January 6th has been used by the most powerful forces in America to smear and target a political movement that threatens them. The FBI has been using January 6th as a political weapon against the silent majority for years, and it s only getting worse.
00:02:26.000You know, for most Americans, January 6th, 2021, probably isn't one of the first hundred things you think about when you wake up in the morning.
00:02:34.000But Pelosi set up a special committee to obsess about it.
00:04:22.000The FBI, chasing down boomers in Homer, Alaska and accusing them of being part of a larger conspiracy to steal Nancy Pelosi's laptop, tells you all you need to know about how wide this net is being cast.
00:04:37.000You can read more about the horrors in Homer on Revolver News.
00:04:42.000The FBI has been the enforcement wing of DC's anti-Trump political forces for some time.
00:04:49.000Even before Trump was elected, they had the Russia hoax brewing.
00:04:52.000Now the Biden regime is using January 6th to label their political opponents domestic terrorists.
00:04:59.000Let's see them ridiculously use this strong arm tactic and these terrorism tools in their hunt in the United States.
00:05:12.000The failed war on terror is now coming home and it's turned inward.
00:05:17.000The institutions that we were told would keep us safe if we would only give up a little freedom have now been weaponized against the American people.
00:05:27.000We never imagined the Patriot Act being used to harass patriots.
00:05:32.000The FBI has a history and a doctrine of deploying assets to infiltrate political movements that scare them.
00:05:39.000When the FBI was right wing under J. Edgar Hoover, they used their tools to infiltrate and surveil civil rights groups.
00:05:47.000Because the growing popularity of people like Martin Luther King Jr. frightened them.
00:05:52.000The politics at the FBI have obviously changed and so have their targets.
00:05:58.000In June, I pieced together explosive reporting from Revolver News and other information I had.
00:06:04.000Today's guest, Tucker Carlson and I, were making the serious charge that federal law enforcement was involved on January 6th.
00:06:15.000This is June 17th. I laid out the argument on In Focus with Stephanie Hamill on One America News.
00:06:21.000Here's what we know, Stephanie. Groups like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Three Percenters were infiltrated to some degree by the FBI.
00:06:30.000That doesn't necessarily mean badged agents were parts of those groups, but it does mean that people were providing information from those groups to the FBI.
00:06:38.000And if the very people who provided that information were accelerating the violence, were riling people up who might have otherwise just shown up on the Capitol lawn to peacefully protest and have their voice heard.
00:06:52.000Well then, I think the FBI is even more culpable in the violence and in the most troubling parts of 1-6.
00:06:59.000That's why I've sent a letter to Director Wray seeking a full accounting of the FBI assets, the FBI operatives and even potentially the FBI agents that might have known what was going on and even might have participated in some of the worst elements of January 6th.
00:07:15.000The FBI was participating in the insurrection that they now claim is an ongoing national security threat.
00:07:22.000Maybe the FBI is the ongoing national security threat actually.
00:07:26.000When Revolver News put out this explosive reporting, the mainstream media went into full meltdown.
00:07:31.000Fox's BS ringmaster Tucker Carlson this week breathing air into this false flag conspiracy theory that originated from a right-wing website that has been flagged by social media for being BS.
00:07:45.000This is Alex Jones Infowars. This is real tinfoil hat stuff. And yet, BT and Revolver News were the sources cited last week by Tucker Carlson.
00:07:55.000The highest rated primetime host on Fox News when he decided to give BT a platform and amplify this bonkers conspiracy to millions of his Republican viewers.
00:08:05.000What's his source? A site run by this guy, Darren Beattie, former Trump speechwriter, left his post in 2018 after attending a conference with white nationalists.
00:08:16.000But forget about what kind of dirtbag he's getting his information from.
00:08:20.000No less than the New York Times has now confirmed the reporting of Revolver News.
00:08:25.000That's right. The New York Times has fessed up to the most milquetoast version of the FBI's involvement that they could present.
00:08:32.000But we're going to get the full story today from Dr. Darren Beattie from Revolver.
00:08:37.000And this is not the end of the story. Likely, it's not even the end of the beginning.
00:08:42.000We have so much more here with Dr. Beattie. Know this.
00:08:46.000The reason you're learning about the FBI's involvement now is that the tapes are coming out.
00:08:52.000That tapes all 14,000 hours, those that we've been calling to release.
00:08:57.000Now they're coming out either through criminal process or through the conclusion of criminal process.
