been great with that. He's bait and he baits people and gives them a chance to break the law. so that you can get to their core personality. But I have some big concerns. I've got big concerns about Pam Bondi and all of them. Yes, I agree. And I don't want to take up too much time and talk the whole time like last time. But just to give people the rundown of why I say that the Whitmer case was the trial run for January six and that that event couldn't have happened without this. First, it goes to several things. First of all, being an operation by the FBI around two thousand eighteen to twenty nineteen to infiltrate the Midwest militia scene. They created a group called the Midwest Coalition, and they had approached the leadership essentially of militia groups and were trying to get them to give names and email addresses. Essentially, all of the people in these groups, a lot of the people who were leading these militias were like, no, we're not giving this information to the feds. So rather than do that, they chose to step down. We think at that point, the FBI inserted their informants into those leadership positions of these Midwest militia groups. And so from twenty eighteen on, The FBI is essentially running the Midwest militia scene. And so that's kind of important background when you consider all of the groups that they bring up who attended January six, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, they're all part of the same milieu. I would suggest the three percenters. And so that's important context to have. So that's twenty eighteen. Now we move forward to twenty twenty and the FBI basically takes over the Wolverine Watchmen. That was a prepping group, turns it into more of a militia with a structure. rankings of people with, of course, their informant being the executive officer, the number two. But in reality, he's the leader. He becomes the leader, the real co-founder or founder of the Wolverine Watchmen, Joseph Morrison, young guy, married with kids. He's busy with his family. He works six days a week. So he's really just the leader in title. They attend a rally, which I know I talked about last time in April of twenty twenty. Anti-lockdown pro to a rally. They show up, kidded up, led by Dan Chappell, about ten of the Wolverine Watchmen. The FBI has the Mobile Command Center there. They're monitoring everything in real time. Dan's wearing a live wire. So this is real time information going back and forth between Dan Chappell, their informant, and the handling agents, Jason Chambers and Hanrik Impala. The guy stood in line. They go through COVID screening. They do like nothing happens. It is illegal. They occupy the building and the media is there filming. And I have to think that there was some coordination between the media and the FBI because the narrative the next day was right wing militia groups storming the Capitol. Nobody stormed anything. But they used that to recruit more people into the Wolverine Watchmen, this global attention that they were getting because of this day. And that was really the trial run that was overseen by Stephen D'Antuono, who was the SAC, the special agent in charge of the Detroit field office at the time. And so that gentleman, we'll call him that, we'll be generous, right? That gentleman who was the sack of the Detroit field office right after they arrest these guys in October of twenty twenty. So they were all arrested pretty much on October seventh. One guy was arrested a week later. Brian Higgins from Wisconsin. That's a different story. And so. One week after their arrest on October thirteenth, Stephen D'Antuono is promoted by Christopher Wray to be the assistant director in charge of the Washington D.C. field office, where he oversees another storming of the Capitol with, again, groups that had already been penetrated by the FBI and in many cases were led by the FBI. And so that context I think is important that they needed to do this dry run in Michigan first at a state Capitol before they could take it bigger to the actual Capitol building. They had to have that trial run of how can we make this narrative stick? How can we get the media on board with reporting it this way? how do we get these people to show up to these events? And I think that that was kind of all part of it. So there is that connection there. And then the fact that the three percenters, well, of course, the FBI had created a three percenter group during the Whitmer investigation. During the course of that, they had their pedophile informant posing as first the head of the Wisconsin chapter of this group. And then he announces to people during the summer that he's become the national commander of this fake group. And Adam Fox, who is framed as the ringleader, like he gets inducted into this fake group by the FBI. They tell him you're going to be the head of the state chapter in Michigan. And they even give him business cards that match the informant Steve Robeson's business cards. And then the FBI will later seize those cards when they arrest Adam and use this evidence against them. I'm sorry, but you can't. This is illegal. You cannot frame people and entrap them like that. You can't plant evidence on somebody and then collect it later. And they did this also to Barry Croft. They had a red bag from Wisconsin. So we know that this was Steve Robeson's, not Barry's, because he lives in Delaware. They had a bag which they claim contained explosives material. the material is really like a can of BB, some black powder, some Tannerite. It's not really explosives material. It could be, but these are all things that could be purchased at any like store. Really? Like you can get some of this stuff at Walmart or sporting sporting goods store, whatever it was purchased legally. It's not really explosives material. However, that's what they wanted to frame it as. They actually admitted on the stand that, That they have planted this bag in Barry's truck so they could seize it later when they arrested him. Outright admitting to planting evidence, but saying, oh, well, we had to do that so we could seize it later when we arrested him. Is this it? Did anybody question this when these court cases were going on? I mean, is it the judges just sit there like like in a I don't know. in a, in a pot and drew stupor because now they're all on, I don't know. I hate to say it. You know what I mean? Yeah. They were definitely, they were, they were in on it. Even the judge in our case, it was like, they allowed everything the FBI wanted in. And then when we tried to present the evidence that they had, like in the recordings, the part where like Steve is talking and he asks a hypothetical question and then he gets the drunken stupor rants from these guys. not allowed to play the hypothetical question what drove it there and because that's all hearsay so the judges are definitely in on it yeah unbelievable that they just like gloss over this that they I mean wouldn't that like uh you know be a mistrial right there it's infuriating should have been it's never was and in moments like this happened repeatedly The FBI got caught actually fabricating evidence at trial in your trial to Eric Molitor. They took the recording that was made on the way up to Whitmer's vacation cottage on that first daytime recon, also planned by Jason Chambers for months. and the informant Dan Chappell with the informant driving the vehicle, they took audio that was from the way back, so four hours later, and they tried to play that and pretend that this was on the way up to make it appear that Eric Mulliter knew in advance where they were going, when in fact he did not. And then after being caught, luckily his lawyer was a really smart guy, Bill Barnett, caught that, when it happened. And he raised an objection to it. He said, this is from four hours later. This isn't the right audio. That's not what he said. And they're trying to manipulate and literally manipulate the jury. So they called a recess. They reviewed it and they said, oh yeah, you know, you're right. We just made a mistake. And then they waited until the next day to address it, to fix it and play the actual audio from the way up. Oh, we just, somebody made a typo. No, actually that's not how these timestamps and audio work. Impala is not typing out the timestamp. It is already put into evidence. It's already done. And he's literally, this is what they do. They take something, they splice it. They say this came from a different date, a different time. and they take it out of Congress. That's exactly what they're doing. They got away with it. Why was not a mistrial called right then and there? And I should also add that the FBI literally was managing that trial. They had two agents sitting next to the prosecutor who they were controlling all of the evidence that was presented, the projector, even the defense's evidence. The FBI had to control and play on their evidence projector uh they had to be the ones running it and then conferring with the lawyers in these back rooms like these trials are managed by the fbi it's a show trial these are yeah they pick your jury too so yeah yeah they wow and not only was eric's tampered with when they were doing the recording when they were listening to us in the basement they had like forty pieces of evidence Once you get into trial, you have this evidence packet. You're not to change or alter the evidence. They had pictures of us at like a Second Amendment rally in two thousand eighteen. Mike had long hair like I do. They put that in there and they said this was an April thirtieth. And it's, you know, Mike's got long hair. The problem is, is Mike had already cut all of his hair off. So then in the bottom corner, it's saying April thirtieth. They ended up taking and changing the date and said it was a two a rally because of what they heard from us. Then they altered it. They said that the first time I ever met Adam Fox, we were doing security in Lansing, two blocks down from the Capitol. And I had walked in. I shook Adam's hand. I got introduced to him. And then I went upstairs and I was just looking out when BLM rioters were burning down the city. they said that was gr well when called on the stand they ended up changing the evidence again and the judge just allowed them to alter the evidence so that the jury didn't know that they were caught in lies I would start seriously considering lawsuits against the judges, as well as the FBI. The individuals that did this need to be held accountable. And I don't care what label they go underneath. I would seriously consider this. Unfortunately, lawyers aren't really willing to take this, especially once they hear and look into and see what they did to these guys. They're scared. None of them have been able to get any lawyers willing to do this. And I don't know. We've got a case down in Florida right now that we went to sixty attorneys in Florida and not one of them would touch it. And it goes it goes in. It's like it's a civil RICO case. There's there's so much involved in this. It's incredible. And I don't know, I've I've come I've come to the conclusion that the that the bar, which is a private membership association, it's not a license to practice law. It's a fraud upon the United States. Yes, I agree. Yes, that's right. And the judges, they work for the judges and the freaking judges are part of the Department of Injustice and the civil action jurisdiction they set up in the state of Michigan. Every single one of them should be ashamed of themselves at this point in time. Yeah, I agree. Um, I know you've talked to lawyers, you've tried to get people to take this case and every time, uh, it's always, you get ghosted. Um, you know, one guy, I actually signed a retainer with him and, uh, I sent the other, I tried to get all five of us on his DACA. He signed a retainer with us. He wanted the case and he's out of Canton, Michigan. Um, it was like a couple of days after I signed a retainer with him, there was a building across the street exploded. It was some like propane factory or something. And that was in Canton, Michigan. I haven't heard from the guy since. I've called multiple times. Like I won't return my phone calls. Well, it goes back to this, that they're threatening and coercing people and telling them you're going to be next. Yes, in fact, the the twenty unindicted co-conspirators in this case, people who maybe attended one or two meetings or maybe only one FTX so that they didn't get enough to charge them. They told them, though, they were unindicted co-conspirators. and threatened them that if they testified on these guys' behalf about what actually happened at these meetings in FTXs, that they would be under investigation, that they were already under investigation, but that their testimony, basically if they told the truth, they were told that they could be arrested that day leaving the courtroom. That is literal witness tampering, witness intimidation, and the judge allowed this to happen. Wouldn't you just I mean, maybe maybe I'm deranged. Maybe I'm a deranged monkey and I don't know it. But wouldn't you just tell these guys to shove it right up where the good Lord split them and do it anyway, because it's the right thing to do and say, now you've just heaped on more coals because you threatened me. Well, you would think. However, I do want to remind people that when this happened, we still had an unfriendly administration. We still had that same FBI that destroyed people's lives. These individuals saw their friends have their homes raided, their families destroyed, their lives destroyed. And look, I mean, I don't blame people for wanting to protect their own lives, everything they worked for to build their own families. And I kind of understand why why at the time they did not testify, I get it. And also some people were prevented from getting there. People were stopped at the airport. They were held up through security until they'd already missed their flight. And this is the kind of thing they would do. They also, the judge picked lawyers, handpicked lawyers for each of the unindicted co-conspirators. And those public