Latest / Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News / When hate speech becomes the voice of political leaders

Transcript

When hate speech becomes the voice of political leaders · Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News

• 0:11
  It's the tip of the spare in the epic battle to defend the United States of America.
• 0:19
  The National Security Hour exposes the wolves in sheep's clothing and the nefarious plots to undermine and destroy U.S.
• 0:27
  national security.
• 0:31
  Welcome back, America.
• 0:32
  This is your host for the National Security Hour on Thursday, the 30th of April, 2026.
• 0:39
  And now it's time.
• 0:44
  Americans, we have a very important topic to talk about tonight.
• 0:48
  And it's not Iran for this episode.
• 0:53
  Had to give that a break because there are although there has been a lot of changes, there's something more important that we need to talk about.
• 1:02
  And that is something that we've often talked about.
• 1:05
  And that's something that I have uh uh been involved in in the past with a job with the U.S.
• 1:12
  government, and that is information warfare.
• 1:15
  It is important that we talk about this again in light of what has happened this past week with yet another unfortunate assassination attempt against the president of the United States and or other key officials in the United States government that were president that were present at this uh past week's press conference uh held there in Washington, DC, and that's something that we need to talk about is how when this gains critical mass, we can see what it has done.
• 1:51
  And I'm gonna talk about some of this uh doctrine that exists and what those in the psychological operations as well as information warfare domains, they try to generate basically as popularity contest and influence a population that's their target audience into getting it at a critical mass at a certain percentage of the population where they can truly control and influence the society, and we're gonna talk about that today.
• 2:25
  I'm gonna give a couple examples of um some uh some things that I've seen through over my years, and it's uh it's really important that I am asking, I'm trying to influence the audience here.
• 2:45
  If you have someone that you love that has an opposite point of view that does not believe that this exists, that uh, or someone that has this philosophy that using radicalization and using intimidation, um, that that is in some cases, and and I've I've talked to people, and I cannot understand how they would think that a situation that we've seen here in this last year, such as what has happened to Charlie Kirk, um that that is acceptable.
• 3:21
  They think that Charlie Kirk, someone who gave the microphone to whoever wanted to come and speak, they thought that what he had to say was was hate speech, was uh some type of violent ideology, and he was allowing other people to explain their position.
• 3:41
  So we want to get into this concept of information warfare and how when we are divided, we will always fall, and how this is going on on American soil, because we we do have divisive rhetoric, and on both sides, yeah, one side that says, if you say anything at all, if you oppose what another party's philosophy is, that there in and of itself is hate speech, but we really do want to focus on what hate speech is and the full manifestation of how it when it goes to full-blown uh derangement, it leads to often radicalizing a population and inciting people to political violence in the United States of America, and that is something that is a national security topic because people say, Well, that's political.
• 4:40
  Yes, it's political, but if our enemies are using information warfare, and they're succeeding at it, and that is being used to influence the population to throw throw off what we have.
• 4:56
  They continue to amplify this rhetoric and using terms and verbiage to include that we are a democracy when we clearly are not a democracy.
• 5:06
  We have a democratic process in our constitutional republic, but if you say something enough times, people will believe it.
• 5:12
  And that's uh that's what they want.
• 5:14
  They want to issue in democracy, which is not what our founding fathers wanted, and it's not the type of government which we have.
• 5:21
  Uh, but uh you say things enough times it doesn't just confuse people, it leads them to usher this in.
• 5:29
  And so we want to talk about this subject of political rhetoric, and it's no longer just a type of speech, it's an operating environment that people have been using, specifically our opponents, and they've been unfortunately doing it very well without firing a shot, without even deploying any troops onto American soil in uniform, waving any flags here, but they are they are spending a tremendous amount of money and a lot of coordination, but it has its return on an investment on its investment, and it is very effective.
• 6:06
  And America is facing a current dangerous convergence of this heated rhetoric here within our own borders, and that's uh creating uh this instability amongst individuals as well as these individuals are rising up, they're coordinating uh through social media and amplifying this, and it's allowing often what is created by foreign influence specialists to be generated into something organic, and that is the goal of psychological operations is you want the target audience to adopt that concept and ideology as their own.
• 6:50
  And we're starting to see that, and we many of us have uh been very interested in the results of what that full manifestation is, and by this, I'm specifically talking about we want to know when the full manifestation, just like what it happened in Butler, Pennsylvania in July 2024, uh prior to the election, as well as uh subsequent attempt in September 2024, uh, same year at the Trump International Golf Course and the prior one uh at the Butler, Pennsylvania.
• 7:00
  Is and by this, I'm specifically talking about we want to know when the full manifestation, just like what it happened in Butler, Pennsylvania in July 2024, uh prior to the election, as well as a subsequent attempt in September 2024, uh the same year at the Trump International Golf Course and the prior one uh at the Butler, Pennsylvania.
• 7:25
  We want to know what happened to that, and we do understand at least.
