TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @CondemnedUSA
Posted - August 1, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Saved - August 17, 2025 at 9:18 AM
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss J. Evans III
Fight Like Hell! Our children and future generations are worth it!
@laralogan - Lara Logan
NEW EPISODE: LAWFARE UNDER FIRE: Treniss Evans & American Rights Alliance Lead the Charge Against a Weaponized Justice System | Ep 29 (00:00) - Fighting Back Against Lawfare (03:15) - Uncovering the Truth of January 6th (11:56) - Insurrection vs. Fed-surrection (21:26) - Lawfare (29:17) - The Broken Judicial System (35:18) - Insane Corruption (47:28) - Election Integrity (55:48) - False Flag Operations (01:03:57) - Unjust Incarceration of Tina Peters (01:10:12) - State vs Federal Election Laws (01:21:51) - Protecting Parental Rights and Religious Freedom (01:29:54) - Unethical Prosecutor's Misconduct Exposed (01:38:03) - Fighting for Justice and Parental Rights (01:43:21) - American Rights Alliance January 6th, lawfare, DOJ, Condemned USA, Department of Justice, false flag, government corruption, insurrection, fedsurrection @GoingRoguewLara @CondemnedUSA @DonateARA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Trennis Evans, COO of American Rights Alliance, leads the fight against lawfare, representing James O'Keefe, Tina Peters, parental-rights cases; he previously founded Condemned USA. Peters' Colorado case centers on First Amendment rights and data preservation; Evans notes she is a Gold Star mother. He argues federal supremacy: “one single fourteenth amendment... reigns supreme over all state laws.” They cover O’Keefe’s lawsuits against Mark Zaid and Booz Allen contractor Jamie Menina, and broader attempts to silence critics. They recount January 6 narratives—“The raid on my home is what created who I am now”—and claim the Select Committee “altered the timestamp” and “dumped the part where I was in it.” They cite parental rights and religious liberties in Shana Gaviola’s California case, and say Don Jr. funded ARA: “Donald Trump Jr took the net proceeds... and donated it.” They challenge a two-tier judiciary and note “22 deaths” linked to January 6.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I mean, when you little see little red dots all over your kid and you you see that horrific moment, it will do something unsettling to you. It will create a visceral reaction. It will forever change. It wasn't January 6 that changed. It wasn't the prosecution.
It was the raid on my home. The raid on my home is what created who I am now, and they're going to answer for these things. I'm gonna make sure of it. It fits with my dying breath.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to Going Rogue with Lara Logan. And my guest this week is one of my favorite people in the whole world, Trannis Evans, who you may know from taking a shot of Fireball on January 6 in Nancy Pelosi's conference room, not office. But Trannis is not here, we'll talk a little bit about that, but really he's here because of the work that he's doing right now. Everybody in the country at this point is familiar with lawfare, which is the process by which people are using the legal system not for justice, but as a political weapon. Well, Travis Evans, you are now working for American Rights Alliance, their chief operating officer, I believe.
Speaker 0: Yes. That's correct.
Speaker 1: Okay. And so and what's interesting about American Rights Alliance is this is one way that people are fighting back against lawfare because you are helping a number of very interesting people from James O'Keefe, who everybody knows, needs no introduction, O'Keefe Media Group, original founder of Project Veritas, to Tina Peters, also someone who needs no introduction, a hero who fought for all of us and got the only copy of a Dominion voting machine before it could be erased. They really don't like Tina for that, not to mention a gold star mom and so on. And then a third case that we're going to talk about today, is really about parental rights and religious liberties, which goes to the heart for me as a mom of the heart of a lot of very important things today, which is really what happens to our children, right? How do we protect them from a political movement that is wrapped up in sexuality and transgenderism and and how the Biden administration went after this mom?
Really, you said it, and I'm stealing I'm gonna steal from you. How they prosecuted child trafficking under Joe Biden. As a mom sending her child away to boarding school versus, you know, actually prosecuting child traffickers. But, anyway, that's by way of introduction, you are a fellow Texan just up the road from me in Canyon Lake, and this is the most quiet I've ever seen you.
Speaker 0: Well, know, I was letting you get all that intro out. You have Laura, you always have so much to say. You know, the banter's always been good with you, that's for sure. We've had a great, great time over the years in the wake of such tragic incidents that we've been involved in and and had, so much interest in and taken so much time to actually help people understand correcting the false narrative of the Biden administration as it relates to January 6.
Speaker 1: Well, I do wanna say you are someone who has really fought for many of the j sixes. I think people quite realize it with Condemned USA, the organization that you created, and it was right here in Fredericksburg, Texas where we first met, wasn't it?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Actually, no. No. It's in San Antonio. San
Speaker 1: Antonio at the Reawakening Reawakened.
Speaker 0: Yes. Mickey Willis Courage nineteen Awards, that was that event.
Speaker 1: That's right. And you were waiting to go on the stage, and I was going out on the stage and we were both trapped there while someone was talking, and we started to chat. Right? Yeah. And it was just a couple of minutes, but, but then you came down to Fredericksburg to meet trying
Speaker 0: to figure out how it was that this guy was who is this guy going on after me?
Speaker 1: No. I just felt sorry for you, because you had to follow me.
Speaker 0: Because everyone well, we had to listen to you drone on
Speaker 1: all that time. Wasn't the first time.
Speaker 0: Or the
Speaker 1: It probably won't be the last. Okay, your mother is here hi mom.
Speaker 0: Hi mom.
Speaker 1: Who's also one of my favourite people. You want to come say hi mom? Yeah, come say hi. Aw. Come on, because I know your mother has been through hell and back because of you.
You're a wonderful woman. I know it's I been
Speaker 2: can never thank you enough for all the work that you have done for my son, Ajay Sixer, and for all of the others. I'm deeply moved by your work, and I've always been by your body of work. Thank you. Always fighting for injustice. Aw.
Well Thank you both so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you both. Just She's been there. She's been in every
Speaker 1: step of the way.
Speaker 0: Kenny, you can't imagine what she's given.
Speaker 1: I love her. I love her. Why are so many young people struggling to have babies today? Birth rates in The US are at record lows, and that's partly because testosterone levels are dropping all the time. According to some studies, t levels are roughly half of what they were fifty years ago.
And if we don't reverse this trend, we could be looking at population collapse. And it's why we partnered with Chalk. They're a Patriot owned supplement company, and their mission is to save mankind from extinction. They have something called the Male Vitality Stack, and it's been shown in clinical trials to boost your free testosterone by 87% in just twenty one days. That is not just a statistic.
You will feel it. And ladies, you'll be pleased to know it's not just for men. The Female Vitality Stack addresses just about every complaint a woman can have. Stress, mood, hormones, energy and focus. And it'll even help you keep up with your man.
So go to chalk.com and use code LARA for 17.76% off your subscription. Cancel anytime. Or you can also call 500-3000 and tell them Lara sent you. You know, right now, we're a long way from where we were in the beginning with January 6. I just remember for you you remember what happened the first time that you came here to talk about January 6?
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah, I do. Well, when we were just talking and I couldn't I just wanted to tell people what I knew and people couldn't listen, you know, and you listened. A lot of people around the country, we had a lot of people come It was in to toxic.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It was literally like leprosy, right? Oh, yeah. I mean, Republicans, Conservatives did not want to touch it. They were all scared.
That's the truth.
Speaker 0: And you set up an event though. Yes. You set up an event.
Speaker 1: At a local winery here. Yeah. And what did you do that I didn't like?
Speaker 0: Oh, spoke for three hours of more than you?
Speaker 1: No. It wasn't that. You apologized.
Speaker 0: Oh, you're right. No. And I will tell you that that was the moment that you said, look, you gotta stop apologizing for that. What you did, going in the building and saying what you had to say, I think you were you had told me to stop apologizing.
Speaker 1: You've already there. Stood up on behalf of everyone in the country. You stood for free and fair elections. You told people in the building not to touch anything and to behave. I mean, you you didn't do anything wrong.
What are you apologizing for? You exercised your First Amendment rights as an American, and that's what you're supposed to do.
Speaker 0: You know, the narrative, what was going on even had infected me, even though I knew the better, knew something real, I knew the truth, even though that I knew in my heart I what it saw how people looked at me, so it created a response. Right? It created this visceral reaction where you're looking at people, and I never forget, like, when I stood up to speak at that first event, people man, the looks on their faces. And then getting up and walking out of the room, there's people turning their back on it, wouldn't listen. They had to get up and walk out of the room because they had been told what happened.
And they said, I saw on TV, I saw what I saw, I know what happened in the story. And that was so many people lived that way. Until people like yourself and others that they trusted actually broke through
Speaker 1: Some of that davidsummerles.hate.com and there were many. Oh, you know, His Glory TV, Chris Burgard and Pastor Dave The
Speaker 0: advocates were many. General Flynn really stood up for this.
Speaker 1: Tarek Johnson. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Think about that. The people that came out and put exposed themselves, put themselves at risk. Tarek Johnson was one of them. You know, Shane Lamond Yeah. The police officer.
He's headed to prison in a couple of weeks if he doesn't get a pardon. Twenty five years of service to the Metro Police Department in DC, and he's gonna head to prison in yeah. Just a couple So he's the one that testified for the Proud Boys. And when he came to testify, they said, if you testify, we're gonna we could charge you. And they ultimately did.
He's been sentenced, and he's scheduled to turn himself in for prison here in August.
Speaker 1: Are you serious? Yeah. So this is
Speaker 0: The Biden well, look, the Biden administration went after him, and the Trump administration's yet to come to the rescue. I have been on the phone with Ed Martin. I've been on the phone with Neil McCabe. I've been on the phone with Jared Weiss, who's now working there as, you know, The New York Times wanted to have an expose. I'm proud of that.
I worked hard to get Jared there, and I'm proud that Jared took that job, and we we worked hard on that. The right people in the right place at the right time to undo or unravel this injustice that took place, it's paramount to what it has to be.
Speaker 1: So this is one of the remarkable things really about your story is you're just a guy from Texas. You had a business, fairly successful, beautiful wife, Stephanie, and you got your boys, you went to the capital to protest an election that we all know was stolen.
Speaker 0: Oh, damn right it was.
Speaker 1: And that that's all about to come out, I think. Yeah. More than that. Right? But but you were then targeted, and and I wanna talk a little bit about your story, the amazing part to me was how you, in the midst of everything that you were going through, when you were under siege, you realized very quickly that most January 6 defendants didn't have the money or the resources or the I mean, just the ability to to get legal representation.
Even
Speaker 0: if you could write the check, right, you'd pick up the phone and you would call attorney after attorney after attorney, and they would say, oh, we're not handling that. We can't deal with January 6. You would find people in the paper that were representing a murderer or a rapist or some crime of moral turpitude, burning down the orphanage or what have you. Right? Yeah.
And that attorney would tell you, oh, I'm sorry. I can't take January 6 cases. We're not doing those. Yeah. And you're going, what are you talking about?
Like and so I'm trying to represent to them, like, look, I'm not even charged with violence or destruction or theft or property damage, none of these things. And they say, sorry, we're not touching January 6. The insurrection.
Speaker 1: The insurrection. That wasn't.
Speaker 0: Well, Laura, make it make sense. You'll never make this make sense. The most armed populace on the face of the planet came to throw overthrow largest weapons. The largest military industrial complex that ever existed, and they came without their rifles. Where's where where are the rifles?
You came you mean to tell me we came in the midst of children, and we came with grandmothers, and we came with plastic flagpoles and megaphones to overthrow the largest military industrial complex on the planet? Give me a break.
Speaker 1: With no plan, by the way, to how to hold the ground, how how to run run the new government. I mean, come on. It's the most pathetic thing ever. How about Enrique Tarrio and the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers who weren't even present Yeah. Who were actually they had to pin the insurrection on someone.
Well Right?
Speaker 0: Because This stitch together a narrative. We know that. I mean, that story is getting it's it's like to all of us, I think it's almost tired, but but it's not tired of the people like Dominic Pizzola and Joe Biggs and others that are yet that are yet to receive their pardon.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Who's still living with a commutation, which while it is, you know, hugely significant that president Trump did that and got them out of
Speaker 0: But
Speaker 1: out of we
Speaker 0: need to take the next step now.
Speaker 1: It has to be. It has to be because it's ridiculous. This is a completely false narrative. It was a cover up it was an operation that was staged to cover up a stolen election and go off to Trump supporters. We all have a lot of choices for cell phone service, and it feels like there are new ones that are popping up all the time.
But for me, there's only one company that stands in the gap for every American that believes freedom is worth fighting for, and that company is Patriot Mobile. The good news is you can switch to Patriot Mobile today without sacrificing quality or service. And if you're worried about coverage, don't be. Patriot Mobile uses all three major US networks. So if you have service in this country today, you'll have as good or better coverage with Patriot Mobile.
And if you think switching is a hassle, it's not. You can keep your number, keep your phone, or upgrade if you want. Padreop Mobile has a team that is based in The US, will get you activated in minutes from the comfort of your own home. And if you're stuck in a contract or you owe money on your phones, don't worry. Patriot Mobile now has a contract buyout program.
