The Anchormen Show with Matt Gaetz - July 21, 2022


Episode 62 LIVE： Deep State Secrets (feat. Dr. Darren J. Beattie) – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz

Hosted by
Matt Gaetz
Mentioned
Ray Epps Darren Beattie Donald Trump Benny Thompson William Burns Joe Biden Cassidy Hutchinson Nancy Pelosi Republicans Kevin McCarthy Kelly Armstrong Adam Kinzinger George W. Bush Bolton Marjorie Taylor Greene Robert F. Kennedy Vladimir Putin Rudy Giuliani Peter Navarro John Eastman Adam Schiff and 11 more
Episode 61 LIVE： Overeducated Elites – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz Episode 63 LIVE： Be Offended – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz

Episode Stats


Length

43 minutes

Words per minute

158.85

Word count

6,988

Sentence count

389

Harmful content

Misogyny

5

sentences flagged

Toxicity

15

sentences flagged

Hate speech

7

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

On today's show, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-GA) and Dr. Darren Beattie (D-VA) discuss the latest in the ongoing saga of the January 6th Committee hearing, including the fake arrest of AOC and Joe Biden, and what the committee might be up to tonight.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
00:00:00.000 Matt Gaetz was one of the very few members in the entire Congress who bothered to stand up against Permanent Washington on behalf of his constituents.
00:00:10.580 Matt Gaetz right now, he's a problem in the Democratic Party.
00:00:13.700 He could cause a lot of hiccups in passing the laws.
00:00:16.720 So we're going to keep running those stories to keep hurting him.
00:00:20.120 If you stand for the flag and kneel in prayer, if you want to build America up and not burn her to the ground,
00:00:26.760 then welcome, my fellow patriots. You are in the right place. This is the movement for you.
00:00:33.100 You ever watch this guy on television? It's like a machine. Matt Gaetz.
00:00:37.860 I'm a canceled man in some corners of the Internet. Many days I'm a marked man in Congress, a wanted man by the deep state.
00:00:45.840 They aren't really coming for me. They're coming for you. I'm just in the way.
00:00:50.900 We are live broadcasting from Capitol Hill, our office here in the Longworth building.
00:01:00.600 And we've got the great Darren Beattie, publisher of Revolver News, with us to break down the news of the day
00:01:06.880 and really the news of this evening and going into next week as well.
00:01:10.680 We've got the fake handcuffs on AOC, appending to a very real arrest that several Democrats
00:01:16.760 sort of walked themselves into on purpose over at the Supreme Court.
00:01:20.740 And Joe Biden apparently does not have cancer but does have COVID.
00:01:24.360 So we hope for his speedy recovery from those things and anything else that may ail him.
00:01:30.520 Tonight, the January 6th committee is meeting.
00:01:33.160 And in a lot of ways, we learn as much from what the January 6th committee doesn't show you
00:01:37.900 as we learn from the things that they do show you.
00:01:41.020 So joining me now is Dr. Darren Beattie.
00:01:43.700 And Dr. Beattie, what do you expect from the January 6th committee tonight?
00:01:49.040 Well, frankly, I don't know.
00:01:51.360 What I don't expect is anything that actually provides insight into what actually happened on January 6th.
00:01:59.740 The ostensible reported topic of the hearing tonight is going to be the, I think it's the period from when Trump gives his speech
00:02:12.420 to sort of the follow-up message that he did later in the afternoon on January 6th.
00:02:20.060 So I imagine it will focus on some kind of half-hearted attempt, as they've been doing, to link Trump to this so-called insurrection,
00:02:30.660 to say, oh, he didn't call it off, you know, strenuously enough.
00:02:36.220 And, you know, just more of the same, basically, of what we've seen. 0.78
00:02:40.020 And I don't know if we're going to be treated to another ridiculous spectacle along the lines of this Hutchinson woman 1.00
00:02:46.960 or the weird, you know, Halloween costume tear, like, militia men that they paraded in the last hearing. 0.82
00:02:57.180 So we'll just have to wait and see.
00:02:59.220 But it's, I expect more of the same.
00:03:03.340 And that means just more ridiculousness and more nothing treatment of the things that actually matter.
00:03:09.340 So this is supposed to be the big finale, the big crescendo, the big moment.
00:03:15.180 And you have to wonder, are they going to do, like, the cliffhanger thing like they do at the end of the other performances?
00:03:21.920 And what a lot of the American people don't realize is that there are thousands of hours of depositions.
00:03:28.560 There are so many records.
00:03:29.840 And if we had real Republicans on the committee, my guess is a lot of that testimony,
00:03:34.420 a lot of those records would, in a lot of ways, exonerate the president, his advisors,
00:03:41.360 the people who wanted to show up on January 6th and make an argument.
00:03:46.260 So, you know, we met with Vice President Pence December 21st over at the White House.
00:03:52.020 And as you might imagine, in those, like, late weeks in December,
00:03:55.920 there was some confusion in the Congress about how the procedure would go on January 6th.
00:04:00.740 Would it be, you know, a unicameral gathering with the Senate the entire time?
00:04:05.100 Would there be breakouts during those breakouts?
00:04:07.760 Would it be House debate, then Senate debate?
00:04:10.020 Would the debate occur simultaneously?
00:04:12.240 Would there then be a rejoining back to a unicameral vote of some kind?
00:04:17.120 And who would preside in such a unicameral environment?
00:04:21.180 So we went over to the White House to really understand kind of the flow of the day,
00:04:26.480 as expected on January 6th from the Vice President's perspective.
00:04:29.460 And the Vice President said, and I remember his exact words, he said,
00:04:33.460 we need to have the debate.