pretenders told those people not to testify. They told them to plead the fifth and that if they said anything, they could incriminate themselves. They could go to jail for ten to twenty years. I mean, that's what people are being told. And then at the same time, they know, too, that the government has a ninety nine point nine percent, almost one hundred percent conviction rate. So when you're thrown into that kind of unfair system where you know this is going to be a show trial in a kangaroo court, I understand the hesitancy to put everything on the line to do the right thing. I get it. But it is unfortunate that this happens. And then the other thing is so many people are threatened and coerced into taking plea deals. You had a number of guys in this case who were coerced essentially into taking plea deals. Caleb Franks is a great example of this. This guy, he had still a public defender, but he had a lawyer who, if you read his early motions, He was arguing the connection between the Whitmer case and January six. He was arguing about the use of informants and all of this stuff and saying there was no conspiracy. Well, caleb unfortunately had uh done some other things with this informant one of uh one of those things being a ghost gun scheme to sell guns to felons and so I wish they also tried to wrap daniel harrison one of the other guys he didn't take a plea deal or anything but they actually ordered a part for this gun they were selling to a felon and had it shipped to daniel's house without his knowledge and so these are the kinds of things they do to get you on all these other If we don't get you on this, well, we'll still get you on this ghost gun charge or whatever it is, this shit that they manufacture. So he was fighting it up until a month before trial. They also, I mean, he had a past, um, he had addiction in the past, but he'd gone through treatment. He was actually a drug counselor when he was arrested. He was doing very well, but um it's very easy for addicts to relapse especially it thrown into a situation like that so this guy had tried to smuggle suboxone into the prison and they got him on that too so they pressured him they were going to make him undergo a psychological evaluation they were going to you know add these other charges for the ghost guns he ends up caving and taking a plea deal but this is This is coercion. This is the kind of things that they do to these people to get them to take plea deals. And then there's Ty Garbin, whose lawyer was a former FBI. And I have questions about whether he was an informant that they actually allowed to go through the process so he could take a plea deal and testify for the government. It's very bizarre. They hand-selected me and Mike. We had... by midnight we already had lawyers retained on our own personal dime because of my family. They had to fight the government to get the court appointed attorneys that we never asked for off our case so that our attorneys could be at arraignment. I mean, it's crazy. You got to wonder about those court appointed attorneys, you know, who are they working for? Well, they all probably do coke with the judge in the back room before trial, I'm sure, because they're all in on it. There's no way around it, but... Yeah. I mean, this is kind of, you know, what we. It's not out of the realm of possibility there, you know. This is what we experienced. And all of the guys who had court appointed lawyers all ended up going to prison. They were all walked into these lengthy prison sentences. And it's a shame. The state guys, for example, who were tried in Jackson County before you guys were. for the material support, right? So they were the ones not facing federal charges. There were six federal, there were eight state defendants. There were three out of Jackson County, Joe Morrison, his father-in-law, Pete Musico, and Paul Beller. And at that trial, so this is right after the first two federal trials. The first one ends in two men being acquitted in a mistrial on Adam and Barry. They retried Adam and Barry. So it's basically, oh, we lost the trial. So we're going to redo it and pick a better jury better jury meaning they decided a more diverse jury would be better for them to frame these guys as white supremacists and all this other nonsense so adam and barry were convicted and at jackson trial right after adam and barry's convictions because remember you can't charge the state guys for providing material support to terrorists if you don't have convicted terrorists they had to get adam and barry in that retrial first so they could get these other guys at the state level well at their trial their number one they were told they weren't even allowed to say the word entrapment so you literally cannot prov you can't do a legal defense entrapment is a legal defense this is long established they said no you actually can't use this defense which is literally what happened so you don't get a fair trial But then they also had this nasty prosecutor, Dottamani, who was head of the hate crimes division there. Oh, no. Yeah, she was a real piece of work. She'd get up there and say, convicted terrorist, Adam and Barry. They were talking to these convicted terrorists. But these guys couldn't say Brandon Caserta was acquitted. Daniel Harris was acquitted. They would use videos of Brandon and say terrorists. And I'm going, what in the hell? He has been acquitted, but they can still maintain this lie. in these trials. So these trials aren't real. And I've had people say to me, well, you know, some of these guys were convicted, some were acquitted. So, you know, if they were convicted, they must have done something. And I'm like, no, no, you don't understand. This is not a real trial. It's not real. It is a kangaroo court. It is completely managed by the government. You cannot introduce evidence. You can't call witnesses. They will lie. They'll fabricate evidence. They will twist things. They'll splice recordings together. They will do all kinds of... crazy things. And then this is the trial record that is used for the appeal. You can't even properly appeal your case because it's based on what's in the record already. And none of this stuff was allowed in the record. Hello? So it's just completely unfair. And for people who would just assume that because somebody's convicted, that means they're guilty is an incorrect assumption. There's so many bad convictions. And when you look at what their MO is, is that ninety eight percent of their their judgments are our our our money judgment and they take eighteen percent of that to go into their their retirement and to fund the things that are behind the judges and the attorneys and the prosecutors and all these people that are part of the system it's it's it's unbelievable unbelievable not another cancer that needs to be ripped out by the roots you know I I I don't even know what to say you know Yeah. And that's the thing about like all these cases in general, they, they, they practice run it and practice run it. Like to me, a mistrial on its own, the government didn't provide enough evidence. They couldn't get you right. It's still double jeopardy on the next trial because all they do is continue to retry you. It doesn't matter if you have a hundred mistrials, they keep working away at it till they can find the right person. and the right jury and the right formula to finally get you guilty. So it's still double jeopardy. Yeah, it's outcome. We didn't get the outcome we wanted. So we just keep trying until we get the outcome we want. That's not justice. That's not fair. It's not a fair process. It is a violation of double jeopardy. Retrial shouldn't be allowed because the problem with that is you already know what the defense strategy is going to be. And it gives you an advantage now at the retrial to preempt all of it. Right. which was what happened with Adam and Barry's retrial. During that first trial, it was a revelation that Twelve Informants were used, that all of these things happened. At the retrial, they just admitted these things and then made up an excuse for why they did it to deflate the idea that this is outrageous. They're like, well, yeah, we used a network of Twelve Informants and two undercovers because we had to get terrorists, you know? And it's just like, oh, yeah, we planted evidence on Barry so we could seize it later when we arrested him. Duh. It's just like, what? What is even happening here? And then also, they didn't, despite their best efforts, they did not actually pick these guys up on the pull cam that they installed on her vacation property when they had them go up for the second recon. And they were saying, oh, driving this way, we've got good low light ambience. They still didn't even get them picked up on these pull cams. So the FBI created a reenactment video of what would have happened. and then they were allowed to play that as evidence in the trial this fake video that they made like they produced a little short film of this is what I would have looked like and I'm just going what is this real life this is actually happening you want to just introduce a video that you made up and say well this is what it would have looked like no No, and the judge, what was the judge's name in this? I want to know. I want to know these people's donkers. John Juncker was the federal judge there. Real piece of crap. And every single motion that he that he got from the government, he granted almost every motion from the defense he denied. He granted like one or two just to maintain the appearance that this was a fair trial. But they were like the least, you know, that they could do. Right. Which is introducing some of the statements made by the informants. but not the actual audio. None of that could be played. They wouldn't let the defense lawyers tell the jury about the allegations of misconduct against the three handling agents. The government wouldn't even let those agents testify at trial. The people who ran the investigation, they kept off the stand because they knew if they got them on there, it would be opened up to asking these questions about Impala's history of perjury. Jason Chambers running a private company while he's working this investigation, talking about reallocating FBI resources to get his private company off the ground, talking about having foreknowledge of the case, trying to get government and state contracts based on his work as an FBI agent. And then Richard Trask beating his wife and almost killing her. So the jury didn't get to hear almost everything egregious that happened. And then they were just played these little select clips taken out of context. And then a story was presented. And this is what Impala said when he was interrogating their own informant, the pedo, Steve Robeson. So they arrested him after this. And in December of twenty twenty, they brought him in for what he initially thought was like a, you know, another meeting with his FBI handlers. Meanwhile, it's actually an interrogation and they're raiding his home, but they don't tell him that initially. And one of the things that they're saying to him is basically, we don't want you to testify. They're saying we can keep your name out of all of this. Basically, if you play ball. And throughout the course of that, one of the things that Impala says to the informant is he says, we have a saying in my office, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. And that's actually how the FBI pursues and presents these cases as they're building a story. They're building a narrative and it doesn't necessarily have to reflect reality. Like Impala said, we don't let the facts get in the way. We're building a narrative. We're building a story. We can cherry pick little things. We can splice audio together. You know, we can lie about this. We can, as Impala said, we can throw the defense into chaos. You know, it's crazy. And in that recording. That's not justice. No. And in the recording, they actually threaten their own informant. And they're telling him they bring up five areas where they say are pressure points. Part of that is the illegal activity they allowed him to commit while he was in their employment and being monitored by them. And so they tell him, like, we're raiding your house right now. Give us your phone. And he has to agree to turn over his phone. And it's just crazy. And then they make him sign an NDA. So does that sound like these agents believe they did the right thing or that they had the truth on their side? You have to pressure an informant to sign a nondisclosure agreement? First of all, how common is that? That's a question we should all be asking. Oh, that's very common. That's very common. They want to shut people up. Yeah. Well, when the first time I had met Steve Robeson, he was carrying a gun on his hip. And when they invited us to that training in Cambria, I didn't know he was a pedophile. I, that's the exact type of person that I would distance myself from completely, you know, but then you find out he's a pedophile and he was hands-on teaching a And then they bust him for buying a felon with a firearm. When they knew he had drugs on him, they knew he had a gun on him, and they recorded him teaching a child how to shoot. Not only that, they knew he was transporting drugs. explosives material across state lines. They let him drive around the country with explosives materials in his vehicle, running around with guns that he's not supposed to have because he's a felon. And they allowed him to be around people's children, knowing what he was. And they deliberately kept that off of his criminal record during this time in case somebody ran a background check on him. But more importantly, They left it out of their own CHS file, which talks about his past crimes. It's not in there. So what does that tell you about the FBI? Yeah, that sounds like pretty intentional. And I have to say that when you start watching our government being run by and the amount of pedophilia and child trafficking that's in there, I mean, trafficking kids and allowing these bottom feeders to do what they're doing, you know, it's like, I