Well, we've got a few stories to cover tonight. I'm not going to start off with the big one. The big one obviously is the publication in time of the quote unquote conspiracy that helped to usher in Biden. But we'll get to that in just a few minutes. So let's start with something, I guess, a little bit. More recent that's happened. So it looks like Lou Dobbs has been released AKA fired from Fox. And the reason for that is a fairly substantial lawsuit that came in against him. And I guess the network as well. And it's let's see, where did it come in from? What was the name of the company? Smart. MADEC smart. MADEC is a, another voting systems company. And it's alleging that there's been defamation against their capabilities, the way that their, their systems are working and essentially taking the, there was fraud in the election argument. And I'm coming back with no, that's impossible. Our machines work perfectly. And since they work perfectly, therefore you're defaming us. This is an interesting phenomenon. So it, obviously there is a history of machines being being, I guess, questioned the Diebold machines had some issues and there was definitely election irregularities that came into question with use of those machines. Obviously right now, now we've got two companies, including including the smart MADEC in the current election where people are questioning the results that are coming out of the machines based on a number of different characteristics. But this time around, it looks like the manufacturers are playing hardball. And so the, the, the lawsuit against Lou Dobbs here, and to be fair, along with Fox as well, not just him individually was for 2.7 billion. So the way I'm assuming they're coming up with these numbers, usually the way these defamation lawsuit figures come out is based on the potential loss in revenue, that results from the defamation activity meaning it's going to be that much harder for them to sell. 2.7 billion worth of their machines, or maybe it's just a fraction. Maybe that's like a three X multiplier on that. So let's say it's, it's going to be hard for them to sell 900 million worth of their machines which is what they were projecting initially. And now after all the negative publicity that's come about, it's going to be that much more difficult for them to do that. And so they're going to recoup the money and there probably is a factor. I don't know if it's a three X factor, there's usually some kind of a factor which is really sort of a punitive portion of that lawsuit. But the first thing that Fox did in a complete surprise to no one is get rid of Lou Dobbs. So they immediately replaced him. Now I don't have Fox. I don't watch Fox. I. I think Fox has been just pandering to the conservative out there for years now. There's not really been a strong conservative bent to Fox ever since Roger Ailes is no longer there, but nonetheless, plenty of people still watch Fox. And so I think the demographic is definitely on the older side, people that were watching Fox, when it first came out. That are still fans of Fox, even though most of the people that were around in the early days of Fox are done. So this is going to have a I think a ripple effect. And one of the things that came out in the story that I was reading about it is also that along with a lot of very positive tweets about this action there are also calls to get rid of more people from Fox. Essentially saying, well, it's good that they've started getting rid of their conservatives, but they shouldn't stop there. They should also get rid of Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, judge Jeanine. So this, this action, I think by a lot of liberals is being perceived as. As just a swing of the way, we're a push of the wave in the right direction. Not so much a there's a particular thing that happened, which is going to negatively affect this company, making voting machines. So they're looking at it from the big picture of essentially taking Biden's word at what he was saying, which is when, by any means necessary, there are no rules, all rules are off, do whatever you want. You will get cover from the Democrats in any manner possible, whether there's violence involved, where there there is. As in this case, lawsuits involved that I suspect is probably not going to go very far. All these things are are part of the large push by the Democrats by the socialist Democrats. In into the the current political climate. And I think their goal is, and we'll see how much of it works. It certainly is working so far. I think the goal is just to shift the goalposts. This, this is really just moving the goalposts in a direction that is much more liberal across the board. Another way to look at it, I guess, is it's shifting the center. It's saying that anybody that used to be what was maybe the center of 10, 15 years ago. At this point is clearly a right-wing fascist and anybody that was a sort of a casual Democrat that like Hillary Clinton, perhaps and would have voted for the first female president, but maybe didn't really necessarily share a lot of deep liberal beliefs. Those people are now just the conservatives. And I think the people that are in the middle now that could be seen as centrists are essentially what was the hard left in the past. These are the the sort of diehards people that would go out to protests in the past and the, the role of people that were those in the past, people that might even go to some rallies, go to some protests. But nonetheless a would call themselves Democrats, not some other party. Now I think that's shifted