00:09:03.000Even the FBI can't hide the truth forever.
00:09:07.000And after the Russia hoax, we're getting better.
00:10:37.000And it really shows the power of proactive narrative formation.
00:10:44.000And so before we talk about what happened in the mainstream media, I think it's worth saying what the landscape was like on the conservative media in terms of the narratives that we used to describe 1-6.
00:11:10.000There's a lot of truth to the selfies narrative, and there's probably some truth to the Antifa narrative.
00:11:17.000But it was sort of scattered, and we didn't really know how to think about it.
00:11:21.000And what the Revolver News piece did was really refocus the conversation really on the one place that the regime does not want it focused on, and that is, wait a minute, we just had this Michigan kidnapping plot that everyone was talking about as an example of how evil these right-wing Trump supporters are and how they're so dangerous.
00:11:47.000We just need to repurpose the entire national security apparatus to suppress them politically.
00:11:53.000And how it turned out that at the time we reported it, we knew that five of the Michigan plotters were actually feds.
00:12:03.000Twelve out of the 26 plotters in the Michigan case turned out to be feds.
00:12:08.000And for your listeners who may not be familiar with this case, in short, the Michigan kidnapping case is actually much more than this so-called plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan.
00:12:20.000It also involved a so-called plot to storm the Michigan State Capitol, a plot that involved one of the three main militia groups imputed to 1-6, and a plot that was infiltrated by the feds, as I mentioned, 12 out of the 26.
00:12:37.000And just as the cherry on top, the head of the Detroit FBI field office at the time who ran this infiltration operation was after the arrest of these plotters promoted by Christopher Wray to the DC field office to oversee aspects of the 1-6 investigation.
00:12:55.000And so, given that context, and given the fact that, as we pointed out, looking at the charging documents of the people variously who were indicted in relation to 1-6 crimes, and seeing there are a lot of names and people referred to who pop up in these charging documents who, by the description, seem to have done just as much, and in many cases, more stuff than the people indicted,
00:13:22.000indicted, and who occupy more senior positions in these militia groups that the government claims to be interested in.
00:13:29.000And so, what's a possible explanation for this manifest selective prosecution?
00:13:37.500Given the context of the Michigan case, one compelling explanation in at least some of these cases of selective prosecution is that these people are being protected as a result of a prior relationship with the feds.
00:13:50.460And that's what started it all, and that, as I mentioned, that's the narrative, that's the one thing, that's the soft spot, it's the weak spot, it's the vulnerable spot, it's the one little narrative spot that they didn't want us to talk about, and that's why they freaked out.
00:14:07.460So, what you're saying, Darren, is that you believe there are senior people in some of these groups that have been bantied around as potential organizational nodes for January 6th,
00:14:21.240where the actual people, not in the rank and file, but in the leadership, were working with the federal government.
00:14:29.540What's your best evidence that's the case?
00:14:31.460Well, I'll be very happy to get to that.
00:14:34.700I just want to preempt some of the actually extremely weak criticisms.
00:14:38.920So, the media descended on this original piece, which was amplified by you and Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson, and so, you know, that's great.
00:14:49.960You know, and I'm very grateful for you amplifying this story, and it helped to really break the sound barrier.
00:14:55.380But once that happened, the media, all the fact checkers in the media, they said, hey, wait a minute, I know you're eager to write your 10th piece about how we need to put on a fifth mask for COVID,
00:15:08.680but why don't we get the fact checkers here to address this revolver piece, and then you can finish the COVID piece later.
00:15:15.180And they all said, okay, so every journalist in the country, it seemed like, descended on this piece, and given that level of resources, I would expect at least some kind of effective critique.
00:15:28.260But the best thing that they can come up with is they focused on this technical term, unindicted co-conspirators, and they said, well, technically, they're not unindicted co-conspirators, which actually turns out to be false.
00:15:39.580There is a use of this specific term, unindicted co-conspirator, in one of the charging documents, but that's really beside the point.
00:15:47.200The issue isn't whether they use the specific phrase, unindicted co-conspirators.
00:15:52.420The issue at question is whether any of the individuals referenced in the charging documents who are not prosecuted are being protected from prosecution,
00:16:02.500are unindicted on the basis of a prior relationship with the feds.
00:16:06.640That's what the issue is. That's why they were so terrified of it, and that's why they all descended on it.