00:04:35.720 I think where there was agreement among members of Congress, President Trump,
00:04:39.540 Vice President Pence, is that we had legitimate election integrity grievances that we wanted to air.
00:04:44.580 We wanted to use January 6th as a mechanism to drive better improvements to the elections process going forward,
00:04:51.880 perhaps even inspire better bills at the state level on ballot custody, on mail-in voting, on signature verification.
00:05:00.380 I mean, that was the flavor of the arguments we were constructing.
00:05:03.580 And we left on December 21st from the White House fully, you know,
00:05:08.120 expecting that that was what the Vice President was going to do,
00:05:10.520 because he told us that was what he was going to do.
00:05:12.040 We were going to have the debate, we were going to have a vote,
00:05:14.700 and then very likely Joe Biden was going to be President of the United States,
00:05:18.260 barring some vast departure of the voting bloc the Democrats have been able to rely on.
00:05:23.620 And that has been now greatly tortured.
00:05:27.600 And, you know, I haven't gotten my letter from the January 6th Committee.
00:05:30.880 I would probably be pretty anxious to go in in front of the cameras
00:05:34.560 and in front of the whole country and lay out the truth of what happened
00:05:38.760 and what we were preparing to do.
00:05:40.100 But, you see, they don't want that.
00:05:42.040 They don't want people, you know, actually in front of the American people.
00:05:45.960 They want to do this Adam Schiff scenario where they tuck you in the bunker in the basement,
00:05:51.020 they video you for eight hours, and then they slice and dice out the testimony.
00:05:55.660 Now, that brings us really, I think, to Ray Epps.
00:05:59.620 You have called Ray Epps the smoking gun of the Fed's direction.
00:06:03.560 And we've talked a lot about his movements,
00:06:06.900 his almost paramilitary organization of other people that day,
00:06:12.120 his presence in critical moments at critical points.
00:06:16.740 And then we get this New York Times piece,
00:06:19.540 a Trump backer's downfall is the target of a January 6th conspiracy theory.
00:06:24.200 And the mainstream media has been highly critical of the documented video evidenced reporting
00:06:31.020 at revolver.news that is still up, that I still encourage everyone to check out.
00:06:35.800 And, you know, Dr. Beattie, what struck me about the New York Times piece is
00:06:39.160 they never asked Ray Epps the operative question.
00:06:41.900 Was he ever working for or in concert with anyone that was directed by the federal government?
00:06:48.220 Why do you think they didn't ask him that question?
00:06:51.800 That's a great question.
00:06:53.620 But before I get to this, I just want to make a couple points about the committee and its structure
00:06:59.340 generally.
00:07:00.280 I mean, really, it's set up, as I said in another context, to call it a kangaroo court is misplaced
00:07:09.580 because we haven't picked a sufficiently embarrassing animal to do justice to what this is.
00:07:15.960 I mean, it's a double whammy from the standpoint of these witnesses, because, first of all,
00:07:20.960 they're not going to pick anyone to come up and testify who about their associated, that
00:07:28.220 there's any kind of possibility that they would deviate from the predetermined narrative.
00:07:33.860 And secondly, even the people like Hutchinson and others that they bring on who are, you know,
00:07:40.220 totally in line with the Benny Thompson, Adam Schiff narrative, they're not even allowing
00:07:45.940 any opportunity for cross-examination.
00:07:48.900 So it's really set up from the beginning to be this fake thing and couldn't be further
00:07:54.320 from a vehicle or an institution that's genuinely set up to get to the bottom of what happened.
00:08:01.900 And the-
00:08:02.500 Wait, wait, before we get to Epps, I want to drill down on this because there have been a
00:08:06.540 lot of people critical of Kevin McCarthy for pulling all of the remaining Republicans off
00:08:12.340 the committee when Jim Jordan and Jim Banks were not allowed to serve on the committee.
00:08:15.720 And I know hindsight is 20-20.
00:08:17.540 And I would love to see my colleague, Kelly Armstrong, who's a very capable criminal defense
00:08:22.440 lawyer before coming to Congress, I would love to see him there answering questions.
00:08:26.740 But I have not joined the chorus of criticism of McCarthy on this point, because, like, were
00:08:34.240 we really going to sit there and allow Nancy Pelosi to have veto over our members?
00:08:38.340 Were we really going to get just, I mean, you know, I don't know, I don't even know the
00:08:44.080 right word for it.
00:08:44.780 Were we really going to get defrocked in such a way that, like, Republicans could be on there,
00:08:49.200 but only the, like, low-energy Nancy Pelosi Republicans that were pre-approved?
00:08:53.520 I mean, as we look back at that decision, I almost think McCarthy made the right decision,
00:08:58.120 even though there are definitely times now when I wish we had Kelly Armstrong there answering
00:09:02.240 questions.
00:09:02.400 Absolutely, it's, I mean, I think we could get in the weeds on that question.
00:09:06.600 But I think more importantly is that any body that purports to conduct an actual sort of
00:09:15.140 disinterested, objective dive into finding out what January 6th was all about, for Nancy Pelosi
00:09:26.640 to have such oversight over any committee automatically dooms it from the start.
00:09:33.420 And however we got to the position where we are now, it's just important to point out and
00:09:39.160 emphasize that, you know, although it bears the trappings of some kind of legal proceeding,
00:09:45.200 and there are a lot of, I think, incredibly improper ways in which the committee sort of is operating in
00:09:54.840 concert with the Department of Justice in a manner that's actually deeply subversive to democratic