further to where people that would have called themselves anarchists would have called themselves socialists, but didn't call themselves communists. Those are the people making up the left wing of the democratic party, which is really why I keep calling it the socialist Democrat party. I don't think they've officially changed the name, but boy, if you look at it, How they're actually acting and who is in the Democrat party? I it's absolutely the socialist Democrat party at this point. So with that, I guess we can move on to the next story, because this is, I don't think this is horribly surprising and I don't think this is going to result in a, in a fast wind, by any means for this company, but it is indicative of what's happening right now, which is. SU deep platform burn and push and do anything that you can to eradicate anybody who didn't vote for Biden. Anybody that doesn't believe in the socialist agenda, that's their goal. And that's what they're still running with. All right. Well enough about that. Let's see. What else? Well there's some more Bernie means I'm going to skip over those that are coming out. I think that'll keep happening for a year. Honestly, the Bernie Bernie memes are pretty damn hilarious. All of a sudden done. Let's see, German prosecutors sees 60 million worth of Bitcoin and are asking for the password and amazingly the the, the person who they're seizing this, these assets from is refusing to provide access to the 60 million worth of CS Bitcoins. So this is a, this is interesting. This is a the sort of thing that I think people that advocate privacy and people that are buying Bitcoin. Always bring up as the positives about owning Bitcoin versus Fiat currency, or even versus gold or something else like that is that Bitcoin has. And it's not just Bitcoin, right? It's all blockchain means currency, but it has a, another level of protection, which none of the other asset types do, which is in the end, it's all locked in. To a locker that ultimately only you can access if you did it right to begin with, right. If you ended up writing down or somehow making it easily available what your pass phrase, hash, whatever method you use is. Obviously that defeats the security, but if you manage to memorize it, if you manage to store it in a way that is completely obvious gated which means that it's not at all obvious or evident that what somebody is looking at is actually a passphrase. If you can manage to do that, then yeah, they're pretty much screwed. It's gonna, it's gonna make it a lot more difficult. For enforcement activities to be able to to seize assets when those assets are protected by something that is not breakable. At least right now, I mean, everything breakable in the long run right now, there's, there's always a method there's always time. There's always systems that'll end up. Being able to compromise things through back doors that maybe weren't intended for that purpose, but for the time being certainly cryptocurrencies are offering a level of protection above and beyond. Now, this is I think, going to be also, unfortunately the negative side effect of that is it's going to push for more legislation, both in Europe. And you know, since Germany pretty much runs Europe at this point I think they're the hub for it. So in both Germany and in the United States and other parts of the world, we're going to see more legislation coming out to prevent this type of thing from happening with cryptocurrency effectively, if we can't get your passwords. Voluntarily from you, we're going to make it illegal for you to do certain things or to maintain a password, or let's say that I mean, let's just pull up a theoretical out of thin air here, right? There's nothing stopping a us legislature from passing a law that says that any time a new password is created for cryptocurrency locker by law, that password has to be stored. In a device that has a backdoor available to the government. So if a law like that passes any company that is offering a method of storage for the for the key is going to be breaking us law and will be subject to to legal action, which effectively means no one's going to do it. So, so every, every locker you'll be able to use. We'll be compliant with us legal requirements. So I think it is absolutely the heyday right now and absolutely the right time to to make sure that you take whatever precautions you need to, to ensure that access to your crypto currencies, even ones that you haven't bought yet, but may buy in the future. Is as secure and as private as possible because the privacy on that is absolutely bound to be reduced during the Biden presidency. Frankly, I think it would be reduced even if it wasn't the Biden presidency. I think there are more and more people in traditional banking and finance that don't like the fact that crypto has these special protections and they would like to make sure that. The playing field is level, which is to say right now, if you're keeping money in the bank and the government decides that they, you owe money to them or something happened where they're going to seize assets from you one way or another, then they can do that fairly easily in the bank. The bank's not going to be protecting your money at all. Certainly cryptocurrency right now is one of the few ways that you can. Managed to hold on to your money, to your, even in the face of government wanting to to get their grubby hands, hands on it. So let's see what else? So that was a serine from Germany, but like I said, I think it'll, it'll be happening in the U S before, too long. Do we need talk about