• 7:25
  We want to know what happened to that, and we do understand, at least I do that the federal government and these criminal investigators often don't want to openly talk about all the information in these cases, because it can lead to inspiration of uh additional individuals or potentially groups to rise up, and it can provide information to those who are coordinating this information warfare on how effective it is when they talk about like what we've uh just heard recently here in April 2026 of this uh at the White House correspondence dinner that this third attempt, and you know, this gentleman had a manifesto about when you say their individual's name or talk about that manifesto, you're you're often giving credence, and you can further inspire other individuals, and that is what has happened, and I always like to use examples, and we saw this this approximately a year ago when President Trump brought in Elon Musk to head up the Department of Government efficiency, and when Elon Musk did that, we saw this, it wasn't just individual, but it was nationwide boycott of buying Teslas.
• 8:54
  You saw vandalism of personally owned Tesla vehicles and Tesla car showrooms being lit on fire all across the United States of America, all in an effort to retaliate against Elon Musk, and he had the board of uh Tesla talking about replacing Elon Musk because his stock was in free fall, uh, and his Elon Musk was brought on to expose and take action against people who are conducting fraud and waste in the federal government.
• 9:30
  You'd think that's obviously we want you know, American taxpayers' dollars to be focused on things that have a payoff for the United States of America, not just a political party or non-government organizations where they're funneling money back and they started to expose fraud.
• 9:50
  And many of those people, when they saw that spotlight being shined in that direction, continue to say that the very first nerve that that scalpel was being laid upon was on USAID, and they kept saying, well, it's just such a small percentage of the federal budget.
• 10:07
  Um, but a lot of that was going to one political party to not just create fraud, but to target and create opposition against their political opponents.
• 10:20
  So that is that is something that you don't have in a normal republic, one that's supposed to have free and fair elections is one where a certain party was using funds from the American taxpayers to basically influence and intimidate in some cases their opposing party.
• 10:42
  That's uh, and there's many cases of that, such as uh how Fonnie Willis and many others were using lawfare, uh, something that is widespread and rampant in communist countries uh to tie up the financial resources and the time of opponents, and that is exactly what happened prior to the 2024 election.
• 11:05
  But um, yes, and the again, further evidence of this is some of these themes and narratives and these claims, the repeated claims that are being amplified, and and these are just so absurd that they it's just like the phrases they used to use white male privilege.
• 11:27
  Where do you come up with that?
• 11:29
  But when you continually say, and I want to give a timeline, a tail of the tape, because we had a president, our last president, Joe Biden, who clearly numerous times and very rarely did have uh much public speaking, especially his last two years as president of the United States.
• 11:51
  But you could see he was struggling mentally, and the media wasn't just saying the opposite, they were saying this is the best Joe Biden ever, as we heard Joe Scarborough say.
• 12:02
  But now they're saying the exact opposite, that same left mainstream media saying that Donald Trump is mentally unfit, and they're using terms such as dictator and no kings, and um without anything to substantiate any of this.
• 12:21
  If Donald Trump were a king or a dictator, an opposing party, and some as you well aware, some countries do have kings and dictators, and they do have in some countries forms of government where uh there are people who advise and can influence the monarchy or a dictator, uh, and some not very effective or any at all.
• 12:51
  But we have a system of government right now, and that's uh something that we are going to see here in the midterms if the Democratic Party were, and they definitely could lead to a vote where they gain one house, either the House or the Senate, and it could lead to um opposition where bills just don't get passed.
• 13:20
  And uh even other things could happen where they could again try to uh impeach the president of the United States, and we know this, and but what I'm saying is there is no credible evidence of Donald Trump being a king or a dictator or a threat to democracy, he is as people understand, he is using the powers and authorities given to him as president of the United States to do what he has been elected to do.
• 13:55
  Certain people may not like this, but it's not a threat to democracy.
• 14:00
  We use again in this republic, we use a democratic process, and that is to elect the individual.
• 14:00
  We use again in this republic, we use a democratic process, and that is to elect the individual.
• 14:08
  And I will give one exhibit uh for evidence, is when we look at the Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell.
• 14:08
  And I will give one exhibit for evidence is when we look at the Federal Reserve Chairman, Jerome Powell.
• 14:18
  If Donald Trump were a dictator, he wouldn't just say, hey, I want to fire Jerome Powell.
• 14:19
  If Donald Trump were a dictator, he wouldn't just say, Hey, I want to fire Jerome Powell, he would fire Jerry Powell, and that has not happened.
• 14:26
  He would fire Jerry Powell.
• 14:28
  And that has not happened.
• 14:31
  And there's many other examples that there are laws that this president is abiding by and he is restraining himself.
• 14:44
  And many of these people are just using hearsay and conjecture and their opinions, but they're stating them as fact that he will start a nuclear war.
