Trump's Legal Strategy Against Big Tech

Keep me on the front lines of the digital battlefield by supporting my work here: https://donorbox.org/seanmorganreport

This episode was sponsored by Sovereign Advisors. Get a Free Gold Consultation: Call Dr. Kirk Elliott at +1 720-605-3900
https://sovereignadvisors.net/pages/seanmorgan/

Thank You !

Transcript

1 (39s):
Welcome to The Sean Morgan Report. I'm your host, Sean Morgan. And today we have a great show for you. We're going to get into the whole big news of Trump's suing Big Tech and really inviting all of his co you know, class action lawsuit participants to participate with him that could be in the hundreds of thousands or millions of people. And we're going to talk to Jim Cutler about that and more talk about the plan. DEMEC how the Biden administration is really trying to go door to door here and get the national guard involved. Try to really get people vaccinated, but you've got a lot of people pushing back on the whole plan DEMEC thing. So we're going to get into all of that and more but first a word from our sponsor. Hello everyone.

2 (1m 18s):
This is John Michael Chambers, the creator and founder of AmericanMediaPeriscope in early 2021, a short squeeze in silver was initiated. What does this mean? It means that individual investors can take advantage of a global supply shortage in silver that the large money center banks will have to end their contracts with physical delivery of an asset that is becoming scarce. The non-existent low supply plus high demand will cause prices to increase rapidly. The only way to take advantage of a short squeeze is to own physical silver call my good friend, Dr. Kirk Elliott, over there at sovereign advisors, they have over 27 years experienced identifying these trends.

2 (2m 2s):
So you can maximize your returns while at the same time, minimizing your risk. Call them today before prices go up any further 7 2 0 6 0 5 3900. Tell them John Michael Chambers sent you.

1 (2m 20s):
So let's get ready into the breaking news. We've got the Trump suing, Big Tech, he's suing Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Now these are all monopolies who have censored him, but also actually all three of those companies have deep platforms. Me and my material, most of them two out of the three was during the height of the 2020 election Twitter actually, you know, finally deleted my account in January. So they kind of more timed it with the whole January 6th debacle. But basically he's doing this through a non-profit called the first policy Institute and they have a website with the contact form where you can share your censorship story by submitting, you know, your story.

1 (3m 10s):
It doesn't make you a co participant of the class action lawsuit, but you know, I don't know how to do that yet. I did submit my story through the contact form. You know, they have my email address, my info. So I'm just kinda waiting and researching to see how, you know, if it's possible for me and other people I know to actually get involved in the lawsuit. So I'll keep you updated on that. But this is a big shift. This is just a really, really important for our movement to actually hit back. You know, I've, I got tired of all the years of talking about repealing section two 30 and having all the Republican senators, you know, grilling the CEO's, but doing nothing about it.

1 (3m 51s):
I feel like this is signaling the shift that we're on the offense now. So I'm very happy about that. Next let's take a look at how supermarkets are stockpiling inventory as food costs rise. Now, this is, this is unprecedented. Usually you don't have supermarkets acting like hedge funds and hoarding future supplies with the anticipation of cost going up. This means they're not anticipating like a five or 10% inflation. They're actually anticipating maybe more like a 20%. So if the big companies and their financial people are making those types of forecasts, that means they're ahead of the curve when it comes to compared to the consumer.

1 (4m 32s):
So, you know, this is pretty scary indicator here that we should pay attention to possibly rising prices across the board. Next, let's take a look at how Pennsylvania is actually doing a full forensic audit at least of several counties that Senator Doug Mastriani has enough people on his committee to just go ahead and, and do this to the subpoena power and everything that he needs to do this in several counties. And, you know, once you show fraud in one county, I mean, then all the other counties are going to pretty much be pressured to do it too. So this is really big. Pennsylvania is a swing state, it's the decider of the election.

1 (5m 15s):
And apparently there were like 21 to one Republican to Democrat voters in Pennsylvania. And yet Joe, Biden's still by a miracle, won it. So I'm really looking forward to the fraud being exposed in Pennsylvania. My home state. Now let's get into the plan. DEMEC the inventor of Mrs. And a technology was removed from Wikipedia after he warned against taking the COVID jabs. And, you know, he was no longer even recognized by Wikipedia as being the creator of the MRN, a, a technology that a lot of these vaccines are based on. And next we've got the Oxford scientists who, you know, supposedly, you know, really did a great job.