00:18:09.420That's actually the view of the government itself, because the government, in charging one of his underlings,
00:18:16.720in arguments saying why his underling should not only be charged but should be denied bail,
00:18:23.560they use his statements and actions to constitute a conspiracy in which they say the guy that they actually charge is in.
00:18:31.580So they're using the words and statements of the militia leader to charge the underling when the leader himself is not charged.
00:18:41.340Well, Darren, if what you're suggesting is true, then the Oath Keepers as an organization is essentially a counterintelligence federal operation.
00:18:53.880If the leader and founder of the organization is working with the federal government and informing to the federal government,
00:19:00.000then is that organization a sincere organization built on whatever its founding documents are?
00:19:06.360Or is it a setup to try to map out people who might have views that are uncomfortable to the ruling elite?
00:19:17.400And, you know, I can't say definitively one way or another.
00:19:22.760My strong sense, based on research into this, is there are a lot of sincere people who join the Oath Keepers who are just misguided and they don't understand.
00:19:32.660Well, what if they're the target, you see?
00:19:35.680You know, we know in the intelligence world, a common feature is to go set up an organization,
00:19:40.960not for the purpose of executing on that organization's stated goals, but as a way to recruit people and then map them.
00:19:49.000Is the Oath Keepers a recruit and map?
00:19:51.220It's a perfect thing if that were the case, because the whole idea is basically recruiting people with military and law enforcement experience who are essentially willing to break laws, in a sense.
00:20:06.720And I can, like, the actual messaging, there's a lot of the messaging that makes sense, but that's kind of what could make it dangerous as a counterintelligence operation.
00:20:16.200I think a lot of the people who join are sincere, are patriots, are misguided.
00:20:21.300But as for the founder and leader, I think there's a lot of questions.
00:20:26.420And there's a lot of questions because, you know, the guy who was charged that I mentioned, who's being charged really on the basis of statements and actions by the founder and leader.
00:20:39.020This guy, first of all, he was reported in the media as being a leader of the Oath Keepers.
00:20:43.780He's not. He's a 65-year-old disabled guy who met the head of the Oath Keepers at the Stop the Steal rally just months before.
00:20:55.000And, you know, the FBI kicked down his door.
00:20:59.880They, you know, pointed a gun at his wife.
00:21:01.880He got the whole treatment, all the electronic stuff seized.
00:21:05.660You see the feds do that, where they take all the electronics, they kick down the door, they do the whole thing.
00:21:12.020And yet, so, which is even more curious, because, again, this head of the Oath Keepers who hasn't been indicted, he hasn't even been properly searched.
00:21:19.460As far as we know, the full extent of what search he's had was that the feds took a single cell phone from him four months after January 6th.
00:21:31.500That simply doesn't make sense to me if he were the target of a serious investigation.
00:21:37.360In fact, he doesn't even need to be the target of investigation for a search like that.
00:21:40.900They just need to think, oh, maybe he has stuff on other people that they're investigating.
00:21:44.620And they've searched people on that basis, too.
00:21:47.540And so, again, I can't say definitively one way or another, but one possible explanation of this is they don't want his full communications records, because those might contain correspondence with an FBI handler.
00:22:03.320And that's precisely the type of correspondence that blew open the Michigan case.
00:22:08.740And it's the correspondence that has become the basis of this New York Times article about the Proud Boy informant texting with his handler.
00:22:17.160And why is that coming out now, Darren?
00:22:19.180You know, I mean, you have essentially reported this information, this tactic of infiltration that, frankly, the FBI and DOJ have used back to the days of J. Edgar Hoover.
00:22:29.760But now using against right-wing groups instead of using against left-wing groups.
00:22:35.960Sort of the target has changed, but the Mad Lib stayed the same.
00:22:40.060I think that we need to catch the signal here, not the noise, in the New York Times reporting.
00:22:57.080Right. So that's great. And a couple of things. Revolver News just published a pretty detailed analysis of what's going in.
00:23:04.880Of course, we want to take the victory lap and say, oh, we're vindicated by the Times.
00:23:08.860And it is a partial vindication. But just a victory lap is a little bit boring.
00:23:12.680We want to we want to advance the conversation.
00:23:15.340And so a couple of things. First, why is this coming out?
00:23:17.960They're not doing this to vindicate revolver news.
00:23:22.220They're doing this because the truth is a lot worse and they're trying to get ahead of the narrative and massage the narrative because it's a damage control piece.
00:23:30.660So that's why I have every expectation that we're going to learn about more and more and more informants.