• 14:52
  But when you use that rhetoric, and the reason that I'm talking about it, and this is so important in this episode, and the reason I've asked if you have friends that feel that Donald Trump is a threat, please send this to him because we need to explain how these themes and narratives and how the space that I used to work in as far as influence operations, you're trying to gain that critical mass, a certain percentage of the population.
• 15:18
  Once you do, you really have a toehold.
• 15:21
  And unfortunately, when you say these lies, just like Hitler said when you repeat it again and again, people will believe that these things are fact.
• 15:31
  And unfortunately, this has gone on so long that it right now is taking over the critical mass.
• 15:40
  Not just in you know, the Democratic Party, but it's in all parties, Democrat, Republican, and independence.
• 15:50
  You know, they believe some of these themes and messages, and sadly, these themes and messages are often created by foreign influence operators, and they're amplified by American political opponents of Donald Trump.
• 16:07
  Um I believe, in my personal opinion, I always state whether it's something uh I give as an example is fact or if it's opinion, but I do believe, and my opinion is these people who are attacking Donald Trump, as Donald Trump has said, they're not just coming after him, they're coming after the United States of America, and he's just standing in the way.
• 16:33
  I felt that way in my own case.
• 16:36
  I wrote about in the book, a few bad men, where they weren't just coming after myself and one other officer.
• 16:42
  They were coming after all those in Fox Company, but especially those in the seven and who were stated listed in uh criminal investigation, and if myself and the other officer were to have fallen fell in the that case, then it would have impacted the rest of the seven and led to something, and I know how it feels when you're standing up against uh the unlimited power and authority of the U.S.
• 17:11
  government, and that's what they did against Donald Trump in that lawfare case.
• 17:15
  So we're gonna go to a break, be right back more with uh after this commercial break.
• 17:21
  So don't go away and we're gonna talk about this radicalization radicalization chain right after this message.
• 17:26
  Struggling with your health, energy, and constantly feeling hungry, want to save money on the rising cost of groceries and dramatically improve your health.
• 17:34
  Go to chemicalfree body.com forward slash out loud today, get nature's super multivitamin doctor formulated green 85 juice formula, empower your immune system, cut your grocery bill, and save 20% on your first order.
• 17:48
  Are you struggling with thinning hair?
• 17:49
  Try roots from the wellness company.
• 17:51
  This doctor formulated non-oily hydrogel uses seven powerful peptides and key nutrients to nourish your scalp and support visibly thicker, healthier hair.
• 18:00
  Visit TWC.health forward slash out loud and use code out loud for 20% off your first order.
• 18:07
  That is TWC dot health forward slash out loud.
• 18:12
  America turns the big two five zero.
• 18:16
  250 years on July 4th, 2026.
• 18:20
  Tell us your uniquely American story by email at Liberty at America outloud.news.
• 18:29
  We'll publish the results on a special webpage celebrating the best of America.
• 18:39
  Now is our time, my fellow Americans.
• 18:42
  America outlawed.news, liberty and justice for all.
• 19:47
  And that is this radicalization chain.
• 19:50
  It's what is used right now in America against ourselves, how they're dividing the United States of America.
• 19:58
  And truly, as I've said many times before, the strength of our nation is we are united.
• 20:03
  And when you can divide that, whether it's politically, whether it's internal in our government, you can influence our government and our way of life.
• 20:16
  And that is what's going on right now.
• 20:18
  And that radicalization, it doesn't begin or come in the form of a direct lawful order from some uh military officer where you hear, okay, this is what's going on.
• 20:32
  It's very subtle.
• 20:34
  It often begins and is seen manifested with this repeated moral framing that this person is evil and democracy will end, and normal politics can't stop him.
• 20:48
  I'm sure those listeners have heard these themes and narratives again and again and again.
• 20:54
  Um but this isn't just divisive.
• 20:58
  When you vilify someone, you have a message that's going out to a wide audience.
• 21:00
  When you have a message that's going out to a wide audience, some people, yes, they get tired of hearing these, and they just may tune it out, like I often do.
• 21:05
  Some people, yes, they get tired of hearing these, and they just may tune it out, like I often do.
• 21:12
  But then there's another core group of people that become very incensed and radicalized.
• 21:13
  But then there's another core group of people that become very incensed and radicalized, and then there is a minority group of people who are mentally unhealthy.
• 21:19
  And then there is a minority group of people who are mentally unhealthy.
• 21:23
  And those type of individuals have the possibility to interpret this exaggeration.
• 21:23
  And those type of individuals have the possibility to interpret this exaggerated rhetoric as a call to rescue the nation.
• 21:34
  And that's what we have seen.
• 21:36
  Here in less than three years, or excuse me, less than two years, we've seen these three assassination attempts.
• 21:43
  And talking to friends of mine who have served with me in the military and gone on to work in the Secret Service, there's continuous threats against the president of the United States all the time.
• 21:53
  But when we see these manifested in a full-blown actual assassination attempt in a public venue, that is very rare that it actually goes that far because they're tracking so many.