mean, they're like, you know, lowest of the low. They're like the carps at the bottom of the swamp, you know, the lake. I can't give any credibility to anybody above them. It's like anything else. You have to clean your own house out. It's like if we have good cops out there, guess what? You're guilty unless you clean these people out. You're guilty. You're complicit. If there's anybody that's good in the government, you're complicit in standing with these people. If you're standing in the medical mafia out there, And you're not calling them out and holding them responsible. You are complicit. You're part of the problem as the American people. If you're not calling these people out, you're part of the problem and you're complicit. We all have that. that duty to the United States of America to do the right thing. And more than that, to do the right thing before God. He's going to take account of every action and every word that comes out of our mouths. And if we don't stand against this stuff, we're complicit in it. Yeah, exactly. So I have here, this is Robeson's CHS file. This is the annual review of source dated November third, twenty twenty. This was after they interrogated him, raided his house and made him sign an NDA. They list here. that CHS has not been involved in foreign legal proceedings. CHS has a lengthy criminal history within the United States. CHS was previously arrested and served prison sentences for theft, forgery, receipt of stolen property, fraudulent insurance claims, bail jumping and various other misdemeanors. The arrest spanned the period of nineteen eighty four to two thousand eight. They're leaving out his sex crimes against children charge. in their own documentation which is why I say when cash patel and dan bongino say we reviewed the the jeffrey epstein file and we've concluded that this didn't happen well they lie in their own documentation in their documents they will keep out information that by the way you can find this is publicly available information now it's been put back on his criminal record but um I think that this is just amazing that they can do this stuff. And then the FBI, one of the other things that they do is that they do not record their meetings with these informants. They don't record their interrogations. They fill out three Oh two forms where they take notes and And then they type up a transcript of what happened based on these handwritten notes. This is outrageous. It's ridiculous. The FBI does not have to wear body cams like local law enforcement does. And I think that that's crazy for the world's premier law enforcement agency to be relying on notes written by an agent. It's all part of their files. It's all part of the crime syndicate. Mm hmm. Yes. I'm just I'm just so shocked. I mean, it's this this story just gets worse and worse and worse every time I hear more details about it, about the lengths that our own government went to to set up and attack Americans. I'm going to say nine eleven. Same thing. It was absolutely an inside job and a setup. Yeah. Every one of them cases are. You go back to Ruby Ridge, Waco, Texas, the Oklahoma City bombing. There's all sorts of crazy shit in every one of them, and the FBI just happens to be involved with. Look at some of these school shootings where the FBI is involved, and before local government can actually look into it, the buildings tore down. I mean, that says a lot. It says volumes about where our government's at and what they will do to their own people just to get a story so that they stay relevant. Well, I think what they're doing is they're getting a story to make us look in certain groups to look bad. They've done it over and over again. It is to control the population and to create these false flags and everything else so that there's something to be afraid of out there so that we do not get together and say, no, no, no, you're breaking the law and hold them accountable. And I don't know, with the puppets that are in office right now and the ones that they always run, Because it's just one big, happy criminal family that supports each other. Yeah, we are. Yeah, it's sad. And we still, like I said, we still have five guys in prison. We've got three of them in state prisons in Michigan at high level, level four security prisons that they're being denied the ability to really contact anybody. We have Adam and Barry at Florence Supermax. And they're being denied the ability to contact people. I mean, Barry, they mess with him all the time. I have power of attorney for Barry. We're supposed to be able to communicate with each other. They prevent that from happening. And then you can try to file what they call an administrative remedy. That is seen here. Barry tried to file one of these and this is how they handle it. So they had withheld mail and they they reject his administrative remedy request, saying you did not attempt an informal resolution prior to submitting a request for administrative remedy. Like, what does this mean? And he writes, these are copies of the struggle just to get the right to have mail. I have much more, including being denied the ability to buy stamps. I am being denied the ability to possess the criminal complaint and indictments used against me, which I need for my appeal. And this is what they do. I tell you what, anybody in jail or the prison system should probably start studying the law while they're in there and just write like there's no tomorrow. Yeah. Half of them though, aren't even allowed access to law libraries. That was an issue we had. I had to order the guys law books from Amazon and have it like sent to them because they weren't even being allowed the ability to do that. Or they're not even allowed to see their own paperwork, which is just outrageous, their own legal documents to prepare for their appeal. And I would add, you know, at the end here that Adam Fox, the guy who was framed as a ringleader, um, they adam and barry just lost their appeal at the sixth circuit while adam's lawyer his court-appointed appeals lawyer never reached out to him did not try to have a legal phone call with him which he had the ability to pursue he could have called him at any time he didn't go visit him he didn't ask for his input on the appeal He did not appeal one of the charges, which was the WMD charges. So now the Sixth Circuit has ruled since he didn't appeal that he's forfeited his right to appeal it in the future. This lawyer did this to him. So let me get this right. The lawyer didn't even consult with. So they're basically running this kangaroo court on both sides with no input. From the actual defendants for their own appeal and then they make it look like they're appealing something. Oh, we just forgot to appeal the WMD charge. No, you didn't forget. This was done on purpose and he had the ability. By the way, these court appointed lawyers are billing the government. So he could have driven from Ohio to Florence, Colorado to meet with him to have a legal meeting. They have a separate phone. It's a red phone for legal phone calls. He wouldn't use that. Then the mail that he was sending him, he sends things a month after he already filed them and he never sent his legal documents, legal mail. So legal mail, when it's marked legal, they cannot open it. They have to bring the inmate in and then they watch them open it up just to show that it hasn't been tampered with. He was sending this regular mail. And they put pauses on it. So it would be maybe a month or two months after it arrived that Adam would actually get it. So he's not having any ability to even participate in his appeal. His lawyer doesn't call him until one month after he loses his appeal. He finally calls him and says, oh, well. I guess the next steps would be filing an appeal with the Supreme Court. And Adam's like, wait a second, you're calling me now. Why couldn't you have called me before so I could participate in my appeal? It's sickening. And so Adam right now is in the process of trying to fire this lawyer. But because so much time has gone by, He now has only, I think, thirty days to fire this lawyer to get a new lawyer to file his next appeal at the Supreme Court, but they'll have to get an extension because it's going to be another new lawyer, new to the case, has to familiarize themselves with sixteen terabytes of discovery and all of the entire record, which is two federal trials, two state trials, and now an appeal at the Sixth Circuit that has been lost. So they sabotage these people. They literally give them a lawyer, court appointed, who sabotages their case, but makes it look like they were trying to do something. And it's just to provide the appearance that this is somehow they're getting due process or that they still have rights. No, no. And people need to understand that this is happening in America. This is Soviet level, Stasi level, East Germany, this is what's happening. And if it happens to one person, it happens to all of us. If they can do it to Adam and Barry, they can do it to you and they will, especially if they get away with it. And so this is why we have to fight to get these men out of prison, to get an investigation into this, to overturn these false convictions. And, um, I'm hopeful that, um, This new Trump administration will do that. I may not have faith or hope in Kash Patel or Dan Bongino, but I do have hope in the actual Trump administration that the president is a compassionate man, that if he gets the information, he will have mercy on these guys and grant their pardons. And that's what we have to push for. We need to push for an investigation into this, into January six as well. And we have to try to hold the people who did this accountable, because if they're not held accountable, they will continue to do this in the future and more people will be victimized. I really believe that back to the Trump administration, I believe that all of these guys are not playing games. You know, they're playing like five D, twelve D chess out there. So with as many people as are downstream from these FBI agents and the people that are involved in the judicial system, this is a huge job to clean out. So it's and it didn't happen overnight. This happened over decades and decades. decades to develop this corporatocracy that we have going on right now. So I give them a little bit more leeway, though I may not like the way they see it at face value that I'm seeing. I'm kind of just like, I'm just going to sit back and let them work through the process and my my I agree with you that I I really wanted to see this come out and see some arrests I really do but what if they're playing a game here not just to get the ones that are at the top of the food chain but get every single other person all the way down including the judges The FBI, the informants, all of them get them all because it is my belief that unless we clean this entire swamp up, it's like leaving one germ on a surface, you know, or two. They're going to reproduce because it is a cancer. Unless you cut the whole thing out, we lose. They're going to have to cut this thing out top to bottom. And, you know, whatever we can do to stand by them in order to get this job done and not not half ass our way through it, but to clean them all out and sterilize the entire government from corruption that's there. We're going to lose. They're going to come right back again. So I agree with how you're feeling with this because I do too. But I'm also thinking there's probably more to the story and that, you know, just we've got to let these people work through the process of this. And if they don't, then guess what? They're next for us to hold accountable. If this doesn't get accomplished at some point in time, we're going to know it. We're going to know it. Exactly. I think I'm so proud to know you. And, you know, to Christina, the work that you're doing is extraordinary. And I appreciate you coming on. And Bill, I'm just really, you know, I'm really glad that we've been able to put this story out here and really bring the details of how serious this is. This is so serious. And we can't stop talking about it, just like J-Six. I did months and months of interviewing the J-Sixers on BNN. And I did it to document it so that people could know for the future what happened. We are going to have to have a documentation of this, just like we're doing right now, so that this can never die. The stories of what they've done can never die. The crimes they're committing against the United States of America, these parasitic vermin. that have been placed in the seats by globalists, the corporatocracy, and it's both fascist as well as communist. It's the Hegelian dialect. If you have two choices, you have been smack placed in there by the corrupt powers that be to make a choice, and both choices are bad. We're going to have to come to terms with this. And start thinking in a different way. Would you guys like to come back on next week, Monday? I'm sure we've got lots more to talk about. Let me check my calendar. I apologize. I'm going to be doing more filming with some of the J-Sixers. So what's... Because I'd like to hear more of this because I'm sure there's more details that you guys. I should be able to do Monday. That's Memorial Day, but not the three days after. I'm not going to be on Monday. Sorry. Oh, no. Okay. I forgot that was Memorial Day. How about the following week? The following week. Yeah, that should be fine. Let's I'll schedule you guys for the following Monday. And we're going to do this again because until, until we get this, this FBI and the judges and this whole corrupt injunction and justice system. And I, and I mean it, it's an injustice system and it's the FBI because they're lying bastards that changed the it's I see it right now in the attorney general's office in Michigan. They're literally destroying evidence. I've seen it firsthand. So guess what? Not giving this fight up. You got people here, guys. I hope the bad guys are listening because some of us are willing to do whatever it takes to hold them accountable in a lawful manner. I'm not saying grab your torches