The Anchormen Show with Matt Gaetz - Episode 9： January 6th (feat. Dr. Darren J. Beattie) – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz

00:00:01.000 The embattled Congressman Matt Gaetz.

00:00:03.000 Matt Gaetz was one of the very few members in the entire Congress

00:00:06.000 who bothered to stand up against permanent Washington on behalf of his constituents.

00:00:10.000 Matt Gaetz right now, he's a problem for the Democratic Party.

00:00:13.000 He could cause a lot of hiccups in passing applause.

00:00:16.000 So we're going to keep running those stories to keep hurting him.

00:00:20.000 If you stand for the flag and kneel in prayer,

00:00:23.000 if you want to build America up and not burn her to the ground,

00:00:26.000 then welcome, my fellow patriots.

00:00:29.000 You are in the right place.

00:00:31.000 This is the movement for you.

00:00:33.000 You ever watch this guy on television?

00:00:35.000 It's like a machine, Matt Gaetz.

00:00:38.000 I'm a canceled man in some corners of the internet.

00:00:41.000 Many days I'm a marked man in Congress, a wanted man by the deep state.

00:00:46.000 They aren't really coming for me.

00:00:48.000 They're coming for you.

00:00:50.000 I'm just in the way.

00:00:53.000 Thanks for joining this week.

00:00:55.000 Make sure to give us that five-star rating.

00:00:57.000 Leave us a review.

00:00:58.000 Let us know topics you'd be interested in for upcoming episodes today.

00:01:03.000 Whether it is the Wuhan virus starting at the Wuhan lab, or the Russia hoax, 0.74

00:01:09.000 or even the topic of today's show, January 6th, there is a pattern that repeats itself.

00:01:15.000 And recognizing it will help you see the future.

00:01:18.000 First, I tell you something that sounds crazy.

00:01:21.000 Like our own government was illegally spying on the Trump campaign.

00:01:24.000 Or U.S. taxpayers were funding a Chinese bioweapon. 0.89

00:01:28.000 Or that our own government was involved in the attack on the Capitol.

00:01:32.000 Then, the mainstream media says, I'm nuts. Gaslighting, even.

00:01:38.000 Then we roll up our sleeves and develop the evidence.

00:01:41.000 Talk to the experts.

00:01:42.000 Just like the Russia hoax.

00:01:44.000 Just like Wuhan. 0.57

00:01:46.000 Then, some story in a mainstream outlet confirms the contours of what we were saying all along.

00:01:53.000 January 6th has been used by the most powerful forces in America to smear and target a political movement that threatens them.

00:02:03.000 Nancy Pelosi, the mainstream media, corporate America, and even the FBI are so worried about the power of America first,

00:02:12.000 they are using January 6th to destroy and divide and extinguish us.

00:02:18.000 They may be more culpable than they originally let on.

00:02:22.000 They cancel us online.

00:02:24.000 They persecute us in the flesh.

00:02:26.000 You 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.

00:02:34.000 But Pelosi set up a special committee to obsess about it.

00:02:38.000 So much for bringing people together.

00:02:40.000 That was just a talking point.

00:02:42.000 Regular folks all over this great country were concerned about jobs, public safety, health care,

00:02:50.000 meeting the month's needs in the world of shutdown mania, schooling, mandates, freedom.

00:02:58.000 On all those issues, Democrats are failing spectacularly.

00:03:03.000 And they have unified control of the government.

00:03:05.000 According to recent data reported in the Washington Examiner, 1.00

00:03:08.000 a majority now believe that Joe Biden is kind of an idiot. 1.00

00:03:13.000 So January 6th is now the political cudgel in America used by the powerful against the silent majority. 0.99

00:03:21.000 Bank of America, they'll turn over your financial records with no warrant, notice or due process.

00:03:28.000 Nancy Pelosi might even demand the phone records of your duly elective representative in the Congress. 0.52

00:03:35.000 Start the fishing expedition and never end it.

00:03:38.000 The FBI might even show up at your home like they did to Paul and Marilyn Hooper.

00:03:44.000 Imagine waking up on a beautiful morning in Homer, Alaska.

00:03:49.000 The sound of your door is that of armed men kicking it in.

00:03:54.000 And what's the crime?

00:03:55.000 Well, the FBI is looking for Nancy Pelosi's laptop.

00:03:59.000 And your wife kind of looks like the woman that might have been in Nancy Pelosi's office.