1 (5m 57s):
The COVID vaccine, they're now creating and experimental HIV vaccine that they're wanting to experiment on humans. So that's, that's the next thing down the pike. I mean, first they get us to take one vaccine that has two different shots, and then they want us to take an extra third booster shot, and then they want you to take an HIV vaccine. And before, you know, it's like, it's a vaccine schedule that we all have to keep on taking them every year. And military members are saying that they're going to quit. If the army mandates a COVID-19 vaccine, that's according to a Congressman, who's pushing back on this and who's interviewed the troops and is creating a law to ban the mandates from the military.

1 (6m 42s):
But y'know according to the military sources, they were getting the word that it is going to be mandatory this fall for all troops. And they're already kind of a, you know, planting the seed and all the military troops minds that this is going to be required in the future. So AstraZeneca and Moderna are registering new names for their COVID-19 jabs. And the worst one is Moderna. They are calling their vaccines spike facts because supposedly it helps with the spike protein from COVID-19. But, you know, you've got so many of these experts coming out and saying that the vaccines themselves contain spike proteins and because of the vaccinated individuals to shed spike proteins through the skin and through the breath.

1 (7m 33s):
And so just calling the spike facts to me is, Hey, branding mistake, but I don't know why they're choosing all these new confusing names. You know, maybe they're just trying to make people think that they're not as bad as the vaccines that they're familiar with the, just give them a new name and maybe feel people will be more likely to take it. I don't know, but it's a, it's probably not going to work. And people just are associating. Vaccine is being the same as all the rest of the vaccines. And they know that there's a major risk and every day the risks are just being publicized more and more, whether it's the young people with enlarged hearts or, or whether it's, you know, people with other types of debilitating injuries or, or whether it's their, you know, fertilization that's been impacted or their menstruation.

1 (8m 26s):
I mean, the, the, the risks are really just being exposed day after day. And now I want to get into a piece that was written by sovereign man, Simon black, over at his blog. And it was just so good that I want to read it out loud because it's just so timely. And I really like how Simon black talks about history as context. He says the Elizabeth Packard disagreed with her husband on religion. While this might not seem like a big deal today, when you were a woman married to a preacher in the mid 18 hundreds, it was a huge deal. Elizabeth became increasingly bold and stating her religious opinions openly as well as her anti-slavery views and support for abolitionist John Brown.

1 (9m 10s):
So in 1860, her husband exercised his legal rights to have her committed to an insane asylum. And Elizabeth spent three years in the asylum before being deemed incurable. She was released back to the custody of her husband who locked her in a room and nailed the windows shut. But with the help of a friend, Elizabeth managed to take her husband to court over the confinement. A jury took only seven minutes to decide that she was healthy, sane, and deserved her freedom. But sadly, her case was not unique. The records from one mental asylum from the air still survive and they show vast amounts of cases in which women were diagnosed as insane because they did not accept the prevailing views of society or of their husbands.

1 (9m 51s):
A common diagnosis was to rule a woman in sane by religious fantasy. In other words, she did not believe in the exact same religious principles as her neighbors and family members behaving and thinking independently was more than enough to deem a woman crazy and totally ruined her life. And everyone in her social circle, friends, neighbors, family members, and even her own husband was able to rat them out to the authorities for their dangerous behavior. You think this sort of custom would have gone out of style long ago, but thanks to a new program being developed by the white house, you to consume report your insane friends and family members who don't express approved social views. Recently, a senior white house official announced a national strategy for countering domestic terrorism.

1 (10m 32s):
And this new strategy includes people for programs, for people to seek help from the government on behalf of anyone they perceive to be radicalizing. The objective here is to prevent violence and domestic terrorism. And that sounds noble enough, but even basic trues about violence are completely tainted by ideology and politics, angry menacing riders, rampaging through the streets, torching cars, looting stores, and destroying property. Well, they're considered mostly peaceful. Hence this white house program doesn't apply to them, but the man who grabs a weapon to defend his family against those angry menacing riders, he is considered a violent radical who should be recorded. Then there's Dr.