and pitchforks. That's stupid people talk. It's like hold them accountable. And we can do that by continuing to talk, never forgetting what they've done. Pound the point until we see some behavioral changes and that everyone in the state knows exactly what's going on. It's going to take all of us standing together to do that. Well, I appreciate you guys coming on today. Thank you so much. I'm going to go to my next interview. Do you have any last words, either one of you? And I'm going to take about a one minute break. I'm just going to encourage people to watch the trailer for my documentary on this case if you want to learn more about it, if you want to follow my work and learn and get updates about when that's going to come out. It is kandkfilm.com, the letter K-A-N-D-K, film.com. You can watch the trailer there. There's also a tab that has the guys addresses if you want to write to them while they're in prison. I know they love getting letters of encouragement. I just ask you to not talk about specifics of their case. Just keep it positive. Keep it faith focused. They love getting letters. I know that's super important to them to keep their encouraging them. yeah exactly and you can also get merchandise for the uh the film you can get a k k hat hoodie shirt there as well so well that's fantastic well thank you guys for being on so much bill did you have anything else you want to say or not uh no no uh I just want to let christina know the first time I did the interview with him we played both your trailers on here so some people have seen it already too so Before you came on, yeah, the Shelly and Bill and Mike, we played both of the trailers on here. And I thought you've done a really good job. And I'm just so honored to stand and talk with, you know, with people that do extraordinary work like you and are brave enough to step forward and challenge them, you know, challenge them and make them have to face the crimes that they've committed, the thugs. We'll call them the thug squad within our own government. They're past swamp. They're a cancer and they're a bunch of thugs. So anyhow, you guys have a great day. I'm going to take a one minute break and I'm going to be back with Daniel and Richard and this. I'm excited about this interview. It's going to be awesome. Have a good day. I'll be right back in a minute. Good morning and welcome to the third hour of Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg and it's the nineteenth day of May twenty twenty five and welcome to our show. So I want to give you a little bit of background with with my introduction with Daniel Richard. OK, so I was at the National Constitution Party committee and Daniel was one of the speakers. And I'm just going to tell you right now. as chairman of the Constitution Party in Michigan, which is the U.S. Taxpayers Party, which we should be able to administratively change our name. But the obstructionists in our state have decided to make that difficult. So we're having to come to terms a different way on that right now. But at any rate, the speakers that were there were incredible. I mean... The amount of intelligence that was in that room, and I don't mean like spook intelligence, just raw intelligence on how to deal with the United States going back to the Constitution to hold people accountable was inspiring. And enter in Daniel Richard and the fact that we're both fighting pro se in the court system. Morning, Daniel. How you doing? Good morning. How are you? I'm great. It's so nice to see you. Same here. Same here. Welcome to Morning Coffee. I'm going to tell you what. It's like this is the first time you've been on my show. It's sort of like just having coffee with a friend. I'm going to have to go for a refill here in about a minute. That's my iced coffee in the morning. But I'm so excited. I wanted to show you. I brought your website up. And I just want to let you guys know, Daniel is a powerhouse. And I enjoyed listening to you, Daniel, so much. I can't even tell you because this is the direction that I've chosen to go in, is holding people accountable by filing cases against people who have broken the law. And your case, I'd like you to explain your case a little bit so that people can know what you've done. If you don't mind, are you comfortable with just talking if I take a break and get myself some coffee here a minute? Yeah, that's fine. I'm going to start with why I'm doing this and where I'm coming from. Perfect. I'm just going to run and grab some coffee here. So I'll listen to you, but I'll be right back. No problem. So for your listeners, I want to explain a very important point about where I'm coming from. And that is the state constitutions, the thirteen original states all have their own constitutions. And the basis of the republic is based on those thirteen instruments, those thirteen sovereign states. And we are not teaching this. So the knowledge and the power that lies within those instruments, I discovered in New Hampshire, we have a provision called Article X, right of revolution. And right of revolution is fascinating. I believe we're the only state in the union that actually has that as a constitutional right. And I'm scrolling up to it real quick here. Hang on. Bear with me. Article X. Because it has, as most articles in both the U.S. and the state constitutions, you will find that there are multiple elements pertaining to your rights within a single article. So Article X, Right of Revolution, here we go. The first thing is it states what government exists, why it exists. The government being instituted for the common benefit... protection and security of the whole community. That's the whole purpose of the form of government right there. I'll say it again, government being instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the whole community and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family or class of men. Well, I would submit to your audience that that class of men is a clear group of people today, international bankers and the lawyers that represent them in the legal establishment. That's exactly the warning. If you study the ratification debate Virginia, when the Virginia legislature debated whether they would adopt the U.S. Constitution, Patrick Henry warned them all that today would come. Today would come because the U.S. Constitution, as written, as the anti-federalists warned, that the judiciary would ultimately destroy the sovereignty of the states. And that's happened. So the importance of this, though, can't be misunderstood, and that is that, remember, the state constitutions come first. The Thirteen Originals are the creator of a corporation called the federal government. James Madison said not once, not twice, but three times in convention while debating the Constitution that the United States government is now and forever hereafter shall be a body politic, Congress, and a body corporate. Why? because it is a corporation. It's a corporation created specifically to carry out the enumerated powers in Article I, Section VIII. You have seventeen enumerated powers, plus or minus if you add a little bit here and there, based on services. But all of them can be summarized into four external affairs to conduct on behalf of the states. Wage war, negotiate peace, contract treaties, enter into treaties, and regulate commerce. So those are all – that's why Trump's tariffs, understanding that the way the federal government was created, that the tariff system was put in place to cover its own operating costs, right? The merchants that were involved – remember, at that time, you had a seacoast-based economy, right? The movie – really doesn't gather steam until the revolution is over. And then really it grows from there a lot faster. But the point is, um, understanding the nature of the matrix, what are we dealing with? Right. You know, as, as a, as a police dog trainer, that's what I've done on my life, trained canines to do all kinds of, uh, work for various agencies at all levels. And, uh, culminating at managing a federal agency, the Department of Energy. I had ten bomb dogs under my command. So there's a lot of strategy that goes on to preparing for that type of work. When you're training, you're always thinking of worst-case scenarios. So, you know, studying my adversary, the art of war, right? So that concept is what I did all of my life. And so as I enter into understanding how my government operates, I took a hard look at the state constitution. This is where I found article ten. And I want to make one point about the previous sentence I stated, and that was for. not for the private interest or emolument of any one man or family or class of men. And they were very specific about that because that leads to the next part. And it goes on to say, and whenever the ends of government are perverted and public liberty manifestly endangered, and here's the key, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may and of right ought to reform the old, which is what we're trying to do now, peacefully, Or to establish a new government, which goes back to the Declaration of Independence and what drove them to write this document. This is key, right? The Declaration of Independence, as I like to refer to, I have some liberty activists, unfortunately, who don't understand. It's a divorce letter, right? It's not a legally binding contract. That's a great way to term it. It really is because it culminates in the king in the Treaty of Paris in seventeen eighty three, where he relinquishes all his claims over the people, the land, the water and so on and so forth. So, see, for me, everything goes back to original source. I was thinking that way as a strategist before recent Supreme Court decisions have come down, specifically the Second Amendment case in the Heller-Bruin decisions. But we'll come back to that. And so I was already in this original intent. I do things backwards as a trainer. It's called backchaining behaviors. So working on that principle, because again, I didn't go to law school. I studied the law and that's all I've ever done is study the law. Lawyers go to school- Backchaining behaviors, for example, I compete in a dog sport where we have three phases, tracking, obedience, and protection. And so we have three moving exercises, healing that leads to a sit in motion, healing with a down in motion, and healing with a stand in motion. The stand in motion is the last exercise, but I teach it last on purpose because I'm dealing with a simple dog who has a memory pattern. So the memory pattern I stagger by doing the repetition enough times, they learn what comes next. Classical conditioning, Pavlov's classical conditioning always produces anticipatory behavior. And you should not forget that when dealing with politicians. And I mean it. What's that? True enough. Right? Because it's that simple. Politicians are just like dogs. They're looking to make their situation better. Right? What does a dog do? He's always looking to get on your couch, get on your bed. Right? Go out the door first. Right? Have no rules. They want to be what makes them be the most that they can get away with. And that's what a dog does. Same thing. Oh, man, do I love that analogy. That's like freaking beautiful right there. But again, my background, right? So as I said, I think with the speech I gave, and that was that lawyers go to law school to learn the practice of law. And that was never my intent. I didn't come to this with the intent of practicing law. I uncovered that my state government in the state constitution not only provides right of revolution, but let me finish that point. When all other means of redress are ineffectual, well, what are all of those redress processes? Begs the question. You have to think about that, right? Because if you're going to try to reform the old, what are you going to base your complaint upon? And there are provisions for that. There are four, and we'll go over them. But so I, once I read this part, it became so powerful to me. And then it goes on to say, and when they're ineffectual, the people may and of right ought to reform the old and establish a new. Well, what's that look like? I would submit to you Magna Carta because chapter sixty, I believe it's chapter sixty one and Magna Carta provides what? redress of grievance process, right? If the king, if the nobleman gave the king notice, right, they gave him forty days to correct the problem, and if he didn't correct the problem, they could remove their allegiance and their alliance to the crown. That was a big part of where our right to redress of grievances comes from, again, knowing your history. You know, there's a great study for any of your listeners who have not discovered Chris Ann Hall. She's an American jewel, right? Oh, I love Chris Ann. She's amazing. This is where I learned the concept of the genealogy of the U.S. Constitution. But interestingly enough, if you pay attention to her teaching, she leaves the state piece out because she travels all fifty states and she does focus on the second part of this social compact because there are two parts and we only talk about one, right? The fundamental flaw in most of the patriot movement right now and has been going on. That's why the Tea Party, in my opinion, failed, right? We keep talking about the U.S. Constitution as the be-all end-all, but it's not. Remember, it was created by who? Thirteen sovereign states where the people control their government. So that concept must be understood if we're going to formulate a plan of restoring, as I heard you say with your previous ghost, I mean, guest, how we're going to, you know, take back our, for the people to properly take control of their government again. And it does, as Benjamin Franklin famously said, you know, what type of government have you given us, Mr. Franklin? And the response was what? a republic if you can keep it. And that's what he understood. He understood citizen involvement. Yeah. And that's such a big deal. And unfortunately, the lack of education that's come through our indoctrination system rather than an education system has put