Gretta at all? There's been a little bit of comments on Gretta. I think now that she's 18, it there's a couple things happening. One is she doesn't sound or look like a child anymore. See that magically happens when somebody turns 18. Just kidding. And the other thing that's happened is now she is legal in a lot of senses in the U S for meme making for comedians to use in. In any kind of humor, including dirty humor. And for a lot of other things, which people kind of treated her with kid gloves when she was under 18, but now that she's crossed the magic birthday age all bets are off. And I think that there's a very good chance that she's not going to be happy with the results and might decide to not be nearly as public facing as her parents have pushed her to be in the past. Because she's going to have to deal with all the backlash with a lot of the, the, the memes fake images, fake videos and everything else of her that she's not going to be too happy about it. I think you guys know what I'm talking about. I don't need to get into him too many details on that count. Biden. Let's see. What's the latest Biden had. Boy, I don't know if we should say he forgot. Or he was just sort of riffing and had no idea where he was a really he was doing, but he manages to talk about how he was being shot at when he was in Iraq. And you know, there have been plenty of people that have said they've been shot at generally if they weren't wearing a uniform, they were usually lying about the incident. And in this case It, it appears that was true as well, because he actually admitted about 10 years ago, when that story first came out of him being shot at, and the other people on that flight said, well, no, we were absolutely not being shot at. He admitted that the story was exaggerated and then maybe another airplane or helicopter was being shot at and not theirs, but it sort of seemed like it might've been there as well. All of that just flew out the window. So either if he forgot that he apologized or he doesn't think it matters, or he forgot about the whole incident and it's now just pulling stuff out of thin, they're just making things up on the fly to what he was doing. And somehow to Democrats it sure seems like saying that I was shot at when I was in a war zone. Is supposed to appeal to a wide swath of Americans and say, Oh, that boy, you were being patriotic by doing that, you've risked your life to be somewhere where you had no business being. And and you were even shot at and you managed to not actually get hit so good for you. So I don't know, I really don't know what that's supposed to accomplish, but he did get caught in that lie, which is Pretty funny. And speaking of funny, we have a a meme story that is absolutely ridiculous. So apparently when the FBI filed evidence against Brian McCreary, Brian McCleary McCreary is I guess the the crazy dude with the horns on his head. He's the, the que. Shaman was that when he was being described at? Yeah, I think so. The Q shaman guy, so bare chested firs around them and the big, big furry hat with horns on them and walking through the Capitol sitting down and the speaker's chair. And I, I hate when people say Nancy Pelosi's chair, that that is such bullshit. Like Nancy Pelosi's chair. She owned that chair. No, that is the speaker's chair. And the speaker changes every time that there's a shift in politics. So calling it Nancy's share is, is absolutely wrong. Now, if I'm, if I'm wrong and she actually went and bought her own chair, that she likes more than the one that was assigned to her as the speaker's chair. And she owns the damn chair buying somebody, correct me, tell me I'm wrong. And that's actually her chair. But from everything I can see, she's just sitting on a seat assigned to a particular post. So let's just call that what it is. But anyway, so this dude, Brian, well, I guess as a pizza delivery guy, which is fairly new, I hadn't heard that before. Interesting. But apparently in the, in the affidavit filed by the FBI that has an image of him in the Capitol behind him. In the background, looking like an official picture, official painting on the walls of the Capitol is a nude picture of a black guy with a let's just say he's very well endowed and This picture I've, I've seen it before because friends have pranked me with it. That's kind of become a meme, like getting a Rick rolled where somebody says, Oh, you gotta, you gotta see this, this amazing image that the Hubble telescope captured and you click on the link and, yeah. Okay. Well, I guess they got sure there's a picture of this black dude with his huge member looking at, you know, Hubble telescope image. Anyway. So somebody managed to Photoshop that image as though it was an actual painting hanging inside the Capitol. And then the FBI used the doctored image and I'm sure they didn't realize it was doctored, but they use that image as part of evidence that was submitted. So, I mean, this is funny on so many levels, not the least of which is the fact that. You now have an image, which is 100% been doctored and altered, which the defense will say, this is a, an altered image because it's true because they didn't bother looking to see whether it wasn't doctorate image. So the FBI is coming across like a bunch of nincompoops on this. We didn't do their homework and are submitting images that are not. Actual captured CCT footage, but they're just, you know, somebody's cell phone photo that then went through the internet, became a meme, got tweaked with this image on it. And then somebody at the FBI probably snagged it off of a