1 (11m 13s):
Aruna Giuliani, who earlier this month lectured at Yale university about her fantasies of killing white people. Again, though, she's neither considered radical nor potentially violent. So she doesn't fit into this new white house program saying, however, the man cannot get pregnant, which was enough for Twitter to ban a Spanish politician recently is absolutely considered radical. The rules are terribly confusing. Fortunately, the us government will be bringing in the big tech companies to monitor behavior and keep us all in check. It's also notable that the federal government is spending boatloads of taxpayer dollars, teaching us government employees about critical race theory, which asserts that everyone is racist and that you are either a victim or an oppressor on your skin color.

1 (11m 55s):
I say this is notable because they don't spend the same taxpayer dollars on the principles taught by Martin Luther king, that we should strive for a society where people are judged by the content of their character and not by the skin color. But Martin Luther King's view is now considered outdated by the woke Progressive's in charge. And they even have science to back up their assertions. For example, the journal of the American psychoanalytic association published an article last month, explaining the whiteness is the malignant parasitic light condition. And as we've all been told, you've got to trust the science. This is rapidly becoming the accepted social view and any departure from this thesis is considered radical. It's ironic that most of the bureaucrats and politicians made and mandating this training, don't have the first clue what they're talking about recently, general mark Milley.

1 (12m 41s):
The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff told Congress that teaching critical race theory and white rage to military cadets at west point was very important. Yet. He simultaneously acknowledged that he doesn't know the first thing about critical race theory, referring to it as whatever the theory is. And that pretty much sums up institutional leadership these days and the land of the free politicians and government business executives. And now even military generals are only concerned about appearances, not substance. They know nothing about critical race theory. They just want to give the appearance that they're doing something when everyone else is doing the same thing. And just about every big company and organization from Coca-Cola to Disney to major league baseball to the central intelligence agency has jumped on board, the woke train and embraced these idiotic principles.

1 (13m 27s):
Hardly a single so-called leader has stood up to say, I agree there are problems to solve, but this approach is totally absurd and I'm not going along with it. These executives have too much to lose power prestige paychecks. So they fall in line and do what everyone else is doing. Standing apart from the crowd, risking your reputation and raising a voice of dissent takes courage. Something that is sorely lacking in political and corporate leadership. This week, pitiful leadership is the reason why the entire woke movement has snowballed out of control. No one with any real power is willing to stand against it anymore. It's also the reason why looting Nike stores and riding and the streets is seen as mostly peaceful. Yet anyone with conservative views is considered radical worthy of being committed to modern day.

1 (14m 9s):
Digital insane asylums, such as being censored by Big Tech. Frankly, if history is any guide, this trend is most likely going to become worse, but one day it will subside. It may take years, but the woke Twitter mob will eventually run out of people the hate and start feeding on its own fanatics. It's like the Soviet union sooner or later, the entire idiotic adult ideology will collapse on its site and black and sovereign man.com. And let's bring on our guest, Jim Cutler two discuss the latest news. Jim, what are your thoughts on that article?

3 (14m 46s):
Well, I, I have been as everybody else quite bombarded with the news is going on. So I'm going to ask you to just give me that soundbite again on that news item with black, because I missed it as I was waiting for my cue.

1 (15m 15s):
No problem. Yeah. So, you know, Simon black is a blogger and he, he just wrote a really good piece about this whole woke ideology. That seems to be accepted by everyone in leadership. You know, whether it's corporates like Coca-Cola or whether it's an intelligence agency, like the CIA everyone's are embracing this whole critical race theory, the claim's that everyone's racist, Andy, and it's totally accepted by, you know, the psychoanalytic association. And we have psychiatrists giving lectures at Yale that they fantasize about killing white people. And you can burn down, you know, buildings during the looting of last year by BLM and Antifa, but that's not considered radical is considered radical to go against critical race theory is considered radical to not get a vaccinations, consider radical, to believe in defending yourself with a weapon.

1 (16m 10s):
So it's really just scary. That is, this is turning into an official policy of ratting and snitching on your neighbors and family. And, and it just reminds you of the Soviet union, which eventually did end up cannibalizing itself and collapsing under its own inefficiency.

