Back to episode — Episode 3052 CWSA 12/24/25
Context —
o be named after a sitting governor because he's been the steward of so much fraud that they're going to name it after him while he's still governor of a state. Now that's kind of funny. So Brandon Gill was talking about this. He's pretty funny too. Republican. So he says, quote, "$9 billion in tax money was looted. Congress has a role to ensure our programs aren't abused by left-wing governors l…
← Previous segment →t it would be discovered that the redactions could be reversed." What do you think? Do you think that somebody cleverly and intentionally made the redactions reversible or do you think it was purely a didn't do it right and didn't notice?
Well, you know, we're tempted to believe in conspiracy theories. So I know a lot of you think it was intentional. I'm going to put the Dilbert filter, as I like to call it, on this situation. And the Dilbert filter says far more likely it was a mistake. Far more likely it was a mistake. It's not impossible that somebody did it intentionally but I'd say it's 10 to one 20 to one more likely that it was just a mistake. It feels intentional. You might be right about that. It feels intentional because it's kind of wacky that it happened at all. But I don't know in the real world, what is more likely? Incompetence, right? Incompetence or really clever play that would cost them their job? Because whoever did the redactions is in a lot of trouble today. And unless they were planning to quit, it's not really something you would do to your own career on Christmas. So I can't imagine anybody doing it intentionally because there'd be a 100% chance you would get in a lot of trouble. We'll keep an eye on that one.
So Alan Dershowitz says, no surprise here, that the latest drop from the Epstein stuff has a bunch of fake files, fake documents, false accusations. There was one that sounded really bad about Trump that turned out to be a total forgery. I'm not even going to mention what the fake was because you just don't want to hear it. But it is known to be fake and a lot of the other stuff is now known to be fake. So Dershowitz is warning us about that.
So Schumer, you know Schumer, right? He goes on some interview. He said the law was written very clearly and it did not allow all these redactions, this blacking out of everything. It did not say you can dribble them out over a period of months. These guys are quote full of shit. They should simply release it all.
Now I refer to Schumer as the randomly cursing lizard guy. He reminds me of a lizard, but when he randomly curses, it reminds us that they don't know how to curse. Why did he need to curse there? Compare that to JD Vance telling people that they can eat shit for insulting his wife. That's a good curse. That's a good curse. But why did Schumer have to just throw it in? These guys are full of shit. He didn't. They just don't know how to do this.
Anyway, I also saw Cenk from the Young Turks. He said something online that I couldn't tell if he was being sarcastic or not, but he said that he believed, I guess he believes there's stuff that would be bad for Trump in the files, but he said the only way that that can be blocked as long as it has been is if the intelligence agencies are behind the blocking of it. Is that a sarcastic comment or does he believe as I do that we have all the proof we need that some intelligence entities are blocking the more extensive release?
How many of you believe that there's a 100% chance we would have seen the files unless intelligence agencies blocked it and that there's nobody else simply powerful enough that they could have done it? Because both remember Democrats and Republicans have had access to the files and they both blocked it. So what would be the one entity that can make both Democrats and Republicans block something? I feel like only the intel people. So at this point, I think there's I've said this before there's no real hope that we're going to see everything we want to see. There's no real hope of that because the intel people have the power to block it and apparently the motive. If you have the motive and you have the power, it's pretty easy to predict.
So I was waiting for this to happen, but the FCC is going to ban the purchase of Chinese-made drones because of national security concerns. Now, I think the reason it took so long for them to ban Chinese drones is because we didn't have a domestic manufacturing way to do it and we needed drones because the drones are really useful for farming a whole bunch of things. So it looks like I intuit from this that enough manufacturing entities in the United States are making drones and they're doing it well enough now that we can just make that a domestic industry and we don't have to get the Chinese drones.
I wonder I am curious who the big drone makers are. I'm pretty sure that Anduril, that would be the high-tech defense industry company. I'm pretty sure they make a bunch of drones and anti-drone stuff, but I don't know how
Context —
much volume they do. Perhaps they've reached some kind of volume thing. But you know, it's not just military drones. I wonder who's making the non-military drones. Well, over in Belgium, apparently 73% of the children and teens in Brussels have a non-EU migration background and only 10.5% are Belgians of Belgian origin. So basically, Belgium is now no longer Belgium. Now, maybe that's good, maybe…
Next segment → →