This is how we win, by aligning our spending with our values. Every dollar we spend matters. So go to patriotmobile.com/lara or call 972 and use promo code Lara, that's l a r a, just to get a free month of service. Switch today. That's patriotmobile.com/lara, or call 972
Speaker 0: Few people know lawfare better than president Trump himself. He lived it. He experienced it. He's seen. He's looked into the faces of evil, the Jack Smiths and others.
He's looked into the eyes of the Select Committee and these people that created these false narratives, delivered this to the American public, and worked with the media lap their media lapdogs to perpetuate said false narrative.
Speaker 1: Okay. So this is the thing about you, Trent, as though that I love, I really feel like represents the true American spirit because you, you know, you weren't politically connected either in the state of Texas or in Washington
Speaker 0: Before Donald Trump came on the scene, I was politically agnostic. Like I just said, there's both parties, they're screwing us. I'm not interested. I don't care what they have to say. I didn't vote.
I just didn't get involved. I just stayed out of it.
Speaker 1: That's crazy.
Speaker 0: And there was finally a guy came along. He runs 16. I didn't vote for him in 16. He comes along, I see the way he has his first administration, I go, holy crap. Somebody that's actually delivering on their promises.
Right. This is consistent with what I want. He speaks like an American citizen. He says things that aren't like the typical pundit that I you know, the the political sphere of things that are usual and makes empty promises and we're going to solve everything and it's going be great.
Speaker 1: We're to end the
Speaker 0: world hunger. Roads and bridges and this and that, and then we're going to take care of veterans, we're going to do all this, which is all lies and malarkey and it always is, and then finally a guy shows up and he's on the scene and he's doing it. I watch that and I'm like, I can get behind this. I believe in you. This is somebody I can believe in.
And because you actually tried against all odds, even when we had the house, we had this and we had everything, and he couldn't get things done because they subverted him. Just like they're subverting him now, where they won't let him have the sessions. They're gonna make sure they meet every so often so that we can't have the appointments, you know, in the in the dormant session. It's insanity.
Speaker 1: So that's but that's what I mean is that is so interesting about the American spirit because you weren't no matter what they threatened you with, no matter what they did to you, no matter what they threw at you, you were not going to bow.
Speaker 0: Well, look, I I wanna tell you, I mean, I wrestled with that. I mean, I gotta be honest. Right? I mean, it it Yeah. It hit me and I wrestled with it.
I know the moment that all fear left and that when all fear left was definitely was in I was in a church. I was at Word of Faith Fellowship, Lee Valentine, and I was sitting in that church and I watched the kids dancing through the aisles. And I had thought about my own kids, and they weren't there, and I thought wrestled long and hard about what I had to do. That was the moment. That was the moment where all fear left because I said, if I don't do this now, if I don't do what past generations have failed to do, if I don't stand up on my principles, on my morals, on what I believe, if I don't do that right here and now, then I'm not then I'm I'm nobody to myself.
I can never look at myself again and call myself a patriot or look at myself again and call myself a man because I'm leaving it to the children of tomorrow to deal with the things I'm too afraid to do today.
Speaker 1: And what were you facing at that time? What was that decision?
Speaker 0: You know, they they wanted to stick me in jail. Think, you know, they were they were asking for some time, and it wasn't that bad, but, Steve Metcalf was my attorney at the time, and he was like, look, shut up and go with the thing at the sentencing. And I was like, oh, no. That's not gonna happen.
Speaker 1: Did they want you to plead?
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, I did. I took the I took the plea deal because I was facing the fifteen twelve, the infamous fifteen twelve obstruction of congress charge that was ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court. Yeah. The felony obstruction of congress because they had to dream something up to make this horrific.
Right? And they offered me finally the misdemeanor. But only after remember, I'd captured a federal human trafficking fugitive who escaped from prison, and then they wanted to cover that up as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah. That was a totally unrelated random thing, a guy that had done some work for you. Yeah. And you saw that he was wanted and so you helped him
Speaker 0: capture Yeah. This individual, yeah. So I was actually responsible for the capture.
Speaker 1: And they just wanted to erase that.
Speaker 0: Oh, they wanted to pretend like that never happened. I mean, that Matthew Graves and the others that, you know, everything had to run through the committee all the
Speaker 1: way
Speaker 0: Who
Speaker 1: was Matthew Graves who was the US attorney in DC?
Speaker 0: Everything had to run through that committee. He was
Speaker 1: missed the January 6.
Speaker 0: Matthew Graves Demon. No. Look, their time will come. Rather than answer on this earth than it or beyond, it will come.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, I have to say it, but, I mean, Matthew Perna, he was a January 6 who killed himself because of the pressure that Matthew Graves' Department of Justice Porto Mundo.
Speaker 0: He's well, don't forget Christopher Stanton was the first. Right? That's the first death Yeah. That we can attribute to January 6 of the defendants that happened after the fact. And then, you know, you now have over 20 deaths associated with January 6, and most of the world never knows, but they've never gone to see Stop Eight in the website there and watched the 22 death story.
There's so many of them.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Stophate.com for anyone who wants to see that. 22 deaths. Right? David Summull has done a lot of great work.
Oh, and and one of the big people who's done so much work, Gary.
Speaker 0: Gary McBride.
Speaker 1: Oh,
Speaker 0: yeah. I mean, I I look, I started working with Gary in '21. Gary McBride endlessly did this to his own detriment. Yeah. He lost his family, lost his home because he had seen enough.
He'd seen the injustice. He saw it. I mean, he's the one that uncovered. Gary McBride is definitely unequivocally the guy that broke the Roseanne Boylan story. Had it not been for Gary McBride catching that, that what happened with Roseanne Boylan.
Speaker 1: Figuring out that Roseanne Boylan, who died on January 6, who they tried to, you know, sort of pass it off as an overdose death just because
Speaker 0: she The issue settled the that Lila Morris delivered on January 6 on the Capitol Steps that they paraded around as a hero at the Super Bowl.
Speaker 1: And and Gary McBride, was the one who found that footage of her beating Roseanne.
Speaker 0: He gave it to Kara Castranova, and Kara broke
Speaker 1: the From the Gateway Pundit.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So it broke that's how the story broke. But Gary's the guy that found it, and after that, he was like a man possessed. He could never escape the injustice that he had seen because he heard what they said, how Roseanne Blund died.
Speaker 1: I know, it's funny, I think of Gary as a J Sixer, but he wasn't even there on January 6.
Speaker 0: No, he was at home It's in
Speaker 1: been his whole life ever since. Another Texan.
Speaker 0: Imagine that. David Summerall, a Texan. Gary McBride, a Texan. Lara Logan, myself. The list goes on of the amount of people that came from Texas that fought back against this.
Speaker 1: So, okay. Before we go on to American Rights Alliance and the legal work that you're doing there, Let's just you know what? Let's just clarify for the audience because I do think this is an important part of your story is how you're the guy in the stupid yellow beanie. Okay? Yeah.
It was a really bad outfit you chose that day, I gotta be honest. However I
Speaker 2: kinda liked it.
Speaker 1: However, it fortunately has the distinction of making you easily recognizable. I'm standing by
Speaker 0: my wardrobe choice.
Speaker 1: You got the boople horn and the yellow beanie and what's so significant about that is I know your story well, I know how you went into the capital, you told everybody not to touch anything, you did a shot at Fireball in Nancy Pelosi's conference room, and then you went out, and that's when you were on the steps afterwards, right, late in the afternoon after four Yeah. 04:17. Right. But the January 6 Select Committee did what with that footage?
Speaker 0: So the Select Committee uses that to their benefit to perpetrate the false narrative. You gotta remember the Colorado ballot trial when they released it on 06/09/2022, and then later in the Colorado ballot case or Norma Jean Anderson et al, they used that. It was all built into their narrative to suggest that Donald Trump started the insurrection by his dog whistle, which I conveyed to the crowd at 02:24 in the afternoon.
Speaker 1: Which was which was what?
Speaker 0: Which was a total lie.
Speaker 1: No. But what did you actually say?
Speaker 0: It was Donald Trump's tweets. I was reading them. They were coming Yeah. Yeah. They were coming over Twitter.
Right? And he was using somebody else's Twitter, and I was reading them for this gentleman approaches me. He's like, I gotta read this. I stood on the steps of the megaphone, read the entirety of these tweets, and what they do is they selectively edit and clip the ones that they want, and then only one they had was that Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to correct the blah blah blah. Right?
So Yeah. This story. But that's what they use, that's what they run, and they change and alter the timestamp and stick two twenty four on it.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And that was important because?
Speaker 0: Well, because it enabled them to say that Donald Trump created that, and they showed the break of the line, and then they showed that, but what ultimately really happened is that was the time where they misfired the canister of obnoxious gas into their own police line, that's what broke down the police line, but they clip away from that. They selectively edit the footage to make sure.
Speaker 1: And so just so people understand, so really what the January 6 Select Committee did when they made their fake movie that was supposed to 06/09/2022. Yeah. Supposed to be what happened is they basically they took something that happened late in the afternoon, long after the violence of the West Tunnel and all the rest of it, and they moved that up and they created a fake timeline where they said, okay, here's Donald Trump speaking and here's, his guy, which was you in the capital. You would never miss him.
Speaker 0: I was the guy that started the insurrection according to a
Speaker 1: In your yellow beanie.
Speaker 0: At ABC producer James Goldstein Yeah. And the select committee. Somebody along the line somewhere in there absolutely fraudulently edited this, created the narrative, and delivered it to the American public to which
Speaker 1: they And made it look as if you you were acting on Donald Trump's orders and you triggered that insurrection at the Capitol. Right. And and, you know, the worst part is you were
Speaker 0: There's a catching worst part? I can't. I'm I'm lost. I don't ever know I'll never know what
Speaker 1: part is this. They there are so many cameras at the Capitol. You are on the security cameras. They all knew exactly what the timestamp was. Yeah.
So when they altered that timestamp, they knew exactly what they were doing, and they just don't care who they destroyed.
Speaker 0: They didn't care. They were look, they figured they're covered under speech and debate clause, they can say or lie and do whatever they want to the American people. Shocking news flash. Congress has lied to the American public.
Speaker 1: So okay. So you actually served time in in prison, in jail for your Yeah. For your crime.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I I got to go to a maximum security federal institution.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're laughing now, but I did speak to you a couple of times when because you, the judge, allowed you to do it over several Weekends.
Speaker 0: I was supposed to do twenty days. This all had to do with the outcome because it was proven that they eventually emailed and provided the information that I did in fact capture the fugitive. The judge was furious that they'd been lying to her. Right? Yeah.
That came out. Then don't forget later the FBI is exposed for trying to force me to work for them in violation of that judge's court order that she wouldn't even hear. Had it been the other way around, I'd have gone to prison for sure.
Speaker 1: Then you had someone else try to get you to to traffic weapons across the tried everything to get you to mess up because you you were only charged in the end with a misdemeanor, but you did torture the judge by talking
Speaker 0: Convicted of a misdemeanor. Plead guilty to the misdemeanor. Noyly inner remaining in a restricted building or grounds. Yes. How dare I?
Speaker 1: And and you did torture the judge with a very very long
Speaker 0: Deputy Defense. Hours of that. I think there's probably two people that really enjoyed that. And then there was people, well, a lot of people really enjoyed it and so those that really regretted.
Speaker 1: How long was it?
Speaker 0: Hours long the first time. And then it went more the second time. I think the judge well, know, it's funny, I think you once said that I lulled her into
Speaker 1: Into a coma.
Speaker 0: Look, Judge Friedrich is the same judge it's holding right now, Dan Wilson. She's the reason that Dan Wilson, who's been issued a pardon, and Ed Martin, his acting US attorney, stepped up and said that the pardon applies. So that situation right now is why Dan Wilson's still sitting in prison rotting two months later.
Speaker 1: Because of that judge. Dabney Friedrich. That's disgusting.
Speaker 0: Don't forget who her husband is. Her husband is the same one that got the Alaska State Senator, Ted Stevens, with the false narrative, and then they later dropped it, which Emmett Sullivan, the judge, was a part of.
Speaker 1: Oh, Emmett Sullivan is a he's a piece of work.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Oh, thought you were gonna say what he really is, but okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I mean, and he's the one that that even after the Department of Justice and the Attorney General admitted that they had no case against Mike Flynn, that they'd manufactured the case. He refused to drop it.
Speaker 0: No. Another man of courage, right? Mike Flynn? Another man of Yeah. He's been symbolic in leadership and the idea of how to respond to this kind of lawfare and what to do, and I think it drove him.
Look where he is now. He can't stop. He just keeps coming for them. And these things that were once called conspiracy theories in the McCaves and all the nonsense
Speaker 1: Now the evidence is out.
Speaker 0: The Russian gate and all the nonsense, Russian collusion, all this nonsense, and now where are we? How's that working out for them?