00:10:01.600 processes, that this is far from anything resembling a legitimate investigation.
00:10:09.360 And part of the reason for that is that they're not only cherry-picking their witnesses, but even
00:10:17.240 their cherry-picked witnesses have, you know, total safe harbor to say whatever they want without any
00:10:25.140 potential of criticism.
00:10:27.080 The Hutchinson, you know, the ridiculous Hutchinson testimony could not have happened if the witnesses
00:10:33.220 were able to be cross-examined. 0.54
00:10:35.500 And so it's just kind of another example.
00:10:37.680 Yeah, let me start with my cross-examined of Cassidy Hutchinson. 0.95
00:10:40.720 Cassidy Hutchinson, who, full disclosure, was my friend.
00:10:44.000 I worked closely with Cassidy Hutchinson.
00:10:46.080 I would have likely asked, well, GCAS, after January 20th, when Joe Biden was the president,
00:10:53.940 you were on your way to Palm Beach, eager and excited and devoted to Donald Trump and his
00:11:00.480 post-presidency.
00:11:01.500 You were on your way down there.
00:11:03.120 You were wanting to work for him.
00:11:05.040 How do you square that professional path with this, you know, strained horror you felt on
00:11:10.940 January 6th?
00:11:11.760 You know, I probably would have asked her about the records and emails where she was requesting
00:11:16.980 support from President Trump, his network, his donors, his legal assets, so that she would
00:11:23.600 not be mistreated by a committee that she herself deemed BS.
00:11:27.320 So I worry with Cassidy Hutchinson that it's more about vindictiveness and vengeance than 1.00
00:11:33.960 it is about a sincerely held belief that developed on January 6th.
00:11:37.280 Oh, that's a great question.
00:11:39.120 Look, it's not just about Hutchinson.
00:11:40.740 It's really about the committee.
00:11:41.860 Because my understanding is I'm not positive, positive, but I'm about 95 percent sure that
00:11:49.640 among those deposed by the committee were the two individuals who have been able to speak
00:11:56.180 directly on the scenario that Hutchinson described in her testimony.
00:12:02.040 Namely, one of the Angle, I think his name is, or the security official, and another White 0.82
00:12:10.140 House security official whose name I've forgotten.
00:12:13.240 But I believe both of those people were deposed by the committee.
00:12:17.240 So why have Hutchinson come on and tell this fabulous tale secondhand and giving it that
00:12:25.340 she learned secondhand and now the audience, the American public, is getting thirdhand?
00:12:29.580 If they've already deposed the people who are allegedly direct witnesses to this, why don't
00:12:36.220 they put them on the witness stand or at the very least release the transcript of their
00:12:42.560 interviews to the public to cross-reference to what Hutchinson's testimony is? 0.91
00:12:47.220 So it's ridiculous.
00:12:48.520 And of course, if there were cross-examination, people could ask that directly. 0.97
00:12:52.500 So again, it's worse than a kangaroo court.
00:12:56.600 But I think there's so much to be said for that.
00:12:59.780 But maybe it's best to shift to Epps right now, because we could talk about what a joke
00:13:05.960 the committee is for hours.
00:13:06.840 Well, there's a report coming out that you've written the foreword to, the January 6th report
00:13:12.060 is there going to be Epps analysis in this document or give me the genesis here.
00:13:18.340 There's going to be Epps analysis and much more.
00:13:20.720 And I encourage the audience, if you like Revolver's reporting on January 6th, if you like the information
00:13:28.600 and analysis that I give on January 6th, this is a very special opportunity because this report
00:13:35.380 is going to be a public document.
00:13:38.380 And the New Yorker, I believe, is releasing its version.
00:13:44.340 And Skyhorse, which has published a lot of great stuff, including Robert Kennedy's amazing
00:13:49.880 book on Fauci, is publishing a version of it.
00:13:54.440 And they have me doing the introduction, much to the chagrin and even scandal of a lot of
00:14:01.000 the left-wing press, because it's a subsidiary, Simon & Schuster.
00:14:05.320 So they say, how could Simon & Schuster support this conspiracy theorist and whatnot?
00:14:10.920 Well, forget about the accusations.
00:14:13.280 Read it for yourself.
00:14:14.980 Order it and show Simon & Schuster that there is actually support for someone who dares to
00:14:20.880 present the other side of the story in a reasoned and factual and highly analytical
00:14:27.060 manner.
00:14:27.760 And so you go to Amazon right now, you can pre-order it.
00:14:31.760 And yes, absolutely, there will be a lot of material on Epps.
00:14:34.960 There will be material on this really bizarre pipe bomb situation.
00:14:40.500 We haven't heard the half of all the weird stuff going on with the pipe bomb situation and
00:14:45.560 much more.
00:14:46.060 But these are all the questions that the January 6th committee fails to explore, because they're
00:14:52.100 so obsessively focused with this ridiculous narrative on Trump, because the idea isn't
00:14:57.060 really to prevent another January 6th, it's to prevent another Trump presidency. 0.80
00:15:01.620 That's the point of it.
00:15:02.980 It's not to prevent another January 6th, it's to prevent another Trump presidency.
00:15:07.060 Well, and Trumpism, right?
00:15:08.380 I mean, and really, yeah, the whole MAGA movement is now what's being impeached, right?
00:15:13.440 When Donald Trump was elected president, they had to delegitimize that election, they had
00:15:17.740 to start with the Russia hoax, that fizzles, Mueller flops, then they need the Ukraine thing.
00:15:23.040 And it's the same tactics, and it's the same smear, but now, instead of being localized over
00:15:28.580 Trump, they're going after everyone.
00:15:30.940 Well, I really want to get to Epps, just two quick final points, though, on the committee
00:15:36.240 itself and how it's structured.
