Speaker 1: Screw around and find out. That is now what pro
Speaker 1: Trump American truck drivers are now saying about boycotting New
Speaker 1: York City after the civil fraud case against Donald Trump. There,
Speaker 1: many of the Trump supporting truckers are saying they are
Speaker 1: now refusing to transport loads to and from New York
Speaker 1: City after the former president was fined more than the
Speaker 1: GDP of some small countries in the world. He was
Speaker 1: fined three hundred and fifty five million dollars as well
Speaker 1: as as well as has his ability.
Speaker 2: To run businesses in the States suspended, and that Friday
Speaker 2: civil fraud verdict.
Speaker 1: Now to be clear, this verdict against Donald Trump will
Speaker 1: be appealed.
Speaker 2: But what we know is you had an.
Speaker 1: Activist da who ran on putting Donald Trump in jail,
Speaker 1: saying I'm coming after Trump if you elect me. You
Speaker 1: also had a judge there wearly hated Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: his antics were like off of a TV show, a sitcom,
Speaker 1: like The Office.
Speaker 2: It was embarrassing.
Speaker 1: This, however, has roal ramifications for the Trump family. And
Speaker 1: what this means is if you're a conservative, you are
Speaker 1: now being put on notice in New York City that
Speaker 1: they will come after you if you do something they
Speaker 1: don't like. They don't need, by the way, anyone to
Speaker 1: actually be defrauded.
Speaker 2: In fact, the banks that did business with.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump testified in his defense at this trial and
Speaker 1: said that there was nothing the farious that went on.
Speaker 1: They were there to defend Donald Trump, and no one
Speaker 1: was defrauded in this case. There was no victims in
Speaker 1: this case because everything was paid back in full the
Speaker 1: exact way that the business was done correctly.
Speaker 2: That didn't matter.
Speaker 1: So the question now becomes who gets the three hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty five.
Speaker 2: Million dollar fine.
Speaker 1: In theory, who not victims because no one was defrauded.
Speaker 1: The state, however, is trying to bankrupt Donald Trump, and
Speaker 1: that is where the pro Trump truck drivers are coming in.
Speaker 1: All right, I want to tell you real quick about
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobile. For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's
Speaker 1: only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only
Speaker 1: trust me, they're literally the only one. Patriot Mobile offers
Speaker 1: dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all
Speaker 1: three major networks.
Speaker 2: What does that mean to you? It means you get
Speaker 2: the same.
Speaker 1: Coverage that you're accustomed to, but you're doing it without funding.
Speaker 2: The left.
Speaker 1: You may not know the Big Mobile gives massive donations
Speaker 1: to Planned Parenthood, to Democratic candidates, causes and organizations. Why
Speaker 1: give your money to a group of people that literally
Speaker 1: hate your values, hate what you stand for, hate your family,
Speaker 1: traditional Christian values. That is why I switch to Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 1: And when you switch, you're sending a message that you
Speaker 1: support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, the
Speaker 1: Second Amendment, as well as our military, our veterans, and
Speaker 1: our first responder heroes. They make switching easy one hundred
Speaker 1: percent US based customer service team. Plus, you can keep
Speaker 1: your same cell phone number, upgrade your phone to a
Speaker 1: new phone, or keep the one you've got in your
Speaker 1: hand as well. And the most important part, every time
Speaker 1: you pay your bill, they take a percentage of your
Speaker 1: bill every month and give it back to conservative causes
Speaker 1: that you help choose to support.
Speaker 2: So check them out.
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobile dot com slash ferguson that's Patriot Mobile dot
Speaker 1: com slash ferguson or nine to seven to two meter
Speaker 1: Patriot get free activation when you use the offer code ferguson.