00:04:03.000 No big deal, right?

00:04:05.000 We have rights.

00:04:06.000 I'm sure the FBI would be happy to show a warrant and clear things up.

00:04:11.000 Wrong.

00:04:12.000 At least not before they handcuff you, interrogate you.

00:04:15.000 Three hours.

00:04:17.000 All while calling you a liar and asking who you're working with.

00:04:21.000 Yeah.

00:04:22.000 The 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.

00:04:37.000 You can read more about the horrors in Homer on Revolver News.

00:04:42.000 The FBI has been the enforcement wing of DC's anti-Trump political forces for some time.

00:04:49.000 Even before Trump was elected, they had the Russia hoax brewing.

00:04:52.000 Now the Biden regime is using January 6th to label their political opponents domestic terrorists.

00:04:59.000 Let's see them ridiculously use this strong arm tactic and these terrorism tools in their hunt in the United States.

00:05:12.000 The failed war on terror is now coming home and it's turned inward.

00:05:17.000 The 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.

00:05:27.000 We never imagined the Patriot Act being used to harass patriots.

00:05:32.000 The FBI has a history and a doctrine of deploying assets to infiltrate political movements that scare them.

00:05:39.000 When the FBI was right wing under J. Edgar Hoover, they used their tools to infiltrate and surveil civil rights groups.

00:05:47.000 Because the growing popularity of people like Martin Luther King Jr. frightened them.

00:05:52.000 The politics at the FBI have obviously changed and so have their targets.

00:05:58.000 In June, I pieced together explosive reporting from Revolver News and other information I had.

00:06:04.000 Today's guest, Tucker Carlson and I, were making the serious charge that federal law enforcement was involved on January 6th.

00:06:15.000 This is June 17th. I laid out the argument on In Focus with Stephanie Hamill on One America News.

00:06:21.000 Here's what we know, Stephanie. Groups like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Three Percenters were infiltrated to some degree by the FBI.

00:06:30.000 That 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.

00:06:38.000 And 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.

00:06:52.000 Well then, I think the FBI is even more culpable in the violence and in the most troubling parts of 1-6.

00:06:59.000 That'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.

00:07:15.000 The FBI was participating in the insurrection that they now claim is an ongoing national security threat.

00:07:22.000 Maybe the FBI is the ongoing national security threat actually.

00:07:26.000 When Revolver News put out this explosive reporting, the mainstream media went into full meltdown.

00:07:31.000 Fox'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.

00:07:45.000 This 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.

00:07:55.000 The 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.

00:08:05.000 What'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.

00:08:16.000 But forget about what kind of dirtbag he's getting his information from.

00:08:20.000 No less than the New York Times has now confirmed the reporting of Revolver News.

00:08:25.000 That's right. The New York Times has fessed up to the most milquetoast version of the FBI's involvement that they could present.

00:08:32.000 But we're going to get the full story today from Dr. Darren Beattie from Revolver.

00:08:37.000 And this is not the end of the story. Likely, it's not even the end of the beginning.

00:08:42.000 We have so much more here with Dr. Beattie. Know this.

00:08:46.000 The reason you're learning about the FBI's involvement now is that the tapes are coming out.

00:08:52.000 That tapes all 14,000 hours, those that we've been calling to release.

00:08:57.000 Now they're coming out either through criminal process or through the conclusion of criminal process.

00:09:03.000 Even the FBI can't hide the truth forever.

00:09:07.000 And after the Russia hoax, we're getting better. 0.91

00:09:11.000 We're battle-hardened.

00:09:13.000 We know how to find the truth and expose it.

00:09:16.000 The FBI's involvement was first reported by today's guest, Dr. Darren Beattie, publisher of Revolver News.

00:09:24.000 Revolver News is a premier source for daily news analysis and hard-hitting investigative reporting.

00:09:30.000 Full disclosure, Dr. Beattie has previously served as a senior advisor to me.

00:09:35.000 And I regularly seek out his perspective on a variety of issues to this day.

00:09:41.000 Joining us now, the publisher of Revolver News, Dr. Darren Beattie.

00:09:45.000 And as you heard, Darren, after Revolver News broke the story that the FBI had involvement in January 6th,

00:09:54.000 you faced a lot of criticism from the mainstream media, including what we just heard from Chris Cuomo.

00:09:58.000 And now, no less than the New York Times is confirming the reporting of Revolver News.