3 (16m 29s):
And you can look at these, you know, these, these historical regimes and their methodologies to see how the current situation has taken a look back, taking a page out of those playbooks and is now using them. Currently. One thing we need to understand is the specter of, of Ostrow say ostracization, where people are just simply afraid of being pushed out of the tribe. They, nobody wants to rock the boat. Nobody wants to expose themselves to thinking a certain way, causing their friends or family and others, to look at them and say, you know, I, I can't be with you.

3 (17m 14s):
I can't talk to you. You've changed. And therefore I need to just move on. And they use that. They use the specter of that to keep those who have something to lose in line. So you're going to see teachers, you're going to see professors, you're going to see newscasters. You're going to see everybody who has a public face, who is of some note notoriety or who is a notable figure where this, this threat is very, very powerful. Others who have far less to lose, they don't care. And so they're going to think more freely and more unto themselves.

3 (17m 57s):
Look at those statistics now, and you are going to see the separation of the, those who have I E good positions, lots of income, something to lose, and those who are not in that category. And that's going to be the majority of people on the planet, the vast majority of people on the planet. So matter of fact, the, when you talk about majority of popular opinion, that's the lines along, which they run. It's no longer about Democrat or Republican. Those are very old out of date. You know, naming conventions that have been used to get people, to battle against each other, if you will, but that's not.

3 (18m 46s):
That's no longer the norm. The norm now is those who are in the in-group. Those are the people who get paid really well and who have something to lose. And those are the outgroup. The, so your, everybody else, your farmers, your workers, your independent contractors, your a majority of people who keep this world running now, and this is a big problem for the people. The group, I will call the elites who are looking at their numbers, dwindle, and we know that they know that they're dwindling because of this, the things they do to get more people into their group, whether it's immigrants, who just think the way they're told to think or the way they are induced to think 'cause, they're being given something.

3 (19m 39s):
And also people who are, you know, paid, who are on welfare, who all feel like they've got something to lose because they're being given something. So the, the elites tend to buy the bullshit. And it is the working people, real people, most of the people who don't, they're not vulnerable like that. So what they think is really more, a more accurate to the world view and B it's immune, or certainly, you know, more immune to being forced to think a certain way.

3 (20m 20s):
So the, you know, the, the elite can have all the, the things that they want in terms of people following the woke line and everybody's woke now. And if you're in a college, they're all gonna tell you to be woke. And if you work for a big corporation, they're all gonna tell you to be work, but I can tell you that that is not translating to the working class, too, the common people they're not buying. And you can see this in poll, after poll, after poll. So it's a strategy and it's an insidious strategy. And it's a disgusting strategy. When you think about having your child's therapist, take up this crap when your child is in real need of help to get through life as they're going through critical years in their life.

3 (21m 13s):
And I'm speaking from experience now to have a trusted therapist S using this kind of critical race theory, or what have you, as part of the therapeutic model for your child or whoever they're working with is that's. I don't have words for that. I really don't as a parent and as a parent of a child who's needed the services, you know, that is going to be severe impact on people receiving these, the services.

3 (21m 53s):
So I think you're going to find, and I think most people are going to find that we will continue with people of, of in the news reporters, you know, their APIs and all that playing this silly game, but it's not going to work like everything else. It is not going to work. So I, I sit with a perspective of, wow, they're really going that far. This is going to have a backlash, and this is going to bite them. And I suspect that it's going to happen more quickly than they think. And certainly we'll hope that in my view, and in my experience, these kinds of things, there seems to be an acceleration.

3 (22m 41s):
They push it out, they get the big backlash, the move onto something else very quickly. And that just seems to be going faster and faster and faster now. So these articles are useful in one hand, but our fear based on the other, and one has to be careful how one reads this kind of information. Cause on the one hand, it can make you quite paranoid that, oh my God, the whole world is going this direction. When in fact numbers wise, they really aren't. And it's just simply another ploy being tried and, you know, lips, especially things like, well, I know we'll get into this topic of going door to door and asking people if they've been vaccinated, but I want to include it in this conversation briefly as another, fear-mongering attempt to hurt people mentally.

