Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Bryan Johnson Sued for 9 million, Alex Jones Returns | HBR News 435

Transcript

Bryan Johnson Sued for 9 million, Alex Jones Returns | HBR News 435 · Honey Badger Radio

0:02
This is HBr News number four thirty five. Brian Johnson sued for nine million.
0:08
Alex Jones returns when we discussed the news of the week and give it
0:11
the Badger treatment. Hello everybody, and welcome to him Honey Badger Radio.
0:19
Sorry and I stumbled over that. I've said it a million times. Welcome
0:23
to Honey Badger Radio. I hope you guys are doing well and you're laughing
0:26
at all of this absurdity so that you're not consumed by it. My name
0:30
is Brian Martinez and I'm joined by my lovely co host Hannah Wallen and doctor
0:34
rennerckm Mike Jay is still unavailable. He is taking care of his grandma and
0:39
we should support him for that. So hopefully you're doing your mem is doing
0:44
all right, Mike. Anyway, we have a great show line up for
0:48
you guys this week, so please be sure to continue the conversations both in
0:52
the chat as well as the comments section of this week's HBr News show.
0:56
We're gonna be talking about the return of Alex Jones to X Millionaire and I
1:03
guess you could say philanthropist and uh, well, you know I'm gonna get
1:08
into it later, but his name is Brian Johnson with a Y, and
1:12
he is facing allegations and being sued for nine million dollars by an ex fiance.
1:19
Ricky Vaughan is free uh for the moment, and more so, stick
1:25
around, it's going to be a good time and be sure to join us
1:26
afterwards for the Patron only show. So, speaking of Alex Jones, going
1:33
back to X which we're gonna be covering shortly, there is an article from
1:38
the New York Post entitled Elon Musk couldn't be more wrong about Alex Jones.
1:42
He is not a free speech hero. He is a hate speech monster,
1:47
written by Piers Morgan, which we're gonna be looking at the in the Patriot
1:52
Show. Yeah, I know, I don't this guy. I mean,
1:57
sometimes he says some thing that isn't complete brain vomit, but most of the
2:02
time it's not. It's like that, I don't know how you live like
2:07
that, how you're like really stupid. One minute, and there's a reasonable
2:12
explanation for everything in this universe except Pierce Morgan. Everyone hates Pierce Morgan,
2:19
literally everyone can anyone just are you Pierce Morgan's fan out there? In the
2:24
comments if you're Pierce Morgan's fan, Please write in and tell me what it
2:30
is you like about Peace Morgan, and I will defy your existence because you
2:36
don't this. Literally everyone hates Peace Morgan. He's never done anything but be
2:39
wrong on almost everything, or at least a dickhead on literally everything, and
2:46
yet he finds work. How do you said his name so many times?
2:51
You made the cat have a temper tantrum in the background. I heard it,
2:53
Yeah, that kind Yeah, your cat? The cat. It might
3:04
be the Peers Morgan fan. You don't know. I don't know what kind
3:07
of personality the cat have. Speaking of pets, Jojo is here as well.
3:15
He has curled up behind me like just doing what dogs do. So
3:21
uh okay. Anyway, So if you want to join us in the Patron
3:23
Show and try to understand why Peers Moorgon gets work, become a badgery yourself
3:30
by going to feed the Badger dot com and setting up a monthly subscription.
3:32
Five bucks a months will get you into our discord, where you'll be able
3:36
to watch all kinds of additional content, including all of our Patron only shows.
3:40
And there's also lots of other stuff going on there, you know,
3:45
Allison. Most of her of the community stuff that she does is on the
3:50
Discord, So you know that if that's if you want more Allison and less
3:54
me, then become a patron and go into the Discord and hang out with
3:58
Alison. And if you don't want to wake up one morning and find that
4:00
you that we have been yeeded from the mainstream Internet, then please go to
4:03
badger feed dot com or or yeah, badger feed dot com or honey Badger
4:10
Radio dot com and that is where all of our content lives. Hope to
4:14
see you guys there. All right, so let us now, without further
4:17
delay, we're going to get into the stories. So first things first.
4:25
After being asked by a few high profile Twitter accounts and holding a poll elon,
4:30
Musk has reinstated Alex Jones to Twitter slash x. Seventy percent of the
4:35
new of the two million plus people who responded to the poll posted by Musk
4:41
indicated that they wanted Jones back on the platform. The move came after Musk
4:46
seemingly grappled with his stance as a free speech absolutist and his decision to not
4:51
allow Jones back on the platform after purchasing the company. Musk initially denied Jones'
4:58
re entry due to Jones's sk epticism about the events surrounding the Sandy Hook mass
5:02
shooting and Musk having lost his firstborn son to sudden infant death syndrome, though
5:11
others have suggested that Musk has brought Jones back to further upset those that he
5:15
told to go fuck themselves last week. Jones was permanently suspended from Twitter in
5:18
twenty eighteen when he publicly confronted CNN reporter Oliver Darcy and called him anti American,
5:26
rat like and less than human hoop based sorry. Twitter safety team then
5:33
put out a statement saying that Jones had violated their Absolute Abusive Behavior Policy and
5:40
due to that and his many other previous violations on the platform, his account
5:45
was to be banned permanently. Now before there was one other thing that I
5:47
think Mike j may have left out. I think it's an important detail.
5:51
I think the main thing that spurred on elon Musk reconsidering this was an interview
5:58
that Alice Shows did with Tucker Carlson on Tucker Carlson's ex I guess show that
6:03
he does where he interviews and talks to people that no one else will.
6:09
And I think that that was probably like a large component. And on that,
6:14
by the way, another thing that that Mike j didn't mention. I
6:18
don't know if it's because he didn't know or didn't think it was relevant.
6:20
But Alex Jones went on Tucker Carlson's show after that, Elon Musk consider bringing
6:27
him back on. Then they had a Twitter spaces meeting which you can listen
6:30
to, where h Tucker Carlson, not Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk, Vivick
6:39
Ramaswami, Alex Jones, and I think Andrew Tate came on for a few
6:44
minutes. He added nothing, but he wanted to be there because it's like,
6:46
oh, big guys are talking. I'm gonna come in here and talk
6:49
about, you know, free speech, like it's some radical idea. But
6:55
the point is, though, I think it was in in that conversation,
7:00
and Alex Jones made clear that he had like issued multiple corrections about the Sandy
7:04
Hook thing and that it was all blown out in proportion and his words got
7:08
twisted, and he made the very very clear case, I don't want to
7:11
go into it, but the Sandy Hook thing, I think it is the
7:15
reason that appears Morgan is angry. That's why he still is like, you
7:20
know, fucking going like ape shit in the background while this is happening,
7:26
but autistic screeching. But I think that it was cleared up and you know
7:31
it's only fair. I mean, like the Taliban have a Twitter account,
7:35
why can't Alex Jones have his Twitter account back? So anyway, those are
7:39
my thoughts on that. Yeah, they always go on about Sandy Hook as
7:44
if it's the only thing Alex Jones has ever talked about in his thirty something
7:48
years of broadcasting. That making a mountain out out of a miniatured jar of
7:56
shrimp paste called the Alex Jones was wrong, Jar, Ignoring the actual mountain
8:03
that is the Alex Jones was right. Jar. That Jar is the real
8:07
reason he's so persecuted and indeed prosecuted, and everyone knows that at this point.
8:13
Point is if that's how it works, if you make one mistake,
8:18
one factual error in your reportings at any point in your long career, that
8:24
you get unpersoned across all major social media platforms in an instant. If that's
8:30
the case, then you can see why hypocrites cling to the what aboutism defense,
8:37
because it's the only thing standing between them and the tidal wave of consequences
8:41
they would face if the standards to which they hold their opponents were ever held
8:46
to themselves. These are the people who went after Nick Sandman for smiling,
8:54
the same people just a couple of weeks ago tried race bating their mobs of
8:58
psychos into hating a Native American child for wearing face paint at a board game.
9:05
It doesn't it doesn't matter how far up the progressive stack you are,
9:09
doesn't even matter if you're a child. If they can make you look racist
9:11
or sexist, they will. They can't help themselves. They need the clicks.