00:10:05.000 How should people think about the way this story, before we get into the substance of it,

00:10:09.000 just the way the story evolved?

00:10:11.000 You went and analyzed documents, legal pleadings, indictments.

00:10:16.000 You pieced that together with other open-source information.

00:10:20.000 And you built this case when you broke it on Revolver News.

00:10:25.000 It really sent the mainstream media into a meltdown.

00:10:28.000 And now, here we are.

00:10:30.000 How should we think about the ecosystem of a news cycle like this?

00:10:35.000 Well, actually, it's quite remarkable.

00:10:37.000 And it really shows the power of proactive narrative formation.

00:10:44.000 And 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.

00:10:57.000 It was sort of scattered about.

00:10:59.000 Some people were saying, oh, it was just people taking selfies.

00:11:03.000 It was harmless.

00:11:04.000 Some people were saying, oh, there were Antifa and left-wing people.

00:11:09.000 And you know what?

00:11:10.000 There's a lot of truth to the selfies narrative, and there's probably some truth to the Antifa narrative.

00:11:17.000 But it was sort of scattered, and we didn't really know how to think about it.

00:11:21.000 And 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.

00:11:47.000 We just need to repurpose the entire national security apparatus to suppress them politically.

00:11:53.000 And how it turned out that at the time we reported it, we knew that five of the Michigan plotters were actually feds.

00:12:01.000 Now the number is 12.

00:12:03.000 Twelve out of the 26 plotters in the Michigan case turned out to be feds.

00:12:08.000 And 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.

00:12:20.000 It 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.

00:12:37.000 And 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.

00:12:55.000 And 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,

00:13:22.000 indicted, and who occupy more senior positions in these militia groups that the government claims to be interested in.

00:13:29.000 And so, what's a possible explanation for this manifest selective prosecution?

00:13:37.500 Given 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.

00:13:50.460 And 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.

00:14:07.460 So, 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,

00:14:21.240 where the actual people, not in the rank and file, but in the leadership, were working with the federal government.

00:14:29.540 What's your best evidence that's the case?

00:14:31.460 Well, I'll be very happy to get to that.

00:14:34.700 I just want to preempt some of the actually extremely weak criticisms.

00:14:38.920 So, 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.

00:14:49.960 You know, and I'm very grateful for you amplifying this story, and it helped to really break the sound barrier.

00:14:55.380 But 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,

00:15:08.680 but why don't we get the fact checkers here to address this revolver piece, and then you can finish the COVID piece later.

00:15:15.180 And 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.

00:15:28.260 But 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.

00:15:39.580 There is a use of this specific term, unindicted co-conspirator, in one of the charging documents, but that's really beside the point.

00:15:47.200 The issue isn't whether they use the specific phrase, unindicted co-conspirators.

00:15:52.420 The issue at question is whether any of the individuals referenced in the charging documents who are not prosecuted are being protected from prosecution,

00:16:02.500 are unindicted on the basis of a prior relationship with the feds.

00:16:06.640 That's what the issue is. That's why they were so terrified of it, and that's why they all descended on it.

00:16:12.820 But perhaps even more suspicious-

00:16:16.260 So that would suggest that your best evidence is their reference in charging documents in the absence of charges.

00:16:22.660 Am I reading that correctly?

00:16:23.880 Well, I mean, it's a case-by-case thing.

00:16:26.680 If they're referenced in the charging documents and they do things that they could be indicted by,

00:16:33.120 by virtue of looking at other people who did the same thing or less who were indicted, there's an element of selective prosecution.

00:16:40.320 There are various explanations for selective prosecution, one of which is that the person is an undercover agent or an informant.

00:16:47.440 So it's a case-by-case. We just laid out the general thesis in this first position saying, look, there's a whole bunch of people here.

00:16:55.260 A lot of them look like they did a lot more than the people were actually charged.

00:16:59.660 This is a case of selective prosecution.

00:17:02.220 Given the context of the Michigan case, it's very likely, or at least we should explore the possibility,

00:17:08.300 that some of these people are being protected as a result of a prior relationship with the feds.

00:17:13.140 Then what we did is we said, okay, we're going to do a deep dive on—we did a deep dive on one particular person,

00:17:19.480 who I think is probably the best case for this, who happens to be the founder and the leader of the main boogeyman militia group

00:17:29.960 that the media and the government has imputed to all of the scary insurrectionist-type behavior on 1-6.