3 (23m 42s):
And what really concerns me, the number of these fools, going to people's doors who are going to get shot because they're considered dangerous trespassers. And they are because the more people that die from this vaccination, the more those people are going to be looked upon as coming into my home and forcing a vaccine on me and me reacting in a way that I wouldn't ordinarily react. Now I'm not predicting anything per se, but I'm concerned about that. And, but this is the thing, this is desperation creating, you know, chaos, of course, chaos being something that, that the elites like using they, they love chaos.

3 (24m 35s):
So plan to see more of this, but plan to, you know, have more important conversations with your family and loved ones and friends about the meaning of it and looking for the signs that, you know, show which direction this is really moving.

1 (25m 0s):
Yeah. Good point, Jim. It just because all of the Hollywood people and the sports people and the people you see on TV are all towing a line. It doesn't mean that's, you know, that's what the re everyday people feel. And that's, what's the Q drops and what Trump and his campaign have been trying to demonstrate through the rallies and so forth, which is that we are the real majority, you know, the, the most human beings don't believe in abortion. Most human beings don't, you know, believe in, you know, things against human rights. And they believe in medical freedom and, and, and different things like that. So, so, you know, it is scary. It is certainly scary how aggressive this campaign is.

1 (25m 44s):
That's kind of important for people to wake up to how much worse it could get. If we don't stand our ground, if we don't stand in our sovereignty, you know, but the door to door thing that Biden's saying now, and he, he has this lofty goal for himself of 70% vaccination, which will never happen. That's, you know, I just think it's mostly psychological, even if they don't go door to door. The fact that they're saying that they're going to go door to door is just a way to get people to think, oh no, the light's going to be shined on me. People are going to ask me about my vaccination status. I've been trying to keep it a secret because I'm afraid of the vaccine.

1 (26m 25s):
And then when I get that social pressure, I don't know what to do. So they're hoping that that psychological pressure is going to get people to just go out there and voluntarily take it so that when people do come to their door, they can just say, yes, sir, I complied, but that's not, what's going to happen. And I know for the large majority of people, they're gonna say, get the heck my property. So yeah, this is, this is just another one of those overly aggressive campaigns is going to backfire with the deep state. And I think this is, you know, part of that whole art of war strategy that we've been discussing for the past year or so, which is that the white hats are allowing a somewhat nonlethal kind of overstepping of bounds so that the American citizens can experience what the tyranny feels like so that they know why an intervention is necessary to stop it.

1 (27m 24s):
And I say, non-lethal because even though there is collateral collateral damage, and there are people dying every day from the vaccines, it's not the same type of damage that would occur if the deep state would take over a hundred percent. So it's perhaps necessary. And, and that's just me kind of speculating. I really don't know if that's the strategy or not. That's just what you know, you and I have kind of thought through. And the Q Intel drops specifically say that, you know, people only change when they get to the precipice and they realize that they have no other choice, but to change when there's a crisis level.

3 (28m 4s):
Yeah, yeah. And the deep state, they want everybody to believe that they have won the election and that the numbers are with them. And then this is how it's going to be from here on forward. And people just have to stop that line of thinking and remind themselves daily that they haven't won the election that is not over, and they don't have the numbers and this isn't going to be how it is moving forward. So these scare tactics really are not going to work for those reasons. And, you know, for us as individuals, it's really important for us to keep reminding ourselves that are family and our loved ones and our friends that these, these things that they're saying is, is for the most part other crap, and to not believe it and to do as much work on their own as they can to, you know, S things like, well, what, what if I do get COVID now there's a whole myriad of reasons why that's not likely to happen, but the simple question of, well, then what do you think about hydroxy chloroquine when you just take that and, and like any prescribed medication and be done with it because, you know, the, the numbers show, the studies show that that stuff is very, very effective.

3 (29m 28s):
Doesn't set sound a lot easier and a lot safer and get them to answer that question. If you have people, you know, elderly in your family who are S you know, saying things that sound like they might do that, ask him that question, get them to answer it, get them to talk to their doctor. You know, if that's possible, if the doctor will even talk about it or find them a doctor that will talk about it so that they hear it from a professional, that yes, I drank C chloric, when is extremely effective, has shown to be very effective. And if they take it as prescribed will long was zinc, and that whole regime they're going to be fine.