• 22:06
  But when we have this amplification of these messages, you're you're really reaching more of these mentally unhealthy people to do the dirty work of people that want that action to occur.
• 22:25
  And that's not what any of us want.
• 22:29
  We no one should ever want the president of our nation, the United States of America, the banner of freedom to have our president assassinated.
• 22:40
  It's it's sick to think that some people this last year celebrated and used horrible language when Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
• 22:55
  And I mean, it that was widespread, it was disgusting.
• 22:59
  Um, but that is what uh occurred, and it was similar in October 7th, 2021, when Israel was attacked, and before Israel even recalled all the reservists, before Israel even began any type of offensive operations, you saw in the mainstream media amplification of this type of same type of information warfare, saying that this was going to be genocide, and you had all these calls that you know, free Palestine when Israel hadn't even responded yet.
• 23:37
  So when you really look at the timeline, and you go back into the archives, and that's why it's so important.
• 23:43
  I love studying history, and that's my first degree.
• 23:46
  It's so important that we know our American history, we know world history, and we can understand when things happen and what those specific events were.
• 23:57
  And we've seen this cycle repeat again and again.
• 23:59
  We're seeing it repeat now with just so much uh rhetoric.
• 24:04
  And I do want to get into how these circles uh develop.
• 24:10
  Um, and I'm going to I'm going to talk about the uh Tulsi Gabbard's and her predecessor.
• 24:22
  And as the director of national uh intelligence, she or her predecessor warned since October 2024 of, and that's obviously prior to President Trump being re-elected in the 47th presidency.
• 24:40
  But uh, that Russia, Iran, and China were intending on fanning divisive narratives.
• 24:46
  This is what not Donald Trump's administration said, but what President Biden's director of national intelligence said is going to divide Americans, and that some of these influence operations were aimed at inciting violence and exasperating uh these types of tensions.
• 25:03
  So that didn't just go on there in October 2024.
• 25:08
  We see this repeated, it went on again and again and again.
• 25:13
  Um I uh I just want to get you guys some information so that you're not thinking that oh, Fred Galvin's just pulling this you know out of one-sided statistic because it's it's definitely not um the director of national intelligence.
• 25:33
  And I just want to give you what while Joe Biden was in office, um is what was repeatedly used.
• 25:44
  So it started in May 20 2024, um, where Ms.
• 25:50
  Haynes, who was a director, she testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, and she warned that Russia, Iran, and China, all three uh major opponents of the United States that they're quote unquote using influence operations to stoke discord and undermine the U.S.
• 26:07
  democratic institutions.
• 26:09
  Again, in September of 2024, just prior to the election, um U.S.
• 26:17
  intelligence agencies uh part of the DNI had also publicly stated that foreign actors are conducting online influence campaigns to shape elections and and public outcomes.
• 26:30
  These include spreading false narratives, exploiting divisions, and targeting U.S.
• 26:35
  voters.
• 26:37
  Again, that same month, um those intelligence communities inside the uh OD and I had talked about uh AI-enabled disinformation campaigns.
• 26:52
  And then the next month, um the office of the director of national intelligence in uh intelligence briefing to the media again repeated that Iran, Russia and China are fanning divisive narratives, and that they were aiming to undermine the confidence in the United States government.
• 27:16
  So that's that's their goal is to destabilize the United States government, and we have foreign adversaries doing it, but I also want to talk about what those foreign adversaries they they understand that just like a business owner, you know, once they get to a certain percentage that they have a certain percentage of the market share, they really control the brand, and they can they can strongly influence that.
• 27:44
  So I want to talk about this, and I want to talk about how inside the United States organically, some of our own political leaders have also amplified this foreign, these foreign narratives that we're going to talk about.
• 28:00
  Going to talk about, but so these thresholds are just like Sun Su had said, know yourself, know your enemy, have no fear in a hundred battles.
• 28:00
  But so these thresholds are enemy, just like Sun Su had said, know yourself, know your enemy, have no fear in a hundred battles.
• 28:10
  Well, we need to know how our enemies think, and they use these types of statistics and information warfare.
• 28:10
  Well, we need to know how our enemies think, and they use these types of statistics and information warfare.
• 28:18
  And they initially try to get that foothold, they call it a committed minority.
• 28:18
  And they initially try to get that foothold, they call it a committed minority.
• 28:23
  And these are activists, approximately three to five percent.
• 28:23
  And these are activists, approximately three to five percent.
• 28:27
  And this very small, highly motivated group.
• 28:27
  And this very small, highly motivated group, they realize when they get three to five percent, those individuals will have a very loud voice, and they can drive these online discourse through these narratives, and they can protest, and that is just the start of how they can energize and inflame that minority.
• 28:49
  Um Erica Chen, a researcher, she just said this once it gets to three and a half percent, that type of participation is enough to trigger major political change, and then the next goal line that they move to is to have that base between 10 and 15 percent, and they get that by recruiting through these demonstrations and influencing media coverage, and we see that in the United States, and that's what I'm gonna get at here in just a second.