00:23:35.680Given the timing, why are we going to learn that?
00:23:37.600Again, this gets back to why if someone's an informant, the feds aren't going to want to seize all of their electronics immediately.
00:23:45.340And that's because there's a legal obligation on the part of prosecution to present any exculpatory evidence to defendants, which could include information about informants and communications by informants to their FBI handlers.
00:23:58.420So I think that explains the timing of why The New York Times feels compelled.
00:24:03.900Probably the feds told them, look, this is going to come out.
00:24:06.860It would get ahead of this for us, which they which they did.
00:24:09.740But the mere acknowledgement of of informants puts the regime and the regime media in a very difficult strategic dilemma, which I would like to explain.
00:24:19.960So in that seminal revolver news piece in which we broke up in the whole story, we actually began the piece with a clip of Amy Klobuchar making an inquiry to FBI Director Wray.
00:24:35.120Now, she sort of asked the question about informants, but she formulates it in a very careful fashion.
00:24:43.520She she doesn't say, did you have informants?
00:24:48.340She assumes and said, don't you just kick yourself for not having had informants, because if you had informants in place, you would have known what was going to take place.
00:24:59.720And of course, you would have stopped it.
00:25:02.080So don't you just kick yourself that you didn't have any informants and therefore no visibility in what what was going to happen.
00:25:09.040And therefore, it's an intelligence failure that explains why you're not able to stop this in advance.
00:25:15.500And he basically gives a non answer because she did him the courtesy of not posing the question directly.
00:25:23.220Now, why did she do him that courtesy?
00:25:25.060Why did she assume that there are no informants?
00:25:27.160Well, the no informants thesis was very important to the official position that this was all the result of an intelligence failure, because if they had the intelligence and they did nothing, then the obvious question is, why did they let it happen on purpose?
00:25:43.280But now that we know for a fact that there were multiple informants, and as I pointed out, they're likely to be even more revealed, this notion that they couldn't have known in advance of plotting and conspiracy and so forth is really, really difficult to sustain.
00:25:59.400So in order to salvage this position that the feds didn't just sit back and let something happen for political purposes, they need a new narrative.
00:26:08.320And this is a new narrative that they're advancing with their proxies in the media.
00:26:12.160And that narrative is, you know what, guys, after all, there was actually no pre-planning on the part of these insurrectionists.
00:26:22.580They were just there, and it got out of hand.
00:26:25.760The reason they say that is that they could not be blamed for having foreknowledge and doing nothing if there was no foreplanning.
00:26:34.140If the insurrectionists had no foreplanning, the feds could not have had foreknowledge, and therefore they're absolved of having foreknowledge and doing nothing.
00:26:42.280The only problem with this is this really compromises another major pillar of the narrative that they're invested in.
00:26:49.180If there is no foreplanning, there's no conspiracy.
00:26:54.380And therefore, the entire conspiracy case against the Oath Keepers, which is the basis of this thing, goes out the window.
00:27:01.300The entire case against the Proud Boys goes out the window.
00:27:04.520The entire media narrative of 1-6 is this pre-planned terrorist attack on the level of 9-11 goes out the window.
00:27:13.260The entire January 6 thesis goes out the window because Benny Thompson, the chairman of that commission, advances his own personal lawsuit, a theory of the case that stipulates that 1-6 was a result of pre-planned coordination between the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and members of Trump's inner circle.
00:27:31.920So there's this really interesting situation where the feds want to cover their asses, cover the downside by saying, wait a minute, now let's say there's no pre-planning, so we're not blamed for knowing in advance and doing nothing.
00:27:44.920But they do that at the expense of the entire narrative that's been concocted to advance this kind of political war on Trump supporters as the new domestic terrorists.
00:27:56.900So either way you go, one major pillar of the official 1-6 thesis goes out the window.
00:28:04.760And that, again, is leaving aside the big elephant in the room, is that it's probably a lot worse even that they knew and didn't do anything.
00:28:14.420It's probably that some of the key instigators who had constituted the conspiracy were themselves feds, much like in the case of Michigan.
00:28:25.780And I think this tension explains some of the mixed messaging you have in the media, because even though the media and the feds are on the same side, they kind of have different priorities in this case.
00:28:37.440The feds want to cover their downside with this new position that there is no pre-planning, but the media wants to take off and continue running with this narrative to demonize Trump supporters.