Speaker 1: That's Patriotmobile dot com slash ferguson or nine seven to
Speaker 1: two Patriot. Now there's one Mega Maga truck driver. His
Speaker 1: name is Chaquez I Go Ray. He posts a video
Speaker 1: to x formerly known as Twitter following the verdict, sharing
Speaker 1: that he and many others of his colleagues on the
Speaker 1: road are now declining New York City delivery jobs due
Speaker 1: to the Manhattan Judge is ruling. Now, many of you
Speaker 1: may not realize that many eighteen will drivers they go
Speaker 1: on job boards and they find loads to run from
Speaker 1: one city to another so you can be choosy. And
Speaker 1: what they're now advocating for is letting New York City
Speaker 1: hurt because of their political bias towards conservatives. I want
Speaker 1: you to hear what this truck driver had to say
Speaker 1: in his own words.
Speaker 3: I've been on the radio talking to drivers for about
Speaker 3: the less hour hour fifteen minutes and I'm talking to
Speaker 3: at least ten drivers going the other way.
Speaker 2: I'm heading down from Soutain.
Speaker 3: Wisconsin, and uh, they're gonna start refusing loads in New
Speaker 3: York City starting on Monday, all right. I got about
Speaker 3: three drivers that I drive with they're ready fabr to
Speaker 3: boss and told them they ain't going to New York City.
Speaker 3: So I don't know, uh how far across the country
Speaker 3: disease or how many truckers are gonna start denying loads
Speaker 3: going to New York City.
Speaker 1: Now the big question is, now, will this gain steam.
Speaker 2: I think there's a very good chance that those that.
Speaker 1: Are pro Trump truckers are going to unite and they're
Speaker 1: gonna say, hey, we're not gonna do this. One of
Speaker 1: the reasons why it's really hard already to get an
Speaker 1: eighteen wheeler load into Manhattan, into New York City. So
Speaker 1: many of them are saying, hey, this actually makes our
Speaker 1: lives even easier. We don't have to deal with New York,
Speaker 1: especially if you're trying to destroy Donald Trump. At the
Speaker 1: same time, here's the second part of what he said about, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm not wishing ill will on the people in general,
Speaker 1: but if this is who you're electing and this is
Speaker 1: what you're gonna do, we're gonna respond.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you I don't wish nothing on nobody.
Speaker 3: But by what I'm hearing, this is real. You know
Speaker 3: we'll see. But you know, leave Trump alone, all right,
Speaker 3: you know he you know you ain't got Trump.
Speaker 2: So cut the book. Now.
Speaker 1: Look this guy here basically saying screw around and find
Speaker 1: out after this video he put up on X it
Speaker 1: went viral. He also went on to say, and this
Speaker 1: is his words on X. He said, I've been on
Speaker 1: the radio now for hours. I talked to these truckers
Speaker 1: are going to refuse loads on Monday for New York City.
Speaker 1: I talked to three guys that I work with who
Speaker 1: texted the Boston told him no in New York City.
Speaker 1: He then went on to say, truckers are ninety five
Speaker 1: percent Trump.
Speaker 2: I'll get overturned.
Speaker 1: It'll get overturned on appeal, he says, referring to this
Speaker 1: court case. But you know how blankingheard is it to
Speaker 1: get one of these blankers into New York City?
Speaker 2: Cut the blank I'll see y'all down the road.
Speaker 1: This video has now been seen six point four million
Speaker 1: times since he put it up on X, and what
Speaker 1: we're seeing from the comments is exactly what he said.
Speaker 2: Those that are identifying as truck.
Speaker 1: Drivers making it very very clear, extremely clear that they
Speaker 1: are going to say to New York City, if this
Speaker 1: is how you're going to treat the former president, units
Speaker 1: it to America and you're going on a good luck
Speaker 1: getting what you need into your city. Now, obviously there's
Speaker 1: two things that could happen one, the cost of goods
Speaker 1: could go up, and two, they may have to increase
Speaker 1: the price that they're willing to pay for those loads
Speaker 1: into New York City if this holds or expands.
Speaker 2: If that is the case, we'll be put in.