Speaker 1: But you know, what's what you did in creating this organization Condemned USA and then representing all these people, how many defendants were you able to assist with
Speaker 0: legal defendants? We spoke to at different times and worked with either the family member of over 600 defendants throughout the course of the four years in various stages, right? And some of it was as simple as helping someone just they needed money to get to the trial. Right? Yeah.
To go be at their son's trial, so we helped mothers. So we didn't really ever engage in legal defense. But hundreds of the cases, we were involved in legal defense through a number of the attorneys that we worked with, and that was awesome. I mean, Roger Roots was on the front line of that, George Palace on the front line, Jonathan Gross on the front line.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't easy finding those guys.
Speaker 0: No, and then you know what's funny is once we found them, it was like, hey, I need you to take another one, and another, and another, We just kept laying them on them, and they couldn't say no because it's like, okay, this is another injustice. So those men, God bless those men.
Speaker 1: Have bless those to say, because I mean, you and I were in contact throughout, and I called you many times because people would bring their stories to me, know, or people were being charged two years later, three years later, they were terrified, and families were terrified. There was a woman in her late sixties, early seventies in this town who was charged. How would you
Speaker 0: not be terrified when the federal government is using the Joint Terrorism Task Force when they show up? They're whining about I love this. Illegals broke into our country, and they stand where they stand today, and people are whining about the idea that there's masked men coming. Has anyone not watched the videos of the Joint Terrorism Task Force raiding 1,600 legal American citizens? Have these same people not recognized as I listen to these lunatic Democrats?
Oh, they're having to drink from the same place as the commode and where they would defecate. I'm like, what do you think prison is? Have you never been there? Know. Suddenly, Democrats don't know what a prison looks like or how that works or what every January 6 was subjected to, and they wanna complain about the conditions for the illegals that have broken into the country.
Yeah. But they didn't care about 1,600 American citizens who were being bludgeoned with lawfare, which is exactly why we created Condemned USA.
Speaker 1: Like the guys who put weapons pointed weapons at your son's head
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: At 14 years old.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, when you see little red dots all over your kid and you you see that horrific moment, it will do something unsettling to you. It will create a visceral reaction. It will forever change. It wasn't January 6 that changed me.
It wasn't the it wasn't the prosecution. It was the raid on my home. The raid on my home is what created who I am now, They're going to answer for these things. I'm gonna make sure of it. It fits with my dying breath.
Speaker 1: And your son is such a lovely young man.
Speaker 0: He is. Tristan's an awesome kid.
Speaker 1: He really is.
Speaker 0: He really is doing great. It's amazing what he's come through.
Speaker 1: And your poor wife has been long suffering because really, when when they picked a fight with you, you took it on completely. Headlong.
Speaker 0: I was never going to back down. There's not one ounce of quitting me.
Speaker 1: Oh, wow. Thank goodness for your mom standing at your side the whole time.
Speaker 0: Oh, I couldn't have done it without her.
Speaker 1: No. I know you
Speaker 0: My my mom was a rock and an an immovable force in this that was always there.
Speaker 1: And not even a Republican. I'm just saying it wasn't it wasn't, you know, for political reasons
Speaker 0: at all. No. We were never this was about look. Well, this is a great misunderstanding or another narrative control scenario that we all came there and we demanded that Donald Trump be put in office. That was never the case for me, and many I never talked to anyone that felt that way.
It was about we wanted a meaningful review. We were tired of the roller coaster. We were tired of the nonsense Yeah. That had been provided time and time and time again. Oh, we got another court case, and the judge refuses to hear it.
Donald Trump never lost any court cases. They never had a trial. These were all refused to hear. Was either you didn't know how many gumballs were in the jar or you didn't know what date the gumballs went in and what date they came out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they had any little detail to get out of having to hear the cases. To give them time to destroy the evidence and crush resistance.
Speaker 0: You got it.
Speaker 1: There's another one.
Speaker 0: There's one I Well,
Speaker 1: to give them time to You're crush
Speaker 0: getting a bug zapper back here.
Speaker 1: To give them time to get rid of the evidence or crush any resistance. Because remember, you weren't even allowed to question the results of the twenty twenty election. In The United States Of America, it became an act, you know, literally a criminal act to say, I I don't I'm not sure that about the election results.
Speaker 0: But all the while, I see constant communication now traveling on social media and it doesn't certainly doesn't seem to be shadow browned or suppressed. Now, where you see these people are out there saying the twenty twenty four election was rigged, know, Donald Trump didn't really want his not legitimate president. I see it all over social media. All over But those statements would always have community notes and Oh. Or move down.
Speaker 1: Get censored to complete. People would get blocked.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, you get your account taken down.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: But this can be said, it's always a two tier system. It's been a two tier system. It's a a tool a total two tier system where they don't care about the truth, they don't care about the facts, don't let let that interfere with their
Speaker 1: Okay. So you're still fighting for j sixes. Dan Wilson is one, and
Speaker 0: the We have Benjamin Martin sitting out. You have Edward Kelly recently saw an FBI whistleblower just yesterday finally released a statement that says that the FBI targeted him and made things up. It's literally the f an f b I agent's come forward and said this, and Edward Kelly's doing life in prison on this other supposed charge.
Speaker 1: And that's the other thing they've done is add fruit to the poisonous tree charges, right, to to muddy the waters.
Speaker 0: Absolutely. So this is and this is what Friedrich's done in Judge Friedrich in DC. Right? So the activist under the robe, judge Friedrich. And she's a disgusting and inhumane individual that should absolutely if she should repent, but she should be removed all of these people.
Beryl Howell, Emmett Sullivan, judge Friedrich, the list goes on. Colleen Culler Catelli, I can name judge after judge after judge Kelly, Sullivan, all of them. Right? Mette, should all be impeached, but we have spineless Republicans, so called Republicans, trans publicans as we might read better call them, right? People who problem right now.
Speaker 1: Publicans. I'm gonna borrow that if
Speaker 0: that's You may actually stole it from somebody else, so it was on loan anyway. Listen. Mine now. Yeah, they take it. So here we go.
In the sense of this, these people don't wanna hold impeachments. And you know why they would said they would blame it on the Darrell Isis and the Ken Bucks. Well, guess what? These people aren't there anymore. Now we've got rid of them.
So what now? What's the new excuse for the house judiciary that was founded in eighteen eighteen o seven with the one of the explicit pillars being to rein in these title three article three judges and have impeachments if necessary when they operate outside the conduct of the robe of the expectation when they operate with impropriety. Where are these people? Where are these courageous Republicans that are all coming to save us that operate on our side? And it shouldn't be a Republican or Democrat issue.
It should be that we abused lawfare. This happened, and these and these judges
Speaker 1: were as a standard. We're all I mean, everybody's affected.
Speaker 0: Well, they don't like here's a great standard for you that they don't like. You got one eleven a with the congresswoman up in New Jersey who's bustled by the officers. Right? She did far more than any many of the January 6 defendants that were charged with the same charge that did years in prison. Yet here she is is up here screaming bloody murder about Alina Habba prosecuting her for one eleven a.
Welcome to the way you guys have decided that it works.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So there's solution to that. Applied at to them.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Oh, no. We we have an unequal application of the loan. It's been that way for a long time. And as long as it standardizes that way, then they're just fine with it.
Speaker 1: And the one thing that I I is really important to me to point out actually is how many j sixes, including Joe Biggs and Enrico Artario and all those guys who feel so strongly about the people they left behind. Because there were a lot of guys in there who, I mean, are victims of malicious prosecutions. Sure. There are legitimate criminals that are in there, and they deserve to be in there. But the way our judicial system has been applied has is in a is an absolute affront to to us as Laura.
A
Speaker 0: civilized nation. We we in The United States Of America, we are the country number five in line per capita of actually imprisoning the most citizens. Number five in the nation or I'm sorry, in around the world. Number five, the land of the free imprisons more citizens than per capita than any number of nations that you would look at and think that it would be a deplorable thing to look at. Right?
That should disturb people. And we start looking at the judiciary. This is the beauty of January 6 to me. This is what I say is this. Had we have not had a look through this lens that magnified the judiciary as it did for January 6, had we have not had this look, had it just been the one offs like the Michael Flynn's and others and Ted Stevens and the stories we can relate to back through history.
But when they did it in mass, when they got greedy, and they did it in mass and they did it to so many, it became apparent. Now it's abundantly apparent to the American citizen that our judiciary is a corrupt and captured operation that has to have a total reform. We saw what they did to president Trump. We've seen what they've done to others. If you don't take this opportunity, what happened in January 6 is a total loss.
There can be some good come from this, a silver lining, and that is the reform of our judiciary through impeachments and holding these people accountable that operated with bias, that operated with impropriety. We know it happened. It's right there on the record. Two different judges that were not my judge suggested that I took part in insurrection. Insurrection is a crime, a US code.
You don't have somebody in and try them for jaywalking and then call them a murderer because murder is a different crime. That judge can say you're stupid, they can say you're a moron, they could say all kinds of things at sentencing, but you can't use the words
Speaker 1: You can't accuse them of a crime they've never been charged with?
Speaker 0: Yes, and that's exactly what they did. They called it an insurrection and it became the narrative, and that's the problem. These judges know that they can't do this. That's impropriety and you've to set an example and you gotta strike down this kind of assault or affront to our judicial system.
Speaker 1: So, the other thing that January 6 exposed is people like The Sixty Five Project and Michael Teeter who are part of this Media Matters for America, David Brock, Knight Foundation, Ford Foundation, Tiles Foundation.
Speaker 0: And all of these, GW, and Columbia University. True
Speaker 1: citizens. You responsible These organizations that really are an assault on American society. Yeah. There's a 65 project under Michael Teter set up by Noel Mison and David Brock. Noel Mison who's still going off to President Trump, and they go off to any attorney who represents Yeah.
Anyone from sanctions.
Speaker 0: It's about making they wanna hang people on like so like, this picture of the select committee and the DOJ wanted to hang people on the wall like malice do as the January 6 community. This is what happens if you speak up about elections. We'll show you. Right? Yeah.
While the left can go out and burn the cities and do what they want, you got January 2037, which is the only date in the constitution, by the way, that says that is a formal date that has to happen at twelve noon where you have to actually have the exchange of power, change over power as they like to call it, for the president. Right? Yeah. The inauguration has to take place at that time. January 6 is not such a date.
There is not a date that is prescribed. It's a suggested date. That's a ceremonial process as the Democrats would have it. But however, even more times in our history that that date became apparent that JFK and others throughout history, that process did affect or change the outcome of a presidential election to codify the right the right answer that was the will of the people, which is what January 6 was about. People wanted a meaningful review.
They didn't want Donald Trump installed. They wanted a meaningful review.
Speaker 1: They wanted they wanted the results sent back to the states.
Speaker 0: As the states were calling for, state legislators are saying we have new information. We're looking at something different.
Speaker 1: Wanna investigate. And there's and there's a a I think a hundred days provided for.
Speaker 0: They could have they could have gone have all kinds of
Speaker 1: a period of time where you review the results and then you report back.
Speaker 0: That's right.
Speaker 1: And that, by the way, is the only thing that didn't happen on January 6, was How was what the protesters wanted.
Speaker 0: How convenient.
Speaker 1: And everything that they said that the protesters were trying to, you know, stop the election being certified and you know, all of that went ahead.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, and interestingly enough, I'll make one point to that. We had house members of the house and members of the senate, which was the minimum requirement. Right? You have to have one member of the senate, members of the house come forward and say they wanted to review, and that recreated the recess for the review that could last two hours, six states, two hours per state, that's twelve hours.
I was thinking we'd be out there till, you know, three, 04:00 in the morning because you had they already said they were gonna do it. But then after the horrible events of January 6 took place, which don't don't don't confuse the truth with the narrative. Right? Yeah. So after those so called events took place, you had a situation where the individuals that said they were going to do this because they had meaningful, incredible reasoning and evidence to do so, then abandoned that process.
Why did they abandon the process? It wouldn't have mattered if a bomb hit the capital. It wouldn't have mattered if, you know, there was mass genocide that day. That was still their duty under their oath of office and what they said. So why didn't they follow through?
I have that question for those people still today.
Speaker 1: Well, you know why. They didn't follow through because the the staged the violence that they incited was deliberately staged to prevent that conversation from taking place.
Speaker 0: Oh, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of Because they didn't want anyone to hear that evidence. They didn't want anyone to present concerns, and they did the Republicans didn't want to be shown. Right? Because they knew then that they would have to vote.
Speaker 0: If the American people were ever had to face the truth of what really happened there that day, if that ever comes out, and who was really responsible, to what level, I think it's going to be something that it will be shocking, but not any more shocking probably than Cointel Pro or what we've done to topple other governments or the shadow governments that we've operated. It's not gonna be any more shocking than these events. I think it's going to be more close to home because they haven't seen it at that level, but you can go to COINTELPRO, Tuskegee Airmen, etcetera, etcetera, down the line event after event. Oh my gosh, our government's corrupt and has done horrible things to the people. Oh, who should be shocked at this point?
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's just that this one is happening and our lifetime's on our watch.