00:15:38.100 So, conflicts of interest abound.
00:15:41.440 So, Benny Thompson, who is the chair of this committee, many people don't know this, but
00:15:46.600 I think it's worth pointing out that in his personal capacity, he actually sued Trump.
00:15:52.840 Like, very, very shortly after January 6th, in his personal capacity, he sued Trump and
00:16:00.180 the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and I think Rudy Giuliani.
00:16:03.420 And in this personal lawsuit, Benny Thompson adduced this theory whereby Trump was colluding
00:16:11.660 with these militia groups and over to overturn the election.
00:16:15.040 Now, leaving aside the fact that that theory is ridiculous, like, how can any committee that
00:16:21.200 purports to be remotely objective put as the chair of the committee someone who's already
00:16:27.560 adduced a comprehensive and elaborate theory of the case beforehand in the capacity of a
00:16:36.000 personal lawsuit?
00:16:37.900 And by the way, we've done a piece on this, but the personal lawsuit traces back very, very
00:16:43.040 suspicious connections to our old friend Norm Eisen, who is one of the key sort of lawfare
00:16:50.800 operatives against Trump and has been running, you know, impeachment scams against Trump since
00:16:56.940 day one, when, like, before Trump even got into office, they were preparing this ridiculous
00:17:03.240 emoluments clause thing.
00:17:04.800 And just another point about Benny Thompson is he happens to be the chair of the Homeland Security
00:17:10.380 Committee.
00:17:11.220 And it's basically the Department of Homeland Security that's tasked with implementing this
00:17:16.740 domestic war on terror.
00:17:18.060 The domestic, the Homeland Security Department was set up in the aftermath of 9-11 to go
00:17:23.200 after Islamic terrorism, basically, or radical Islamic terrorism.
00:17:28.140 Now, with the pretext of January 6th and the false narrative behind it, the DHS specifically
00:17:34.700 is at the forefront of this reconfiguration of the national security state against American
00:17:40.540 people.
00:17:41.460 And Benny Thompson is Congress, is the DHS's stooge in Congress.
00:17:46.620 And so I think those are just two very important conflicts of interest that sort of compound
00:17:54.180 upon the already kind of ridiculous way in which the committee is structured that should
00:17:59.280 drive home to any thinking individual just what a sham this operation really is.
00:18:06.580 Insurrectionist Benny Thompson is one of my favorite episodes that we've made on the podcast.
00:18:09.840 I encourage folks to check it out.
00:18:11.940 Benny Thompson was more than just a little sympathetic to black nationalists who moved
00:18:16.960 to his tiny little community in Mississippi in order to set up a black ethnostate. 0.81
00:18:21.720 So that's not conjecture.
00:18:23.460 That's not a conspiracy theory.
00:18:24.920 There are records and documents that certainly bear that out.
00:18:27.940 But we have to get to Ray Epps.
00:18:29.340 He was also sympathetic to voter fraud, the whole conspiracy that George Bush stole the
00:18:36.700 election in 2000.
00:18:38.620 Yes, they've been on all sides of the election denying insurrections.
00:18:42.180 So the hidden agenda behind the New York Times Desperate Puff piece on Ray Epps, why did
00:18:48.980 we get this New York Times piece on Epps now?
00:18:51.620 And what does it mean to you?
00:18:52.520 This piece is such an embarrassment.
00:18:57.240 Even the New York Times, I'm surprised that just as an editorial matter, they're not a
00:19:03.500 little bit more protective of their reputation as a, you know, ostensibly legitimate paper
00:19:11.320 of record.
00:19:12.320 Just let this sink in.
00:19:13.660 The one person caught on camera, repeatedly urging people to go into the Capitol as early
00:19:24.660 as January 5th, is the one January 6th riot participant about whom the New York Times will
00:19:33.380 write an ultra-sympathetic Puff piece.
00:19:37.720 If you read this piece, it's almost designed like these sympathy pieces for families, like
00:19:46.580 after some kind of natural disaster who have their home and everything ruined, and they
00:19:51.800 go to the, you know, the ruined neighborhood without all of the houses, you know, blown
00:19:57.520 down, and they do a sympathy sort of personal profile piece.
00:20:01.620 That's almost the kind of piece that the New York Times decided to do about Ray Epps, which
00:20:07.260 is weird enough, but what's a scandal are the key questions that get to the core of the
00:20:13.020 whole matter of January 6th that the piece fails to explore.
00:20:16.580 Right.
00:20:16.820 You think you're a New York Times journalist.
00:20:19.900 You have access to this individual who, whatever you think about him and whatever you think about
00:20:25.300 January 6th, this individual is, in Ray Epps' own words, at the center of it.
00:20:31.260 He's at the center of the controversy regarding what January 6th actually was.
00:20:36.920 And so you have access to this guy for a whole day.
00:20:40.940 And instead of writing a piece that includes, hey, Ray Epps, are you going to give a blanket
00:20:47.640 denial of any involvement with the federal government, with any involvement with sort of a cutout
00:20:54.320 organization or intermediary?
00:20:56.500 No, there's no blanket denial in the entire piece.
00:21:00.320 All there is is Epps reiterating a highly legalistic denial that he presented to the January 6th
00:21:09.320 committee through his lawyer, who just happens to be a decade veteran of the Phoenix FBI field
00:21:14.920 office, saying that Ray Epps was never a member of law enforcement.
00:21:22.420 It's such a specific denial.
00:21:24.100 It's damn near an admission.
00:21:25.520 It's so specific.
00:21:27.520 And the specificity pertains to law enforcement.
00:21:32.300 Now, that leaves open so many-
00:21:35.680 Oh, national security.
00:21:36.800 Scandalous possibilities.
00:21:38.180 Task forces, intelligence.