Speaker 1: A very very interesting situation for not only New York City,
Speaker 1: but also for the Biden administration to see what their
Speaker 1: response is. This is now where we are. It is
Speaker 1: truly shocking to see it this way. I think it
Speaker 1: is very very awesome, amazing that these truck drivers and
Speaker 1: many truck drivers listen to this show. And I want
Speaker 1: to encourage you if this is what you're a part of.
Speaker 1: This is what I refer to as a legitimate peaceful protest.
Speaker 1: God bless you, because this is exactly what should happen.
Speaker 2: This is exactly and how it should happen.
Speaker 1: This is the whole ball game here, and this is
Speaker 1: how we make a stand. Because imagine if a bunch
Speaker 1: of eighteen millers stop giving goods to New York City,
Speaker 1: what does.
Speaker 2: That do to New York City.
Speaker 1: They're going to run out of goods quickly, and then
Speaker 1: it's going to become a real issue quickly. It's going
Speaker 1: to be clear that there's going to be problems quickly.
Speaker 1: This is the biggest problem that we have in this
Speaker 1: country is that people don't understand that we do have
Speaker 1: the power to stand our ground, we do have the
Speaker 1: power to fight back, we do have the power to
Speaker 1: unite together.
Speaker 2: And I'm hoping that what ends up coming.
Speaker 1: Out of this is that the truckers actually inspire other
Speaker 1: Americans who we are in the silent majority, to say
Speaker 1: enough already. You know, I look at the pro Palestinian
Speaker 1: protesters real quick and what they have done send this
Speaker 1: war broke out. But with these terrorists that killed the
Speaker 1: innocent people in Israel. Have you noticed how organized and
Speaker 1: how loud they are. Have you noticed how many roadways
Speaker 1: they've been able to shut down. Have you noticed how
Speaker 1: many protests they've had. You would think that there's a
Speaker 1: hell of a lot of pro Hamas protesters, Palace and
Speaker 1: in protesters in the country. In reality, there just aren't
Speaker 1: that many. You look at the protests, they're usually small.
Speaker 1: And my point is, imagine if all these truckers say, Okay,
Speaker 1: watch this, watch what we're about to do. You think
Speaker 1: what they're doing is impressive. Wait till hundreds of loads
Speaker 1: a day get missed into New York City. Watch how
Speaker 1: fast that becomes an issue. This is why I'm saying
Speaker 1: it's so inspiring. So I want to make it clear
Speaker 1: to every truck driver that's listening right now, if you're
Speaker 1: a part of this, God bless you. Let me also
Speaker 1: just get into the finds here and back to this
Speaker 1: court case for a moment with Donald Trump. The judge
Speaker 1: that is fined Donald Trump more than three hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty million, bars him from running businesses in New York
Speaker 1: for three years, and goes after his kids. I want
Speaker 1: you to understand that this is exactly what socialists and
Speaker 1: communists and Marxist due to their political enemies, they ruined
Speaker 1: them financially and they try to lock them up and
Speaker 1: put them in jail.
Speaker 2: But it's not just them, it's their families.
Speaker 1: Look at how this also went after the Trump sons,
Speaker 1: Eric Trump and Don Junior. The judge who presided over
Speaker 1: the civil fraud trial against Donald Trump, not only did
Speaker 1: he not have a single person that said they were defrauded,
Speaker 1: but the people that they claim were defrauded came into
Speaker 1: the courtroom and actually defended Donald Trump. It didn't matter
Speaker 1: because what they said was you are going to be ruined.
Speaker 1: Business associates and the company you got to pay more
Speaker 1: than three hundred and fifty.
Speaker 2: Million in damages.
Speaker 1: It's more than some smaller country's GDP and more than
Speaker 1: their budget for an entire year. They say that's in damages, right, Okay,
Speaker 1: so let's talk about the damages. Who was damaged, who
Speaker 1: was defrauded, who was harmed? If you can't answer that question,
Speaker 1: then what the hell are we doing here? If you
Speaker 1: go to the people you claim were defrauded and they
Speaker 1: end up testifying on behalf of Donald Trump saying we
Speaker 1: were never defrauded, he paid us back, everything was fine,
Speaker 1: then the question then becomes what are we doing here?