Speaker 0: There you go.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And there's so many families that were just torn apart.
Speaker 0: Look at how many people lost their homes, lost their businesses, they've lost everything. Have to be
Speaker 1: whole. Been restored.
Speaker 0: No. They have to be made whole. There's civil suits. When you hand out money, $4,300,000 to the January 2027 people and twenty seventeen people, excuse me, when you hand out money to the January 2037 people at $4,300,000 to suits that were waged by the ACLU, and those people who literally firebombed police, they threw Molotov cocktails, class a fireworks at police. They did these things.
They brought weapons. They flipped over cars. They burned. We all remember the images of Donald Trump's inauguration as DC was on fire. This nation's capital was ablaze and we saw
Speaker 1: the smoke and the whore. Attacking the secret service.
Speaker 0: And you're like, oh my gosh, this is happening here in The United States. And that wasn't an insurrection. On the date of the actual transition of the so called powers, they like to think of it, which I think of it as representation, right? Not power, but that's how it's described even by the media because they get caught up in their own ideas, right? It's not about power, it's about representation, and that's where the misconception starts and ends.
Speaker 1: So your work really on with January 6 is what led to you taking on this responsibility at American Rights Alliance.
Speaker 0: Well, you know, people think some people have suggested that Peter Ticton was kinda Johnny come lately to January 6. That's not the truth. As you well
Speaker 1: know Peter Ticton, was president Trump's attorney for many years
Speaker 0: Yeah. So and an old friend. Old friend. Yeah. They went to school together.
They went to New York Military Academy together. They were roommates all four years.
Speaker 1: And I know Peter.
Speaker 0: So trusted soul. I'm a big fan.
Speaker 1: He's awesome.
Speaker 0: Yes. Peter's great. He's one of my favorite people. So after January 6 took place, Trump knew that they were coming for him. It was obvious.
Right? In a way, they had never come for him before and not in a way you could have foreseen. So after that, he needed someone he trusts to be central repository for everything January 6. He needed someone he trusted to review who was doing what with his legal efforts. Right?
And defenses as they were coming down the line, the talks were pretty nasty, treason and all these other nonsensical ideas. For making a speech, for saying peacefully and patriotically make our way down to the Capitol. And whatever anyone else did was, you know, on them, right? So here we go. So Peter Tichten was that central repository.
I started working with Tichten in '21. We started talking, I started presenting people to him, sharing information, sharing video, sharing idea, telling him what was happening in these cases. And over time, Peter and I developed a relationship that was very strong. And when numerous cases came down, when they came at Donald Trump with the idea they were gonna remove him from the Colorado ballot, it was Peter Tichton that I called and said, this guy, Scott Gessler, that's doing this case, I don't know if he doesn't know, I don't know if he's ill informed, I don't know what the deal is, but we've gotta get to the bottom of this and I gotta get the information there. Mark Mosier, who is at Hard Meat Dillon's firm, I also called.
Before the day was out, Scott Gessler was calling me and saying, what can I do? Okay, what is it you have? And I was like, well, the fraud that they played for the court at opening arguments was nothing more than a fraud on the court. That select committee video that was done is is a fraudulent narrative, and they had a responsibility to review that before they presented it as evidence in this courtroom.
Speaker 1: Which is the video that altered the time stamp on you.
Speaker 0: Yes. We're right back to that, but that was just one of the many problems with that video. Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah. There were many fraudulent things in that video.
Speaker 0: But it went to mainly the idea that the 02/24 narrative that Donald Trump started the insurrection and I was the mouthpiece for a start of the insurrection. Right? Absolute insanity. I wasn't even there yet. I wasn't even at that spot.
It was just absolutely absurd. So and the FBI asserts that. Right? In my own documents, they're saying that's not the case.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It wasn't hard to prove.
Speaker 0: No. It was so easily
Speaker 1: And in fact, what they did when you when you went off to them is they removed
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. They removed The timestamp. Right? When when they they dumped the part where I was in it. Right?
They dumped that. They just play the audio. They got rid of the timestamp in the video. Yeah, so that was the big change. The select committee actually went back and changed their so called, and they said that they entered this into evidence, Benny Thompson's words were, I know and are into the evidence, the facts and events of January 6.
Speaker 1: Facts and events. It
Speaker 0: was unconscionable because he knew it was a lie. And they even went back to change it after he hit him with the lawsuit in the Fifth Circuit. So look, it's a long story and we can have to dig way down in that. We did a documentary years ago that we never got out, but that story's in there.
Speaker 1: What's in your book?
Speaker 2: Wait, is Show your book. Oh yeah, the story is
Speaker 0: in the book.
Speaker 1: Call it insurrection comrade. Nice, it's catchy.
Speaker 0: Well, I tell
Speaker 1: you that
Speaker 0: the book, wait, because only a only a commie could call that an insurrection, right? It was about a narrative. So, you know, actually it was wonderful. I got these two wonderful people, one to endorse the book, one to do the foreword.
Speaker 1: You did?
Speaker 0: I did. And
Speaker 1: who was that?
Speaker 0: Well, you know, of course, General Flynn did the, and then, that other lady's name, I can't remember, you know, mildly attractive blonde woman. Let's see. I'm trying to think. Laura. Oh, Laura's on
Speaker 1: the Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 0: So, but thank you. Look, I really wanted to thank you for that. That was great. The fact that you did the forward and what you said about the January 6 people, and what they experienced no, it was great. So thank you for that.
I think it meant a lot to all of us that you did that.
Speaker 1: Well, if people wanna know more about it, they can read your book. Right? Let's see. They should. It comrade.
Call it Insurrection Comrade by Trenton's Jay Evans the third. You heard it here people. Read all about it. Read all about it.
Speaker 0: Well, you know what's great is I was excited that I put it actually made best seller on Amazon and
Speaker 1: This is very good. Because you know know what all that means is that that many people, even when they don't they're not armed with the facts or the truth, they instinctively know they're being lied to and they want to know the truth. Yeah. Okay. So, there's aren't you isn't Evan Turk also at American Rights Alliance with you?
Another former Trump attorney?
Speaker 0: Yeah, so Evan Turk, and he had a career on Wall Street before he So became an he does a lot of financial planning, does a lot of work, he's a litigator. Evan is actually Donald Don Jr. Wanted to do something. And you know where the funny, there's a story about where the money came from for the startup money. Remember when at Butner, right, where they attempted to assassinate President Trump?
Yeah. Ironically, only place that CNN ever covered a full rally, a live rally.
Speaker 1: Isn't that amazing? They just, they have such good news instincts.
Speaker 0: Yeah. You would call it news. That's funny. Yeah. That's a good word.
Anyway, anyway, so where that They
Speaker 1: didn't care about any Trump rallies, but boy were they well positioned at Butler.
Speaker 0: Yeah, boy, they were right there for it. Amazing. So the fight fight fight merchandise that came from that, Donald Trump Junior took the net proceeds from that and donated it and said, don't wanna profit from this event. I wanna do something for the American people because that's who I doubt my father was fighting for. He wasn't fighting for himself.
He was telling the American people we're gonna fight, fight, fight. Right? Yeah. So he said, this is a way to do this. I have an idea.
And he gifted that money to Evan Turk to start the American Rights Alliance to fight lawfare against anyone that was experiencing lawfare, civil rights abuses, parental rights, religious liberties, on down the line. That's really amazing. So Evan gets it started. He calls Peter Ticton, which is a natural choice. Right?
Peter Ticton, a well known litigator, and says, Peter, here's what I have. I have this money, we're gonna start this. He involved some others, and next thing you know, they had it all built, right? And it's funny is it looked a lot like what we built at Condemned USA. And Evan and I not really knowing one another, Peter says, You gotta talk to Trinis.
Speaker 1: He said, I got this really difficult He's little guy a real pain in the you know what. He's the problem that just won't go away. He's not a lawyer, but he has studied the law. Actually, what's just kind of amazing because you've been involved in so many legal cases now.
Speaker 0: I mean, you can't help but learn. I I think it was forced into me, whether I chose to learn or not, it was going to be there. So Peter and I met with them and I was doing an event down in, down in Florida and Evan came down and we met. We kind of really found out that we have kind of kindred spirits about saving the country and, defending people, and that was consistent with what Peter and I had already knew about one another. Evan and I kind of felt things out, he made a great offer to me and said, I want you to come over here and do this.
It's funny, Lars, I say great offer because it's a fantastic pay cut from what I've done my whole life.
Speaker 1: I was just thinking that as you said it, I was like, a great offer. It is a great offer because I know you believe in the work. Yeah. But it is still a pay cut. Oh.
From your other pay cut.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Pay cut from my pay cut.
Speaker 1: So Because working on this all these years, I mean, sure there was at one point your business was like, hello, do you remember us?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Oh, Thankfully my brother stepped in to take on that role and I'm really thankful that he's going to take that role on. So I'm away from that now and he can do that. But reality says this, Evan and I hit it off for a reason, it worked out, and then we came to an agreement and they offered me the position. Originally they came to me just to talk to me about being a spokesman for their organization.
And before you knew it, after Evan and I got together and met and Peter and I talked more, they offered me the position as the Chief Operating Officer of the organization. And they said, Okay, what do we do next? And I said, Okay. So we got into that and started looking at websites and revamping what we were doing, some of the little things, right? And you know, that really weren't cataclysmic as to what was going to happen with the organisation.
And within a week I got a call from Tina Peters. And Tina Peters called me and said, Tronis, I have all these great lawyers. I don't know what I want to do with my case. I need help to sort it out. There's varying opinions.
What do you think? I was like, wow, this is heavy. Right? Because I had written Tina's amicus brief for her appellate case back in February with John Mosley. John Mosley and I worked on that together.
Don't wanna say just me. I wanna take credit, but you gotta hear the source. So
Speaker 1: I just wanna remind people that Tina Peters was the secretary well, she was in Colorado Uh-huh. In a district in Colorado. Yeah. She was the county clerk.
Speaker 0: Mesa County.
Speaker 1: In Mesa County, and that was a Republican county, and it went Republican. So just so people understand, it had it had always it had been Republican for a long time.
Speaker 0: It's a very red county.
Speaker 1: But there was something that happened that just Tina didn't trust, which was when Dominion came in and they said that they needed to do a, I don't know what it was, a reset or whatever
Speaker 0: Well, had a trusted build.
Speaker 1: That's right. Trusted build.
Speaker 0: Right? Yeah. I mean, it's wonderful language. Right? Like, just like citizens for responsible ethics in Washington when it's run by normies.
Speaker 1: Yeah. They always come up with the with the words that mask their real intent. And so what happened is Tina got somebody in there who did a forensic image Yeah. Of the machines before the trust is built.
Speaker 0: With her duty to preserve all election data from a federal election. Consistent with her duty.
Speaker 1: But they got her because he came in using someone else's badge. Well,
Speaker 0: here's the problem,
Speaker 1: Whatever. Miss They they they were gonna find some excuse to get her.
Speaker 0: Laura, there's something called good faith. She went to Jenna Griswold in advance and said there's a problem.
Speaker 1: She tried
Speaker 0: to this up the ladder. Yeah. And then she believed there was a problem. Believed that
Speaker 1: there was The generous wrongdoing. Funded by George Soros.
Speaker 0: Yeah, imagine that. She believed that there was wrongdoing. So in good faith, she had to take some other measure to preserve that data to uphold her federal responsibility, her duties, is that clear?
Speaker 1: Under the law. Yes. She had a legal responsibility to preserve those records.
Speaker 0: If she didn't do it, she could've been charged with federal crime.
Speaker 1: And and the trusted build is how they get around it, right, because there's all this, you know, technical stuff that they that they they know that most people don't understand what it is, but essentially, they they just erase the files because they say that you have to make room on the, on the computer for the, for other information. Right? And, and basically, you know, Dominion comes in and does whatever they do and nobody knows because nobody nobody reads code, nobody's inside the machines, nobody's
Speaker 0: watching simple fact. Right? Yeah. If you go take your phone down and you go, hey, I wanna get my this phone, I want everything transferred from this phone to that phone. We've all been through that.
Right? Or a laptop or iPad or whatever it is. You walk that device in there, the first thing you wanna do is back everything up. They ask you, did you back everything up to the cloud? Yeah.
They want you to back everything up even though they tell you they can transfer all the information because why? Because things get lost. It happens. Digital things happen. Idiosyncrasies in the digital world occur.
So Tina wanted to make sure there were no problems. She wasn't out just, you know, seeking something. She wasn't have an idea what she was looking for. She just wanted to do her job and do it correctly.
Speaker 1: But she suspected that there was a problem because, you know, I remember Tina told me that, right after the election, she was getting all these calls from people in her district who were saying that they were concerned about the outcome of the election. Now it was a red county. Trump had won. You know, extensively, there isn't any reason really to chase this, but there's something called the truth, and people want honesty and integrity in their elections. Even when they get the outcome that they want, they still it still matters.
And so she's getting all these calls and she's like, no. You know, we got the result that we expected in a sense because Trump won. It wasn't. She said the numbers weren't quite what you would expect, but nevertheless, the outcome was. And so, therefore, what are they talking about?