• 29:20
  But this is where they start to 10 to 15 percent pressure institutions and local governance, and this is where we start to see a lot of friction in society, but it's at the third level where they get critical mass, and this is where the tipping point is at the 25 to 30 percent at that stage that they have had this established legitimacy, and that's where the polarization becomes embedded in the structure of the political process, and it's recognized in the information warfare world is tipping point once you get to 25 percent, and then that's when the population adopts a belief, and it can rapidly become the dominant belief to shape the national direction.
• 30:15
  So the next level, once it gets to 40 to 50 percent, this is obviously at that level of almost half, because we have a percent that doesn't vote, and you may have the third or other parties in certain types of in certain governments, but in our own, we have Democrat, Republican, and independent, you have some minority green party, but but once it gets to 40 per to 50 percent, that is decisive, and that drives elections and policies, and that's when certain institutions can fracture, and we're seeing this when we see how certain political parties are trying to defund ice.
• 31:00
  Um yeah, they have about half control, and they're they're saying no, we're not gonna fund this.
• 31:06
  And it's been ongoing, you know, for several weeks.
• 31:11
  Uh, just like we had the government shut down the longest time in I don't know, maybe it was the longest time in history, you'd have to go back and look.
• 31:17
  But that's uh the goal of our enemies, our foreign adversaries, Russia, China, and Iran.
• 31:24
  They aim to establish that foothold three to five percent, then polarize by getting 25 percent, and so their objective isn't to get the whole consensus, it's division, and when you establish that there's loss of confidence, that can lead to this paralysis, is which which is what they want.
• 31:47
  Now, and you say, Fred, maybe I don't see all this.
• 31:52
  That's why I'm providing you with this information.
• 31:56
  And I'm gonna give you this source, the data for progress had a poll in May of 12th, 2024, and it found that 50 to 60 percent of American voters, and that's majority.
• 32:11
  Um, and they asked the question in 2024's national poll, it said, is Trump a greater threat to democracy than Joe Biden, and 70 percent of Democrats said yes, they believe Trump is, so they have more than you know, that 25 percent critical critical mass in the Democratic Party.
• 32:40
  Now, with independence, it was 50 to 65 percent, and with Republicans, they typically don't agree with that.
• 32:50
  It was 25 percent.
• 32:52
  So, most Republicans are also aligned.
• 32:55
  So, we're seeing that this belief is real and it's widespread.
• 32:59
  That's why they're constantly just like President Obama's mentor, Saul Linsky in his book Rules of Radicals, and he said, you know, he had several of these rules, and a few of them all uh specify here.
• 33:11
  It said, identify the target, and it said focus on the target and continue to you know amplify and don't don't stop on that.
• 33:21
  Well, that belief it's not universal, but it's real and it's widespread, and it's not the fringe, it's well over 25 percent.
• 33:29
  Now, I want to bring up an example of how this is played out in real world.
• 33:37
  So when I was in the marine corps, uh, one of the places I was assigned actually twice was over in Okinawa, Japan, the uh further southern prefecture of Japan, and they were relocating some marines from Japan down to Guam in the Commonwealth and Northern Marianas Islands, as well as relocating a base in central Okinawa, the Fatima Marine Airfield up to a um another site at uh further north in Camp Schwab.
• 34:16
  So the reason I bring this up is there were many Japanese protesters that I saw on a daily basis, they had shade structures, they had food, and these were a minority, but again, and they never got to that critical mass of 25 percent.
• 34:33
  But they they had small groups of people that would come down from the mainland, there weren't even people from Okinawa protesting that this is not good for the Okinawan people.
• 34:43
  Um but they would have visibility, they knew how to use the media, and I'd see I had seen this repeatedly over many years.
• 34:53
  I was stationed there twice, a total of over six and a half years, and I would continue to see how they would use images, uh videos and photos of these protesters outside the gate, uh, at several different bases at the jungle warfare training center at Camp Schwab at the air base at uh Kadena and the Marine Air Station at Fatima, they would they'd have these and show that you know, really these uh extreme protests.
• 35:00
  Images, uh videos and photos of these protesters outside the gate at several different bases at the jungle warfare training center at Camp Schwab at the air base at uh Kadena and the Marine Air Station at Fatima, they would they'd have these and show that you know, really these uh extreme protests, but it was if you were there yourself, you saw how small this is usually just a handful between one, sometimes a dozen, and I'm sure times when I wasn't there was larger than that, but it was always a very small percentage that they were paid.
• 35:23
  But it was if you were there yourself, you saw how small this is usually just a handful between one.
• 35:39
  Um the the consensus was that these were not people from Okinawa, they were mainlanders, and many of the, I mean, I lived there six and a half years, and I lived in a village off outside of these bases, and everyone that I knew was uh, you know, they were indifferent as far as uh a base being relocated or closed.