00:21:40.380 Department of Homeland Security, Joint Terrorism Task Force, military intelligence, cutouts and
00:21:45.760 intermediaries thereof.
00:21:47.280 And so to be so specific in repeatedly emphasizing law enforcement in denial is, at best, a half
00:21:55.420 denial.
00:21:56.060 And the piece doesn't push for a full denial, which is incredible.
00:22:00.240 Well, that's on purpose.
00:22:01.620 I've got to get to this text message you reference.
00:22:04.020 And again, you've got to read the exclusive piece, revolver.news, the hidden agenda behind
00:22:10.060 the New York Times puff piece on Ray Epps.
00:22:12.060 And what's amazing is that when there's actual sourcing, when there are actual records and
00:22:18.100 there are actual videos, in the revolver pieces, you actually get to see the videos.
00:22:22.480 You can judge with your own eyes.
00:22:24.180 But here, there's apparently a text message that Ray Epps sends to his nephew after the
00:22:31.200 riot occurred, where he talks about how he helped orchestrate the movements of people
00:22:36.460 leaving President Trump's speech at the Ellipse.
00:22:39.060 Now, you know, by the time President Trump was done at the Ellipse, Ray Epps wasn't even
00:22:42.400 at the Ellipse.
00:22:43.400 He was already encouraging people to breach closer to the Capitol, where fencing was taken
00:22:49.040 down.
00:22:49.360 And again, you've got to go back and see the full Ray Epps library on a revolver to get
00:22:53.880 caught up.
00:22:54.820 But why do you think the New York Times didn't just publish the text message that they paraphrase?
00:23:03.800 It's such a good question.
00:23:05.260 And by the way, I think the relevance of the text message is, this is part of a host of
00:23:10.480 information that's going to further complicate the official narrative.
00:23:15.760 And this New York Times piece, the only sensible explanation for it is that this is the, this is a
00:23:23.600 damage control push in anticipation of more damning information pertaining to Epps.
00:23:29.380 Because Epps is the smoking gun of the Fed's direction, they would otherwise have no interest
00:23:34.880 in reintroducing this individual's name to the public at all.
00:23:38.800 The only reason that would make sense is if it's getting even, even worse.
00:23:42.880 And there are two other really key questions that are astonishingly not explored in this New
00:23:49.020 York Times piece.
00:23:49.880 The other one is, it calls him a Trump supporter.
00:23:52.460 It says he went to D.C. to defend Trump.
00:23:57.140 And in fact, it further elaborates that he just went to D.C. at a last minute trip with
00:24:03.000 his son in order to hear Trump's speech on election fraud.
00:24:07.400 The piece doesn't say that Ray Epps actually never ended up going to Trump's speech.
00:24:12.940 Right.
00:24:12.960 So this, this alleged Trump supporter who traveled all the way to go to the speech, instead, he
00:24:19.000 goes all the way from Arizona to D.C., does not go to the speech and instead fixates on
00:24:26.600 this bizarre mission to get everyone to go into the Capitol to, in his own words, according
00:24:32.580 to the text message, to orchestrate the movements of the people to the Capitol on the day of.
00:24:38.600 And then he happens to be conveniently positioned right at the peace monument, which is the site
00:24:46.000 of that initial and decisive breach, right before the Proud Boys even arrived there.
00:24:52.140 And according to the official narrative, it's the Proud Boys that kicked everything off.
00:24:56.220 So not only does he travel all that way and just not go to the speech, he happens to be
00:25:01.880 positioned at the right place at the right time to kick off that initial breach of the Capitol.
00:25:06.760 And the New York Times piece, the Times reporter, I'm sure knows that he didn't go to the speech
00:25:14.020 or he should know that he didn't go to the speech.
00:25:16.400 And instead of pointing out that he didn't go, there's nothing about it and no explanation
00:25:21.540 as to why in Ray Epps' account, he went there to go to the speech and he ended up not going
00:25:28.160 and instead focused on this maniacal mission to get everyone to go into the Capitol.
00:25:33.520 So that's another one.
00:25:34.340 And then the final and most obvious but most important question that the New York Times
00:25:39.100 piece fails to explore, it fails to devote a single sentence to it, is, Ray Epps, where
00:25:47.480 did you get the idea to get everyone to go into the Capitol?
00:25:51.440 Because you know what?
00:25:53.080 On January 5th, you were the only person saying it.
00:25:56.980 And in fact, the idea was so outrageous, so outlandish, so out of place that the immediate
00:26:05.340 reaction of the crowd around him was to call him a Fed.
00:26:10.000 And yet, notwithstanding this sub-zero buying temperature of the crowd around him, he's undeterred
00:26:17.780 and he continues to call people to go into the Capitol.
00:26:21.100 And just as an amazing side detail, both of those real iconic times where he's telling
00:26:27.580 people, go into the Capitol, into the Capitol, he prefaces this command by saying, I probably
00:26:35.140 shouldn't say this because I'll get arrested.
00:26:37.960 I'm probably going to go to jail for this.
00:26:40.320 But, so he's acknowledging that he's, you know, engaging in illegal activity or at least
00:26:46.920 encouraging others to engage in illegal activity. 0.97
00:26:50.200 And I suppose it would be one thing if it were just some random drunk guy with a ridiculous 0.98
00:26:55.180 idea.
00:26:55.920 And that's the last we heard of it on January 5th.
00:26:58.180 But he follows up with this and he's everywhere January 6th, orchestrating people's movement
00:27:03.760 to the Capitol.
00:27:04.820 He's pre-positioned at the initial breach point before the Proud Boys even get there.
00:27:09.960 And he whispers into a guy's ear two seconds before that guy becomes one of the first people