9:16
They're in the business of deliberately enraging their hopelessly misinformed audience and pointing them
9:26
in the direction of any randomly selected manned woman or child who gets on the
9:31
wrong side of a photograph. These people are, they're scum. They're pond
9:37
scum. They are professional parasites. They go to what they go to work
9:41
in the morning, they have their coffee, they sit at their desk,
9:46
and then they seek out lives to ruin, and then they ruin those lives
9:52
every day, sometimes on purpose, sometimes just you know, collaterally, but
9:56
it's all it's always the end result. Some gets mobbed, they pick someone
10:01
up, they cover them in shit to attract all the flies, and then
10:07
and then they throw them in a gutter to be slowly eaten to death by
10:11
the aforementioned flies. It's what millions of sociopathic gobshites do for a living and
10:18
call it journalism. And those self same assholes want Alex Jones yeated from the
10:24
Internet forever because he did it once yeap accidentally. Unbelievable, unsmegging, believable,
10:33
unbesmegging, lever smegging bull Personally, I would I would like, I
10:39
would like. I would like the option when not even such ghoulish parasites like
10:45
these are banned from social media like Twitter. I want them there. I
10:50
want to see what lies they're telling today. I enjoy watching them get community
10:54
noted. But at the same time I can I can entertain the idea of
11:00
also perhaps having another social media site that bans everyone who's ever made a mistake,
11:05
a site that's strictly for individuals or organizations that have categorically never said anything
11:11
false or misleading. It would have a total of zero active users, and
11:18
god knows how many lurkers queuing at the door like his Black Friday, wondering
11:22
what on earth could be going on inside, And yeah, it's nothing.
11:26
You can't see what's inside a site like that, because nothing is what's in
11:31
there, because everyone lies, even AI lies. People lie accidentally on a
11:37
regular basis. Alice Jones did it once. Meanwhile, you've got state sponsored
11:43
media machines lying every time they breathe out. And they're not just doing it
11:50
to make money. They're doing it so they can send us to die in
11:52
some war that has nothing to do with us. They're doing it so they
11:56
can inject us with a science experiment that doesn't do shit except killers. They're
12:01
doing it so we'll send our kids away to get the genitals butchered on a
12:07
slab like a fish. And they're charging Alex Jones a billion dollars for what
12:11
he's done by that reckoning. The lies told, and the lives cost by
12:18
those lives by state propaganda over the years amounts to punitive damages of I think
12:24
it's in the quintillions. It's far more money than has ever existed or will
12:28
ever exist. As such, we can go ahead and declare every government bankrupt.
12:35
You all can go liquidate yourselves with your tail between your legs, and
12:39
let us have our planet back. I'll be off of that. Really big
12:48
problem with the whole debate about free speech and lies and truth and so on,
12:52
is this, most of the people talking about it don't understand the concepts
12:58
they're talking about. And when I say that, I mean I can't.
13:01
I can't tell you how many times I've been in an argument with somebody on
13:05
Twitter and they have treated us a mistake as a lie, where they've they've
13:13
referred to something that somebody has said as as a deliberate falsehood, like as
13:20
a deliberate lie, because the thing is not true when it turns out that
13:26
the individual really believed what they were saying. A lie is something that you
13:31
know is not true. It's a deliberate act. It's never an accident.
13:35
There's no such thing as an accidental lie. That's called a mistake, right
13:41
you. And when you call someone a liar for making a mistake, oh
13:46
you're you're fucking up. You are making a mistake as well. Once you
13:50
learn the person has made a mistake, and you continue to call them a
13:54
liar after you know that they stated what they believed to be true at that
14:00
time. That makes you the liar. That's the first thing. When we
14:05
talk about free speech, there's not you know, all speech is free speech
14:13
except political speech. No, it's the other way around. When you look
14:18
at the Constitution of the United States, which is where a lot of people
14:22
take the concept of free speech from. It specifically was created to protect political
14:30
speech, to protect disagreement with the status quo, disagreement with the company line
14:35
where the company is the establishment, the US government, the establishment media,
14:41
and so on. That is the core value of free speech period. There
14:50
is no exception to that right. The only thing that possibly could be considered
15:01
an exception is I think if somebody was dumb enough to argue that that something
15:07
that is criminal elsewhere, Like, uh, planning a crime doesn't become okay
15:16
because you use speech to do it, right, Committing a crime doesn't become
15:24
okay because you put it on display. So for instance, image crimes where
15:33
where the the subject of the image is a crime victim and the image is
15:39
the crime. That that doesn't become okay because free speech right. But that's
15:45
not criticizing your government either, that's taking advantage of someone's inability to refuse or
15:52
doing deliberate harm in order to force somebody to do something that they didn't want
15:56
to do. And that's that's a much bigger deal. Anything that is not
16:00
that, though, pretty much goes. It means that when you argue that
16:07
it's not free speech if it's stupid speech, well, yes, yes it
16:11
is. People have the right to be stupid. It's not free speech if
16:14
it's mean. Actually, yes, yes it is. People have the right
16:18
to be mean, and you have the right to be mean back. And
16:21
you also have the right to walk away from them or push them out of
16:23
your life. And until they force you to listen against your will, they're
16:33
not doing anything wrong. You can shut out any speech that you want to.
16:37
There's no right to be heard. There's only a right to speak.
16:41
There's no right to force other people to listen to you. There's only a
16:45
right to speak. So if Musk decides to let somebody on that everybody hates,
16:52
which obviously is not the case here, not everybody hates them, But
16:56
if everybody did, if he was the worst villain, troll whatever of Twitter,
17:03
and everybody was like, oh God, not that guy, Fine block
17:07
him. Mute him, don't read his tweets. Nobody has to read what
17:14
he's posting. Nobody should be upset about this. Anybody that is upset about
17:21
this is an idiot or a liar. Speech if you have to decide whether
17:29
it's a mistake or they know what they're talking about. Speech is thinking,
17:37
basically, and we can't We can't discuss ideas if we're not allowed to talk
17:44
about them. Otherwise we just keep them to ourselves, and that doesn't really
17:48
help much. And I think it is the goal of silencing people is really
17:52
to keep people from thinking, because if you don't hear, you know,
17:57
a unique perspective on something, then you're just going to carry your own assumptions
18:03
or you're only going to have the perspectives that are approved. And it doesn't
18:07
matter if we're talking about facts or opinions. You have to have, like
18:12
if you really want to be able to think about things, then you have
18:18
to be receptive. And that means there has to be messaging that you're that
18:23
you know is out there, that you can access it there are people trying
18:26
to prevent it, then you're not going to hear it. You know,
18:30
Alex Jones like Mike said, he's right, like most of the time,
18:34
probably at least when it comes to like what do you report on? He
18:38
predicted nine to eleven. There's like video of him predicting it. You know.
18:44
He he he's talked frankly about the Israel Palestine thing, which has been
18:48
presented as a you know, two dimensional, oversimplified let's say, story from
18:56
both sides of it, whether you're on the Israel side of the Palestine side,
19:00
and he's basically said, look, here's you know, here's what here's
19:03
what's really going on. You know, to my knowledge, right, he
19:06
has been a force for good overall. But I mean that should be obvious
19:11
if you know, if you if you have taken enough time to watch you
19:17
know, info wars. I mean when he used to do it. I
19:18
don't know if he still does or whatever, but but I mean I think
19:22
overall his voice should be out there, you know. I mean, remember
19:25
when they first banned alf shows from YouTube, I said because some people were
19:30
like, well, you know, he's crazy or he's a buffoon or whatever
19:33
I said years ago, and it happened that that more people will get banned
19:37
if you allow this than it will whoever else because they will use they'll use
19:42
Jones as the pretense for whoever and who else got banned off of YouTube a
19:47
lot of people, did you know, some of them more radical voices,
19:52
but I didn't want them banned, people like uh, you know, well,
19:56
I don't know if they got banned, but people like Coltane left or
20:00
War was banned. Stefan Maulnu was banned, you know, and that was
20:04
his whole livelihood. I never wanted that, and and he was Why would
20:10
they do that because he had some things to say that they didn't like basically,
20:14
and Jones is the same. But but this isn't really about making the
20:18
defense for Jones, because I don't think that's necessary. I've done it plenty.
20:22
I want to give props to Musk because I think that he was He's
20:29
acting in a very rational way. Whereas because he had lost a child.
20:34
I think it struck a nerve when he was when he heard or was told
20:40
that Jones has said these things about Sandy Hook, which is again it's oversimplified.