tweet. And so the aha see, here's here's proof that he was in the Capitol because we have a photo of him in the Capitol and didn't bother checking or realizing that this was actually a doctor damaged, right from the get-go. So a little bit sad for the FBI, that one better like next time Mike pillow guy. Well you know, I guess what he brought to the president. Earlier in, in January, he is now put together into a, I guess it's being described as a documentary, a, essentially a video that shows a whole bunch of election fraud, proof documents all gathered in a video source. And he went so far as to actually buy time on the OAM network, which is a Fox competitor. It's also a Newsmax competitor. It's another network that's watched by a lot of conservatives, a lot of older people, a lot of dare I say boomers. And I can definitely say that because my parents watch it and they are boomers. In fact, they're on the very oldest range of boomers. Anyway, Oh man played his video and they put up a, a big w w what do you, what do you call those things? Like a, an announcement or a a they put up a disclaimer, I guess, is what they put up before the video. And the disclaimer is not really saying anything. And you're just, just. The creating some distance between OAN and this video that they're playing because the airtime was purchased from them. Just like any advertisement. The is airtime. That's purchased from a network that's on the air, but OEM, which is one American news. They played this and I'm not, I, well, again, I guess the reason that he had to buy actual airtime is because he wanted to reach people that don't simply. Get their news online, which certainly most younger people do. They don't watch television either cable or, or they're they typically rely on programs on the web, maybe YouTube videos, maybe not even that maybe just tweets and other post things on social media to get their news. So, so basically Mike paid to have a video play to people that already 100% agree. With the contents of the video and probably didn't convert a single person that wasn't already in the belief that the election fraud occurred. And I will obviously say, I think it's evident from everything I've seen. There's a ton of instances of election fraud. The problem is that there was not a cohesive. A lawsuit brought up that combined all this, the Texas one, I think was the best going forward. And unfortunately, SCOTUS, which I've always said is very liberal. And that the, the last two nominees that Trump put in there were not any less liberal than the rest of SCOTUS. And they absolutely are. They effectively had shut down. Texas is challenged by saying that Texas doesn't have a standing in the manner that one state can't challenge another state's election procedures. Even if those election procedures go counter to the laws, it is only up to the people within that state to then challenge those procedures and go after the people that did things that were illegal. So it's an unfortunate Result for Texas. And I think for a lot of people, but I think it's also an understandable one in a sense that if you allow one state to get, to start suing another state for the way they're conducting elections, then you open up the Gates to having, for example, California is suing Texas. At the next election for having ID checks as part of election and saying that actually validates human rights. And of course the ninth circuit court would absolutely agree with that stance. And so Texas is election results might be held up or invalidated. And then the only thing that Texas could rely on as they Supreme court to essentially say the same thing to California, That it said to Texas this time around now even though I might understand why the Supreme court went the way he did in this particular issue, I think them not accepting to hear or review cases that were filed other than Texas is the thing that demonstrates the very strong, liberal bias on the Supreme court in general. The court is not interested in. Hearing anything that might make it look as though it has a conservative bias now who is afraid of appearing like they're conservative. Well, liberals and centrists. And I think there's a website. I can't remember the name of the website. I posted it on. On no agenda social a month ago or so, but it had a very good breakdown of every case that every judge on the Supreme court, since the 18 hundreds has heard and then grading the vote of that judge if known. For that particular case on the spectrum of conservative to liberal and things like you know, strict, constitutional it's would be on the conservative side. Revisionist would be on the liberal side. What you see is a graph where everybody that's appointed except for Clarence Thomas. He's literally like the one exception so far, but every other judge, both Republican appointees. And Democrat appointees, wherever they start in that particular political spectrum over time, they all drift to the left. They all become more liberal. So if you put in somebody who is already a centrist, but considers themselves a Republican, somebody like a, a Bush type Republican. What you're going to end up with is somebody that's more of a Ruth Bader Ginsberg Democrat over time. And that's just been historical law. There's literally only one exception to that in SCOTUS, which is Clarence Thomas, every single other Republican appointee people that the Democrats were really hating on during their confirmation hearings. These people rule more in favor of a liberal. Yeah, to these cases, they're, they're, they're voting more like liberals vote in