00:27:15.780 to break down the bike rack barricades on the west side of the Capitol.
00:27:20.940 Well, astonishingly, they don't even ask him what his goals are.
00:27:23.700 I mean, you would think the New York Times would start by saying, gosh, there's all this
00:27:27.460 video of you moving people in position for a breach, you encouraging people the night
00:27:32.180 before.
00:27:33.020 What were you hoping to accomplish by getting people into the Capitol?
00:27:37.200 The question not even asked.
00:27:38.600 And what I think people have to realize is that the New York Times is the comms department
00:27:45.140 for the deep state.
00:27:47.000 The New York Times and the deep state are linked.
00:27:49.520 They perform different functions under the same banner.
00:27:52.960 And you have a revolving door of individuals and information kind of swirling around with
00:28:00.060 the Department of Justice, with the FBI, with a lot of these entities, and the New York
00:28:04.640 Times.
00:28:04.960 And so, of course, it's the New York Times that's going to do this.
00:28:08.280 But I've got to ask you, Dr. Beattie, we've gone over the New York Times interaction with
00:28:13.100 Epps and the deficiencies there.
00:28:14.220 But now let's talk about the committee.
00:28:15.900 Because Adam Kinzinger came out and tweeted with great bravado that the committee had spoken
00:28:20.900 to Epps and that he'd given his sworn testimony and that that would be released.
00:28:25.920 You know, of all the junior staffers lurking around the White House that we've heard from
00:28:30.140 and that we may hear from tonight, kind of interesting that we haven't had one single
00:28:35.000 clip from Ray Epps, not one release of his testimony.
00:28:40.020 Why do you think that is?
00:28:41.680 That's a great question.
00:28:43.060 And really, like, provides some compelling context within which to digest all of this
00:28:48.920 is that Ray Epps, whose behavior on January 5th and 6th was so egregious that he was one
00:28:57.280 of the first 20 people put on the FBI's most wanted list for January 6th.
00:29:01.740 And in fact, I failed to mention this, the New York Times' own video documentary on January
00:29:08.200 6th, ominously titled Day of Rage, features Epps multiple times and narratively depicts him
00:29:18.660 as one of the handful of rioters who plan to storm the Capitol in advance.
00:29:24.820 The New York Times' own video documentary on it, his behavior was so egregious that he was
00:29:30.400 cherry-picked to emphasize what a day of rage, an ominous day this was.
00:29:36.040 And now he goes from all of that to being unarrested, unindicted, the only January 6th
00:29:44.220 participant that Adam Kinzinger will defend, and the only January 6th participant about whom
00:29:51.200 the New York Times will write a puff piece.
00:29:54.640 Pretty remarkable.
00:29:56.440 And I think we can all-
00:29:56.960 I don't think we're going to hear a word from him.
00:29:58.360 I think they never released the transcript.
00:30:00.420 They might.
00:30:01.060 I hope they do.
00:30:01.740 They should.
00:30:02.300 They promised they would.
00:30:03.580 But it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't.
00:30:05.960 I don't think we're going to see any clips of Ray Epps on tonight, the grand conclusion,
00:30:09.880 the grand finale.
00:30:11.400 And I think that their way of dealing with those unanswered questions was to have the
00:30:16.220 mouthpiece of the deep state, the comms department of the deep state, the New York Times put this
00:30:20.620 piece out.
00:30:21.060 But folks can always get the truth at revolver.news.
00:30:24.300 And really, I think the best thing people can do if they want both sides, if you don't
00:30:29.160 want to be programmed, if you don't want to be manipulated by this illegitimate, partisan,
00:30:34.540 unconstitutional, rigged process, the January 6th report forward by Dr. Darren J.
00:30:40.520 Beattie, go get it, read it, be fully informed, and help us get the truth out. 0.72
00:30:46.440 One entity that doesn't always help us get the truth out, Dr. Beattie, is the CIA.
00:30:50.400 And I wanted to move to another piece that you've aggregated onto revolver.news, the original
00:30:56.100 reporting from Newsmax.
00:30:57.880 And the piece really cites the director of the CIA, William Burns, talking about the fact
00:31:03.620 that Vladimir Putin is, quote, too healthy.
00:31:07.800 Dr. Beattie, why is the head of our CIA commenting on the health of the Russian president?
00:31:15.680 I mean, like, especially you got Biden falsely claiming he has cancer, then truthfully claiming
00:31:21.940 he has COVID.
00:31:22.680 Like, don't we have kind of enough issues with the health of our own president to be talking
00:31:25.880 about Russia's president like this?
00:31:27.620 Right.
00:31:27.820 I can say one thing.
00:31:29.300 We can rest assured that no major intelligence official of any adversary country will ever
00:31:35.940 say that Joe Biden is too healthy.
00:31:38.660 And if they do, we have a big problem because, you know, he's one hair's width away from, you
00:31:44.020 know, complete brain death, it seems.
00:31:46.740 But yeah, it's a weird and ominous kind of thing, especially coming from an intelligence 0.91
00:31:54.860 official like that.
00:31:56.520 It's unclear exactly how to read it.
00:31:58.600 But there is something a bit Bolton-esque, shall we say, about such a pronouncement.
00:32:08.680 And of course, like they are intelligence officials are obsessed with Russia. 1.00
00:32:13.680 But are these guys going to sleepwalk us into a nuclear war with stupid comments like this? 1.00
00:32:19.020 I mean, and by the way, I'm surprised. 1.00
00:32:21.420 I would not have been surprised if this had come from a fool like Bolton, who's been wrong 0.99
00:32:25.980 about just about everything. 0.98
00:32:27.660 But Burns actually has prior rhetoric that seemed considerably more reasonable.
00:32:33.640 I mean, William Burns, our head of the CIA, warned against NATO expansion into Ukraine,