20:45
It's that you should like, look at the conversation he had with Musk,
20:51
and you know, and Vivick was there supporting him and supporting free speech
20:55
was why I like Vivick Ramaswami as an aside, and you know, I
21:00
think that it was good that Musk was like, you know, this is
21:03
the right thing to do, and he just did it. And I don't
21:06
know if he was ever like a man that we weren't supposed to like.
21:08
I know that he went to some World Economic Forum things a couple of times.
21:12
I don't know if he still follows those guys or what. But I
21:17
think this is a good thing, and I will give credit where credit is
21:19
due, regardless of i've I feel about the person themselves. I think this
21:22
is a good thing to do, and so I support this action. I'm
21:26
glad that Musk did it, and I hope that he brings back a lot
21:30
of people who have been banned. You know, some people are still angry
21:33
about the fact that he didn't bring back I don't know their friend or whatever,
21:37
but just you know, give it time or make a new account.
21:38
I made a new account on x It's badger arcade. My old account is
21:42
still banned because I basically said that Nazis and communists are the same thing,
21:48
and the COMMI slash Nazis on Twitter got me banned back. This was back
21:53
when it was run by what's his name, the al kayeeda looking guy I'm
22:00
a bin twitter tweeting. I forget his name, but you know what I'm
22:03
talking about. Yeah, so the guy who used to run Twitter. Jack
22:10
what was it, It's Jack something. Jack Dorsey's right, Jack last name
22:15
is not Knoff Jack Dorsey. Yeah, but but anyway, uh so,
22:23
yeah, I mean, like if if I think that Twitter has a bright
22:27
future, I hope that because we're streaming on Twitter right now. I think
22:32
that you know that. And Rumble, which again I'm I'm asking you guys
22:36
to follow us on Rumble. Rumble is probably I've been asking around for alternative
22:41
alternative to YouTube, and I think Rumble is a superior one, so superior
22:48
to YouTube in terms of its like free speech stuff. It's technically, you
22:52
know, and it's a little behind still and obviously doesn't have the same user
22:56
base, but that could change in time. So anyway, I support must
23:00
decision. I think it's great and I'm glad that you know that, uh
23:07
that that Alice Jones is back on and I hope that with him and the
23:11
ship that Tucker has been doing, Like do you guys, remember Coach red
23:15
Pill? Do you remember that guy? Is Is he the same guy as
23:19
the as the guy who's arrested in Ukraine right now? Yes? Yes?
23:25
Is that guy Coach? It's reality to Ukrainian prison. Yeah, like a
23:32
work camp or something. He's in a gulag essentially, And Tucker Cross And
23:37
spoke to his father about him, and they're and they're trying to you know,
23:41
they're trying that. Elon Musk saw that. I mean, like,
23:45
it's crazy, dude, Like when you think about degrees of separation, Okay,
23:49
I am two degrees of separation away from Coach red Pill because I know
23:55
people who who know him, and that puts me three degrees of separation away
24:00
from Tucker Carlson anyone. You and I have both met Count Dakilla, he
24:08
does Joneslon Musk, And that's the whole fucking world, right, It's crazy,
24:15
right. Oh. And Dianna Lorraine, Dianna Lorraine who I I still
24:19
I have her phone number. She's she used to be on Info Wars.
24:22
She was like a recurring co host or something. So crazy. Anyway,
24:27
just weird how things work out, you know. But anyway, I am.
24:33
I am getting a little uh off a far field, but I like
24:37
where things are going. I like that there are more people talking and having
24:41
honest discussions and I think are very important, and it it fills me with
24:45
hope. I think it's it's white pilling to see that people are doing this
24:48
and the fact that the the I don't know whoever we're up against, the
24:55
globalists, whatever it is, they are freaking out. I don't know if
24:59
you know, but like yesterday, and I'm not saying it's connected, but
25:02
yesterday Stephen Crowder was going to have Alex Jones on to talk about him being
25:08
reinstated to Twitter, and that morning rumble was I don't if it was yet,
25:15
it might have been yet. Yeah, it was yesterday, Rumble was
25:17
down like I couldn't get on it, and it was like all morning,
25:21
and I thought, well, and some people said it was a de Doss
25:23
attack. I looked into it and everything. I went to down detector and
25:26
I saw that it was like not even opening up for a lot of people.
25:30
And it was right when Crowder was having Alex Jones on because Crowder and
25:34
Jones been working together on stuff too. So anyway, I think I think
25:41
it's interesting, is all I will say to that, but let us know
25:45
what you guys think about this in the comments. I think it's a good
25:47
news and I'm happy that Musk did that. Let me look at your super
25:52
child's really quick. And because I did get one from Meredith our top g
25:57
and she said, as HBr News for five dollars, thank you, Meredith,
26:03
HBr News number four thirty five, Honey for the Badgers. People focus
26:06
so much on what Jones got wrong about Sandy Hook that they want to ignore,
26:11
excuse me, the legitimate points he was making about it, the problems
26:15
that actually tend to show up in all other such incidents, the problems that,
26:19
if addressed, might actually reduce such incidents. Yes, if you wanted
26:25
to reduce those incidents, you might have paid attention to those things. And
26:30
then I got Richard Bierre gives us five dollars and says thank you. Richard.
26:34
Did your new account on X come with a block from Steve Shives?
26:37
You know I never looked. I don't know, I never I never looked.
26:42
I forgot about Steve Shives using sperm. I have no idea anyway.
26:48
Maybe we'll find out that Steve Shives is in jail in Taiwan any day.
26:52
Now that's up in this are the odds, right, It's easy to forget
26:59
about him if he's got it but he blocked. You know, It's like
27:03
it's easy to forget about the air too either. You know. That's honestly,
27:08
and Hannah, that's why I never block anyone, because I think if
27:11
you you could forget about them, and and then you will miss if they
27:15
ever have their redemption arc happen, you won't be there for it. And
27:19
I think there's here's here's when I blocked. There's there's a couple of different
27:23
times I get I get followed by a lot of porn bots, Like every
27:27
time I say something about porn yes, oh no, every time I say
27:33
anything about women and sexual accountability, they see women in sexual because that's what
27:38
the algorithm is looking for. And boom, I get followed by another porn
27:44
bot. And then then if I miss that it's a porn bot, then
27:51
it starts messaging me you want to see my boobs? No, if I
27:55
want to see boobs, I've got to set I can look at them in
27:56
the mirror. Okay, So I I end up blocking all of those,
28:02
but then the other one is that there are certain types of anti MRAs that
28:08
they'll claim to not be feminists too, that's the funny part. But anti
28:14
MRAs that will block you and then quote mind you, and then post stuff
28:21
out of context and twist it ala futrelle and send people your way to waste
28:26
your time. And I've had to block about five or six of those in
28:33
my however many years. I think I've been on Twitter since like two thousand
28:37
and nine anyway, and all that time, five or six people I've blocked
28:42
because of that. And one lady who was messaging me like five hundred times
28:48
a day that that got old. Yeah, most of it. Most of
28:56
it was do you remember the guy that Mike made the the chicken video the
29:06
chicken cartoon. I can't remember what it was called for. Yes, that
29:11
guy. Yes, was that just one guy. It was a guy with
29:17
a thing. It was just one guy. Yeah, it was just one
29:19
guy. But there was some stupid chick that kept messaging me his shit about
29:26
Karen and I'm like, this has already been addressed once. We don't need
29:30
to talk about it again. That was and I'm serious, she was contacting
29:34
me like five hundred times a day. She was tweeting at me message dming
29:38
me. I couldn't tweet anything or being a conversation without replies from this woman.
29:45
And she wouldn't just reply once, she would reply several times to the
29:48
same tweet with the same shit. So of course I block when stuff like
29:55
that happens. So my blocklist isn't very long. It's mostly populated by poor
30:00
bots, but there's there's a few real people on it, and that's why.
30:04
Hmm, well, it makes sense i'd block bots too. I mean,
30:08
I have to do it on Telegram all the time. Anyway, let
30:12
us know what you guys think about this in the comments. We're gonna move
30:15
on to the next story. This is just a quick little follow up.
30:18
You guys may have heard about this Douglas Mackie. You guys might know him
30:25
as Ricky Vaughan on Twitter. Uh. He was the meme maker that was
30:30
arrested for making a satirical Hillary Clinton voting poster. He's out of prison,
30:34
but isn't free just yet. Douglas Mackie, better known online as Ricky Vaughan,
30:40
has been released by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals until they hand down
30:44
their ruling on the situation. Though free for the moment, Mackie is still
30:47
facing seven months of prison time should his appeal be denied. Why are we
30:53
getting so much good news this week? It's suspicious. It feels like a
31:00
one's good too, exactly. Yeah, got a bad feeling about this.