Speaker 2: Yet again, well, we know what we're doing here.
Speaker 1: These are communists, Marxist socialists who are trying to shut
Speaker 1: down the president of the United States of America and
Speaker 1: bankrupt him.
Speaker 2: In the process.
Speaker 1: To not just send a message to Donald Trump, but
Speaker 1: to every other conservative you better watch out because you
Speaker 1: could be next.
Speaker 2: You play by the rules that we lay.
Speaker 1: Out for you, and if you buck the system, which
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has clearly done, then we will come after
Speaker 1: you in liberal cities where you are or where you've
Speaker 1: done business and we will do everything we can to
Speaker 1: bankrupt you.
Speaker 2: I do not believe that this case is going to
Speaker 2: stand on appeal. I think it'll be overturned.
Speaker 1: But you got to understand that Judge Arthur ordering the
Speaker 1: former president of the Trump Organization to pay this three hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty four million of damages and barring Trump from
Speaker 1: serving as an officer director of a New York corporation
Speaker 1: or other legal india in New York for a period
Speaker 1: of three years. He's doing this because he wants to
Speaker 1: not just ruin Donald Trump. He wants to bankrupt him,
Speaker 1: and he wants to him to be basically homeless.
Speaker 2: He wants it to.
Speaker 1: Be the biggest punishment of his life, only for committing
Speaker 1: a crime of what running for office again.
Speaker 2: None of this right now that we're.
Speaker 1: Talking about would have happened if Donald Trump wouldn't have
Speaker 1: said I'm running fors and again after he lost last time.
Speaker 2: The New York Attorney General James.
Speaker 1: Whose office brought the case, said that with pre judgment interest,
Speaker 1: the judgment actually totals more than four hundred and fifty million,
Speaker 1: an amount, she says, which will continue to increase every
Speaker 1: single day until the judgment is paid, So the three
Speaker 1: P fifty four is actually four fifty, which will be
Speaker 1: a half a billion dollars very soon. Politico also ran
Speaker 1: a propaganda article this weekend saying, can Trump pay? What
Speaker 1: if he doesn't? What's going to happen to him? Right,
Speaker 1: that's their line, what happens? Can Trump pay? What if
Speaker 1: he doesn't? Here's what we know about Trump's massive civil judgments,
Speaker 1: because remember this is all about Donald Trump being guilty.
Speaker 2: That's it. There's their byline says, he's now.
Speaker 1: Referring to Trump on the hook for nearly a half
Speaker 1: billion dollars across three civil cases. These are the rules
Speaker 1: for when and how he must pay. You go down
Speaker 1: to the article. It says a seven figure verdict, an
Speaker 1: eight figure verdict, and now a nine figure verdict. You
Speaker 1: know it's a trend here, right, we'll get you. Oh
Speaker 1: that wasn't enough, all right, We'll go bigger the next time.
Speaker 2: Oh that what enough? All right, We'll go bigger the
Speaker 2: next time.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has been hit with all three in the
Speaker 1: past nine months, with Fridays three hundred and fifty four
Speaker 1: million dollar penalty for New York business fraud by far
Speaker 1: the most massive that we've seen He's now in the
Speaker 1: hook for over four hundred and forty million, and then
Speaker 1: with interests. These are all civil judgments as he heads
Speaker 1: towards a Republican nomination, and as he prepares for one
Speaker 1: or more criminal trials this year. This is Politico saying this,
Speaker 1: those criminal cases could put him in jail, and in
Speaker 1: the meantime, is escalating troubles in his civil cases are
Speaker 1: packing a devastating financial punch, even for a man who
Speaker 1: claims to be a billionaire. Four hundred and forty million
Speaker 1: is potentially crippling amount of cash to turn over.