00:28:50.300I think it's only going to get worse for the regime, and we're not going to stop pushing.
00:28:54.900So, Darren, let me distill what you just said there.
00:28:58.280The New York Times reporting really isn't intended to confirm your reporting.
00:29:04.140It's intended to lance the boil and to try to reduce the intense exposure and embarrassment for the FBI if, in fact, their assets were doing more than merely infiltrating these organizations, but if they were animating a higher acuity of criminal conduct.
00:29:23.620And then similarly, you know, when they come out and say, there's no organizing feature to this, there's no grand plan to storm the Capitol.
00:29:32.680Well, they may be saying that because the grand plan was theirs.
00:29:37.380And if it is true that the grand plan was theirs, it wouldn't even be the first time they had that plan because it was part of the Michigan endeavor that resulted in the very person who put together the Michigan operation finding a big job in D.C.
00:29:53.700So is sort of, you know, infiltrate right wing group, animate criminal conduct, threaten some political figure or some political building.
00:30:06.200And whether it's Michigan or Washington, D.C. or something else, we have found the operation and the greatest vulnerability in this operation, the biggest opportunity for us to find the truth is to really get a full accounting of all of the federal assets who had infiltrated and then tie those assets to higher acuity of criminal conduct.
00:30:29.660I mean, is that is that the Darren Beattie roadmap for a Republican Congress once we get the gavels and have the power of oversight?
00:30:39.820I mean, that is the iceberg that sinks the Titanic of that is the false narrative of January 6th.
00:30:47.660And that's precisely why the media freaked out initially when our piece came out, raising the general thesis.
00:30:55.640Now, I should say that even more remarkable and suspicious than the media freak out over our first piece was the complete media silence over our follow up piece, which focused on a specific individual.
00:31:10.200That is the head of the Oath Keeper, Stuart Rhodes.
00:31:13.920None of the fact checkers wanted to touch that piece.
00:31:17.320They simply didn't want anyone to know about it.
00:31:20.280To me, that's even more damning than the reaction to the initial piece, which is a freak out.
00:31:24.820Is this the first time Stuart Rhodes has sort of found himself in a circumstance where he's part of an organization or an entity that becomes subject to federal law enforcement interest?
00:31:35.300And then he sort of, you know, disappears when the enforcement action arrives?
00:31:40.220No, actually, that's another interesting aspect.
00:31:43.000When you look into his biography and history, he's been involved in a lot of these things and been involved in the Bundy Ranch and this or that.
00:31:51.460And going back, you can find witnesses and people saying, look, there's this weird thing where he gets involved in these flashpoints and a lot of people around him get indicted and he manages to go free and move on to the next thing.
00:32:07.860So, I mean, that alone doesn't prove anything, but it's an interesting additional point of context, you know, given what the evidence seemed to suggest in relation to 1-6.
00:32:19.560Darren, I can't let you go without asking you a question about another hot issue in the news, Julian Assange.
00:32:27.280There's a lot of analysis on Revolver News regarding the reporting we've seen, the CIA developing a series of severe options to invade the Ecuadorian embassy and take out Assange or kidnap him.
00:32:42.520How should Americans think about the fact that our government was making these plans?
00:32:46.560Well, I mean, I think it's part of the same conversation that we've been having before, and that is the problem of the national security state run amok.
00:32:58.500And Julian Assange really represents the ultimate conclusion of where that can lead.
00:33:06.400His great offense was he embarrassed the national security state profoundly, and he did so from the left, which affords him some degree of protection.
00:33:17.320But he embarrassed them so much and so severely that he has to be punished severely from the standpoint of the security state.
00:33:24.840I think it's a shameful thing. It's a demonstration of hypocrisy that severely compromises whatever kind of moral high ground we might pretend to have when engaging with other nations.
00:33:41.060But I think, perhaps even more important from our point of view, it demonstrates what's really the lesson from the 1-6 conversation that I think is particularly hard for people on the right.
00:33:54.320I think the political psychology of people on the left is to be charitable.
00:34:00.800They want to critique unjust institutions of power.
00:34:05.980They want to challenge unjust institutions of power.
00:34:09.500I happen to think nine cases out of 10 or maybe 99 out of 100, they unwittingly or otherwise actually serve those powerful interests.
00:34:18.680But they have to think of themselves as challenging, unjust, powerful institutions.
00:34:24.660People on the right, on the other hand, tend to have a very different political psychology.