3 (30m 11s):
Totally fine. So at that point, once they believe that there's a viable alternative, then they are not going to get that vaccine. I'm quite sure of that one, because one, a vaccine, it bypasses your body's immune system. This is something that's rarely talked about. When you take an injection, you're piercing the skin that is a biological protection for your body, your skin, and a bypassing, all of that, and going straight into your bloodstream. That's why adverse reactions to vaccine and to anything that is injected into your body, which takes a completely unnatural form of transferring medications or herbs or healing agents of any kind into your body, bypasses all that.

3 (31m 5s):
And, and that's what they want. They want you to believe it's okay for them to stick needles in to you for anything. And we have got to get to a point where we just simply say, well, no, is there a way to administer this drug or this medication without injecting it into my body? Is there a way,

1 (31m 27s):
Right? This is all about, are you going to be sovereign and tell other beings that they don't have the right to penetrate your boundaries? You know, whether that's sticking a swab of your nasal cavity and into your brain, whether that's injecting you with something or microchipping you or whatever, putting a mask over your face, this is all about sovereignty. This is all about saying who is in charge of you and your body. You know, is it you, or is it the government are the, you know, the medical establishment or what have you. So this is just a choice.

1 (32m 8s):
Humanity has to make, I want to wrap up by just discussing the Trump lawsuit, because I want to talk through what happens if he wins with hundreds of thousands of co-signers to this lawsuit as class action participants. And what if he loses? Can you walk me through, what, what are your thoughts on those two possibilities?

3 (32m 33s):
Yeah, I'm going to start up by saying that Trump is a strategist of S renown. He's an extremely good strategist. Now people may contest that because they would point to things like the election or the lawsuits around the election, or what have you and say, well, he lost this and he lost that. And, but you've got to understand that losing a battle is a strategic event. And many times good leaders will give up territory will lose a battle in order to win the war, because they know that that is immaterial, that losing in that location. And that part of the battle for the war is not material.

3 (33m 18s):
It's not going to affect the outcome, but it will have psychological impacts that they might see as valuable. So same with what Trump is doing. He's now choosing the plays and time to launch this particular salvo. And it's not a small deal at all. My speculation is that this isn't a slight of hand operation. This is what it appears to be of direct attack on the social media corporations. That up to this point have been wielding a tremendous amount of power. Now, there are a number of things that are involved here. There's section two 30, which these companies have enjoyed a lot of immunity on as well as other things that they are doing in the background that we're not aware of.

3 (34m 7s):
And these are the things that I consider important from a strategic point of view. Now they all, every one of those three companies, Google and Twitter, and Facebook have corporate facilities in pretty much every country on the planet. Now, this suit has been filed in America and in American courts. However, there's going to be massive friend of the brief suits, you know, being also filed. And the, you mentioned this earlier, where people like yourself, like me, who have been aggrieved can join the class action suit.

3 (34m 51s):
Okay? So that's, that's going to be happening in a very big way in this country. What people are not talking about is the fact that people similarly aggrieved in other countries can file suits in those countries against these entities, because they have corporate facilities in those countries. Okay? So the vulnerability of those three companies to massive numerous and extremely costly lawsuits goes up exponentially, and they are going to find themselves in a very untenable position because in all likelihood, any large finding in any particular country is going to be used in another country.

3 (35m 48s):
So they don't have much to hide behind. They don't have a country to hide behind because they've chosen to expose themselves in every country on the planet. So the strategy and believe me, the, all these lawyers are going to be talking to each other, lawyers in this country, lawyers working for Trump lawyers for working for companies and politicians in other countries. They're all going to be talking. They're all going to be strategizing. They're all going to be looking for ways to piggyback their work with others, to increase the power of, of what they're all trying to accomplish.

3 (36m 28s):
So this is a, I would say this is a, a critical juncture, if you will, and a significant, I think we're going to look back on this. And this will be seen as a significant turning point in the course of events. So what comes out of this is hard to say at the moment, because most of us are not privy to some of the details that are going to be used in those court cases, but again, whatever they're going to be using, however, they go about this from a legal standpoint is, well, thought out, this they're not going into this haphazardly.