Speaker 2: Can Trump afford the judgments? When does he have to
Speaker 2: pay them?
Speaker 1: And what happens if he says he can't or if
Speaker 1: he's outright refuses.
Speaker 2: Here's a look at what comes next. Politico rights.
Speaker 1: Trump's company isn't public and he has famously refused to
Speaker 1: close his tax returns, so his cash flow situation is
Speaker 1: shrouded in mystery. Politico rights right, And see, they got
Speaker 1: to paint a picture that Donald Trump somehow isn't trusted. Well,
Speaker 1: if your company isn't publicly traded, why the hell should
Speaker 1: you know exactly how much cash I have?
Speaker 2: Anyway?
Speaker 1: In fact, most people I know don't know what their
Speaker 1: best friend has in cash, or even their family members.
Speaker 1: But apparently, if it's Donald Trump, you should know it
Speaker 1: all and if you don't, he's hiding something.
Speaker 2: Wish. They use the same logic.
Speaker 1: When using talking about the Biden crime family, don't you?
Speaker 1: Politico then writes, even if he has four hundred and
Speaker 1: forty million in cash on hand, and it's far from
Speaker 1: clear that he does, paying the judgment could wipe out
Speaker 1: his account, since Trump himself has placed as cash reserves
Speaker 1: in the in the ballpark of that amount. Trump claimed
Speaker 1: in a deposition last year he had substantial, substantially an
Speaker 1: excess to four hundred million in.
Speaker 2: Cash on hand.
Speaker 1: We have I believe four hundred plus and going up
Speaker 1: very substantially every month, he said, adding my biggest expense
Speaker 1: is probably legal fees. Unfortunately, but it's unclear whether that
Speaker 1: number is accurate. That deposition, after all, was part of
Speaker 1: a of the very lawsuit in which a judge found
Speaker 1: that Trump had repeatedly inflated his net worth. If he
Speaker 1: doesn't have enough cash on hand, would he have to
Speaker 1: sell properties? See this is the wet dream of the
Speaker 1: Democratic Socialist Communist Party. Trump would likely have to sell something,
Speaker 1: although it wouldn't necessarily have to be property. He could
Speaker 1: sell investments or other assets. They write, what happens if
Speaker 1: he resists paying?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: Because again, this is Donald Trump. We've already agreed that
Speaker 1: he's guilty. We've already agreed that he's the worst person
Speaker 1: in the world. Wor right, That's what Politico's saying here.
Speaker 1: In the civil fraud case, which is in New York
Speaker 1: State court, if Trump can't post the funds or get
Speaker 1: a bond, then the judgment would take effect immediately and
Speaker 1: a sheriff could begin seizing Trump assets. The rules are
Speaker 1: slightly different in federal court, which is the venue for
Speaker 1: the eighty three point three million dollar judgment that Trump
Speaker 1: owes for defaming the writer e Jing Carroll after she
Speaker 1: accused him of raping her. By the way, he was
Speaker 1: never convicted of any such crime, and then when he
Speaker 1: said she was full of it, she sued, And guess what,
Speaker 1: in a liberal court they said, yeah, we like this.
Speaker 2: Let's let's put.
Speaker 1: Trump in more financial peril with an eighty three point
Speaker 1: three million dollar judgment. He also owes Carol an additional
Speaker 1: five million from a separate verdict last year Carol could
Speaker 1: pursue post judgment discovery under the jurisdiction of the judge
Speaker 1: who oversaw the trial. Through that process, the judge could
Speaker 1: order Trump to produce his bank account records, place leans,
Speaker 1: or garnish his wages.
Speaker 2: Do you see this?
Speaker 1: This is the playbook for anybody that gets out of line.
Speaker 1: Now in a liberal city or state in America, they're
Speaker 1: going to bury you.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I say, this is why the truck drivers are saying,
Speaker 1: screw you, New York. If this is what you're going
Speaker 1: to do, see if we'll work in your state, See
Speaker 1: if we'll deliver your loads.