everyone in America at a severe disadvantage because we weren't taught. We were not taught the fundamentals of of law we were not taught the fundamentals of the or the history of the united states I mean in it and so we're disadvantaged so now we're having to relearn again the process with donald trump being and you know our president president trump being in office is that we've had to confront a lot of things going through the nonsense we've seen in the past I don't know ten years you know, acutely before that, but it has come down to having to deal with this. And people are learning to critically think, to question everything, and to go back and relearn what we missed. No, you're absolutely right. So when I discovered, back to Article X here, once I discovered this, then I realized, okay, If I believe that the judiciary is broken and our form of government is broken, and I do, I believe that wholeheartedly and we'll get to that, is that... Knowing this, what are, remember I said, what are the four ways by which redress of grievances can happen? Well, under our state constitution, it's reserved under Article XXXII. And what's unique about New Hampshire, New Hampshire was the first of the colonies to write a state constitution. That happened on January fifth, seventeen seventy-six. but it was a highly flawed document. Number one, it did not obtain the consent of the entire state population as the state was laid out on the property boundaries of the colonial period. And so it was the local merchants who had grown rich off of moving here and prospering, working in hand with the crown. And so all of those men realizing after, because remember, the Declaration of Independence and the revolution didn't happen in a vacuum. It began in sixteen twenty. Right. They landed at Plymouth Rock. It was the second boat to hit the North American continent fundamentally for the revolution. For the purposes of this story, right? So when they start with the Mayflower Compact, that leads to a hundred and fifty years of colonial rule. And what will happen is they'll bring their practices with them. You know, we have a famous saying here in New Hampshire, don't move to Massachusetts people who love to move here because of the better freedoms of liberties, especially on Second Amendment rights. But anyway, don't move here and mass it up. Yeah, it's like everybody from California that moves away from California, you know, California out there and goes into some of the other rural areas and wants to bring all the regulations and rules and that with them. And it is right. The other states up, you know, if you're going to be a commie, stay in your little tiny central desk you want. But we don't want any part of this. Right, right. And, you know, that's part of, I don't know who's knocking at my door. I live in the country, so I'm just going to ignore them. Probably a delivery driver. Anyway. So, yeah, so this leads to they land here. And so, a hundred and fifty years goes by. And so, all of the harms that are known as a problem, in other words, the reason they leave England, England follows them there, right? And we see this in the education system, which is important to my story, understanding the nature of education, what is considered public education. See, what they established then, who were these people in New Hampshire in that colonial period? They were Puritans. They were living out the Protestant Reformation. We can't forget that. I don't wear my faith on my sleeve, but we can't ignore that element because it's a critical piece of the crisis that we're in right now is understanding that public school, why was reading, writing, and arithmetic the primary basis was so they could read the gospel. They were teaching Latin, they were teaching Greek, and these elements. But those problems again came to Massachusetts. So they would leave Massachusetts and move north to New Hampshire within that first colonial period. And during that, they started to change our education system, which gave us our first two major public institutions that are now private schools, which is Exeter Academy and Dartmouth University. Both of those institutions were created under the colonial rule. But either way, we get to this revolution. We can't take it anymore. We know the rest of the story of the Declaration of Independence. It leads to a revolution. We prevail. And then they set about writing new forms of government. During the revolution, Virginia was what followed New Hampshire to write the second Constitution. And this put in place, again, if you want to know what the U.S. Constitution says, read those thirteen originals. Because then you don't have to rely on who? The court. Because the court often has to give decisions based on the arguments and the nature of the complaint before them. I have found that unethical attorneys have used this tactic to advance political agendas by moving litigation where both sides are arguing colorable law. I know you know what that means, right? The illusion of authority, of state authority. And they are both there arguing that, you know, the attorney general is saying, hey, our unconstitutional law, our colorable law is good enough. because they're using deception to make those arguments because of previous bad precedent. And then having the ACLU saying, no, we want it more colorable. We want it to be even more unconstitutional. And this gets into the harm. My whole story is understanding that we are a Republican, not a democracy. And what does that really mean, right? Because this gets back into how is law made? Why is it made? And what is our redress of grievances? So this whole process gets put in place. And New Hampshire, one of the things I like to highlight to people about explaining that very thing, what is the difference between a democracy and a republic? Many people have given good examples of it. But I like to explain it this way. If you look at Canada and England, they are still subjects of the crown. They have a parliament. Under their form of government, their written form of government, they have surrendered their sovereignty to their parliament. Their parliament, under that democratic process, represents them in their best interest. And let's see how well that's working for them right now, because it's not working for them very well. Because you have these globalists who are now trying to force multiculturalism. Remember I said earlier, we're going to return to the conversation of morality. who's going to decide morality, why it was important to understand that the Christians who settled the original thirteen states and the importance of that, because they were trying to live out, again, the Protestant Reformation as they saw fit. They did not want to have the tyranny of the Church of England and the abusive practices of the Roman Catholic Church. I'm a former Catholic, so don't beat me up on that. But the point is that history is well known that the church used because they understood what? To control the people, you control their minds, right? You control what they believe in their heart. And so that's what they were freeing themselves over. And so understanding the switch from a sovereign king to the people being now sovereign, the author of the law of the land. The law of the land begins with the state constitution. So for me, there are a hundred and one articles. Now, when it was originally written, it only had the Bill of Rights, which comes first, by the way. The U.S. Bill of Rights is an afterthought. Your state constitutions, almost all of them, begin with a Bill of Rights for a reason. And this is one of the... See, New Hampshire, another unique feature of New Hampshire is we are the first country in the world ever to form itself into a country by a constitutional process where... After the revolution, they were completely dissatisfied with that original document I mentioned earlier, January fifth, seventeen seventy six. Why? That document had one body. It was an assembly of men who had wealth and organizational skills, and they elected a committee of safety. But there was no rule within that first contract to amend it. There was no way to change its defects. or no provisions. So they let it stand because the committees of safety during the revolution went to each and every home on horseback and got them to sign a pledge. They wanted to know, are you with us or are you not with us? And that's what the committee of safety did. That's what I resurrected here in New Hampshire. They rode around and checked the loyalty. And if you didn't swear an oath to the revolution, you were disarmed. or worse, depending on the nature of what was going on. But back to the whole point here is that this whole process leads to the state constitution. They have a convention in, and the first convention rejected it because there was no bill of rights. They were upset with the king. Why? Because they had a Bill of Rights. It was called the English Bill of Rights. Why? Because they were all Englishmen. They were here under the protection of the crown. They were denied what? Due process. Because all of their petitions and remonstrances submitted to the crown for the abusive practices of the parliament. Passing what? Taxes. Taxes are abusive practices, right? And we know the long list. They're in the Declaration of Independence, right? So what do you think the founders of New Hampshire were going to do once given the opportunity? They were going to protect themselves from those abusive practices. So the first issue was the first convention didn't produce a Bill of Rights. So it went back to a second convention. We get a Bill of Rights. There are thirty nine enumerated powers. And then the final convention, we get a president. We want a president of New Hampshire because we're becoming a new independent and sovereign nation. Big deal. Not talked about very often anymore, but that is in fact what those thirteen states become because the state is a sovereign nation. The country of England is a state. So is Qatar and any of these other sovereign states. But the point is these three conventions made New Hampshire after ratification and it went back to the people and at the local level, at the key, at the local level got the consent to change their form of government. That's huge. And New Hampshire's constitution would be changed a hundred and fifty times from the beginning to today. Not all of it good. So let's be clear about that. Not all of it good. But the point is that there is a process there. So remember I said there's if all effective means of redress are not effectual. So that's the first one. You have the right to petition under the Bill of Rights to petition the government for redressing your grievances. to remonstrate and protest against the passage of bad law. For example, the very first time that was used was used by James Madison in Virginia to protest state funding of schools. Why? Because he understood something very brilliantly, I might point out. He pointed out, have you folks forgotten that which the state finances it controls? And oh, by the way, which version of Christianity do you propose we're going to teach? This is the bedrock instrument of all separation of church and state arguments, which gets to the heart of why are we in trouble? Our public education system today isn't a public education system based on morality and religion. It's based on secular ideology moved by the progressive left and the teachers union. And the reason we have half of America believing what it does, you're right, we have a serious cancer. And your own tax dollars have financed that revolution. And that revolution is the destruction of America. Those are not public schools. I beg anyone to answer the question, who decides what is moral or righteous and who should make that decision? Who's doing it now and who should make that decision? I'll let you answer. Agreed. I think it needs to go off of a standard and the standard that I think is probably standard we need to go off of is the rights given by God. And, you know, you go back to the Bible. The Bible has the purest form of government in it. If you go to kings and judges, if you go there, the system is all there and how to run a government that's set up for for keeping the peace. Right. It's all there. And they keep they kept, you know, the Jews, the Jews or the Israelites were doing the same thing that's happening in America. God gave ten commandments. That wasn't good enough. So they layered another six hundred and forty eight on top of that so that you were always in conflict. And it set it up to put people in in a situation of actually no standard, but just have something they could complain about and used to harass each other. Right, right. No, you're absolutely right. And when I address this issue, I point out to people, again, I'm not here to wear my faith on my sleeve. What I am asking people is to respect the history of what's happened. And the fact of the matter is the common law is predicated on, right, because a lot of times the conversation leads to other things explaining why it's more important. And that's my point in getting to in seventeen eighty three. The New Testament was seventeen hundred years old. Right. And so what do we have? If you if your only takeaways, if you are secular minded, if you're speaking to a secular audience and the two takeaways for sure are one history of human species on as a recorded instrument is probably the best, most accurate record we have right of the trials and tribulations of human beings. And from a behaviorist point of view as a dog trainer, I say to myself, what do we have in the makeup of the body? And ask that question on a broader scale. What do we have globally? And if you go, who sets the moral compass in any spot on the globe? And the answer to the question is, depends on the religion that dominates the usage and custom of that locale for X amount of time. So as you move around the globe, Each and every society is, in fact, in some variation or another, their society, their moral fiber, what they believe in their hearts is predicated by the religion of