Speaker 0: It didn't matter if the result was one you expected or didn't expect. The preservation duty of that clerk was to Correct. Make sure it was preserved. And when anytime someone's gonna do some update or change or you potentially lose something, trusted build, data file and analysis, whatever, the first thing you should do is have an imaging to protect it. So it was a forensic imaging.
That was it.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But then what happened in Mesa County 0. Was when Sherona Bishop and and other people started doing going door to door, they started discovering that, you know, that there's, like, a mental, health facility where people, you know, nobody voted and there's all these votes, or that there's multiple votes at one place, or that there's an old age home. You never get
Speaker 2: to see people voted.
Speaker 1: You know, and that's what really know, that's when Tina started to ask questions and go to Jenna Griswold, the secretary of state, and and the response that she got was odd.
Speaker 0: Well, the response that she really got honestly is down the I mean, not far from that moment was that the FBI raids her home.
Speaker 1: Yes. That's right. Which is a clear indicator that people don't want you asking questions that you really have a duty to ask. She had a duty to ask those questions and they can go after her for process. It's just like they'll create a process crime for anyone.
Right? I mean, you know, break a team from right on crime. He always says, show me a person and I'll show you a felony. Yeah. Like he said, you we've got so many laws governing so many things.
They've criminalized just about everything under the sun that if you really wanna go after someone for something, Absolutely. You can find
Speaker 0: There's a way to put everybody in prison, every American, there's something they're doing or have done that and you could actually do that. And then the FBI comes in and says, have you ever looked through the window and seen, you know, have you ever looked through the window and when you're thinking, my gosh, people are no, would never do such a thing. Yeah. And then they go, well, you know, suddenly you lied. You've looked through a window of a store and seen somebody inside.
That's a lie. You know? I mean, it's it's as benign as that. It's so simple to get a lie from the FBI. They say, you know, have you ever done this or have you ever done that?
And have you ever? Right? And it's so broad and then they twist things and they manipulate. Once they have twisted and manipulated just right, then all of sudden they get you with a crime, they get you admitting, well, I didn't mean that, well, you didn't mean, so then you did in fact do what we just said, right? And that's how they do it.
Speaker 1: Well, and also it's intimidating.
Speaker 0: Horrifying. I mean, there's a doctor we're dealing with and they went to him and asked him if he had ever done anything or been involved in certain things, at the end of the day, the guy's done tens of millions of dollars a year worth of business. And it's over $6,000 of something he made up, the record wasn't exactly accurate, and that's why he's facing prison. But his crime was dealing in COVID. He was not prescribing the accepted narrative.
He was doing ivermectin, he was doing the hydroxychloroquine, that's what
Speaker 1: it And he's not the only doctor to face this.
Speaker 0: No, Doctor. Young, right? I mean, who we both know sitting in prison right now, Doctor. Keith Moore, and on and on, and Doctor. Artis was silenced, and Doctor.
Gold and all. Mean, we can go down a list of doctors, Doctor. Stella Emanuel, who, you know, all of these people, This happened with COVID. It happened with Christians. It happened with the school board parents.
It happened it was an assault. And why? But you gotta understand that where this came from. Places like SPLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Cruz and the ones you talked about, but more so, George Washington University and Columbia University misused a $77,000,000 grant that was offered up by the Obama administration when they had the House and Senate pressed through. That money goes straight out, and those people sent people into all 16 of our three letter agencies.
They sent people into members of Congress. They sent people these were all interns. Right? And these were the trusted interns that joined these programs that were being run by draft dodging communist professors of the sixties. Right?
These individuals were trusted tenured people at GW and Columbia University running the program. They sent the interns out. Well, what this really amounts to is espionage into our government. It doesn't amount to a study. It was a study by those that would think if you have the intent to overthrow the government and utilizing these children in this way, then they shape and mold the children over the next four years and they send them out.
You notice how the age of the FBI and directors and people just drop like a stone
Speaker 1: once very young.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, because they had to move out. Remember Obama gets rid of all of generals and they fire all these people?
Speaker 1: Oh, yes.
Speaker 0: Well, yeah. It was because they needed to wipe the playing field clear of any conservatives. Young
Speaker 1: people who they molded in right.
Speaker 0: They came in in their image in this communist manifesto type ideology, the Marxists and the ideologues. Right? They come in, and now all of a sudden you have control of these agencies and they're telling you, hey, this person's not on board with our agenda. They must be a domestic violent extremist. And that's where GWU and Columbia University developed.
Speaker 1: And then they turned to Southern Poverty Law Center and Media Matters for America, and they help have them advise them, advise Uh-huh. And write the algorithms and determine which are the keywords, what are you going after someone for, and then they, on top of that, at the same time, the other pillar of this is they get the FBI to go and to create like the the the kidnap plot in Michigan.
Speaker 0: But don't forget also That was completely fake. Like we like we exposed here in Fredericksburg with the event that you put together, we spoke at together three years ago. We showed how the FBI had just recently released and DHS had released their new list of domestic violent extremist symbols. I remember the Betsy Ross flag was on there. Yes.
And it was even the bible, the cat and the cross.
Speaker 1: And the and the George Washington
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. The tree. Yeah. The oh, the tree of liberty. Yeah.
They were all signs of domestic violent extremism and that was something that could
Speaker 1: Including, I think do I have to come and take flag? Oh, It
Speaker 0: was on there.
Speaker 1: Oh, it's confirmed. There's the evidence.
Speaker 0: I'm really glad to be sitting here with a fellow domestic violence extremist. I just don't
Speaker 1: Hey, I was listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center when I spoke at a Moms for Liberty event. Congratulations. Wasn't that kind of them? You. So kind of them.
So so they they really have it sewn up, you know, on on you're surrounded because on the one hand you've got so what you're talking about, the Obama administration gives $77,000,000 grant to two universities. Right? They then do a study and in the name of that study, they put interns in different agencies inside the government and they mold these interns who then go into those agencies and serve in positions of power. Yes. And that these agencies are like the FBI, the Department of Justice.
Speaker 0: DOD, I mean it goes The
Speaker 1: government of defense.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Everything. You have all all of our all of our intelligence agencies. Right? DNI, all ODNI, all
Speaker 1: of these So, now they've got their people everywhere. And we all know you take a young person and you give them an opportunity, they haven't lived enough really to be cynical enough.
Speaker 0: They knew not what they did.
Speaker 1: They believed. They're true believers. When you're young and somebody else I even remember when I was young and I got a job at CBS, I was a true believer.
Speaker 0: That's a long, long time ago.
Speaker 1: It was one hundred and fifty years ago. I know I'm looking great, right?
Speaker 0: You do, it's amazing.
Speaker 1: It's genetics. Yeah. Just genetics.
Speaker 0: You look great for even for 35.
Speaker 1: I know. I know. Seriously. Even for 35, 20 ago. Okay.
So going back to this system they created, and then they put then they literally run false flag operations inside the FBI and and they have groups, you know, outside of that. They have academics and think tanks that provide the ideology, right, that supports what it is they're doing and you know I They close the loop. They do, they close the loop and this is one very important part I want people to understand is that I was looking at law enforcement bulletins for years and they would literally have one or two or three items that related to Islamic terrorism that were actually real terrorist threats. And then they would have all these other things that were about the white terror threat. Right?
Yeah. And and they were all screenshots from chat rooms that were very obviously FBI people inside those chat rooms.
Speaker 0: Oh, like Right. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And then they reported to Southern Poverty Law Center, you know, or media matters and then they say, oh, you need to look for this. This is the real terrorist threat. You're right, they created a loop. Yeah.
These are horrible people.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, look, they mean to undermine Western culture, Western civilization, they mean to tear it all down. They are not a fan of capitalism, and for whatever reason
Speaker 1: They're a fan of America or sovereignty at all. No. Or humanities.
Speaker 0: They're globalists. They're ideologues. They have all kinds of other ideas about anything that we would hold dear as conservatives, as Christians, as just good Americans. People that believe
Speaker 1: in the constitution people.
Speaker 0: Decent individuals, decent human beings that give a damn about children, that give a damn about making sure that the the future of our children is something that they could live, that you could even stomach, much less have an expectation of.
Speaker 1: Well, that tolerance should actually be tolerance and liberty should actually be liberty and it's really not a Yeah. Democrat or Republican
Speaker 0: Yeah. They wanna blur the line and create it. Yeah. I agree with you. So Not a partisan issue.
Speaker 1: So now you're in American Rights Alliance and you're trying to help people with significant cases, right? So what are you doing for Tina Peters?
Speaker 0: Well, Tina Peters, so we came in, we entered. So I went to Peter and said, look, Peter, we gotta take this case. It's Tina Peters. We need to And make she's in her a She's in Colorado. She's been there almost a year.
Listen to this, you gotta remember, so what most of America doesn't understand, She was denied bond. In Colorado, under Colorado law, you have to either prove to be too violent or you have to be a flight risk to not be let out on bond pending your appeal. That means the process between the time you're found guilty at the district court level, right, or the state, you know, basic court level, and then you go on to your appellate court system. This could be a year, year and a half before you get to your appeal, if it's even granted. And all Tina Peters was asking at that point is to be out on bond at home under the authority of the government, you have to supervision, etcetera, and check-in and all those things, even an equal monitor, whatever, until the appeal was resolved.
Right? This judge in the courtroom in Colorado literally went on record, and a lot of people know this, but a lot of people don't, went on record and said, miss Peter's speech was the danger. Her first amendment protected speech, the idea she was allowed to hold, the things that she has the right to believe, it was her speech that created the reasoning that she must be locked up in a in a prison, in a in a Colorado prison, and not be allowed to be out until bail pending appeal on a what? A non violent crime. Who was harmed by what Tina Peters did?
She did her job and the judge knew that. This conviction is rife with impropriety.
Speaker 1: It's outrageous. The judge
Speaker 0: is a disgusting individual that that he himself should be removed from the bench and be imprisoned probably for these types of actions. I bet if we were to venture further into his decisions, we would find a lot of this kind of nonsensical activity impropriety from the bench. But this is what's going on. The fact that, Philip Weiser and and the, the there in Colorado, the AG and the the Jenna Griswold.
Speaker 1: The secretary of state Jennifer as well. This is she's disgusting.
Speaker 0: She's a disgusting individual. She's another partisan hack that is run Disgrace. By George Soros and others that absolutely should not hold an office. But this is what we get. When you allow these people to infiltrate The United States, they knew they could never take us from outside.
They had to take us from within, and that's where all this insanity is coming from, what's brewing up. So we see this in Tina Peters. Now we have, you know, as you know, last week we had the oral argument on the habeas motion. Habeas Corpus showed me the body, the opportunity to get her proven that she was deserves to be out on bond, that the result of why she's there was the misappropriation of power by the judge of what he did and actually going after her, this impropriety he exerted by saying that her First Amendment protected rights to her beliefs created the danger. This isn't a woman saying, I believe I should be able to shout fire in a crowded movie theater.
This isn't a person saying, take up arms against the government. This is a person saying, I did my job. There was a problem with the election or the data afterward, and I wanted to make sure we had preservation. That's her speech.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And even if she let somebody use a badge that wasn't theirs, I mean, this is hardly makes her a violent criminal.
Speaker 0: Even if. Even if even if that's the case. But good faith, again, by the idea
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: She knew that when she went up the chain of command, they they gave that order back down Yeah. And said, no. Don't do that. We're not doing anything. She had a duty and she upheld her duty.
Speaker 1: Duty to do And by the way, this is a woman in her what? Late sixties, early seventies? Yeah. Laura Who's son
Speaker 0: nine years old.
Speaker 1: 69 years old whose son was a navy seal
Speaker 0: who She's a Gold Star mother. He died. He gave his life in the line of service. And let me get this straight for the American people. This is something they need to get real right with.
Her son's not there to fight for her. Her son's not here because he gave his life fighting for this country, and the American people should damn well be behind Tina Peters because she's already made that sacrifice. And her son, if he were here, he'd be fighting like hell for her, I'm certain of that. So I think every one of us owe it to Tina Peters who's already made that sacrifice to fight for her.
Speaker 1: And to be clear, he didn't he he wasn't on a battlefield when he was killed. He was doing an event for the the Navy SEAL team that that jumps out of planes and over an event and he plummeted to his death in a stadium. Yeah. Which was a horrific horrific. Absolutely was in service.
No doubt. I just wanna I'm gonna preempt all those, you know, those let me idiots Oh, okay. That will come after this and say, you know, this wasn't no. I mean, he, and he served his country on the battlefield. He was deployed multiple times.
Yeah. And, and he had a stellar career, by the way. And, an amazing young man. And and, Tina, you know, still carries that that pain.
Speaker 0: How can you not? She's a mother. Of course. You lose a child, it's forever.
Speaker 1: And by the way, a wonderful woman, really brave woman. I mean, you just imagine that, the pressure they put How her
Speaker 0: many other we have how many counties? So we got two sixty counties in Texas. How many people did that and preserved the data?