3 (37m 10s):
This is an extremely important decision and an extremely important strategy in order to accomplish certain things that are really part of the bigger picture. When you look at strategies around the audits, look at the, and I, I beg people to do this. Look at the things that are coming up. Now, the, the, the audits. Did anybody think that we'd ever have this many audits in this many states at this time period when Trump isn't even in the office anymore, right. Did anybody think that was actually going to happen and will it did, and it is happening.

3 (37m 52s):
And now not only is that happening, but now he's chosen this moment when the, all those audits are on and on a speeding up trajectory chosen this moment to go ahead and push this next strategy, which is taking all of the social media companies to court. So, you know, it's like, again, as Q has told us, we're not wasting a lot of ammo, but they are. And now we've got reserves. We've got lots of bunkers full of ammo that we can pull out whenever we want to. And now that's what we're seeing.

3 (38m 32s):
And this is a major strike. This is a, what you would call a carpet bombing operation because they're dropping bombs on everybody simultaneously. So the enemy is really doesn't have an opportunity to, to communicate regroup, come up with another strategy. They're now fully hunkered down in their foxholes, trying to defend themselves against this fuselage of bombing operations that are now taking place. So again, from a military strategic standpoint, this is what you want to see you. This tells you something about where we are in the trajectory of the strategy around winning this war.

3 (39m 20s):
And I, I would say we're now in that exponential ramp up phase where you're just going to hit the enemy so hard. And so, you know, with such force that they're going to be stunned, they're going to be kicked back on their heels. They're going to be the momentarily, unable to come up with a, a strategy because they didn't, they didn't expect the, the, this kind of intensity. So it's, to me, this is all good news. And it makes me very happy to see, and it makes me quite confident that again, we're seeing reality.

3 (40m 5s):
We're seeing this kind of kinetic buildup as an actual real strategy, because one, nobody got for Warren done this, you know, at the very end, just before he, he pulled the plug on, this was when they said, okay, something big is gonna happen on Wednesday. And we're all sitting around going cool. I wonder what this is going to be. So, you know, in terms of tipping off the enemy, wasn't done, nobody said nothing about this. It was a very tight operation. You would have heard leaks about this all over the place. You would have seen reactions by the social media companies all over the place.

3 (40m 46s):
If they knew this was coming, I believe they did not.

1 (40m 52s):
Yeah. You know, the legal argument behind this is that these companies were acting on behalf of the government. And so they're not publishers. And because they're acting on behalf of the government, they have to respect the constitutional rights, freedom of speech. I wonder what proof Trump team has. The, these companies are acting on behalf of the government. You know, whether that's just being a collection of data collection for intelligence agencies or the acting as sensors to, to certain agencies as w has already come out in certain areas to the, I think he's got an ACE up his sleeve with his legal proof, his evidence, and he might have an ACE up his sleeve when it comes to the CEO's, who he is personally holding liable.

1 (41m 43s):
He might have these three CEO's in his pocket already, you know, and I don't know that. I'm just saying that if I was a strategist, that's what the kind of thing I would want to have happen if I'm going to start going after the CEOs. And I like the Trump is not making this about himself. This is about anyone who's been censored by these companies, any American whose constitutional rights have been violated. So let's say Trump loses. It's not just Trump. Who's losing is the American people and hundreds of thousands or millions of people are losing. And so if they lose and a court of law, then the, that means the law, the legal systems, not just, and if the legal system is not just, well, then we might need to have an intervention from the military to execute justice.

1 (42m 31s):
So just the same kind of situation that we've talked about with the audits, where if the Supreme court rules in favor of overturning the election, then they're, they're doing their role. They're fulfilling their, their judicial role. If they refuse to do it by not hearing the case or ruling against it or whatever. Well, then that means that that section of our, you know, our system has failed the people and we need to have someone or something step in and fill the vacuum, which once again, could be that military intervention. So those, those are my final thoughts. We've actually run out of time, but we're going to discuss more of this at length with Jim next week.

1 (43m 16s):
We're still tweaking the time's at the show, but you can follow us on AmericanMediaPeriscope dot net. And we have a library there. You can also find us on rumble. And so thanks for watching today. And you can find us here next week, same time, and really appreciate everyone. Who's been falling, Jim and I for the last year. So we're going to keep on keeping you updated every week. Thanks a lot, folks. Bye. Bye. That'd be great. <inaudible>.