that society, right? And so when you go to cross that up, what's that lead to? A lot of chaos. In other words, what are we seeing in this multicultural experiment in England, in France, and so on and so forth? It goes to customs instead of what becomes custom or customary, in my opinion, rather than based on integrity and your service or the way you treat others. Right. And then they can justify anything by customs. It's like you get into the amount of Satanists that are out there right now and Satanism. That is just huge. And then they justify that and they justify all their behaviors around that. Well, it's exactly right. So that's exactly the war, right? The war against good and evil is that you have a document that's thousands of years old that has, it's a history book and it has a rules. It has, I love the acronym, Bible, basic instruction before leaving earth, right? I love to study Proverbs. And so I find a tremendous amount of guidance in Proverbs. And I try to read one a day based on the calendar. And it forces me to stay on schedule. And so my takeaway from it is the importance of the wisdom of the scripture because it guides people in the function of their lives. Whether you don't like it or not, the evidence of ignoring those principles are today. Simple. Those principles, what would you rather have? Those principles that guide our society where morals and values are taught as part of a child's education from birth or the radical leftist progressives doing what they feel, what they feel. So in other words, your morality is based on your feelings and not based on any type of reality other than your selfish, you know, out of control behavior. We talked about that on the first hour of the show today, on the switch from logic to going to emotions and having emotion-based. Well, the problem is that if a person makes a decision based on emotions and all logic is out of it, you are going to be blown around by whatever new doctrine is coming in front of you or policies or ideology or anything like that. Just because you think that in a way they've kind of demonized history and made us try to make us believe that they were ignorant. They're so much smarter than we are now. It's incredible. We look back historically and go, why can't we do what they did then without having all the automation and such? It's like, no, they were smart. They lived with the land. They understood how the world worked. And we have lost, we've lost so much intelligence to the lack of being connected with that and replaced with this emotional quotient that's turned people into like sniveling little, I don't know, pukes in a corner that are curled up in the fetal position. Are you kidding me? It's sad. Our current generation is in dire straits. I think so too. It's like, I mean, you know, you listen to him go from, you know, when you stand with God, I'm just going to say this is my right hand here because it's all backwards here. So I'm going to have to change here. So if you start with God, let's just say God is on the right and purely not politically right. But let's just say that God is here and Satan is over here. You've got pure good and pure evil. Some of us, we're kind of in the middle trying to make these moral decisions on a daily basis because there's a little gray area coming with some of the things. But if you stick to the Bible, the wisdom that's there and how to handle situations makes it real easy. Makes it really easy to cut to the chase. How are you treating others? Are you treating them with a fairness that you want back? One of the things that I started out when I was in business is telling clients and or telling tenants when I started buying real estate and such was don't treat your neighbor the way you want to be treated because you'll just sit in there and get in a fight. Treat them the way your grandma, you want to see your grandma or somebody you really love. Or your pet. If you really love someone or something, treat the people around you on this earth the way that you want to see them treated. And if you see somebody treating somebody you love poorly and it breaks your heart, there's your first clue to that there's something wrong going on. Don't repeat it to others. Right. Pretty easy. Very easy. Well, I'm going to return to my story of New Hampshire and wrap up our hour here in a few minutes. Yeah, just keep talking. We're fine. I don't have to go anywhere. So if you have to go somewhere, I get it. But don't feel rushed. So I have I want to take everyone to the very first article in our Bill of Rights because it sets up the republic, because everything that follows the state constitution and the U.S. Constitution starts with this sentence. All men are born equally free and independent. It has a semicolon. Therefore, all government of right originates from the people. I can't emphasize that enough. It doesn't say some. It doesn't say maybe. It doesn't say in the future. that you're just going to ignore this document and create more government. That's the big takeaway. All government of right originates from the people because the paradigm is inverted now. The people are sovereign. The people are the author of the law of the land and no longer the crown. And that's why that very first sentence, it only sounds like a few simple words, but its meaning is profoundly powerful when the rest of this document manifests itself. But it goes on to say, after it originates from the people, is founded in their consent. Think about that. In order to give government more power or to take it away, what did I say the first problem with the state constitution was? You couldn't change it. It wasn't amendable. So they made it so that it is. And who is the one capable of making that change? The people, not the government. And this is the whole nexus of all of our problems right there. I could end the show right now and tell you that's the whole problem, right? That government, see in a democracy, as I alluded to earlier, England and Canada is great example. They've surrendered that capacity, right? See, those politicians get to act in their best interest and they can't be trusted. Look at what they're doing to them. Look what governments of the past have done to their own people when given that power away. No, it's reserved under the people. What's the Ninth and Tenth Amendments say, right? Ninth says, just because we didn't think of it when we wrote this document doesn't mean you can assume more power. And the Tenth Amendment says, yeah, and by the way, those powers that you gave us are the limits of our power. And if not, they're retained to the states and or to the people. This is why. This is why. And again, that's why it's so profoundly important to know the sequence of events because you don't need case law to figure this out. So the next step, of course, is what rights, because we get into protection in the next article, all men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights, among which are the enjoying and defending life and Liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property. In a word, seeking and obtaining happiness. That covers a lot. Donna, have you ever read James Madison's essay on property? I don't know if I have. There's your homework assignment. Look it up. I guess so. What he does is he explains that property within the meaning of the word in this period in our history meant you have a right to your property and a property in your rights. In other words, a trespass on your rights is a trespass violation because it's what? It's your property. It belongs to you. The Bill of Rights is your private property. Again, something that's not being taught, but is in fact in our New Hampshire case law, that it is the private rights of the people. So I didn't just make that up. And so from a very important case, but we won't get into that. And the other important part of that- What's that? What's the case name? It's a Worcester. W O O S T E R. Worcester v. Plymouth. Not rooster, but Worcester. And it's a personal injury case where someone gets hurt on the roadway in eighteen eighty two when he sues the state and he's seeking a trial by jury. And it's a brilliant, brilliant dissertation on constitutional law by the New Hampshire Supreme Court addressing that issue. And, uh, That would be me. Hang on. That isn't me. Is it being cited there? Worcester v. Plymouth? Let's see. That's what I put in. Let me go back a minute and see if I clicked it because that's what was one of the first references that came up. Nope, that isn't it. Let me see. It's right here. I'll send you a link. Here, we'll go here. I'll send you a link. Yeah, that's it right there. The should be eighteen eighty two. Yeah, that's it. Yeah, and those are the cases that also cite it and attach to it. Oh, that's interesting. Yeah. Wow, that's a cool source. I haven't seen that one before. I look at a lot of sources, so that's cool. So what happens is, is the state tries to invoke the rights of the people. See, part two, the form of government under our constitution, because we have a part one and a part two, and that's what Worcester v. Plymouth breaks down. And so the state tries to say, hey, we're entitled to a trial by jury. And the court says, no, you're the government. You're not entitled to a trial by jury. That right is reserved to the people because the rights of the people belong to the people, not to the state. big deal that's a big deal so uh back to this point here so natural essential and inherent rights so I always ask my audience who gets to do the enjoying defending of your life liberty and property you do right it's for you it's not for the government there again why was there a militia Because the people were going to protect themselves. We didn't want what? Standing armies. Sound familiar? Oh, yeah. So this is all part of understanding the true nexus of the real source of authority. Because all government action today is perverted so that they've circumvented the function of both our state and federal constitutions. And they've done it by case... by influencing judges over the last hundred and fifty years or more really from the beginning you mean you look at the alien and sedition act uh because what was it john adams didn't like being called fat local reporter or had he had him arrested but anyway um so yeah that's the big point I want to make out here because I'm going to close with with the following two pieces enjoying defending in life. So that belongs to the people right now. The next part is the, I want to go to the last sentence and then I'll tie it with the contract. The last sentence in our state constitution, which is now a hundred and one articles is a fascinating reinforcement of the very first sentence. And I'm almost there, almost there at the very end. Here we go. provided that no alteration shall be made in this constitution before the same shall be laid before the towns and unincorporated places and approved by two-thirds of the qualified voters present and voting upon the question the question is giving the government any more power period we'll prove it to you so article twelve back to the bill of rights article twelve is your contract People say, how do they have any authority over you or your life? And how would they have authority to pass rules and regulations that clearly conflict with any of your rights? And so here's the proof that that fact is reserved to you. Hang on. Article XII in the New Hampshire Constitution says the following. Right here. Every member of the community has a right to be protected by it. That's why I went to what are your rights, right? Protecting your rights. So now they're going to talk about what you get as a taxpayer, okay? Because there's a quid pro quo here. Every member of the community, so that would include women and children and those who don't have voting rights, just to be clear. Every member of the community has a right to be protected by it in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property. He's therefore bound to contribute his share in the expense of such protection. There's that word protection again. And you can take this to the bank. New Hampshire case law on this article. The state loves to quote this portion as your duty to pay taxes. So you can take what this means to the bank when I'm telling you right now, because it's entrenched, because it's true, right? This is the article that says you have to contribute his share in the expense of such protection. Well, I would submit to you that protecting your rights is the whole purpose of part one. I mean, part two is the reason it was created was to protect part one, right? Because they had the common law. They didn't need all these new rules and regulations. And how do I know this? Because this document that I'm reading from right now is the early state papers in the first four years of the New Hampshire legislature. It's nine hundred pages long. You want to know what the legislature meant when they wrote this document? Four years of the House and Senate journals are there to read, which is what I read. That's why I know all of this stuff, right? That's why I read every election law the state legislature ever wrote back to the colonial period. So I know why the elections, why the changes were made, more importantly, and how they achieved them. But we'll talk about that next time we get together. to finish up this point on the protection. So you gotta pay and or to yield your personal service when necessary. This is fascinating. Grand juries were also when they exercise their common law function that has been stripped out of their current function. Today they act as a rubber stamp for your local prosecutor. That's it. It's so backwards. Under the original intent and the original law of seventeen ninety two in New Hampshire, the grand juries here did four things that they currently do not do. One, investigate whatever they want once they're in paneled just to make sure government is operating efficiently. And if it suspects that government is doing something wrong and it wants to investigate, it can do so without harming an individual's