31:07
Yeah, I should think this is This is just some judges and whatever,
31:11
some legal officials or whatever reconvening after whatever backlash might have backlash might have blown
31:17
in their directions. Since this story went viral, they're asking themselves if it's
31:22
worth treading into the history books like this and all the gas lighting they'll have
31:26
to do to try and keep their toes out of those history books for being
31:33
one of the pivotal straws that broke the back of the First Amendment and plunged
31:37
the United States into exactly what it was designed not to be. Or on
31:44
the other hand, do they quietly equip the man and sort of sort of
31:48
gingerly pretend they didn't almost commit high trees and just now and then they'll face
31:56
a brief backlash from some terminally online NPCs who can't go a day without human
32:02
sacrifice in the name of preserving our infallible democracy and curing the world of all
32:08
negative emotions that we deem negative at the time. I don't know, but
32:14
I'm not going to start celebrating, even if he was actually acquitted. Relieving
32:21
news on top of very worrying news is not a combination that puts my mind
32:27
at ease. A scoop of ice cream on top of a scoop of human
32:30
feces is not a dessert that I am willing to eat, not underneath or
32:37
in any order. No, I will not start celebrating a wind condition,
32:43
even a temporary one, until someone hands me a dessert that has absolutely no
32:49
traceable amounts of human feces in it. Don't even hand me a delicious pie
32:53
that has one lone dingleberry of human shit in it. I will send it
32:59
back, Sir. I will not eat that, and I have a good
33:01
mind to talk to your manager. No human shit in my food, do
33:06
you hear me? A well, you mean like a little bit of ship
33:10
No, just a little shot of a little shot glass full of burgers and
33:17
cum. No, read my lips. You're saying that really well aware.
33:27
In the chat, guys, I want you to punish criminals, and only
33:30
criminals, not innocent law abinding, abinding citizens whose sense of humor happens to
33:37
not suit your political party. Never do that, right, not one,
33:43
got it, zero z and so on. Worry for going off on this
33:49
time. But I'm just I'm I'm sick of consuming human ship. Guys.
33:53
It's like it's it's a pet peeve of mine. Winds me right up.
33:58
It does not a fan, not an enthusiasts. I err of the side
34:02
of not it. I'd rather not. I think I've made okay. The
34:09
tough thing about this is, you know you want to you want to celebrate
34:13
it, you want to say, hey, this is this is an indication
34:15
that they're not going to send him back, because I mean, if if
34:21
you look at how this works with appeals, a lot of times, uh,
34:27
an individual that's been convicted of something, if they're trying to appeal their
34:30
sentence, they have to do it from inside the the jail. They have
34:36
to they have to show up in court in their orange jumpsuit and everything,
34:42
you know, unless they get the right to wear street clothes in there.
34:45
And uh, it's I think it's more likely when it's somebody that's been convicted
34:52
of a dangerous crime, then the prosecution turns around and argues, well,
34:54
if we let this guy out and you don't overturn the conviction, Uh,
35:00
then then you've let a murderer out or a you know, a robber,
35:04
burglar, rapist, whatever the person was accused of. Whereas this guy's convicted
35:09
of chip posting too aggressively and as a as a means of insulting the other
35:16
side. Like I just can you imagine, all right, especially like gen
35:23
xers. Okay, go back to maybe nineteen ninety when when some of us
35:30
were still in high school in nineteen ninety some of us were about to graduate,
35:34
you know, like the next the next year. You know, some
35:37
some gen xers were in college college maybe some some were getting married. The
35:44
internet was you had to you had to direct dial the other person's computer with
35:51
a phone modem that made horrible noises until the connection happened. And uh it
35:57
was it was all text back and forth. Can you imagine being told back
36:05
then that somebody would be imprisoned for ship posting and when ship posting gets explained,
36:15
oh, it's it's a joke. They take a picture and they put
36:20
a caption on it as a joke, like like a when you when you
36:23
take a picture out of a magazine and turn it into a comic, a
36:27
homemade comic, by putting putting text on it, putting you know, writing
36:31
on it, or cutting out text, you know, like a collage.
36:35
It's supposed to be funny and an inside joke between a lot of people,
36:42
and I think we would have all lost our minds, right, somebody going
36:46
to jail for a joke? Yeah? Really? And and here it is,
36:54
well, yeah, I went to jail for telling a joke. And
36:59
the the prosecution's argument is that you are too stupid to know he wasn't serious.
37:08
That's it. That's the whole argument. You're honor my client or my
37:14
client, your honor my client, the American people, Right, you're honor
37:17
this man needs to go to jail because the American people are stupid. Yep,
37:22
that's really what it is. But you know what I think, Yeah
37:29
it is. And if it weren't for people like in I guess you could
37:35
say independent media reporting on it and like calling attention to it, even the
37:39
Daily Wire, you know, talked about it. I think that he could
37:44
have silent just gone to jail and nobody would have known because the mainstream media
37:46
would not have reported on it, or they would have spun it in such
37:50
a way to make it sound like it was it was actual, like you
37:52
know, election tampering or something, because that's kind of the claim, right,
37:58
but they wouldn't go into detail. So if it weren't for people talking
38:00
about it and shining a light on it, I don't think he would have
38:04
gotten as far as he has. I think they would have just thrown him
38:07
in jail and not said anything. I mean, they have done it to
38:09
other people. I've heard stories of other people who have been you know,
38:14
put the thrown in like a hole without without a trial or anything. And
38:19
January sixth is an example, but it's not the only one. A lot
38:22
of people that were there on January sixth are in jail now and they didn't
38:27
do anything. So anyway, you know, if the people of the United
38:34
States ever get control of the United States back mm hmm from from the folks
38:39
that have taken over the government, their need to be hearings, Oh and
38:45
there need to be like we hear all the time about how you know,
38:49
oh this this. When this administration gets overturned and the next one comes in,
38:52
they're gonna do something about all these terrible things, and every time,
38:57
right, every single time, from before we were born clear up till now.
39:05
Every administration that that has done things they should not have done. Yeah,
39:14
you know, they'll have they'll have investigations and they'll have hearings, and
39:16
everybody says, I don't remember or you know this, that that's not the
39:21
way it happened, or we were justified because of this or or executive privilege,
39:25
and everybody gets away with it. Right. The only person who doesn't
39:30
get away with it is the one who did nothing wrong, all right,
39:34
And that's it. Uh. There needs to be accountability that comes from the
39:39
citizens and not not the establishment, because the establishment doesn't have accountability and it
39:47
doesn't hand down accountability. It just punishes when it's angry. Right, So
39:52
there there has to be a situation where and I don't care if it's you
39:59
know, elderly people like Nancy Pelosi or or young people like Hunter Biden,
40:07
there has to be full accountability with the types of penalties that they are threatening
40:15
the people who are trying to maintain freedom with. Yeah, Hunter Biden is
40:22
not young. He's older than me, I think, yeah, but I
40:28
mean, yeah, well, yeah, I'm not sure AOC is all there,
40:34
though she's the one person that I would be like, all right,
40:37
everybody I know, imprisoning them is one thing. I think in her case,
40:47
a mental health facility would be more in order, because I genuinely don't
40:52
think she's all there. I know everybody's like, Oh, that's hilarious.
40:55
No, I genuinely don't think she's all there. Yep. That's my genuine
41:01
opinion is that there is something mentally wrong with that woman. Yep. I
41:07
think Nancy Pelusi is just a sociopath. But I think AOC is missing a
41:12
few cards. Perhaps that might make her useful. I mean, she was
41:16
basically placed there by the young Turks, so to make of that at what
41:22
you will. But anyway, it's a job to lie, much like for
41:24
the rest of the young Turks. And when it's your job to lie,
41:28
the longer you do it, the more your age gets accelerated. You see
41:31
how every president ages rapidly during that time in office, except Donald Trump.