other courts than they are, like they did initially, or like the four off on the for a lot of them, like they did prior to being in the Supreme court. So in a lot of ways, it seems like getting an appointment to a lifetime position, frees somebody up to become more liberal than they have been pretending to be. And maybe that's exactly what's happening at this point. I'm certainly speculating on that. But the one thing that we do know that is a fact is their voting records and the voting records absolutely drift left for every single judge with the one exception over the course of time. All right. Well, I guess it's time to talk about the the, the big elephant in the room as it were. And that is the, the first story that I mentioned. And the thing that I think most people have been talking about, which is the time story talking about the election fortification that was done by the media that was done in collusion with the Democrat party. Of course they're not using the word rigged. That would be a, I think even for them going above and beyond and admitting to something that they don't necessarily want to admit to, but in effect, confirming. That they would make sure that this election was going to go down the way that they wanted to, which is obviously Joe Biden. And that was going to be done by any means necessary. It included things like getting laws changed in situations where voting laws couldn't be changed. It was getting the right people in place to simply ignore laws. It was making sure that people that were working for election commissions in part-time and temporary positions were predominantly Democrats. We've had evidence of this where over two thirds of people that were working on the election process were actually Democrats. They were partisans. The, the volunteer effort was also much stronger. On the Democrat side for election volunteers as well. And what it pointed out in the article that I certainly wasn't aware of is that a lot of this was masterminded by the one of the guys from the AFL CIO, which is the largest union in the country, a guy named I'm sure I'm mastering his last name. P O D H O R Z E R. And so for, well, over a year, he was doing things behind the scenes and making sure that the political landscape was going to ensure a Biden victory. So this is, this is one of the few times where we actually have admittance by the AFL CIO of rigging an election. Now, of course they would never use those words. They would use very different words. And I'm sure that they would argue that anything that was done was perfectly legal and frankly, most of it probably is legal. The thing that made the selection different, wasn't simply that the Democrats managed to do things to steal the election in which there's plenty of examples of things that are very clearly election tampering as well. But that the Democrats started working on this both through legitimate and not legitimate means for over a year prior to the election. This was not a knee jerk reaction to COVID. This started before COVID. This started, regardless of whether COVID was going to work in making people become. Unhappy with Trump. This started prior to all that. And so regardless of whether we had COVID or not, the plan was in place to orchestrate a very favorable platform for the Democrats and as unfavorable a platform for the Republicans as possible, the fact that COVID actually caught on and I'm not going to jump into what COVID is or how it started, but the fact that it caught on. That the country believed that things outta be done very differently this year than they were done last year absolutely helped Democrats, but they weren't relying on just COVID to win the election. They were already working on the ground level to ensure that this election would go their way. And that somewhat touches on what I've been saying and what I'm going to continue to talk about. With more detail on this podcast, which is that if the Republicans and let's, in fact, I'm not even going to call them Republicans because it's really, if the conservatives, because I think the Republicans are done, if the conservatives want to win the next election or more importantly, make inroads during the midterm election. There's a lot of work to be done. That work starts on the ground level. That work is for everybody, not just people that are employed by the parties, don't expect the Republican party in any state to do a whole lot. The Republican party nationwide itself has proven itself to simply be Democrat light party. And in some States, the Republican party is much stronger than the national party. But even still forget about parties, forget about counting on somebody else. Don't assume that your donation of $50, even $50 a month is going to do a whole lot to secure the next election. Everybody will need to actually be involved to take on some level of personal ownership in the election process to make sure that the next election doesn't go the way of the last election. This article just touches on some of the things that Democrats did. Some of them are unsavory, but plenty of them are perfectly legal. Conservatives are going to need to start matching the Democrats on exactly those same legal tactics. They're going to need to get more involved. They're going to need to become more aware of how the, the election process works. And their need to, they're going to need to contribute more than just simply a few bucks, because if that doesn't happen, if, if all you do is just hope that well, after last election, everybody's going to wake up and we'll, we'll definitely not have