Speaker 1: Many people had the courage
Speaker 0: to One. Do
Speaker 1: One in
Speaker 0: One whole in the entire freaking country that had the courage to do what Tina Peters did and say, wait a minute.
Speaker 1: Yeah. She
Speaker 0: really I is gotta I gotta something about this. I wanna preserve this.
Speaker 1: And just to to answer the question for people who say, well, why hasn't Donald Trump pardoned her? It's because it's a state case.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So interestingly enough, in the reply brief that came just yesterday, it was filed last night, right, or yesterday afternoon, There was a reply
Speaker 1: So brief this week because this will go out on Friday. Okay.
Speaker 0: So in the reply brief that was filed on Monday, this week, right? In the reply brief filed Monday, what was that? The twenty seventh or whatever?
Speaker 1: Filed the July 27? Twenty eighth. Okay.
Speaker 0: In the reply brief filed on the July 28, the government, the state of Colorado admits that there were certain federal aspects of what's going on, but they wanna say, oh, we're gonna hide this, right? They wanna say, well, but it wasn't preserved in the case. Well, we have, there's a little something coming from there. So there's a comparative value that we came up with this morning and the new filings in our reply will I think reflect some of that. So I think it's gonna be very interesting what they've now done to themselves, and, we've we've painted them into a corner, or they've more painted themselves into a corner, and there's more to come for them where this is headed.
Donald Trump is going to be able to ultimately pardon Tina Peters. We are going to prove that she was doing her duty and that the supremacy clause is going to take effect here, and that she has federal immunity from the state prosecution at the end of the day for what they've done to
Speaker 1: her. Because there are federal and state laws regarding the preservation of election records. Correct?
Speaker 0: And the federal laws supersede or they're supreme to the state laws. Just like you can set the speed limit on the highway, this the federal government can set the speed limit to 70. The state can't say the speed limit's now 85. Not up to them, it's a federal highway, right? Right.
Now the state can say, you gotta slow down to 55 in this section in my state, and they can do that.
Speaker 1: But you have to go through this process.
Speaker 0: Well, you bring it down, but you can't take it up and that's just where they've done, right? So they've nullified the federal part of this. Now what's interesting is the state doesn't have the ability to assert that something fits the supremacy clause or assert something. They don't have that ability, right? They can't rule on that.
Now a judge could say, believe there's a problem here. I believe that supremacy takes effect here, but a state judge can't rule definitively that this has happened. Right? So this is where the process is so skewed because it's all been in state court. Although it was led by the FBI, we know the DOJ was involved in this, there was a leadership role from that.
What happened to Tina? The honest issue is if the state was ever just honest and just said, look, Ms. Peters did her job under the federal election, we may not like what she did or we don't agree with it, but she did her job, but they want to hide behind the idea that, well, this isn't federal court, this is state court, you did this. It's so subjective and it's so wrong.
Speaker 1: And what do you mean by the supremacy clause? Just explain that.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So the supremacy clause is the same thing that happened in like the Norman G Anderson et al case or commonly known as the Colorado ballot case. Colorado says, we wanna take Donald Trump off the off the ballot in our state. Right? And the supremacy clause and it goes all the way through all the Colorado courts.
Right? You get all the way through the state court, and you get to district court, and you get into the supreme court, and they rule against Donald Trump every time. So, yep, you can take we can take you off the ballot. States can take you off the ballot. The supreme court, and that's even the liberal judges, all nine zero decision on Nirma Gene Anderson et al, right, comes back and says, no.
You can't do that. There's one fourteenth amendment. Not a fourteenth amendment for Illinois, not a fourteenth amendment for Colorado, and not one for Texas. It's one single fourteenth amendment. The fourteenth amendment is the fourteenth amendment, and it reigns supreme over all state laws for each and every single state.
The state law is under the supremacy of the federal law in this case.
Speaker 1: So is the issue here that you you have to let this play out in the state court in order to end up
Speaker 0: Unfortunately, but in the habeas process, the judge was very favorable reason recently, so we do believe that that's going to be beneficial. We think that that's one of the process. We also have another action that we're nearing getting ready to file that one. So we are gonna get multiple actions in You're good. Yep.
We'll get multiple actions in play on the effort to assist Tina to get her where she needs to be into this federal court where Donald Trump can pardon her.
Speaker 1: So another big case that you have is my, my friend James O'Keefe Yeah. Who man, that guy, he gets sued every time he turns around. He is I mean, they've been trying to get him with death by a thousand cuts, death by a thousand lawsuits.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And James is formidable. I mean, he doesn't bow under the pressure, which is extraordinary.
Speaker 0: I You don't even know how it happened, like that was right after Tina. I'm telling you, if you don't think God's involved in this, it's weird because as soon as I come on at American Rights Alliance, next thing you know, I'm getting a call from O'Keefe, hey, Trinis, what do you think about this? I'm getting sued by this, you know, Jackass Mark Zaid up in DC and he goes, know, I'm getting sued to this Jamie Menina case, like, what do you think about this? Like and he's running it by me. I'm like, well, know, I kinda saw it, you know, hit hit the pavement.
I don't really know much about it, like, what's going on? And he goes, well, he's the Booz Allen contractor, the former FBI agent, and what do you think? Would you recommend in DC? And I was like, you know, ironically, so James, this is what's happening now. Glad you Yeah.
Speaker 1: And and for people so that they understand, this is the the investigation that that O'Keefe Media Group did. They captured a Booz Allen contractor working for, I believe, the Department of Defense?
Speaker 0: At the Pentagon. Yes.
Speaker 1: Yeah. At the Pentagon. And and he was saying on camera that basically they're going to subvert and stop Donald Trump.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Any million ways that they could come after Donald Trump, the you know, million cut scenario, whatever they could do to stop Donald Trump that this is what the guy says on camera. And they file a lawsuit. Mark Zaid files a lawsuit.
Speaker 1: Mark Zaid. I have some history with Mark Zaid because guess who he represented? Was the GRS contractors in Benghazi, the the guys who were on the ground for the CIA at the Special Mission Compound in Benghazi. And and so I was when I was working on my Benghazi investigation for sixty minutes, I was trying to talk to some of these guys, of course. Right?
Because they were firsthand eyewitnesses before they did the movie deal, before the, you know, the thirteen hours came out and all the rest of it. And I managed to get ahold of one of the guys. And he said to me, yes. Yes. It took me months and months and months.
It was a big deal. And he said, yes. I will do an interview, but you gotta talk to my attorney. Well, his attorney was Mark Saeed. Oh, god.
So amazingly, his attorney wasn't returning my calls, and he was difficult to reach. And eventually, he returned my call, and he was like, mhmm. Mhmm. Yeah. I know.
I'll get back to you. And then, of course, I never heard from him again. And I'll never forget a very, very good journalist. I was talking to him about, like, I can't get this guy. I mean, I finally got ahold of one of these guys.
He's agreed to do an interview, and his attorney is messing me around. And he said, who's the attorney? And then I told him, he started laughing. And he said, what do you know about this guy? And I said, well, apparently, he's the go to guy if you wanna take on the CIA.
And and I said and he said to me, well, isn't that funny? Have you ever looked at his record?
Speaker 0: Has he ever beaten him?
Speaker 1: Yes. And what do you find when you look at his record? No. Of course, he's the go to guy who, is there if you wanna take on the CIA because what does he do?
Speaker 0: Lose.
Speaker 1: They get they or or manages the process. Yeah. So what do they do? They manage the process. So the system that they've created is really one of narrative control.
They know that it's gotta come out. They know that these, you know, how how do we silence these guys? Well, we give them a book deal and we give them a movie deal that makes them heroic, gives them their fifty minutes of fame and never ever ever answers the questions about Benghazi that are central to what were they doing there, what was this really about, how you know, who was really responsible and so on and so on. So you get a superficial narrative and then nobody else has a chance of of because, oh, when you go to a publisher or you go to a movie, you know, a production facility or whatever, they say, the Benghazi story has been done. So they've set the narrative, they've controlled it, they've done the damage control and they've gotten rid of the threat.
And Mark Zayed, in my experience, was an integral part of that process with Benghazi. So I wasn't surprised at all when I saw Mark Zayed, what happened right in 2000 after 02/2016, after Trump won, who was the guy that came out and said, you know, we are the resistance. We will bring Donald Trump down at any cost, something along those lines. Yeah. Was Mark Zaid.
So he revealed himself for who he really was.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, so here we go again. Right? So this is so Zaid is back front and center representing Jamie Menina.
Speaker 1: What's Who's the Booz Allen contractor?
Speaker 0: Oh, he's much more than that, Laura. This is what's really interesting. So credit to the journalists out there, know, to our independent media people out there. Josh Redpill is the first place I saw this. He sent it to me.
He's like, hey, gotta see this. So Keith is dealing with this Jamie Menina guy who's, again, Booz Allen contractor working at Pentagon trying to stop Trump. But he's former FBI. Interestingly enough, if it's not during the time he was FBI right around, at least it's very interesting that there was this DC predator. You know how that show like, what's it?
It's like a up predator. The guy that looks really old now that does that.
Speaker 1: Where they go off to pedophiles.
Speaker 0: Yeah, right. Well, all I can tell you is there's a DC predator episode Yeah. With Jamie Menina in a home and they come out and they're like, what were you doing here? I wasn't gonna do it. I you gotta watch the episode.
That's funny. We I'll I'll send it to you guys so you can share it.
Speaker 1: Where they set them up, they think they're going to meet a minor.
Speaker 0: A person Jamie Menina apparently, according to this episode, looks as though to me, I can see he's entered this home, and then the DC predator people pop out of other rooms and from behind the walls, you know, kind of thing and say
Speaker 1: A pet is the worst nightmare.
Speaker 0: What are you doing here? And he's, you know, oh, I'm not me, nothing. He's running to the door and he's grabbing his jacket and running out the door. This is the same guy. My question would be is if he was working for the FBI still in '21 or rather he was or wasn't.
If you DC caught a predator, this really is true, why is this guy not been prosecuted?
Speaker 1: How can you be on a defense contract if that's the case?
Speaker 0: Well, who's doing the background checks for Booz Allen? Who's doing the background checks to be in the Pentagon? Is it accepted practice to be a pedophile and work at the Pentagon for Booz Allen? Is that an acceptable practice? I don't know.
Speaker 1: Well, was he ever charged?
Speaker 0: Well, that's the question. Is he ever charged? I don't know the answer to
Speaker 2: that either.
Speaker 1: Because you are innocent until proven guilty. Although, if you're caught on
Speaker 0: I mean, if you're caught on camera there, you're caught on camera there, the evidence I mean, it kinda speaks for itself, you know.
Speaker 1: But he I I I mean, there was a
Speaker 2: song about that wasn't me
Speaker 1: or His innocence. Right?
Speaker 0: Well, would assume. I I don't know. Look, I don't know. Haven't seen him ask the question. But I think what's gonna be very interesting is they'll be having, depositions here soon.
I think that when you're talking about he says that his character has been defamed by James O'Keeffe. Right? Well, I think your character has to be first established before you can claim that it's been impugned by one. Wow. I'm looking forward to
Speaker 1: Is this like fish in a barrel, this one?
Speaker 0: Well, look. So I've been working with Brent Day on this case since the beginning who's working at Peter's Law Firm. The motions to dismiss were filed. The anti SLAP just went in last week. You'll be able to watch Jen Baker's covering this at Gateway Pundit.
She's covering this case closely. She's working with us at American Rights Alliance as well. She's been there with me years at Condemned USA. So I'm excited to watch these things come to light that we're finding. And we wouldn't find it if it weren't again.
The independent journalists, we sure as hell didn't get it off of a CNN, ABC, CBS, you know, or MSNBC interview of showing us that this happened.
Speaker 1: Can't be that hard to find.
Speaker 0: You know, you'd be surprised how how easy it really was once I was just sort of looking. So I don't know. Like I said, I think you guys will enjoy watching.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad that you're helping James because truly that man gets sued by everyone. They have not been able to I mean, they've tried to put him in prison and that didn't break him. They raided his house with the FBI, that didn't
Speaker 0: break After his organization?
Speaker 1: They've targeted yes, they took the organization that he created, that is that was James O'Keefe, you know, and not only that, but, you know, he raised all the money for it and, you know, I'm I'm sure they said he ate some pregnant woman sandwich in front of her, you know, and he used black cars and and and no doubt, you know, when you when you work closely with people, I'm sure there's things, some of them legitimate that they can say about you. They can say it about all of us. Bet I bet not everyone who worked for you loved you. Right? Same with me.
Speaker 0: Do know how I met James?
Speaker 1: How?
Speaker 0: You're the one that drug me to an event at Mar a Lago. Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I went to an event with you at Mar a
Speaker 1: Lago.
Speaker 0: Yes. Right? And James and I were sitting there and we'd already seen the movie. The movie was premiering. I can't remember is it Oh, movie.
Yeah. Mike Smith.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Into the Light.
Speaker 0: Into the Light.