• 36:02
  Uh, but uh obviously somebody is driving that agenda, so they are organized, they're financed, and they're trying to push this narrative to gain that influence with the Japanese government.
• 36:17
  Um, but we've seen over the years that uh that that was very ineffective.
• 36:23
  So now I'm gonna go to a break here in a little bit, but we're gonna talk about some of this history, recent history of this domestic rhetoric here in the United States be used by our own political leaders, and how that crosses into this dangerous territory of hate speech, and how that is a form of information warfare on American soil.
• 36:45
  So don't go away.
• 36:46
  We'll be right back after this commercial break.
• 36:48
  You wouldn't go a day without brushing your teeth or washing your hands.
• 36:52
  What about washing your nose?
• 36:54
  I mean, your nose does filter the air you breathe, air loaded with bacteria, viruses, and irritants, make nasal hygiene part of your routine with clear.
• 37:02
  No messy bottles to fill, no drowning sensation.
• 37:05
  Clear is a natural drug-free saline with the added benefit of xylitol, which blocks bacterial and viral adhesion.
• 37:12
  Available in stores and online at clear.com.
• 37:15
  That is XLEAR.com.
• 37:18
  Have you been looking for a healthy snack for on the go?
• 37:22
  Well, not all energy bars are soft and sugary.
• 37:26
  Bear bars or a crunchy savory bar made from just six simple natural ingredients, bear bars or plant-based, organic gluten-free, contain six grams of protein and are low temperature dried for unique crunch.
• 37:42
  Most energy bars are based on chocolate or fruit and are held together with syrups or sweeteners.
• 37:48
  To learn more, just visit barebar.com slash out loud.
• 37:56
  Welcome back, America.
• 37:57
  This is your host, Fred Galvin.
• 37:59
  We're back, and I wanted to talk on this final segment regarding the domestic examples where this rhetoric crosses into this very dangerous territory.
• 38:14
  And the examples I'm going to talk about, and there's many of them, and this is why I want our listeners, especially when this comes out on Friday, the day after you're listening to it on the American News Outlet, American News Network, when you can get the link for the podcast on Friday, you can get it on American News Network, American Out Loud, and get that, and please either post it on social media or send it to your friends because they need to hear this because this is what I'm talking about.
• 38:48
  And I'm going to state these facts that are incontrovertible of how multiple American political leaders, when they say these things, again, it's going out, and you have to consider the entire audience that some of these people are mentally unhealthy.
• 39:05
  And I want to bring up uh this experience I had going through our masters of business administration uh program.
• 39:14
  We had a public policy residency where we they took the whole class of us and sent us to Washington, DC, and we had just an amazing uh group of seminars led by politicians, and one of them, former governor, I won't say who, they said, you know why you'll never hear the end of negative ads.
• 39:34
  We had no idea.
• 39:35
  We were uh business people, primarily some medical uh professionals, but they said because those are the most effective ads.
• 39:44
  So there is a reason why politicians use these very negative ads, it's because the strongest psychological emotion that compels people is fear, and so they want people to be afraid.
• 39:59
  And these examples that I'm stating, they're not all criminal threats, but they are rhetorically reckless when spoken by these powerful figures.
• 40:09
  The first one we'll talk about is Representative Maxine Waters, and how 2018 she was urging supporters to confront the Trump administration while President Trump is publicly in office the president of the United States, and she's saying that if they saw these cabinet officials and restaurants and apartment stores or gas stations, she said create a crowd and tell them they are not quote unquote not welcome anymore anywhere, end quote.
• 40:40
  And Chuck Schumer, he also likewise told Supreme Court justices and Kavanaugh outside their Supreme Court.
• 40:52
  He made a big appearance.
• 40:53
  Many of you recall this, that they had quote unquote release the whirlwind, and they would quote pay the price and uh quote won't know what hit them, end quote.
• 41:07
  So these types of threats, you know, when people think that yes, this is uh this is something I need to solve, that's gonna go to certain percentage of our population are not mentally healthy.
• 41:23
  That's a call to action to those types of people.
• 41:26
  And then when Senator Corey Booker, I need to specify these individuals, and uh actually specify in quotes, using their own words what they said.
• 41:37
  That's why it's so important for you to forward this, so people become aware that oh, maybe that's why, you know, I have heard that there has been three assassination attempts, more against President Trump that we've seen in the media than any other president in my lifetime.
• 41:57
  But when Senator Corey Booker came out there and talked about, quote, getting up in the face of some Congress people, that's type of end quote, that's this type of escalation rhetoric.
• 42:00
  And talked about quote getting up in the face of some Congress people, that's type of end quote, that's this type of escalation rhetoric.
• 42:10
  And in 2016, when then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said, quote, these basket of deplorables, end quote.
• 42:10
  And in 2016, when then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said, quote, these basket of deplorables, end quote.