Speaker 2: Quote.
Speaker 1: I think he's going to have to pay. And whether
Speaker 1: it requires him to sell or put a lien on
Speaker 1: something to get a loan, that's his problem, not ours.
Speaker 1: He's going to pay. That's what Carol's attorney said on
Speaker 1: CNN last month. The judge Kaplan added to quote, will
Speaker 1: use judgment enforcement mechanisms.
Speaker 2: To make sure that he pays.
Speaker 1: If Trump truly can't afford the judgments, he can have
Speaker 1: to declare bankruptcy. Another wet dream of the left. Can
Speaker 1: Trump delay payment by appealing the verdicts. No, in all
Speaker 1: three cases, he has to put money in an ASCO
Speaker 1: account with the court, or get a bond while he's
Speaker 1: appealing the verdicts. With a civil fraud verdict which Trump
Speaker 1: is valed to appeal, the amount to be posted or
Speaker 1: bonded is set by the court. It is typically about
Speaker 1: one hundred and twenty to one hundred and twenty five
Speaker 1: percent of the judgment amount to account for additional post
Speaker 1: judgment interests that occurs that accruesed. I should say during
Speaker 1: the appeal process. With last year's Carol verdict, which Trump
Speaker 1: has appealed, he turned over five point five million to
Speaker 1: the court, which was worth eleven percent of the judgment.
Speaker 1: For the more recent Carol verdict, which Trump has also
Speaker 1: vowed to appeal, one hundred and eleven percent of the
Speaker 1: judgment would be ninety two point four to six million.
Speaker 1: You notice what they're trying to do. They're trying to
Speaker 1: bankrupt him. I want to say what I said a
Speaker 1: moment ago. For the most recent verdict, which is the
Speaker 1: woman who has sued him, Carol, Trump is vowed to
Speaker 1: appeal that absurd.
Speaker 2: Judgment against him.
Speaker 1: One hundred and eleven percent of the judgment, it would
Speaker 1: be ninety two point four eight million, listen carefully. Trump
Speaker 1: has a thirty day window after the January twenty sixth
Speaker 1: verdict to either pay cash and do the court's escrow,
Speaker 1: or get a bond while he appeals.
Speaker 2: If he chooses to file a bond, he.
Speaker 1: Will likely have to pay a twenty percent deposit that
Speaker 1: would be sixteen point sixty six million and put up collateral,
Speaker 1: but it could come with fees and interests, making it
Speaker 1: more expensive in the long run, and it would require
Speaker 1: Trump to find a third party willing to take on
Speaker 1: the risk of loading him the money. Politico then, rights,
Speaker 1: does he personally have to pay the verdicts? Could he
Speaker 1: get his campaign or pack or the RNC to pay.
Speaker 1: The courts don't have restrictions on the sources of funds
Speaker 1: used to pay judgments, and Trump would surely like to
Speaker 1: tap other funds. Then whatever money is in his own
Speaker 1: personal accounts, he could transfer assets from the Trump organizations
Speaker 1: to him in order to help satisfy the judgments.
Speaker 2: Using his political vehicles to pay would be well far trickier,
Speaker 2: they say.
Speaker 1: There is a general ban on using campaign donations for
Speaker 1: personal uses unrelated to a campaign or the official duties
Speaker 1: of an office holder, and as for his political action committees.
Speaker 1: A professor of constitutional law at New York University Law School,
Speaker 1: said they can't pay Trump's judgments.
Speaker 2: Campaign funds cannot be.
Speaker 1: Used for that purpose, regardless of whether the pack is
Speaker 1: the decision maker, he sent an email to Politico. Besides,
Speaker 1: they say Trump's packs may not be able to afford
Speaker 1: the judgments since he's been using them to pay for
Speaker 1: the many lawyers defending him across his criminal.
Speaker 2: And civil cases.