Speaker 1: Great movie by the way. It was great. Mike Smith's movie was excellent. Even though I'm in it, it's still a great, very important mean, it
Speaker 0: has its drawbacks. Yes.
Speaker 1: But Watch intothelight.org. Go to intothelight.org. You have to see that.
Speaker 0: Fantastic movie.
Speaker 2: So I
Speaker 0: had already seen it. Right? So I'd already seen the the quiet side behind the scenes there with Mike because we were all there at the event. But it was what was amazing to me about that is James and I were sitting, we ended up seated next to each other at Mar A Lago at the event. And we ended up sneaking out a little bit early because we kept talking.
Like we had gotten this conversation about five zero ones and the stuff that's going on and having an organization and and we and we kept getting the shh, you know, because people hadn't seen the movie and we were trying to whisper and it wasn't working. So we left. And about halfway through the movie we left and because we've both seen it. And we went we went to go have dinner and we sat down at dinner and then that's how we got to know each other.
Speaker 1: But it
Speaker 0: was the event that you and General Flynn got me in to go to the Mar A Lago event. So that was another thing that you were a connector of that's now become full circle in this with how Keith and I are now working together through American Rights Alliance and what we're doing. James did a brilliant he spoke out for American Rights Alliance, gave us something really nice to work with, a testimonial if you will. I'm so honored that he's doing that. He cares, like he cares about
Speaker 1: James is a real fighter and he's been a victim of the false narrative over and over again, or even just by omission because people don't really know James. I I did an hour long piece with him when I for my series, No Agenda, for Fox Nation. And, you know, they they try to paint this picture of James as some far right, you know, activist who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and nothing is further from the truth. He grew up in an Irish, you know, working class construction family, did a lot of construction at the weekends with his father and his grandfather. I mean, his grandfather would make him, you know, do all the work by hand.
He'd be peeling wallpaper off the walls until his fingers bled, you know, in the freezing cold.
Speaker 0: Maybe that's what we should have these people that have subverted the will of the company and country, that's what they should have to do is peel wallpapers.
Speaker 1: As their punishment. Yeah. Yeah. Well Modern
Speaker 0: chain gang.
Speaker 1: I, you know, I I really hope that you're successful on this case because, in spite of whatever people's personal feelings may be, it is important that, the law should not be used as a weapon. Like Gateway Pundit, you know, they published that video of the the women pulling what were they, like, really boxes? Not really boxes, but containers for votes out from under a table in Georgia. You know? And and they and they
Speaker 0: were Now Ruby Freeman and Seamus.
Speaker 1: Yes. And they were sued almost into oblivion for that, you know. So they're trying to use the law to silence journalists and and when you're small independent publications, you're vulnerable.
Speaker 0: Giuliani. Look what happened to Giuliani. Exactly. Rudy Giuliani,
Speaker 1: who was another American hero Yeah. And another friend of mine, a great man. Love that man,
Speaker 0: actually.
Speaker 1: He's he's amazing, Rudy. Doesn't deserve anything they've done to him. No. And, you know, you know, the law firm he started when, when he became Trump's lawyer, I think, after 2016 when Trump hired him, his own law firm fired him. And he didn't drop Trump and take care of himself and keep his position in He the law said, no.
I'm gonna do the right thing. Yeah. Another great man. So okay. Well, I know there's another case that that you guys have taken that is that is kind of important to me, close to my heart, because it's parental rights and religious freedom.
Tell me about the case out of California.
Speaker 0: Look, I'm gonna tell you that I don't care who you are. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican. Any of these cases that we have, right, all of these cases center around people's rights. They center around constitutional rights. They center around duties.
This case in particular, James O'Keefe is a First Amendment case. Yeah. But Shana Gaviola, this case is one that should disturb you. This is parental rights and religious liberties as you said. So, I would believe, and I think most parents would believe that you have a right to send a child.
If you want to send your child to public school, have a right to send your child to public school.
Speaker 2: Sure.
Speaker 0: My 10 year old child, 12 year old child, 14 year old child is not gonna tell me where they're gonna go to school or which bedroom they're gonna sleep in Don't
Speaker 1: be ridiculous.
Speaker 0: If they're rather not they're gonna do the laundry or mow the lawn or take part in the household chores.
Speaker 1: Well, for that part, your kid can say, I'm not going to school today. Really? No.
Speaker 0: No. Come on. Yeah. Ironically, this day and age, you would get in trouble for truancy, right, after some period of time.
Speaker 1: Correct.
Speaker 0: So your child doesn't run the household because that's not the way it works. Parental rights, we have the not only right but responsibility to supervise
Speaker 1: You're the children. Supposed to be in charge.
Speaker 0: Yeah, because you can be held accountable if not. So think it in these terms. So this mother is going through a situation with her son. She discovers that some things are happening with her son and she finds to be inconsistent with her beliefs, right, going on in the school. And it's being said that part of this could be something to do with even maybe transitioning or something of this nature that the school is suggesting these things, right?
Not necessarily if the child is attempting to or trying, but that's what's being suggested here by the And Ms. Gaviola has some interesting points to make about this. Now what I would be concerned about, what I would be concerned about is that every parent should have a right to make the choice of where their child attends school and what they're subjected to. I think there was a time where we would recognize that a parent didn't want their child to take part in the sexual education course at the school, then they wouldn't have to allow that. They can choose not to.
A child didn't if they didn't want their child to take part in some, religious services at school, They didn't have to. Right? Or say, so help me, God. Right? We made special exceptions, and parents had the right to these things.
Maybe that didn't fit their religious beliefs. So religious beliefs, parental rights have all long been a part of this for both sides of the aisle. Yet here we are now where a case like Shana Gaviola, she sent her child to a Christian school in Missouri to escape the policies and procedures and what she didn't agree with that were going on in the state of California. In a public school. She's now this is the child trafficking that the Biden administration wants to attack.
She's been attacked for by them, by the Department of Justice. This is an ongoing case held over from 2021. Soon as Biden administration and DOJ came in, they have prosecuted this woman. She's being prosecuted for transporting her child across state lines. Child human trafficking.
Speaker 1: To go to a boarding school in
Speaker 0: Missouri? Send the school to Christian to send the child to Christian school.
Speaker 1: I I just how does this even come onto the radar of law enforcement? Like, this is so far from anything that law enforcement should be able try.
Speaker 0: At 14 years, the ripe old age of 14, according to the documents, was trying to be emancipated. Emancipated. No. The child
Speaker 1: wanted to be emancipated. So who's backing the child in that? Because no child figures that out on their own.
Speaker 0: Well, seemingly, according to Ms. Gaviola and what I've seen, what I've been able to read about this, and what's very concerning to me is at 14 years old, where where can you work? What full time job can you hold until
Speaker 1: you won't pay your
Speaker 0: way? Right? I I it's just kinda crazy. You there are rules about this. Not only that, but she had a custody order from the state of Tennessee.
I don't remember anywhere in this doc do I see that anywhere where the California is properly dealing with the custody order. The judge who originally issued a ruling on this initial piece had to recuse herself later because it was discovered that there was a connection from within the judge's court that had to do personal connection within this family of the Gaviola family.
Speaker 1: But I'm just trying to understand, is like the the the child she sends her child to boarding school in another state, and the child didn't decide I wanna be emancipated on their own. Who put this idea in the child's hand?
Speaker 0: I don't know. It's a it's a great question. Now we're seeing that the child is now suing the mother. Right? Like for this and what's crazy to me
Speaker 1: And who's paying for that lawsuit?
Speaker 0: That's a great question.
Speaker 1: Because a 14 year old isn't paying for that lawsuit.
Speaker 0: A great question. Well, he's a little older now. So great question. He's now 20. Right?
This has been going on six years since '19. This has been ongoing. And here we are still involved. This is still going.
Speaker 1: This would absolutely break my heart as a mother.
Speaker 0: It should. Look, Shana Gaviola's facing prison time. She called me and you know how she found me? This is the craziest thing. Her judge is the same judge that Ben Martin, the j sixer had.
He's not been fully relieved of his case. He is out. He was able to get out, but his judge is the judge that oversaw his prosecution, his conviction, all these things.
Speaker 1: And didn't wanna release him after he
Speaker 0: was pardoned. And refused to release him after his pardon. She abstained from making a decision. She finally, finally recuses herself from the case. After mister Martin sat there in prison for over a month, the chief judge immediately steps in and signs the release order for mister mister Martin, releases him, he goes home.
Right? But he's still unsupervised release by the court, supervision of the court.
Speaker 1: Which is also a violation of the party.
Speaker 0: Well, you're damn right it is. You're damn right that is. Now so here's what else happens. Right? This is the same judge that rules get this, you're gonna love this.
This judge rules that ICE has to have a warrant when making an arrest. Suddenly, law enforcement has to have a warrant to make an arrest. ICE is a law enforcement agent. If if I walk out of here and I go through a rock through a window on the way out of here, I'm gonna be arrested. The law enforcement doesn't need a warrant to arrest me.
They have probable cause. They just arrested me and they saw something happen. The same thing was happening with ICE. They saw the person that fits the description that broke the law. They got arrested.
You're walking down the street, you got an active warrant for you. That's what happened. Any of these reasons. Right? This is the same and maniacal judge that we're now facing in the Gaviola case.
We faced her with Ben Martin. Trump faced her in this. She's already been overturned on this ludicrous ruling, and now we're facing her here with Ben Martin or with Shana Gaviola's case. Now we face this judge with Shana Gaviola's case.
Speaker 1: Which is in which state?
Speaker 0: This is in the Eastern District Of California, Fresno. So George Palace is another ARA attorney, formerly a condemned USA attorney, American Rights Alliance attorney. George Palace is representing this case. We had to move heaven and earth to get the previous defense counsel off of the case. You're gonna love this.
So defense counsel previously had made some significant omissions to miss Scavulo that I discovered during my investigation at her best. She immediately wanted to change counsel after this. I was very disappointed to find what I found in that case and that's going to be glaringly obvious that there was some maybe not everything was quite maybe counsel wasn't exactly being honest with miss Gaviola after all of these years. But I have a reason why I suspect that, Laura. So may I?
You're gonna love This gets even better. It's gonna go deeper here. This is gonna rock knock your socks off. Michael Tierney. You can't make up the name.
This is the AUSA prosecuting the case. Michael Tierney, who's prosecuting this case of miss Gaviola. Here's what you're gonna love about this case. He sees miss Gaviola in a an establishment in the evening, approximately 8PM, May 30 at night. He approaches Ms.
Gaviola, stands next to her chair and starts hitting on her. Is this a bar? Starts hitting on her. Right? Yeah.
I wanna say, look, it's an establishment that's open in the evening. She's there having dinner with friends and sitting in the bar. He approaches this woman, the defendant that he's prosecuting. Right, that he's AUSA on the case, and starts talking to her and she says, what are you doing here? Like, what is going on?
She's creeped out. He's leaning up over near her chair. She's creeped out. He's trying to hit on her and she says, I don't you can't talk to me. You shouldn't like last years of your life trying to destroy mine.
Like, what are you doing here? Like, this is weird. He says, I think we can talk as long as we don't talk about your case. Witnesses to this event, here it gets better. She's disgusted, feels dirty, like I can't believe this guy's talking to me.
She gets up and goes to the restroom. She comes out of the restroom only to find he's followed her to the restroom, he's outside the restroom. He says, hey, guess what? I have agent Snow on the phone. This is the FBI agent that raided her home.
Speaker 1: Right? Raided her home.
Speaker 0: The FBI agents that raided
Speaker 1: her home. Right?
Speaker 0: She had sent the child to the boarding school in Missouri. And she's like, you gotta be kidding me. Can be threatened here, like, what's going on? She's now scared to death. Right?
She goes, collects her stuff, gets her friends. I gotta go. I'm leaving. She goes outside.
Speaker 1: And the case is still active at this point.
Speaker 0: The case is still active. They're prosecuting her. This is absolutely happening. Listen to this. And the witness statements agree with all this.
Get this. It gets better. Michael Tierney, the AUSA, that should be removed. I don't know where my justice department is. I don't know what's going on.
Where's where is the civil rights division? Where's Harmony Dillon? Where we've got a new US attorney in the Eastern District. This person should immediately stop this prosecution. This guy should be removed, sent for disciplinary action, if not ever practice law again, certainly not for the government.
Right? And absolutely, this case should be dismissed and we should move on. Scaviola should move on with her life. Now here's what we have that's going on. He then approaches her outside in the parking lot and says, miss Gaviola, like he's thinking, I I don't know what he's thinking, but what's interesting and says, hey, you need to take this call and puts miss Gaviola, the defendant, on the phone.
This is the prosecutor handing him her phone. Imagine this and says, take this call. It is the it is her defense counsel. It's 10:30 at night. Is this to first hit on her then cover your tracks to make drive some fear, maybe we should have some interaction.
I don't know what the guy's doing here. I'm not sure. I can't speak to it. What I can say is this should have been his conduct should have been reported to the court. Both her previous defense counsel and mister Tierney should have reported this conduct to the court.