another one of these. It's not going to fly because the Democrats have got their base working at the grassroots on the ground. Pounding the pavement, volunteering, taking those low paying jobs when the, there are openings for election workers and they're doing all these things, not because they care about poor people, not because they care about black people and other minorities, they're doing it because the liberal elites know that this is how you hold onto power. Was this AFL CIO. Doing this on behalf of their members. Absolutely not. There now, more members, more members. I shouldn't say that there are now more people that are working low wage jobs that consider themselves to be right of center than ever in the history of this country. The, the Republican party for as shitty as it currently is, did manage to make a lot of people realize. That the party of the rich elites is the Democrat party and the party of the little guy trying to make a living, trying to feed his family is the Republican party. Now, unfortunately they've missed the Mark on so many other things, but on this particular point, I think they've done a pretty good job. So when the AFL CIO gets involved in electing Joe Biden, it's not for the benefit of their members. It is for the benefits of the S the technocratic elite. The people that actually run this country are not some bankers. They're not a bunch of Jews from 180 years ago. Like a lot of idiots seem to believe on the right as well. Now, the people that want to make sure that the country is run by Biden. Are people that are first and second generation billionaires, there are people that have made their money and let's be honest. A lot of them made their money relatively. Honestly, I don't think we need to pile on everyone that has grown a company to a huge size and saying they were lying, cheating and stealing. No Zuckerberg did a great job of bringing in marketing experts that can transform his shitty copy of. Of my space into the behemoth that it is today. So he absolutely did the right thing from a business standpoint. The problem is by creating that behemoth and suckering, a bunch of people to join Facebook and become the products that they sell to advertisers that now funnels money to people like him. That, that technocrats elite that we're talking about, who don't see the anybody really on the right, but certainly not a guy like Trump as being their candidate. They've never liked other people that weren't also technocratic. And so for as much as you can see, well, Trump's a multi-millionaire if not a billionaire. All these guys are as well. Aren't they all part of the same club? The answer is no. And actually, I think Adam and John talked about this, they see him as a rich blue collar guy. He's a guy who is working on construction sites. There are guys sitting in offices and typing on their computers and generating code without doing any physical labor. Now, of course, in reality, neither Trump nor any of these. A billionaire and business owners do an actual physical work of any kind. But, but it's the perception. It's the perception that they come from a white collar background and Trump comes from a blue collar background. And so Trump isn't part of their club. Trump may be part of a rich man's club, but it's a different rich man's club. It's sort of like in the old days, you can have a golf course that would. W, well, it would have a fairly expensive initiation fee and expensive dues. But on top of that, they also didn't allow blacks and Jews and other people that they didn't like into the club. And it's the same thing here that the technocrat elite doesn't want a guy like because even though he may be able to afford the initiation fee, he's not part of their club. And along with that, the rest of us, because anybody that supports a blue collar guy, like Trump is clearly also not a member of their club and never will be a member of their club at best. They're going to use us as the products and then generate money off of us. And this is why I've been advocating so strongly for people to get off of social media. Get off of social media that gives money to people that hate you. You don't have to hate them. You could be okay with all of them. You may think they've done great things for all I care. But what you have to realize is they do hate you. They look down on you. They don't see you as somebody that is an equal. They see you as somebody that is more of a vermin running on the street. That's the way they perceive you, and that's why the money they make off their companies. They turn around and provide as funding for this whole organization on the left that was built up that is outside of the actual DFL outside of the actual Democrat party. But nonetheless has been spending money on making sure that Democrats win. And this article is a wonderful thing. I mean, clearly the reason they did it is because they're not afraid of talking about it right now. Otherwise time would have never published this, but the fact that they're not afraid of talking about it is an indicator of just how cocky they feel right now and how vulnerable they will be as a result of that cockiness two years from now. So right now is the time to start organizing right now is a time to start planning, getting involved. And understanding what you can do on the local level individually with your time, with your resources, with your support and with your money. But the money part is like fourth or fifth place in that list. Guys, you can't just expect to write a check and everything to get solved. It's not going to happen that way.