Speaker 1: Now, two of Trump's packs spent twenty nine million in
Speaker 1: legal consulting and legal fees in the second half of
Speaker 1: last year, leaving only five million in his leadership pack's
Speaker 1: bank account. Republican National Committee doesn't have the same ban
Speaker 1: on the personal use of finds is Trump's campaign committee,
Speaker 1: but paying Trump's judgments could jeopardize They say it's non
Speaker 1: profit status.
Speaker 2: So you think.
Speaker 1: About what all I just said to you here, and
Speaker 1: you've got to understand something. What's clear is the democratic
Speaker 1: Communist Socialist.
Speaker 2: Marxist have their game plan.
Speaker 1: Their game plan is to tie him up in court
Speaker 1: during this election cycle number one and then bankrupt him
Speaker 1: with absurd and ridiculous judgments in courts like New York City,
Speaker 1: where they can destroy his life, his family's life, and
Speaker 1: take everything away from him. This is also, i will
Speaker 1: say it again, bigger than Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: I want to be clear about that.
Speaker 1: This is so much bigger because this is also a
Speaker 1: shout across about any other hardcore conservative that thinks.
Speaker 2: About getting out of line.
Speaker 1: Because what they're saying is will come after you too.
Speaker 1: You notice their coming after him all over the country
Speaker 1: in liberal places where they can get liberal juries and
Speaker 1: liberal judges and activist Soros das. I also want to
Speaker 1: hit pause on this story for just a second and
Speaker 1: go back to another story I talked about earlier this
Speaker 1: week and one that I think directly relates to this,
Speaker 1: so you understand just how corrupt our government is earlier
Speaker 1: this past week, and if you missed it, go back
Speaker 1: and listen to the entire podcast. Okay Dowla Ben ferguson
Speaker 1: podcasts wherever you get your podcasts, and you can go
Speaker 1: back and listen to this episode because I expose for
Speaker 1: you the CIA and foreign intelligence agencies illegally targeting Spye
Speaker 1: illegally on twenty six Trump associates before the two thy
Speaker 1: sixteen election cycle. We now know that our government and
Speaker 1: our intelligence community of our government asks foreign spy agencies
Speaker 1: to spy on twenty six associates of Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: the run up to the twenty sixteen election.
Speaker 2: Those around him that were working for him, which.
Speaker 1: Then triggered the allegations that the former president's campaign had
Speaker 1: been colluding with Russia. According to a report, who was
Speaker 1: behind it the highest player players in the Biden of
Speaker 1: or I say, the Obama administration.
Speaker 2: In fact, this was twenty fifteen.
Speaker 1: Former CIA director John Brennan identified and also presented the
Speaker 1: Trump targets to the US intelligence sharing partners and the
Speaker 1: so called Five Eyes agencies. Now we're the five Eyes.
Speaker 1: It's an intelligence gathering organization in the US, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia,
Speaker 1: New Zealand. The report by independent journalists, one of them,
Speaker 1: Matt Taibi, had talked about how this is what they
Speaker 1: are now doing. They cite multiple unnamed sources, including ones
Speaker 1: close to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that's
Speaker 1: led by Representative Mike Turner, a Republican from Ohio. Turner's
Speaker 1: office did not respond to requests for comment about this
Speaker 1: earth shattering news for the intelligence agencies the US intelligence community.
Speaker 1: They did say they identified the twenty six Trump associates
Speaker 1: as people to quote, bump, or make contact with, or manipulate.
Speaker 1: One source told the Outlet, and spy speak just so
Speaker 1: you know what bumping is. Bumping is when a reason
Speaker 1: is manufactured out of thin air to meet with a
Speaker 1: target of interest in order to develop a relationship that
Speaker 1: could lead to actual intelligence.
Speaker 2: That's now what we're being told.
Speaker 1: They were quote targets of our own intelligence community and
Speaker 1: our own law enforcement targets to colect and misinformation.
Speaker 2: The sources confirmed British.