00:32:40.360 said that it would be provocative.
00:32:42.080 And so if NATO expansion is provocative, saying the guy is too healthy seems to be certainly
00:32:46.940 provocative, and we all know that the intelligence community utilizes code through the media at
00:32:53.520 times to communicate with assets.
00:32:55.900 It's not always hand-to-hand.
00:32:57.600 It's not always a WhatsApp, peer-to-peer digital thing.
00:33:01.100 Sometimes there is code that is communicated with coded language.
00:33:06.440 And I mean, to talk about the guy being too healthy, you have to wonder whether or not that means
00:33:11.980 something else.
00:33:12.920 And I don't know if it does or if it doesn't, but like Burns was the guy saying NATO expansion
00:33:17.280 was crazy.
00:33:18.220 So does it surprise you to hear it come directly from him?
00:33:23.680 Not necessarily.
00:33:25.140 And again, I think it could mean anything.
00:33:27.860 And if we were to really, you know, analyze it properly, I'd want to, you know, actually
00:33:34.600 hear exactly what he said and get the exact context of how he said it.
00:33:39.720 But I don't think that any CIA official is really immune to this kind of dangerous rhetoric
00:33:50.660 when it comes to Russia.
00:33:51.940 But it makes me believe it might be a code or it might be an op because it is, it divorces
00:33:58.160 from what we've heard from Burns previously.
00:34:01.340 You know, and so when you see someone kind of wildly switch, it almost, it has a certain
00:34:06.160 operational feel to it.
00:34:08.040 Dr. Beattie, I was among 18 Republicans who voted against the United States House of Representatives
00:34:14.900 lecturing to other NATO countries that they need to accept Finland and Sweden.
00:34:20.200 I felt like it's probably good to end one war before we start the next one. 0.96
00:34:25.480 And if there's any opportunity for us to wind down this carnage in Ukraine and to save people 0.62
00:34:29.740 from being needlessly slaughtered, we should probably do that before engaging in other provocative
00:34:35.920 NATO expansion.
00:34:37.420 And yet only 17 of my colleagues joined me on that.
00:34:40.880 How do you think history will view this like era of reckless, provocative NATO expansion?
00:34:46.400 Well, I think it's, it's deeply, uh, it's deeply damaging, um, not only to global stability
00:34:54.560 in that region, but it's damaging to America's position in the world because it doesn't reflect
00:35:00.920 a proper prioritization of our, um, geopolitical interests.
00:35:07.360 And I think as a matter of domestic politics, what it does is to underscore that, unfortunately,
00:35:12.700 despite all of the gains that we've gotten, uh, from the Trump phenomenon, we're better
00:35:19.640 off than we were under Bush, but still the, even the Republican party is largely under sway
00:35:26.200 of the national security state.
00:35:28.080 And that's a very difficult teat to completely wean ourselves from because so much of the
00:35:38.000 sort of, um, mythology of American conservatism is winning the cold war with the national security
00:35:50.620 state.
00:35:51.100 And so to fully sort of update to the reality that the national security state is not only
00:35:57.220 antithetical to America's long-term interests, but is directly hostile to, um, conservatives
00:36:05.140 in the United States, um, there's still a lot more lifting to do.
00:36:11.040 And I think we're seeing, unfortunately, part of that legacy, but also we're seeing the more
00:36:17.980 sort of crude effects of just how the national security state can wield its influence through,
00:36:24.160 um, all kinds of other, uh, you know, direct mechanisms through its money, through its institutional
00:36:30.480 influence, um, and so forth.
00:36:32.920 So, uh, unfortunately.
00:36:34.260 Well, I think the American people get it.
00:36:35.620 I mean, uh, one comment, Puzzle Rock on Rumble.
00:36:38.340 Matt, do Republicans have any idea how furious people are that they allowed the BS fake insurrection
00:36:45.120 lie to go unanswered?
00:36:47.980 And I think that a lot of voters feel this way.
00:36:50.860 And as we go into a midterm election, you have to ask yourself, what is the covenant
00:36:55.000 that Republicans offer?
00:36:57.380 What is the value proposition to someone to vote for us in the midterm?
00:37:01.120 And I think it has to be vindicating people's liberty and telling people the truth, the truth
00:37:06.520 about January 6th, the truth about the 2020 election, the truth about the coronavirus, uh,
00:37:11.880 and its origins and the truth about the vaccine.
00:37:14.000 And why it was forced on so many people with these, these, these just overbearing tools
00:37:19.480 of the government.
00:37:20.260 And too often, I think the Republicans don't learn that lesson, but the American people
00:37:24.900 do.
00:37:25.120 That's an excellent point.
00:37:25.680 Just a quick response to that is absolutely.
00:37:28.400 Look, there's as ridiculous as the whole, you know, January 6th issue seems, the stakes 0.58
00:37:36.080 are very high and are no laughing matter at all. 0.77
00:37:39.220 This is going to be the dominant narrative that the regime uses to fully facilitate the
00:37:44.800 reconfiguration of the national security state against us, to weaponize the national security
00:37:50.860 powers of the United States against us.
00:37:53.240 There's so much at stake here.
00:37:55.360 And given how much is at stake, it's really scandalous, not only how few Republicans are
00:38:00.740 even drawing attention to it.
00:38:02.240 So I have to always, you know, commend you're one of the handful of stalwarts of fire brands,
00:38:07.880 really, who's brave enough and discerning enough and intelligent enough to understand what
00:38:13.800 the stakes are and why it's important and to draw attention to this issue.
00:38:16.980 But beyond the handful of brave congressmen such as yourself, wouldn't it be worth at