00:17:37.660 And look, we can't say definitively one way or another what he is.

00:17:47.940 What we can say is, here's the head of the main militia group that's been imputed to the insurrection activities of 1-6.

00:17:56.660 He has not been charged eight months later with anything when there's clearly indictable offenses.

00:18:04.060 And when I say there's clearly indictable offenses, is that my subjective view?

00:18:08.960 No.

00:18:09.420 That's actually the view of the government itself, because the government, in charging one of his underlings,

00:18:16.720 in arguments saying why his underling should not only be charged but should be denied bail,

00:18:23.560 they use his statements and actions to constitute a conspiracy in which they say the guy that they actually charge is in.

00:18:31.580 So they're using the words and statements of the militia leader to charge the underling when the leader himself is not charged.

00:18:41.340 Well, Darren, if what you're suggesting is true, then the Oath Keepers as an organization is essentially a counterintelligence federal operation.

00:18:53.880 If the leader and founder of the organization is working with the federal government and informing to the federal government,

00:19:00.000 then is that organization a sincere organization built on whatever its founding documents are?

00:19:06.360 Or is it a setup to try to map out people who might have views that are uncomfortable to the ruling elite?

00:19:15.500 No, that's an interesting question.

00:19:17.400 And, you know, I can't say definitively one way or another.

00:19:22.760 My 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.

00:19:32.660 Well, what if they're the target, you see?

00:19:34.900 No, that's precisely.

00:19:35.680 You know, we know in the intelligence world, a common feature is to go set up an organization,

00:19:40.960 not for the purpose of executing on that organization's stated goals, but as a way to recruit people and then map them.

00:19:49.000 Is the Oath Keepers a recruit and map?

00:19:51.220 It'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.

00:20:06.720 And 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.

00:20:16.200 I think a lot of the people who join are sincere, are patriots, are misguided.

00:20:21.300 But as for the founder and leader, I think there's a lot of questions.

00:20:26.420 And 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.

00:20:39.020 This guy, first of all, he was reported in the media as being a leader of the Oath Keepers.

00:20:43.780 He'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.

00:20:55.000 And, you know, the FBI kicked down his door.

00:20:59.880 They, you know, pointed a gun at his wife. 1.00

00:21:01.880 He got the whole treatment, all the electronic stuff seized.

00:21:05.660 You see the feds do that, where they take all the electronics, they kick down the door, they do the whole thing.

00:21:12.020 And 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.

00:21:19.460 As 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.

00:21:31.500 That simply doesn't make sense to me if he were the target of a serious investigation.

00:21:37.360 In fact, he doesn't even need to be the target of investigation for a search like that.

00:21:40.900 They just need to think, oh, maybe he has stuff on other people that they're investigating.

00:21:44.620 And they've searched people on that basis, too.

00:21:47.540 And 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.

00:22:03.320 And that's precisely the type of correspondence that blew open the Michigan case.

00:22:08.740 And it's the correspondence that has become the basis of this New York Times article about the Proud Boy informant texting with his handler.

00:22:17.160 And why is that coming out now, Darren?

00:22:19.180 You 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.

00:22:29.760 But now using against right-wing groups instead of using against left-wing groups.

00:22:35.960 Sort of the target has changed, but the Mad Lib stayed the same.

00:22:40.060 I think that we need to catch the signal here, not the noise, in the New York Times reporting.

00:22:47.320 Help us read in between the lines.

00:22:49.420 This was obviously a leak from the government to the New York Times to take the air out of the balloon.

00:22:55.800 How should we think about that piece?

00:22:57.080 Right. So that's great. And a couple of things. Revolver News just published a pretty detailed analysis of what's going in.

00:23:04.880 Of course, we want to take the victory lap and say, oh, we're vindicated by the Times.

00:23:08.860 And it is a partial vindication. But just a victory lap is a little bit boring.

00:23:12.680 We want to we want to advance the conversation.

00:23:15.340 And so a couple of things. First, why is this coming out?

00:23:17.960 They're not doing this to vindicate revolver news.

00:23:22.220 They'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.

00:23:30.660 So that's why I have every expectation that we're going to learn about more and more and more informants.

00:23:35.680 Given the timing, why are we going to learn that?

00:23:37.600 Again, this gets back to why if someone's an informant, the feds aren't going to want to seize all of their electronics immediately.

00:23:45.340 And 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.

00:23:58.420 So I think that explains the timing of why The New York Times feels compelled.