41:37
Yeah, it's because it's a job to lie. All right, So we're
41:43
we're gonna move on to the next story. Let me know what you guys
41:45
think about this in the comments. Again, I am hopeful. I think
41:49
that it's a good thing that this was a story that was made big enough
41:53
that I think the media had to do something again. If you look at
41:57
what I was just saying, Gonzala Lira coach pill Tucker Carlson reported on him
42:01
did an interview with Alex Jones. I think that if people are doing this,
42:07
it makes change possible. So I'm hoping that you know that. Uh
42:15
why am I forgetting his name, Douglas Mackie. I was thinking Ricky Vaughn
42:20
from if you guys ever seen the movie Major League, that's where Ricky Vaughn.
42:23
That's what that comes from. Very funny movie. It's like a parody
42:27
movie about a baseball team. Very funny shit. But anyway, so yeah,
42:32
I hope that it works out for him, and we will obviously let
42:36
you guys know when we get more updates because it's super important, all right,
42:40
And I got some super childs. But first I want to say something
42:45
because I see a conversation going on and rumble that I feel I really have
42:47
to respond to. So mister O three on three said, the Alex Jones
42:52
game is my game of the year, and Mangaka ninety two replied and said
42:57
easily game of the year. And then he said, uh, New World
43:00
Order wars greater than greater than greater than greater than greater than Boulterer'sgate three,
43:06
and I'm gonna add to that is, uh, the Balder's Gate three as
43:10
it stands, Yes, it's inferior. But if you watch my stream playing
43:15
ballers Gate three over on Honey Badger Arcade, I have made a full party
43:19
of nothing but Badgers and it's a much better game for it, none of
43:22
this woke, trash, diverse NPCs. It's all like, it's Karen,
43:28
it's Hannah, it's Allison, it's prim it's Mike, it's me, and
43:32
it's badass. So check it out over on Honey Badger Arcade on YouTube and
43:37
you'll see, like what the game, the game is as it is meant
43:40
to be played, Badger's Gate three. But anyway, and then I got
43:45
I got some super chows, so I'm gonna put those up and if you
43:50
guys want to give us a super chow, go to feed the Badger dot
43:53
com for slash just the tip and feed Badger chan. Okay, So Richard
43:59
Bierre just five dollars and says in the Houston mayoral race, one candidate actually
44:04
told her constituents to vote for her on the wrong day, So Houston doesn't
44:08
have Sheila Jackson Lee as the mayor. So but that's but she should know,
44:16
like that wasn't a joke, was it. No, she told her
44:20
constituents, so she messed up. Okay, thank you Richard. That is
44:24
that is hilarious qualifying factor there when you fuck up that badly, Yeah,
44:35
get voted in. And then I got a super chat from an anonymous person
44:40
for five dollars and they said Alex Jones isn't honest about Israel and Palestine.
44:45
If you want the truth about apartheid zionist Israel, follow Ryan Dawson on Rumble.
44:50
Dawson used to be on YouTube, but his channel was nuked. He's
44:53
also back on Twitter. His Twitter handle is at RYE Liberty. If you
44:59
want the truth about nine to eleven and Israel, Alex shows won't cover the
45:02
dancing and Israeli agents that celebrated the nine to eleven attack, and he won't
45:07
touch the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty Navy Technical Research ship. Ryan Dawson
45:13
also covered Jeffrey Epstein long before Jones and Ryan isn't afraid to bring light to
45:16
the fact that Epstein was basically sponsored by Israel to blackmail politicians, celebrities and
45:22
world leaders. Alex won't tell you about how evil Israel is. Well,
45:25
that's fine. I still support Alex Sjones having the right to be on the
45:30
platform. And again, I think this only basically further emphasizes why I think
45:38
that people should have free speech, because I don't want the guy that you're
45:44
telling me about Ryan Liberty to be banned either. He should be able to
45:47
make those statements. So I will let that lie and again send us a
45:53
super chow if you want by going to feed thebagel dot com or slash just
45:58
the tip. So all right, let's get into the next bit of news,
46:04
which could also be good. Megan Rapino, a renowned figure in women's
46:08
soccer, has built a legacy beyond sports through exceptional skills on the field and
46:13
fearless activists. Recent controversy arose when Riley Gaines was named Woman of the Year,
46:20
sparking debate over the legitimacy of the accolade. Supporters of Gains emphasize her
46:27
achievements and the recognition of emerging talents, while Rapino's followers expressed disappointment, highlighting
46:31
her consistent impact in years of dedication. This controversy challenges Rapnold's established reputation and
46:37
prompts a reality reevaluation of recognition criteria in sports, encouraging a discourse on acknowledging
46:44
both established figures and rising talents. While monumentally momentarily impacted, Rappnold's reputation remains
46:50
strong, grant her significant contributions to sports and society. But let me let
46:54
me read it as it is written here. So m hm. Riley Gaines
47:00
has been given the Woman of the Year award and people are mad that it
47:05
did not go to Megan Rapino and Riley Gaines. If you don't know,
47:09
she was like aside from being an athlete, she was you know, a
47:14
four Let's say she was in the front lines and the fight against trans women
47:20
and women's sports, and I think that is what really is, you know,
47:25
making a big change. Now we can talk about what we think about
47:30
trans women and women's sports. But I'm just glad that Megan Rappino lost the
47:35
title. So I was reading a summary of this article from Catsarsuite Dot com
47:44
apparently is a woman's website. So I don't know, but I still think
47:52
it's good news. Is that really the day with the West? Yeah?
48:00
Cats are that's that's that's fabulous. The crazy cat lady image of feminists and
48:12
social justice where your women everywhere is confirmed. All the times that I that
48:19
I sent that meme of the pregnancy test, that that comes back cat lady
48:27
to uh to feminists on Twitter are vindicated. They always get mad. No,
48:31
I don't even have a cat you know, like you don't yet,
48:37
but but yeah, of course it would be on a cat block yess an
48:49
attack. But here's the thing, how do we know either one of these
48:55
women, Like, so we have two athletes, it has to be between
48:59
two athletes. Is this a woman of the Year. Is this a just
49:04
an athletic thing, like a sports thing, or is it because I I
49:09
never paid attention to this before. I don't think i've ever. This isn't
49:15
like Time magazine, right, is this Time magazine? Okay, No,
49:20
there's that would be that would be kind of a yeah. Not that there's
49:25
anything wrong with athletes, it's it's just that there are people who do things
49:30
that have a much more direct impact on people's lives than than like watching athletes
49:38
do their thing. It's it's quite it'd be quite upsetting to think that Women
49:46
of the Year went to an athlete and not a scientist or you know,
49:52
a practitioner of medicine, or you know a somebody that's that's done great work
50:00
getting food to people in a place where people don't have food, or something
50:05
along those lines. But if it's just an athletic thing and it was between
50:12
athletes and that's it, that's a different story. Maybe it's female Athlete of
50:15
the Year, but they call them call her a woman of the Year.
50:20
In that case, the whole argument about trans women and sports and everything,
50:25
notwithstanding, Gaines did what you do when you're engaging in activism to try to
50:34
get legislation passed and everything. You don't just go on media outlets and complain
50:43
about it. You go straight to legislators. And she was fortunate she got
50:49
to actually go in and speak to legislators. She went into congressional hearings,
50:54
which you don't always get invited or you know, get permission if you ask
51:01
to do that. So that's that's really kind of a neat thing right there.
51:07
What is what did revenue, do did team? But she I think
51:16
she like missed like a special penalty kick at some point recently and lost the
51:22
championship. Yeah, I just her significant contributions to society is that what being
51:30
a feminist woman in women's sports, like she she was basically like lived it
51:35
up as a kind of uh, you know, icon or something. She
51:39
and and basically her existence in women's sports is supposedly like a thing for women's
51:44
rights. But Riley, I think it really what it comes down to is
51:47
Okay, first of all, so I did a little looking around, and
51:52
there aren't a lot of people. Some people are like there are like Snopes
51:55
is fact checking it and they're claiming that it's satire. But then there's other
52:00
websites like this USA community dot live is you know, is saying that that
52:05
there is this title for an athletic Woman of the Year and that Riley Gaines
52:10
claimed it because she was doing more for women's rights, because she was fighting
52:15
for you know, against trans women and women's sports. So it's basically feminism
52:21
fighting feminism. And yeah, it is basically fighting feminism. But at the
52:28
same time, I mean, I don't I don't dislike Riley Gaines. I
52:31
don't you know, she seems like probably not someone who would call herself,
52:37
you know, like she's not like an activist type. I think here's my
52:39
point. Here's my point. Right. So you let's say you have a
52:45
gas station and there's a competition for employee of the Year, and they have
52:52
male employee of the Year and female employee of the Year at the gas station.