00:38:25.620 least a couple million dollars to the Republicans to blow this narrative up completely?
00:38:32.480 Why isn't the GOP dedicating money to try to identify, for instance, the scaffold commander?
00:38:39.960 Yes.
00:38:40.380 You talked about him in a press conference.
00:38:43.660 I think you're the only one who's really talked about him.
00:38:45.920 You and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
00:38:47.700 But this guy, we're talking about Epps.
00:38:50.340 Scaffold commander is at least as damning as Epps, maybe even more so because he hasn't
00:38:55.560 even been identified.
00:38:56.980 He was never even put on the list.
00:38:59.000 And so why isn't the GOP dedicating two million, three million, five million, which is the grand
00:39:05.880 scheme of their budgets that they routinely waste on dumb stuff, nothing?
00:39:10.760 Why aren't they dedicating at least a few million dollars to definitively identifying this guy
00:39:17.240 and potentially exploding the whole narrative right in Liz Cheney's face, right in Kinscher's
00:39:23.440 face, right in Benny Thompson's face?
00:39:25.440 The priorities here, they're not playing to win because if they were-
00:39:28.760 No, they're playing to win by default, Darren.
00:39:30.660 That's the issue.
00:39:31.780 Right now, Republicans in Congress have an optimism that we are going to win not based on any covenant
00:39:38.640 and promise and commitment to our voters, but because the other side has gone so crazy
00:39:44.120 and has made people so uncomfortable and has made our country dirtier and poorer and less
00:39:50.140 ambitious as a national prospect.
00:39:52.740 And so that worries me.
00:39:54.280 My grave concern is not that we're going to lose the midterms.
00:39:57.300 It's we're going to win them, not understanding why, and potentially just winning them by default.
00:40:02.200 And who even wants to do that?
00:40:03.640 It's like winning a baseball game by forfeit.
00:40:05.780 And really, the Democrats are kind of forfeiting a lot of this ground to us, but that doesn't
00:40:11.080 absolve us of our obligations to get to the truth and to actually deliver wins for our
00:40:16.860 people.
00:40:17.540 And that, I think, has to become a greater kind of organizing principle of the Republican
00:40:24.360 conference going forward.
00:40:25.620 And based on what we're certainly seeing from the comments on this episode, people want
00:40:30.460 these answers.
00:40:31.120 People are eager for them.
00:40:32.160 And I know one place they can always get them, revolver.news.
00:40:36.060 The scaffold commander you just mentioned, folks have got to go watch these videos that
00:40:39.780 you've put on your site.
00:40:41.420 I mean, just think about this context.
00:40:43.540 The guy who is at the top of scaffolding with a bullhorn directing people into the Capitol
00:40:50.860 and just yelling at them to charge on has faced no consequence.
00:40:56.100 But Peter Navarro has been in leg shackles and John Eastman got, like, you know, patted down
00:41:02.700 and his phone taken away.
00:41:04.260 So, like, a trade advisor and a lawyer have faced, like, extreme criminal process and the
00:41:10.560 guy at the top of a scaffold yelling people into the Capitol, absolutely nothing.
00:41:15.180 That is not a result of incompetence.
00:41:17.480 That is by design.
00:41:18.700 Because what you see from the January 6th committee from the New York Times is a cover-up.
00:41:23.980 They're always accusing us of the stuff that they're doing.
00:41:28.020 In the Russia hoax, they accused Trump of being a Russian asset.
00:41:30.820 Well, it was actually Hillary colluding with the Russians and spreading the Russians' lies. 1.00
00:41:35.040 And now on January 6th, they say, oh, the Republicans are trying to, you know, disrupt our politics
00:41:39.900 and threaten our democracy.
00:41:41.220 What threatens our democracy is a national security state that is turned against a movement
00:41:46.920 of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans.
00:41:50.060 You've got to get the January 6th report forward by Dr. Beattie.
00:41:54.280 It's available on Amazon.
00:41:55.580 It is the only way you are going to be fully apprised of both sides of this, fully educated,
00:42:01.380 fully knowledgeable.
00:42:02.120 Dr. Beattie, how can folks continue to follow your work on social media?
00:42:06.180 And what platforms have you not been banned from?
00:42:08.240 Well, as always, the go-to is revolver.news.
00:42:13.300 If anyone listening to this hasn't seen our response piece to the New York Times-Ray Epps
00:42:18.960 janitorial mop-up attempt, go to revolver.news.
00:42:25.200 It's right at the top.
00:42:26.260 Share it.
00:42:26.840 And it has that video, which really speaks for itself when it comes to Ray Epps.
00:42:31.100 The New York Times piece says it was selectively edited.
00:42:33.600 Are you kidding me?
00:42:34.320 Maybe the Times should present the full video and see if that helps their case or hurts their
00:42:39.360 case.
00:42:39.780 So all the video is on the revolver.news piece.
00:42:42.580 It's right up top.
00:42:43.620 It's white hot.
00:42:44.480 Other than that, I'm on Twitter at Darren J. Beattie.
00:42:48.880 And as you mentioned, I encourage everyone to go to Amazon.
00:42:53.100 Find the copy of the January 6th committee report with introduction by me.
00:42:57.960 Not the New Yorker version, which is just going to repeat Benny Thompson's cliff notes.
00:43:05.660 Go and get the Skyhorse version and get a copy for your friends, too, because I think
00:43:12.340 every American deserves to know the truth about January 6th.
00:43:16.680 Undeniably.
00:43:17.220 Well, thanks for joining us, Dr. Beattie.
00:43:18.740 Thank you for your investigative reporting.
00:43:21.100 Everyone, make sure you're subscribed with your notifications turned on.
00:43:23.780 Leave us a comment.
00:43:24.820 Give us that five-star review on Apple iTunes especially.
00:43:28.840 Let's roll the credits.
00:43:29.560 We'll see you next time.