Speaker 1: Government Communications headquarters Intelligence Apparatus was also making contact we've
Speaker 1: now confirmed with Trump's associates as early as March of
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen. According to the report, they were making contact
Speaker 1: and they were bumping Trump people.
Speaker 2: Going back to March.
Speaker 1: Of sixteen, they were sending people around the UK, around Australia,
Speaker 1: around Italy. The MI six was working at an intelligence
Speaker 1: school they'd set up.
Speaker 2: A spokesperson said.
Speaker 1: The Outlet of the claim it was asked to conduct
Speaker 1: wire tapping against then President elect Our nonsense. Well, remember
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and Barack Obama also said that there was
Speaker 1: never such thing as spying on Donald Trump. We now
Speaker 1: know they lied about that intelligence related to the alleged
Speaker 1: surveillance effort, they say is housed in a ten inch binder,
Speaker 1: according to the outlet, which Trumps seventy seven ordered to
Speaker 1: be to classified at the end of his presidency and
Speaker 1: could contain evidence that quote multiple US intelligence officials broke
Speaker 1: claws against spying and broke claws against election interference, which
Speaker 1: are both major felonies.
Speaker 2: Get this.
Speaker 1: The whereabouts the alleged thick binder are quote unquote unknown.
Speaker 1: The Trump campaign and the CIA did not respond to
Speaker 1: the New York Post requests for comment on the story either.
Speaker 1: What we do know is that warrantless surveillance of US
Speaker 1: persons is specifically.
Speaker 2: Prohibited by US law. Let me say that again.
Speaker 1: Warrantless surveillance of US persons is specifically prohibited by US law.
Speaker 1: So why was the intelligence community gathering intel on all
Speaker 1: of these Trump associates and asking the Five Eyes spying
Speaker 1: conglomerate to spy on people, or bump people or entrap
Speaker 1: people with a Trump campaign? Former FBI lawyer Kevin Klinsmith
Speaker 1: was sentenced to probation in twenty twenty one after admitting
Speaker 1: that he falsified an email to renew a wire tap
Speaker 1: against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page. You noticed by
Speaker 1: the way he was sentenced to probation, not to jail.
Speaker 1: Page had been wired tapped after intelligence sources suspected he
Speaker 1: might have been targeted by Russian spies. The wired tap,
Speaker 1: which was approved by the of course secret Foreign Intelligent
Speaker 1: Surveillance Court, was renewed several times after it was first granted,
Speaker 1: even though the information data backing it up said it
Speaker 1: was not to be done and they didn't have probable
Speaker 1: cause to continue to.
Speaker 2: Grant the warrants.
Speaker 1: We also know that March Special counsel John Durham concluded
Speaker 1: that the FBI investigation of Trump's alleged collusion with Russia
Speaker 1: was was quote unquote seriously flawed and had no basis
Speaker 1: in evidence after.
Speaker 2: A four year review of the probe.
Speaker 1: In response, the FBI said it was implementing dozens of
Speaker 1: corrective actions since the improper Trump probe and that the
Speaker 1: quote missteps identifying the report could have been prevented close quote.
Speaker 2: None of this, by the way, seems to have actually
Speaker 2: taken place.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty two, You may remember that Matt Taibi,
Speaker 1: as well as another journalists, Scholl Amberger were involved in
Speaker 1: the publishing of the Twitter Files expose, a which detailed
Speaker 1: how the social media giant's previous management team sought to
Speaker 1: silence controversial voices and suppressed new items, such as the
Speaker 1: posts reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop to save Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's presidential election cycle. I beg you go back and
Speaker 1: listen to the podcast that we did on this You
Speaker 1: connect these two stories together, and it is two stories
Speaker 1: that should scare the hell out.
Speaker 2: Of anyone that's listening. Please share this podcast with your
Speaker 2: family and friends.
Speaker 1: Please make sure you write us a five star review
Speaker 1: wherever you're listening to this podcast, so that will help
Speaker 1: us reach more people.
Speaker 2: And we will see you back here tomorrow.