52:55
Yeah, and the two qualifications are that you do your job very well
53:01
and also that you contribute something to, you know, the environment in the
53:10
workplace, that you've done something in the workplace that isn't necessarily part of your
53:16
job description but makes it a better place to work or makes it a better
53:22
place to shop or whatever. And you have employee number one, who kind
53:28
of sucks at their job and hasn't done anything to contribute to the work environment.
53:35
And you have employee number two, who is pretty good at her job
53:39
actually and also had a habit of bringing in snacks to share with coworkers to
53:50
make the breakroom feel more hospitable. And some people get mad that the first
53:58
one didn't win because she's a known social justice warrior. That's just political.
54:04
It has absolutely nothing to do with the criteria for the contest, the criteria
54:09
being contributing to sports and contributing to society. So if no offense, you
54:17
lose to a high school team, and then you know, go in go
54:23
on to not not bring home the gold if I remember, right, versus
54:32
you know, you you actually do very well in your your particular sport,
54:39
and then on top of that, you engage in public activism and you demonstrate
54:47
civic participation and do so in a way that is highly visible to young people
54:55
of your demographic, which you know, her demographic is women. So young
55:00
women now if they want to participate in civic discourse and uh, you know
55:07
the civic activism where they're engaging with people who are actually making law and policy,
55:14
they know what to do because they see this happening, like that's a
55:17
huge contribution. Yeah, and it just the the sour grapes thing isn't just
55:22
sour grapes. It's sour grapes because it's good guy bad guyism. It's my
55:30
political perspective versus your political perspective. They might as well have said, this
55:35
woman shouldn't win because we think she's like a Republican, and this woman should
55:38
win because we think she's like a democrat, you know. That's that's essentially
55:44
the complaint, and that's that's what feminists are doing there. This woman shouldn't
55:49
win because we think she's like an anti feminist. This woman should win because
55:55
we think she's like a feminist. She'll tow both sides of the line and
56:00
this other woman is going to take a stance and you can't do that on
56:04
this issue. Yeah, yeah, so well that's that's when you see that.
56:09
And of course the other end of it is I think I think having
56:15
seen Gains on video and editing, she strikes me as a pretty clean cut
56:21
person, you know, just like just girl next door type. And yeah,
56:28
she was definitely yeah, like a like a pretty clean cut, like
56:34
you said, athletic. Yeah, maybe she's muscular, but feminine, you
56:37
know, right, like a small town type. She might not be from
56:42
a small town, but she would fit in very well in one. And
56:45
I think that would piss off a lot of like feminists, especially the younger
56:51
galls that have invented bimbo feminism, which is a thing, believe it or
56:57
not, Like our our generation of femine would have been so pissed off with
57:00
that, but they're they're accepting it. But in any case, yeah,
57:05
that that's they're gonna hate her because she seems very nice. She seems very
57:12
clean cut, she seems, you know, very like. Once upon a
57:16
time she would have been described as all American as probably bad words. Now
57:22
yeah, and so they're gonna hate her. They're gonna hate her, right,
57:31
she probably her hair is probably the natural color that she was born with
57:37
her hair being and everything. So yeah, they're they're going to hate her.
57:40
Yeah, all right, Well, apparently was the n n C double
57:46
A that you know, there's like the Collegiate Athletic Association, the National Collegiate
57:52
Athletic Yeah, it is Athletic year, yes, and I guess you know
58:00
it's I mean Megan Rapino. You know. It's funny. They're both up
58:05
against males at one point, and Rapino lost, so Richard Bierre, speaking
58:10
of which Richard Viierre gives a super chow and says, Megan isn't Megan Rappino
58:15
suddingly and bravely didn't Megan Rapino suddenly and bravely lead her soccer team to defeat
58:22
against a team of middle school boys. Yes, yes, that was her,
58:27
and she was the one that was arrogantly saying I deserve this. I
58:30
deserve this, so she doesn't apparently deserve this other thing. But it's fine.
58:37
I thought it was funny and it's it's always nice to see people like
58:40
Megan rapnot get taken down a peg. But we will endeavor to move on
58:46
to next story. So let us know what you guys think about this in
58:51
the comments before we get into the next story. There is a super child
58:54
that I want to read. Somebody sent me this yesterday and I'm gonna read
59:00
the Superchow again just so that you know, we see like we have a
59:07
little bit of context because I got this message and it was basically asking me
59:12
to report on this story. So Dane gave us five dollars yesterday and says
59:15
Brian Johnson just released a video covering his legal battle with his ex fiance,
59:21
who is suing him for nine million dollars. Brian Johnson is a billionaire that
59:25
went viral about a year ago because he is spending millions a year on his
59:30
anti aging routine. He is one of the health fitness channels that I follow.
59:36
He's done a lot to help people and he makes all of his research
59:38
and health routine, free and available to the public. This bitch only wants
59:45
to steal money from him by making false accusations. She's trying to meet to
59:49
him because he is a high value man worth four hundred million dollars and didn't
59:53
marry her parasitic ass. I would jump on this topic while it's hot.
59:58
He's very popular on YouTube. He has over six hundred thousand subscribers Buck Marriage.
1:00:02
It's a scam at that parasites feed off of Go MiG Tao and I
1:00:07
have there are articles about this story, but they're not favorable to Brian Johnson.
1:00:14
So I'm gonna read a summary of one of them, and then I
1:00:17
have a He did put out a video and it's like fifteen minutes long,
1:00:22
but there is an entire transcript. I can go through the transcript and find,
1:00:30
you know, the relevant parts if we have to, So I will
1:00:34
read the article, I mean the summary. So tech mobile mogul, tech
1:00:38
mogul Brian Johnson, let me just put this up here, known for his
1:00:45
extravagant efforts to maintain a youthful body, faces a bombshell lawsuit from ex fiance
1:00:51
Taryn Southern. The suit alleges that Johnson, forty five years old, was
1:00:55
a serial cheater who dumped Southern during her breast cancer treat Southern accuses Johnson of
1:01:01
being manipulative and controlling, pressuring her into accepting his philandering lifestyle. Johnson,
1:01:07
in a separate filing, accuses Southern of extortion. The lawsuit details a tumultuous
1:01:13
relationship, including Johnson's alleged flings, demands for Southern sexual history, and his
1:01:20
refusal of financial support after her cancer diagnosis. The legal battle involves claims of
1:01:24
breached agreements and mandatory arbitration provisions. Southern seeks unspecified damages, while Johnson's lawyers
1:01:32
insist on resolving the matter through arbitration. And let me look at the video
1:01:40
because he did it, he wrote, he basically, So it's kind of
1:01:45
a well, before you get into that, I got one question. Okay,
1:01:51
do they live in California? You know what? I don't know.
1:01:55
Probably Okay, it makes a difference because California has calimony. Uh huh,
1:02:07
they're in Los Angeles. Okay, so they're in California's That makes a big
1:02:12
difference. Okay, So go on, ok So anyway, yeah, there
1:02:15
is so essentially we're at a a bit of a you know, it seems
1:02:21
to be like nothing is proven yet, it's hearsay. But he he basically
1:02:29
put out a video where he claims that she is trying to extort him for
1:02:34
money. I mean, it's not, you know, insane to to think
1:02:39
that that's possible. But I don't see strong evidence either way except that.
1:02:49
Let me see, I'll read some of this. This is from his letter.
1:02:52
I guess, Jenna is I explain the details, So if you bear
1:02:55
with me, I'll go through the entirety of what has happened over the past
1:02:59
two and a half year. My former fiance threatened to make scandal public accusations,
1:03:04
scandalous public accusations about me unless I paid her nine million dollars in a
1:03:08
week. Two years later, a judge ordered her to pay me a half
1:03:12
a million dollars for the fees I had spent defending my innocence the dark underground
1:03:17
accusation economy. Okay, so how did this happen? It started on April
1:03:22
sixth, twenty twenty one. That morning I was telling you about with a
1:03:28
one hundred and thirty three page letter from her attorneys, A quote redacted is
1:03:34
willing to settle all her claims against mister Johnson and his companies for nine million
1:03:38
dollars. Okay, so maybe I could just play some of this. I'll
1:03:44
messhare me share this with you guys, and we will take a look at
1:03:50
it. So hold on, will I put this on the screen here and
1:03:52
you guys join this and then you'll be able to see it, and I
1:03:57
will start it from about tier So what is that? So like three minutes
1:04:08
in? Okay, go up, Yeah, here we go. All right,
1:04:12
I'm gonna play it. This was surprising because after over a year of
1:04:17
our relationship ending, for the first time ever, she was accusing me of
1:04:24
a wide range of quote, abusive and pervase behaviors. Through her attorneys,
1:04:31
she threatened to make her allegations public if I didn't pay her that nine million
1:04:35
dollars in one week receiving this, WTF? What claims? What wrongdoing?