00:24:03.900 Probably the feds told them, look, this is going to come out.

00:24:06.860 It would get ahead of this for us, which they which they did.

00:24:09.740 But 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.

00:24:19.960 So 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.

00:24:35.120 Now, she sort of asked the question about informants, but she formulates it in a very careful fashion.

00:24:43.520 She she doesn't say, did you have informants?

00:24:46.680 She assumes that he didn't.

00:24:48.340 She 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.

00:24:59.720 And of course, you would have stopped it.

00:25:02.080 So don't you just kick yourself that you didn't have any informants and therefore no visibility in what what was going to happen.

00:25:09.040 And therefore, it's an intelligence failure that explains why you're not able to stop this in advance.

00:25:15.500 And he basically gives a non answer because she did him the courtesy of not posing the question directly.

00:25:23.220 Now, why did she do him that courtesy?

00:25:25.060 Why did she assume that there are no informants?

00:25:27.160 Well, 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?

00:25:43.280 But 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.

00:25:59.400 So 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.

00:26:08.320 And this is a new narrative that they're advancing with their proxies in the media.

00:26:12.160 And that narrative is, you know what, guys, after all, there was actually no pre-planning on the part of these insurrectionists.

00:26:19.040 It was all a spontaneous thing.

00:26:21.080 It wasn't really a conspiracy.

00:26:22.580 They were just there, and it got out of hand.

00:26:25.760 The reason they say that is that they could not be blamed for having foreknowledge and doing nothing if there was no foreplanning.

00:26:34.140 If the insurrectionists had no foreplanning, the feds could not have had foreknowledge, and therefore they're absolved of having foreknowledge and doing nothing.

00:26:42.280 The only problem with this is this really compromises another major pillar of the narrative that they're invested in.

00:26:49.180 If there is no foreplanning, there's no conspiracy.

00:26:54.380 And therefore, the entire conspiracy case against the Oath Keepers, which is the basis of this thing, goes out the window.

00:27:01.300 The entire case against the Proud Boys goes out the window.

00:27:04.520 The entire media narrative of 1-6 is this pre-planned terrorist attack on the level of 9-11 goes out the window.

00:27:13.260 The 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.

00:27:31.920 So 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.

00:27:44.920 But 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.

00:27:56.900 So either way you go, one major pillar of the official 1-6 thesis goes out the window.

00:28:04.760 And 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.

00:28:14.420 It's probably that some of the key instigators who had constituted the conspiracy were themselves feds, much like in the case of Michigan.

00:28:24.020 So it's an interesting case.

00:28:25.780 And 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.

00:28:37.440 The 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.

00:28:47.240 So it's a very interesting situation.

00:28:49.120 It's a very dynamic situation.

00:28:50.300 I think it's only going to get worse for the regime, and we're not going to stop pushing.

00:28:54.900 So, Darren, let me distill what you just said there.

00:28:58.280 The New York Times reporting really isn't intended to confirm your reporting.

00:29:04.140 It'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.

00:29:23.620 And 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.

00:29:32.680 Well, they may be saying that because the grand plan was theirs.

00:29:37.380 And 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.

00:29:53.700 So is sort of, you know, infiltrate right wing group, animate criminal conduct, threaten some political figure or some political building.

00:30:03.600 Is that the new deep state mad lib?

00:30:06.200 And 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.

00:30:29.660 I mean, is that is that the Darren Beattie roadmap for a Republican Congress once we get the gavels and have the power of oversight?

00:30:38.940 Yes, absolutely.

00:30:39.820 I mean, that is the iceberg that sinks the Titanic of that is the false narrative of January 6th.

00:30:47.660 And that's precisely why the media freaked out initially when our piece came out, raising the general thesis.

00:30:55.640 Now, 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.

00:31:10.200 That is the head of the Oath Keeper, Stuart Rhodes.

00:31:13.920 None of the fact checkers wanted to touch that piece.

00:31:17.320 They simply didn't want anyone to know about it.

00:31:20.280 To me, that's even more damning than the reaction to the initial piece, which is a freak out.

00:31:24.820 Is 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?

00:31:35.300 And then he sort of, you know, disappears when the enforcement action arrives?

00:31:40.220 No, actually, that's another interesting aspect.

00:31:43.000 When 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.

00:31:51.460 And 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.

00:32:07.860 So, 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.