• 42:19
  And she also said, quote, you could put half of Trump's supporters in what I call a basket of deplorables, end quote.
• 42:19
  And she also said, quote, you could put half of Trump's supporters in what I call a basket of deplorables, end quote.
• 42:27
  I mean, uh you're
• 42:27
  I mean, uh, you're you're having a presidential candidate demonize their political opponent.
• 42:35
  Same thing when President Joe Biden in the 2022 midterms spoke multiple times there in 2022, calling Donald Trump semi-fascism, and then in a Philadelphia speech, he referred to uh uh Republicans and stated, quote, MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.
• 42:59
  And when people start hearing that and they think, oh boy, you know, like I have to take action, they're using that fear like I talked about.
• 43:07
  They said that's in our MBA class, it's so powerful, you'll never see the end of it.
• 43:12
  But when you're really vilifying your political opponent, uh when you create this abnormal psychological fear, you're calling some people to take violent action, not just hey, my call to action is go to the polls.
• 43:31
  Some of these extremists don't think that way, and we've seen evidence of it the third time this week, where you have a large known case of this actual attempt.
• 43:43
  Um that is where we're crossing the lines.
• 43:46
  And you saw in 2021 where Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, she was calling the Republicans, quote, an enemy of the state, and she further went on, said they're quote, a threat to democracy, quote.
• 43:59
  When you say this, what's the outcome?
• 44:03
  Again, this is why we need to focus on okay, this is the action that they said, and what's the reaction?
• 44:12
  So we've seen this violence against political opponents like in June of 2017 there in Alexandria against Steve Scalise, a gunman open fire on these Republican members of Congress during a baseball practice, and Stephen Scalise was uh critically wounded.
• 44:28
  Um you saw a very similar event uh that same year later on in November 2017 down in Kentucky, uh, with uh Senator Rand Paul, who was assaulted by his neighbor while he's mowing the lawn and he sustained uh broken ribs and lung damage.
• 44:45
  Um you saw this uh in June 2022, this armed individual outside uh Scotus uh Kavanaugh's house, and uh he's allegedly there intended to assassinate Kavanaugh, uh his house there in Maryland, and then uh also the next month in July 2022, uh Lee Zeldon and attacker rushed with a sharp object during a campaign event, and then uh you've had Senator Mitch McConnell uh face multiple threats and protests outside of his residence.
• 45:22
  So what they're doing, these are six incontrovertible facts of what's happened, and some of these people has been repeated, and as I previously said, you know, against the president of the United States, a seventh uh attempt.
• 45:37
  But when you add all these up, this is these are multiple individuals, multiple attempts on many of these individuals.
• 45:46
  And so this what you see is this escalation problem, the language that's the temperature is moving up, it's constantly increasing the violent rhetoric and the temperature, the language has shifted from we disagree, then they say they are dangerous, then they escalate it to they threaten the country, and that type of progression, it does matter in the radicalization dynamics, and that's why it becomes dangerous when you have leaders constantly repeating and amplifying this is a threat to democracy, extremists, fascism, dictator, kings, then some of these listeners that are mentally unhealthy, they think that extraordinary action is justified.
• 46:35
  That's a key distinction, is none of those claims that we mentioned from those democrats had making their comments were a direct call to violence, but it's the second and third order effects, it's what they're either intending, or you know, and this is where I don't honestly know if that's their intent or if they're actually going into the playbook, but when they have this with the repetition and the amplification, certain unstable individuals interpret that is a green light, and when they hear these leaders saying that, they think that they have support, and that's it.
• 47:23
  That is never what we what we want.
• 47:26
  So the bottom line is that this device of rhetoric, it does exist across the our political leadership, and it is very dangerous, and that is what we need to start focusing on is when you have this divisive rhetoric, and it leads to violence because it's being frequently repeated and framed that hey, this is something that is essential.
• 48:01
  We we need or when some of these leaders are saying you get up in their face, let them know they're not wanted there, and like uh Joe Biden said I'd punch him in the face.
• 48:10
  So when you think, okay, here I'm hearing from the president of the United States saying to his political opponent that he'd punch them in the face, when that's received by vulnerable individuals, they again take that as a green light, and that is not what we want.
• 48:28
  That's what leads to these types of political problems.
• 48:32
  So that's uh when you have this type of political rhetoric that often will cross over and lead to violence, and that targets the continuity of our stable government, and we want a stable government.
• 48:51
  We never want political violence.
• 48:54
  Uh, I fully support our freedom of speech, I fully support a right to bear arms, but when leaders are very careless, and I'm not just talking about members of Congress or the president of the United States, but I'm talking about members of the media and these influencers getting out there and destabilizing the public confidence and our government.
• 49:00
  Leaders are very careless.
• 49:02
  And I'm not just talking about members of Congress or the president of the United States, but I'm talking about members of the media and these influencers getting out there and destabilizing the public confidence and our government.
• 49:17
  Um discussing how you know this violence is acceptable.