1:04:45
Is this? April fools? Am I being punked? I'm so confused.
1:04:50
This is a person whom I'd once had the most beautiful relationship with and now
1:04:56
she was unrecognizable to me. Yeah, he said, but he meant perverse,
1:05:02
all right, he misspoke on that perverse. I double clicked on the
1:05:11
email and I started reading the letter, and the contents were shocking. I
1:05:15
felt paralyzed. What was even more shocking was that my fiance and I had
1:05:21
signed a separation agreement a year earlier. When ending our relationship, we both
1:05:27
agreed to walk our separate ways. It was clear that she and her attorneys
1:05:30
were gambling that they would put enough pressure on me of my reputation being tarnished
1:05:38
publicly, that I would pay up and settle privately. She was embolded by
1:05:43
lawyers blinded by their greed to take advantage of her vulnerabilities and exploit my wealth.
1:05:49
After over six months of threatening to destroy me with more serious allegations in
1:05:56
her quote podcast, a book deal, and a potential TV series, the
1:06:01
attorneys who sent the demand letter never filed a complaint or produced a single piece
1:06:08
of evidence to support the allegations. Then she got new attorneys. Seeing that
1:06:15
threats alone were insufficient, they filed the case in court and tried to make
1:06:21
me look like a monster. I successfully moved part of the case into arbitration,
1:06:30
where we had agreed to resolve any disputes. As their legal losses mounted,
1:06:35
they became increasingly unhinged, in what they were willing to say. Sadly,
1:06:42
global media ate it up. On March thirty first, twenty twenty three,
1:06:47
after extensive motions, depositions, and discovery, the arbitrator dismissed all her
1:06:55
causes of action that had been referred to arbitration and ordered that my accuser pay
1:07:00
me a half a million dollars to reimburse attorney's fees I had been forced to
1:07:05
spend defending my innocence. The ruling and award were confirmed by an active superior
1:07:13
court judge on September twenty ninth, twenty twenty three. After years of litigation.
1:07:18
The corroborating evidence my accuser had of any of my accused wrongdoings nothing,
1:07:27
not a single thing. In considering my accuser's attempt to invalidate the separation agreement
1:07:35
she had signed, the arbitrator, a well respected retired judge, pointed out
1:07:41
that my accusers quote, undisputed conduct and testimony refute her claims. In other
1:07:50
words, my accuser's own evidence contradicted her own story. This is noteworthy as
1:08:00
my accuser's day job is chief story telling officer at an implantable medical device company,
1:08:09
where trust is life and death this entire thing has been bizarre and surreal.
1:08:17
Accusers, my accusers attorney were sanctioned by the judge, a severe reprimand
1:08:24
that courts reserved for truly egregious behavior, for making, as the judge wrote,
1:08:30
quote serious allegations factually and legally baseless and frivolous unquote. Her lawyers were
1:08:40
ordered to pay the court a fine of two thousand and five hundred dollars.
1:08:45
In our settlement discussions, I insisted her attorneys pay some of what she owed
1:08:50
for their complicitness. It would have been so easy to relent and quietly make
1:08:58
this go away. That's what nearly everyone does. But I am not guilty,
1:09:04
and they gave me no choice but to spend two years litigating to defend
1:09:11
my innocence. I think that's enough. I think he has got the ballpark.
1:09:15
So he was with this woman for a while, they broke up.
1:09:21
She tried to essentially get whatever she could out of him. She made allegations,
1:09:26
she brought on lawyers, and he decided to make this pup. Do
1:09:30
you want to hear more of this or do you do you think you've heard
1:09:32
enough? Well, actually there's some of this stuff. He's already said I
1:09:35
want to comment on because yeah, go ahead. So the thing, the
1:09:42
thing that I was actually worried about was that they didn't have any previous thing
1:09:46
that she was trying to undermine the fact that there was an agreement already that
1:09:53
she signed. That's a that's a good thing because she just came out of
1:09:57
the blue and went after him after or breakup, like there'd be he'd be
1:10:02
at risk without without something that she signed. It's possible because it is California.
1:10:13
I hate to say this, but I mean, it is California.
1:10:18
Well it's it's not that it's California is a little crazy, and the legal
1:10:24
system, the establishment in California is a little crazy. It's like AOC would
1:10:30
make a lot more sense coming from California than anywhere else. She's in New
1:10:35
York, I don't get it, but it's not the Yeah, New York's
1:10:39
a little crazy too, but California is crazy. It's a whole different kind
1:10:44
of crazy. And yeah, there there's the Comifornia aspect of it, and
1:10:50
then there's just there's the the I think that too many people have done too
1:10:57
many drugs, and too many drugs have ended up in the groundwater in California,
1:11:01
and too many Californians don't realize they've been drugged or shit like that because
1:11:08
the state is just fucked up some of the things that have happened in that
1:11:12
state. Right, So, in any case, there's always the worry that
1:11:19
there's going to be some judge who is just completely off his rocker or her
1:11:26
rocker. That's going to be like, well, you guys had a relationship,
1:11:30
therefore you owe her, and not even worry about any of the allegations,
1:11:33
whether they're true or false or anything. And of course feminists have established
1:11:39
that not giving a woman money when she wants it is abuse. Yep,
1:11:44
that's I wish I could say that's not true, but that is true,
1:11:48
and it's they call it economic abuse. And it used to be limited to
1:11:55
if you control the woman's finances and prevented her from meeting her fight her her
1:12:00
needs by preventing her from having the financial opportunity to meet her needs, that
1:12:04
would be economic abuse. But now it's it's to the point where if she
1:12:10
wants to buy address and it's not in the budget, if you don't make
1:12:15
sure she has a way to buy it, that's economic abuse, right,
1:12:20
that's that's how bad it's gotten. If you have a woman who is unscrupulous
1:12:25
in your life, she can take you to court for having physical limitations,
1:12:32
right, she could take you to court for not being able to produce blood
1:12:38
from a turnip. And and that's that's California is sort of the center of
1:12:45
that. So there is that regardless of the fact that he doesn't appear to
1:12:53
have done anything wrong, like there doesn't unless there's some evidence that's not being
1:12:59
talked about her shown here. I can't see that this guy did anything he
1:13:03
shouldn't have done. And even if everything she has said, everything she's accused
1:13:09
him of that we've seen here, if he cheated, if he didn't give
1:13:13
her money when she had cancer, if he was an asshole, a complete
1:13:16
utter asshole, if their relationship was tumultuous, she didn't leave during all of
1:13:23
that, She didn't break up with him at that time like that, that's
1:13:27
is she not an adult? Somebody? The guy who sent me the original
1:13:31
superchow about this story, he just sent them the super Jama read it.
1:13:36
He says that for five dollars, thank you, Dane. If I remember
1:13:40
correctly from watching the video, he made her donate the money to cancer research.
1:13:45
He didn't even take the five hundred thousand. Well, that's that's nice
1:13:49
and everything, But even that if my opinion, you know, like if
1:13:53
he had kept the money, that's fine too. It's just none of the
1:13:56
things that he did. You know that he didn't hold her against her will.
1:14:00
He didn't kidnap her and stick her in the basement and say, you're
1:14:02
going to listen to me, be an asshole, and I'm not going to
1:14:05
give you any money, and you, by the way, I'm gonna cheat
1:14:09
on you the whole time you're locked in my basement. No, they weren't.