reputation. and protecting that individual's identity unless it needs to move to the next couple of steps. So if it finds that there's a minor gray area breach, it could refer a recommendation. I'll give you the state of Florida as an example of this function. State of Florida in the turn of the The local grand jury found that they were concerned about the local tax collector. The county tax collector was only keeping the tax dollars inside of his locked office. There was no safe. So they found a discrepancy in government protection and efficiency and made a recommendation to buy a safe and the county bought a safe and secured your tax dollars. That's an example, a positive tool that's been stripped from its function. Next is that if someone has administratively or a member of the legislature or a politician has in fact done something worthy of sanctions but not removal from office, could make those recommendations as well. That's who should be investigating your House and your Senate, not your members of their own staff and members they appoint themselves. That's ridiculous. That's the fox watching the hen house. Okay. It's what the grand jury is for, but that's not what we'll get to what it does now. But the next thing is in Alaska, when it became a nation actually put this in it, that the grand jury can remove the governor. So if it finds that he's violated his oath of office, they can use that as grounds for removal from office by a grand jury indictment. So those are some of the things, and or what is the other, the final step, of course, is if it finds that there is what should be, see, your grand jury is based up in common people. It's not full of lawyers. So if they have suspicions, they submit what? A... the referral process you have, um, no, no, there are two things. Um, I'm drawing a blank. Give me a second here. I've got to go to my resource here. Fifth amendment constitution. Yeah, this is a great process to go through to just to really explain this because so few people explain the process that I've even talked to. Right. So presentment power and what's the indictment? You get a true bill or no bill, but the... the presentment power, that's what it is. So you're presenting, you present to the county prosecutor and if he finds that there's probable cause to move forward, that's fundamentally where you're at. Now today, what they've done is they've stripped away that process from your common law at the local town process. Here in New Hampshire in seventeen ninety two, I found the original law and what it provided for was that when Every year it's a local election at the local level, independent of the judiciary. So they elect their grand jurors. And if you have cause for why you shouldn't serve, you have to convince your fellow neighbor why you shouldn't do your duty. That goes back to contribute your service when necessary. It wasn't just militia duty, but it was also any public duty because self-governance, Self-governance. Did they run for this for being part of the grand jury or were they nominated or how did that work? You were only the qualified voters of the district that were taxpayers because you had to be a taxpayer. You had to pay a poll tax. Only they were part of the jury selection and they would have, the moderator would call for a special local election just like we do today for reelecting a missing member of the House, Senate or otherwise, right? So this election is called for that purpose. And so the process was the county clerk being the person in charge of the court docket, would go to the judge and say, hey, we're going to need X amount of jurors. He'd sign the order. The order would go to the local town. The local town would elect the amount of jurors they need to fit whatever they need in that county because it was broken down by counties. So whatever that county needed, they would send those orders. They'd have an election at the local level. And then those elected would show up on the day of the order. The judge would swear them in and they would act independent of the judiciary. Now the legislature has given the clerk of every court in the state access to the DMV record and your voter registration records. And they now control the entire process. And it's strictly for the purposes of getting indictments. That's all they're in paneled for is to rubber stamp. And so all of the previous powers of the grand jury, the presentment powers to investigate and do all of those other things they ought to do. And again, they're gone for a reason. Why? Because this leads to the next story, the judiciary and how all of that got changed. But let me finish Article XII. So those are examples of your obligation. So you have to pay money, you have to pay taxes, and you have to do your civic duty. Next. Now the taxing. So what do you get for that? And this is not, by the way, this is not, this is going to sound like eminent domain, but it's not eminent domain because eminent domain would be a modern amendment, I think, in the last fifty years where they made a twelve A. This is Article twelve in the New Hampshire Bill of Rights. So this, like I said, isn't, it could be interpreted and may got used as eminent domain, but it's not as that specific provision. It's talking about how you pay taxes and whether you have to pay taxes, but no part of a man's property shall be taken from him for the purposes of, or applied to public uses. Right. Can't take from him and apply it to the public largesse. Okay. All of our taxes are unconstitutional at this point in time. So again, this is seventeen eighty four without his own consent, who the person, the person you're trying to take money from. So history, my research showed that means that if the town collector or the tax collector is willing to take chickens, donkeys, horses or other materials or methods of paying taxes, there was a lot of bartering going on. There was a shortage of paper money. They were using gold and silver. Because for depreciation purposes, by the way, also. But so this is going on. And then so it goes on or apply to public without his own consent or that of the representative body of the people. Most of my state legislature reads that and think we're talking about them. We're not talking about them. We're talking about us, the people. Because remember the first sentence in the last sentence of the document that says that only we, the people, can change this government? Well, they're also talking about the taxing provisions. New Hampshire's constitution was only based on property tax in seventeen eighty four. It's been amended six times since then to expand the state's taxing power. There's my evidence of what I'm saying is true, because prior to that usage in custom, there was no ability to charge you in any other way than based on your property. So does that make sense to you? So in order, because back to what did Parliament do, the Stamp Act and all those passage of laws to keep raising revenue for the king, because he needed more money. He was on multiple war fronts by the time the revolution was leading into the revolution, right? He had conflicts. He spread his military apparatus too thin globally. So to raise more revenue, he kept raising taxes on the colonists. And that's led to the revolution, wasn't it? Boston Tea Party and so on and so forth. So that's what that means. That means that you can't raise new taxes. This is one of the things we get for paying you in the first place. This is a big deal. It's a big deal. So next, and this is really, really powerful. I said this over and over again during COVID. So keeping in mind the preceding sentence that we just talked about, about not being able to change the government's authority over taxes or you, nor are the inhabitants. Who are the inhabitants? They're defined by this document as those people who possess political rights. Inhabitants are those persons who have the right to elect or be elected in the town, parish, or plantation where they live. That was the language used during that period. So now it's strictly the town or local municipality. But the point is, inhabitants are people who vote. That's the name. That's the constitutional word that says a voter or someone who runs for office. Not a resident. That's key. We'll talk about that next time I talk. We get together. Explaining that difference, because there's a real big difference, and most people don't know it. You're called a resident. The reason you're called a resident, they trafficked your legal person into D.C. so you pay federal taxes. Why? Because you're regulated by the ten-mile square. How do they establish taxing power over state citizens? If you're not in DC or, or any other federal territory that gets into a whole nother lengthy explanation, but it begins with understanding this. That's why I'm beginning with this for you and your audience. So extraordinary, Daniel. So the next thing that comes up is nor the inhabitants of this state controllable by any other laws than those which they, who is they? The people, the inhabitants, the people who pay for the taxpayer, right? So nor the inhabitants of the state controllable by any other laws than they or their representative body. We just discussed that their representative body is who? Them, the inhabitants. That's who we're talking about. The inhabitants have given their consent. I love this story. In the state of New Hampshire proposed the state legislature wanted to grow its power. It felt the need that it would exercise the amendment process. And so it proposed twelve changes to our state constitution. And I'm going to focus on five. First, we have an executive council that oversees our governor, and they were promoting the concept of getting rid of an executive council, one who had represented each district of the state, spread out in five districts. And that way they oversee the appointment of judges and spending of money. Let's get rid of that office and in its place, replace it as the next amendment, create a new office called the Office of Lieutenant Governor. You have one, don't you, in Michigan? Yes, we do. So they were going to change that here. Next, they had a Department of Agriculture because there wasn't one. A Department of Railroad. There wasn't one. The year is eighteen fifty. That's why history is so important. What powers were they exercising then and why not? The fact that these agencies didn't exist and the fact that they are now Asking for permission to grow government's power. And the last one you're going to love, a Department of Education. And the people, and, and twelve other changes. And, and so the people said, no, we're not giving you more power. So how do we have a Department of Education? Because the legislature, as I said earlier, went around the people, the will of the people that says they can't do this. And by statute created Department of Education. And then FDR would summon the governors of all fifty states during the reconstruction, not reconstruction, during the New Deal. He summoned all the representatives of the state governments to go home and get your legislatures to pass legislation accepting federal aid. Yeah, that's where that's where you come to. There you go. That's the poison pill right there. There you go. Take that foreign aid and you are there, you know. You're going to do what they tell you to do. All of our municipalities are completely broken. Right. They're broke. Unless they've got the federal monies coming to them, they're completely broken. Let me read one more to you that you'll find the taxing clause in the Bill of Rights, by the way, which is going to exclude federal taxation and it's going to exclude any changes to the existing Constitution unless the people permit it. Which they didn't, right? They didn't. They didn't. They did six times, but the U.S. Constitution, they didn't. They didn't pass the Sixteenth Amendment. That was fraudulently forced on the American people because of the Federal Reserve and all the power players that were in effect at that time. I'm going to give you a question here and then finish up with what you were saying. But how many amendments could you strike to the point of being actually lawful? Because I've always said you go back to, I don't know, Fourteenth, maybe? Everything after that? Well, the answer to your question is rather lengthy, so I'll give you a good research tool. Okay. John Locke, two treaties. Okay. Dissolvement of government. John Locke, and I'll give you a specific answer. John Locke famously said in his work that when talking about this very thing, how does a government become defunct? And he explains all the various methods that a government that exists can be made defunct, whether by its own hands or by external affairs of invasion and so on. So he talks about all the different ways that can happen. It's a great study. And he famously says that once a government redefines and reelects itself, not pursuant to the law of the land, it nullifies its very existence because it isn't the elected body of the will of the people because they didn't obtain the will of the people. They obtained their own consent, didn't they? Yes, they did. I think I used this analogy at the speech, and I'll give it this morning with your audience, and that is, I'm sorry, I lost my way. I got ahead of myself. It's okay. I've been interjecting too, so that's probably not ideal. Well, this is... Oh, the taxing clause. Ready? Okay. No subsidy, charge, taxed, imposed, or duty shall be established, fixed, laid, levied under any pretext whatsoever. I'll say it again. Under any pretext whatsoever without the consent of the people, which is the amendment process, or their representatives in the legislature. Remember I said to you, that the representative body of the people was not talking about the legislature. It was talking about the people. There's my evidence. We're still in the bill of rights. This is article twenty eight. We're talking about an extension of article twelve, the taxing clause. So the reason is the representatives of the legislature or the authority derived from that body. In other words, the reason