00:34:29.820They want to think of themselves as venerating and defending just institutions of authority.
00:34:37.680And so it's much easier to go from the political psychology of the left to a critique of the national security state.
00:34:47.500And what I try to do with Revolver, I think it's what you do tremendously well as a representative and just as an observer and commenter on events and an active participant.
00:35:02.180But it's harder on the right because the psychology is wanting to venerate just institutions.
00:35:08.040But what do you do when these institutions are corrupt, including not only the national security state, but the DOD up to brass itself?
00:35:20.380It's a more difficult pill to swallow.
00:35:23.120But unless we orient ourselves to this new reality and address it, we're not going to get anywhere.
00:35:30.260Because the ultimate bottleneck to political effectiveness, I believe, is the national security state.
00:35:37.700Unless we address the problem of the national security state, bring it under control, bring it to heel, politics in this country will be pretty much fake and performative.
00:35:50.260As long as there's a national security state operating in the fashion it does now, politics will effectively be fake.
00:35:57.640And it'll be easy for, you know, grifters to raise money ginning up, you know, issues that get people emotionally and go nowhere.
00:36:05.960But in terms of actually fundamentally altering the course of this country, it will not be possible until we address the question of the national security state.
00:36:14.640Well, and you're describing the status quo, because, you know, what I see is that far too many of my colleagues are merely the actors and the scripts are written by others.
00:36:36.880You know, and I am proud that he didn't get me, that I at least had the wherewithal to get past Borat in whatever incarnation I found him in.
00:36:45.900But, you know, I do think that we share the perspective that the greatest threat to our country right now is the inward turning of national security authorities against our people.
00:36:58.240And that is precisely why these January 6th detainees are still behind bars.
00:37:04.100They don't pose any ongoing threat to the ruling government of the United States of America.
00:37:08.920But if we face that fact, then those authorities that they want to use against MAGA, against America First, against people on the populist right, well, then those wouldn't be attainable, accessible to them.
00:37:24.740Now, my recommendation to folks is if you want to stay up on this, if you want the cutting-edge news, go to Revolver, and then you can see the future.
00:37:33.700Because if you're not going to Revolver News every day, all you're seeing is the CNN, MSNBC meltdown of the Revolver reporting.
00:37:43.180And then months later, you see the, you know, kind of sheepish confirmations from entities like the New York Times.
00:37:49.280But if people just read Revolver in the first place, you will literally be able to see the future.
00:37:53.880Darren, thank you for your analysis and your perspective.
00:38:15.200Last week, I gave you important information regarding the horrors and crimes that occur at foreign consulates operating within the United States.
00:38:25.540I called on the Secretary of State to close the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles and to get answers from Israel's consulate in New York.
00:38:36.560This man, Jake Novak, works at the New York Israeli consulate as the broadcast media relations director.
00:38:44.160It's a big job to be the media relations director for Israel in New York.
00:40:52.800This tweet statement is helpful, but it's not enough.
00:40:58.120The one thing I won't be able to pursue anymore is Twitter engagement with the man involved in pricing a shakedown of my father, Jake Novak.
00:41:06.400He has blocked all of my accounts and the accounts of my congressional staff, maybe because I've repeatedly exposed that he was doing exactly what it looks like he was doing, even according to the government of Israel's confirming statement.
00:41:25.000I don't know how to feel about being blocked by an employee of a foreign government after that person was lying about me to the brilliant Dilbert cartoonist.
00:41:59.240But it's hard to imagine Israel's New York consulate overly sensitive about the exercise of trolling when the tweet pinned to the top of their Twitter timeline is a call to troll Ben and Jerry's ice cream.
00:42:14.780If social justice, diversity, peace, and tolerance are important to you, show your support for at Ben Jerry Israel by tweeting at Ben and Jerry's and urging people over politics.
00:42:28.880I'll reiterate, I'm a friend to Israel, a far better friend than the Democrats who voted to defund the Iron Dome for sure.
00:42:35.560I even support their trolling of Ben and Jerry's ice cream.
00:43:32.680Running interference, it seems, for someone or something.
00:43:36.260The Jerusalem Post falsely reports, quote,
00:43:39.640The correspondence occurred before Novak began working for the consulate.
00:43:43.860This is the correspondence that was the pricing of the extortion, checking in on the extortion exercise.
00:43:49.000And I know it would be convenient for the consulate to distance themselves from Novak to say that he did all these things when he wasn't in their employ.