1:14:13
They were not married. She didn't have to divorce him. She could
1:14:16
just walk away. If you're engaged and you're not married, you could just
1:14:23
walk away. At least if you're a woman, you don't. There's no
1:14:28
anything that you have to do. The most that she had to do was
1:14:32
sign a paper because California has its palamony things to agree to that. Yeah,
1:14:41
and don't forget, she's also getting a book deal and a TV series
1:14:44
out of this. Well she could have she could have said no to that
1:14:46
deal too. She could have said, you know, fuck you, I'm
1:14:48
gonna get money out of us. That's I think that's I mean, it's
1:14:51
Hollywood like, right, but that's so. Yeah, she can even keep
1:14:58
the ring. Like you decide you're not gonna marry a guy, you don't
1:15:01
necessarily have to get back the ring, like, but there been lawsuits over
1:15:05
that too. No, I'm not gonna marry you, but I'm gonna keep
1:15:09
this ring, this diamond ring. In fact, I'm gonna pawn it,
1:15:11
you know, like that that happens, right, yep. That so I
1:15:16
just hopefully they get a good judge. Hopefully the judge is intelligent and wise
1:15:23
and not not a complete nutter dipshit, and hopefully the judge is like,
1:15:29
no, lady, this is bullshit. Obviously you are already sanctioned for this
1:15:33
once. We're gonna sanction you for you know again, for it again.
1:15:38
And if you continue this vexatious litigation like, then we're gonna have fined against
1:15:43
you for vexatious litigation, which actually you have to bring a civil suit for
1:15:46
that. I guess how I know, But everybody knows about the seven years
1:15:54
in Hell case. That's how that case was resolved. It was resolved by
1:16:00
bringing a civil suit for vexatious litigation. And there's actually articles about that case
1:16:08
in feminist publications because they are terrified that that can be done. You know,
1:16:12
when a woman just brings case after case after case against a guy and
1:16:15
then drops some more, doesn't show up, or loses over and over again,
1:16:19
and then gets a restraining order by saying, you know, he's he's
1:16:24
dangerous and I'm terrified of him. And the evidence is that I have accused
1:16:27
him falsely now like seventeen times, and obviously that that makes him dangerous.
1:16:33
And and and they actually give her another restraining order based on that which which
1:16:42
happened. And so of course that may be his only route here. He
1:16:46
may have to go after her for vexatious litigation, malicious prosecution, you know,
1:16:51
something along those lines, and get a judged to say, no,
1:16:55
you can't, you can't file anything against this man again without my permission.
1:17:00
And if you come to me, you can get in trouble for it.
1:17:02
If you come to me with a without a very good excuse, uh,
1:17:06
you can actually get in trouble for it, because that's that's basically what being
1:17:12
labeled a vexatious litigant does. You You aren't allowed to proceed any further against
1:17:17
your target without without the permission of the judge that finds you to be a
1:17:21
vexatious litigant. And uh, if you ask for permission and you don't have
1:17:30
a very legally justified reason to bring it up again with the judge, then
1:17:36
then you can actually get sanctioned for that. It's vexatious litigation. So uh,
1:17:44
in any case, I like that's what he's probably gonna end up having
1:17:47
to do. But from what I see here is I see a woman who
1:17:53
realized that she could have gotten more money out of this guy than she got
1:17:58
and regrets not being a cunt and and decided to try to undo her reasonability
1:18:11
and and uh, you know, be a count for money. And we'll
1:18:15
see if the court's going to put up with that or if the court's going
1:18:17
to tell her to fuck off. Yep. Well, I hope, I
1:18:23
hope he beats this thing. I mean, it looks like he's got all
1:18:28
the facts on his side, and again not surprising. I mean it's like
1:18:32
the perfect storm. You know, you have a you have a billionaire guy
1:18:38
who spends a lot of money on on his Uh you know, I guess
1:18:42
he's got an anti aging thing. But he's also he also owns some uh
1:18:47
he owned a company he sold to PayPal, So you know, he's got
1:18:51
his hands in a lot of different what do you call it bowls? I
1:18:58
don't know what the fingers and I guess I don't know. But anyway,
1:19:00
what I'm saying is he's got a lot of money. He is well to
1:19:04
do, so you know, that's one thing that attracts or or at least
1:19:11
tempts women. And then on top of that, he's in California, where
1:19:14
the laws are such that they can be used against him. But also he
1:19:17
is, uh, you know, in a place where there are probably more
1:19:24
people that will leach off of you and try to, like, you know,
1:19:28
take your ship. I think I think that in places as affluent as
1:19:30
that, you're gonna have more of these kind of parasitic relationships. I'll put
1:19:38
it that way. And I know because I've heard. I mean, I
1:19:41
don't know people in Hollywood like that, but like I know people who work
1:19:44
in the in the area of Hollywood, and they know people like Lisa Brighton,
1:19:48
for example, and they talked about how bad it is. And I
1:19:51
think you guys know you can see it. You know, how they how
1:19:56
they how dirty they do each other in that in that town, and not
1:19:59
just in the inner payment industry, but just like all other people with money.
1:20:02
It's it's just it's a bunch of places where people say shit they don't
1:20:09
actually mean to each other because they're trying to get in good with them and
1:20:12
you're gonna have stuff like this. It's just not a good situation. Anyway.
1:20:16
I hope that mister Johnson, you know, works it out and uh
1:20:23
yeah, I mean it's it's just a lot. It's it's a lot,
1:20:26
and I hope he makes it so. Man, if you want to like
1:20:28
tell us your story, you're welcome to come on our show, Tech Mogul
1:20:31
Brian Johnson. I'm fully not expecting that, but I will always put it
1:20:35
out there, Alice Jones, You're welcome to come on the show whenever you
1:20:40
want, and we probably we can anyway. It would definitely have to be
1:20:50
a non YouTube show, if ye. But we are on Rumble, I
1:21:00
mean yeah, yeah, we are on a bunch of other platform and I
1:21:03
think it would be a big hit, and I bet he would have a
1:21:06
lot. I think he would have more useful things to say about men's issues
1:21:11
than you'd probably expect. So, oh, I bet he has all kinds
1:21:15
of he's isn't isn't he uh? Paying child support and stuff? I don't
1:21:20
know. I don't know, or I can't remember whether he's divorced or he's
1:21:26
supporting kids as a as the bread weather winner of a family. But I
1:21:30
know he has kids. Yeah, I'm pretty sure he's divorced. I never
1:21:34
remember feminists making fun of his testimony and divorce court. But in any case,
1:21:43
this story, guys serves as a reminder if you're if you're going to
1:21:50
take the risk of getting into a relationship with a woman, pay attention to
1:21:56
everything about her and and think about it from the standpoint of if she was
1:22:01
a dude. Is this a dude you would get into a business relationship with
1:22:06
where he's allowed to get out of it anytime he wants with no penalty,
1:22:13
but you can't. And even if he leaves the relationship, he can still
1:22:17
take your responsibility to him with him and hold you accountable. That's that's the
1:22:26
type of relationship that you end up in with a woman, is that she
1:22:30
can leave the relationship and still expect you to hold up your end of it
1:22:35
financially forever. So and she can be taken seriously with that expectation, and
1:22:44
in many cases the courts will agree with her. So you have to be
1:22:47
very careful and really seriously vet for character and is something she does would be
1:22:57
really sus in terms of her person some accountability if she was a dude,
1:23:01
it is when she's a woman. Yep. All right, So I think
1:23:15
we're gonna wrap it up there and go into the Patron Show. Look at
1:23:19
this Piers Morgan article, which I'm sure is going to be very enlightening.
1:23:24
He's going to make a very rational case or why Elon Musk is wrong about
1:23:30
Alex Jones and couldn't be more wrong, more wrong than about Alex Jones.
1:23:38
I look forward to that eyebrows. So if you want to join us,
1:23:48
go to Feed the Badger dot com. Set up a monthly subscription five bucks
1:23:51
a month. We'll get you into our discord were you'll be able to watch
1:23:55
all the additional content and if you give it a higher levels, you could
1:23:58
even be in the conversation with us live. So you can actively watch Mike
1:24:04
shoot fireballs from his as. You can actually actively see it happen in real
1:24:10
time. I think that's so anyway. Yeah, so we're gonna wrap it
1:24:19
up there. Hopefully I'll see you guys in the Patron Show. If you
1:24:21
guys like this video, please smash that like button subscribe. If you're not
1:24:26
already subscribe, hit the bellf notifications, leave us a comment, let us
1:24:29
know what you guys think about what we discussed on today's video, and please
1:24:32
please please share this video because sharing is caring. Thanks guys so much for
1:24:38
coming on today's episode of HBr News. Shout out to the Rumble Gang,
1:24:43
and we will talk to you all in the next video.