I don't know an attorney in the land that I've talked to about this case that even believes it and we show them what they're like, oh my, this really happened. We have this guy dead to rights. This is gonna happen. This is gonna come out. Right?
Speaker 1: So what does her defense counsel say to her?
Speaker 0: He says he he says to her later, well, was rather unusual. Modi, get this.
Speaker 1: Was he just say hi?
Speaker 0: I I I Look.
Speaker 1: What was the point?
Speaker 0: I wanna go I won't I don't wanna get into the detail. Wanna give away too much. I'm just telling you, this is what's been exposed so far. So we're talk about this.
Speaker 1: And by the way, what did the FBI agent say when when he was on the phone? She. She. Snow. Why didn't
Speaker 0: agent Snow come forward and say, hey, listen, we're calling a defendant here from an establishment. Did she make a report? I wanna know when the date of her report was filed that this conduct took place that she's aware of. Who's her superior that addressed this? Who in the DOJ took a look at this?
Why didn't mister Capozzi, her defense counsel, do something to engage in this? Did they put this on the record in the court? Because we can't seem to find it. So my question is, why is this case still ongoing? It has any number of problems that have gone on here that are inconsistent with the rules of professional conduct for A an officer or the
Speaker 1: mother has the right to send their child. Mother and father have the right to send their child to any school they wanna send
Speaker 0: Happens all the time. Happens all the time. Children are sent against their will to boarding schools and other things. And Wayward I'm not suggesting that this child was wayward, just there were some things happening here. This needs to be seriously looked at.
This case, in my opinion, the DOJ is operating inconsistent with Donald Trump's directive. He's made a very clear directive that they were gonna uphold parental rights, religious liberties. That's right. Donald Trump has given a very clear directive to the Department of Justice and the Attorney General's office that they would uphold religious liberties and they would uphold parental rights and they would stop the abuses and the assaults that happened, yet this case still goes on. I think he can't know everything.
Right? He gave the directive, and this is AG Bondi's position. She needs to get involved here. She needs to stop the prosecution of miss Gaviola. She needs to get it in this AUSA Michael Tierney in line.
She needs to get this guy by the ear and drag him around like a mother should, right, and get this guy dealt with for the violation of the rules of professional conduct. The US attorney there in the Eastern District should immediately dismiss this case, and miss Gaviola should go on with her life because her other children are all gonna testify that she's done a fantastic job of raising children. It's interesting that the other ones are all doing so well and they're all so happy. And we have one child that wanted to be emancipated that is now so full of discontent. I'm very sorry that this child's upset.
I'm a young man now, I suppose. But the reality is that we cannot have a prosecution of a mother trying to do the very best she can by her Well, teenage
Speaker 1: Trentis, there are going to be a lot of people listening to this who are gonna wanna help with their legal cases. I know you can't take every case that comes your way. I know that these things are challenging, but but what where can people find you where can people find you if they wanna bring if they wanna at least find out if you'll consider helping them?
Speaker 0: Look, so there's there's one other realm that we've been able to help a lot of people here. You know, we're handling the pardons for Shane Lemond, we're handling the pardons for the remaining people, the majority of the remaining people that haven't received a pardon.
Speaker 1: For January 6.
Speaker 0: Peter Tichton is uniquely I think we're uniquely positioned as American Rights Alliance to be able to wave the banner of injustice over the cases that we have experienced that we can see.
Speaker 1: And by the way, good for Don Jr. I have to say he deserves credit for that because there's no shortage of, you know, media articles attacking Trump's sons for anything you can think of.
Speaker 0: Oh, heaven forbid, but look And
Speaker 1: you have an example of something where it just it didn't feel right to him to profit out of that and that speaks to character and that should be acknowledged.
Speaker 0: I just I wanna do this. I would like to personally thank Don Jr. For doing this, to creating this opportunity for the people that are truly in need. So many people.
Speaker 1: Don't suck up now.
Speaker 0: No, I would say I would wanna think
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding. Okay, go ahead.
Speaker 0: No, I want more money. Fuck I
Speaker 1: know you need more money. Don Jr. Trentis needs more money. Peter and Evernon, Trentis need more money.
Speaker 0: No. In all serious though, I mean, it was great. It was a great gift for a startup enabling us there. There's gonna be more to be done and we need we're definitely gonna need more resources on that, but I am very grateful that this opportunity because honestly, it's given me the opportunity to go do something that I really care about. It's given me the opportunity to work with people like Peter and Evan and all of us to move forward together.
Speaker 1: And fight and fight injustice for people who, let's face it, I mean, These people would never be able to afford this. Never. No. Lawsuits are unbelievably expensive. Most of the time, the state wins.
Oh. Right? So and the stress of it, everyone will tell you don't sue because the stress of it, but there but there are times where principles are worth fighting for. Mean, they're always
Speaker 0: worth fighting for. The constitution is worth fighting for. The rights of American citizens and the future of this country are all worth fighting for, and that's what American Rights Alliance is gonna do. We're gonna continue to uphold those things. We're gonna continue to make sure that we go forward with a message that says we will not be beaten into submission by those that will abuse the law and operate with injustice.
Speaker 1: And those who will take the law and turn it into a weapon against the people it's supposed to protect.
Speaker 0: That's right.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I'm glad you're in the fight. I wouldn't hesitate to turn to you, hopefully. Hopefully, I'm not gonna need that, place. I don't need a lawsuit to deal with.
But I'm ready just in case any anyone thinks, you know, that there's a weak spot there. No, there isn't. Yeah. Okay. So where can they find American Rights Alliance?
Direct people to?
Speaker 0: Americanrightsalliance.org.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 0: It's very simple.
Speaker 1: Are you on X?
Speaker 0: Yeah, I'm on X. So I'm still there at Trenton at Condemned USA.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: American Rights Alliance does have X. We have
Speaker 1: A website?
Speaker 0: Yeah. I have to give it to you in the lower thirds. I can't remember. You can be The new they just got the social set up on there. Okay.
They just got it done.
Speaker 1: Alright. So you so you you know, anybody can find you trinusevans@americanrightsalliance?
Speaker 0: So look, you can email me. It's very simple. You can just email us. Like, if you have a case, you have a reason for a pardon, you think that you are deserving of, recognition or there's an injustice that's occurred, simply email us at info@americanrightsalliance.org. Infoamericanrightsallianceinfo@americanrightsalliance.org.
Speaker 1: Okay. Perfect. Thank you so much. That's it for this edition this edition, this episode of going rogue with Lara Logan. Please, you know what to do.
Like, share, subscribe, and do, you know, whatever you can to support, independent journalism. It takes a lot. It takes a great team sitting around here, around me to put this together, and we can't do it without you. So laralogan.com. Support us in any way that you can, and thank you so much for watching.
Posted - February 21, 2025 at 1:53 AM
Saved - February 21, 2025 at 8:05 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Today was a significant day for J6 defendants. In Florida, Daniel Ball's case was dismissed, and Elias Costianes is set for dismissal. Meanwhile, Radical D.C. Judge Friedrich denied motions and scheduled Dan Wilson for prison next Thursday. We need support for Dan Wilson and to continue this fight!
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss J. Evans III
Incredible recap for J6 defendants today! Judges in middle district of Florida Daniel Ball- case dismissed Elias Costianes case set to dismiss RADICAL D.C. Judge Friedrich Denies motions and sets Dan Wilson for prison next Thursday for the same charges. DC Judges must be IMPEACHED! This is more evidence we had no chance at a fair trial in DC. Please support Condemned USA this fight is not over!
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss J. Evans III
Help us with Dan Wilson https://www.givesendgo.com/HelpDanWilson
Dan Wilson Freedom Fund
Recently pardoned J6 Political Hostage, Dan Wilson, is still fighting the remnants of the corrupt Government led by the Biden Regime. He is being threatened ...
givesendgo.com
Posted - February 20, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Saved - February 20, 2025 at 11:38 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I can't believe it! Elias Costianes is getting released, and this could pave the way for Jeremy Brown and Dan Wilson. Huge thanks to Condemned USA for taking on this fight. Roger Roots filed the motion, and George Pallas did incredible work. Together, we're making a difference!
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss J. Evans III
BREAKING. HOLY COW! We were successful! Elias Costianes is getting released! This sets precedent for Jeremy Brown and others like Dan Wilson! Condemned USA took on this battle! @RogerRoots filed the motion @end_lawfare @ @GeorgePallas15 DID THE WORK!! We the people working together are winning.
Posted - December 9, 2023 at 6:04 PM
Saved - December 9, 2023 at 6:42 PM
Posted - December 9, 2023 at 6:04 PM
Saved - December 9, 2023 at 6:41 PM
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
@KingAodh Lol. I was no part of any attack. Go read the court documents. I supported police and the Capitol. You are still not reading the documents or posting anything relevant to the discussion.
Posted - December 9, 2023 at 6:27 PM
Saved - December 9, 2023 at 6:41 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
In court, I admitted being inside, but there was no insurrection. Read my case, exposing left's lies. Proof of fraudulently altered time stamps and DOJ cover-up. I captured a fugitive, hidden for 15 months. Seek truth, watch my videos on Rumble for evidence.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
I am not denying I was inside. I owned that in a court of law. There was no insurrection. Go read my case. Go read the lies spewed by the left. Look at the proof of FRAUDULENTLY ALTERED TIME STAMPS. The DOJ COVER UP. I captured a human trafficking fugitive escaped from prison and the DOJ covered it up for 15 months. Don't be afraid of the truth. See my videos on RUMBLE FOR PROOF OF MY STATEMENTS.
Posted - December 9, 2023 at 9:10 AM
Saved - December 9, 2023 at 3:26 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
There were numerous Antifa members and Trump supporters who broke laws during the events. The DOJ overcharged some with minor offenses, while others committed more serious acts. The lies of officers at The Select Committee and in court are backed by evidence. The media's lack of truth shouldn't be surprising. Consider the possibility of a corrupt DOJ and biased judges. The D.C. Metro Police, known for their violence, may not have acted to the highest standards. Their history of unlawfully attacking protestors and losing lawsuits raises questions. Educate yourself or speak in ignorance. Visit stophate.com and condemnedusa.com for more information.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
There were plenty of Antifa. Trump supporters broke many laws. Most were minor offenses overcharged by the DOJ. Many committed more serious acts. We have more than enough evidence to support what you suggest is untrue. We can start with the lies of officers at The Select Committee. We can continue as those same lies were told on court. The media lies to you. Is that really a shock? Surely, you don't trust the media and the government for 100% truth. Have you ever stopped to think the DOJ is corrupt? The judges are possibly blinded by similar lies or corrupt as well? The 9th most violent pplice force hated by their citizens (D.C. Metro Police) were acting to the highest standards? The same police force that has attacked protestors unlawfully repeatedly over recent years at numerous events and been sued and lost tens of millions. If that doesn't raise questions, I don't know what does. Your choice is to become educated or speak in ignorance. I save all these comments for my book to immortalize the stupidity of those who continue to speak lies. Ignorant is uninformed, you have been informed. http://Stophate.com http://Www.condemnedusa.com
StopHate.com
stophate.com
Home - CONDEMNEDUSA
Our Core Values Due Process Our #1 goal is to preserve Due Process for all our clients. The DOJ is not exempt from accountability, and has an obligation to play your case by the rules. Civil Rights Civil Rights are Human Rights. Your right to freedom of thought, speech, and association doesn’t end because your […]
condemnedusa.com
Posted - May 17, 2023 at 4:03 PM
Saved - May 17, 2023 at 9:12 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
On January 6th, Will Watson was told by police that he could protest peacefully. Despite encouraging others to follow police instructions, he was arrested and separated from his family. Will is not a threat and his family needs help caring for his premature baby. Donations are legal and necessary for his defense. Please consider donating or sharing to help the Watson family.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
On January 6th, inside the capitol of the United States, police officers told Will Watson that they were going to be heard as protestors, as long as they remained peaceful.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
Will turned to encourage other protestors to FOLLOW POLICE INSTRUCTIONS, as he was asked to do.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
But because Will is of the wrong political persuasion, the DOJ has ripped him from his family to ensure that he, like every other J6 protestor, is made an example of to quell political dissent against the current administration. Will is not a violent threat to society. He is a new father, a chef, and an active member of his church. Will’s little girl was born after his incarceration, prematurely. His family is left to care for her without the help of her father, and her medical needs are hefty.
@CondemnedUSA - Treniss Evans
Will is the furthest behind in his fundraising goals for this month, with less than $100 being raised for his family this month. We understand that people are afraid to give to J6ers in need, due to a fear of retaliation by Merrick Garland’s DOJ, but we are here to assure you that all American citizens are still legally entitled to an adequate defense in this country. YOU still have rights as an American to donate to whichever cause you choose, and Due Process, is not up for debate. To get Will back on track, we are seeking 275 sponsors to donate $25 a month to the Watson family to take care of his little girl, and eventually see her reunited with her father. If you cannot donate, PLEASE SEND to at least 10 people that you know. Our civil liberties are on the line. Go to: https://givesendgo.com/freewillwatson to find out more.