00:32:19.560 Darren, I can't let you go without asking you a question about another hot issue in the news, Julian Assange.

00:32:27.280 There'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.

00:32:42.520 How should Americans think about the fact that our government was making these plans?

00:32:46.560 Well, 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.

00:32:58.500 And Julian Assange really represents the ultimate conclusion of where that can lead.

00:33:06.400 His great offense was he embarrassed the national security state profoundly, and he did so from the left, which affords him some degree of protection.

00:33:17.320 But he embarrassed them so much and so severely that he has to be punished severely from the standpoint of the security state.

00:33:24.840 I 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.

00:33:41.060 But 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.

00:33:54.320 I think the political psychology of people on the left is to be charitable.

00:34:00.800 They want to critique unjust institutions of power.

00:34:05.980 They want to challenge unjust institutions of power.

00:34:09.500 I happen to think nine cases out of 10 or maybe 99 out of 100, they unwittingly or otherwise actually serve those powerful interests.

00:34:18.680 But they have to think of themselves as challenging, unjust, powerful institutions.

00:34:24.660 People on the right, on the other hand, tend to have a very different political psychology.

00:34:29.820 They want to think of themselves as venerating and defending just institutions of authority.

00:34:37.680 And so it's much easier to go from the political psychology of the left to a critique of the national security state.

00:34:45.620 On the right, it's a harder job.

00:34:47.500 And 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.

00:35:02.180 But it's harder on the right because the psychology is wanting to venerate just institutions.

00:35:08.040 But what do you do when these institutions are corrupt, including not only the national security state, but the DOD up to brass itself?

00:35:17.160 Well, it's a much heavier lift.

00:35:20.380 It's a more difficult pill to swallow.

00:35:23.120 But unless we orient ourselves to this new reality and address it, we're not going to get anywhere.

00:35:30.260 Because the ultimate bottleneck to political effectiveness, I believe, is the national security state.

00:35:37.700 Unless 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.

00:35:50.260 As long as there's a national security state operating in the fashion it does now, politics will effectively be fake.

00:35:57.640 And it'll be easy for, you know, grifters to raise money ginning up, you know, issues that get people emotionally and go nowhere.

00:36:05.960 But 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.

00:36:14.640 Well, 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.

00:36:25.240 The direction is provided by others.

00:36:27.540 And, you know, that's why Sacha Baron Cohen is able to get so many members of Congress.

00:36:31.100 Because, you know, frankly, we're used to somebody just handing you a script, pointing you at the camera.

00:36:36.280 Yeah, it is.

00:36:36.880 You 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.

00:36:45.900 But, 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.

00:36:58.240 And that is precisely why these January 6th detainees are still behind bars.

00:37:04.100 They don't pose any ongoing threat to the ruling government of the United States of America.

00:37:08.920 But 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.

00:37:22.460 And so that is the performance now.

00:37:24.740 Now, 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.

00:37:33.700 Because if you're not going to Revolver News every day, all you're seeing is the CNN, MSNBC meltdown of the Revolver reporting.

00:37:43.180 And then months later, you see the, you know, kind of sheepish confirmations from entities like the New York Times.

00:37:49.280 But if people just read Revolver in the first place, you will literally be able to see the future.

00:37:53.880 Darren, thank you for your analysis and your perspective.

00:37:57.240 I think you're right.

00:37:58.920 And the only hope, the only antidote to this is just a series of truth bombs.

00:38:05.860 And I'm glad you've got a platform where that can happen.

00:38:08.200 We hope this is a platform where it can happen as well.

00:38:10.440 And we hope we can chat again soon, my friend.

00:38:12.500 Absolutely.

00:38:13.220 Thank you so much.

00:38:14.060 And thanks for everything you do.

00:38:15.200 Last week, I gave you important information regarding the horrors and crimes that occur at foreign consulates operating within the United States. 1.00

00:38:25.540 I 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.

00:38:36.560 This man, Jake Novak, works at the New York Israeli consulate as the broadcast media relations director.

00:38:44.160 It's a big job to be the media relations director for Israel in New York.

00:38:50.900 He's not a low-level guy.

00:38:53.300 Novak implicated himself as some sort of player in a criminal extortion plot against me.

00:38:58.600 That criminal scheme has already resulted in one indictment.

00:39:02.600 Here's the news.

00:39:04.060 The Israeli government has now responded to the news that one of their employees has been involved in something so terrible.

00:39:11.060 And they have confirmed a number of very revealing things.