• 49:17
  Um discussing how you know this violence is acceptable.
• 49:28
  That has the capital report.
• 49:28
  That is the Capitol Police, they reported in 2024 that there was 9,474 threats uh against leaders.
• 49:41
  That's that is that is ridiculous.
• 49:45
  And those threats to members of Congress, their families and staffs.
• 49:50
  Um it's just that is despicable, and it's actually led to several several members of the this cabinet actually seeking a safe haven by moving their families and themselves to residences on military bases because they're they're so threatened.
• 50:15
  And as I had discussed in the opening segment, we had Elon Musk that not only was he targeted and the brand name of Tesla and uh individually owned vehicles were targeted, but you saw the um he was living in the white house in a Mar-a-Lago.
• 50:36
  Excuse me, I'm sorry about that.
• 50:39
  Uh he was living in the White House and in Mar-a-Lago due to threats to him and his family.
• 50:47
  Uh excuse me.
• 50:50
  There's no there's never any type of excuse for that, and that's being uh those flames are being stoked.
• 51:02
  Uh they're throwing gasoline on that type of fire, and that is what we need to do is to lower the temperature.
• 51:09
  And um, I've actually had some friends who are members of our active duty military, and they've said that they can't they can't even get base housing in certain areas.
• 51:24
  I'm not going to mention who these people are, because they said that certain of these homes are uh are being occupied by members of the cabinet because the threat against their families is so high.
• 51:41
  And I do on a side note, I I do recall uh in previous uh personal interviews I had with Tucker Carlson.
• 51:51
  Uh, he had mentioned that his family had the same type of of threats, and here he's not a political leader, but he is uh this was when he was living in New York City with his family, and they were continually threatened, and he had to literally move his family out of the state to a safer area just so that they would not continually have threats.
• 52:15
  And so when let me talk about this line and where it can be crossed, because a lot of people again, as I mentioned, they just think that if your comments oppose their beliefs that that's a that's hate speech, and no, that's that's free speech.
• 52:38
  It's when it starts, it's not whether you enjoy it or not, it is when it can be um taken as a threat by someone.
• 52:49
  That's where the line is, and because America does protect harsh political speech, the uh the uh first amendment protects criticism, protest, satire, political opposition, but the law does not protect actual threats, targeted intimidation, incitement to imminent lawless action.
• 53:14
  That's that's against the law, specifically 18 U.S.
• 53:18
  Code uh 871.
• 53:21
  And this is where when that's a federal law that specifically criminalizes threats against and it specifies the president, the vice president, the president-elect, and his successors under that code.
• 53:34
  So when you have individuals such as Madonna, where she said in January 2017, her comments right at the inauguration, um, her women's march on Washington the day after President Trump's first inauguration, but she said I thought a lot about blowing up the White House.
• 53:56
  That is that is where things cross the line when she says she's thought a lot about that, and that is not something when we're talking about speech where it actually crosses into a threat or conspiracy or harassment, and just like they or doxing and doxing is like what they're trying to uncover the identity of these ice agents.
• 54:20
  Um, same thing happened to myself and our uh case that we had in 2007 when I was in the Marines where they stick gave our names and information.
• 54:32
  Uh this can lead to uh violence and it could lead to stalking and an it's it becomes a very clear actual danger.
• 54:43
  So this is where in the United States our call to action is that we must have political leaders that lower the temperature of this rhetoric to especially there, it's going to be heard by the lowest common denominator, and those are people who may be mentally unhealthy, and that is a growing population, like again, a state of the numbers.
• 55:10
  There is uh this has taken not just a foothold in American society, but many people believe these uh comments that Donald Trump is not uh good for democracy.
• 55:22
  So, but our standard for public leaders should be higher than where it is right now.
• 55:28
  Is we we need to raise that bar, and our republic is not going to be able to survive if every election is framed as some type of an apocalypse, and every opponent is a some type of exit existential threat.
• 55:45
  But this is uh very important topic.
• 55:49
  Hopefully, I was able to explain how the enemy thinks, how they employ it, and how our own government leaders, those in power are using what the enemy is doing to divide and also to threaten members of the political of their political opponents and their families.
• 56:00
  Enemy is doing to divide and also to threaten members of the political of their political opponents and their families.
• 56:11
  So that is what we cannot afford to have in the United States.
• 56:11
  So that is what we cannot afford to have in the United States, and I would appreciate it again as uh we are still at um we're in a military conflict in the Middle East that you pray for our American men and women that are serving forward and then.
• 56:34
  We have uh we have put them in a position right now where they need to fight, they need to have a clear mind, and every American needs to stand behind our men and women who are fighting uh for the United States of America.
• 56:48
  So uh that being said, God bless those men and women and God bless America, God bless you.
• 56:54
  And please uh forward this uh to your friends and family either through social media or an email.
• 57:00
  And until next week, we will we will be back at the same time, same channel.
• 57:05
  Thank you again for tuning in.