that says the second part, there are three provisions there. There are three commas. First is the taxing power of the state can't be changed without the consent of the voter. The taxing power we have given you, you are free to do what? Delegate that to the local level. And that's what happened. So here in a Dillon rule state, we are not a home rule state. We are a Dillon rule state where each municipality, town, or political subdivision of the state is bound by the state legislature and the power it grants it, includes the SAUs, the schools, and so on, which forces upon the entire state an equal form of government so that each of its political umbrellas must act in the same manner statewide. I want to talk about the home rule. What are the deficiencies in home rule? Well, home rule allows, by the Constitution of that specific state, and there are many states in the Union who have that provision, right, where they've delegated in the Constitution by amendment the power or was created that way in the more modern states that came after the fact from the colonial period moving forward. But you find that... that they amended their constitutions in order to permit that to happen. So the local municipalities are in fact authorized to do A, B, and C, whatever the state constitution provides. I'll give you an example in Arizona. Arizona's Constitution, every state in the union, because of Article I, Section IV of the U.S. Constitution, that is the Elector's Clause, that Article I, Section IV. It delegates specifically to the legislatures of the several states, that's all fifty states, the responsibility to establish the time, the manner, and the place of conducting federal elections, right? So because it's responsible for doing that, it's the legislature and no one else. In other words, no one else gets to do that. Everyone else is excluded because they've been named as the official body. Arizona wanted to change that. And our state has contemplated that the progressive Democrats want to make a change. They want to amend our Constitution as Arizona did and create a brand new redistricting commission that is constitutional in authority. so that then the legislature can write statutes that cause that provision of the Constitution. So you end on a great note here. This is the proper method of doing things, that if you want to give more power to your state government, create a redistricting commission, as Arizona said, and give them power, but they, this new body, are still bound by federal law, and they're still bound by the state Constitution that gave it life. So that's the whole point there. And by the way, this has survived U.S. Supreme Court's judicial scrutiny under the recent Moore v. Harper case, which is a big part of my case. That's why I know this so well, right? The Moore v. Harper decision is a redistricting case. And so that case, as all of those cases come out, the following answer comes from those decisions. And that is the Supreme Court ultimately tells in its opinion that it has no authority to enter into debates about redistricting. Those are what is called justicable, right? Just whether a case is justicable. In other words, I may be pronouncing it wrong, but it's a complicated word. Forgive me. So they'll say it's not justicable because it is not reviewable because it's a political question. And the court isn't in the position of entering into political dialogue. It's there to judge controversies placed before it. So this is one tool the court will use to not render opinions like they did on my right to redress case. They said the question you posed to the state Supreme Court wasn't that at all, is it was a political question and they were free to handle it any way they saw fit. No, they don't get the right to ignore what petitions for redress grievances they will or will not hear. That's for the general court to decide. That's outrageous that they did that. And I'm not done with this story because it leads to my second lawsuit, my election lawsuit, which is to prove that the state citizenship requirement and granting voting rights to resident aliens is not acceptable. But I digress. Well, I love talking to you. I think this is great. So here's your election. This is one of your lawsuits. Right. Yeah, that's the first one. That's the first one. And I don't think you have the second one up there yet, do you? I believe it is. Let's see, where would it be? It should be there in the list. It just may be not in sequential order if it's not there. Okay. Well, you know what? I'm going to post this and everybody go on Daniel's Lawsuit and explore around her a little bit because I think you're going to learn a lot. I love talking with you. I mean, it's like, this is so fun for me to listen to you put down so much history as well as the basis, the legal basis, the lawful basis here on how we got to where we are. And I think it's fantastic. I tell you what, I'd like you to come back on in two weeks. We're going to I'm going to take Memorial Day off. But would you come back on the following Monday again? And let's get on with this because this is a great education. You never get anything in one one shot. It takes a little repetition and it takes more more details coming in to really understand this. And I think this is so important. I just love it. So would you like to put any last words in? I always say a prayer when I'm done because I actually do, I don't wear it, I live my faith. And I think that we're in such a crisis and it's a spiritual war that we're on and the war is to capture our minds. My commitment is to, as a believer, is to continue to encourage people and realize that The only answer we have to any of this nonsense going on is God almighty and his precious savior, Jesus Christ. And I stand on that. So I agree. I agree. And the reason I take a different tactic is I love this old, this old, I forget where this comes from. A friend of mine, an Italian said, there's an old Italian saying, and I don't know if it was the Italians that came up with it or not. But he makes the good quote of, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Right. And he adds to that, unless you know what makes him thirsty. Right? Fair enough. And so that's my personal tactic on addressing faith-based issues because I speak trying to, people are asking me to run for office. So I've been, that request keeps coming. And so I realize a lot of times when I speak, I'm addressing non-believers. Those who are saved don't need to hear from me. They've already been saved. So God bless them. So those aren't the souls I'm looking for. I'm looking for the souls that aren't saved. And I feel that if I can reach people through common sense and through making them think for themselves, and that's why I've taken that tactic because I have, you know, I've trained thousands of dogs, more than thirty five years of experience. And so this has given me a unique perspective on applying behavioral science. to a very simple animal that doesn't have a complicated thought process like we have. We have a unique capacity that the dogs don't have at all because their entire world revolves around their four primary instincts, defense, prey, pack, and reproductive, and memory. So they repeat things that are painful or they repeat things that are pleasurable and tend not to repeat things that are painful. And so that simple concept has taught me a unique way of dealing with people because each of those thousands of dogs that I've trained has all had a human being attached to them. It's not for the dog. It's for the human that I've had to find different ways of conveying what they perceive as a complicated subject, which is why does the dog act like a dog? Yeah. Cause doc, that's fun. So I rescue horses and I do some horse training. I like to, I like to rescue ones that have been specifically abused. I find it to be the most rewarding reestablishing trust with an animal that's been, that's been horrifically neglected or abused. I really do find that to be, I'd rather deal with that than have a perfect horse delivered to me. Great. Great stuff. It's great stuff. And it's really, it's where we start to compassionately deal with each other in the neglect and the abuse and neglect that we are coming out of from our own government. The ones we were made to trust or told to trust are the ones that are breaking the trust. So now how do you find something new that you can trust? That's the question that everybody's going to have to answer. You've got to go back. You can't continue to layer on more and more of the same stuff. You've got to go back in time instead of going forward. You've got to go back. That's how you get there. Well, that's how I took on this subject matter of how does my government and why does my government do and say the things it does. And so it's to start from the beginning, start from original source. That's good. I can tell you where we are now. We're run by a criminal organization. It's a crime syndicate that's global, but I digress. Anyhow, well, I'll see you for a minute. We're going to go on to our day and then I'll see you in two weeks. Same time, same place, same bat channel. Okay. Awesome. Thank you, Donna. Let's pray together a minute here. Dear Heavenly Father, thank you so much. for all the wonderful people that are out there that are trying, that have a heart for you, a heart for service, a heart to do the right things, even if everybody else around us is doing the wrong thing. and knowing the difference. The only way we know that is by coming to you, asking you for wisdom, asking you for discernment on the path that we're on. We're not asking for an easy path. We're asking for you to give us the feet to walk the path that you set before us. And we're thankful that you go with us every single step along the way, guiding us, giving us what we need for that day and for all days, the information we need, the doors to open and other ones to close so that we go down in an area that you want us to serve in. We need to go down those paths. Not everything. There's so many of us. And if each of us just picks up a little bit of what you ask us to do, the problem's solved. The problem is for us is to focus on you, on your word, on your guidance and such. You're a wonderful, wonderful friend to us. And we're thankful every day. I ask your favor to rest strongly upon Vicki, upon Christina, Mike, Bill, Daniel, and all the people that have shown up today to both contribute and to listen to Brandenburg News Network and whatever we're doing here. We don't care what the outcome is. We just do what you ask us to do and let you worry about the rest because we trust you. It all base is based on our trust of you, our belief in you and our trust that you are good all the time. And we are thankful for the fact that you always provide a way in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and savior. We pray. Amen. Amen. Final thought. Ready? Yeah. No, believe in miracles. You just watched one. How did I do what I just did other than God's intervention in my life and allowing all this to happen? I don't have an app academic pedigree that would warrant the lesson I just gave everyone. I give God all the glory because that's where it comes from. It doesn't come from me. I'm a dog trainer. How did I do this? You're a dog trainer and I'm a horse crap shoveler. So there you go. That comes with dog training, by the way, lots of it. Yeah, there you go. You know what? It uniquely qualifies you to be in a realm of politics because you can spot the bullshit, the horse shit a mile away and call it out. Yeah, that's it. When you clean up of it, you get to know what it looks like. That's right. You know what it looks like and you know how to get it out of the barn. You know, it's like, get it out of here. We're done with this. So with that said, everybody, thank you for joining us today. I'm going to be on tomorrow with, let's see, tomorrow is John Tater. And I've got a special guest on. You're going to love Rolo. He's going to be on tomorrow. And he is, I've met with him, talked to him many times. He's working, he's working pretty close to, every time I see him, it's at Mar-a-Lago. Let's just put it that way. We're going to be talking about faith and faith lessons tomorrow and how that shapes good people who decide to step up in government, what it really takes. And I mean, I'm not talking about doing mouth service to say, you know, to say, I'm a Christian and then praying and then stabbing somebody right in the back. It doesn't jive. That's not the way it works. Okay. That's a wolf in sheep's clothing. And there's lots of them out there. Tons of them. We're going to be talking about what it takes to to live out your faith tomorrow and faith lessons. And I think it's going to be wonderful. John Tater, y'all know what he does. Been on here for a couple of years with John every Tuesday talking about. what actual lawful defenses as we go through the lawful defense in filing pro se. And just as Daniel is done too, is filing our own, our own cases and holding people accountable. We have to do that. And with that said, God bless you all. God bless all those whom you love and God bless America. Make it a great day. God puts all sorts of things in front of us. Even if it's just going to the store and smiling to the people there, telling them how important their lives are, being encouragement. You never know who you're talking to who may have been carrying heartache and heartbreak that they can't even talk to anybody about. And one word of encouragement can change their whole life. That is one of the greatest gifts you can give a person is just walking up, take a few minutes to look in their eyes, acknowledge that they're a person and encourage them. And you might be really surprised at what your significance is on a daily basis when you do that. Have a great day. Daniel, stay on the line for just a minute. I'm going to end the stream and then we talk about real stuff. I wish you could join us for these conversations because they're fantastic. But anyhow, we'll see you tomorrow and then Daniel in two weeks.