00:39:15.160 Quote,

00:39:15.680 There's a lot to unpack here.

00:39:42.420 First, Israel confirms the authenticity of the Novak messages regarding extortion.

00:39:48.680 That's very important.

00:39:50.060 If these were fake, Israel certainly would have included that fact in a statement like this.

00:39:56.040 Unlike things the media accuses me of, this extortion actually happened.

00:40:01.700 Second, Israel distances itself from Novak.

00:40:04.940 Clearly.

00:40:05.960 They know this is a rotten criminal enterprise and they clearly want nothing to do with it.

00:40:10.360 Good for Israel. 0.98

00:40:12.200 If this were a righteous, honest act, they'd probably say so,

00:40:16.780 rather than focusing on downplaying their connection to Novak, who's, by the way, still their employee.

00:40:23.360 Finally, the government of Israel knows more about the origins of the lies about me than I do.

00:40:30.960 Think about that.

00:40:31.740 Based on this message, they have clearly discussed the matter with Novak.

00:40:36.580 They made him explain himself to them.

00:40:39.380 Now I want that explanation.

00:40:41.840 I want to know exactly what happened.

00:40:45.080 I've asked to meet with Israel's ambassador to the United States to discuss this directly.

00:40:50.120 He has not responded to my request.

00:40:52.800 This tweet statement is helpful, but it's not enough.

00:40:58.120 The 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.

00:41:06.400 He 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.

00:41:23.240 Jake Novak recently tweeted,

00:41:25.000 I 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.

00:41:50.340 It's a lot to get your head around.

00:41:51.980 Were my replies to Jake Novak trolling?

00:41:57.040 Okay, yes.

00:41:59.240 But 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.

00:42:14.140 Quote,

00:42:14.780 If 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.

00:42:28.880 I'll reiterate, I'm a friend to Israel, a far better friend than the Democrats who voted to defund the Iron Dome for sure.

00:42:35.560 I even support their trolling of Ben and Jerry's ice cream.

00:42:41.540 People over politics indeed.

00:42:44.080 I just want to know what Novak knows, and what the government of Israel knows after questioning him.

00:42:49.840 Who encouraged Jake Novak to push these lies about me?

00:42:54.020 I mean, one of them even says I'm involved in a murder conspiracy.

00:42:56.740 My pursuit of the truth will not relent.

00:43:00.980 People should know that about me.

00:43:03.400 Novak blocked me online.

00:43:05.380 But will he also be able to block the FBI, the DOJ?

00:43:10.560 Will he even have to?

00:43:12.800 According to the law, Jake Novak doesn't have diplomatic immunity.

00:43:16.820 But he may have something more powerful.

00:43:20.680 Diplomatic influence.

00:43:21.820 How could the FBI not question someone with direct admitted knowledge of a crime?

00:43:30.360 Then there's the Jerusalem Post.

00:43:32.680 Running interference, it seems, for someone or something.

00:43:36.260 The Jerusalem Post falsely reports, quote,

00:43:39.640 The correspondence occurred before Novak began working for the consulate.

00:43:43.860 This is the correspondence that was the pricing of the extortion, checking in on the extortion exercise.

00:43:49.000 And 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.

00:43:57.660 But that is verifiably false.

00:44:00.440 On March 16th, Novak tweeted his association with the embassy.

00:44:04.100 The messages occurred on March 27th.

00:44:06.740 In early March, Novak tweeted a story about the new hires in February and said that he was one of them.

00:44:11.860 Lastly, take a look at Jake Novak's LinkedIn profile.

00:44:15.360 If I'm correct, I see that he began working in the New York consulate for Israel, February 2021.

00:44:23.240 Be better, Jerusalem Post, and correct your false narrative-conforming reporting.

00:44:29.700 And until then, everyone can find the truth on Firebrand.

00:44:34.760 So tune in, because we're going to follow it wherever it may lead.

00:44:41.860 For the help of his friend

00:44:55.520 So tune in and for the Нач

00:44:59.740 The 18th year in Kirwan

00:45:01.240 We're going to follow now.

00:45:03.120 We are going to discuss those experiences

00:45:04.060 We've got lots of two things

00:45:05.040 and we begin to research

00:45:07.140 After an hour and a half

The Anchormen Show with Matt Gaetz - September 30, 2021

Episode 9： January 6th (feat. Dr. Darren J. Beattie) – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript