Oath Keepers Convicted of Seditious Conspiracy

Hi guys. Welcome to The Liz Wheeler Show. I’m Liz Wheeler. Question for you guys. Are you subscribed to this show? If not, why not? Please go over to Apple Podcast or Spotify, YouTube or Rumble, wherever you listen or watch a podcast. Click that subscribe button. I greatly appreciate everybody who subscribed, and I’m not going to stop bugging those of you who haven’t yet. Until you do. Greatly appreciate it. Greatly appreciate it. Okay, we do have a lot to talk about today. What are we going to talk about today? Well, the gay marriage bill passed officially in the Senate, so I wanna briefly talk about that because the implications to this, it actually has almost nothing to do with homosexuality, same sex attraction or somebody’s choice of a life partner. I mean, it’s impossible to fully separate it, but that’s not the biggest problem with what the United States Senate did.

Pete Buttigieg wants you to think that that’s the biggest problem, but it’s actually not. So I wanna talk about that a little bit. I also wanna talk about the weirdest story ever, and that’s saying a lot, having spent all these years in politics and in political commentary and in the media, there are a lot of really, really weird stories about personalities and talent and hosts, and certainly politicians. And this one might just take the cake. I think this one actually is worse than Eric Swalwell’s. Well, all of Eric’s Swalwell’s stories. I wanna talk about that story. I also wanna break down the Oath Keepers trial. This is related to January 6th. I know a lot of you guys are tired of talking about this. You wanna leave it in the past. And honestly, we can’t. We can’t leave this in the past because if we do not root out corruption, especially corruption that’s targeted at conservatives, then the Left, who you who weaponize the federal governments target conservatives with that corruption are going to do it again. So I wanna break down this verdict and what exactly this means. So let’s get to it.

So let’s just back up for a second. On November 21st, I sent out the following tweet. I said, can we take a moment and thank Elon Musk for ridding Twitter of child pornography and child trafficking hashtags? Of all the battles he’s fighting, this is the most important. Think about how many little children he’s saving from sexual abuse, exploitation, and torture. I could cry thinking about it. I tweeted that because obviously, most of the discussion and debates surrounding Elon Musk and him taking the home of Twitter is related to free speech, which is important. It’s critically important to the survival of our nation. But Twitter has been a cesspool of child exploitation, child sexual abuse imagery and links and websites and trafficking. And the previous administrators of Twitter didn’t do anything about it. They created child safety teams and they made claims that there were ways that, that you could report it. And then they took away those reporting mechanisms. But Elon Musk has actually done more in his, what, one, two months of being CEO of Twitter to get rid of this on Twitter than the previous owners combined. So Elon responded to my tweet and said, this will forever be our top priority.

That’s it. This will forever be our top priority. And this should be a moment of unity, right? This should be something that regardless of whether you voted for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and Joe Biden, or whether you voted for Donald Trump, this should be something that we can come together, we can hold hands and we can say, this is a victory for us all because children’s lives are being safe, children’s bodies are being protected, children’s minds are being protected. But the way that the Left is reacting to this is disgusting. The Left is, first of all, denying that this is the case. Even though you, I mean, if you want, you can see for yourself that these places that used to be streams of, of links to child pornography are now basically empty. I mean, it’s an ongoing problem, right? It’s never going to be completely eradicated.

It will be an ongoing battle to make sure that this is eradicated from Twitter. But Elon Musk has done a tremendous job. He’s making tremendous headway here. But the Left can’t celebrate this. And so I just have one simple thing to say to the Left here. If you cannot celebrate the fact that little children are being saved from sexual exploitation, sexual trafficking, and sexual abuse and sexual torture because you’re so unhappy about Elon’s free speech on Twitter, then you are part of the problem. The fact that the Left refuses to celebrate Elon Musk, ridding Twitter of child porn tells us all we need to know about the Left period. So then of course, we move to the gay marriage bill. The gay marriage bill. We, we talked about this two weeks ago. We did a whole deep dive on why conservatives need to fight for traditional marriage, why we should oppose the government endorsing or validating same sex unions and redefining marriage to include men who want to be with other men and women who want to be with other women. How the government doesn’t have a right to redefine words. And today, or yesterday in the United States Senate, this gay marriage bill passed 61 votes to 36 votes. Take a look at this.

Sir. 61, the nays are 36. The bill as amend as amended has passed.

Mr. President, what a great day. What a great day.

So that was Chuck Schumer’s voice in the background that said, what a great day. Did you guys know that Chuck Schumer’s daughter is gay? Chuck Schumer’s daughter is a lesbian who is quote unquote married to another woman, and they are expecting a child. He posted this on Twitter. You can go see for it. You can go see it for yourself. He posted a picture of himself in his office on the phone with his daughter telling this, and maybe this is here nor there. Maybe it is relevant when you see a United States Senator using the power of the federal government to give something to his own family members that’s outside of the purview of what the United States Senate is supposed to be doing here. But that vote number is what we should focus on. 61 votes to 36 votes. That means that 12 Republicans voted in favor of this bill.

That would be Senator Collins of Maine, Senator Portman of Ohio, Senator Burr of North Carolina, Senator Tillis of North Carolina, Senator Romney from Utah, Senator Murkowski of Alaska, Senator Blunt of Missouri, Senator Capito of West Virginia, Senator Loomis of Wyoming, Senator Sullivan of Alaska, Senator Young of Indiana, and Senator Ernst of Iowa. Each of these 12 members of the United States Senate who pretend to be Republicans should be voted out of office right now. Because if they don’t understand that this has nothing to do with being a tolerant nation, nothing to do with being an accepting nation, nothing to do with a nation that protects equal rights for every person regardless of their age, their sex, their race, their sexual orientation. If they don’t understand that this gay marriage bill is a threat to religious liberty, if they don’t understand that this gay marriage bill empowers the federal government to act as the arbiter of truth,

meaning when we have a word that has a definition already, marriage, marriage is an institution that was ordained by God. It is recognized by the government. It is not given to us by the government. The government cannot change it. The government cannot abolish it. The government cannot redefine it. But if the government seizes the power to redefine a word like marriage, then they are appointing themselves as the arbiters of what’s true. They are telling you and me, me, as a practicing Catholic, that I must accept that the definition of marriage, which is taught by the Catholic church, I cannot live under that definition in our country, that I must accept an additional government endowed definition of marriage, which includes something that the Catholic Church teaches is immoral and simply not valid. Same sex, quote unquote, marriage is here. If a government endows themselves with the power to be the arbiter of truth, then they are giving themselves the power to be authoritarian because it doesn’t stop at just the redefinition of the word marriage.

Where is the limiting principle on this? What couldn’t, what couldn’t they redefine to serve their political interests? The answer to that, of course, is there is no limiting principle on this. This is why this bill, this is one of the reasons why this bill is so awful. It’s one of the reasons why we should be so upset at these 12 Republican Senators who, for the sake of whatever their excuse is, virtue signaling, they don’t wanna impose their religious beliefs on other people, they think there’s protections for religious liberty in this bill. They think people have a right to live however they want. I don’t care what their justification is for voting for this bill. If they don’t understand what this is really about, then they don’t deserve to be a United States Senator, let alone a member of the Republican Party in the United States Senate.

We have, of course, we expect this from the Left, right? We expect Democrats to portray this gay marriage bill as being about homosexuals. This is what Pete Buttigieg, Secretary Pete tweeted. He goes, strange feeling to see something as basic and as personal as the durability of your marriage come up for debate on the Senate floor. And this is what I would, this is what I would say in response to Secretary Pete. It’s not about your personal choices. It’s not about your personal relationships. It’s not about who you live with. It’s not about any of that. It’s not about you. It’s a matter of whether politicians have the power to redefine words that impact all of us. Because if they do, they become the arbiters of quote unquote what’s true, and therefore, authoritarian. And that’s dangerous even to you.

Every single one of these senators should be kicked out of the United States Senate. So now we get to the weirdest story of the day. This really is like the weirdest, weirdest story that I’ve ever heard. Maybe you’ve heard, maybe you’ve seen headlines, maybe you’ve seen pictures, maybe you’ve been afraid to click on articles that show the photos of this individual. Sam Brinton is his name. He is a biological male, just as a little trigger warning to the Left here. But Sam Brinton identifies as gender fluid and uses the pronouns they/them. I will not indulge that delusion, but Sam Brinton is billed as the first non-binary Biden admin, or senior government official, really not just in the Biden administration. He is a Biden administration senior official, but he is the first non-binary senior official in the United States government.

And let’s actually show this picture. He, he crossed dresses. He’s just the weirdest of the weirdo dudes. This is him in some kind of ballgown on the red carpet. This guy, you’ve seen him, right? Yeah, this guy. So it’s not just that he’s a cross dresser, it’s not just that he’s a man who dresses in women’s clothing with a weird mohawk. He also is very open about having really disturbing sexual fetishes. Oh, yeah, we’re gonna talk about this. He, he calls himself a pup handler. Oh, there it is on the screen. So, sorry, I’m not sorry. He calls himself a pup handler. What does that mean? Well, you can infer what that means by looking at this photograph. It means that it’s some kind of weird bondage, leather sexual fetish, where one person pretends they’re a dog and the other person is the dominant owner.

Like what? Gross, disgusting. Messed up, perverted, just totally effed up. I don’t even have words to describe how messed up this is. This individual has been elevated by the Biden Administration because, you know, this is a diversity hire. This is, this is, look at this like a trans person in a position of power. This person, Sam Brinton, posed with Rachel Levine. Rachel Levine. And they were lauded as the first non-binary and trans members, senior members of a presidential administration. Well, well, well, okay. So now let’s get to the headlines. He already made headlines because of his perverted behavior. This is clearly dis psychologically disturbed, sexually disturbed behavior. But now apparently he has been arrested for stealing luggage. He’s a suitcase thief. So arrested for stealing suitcases. This story is so weird. This is what the Washington Examiner reports. The police report said Brinton took a flight from Washington to Minneapolis St.

Paul in the afternoon of September 16th. He checked no bags. And after landing, allegedly went to a luggage carousel, pulled a blue Vera Bradley bag out, tore off the name tag, stuck it in a handbag, and fled the area at a quick pace. So that, by the way, is the first red flag because I think it could be a normal mistake to pull the wrong bag off of a carousel. If it’s an average looking hard black hardback away bag or something, you pull it off. You didn’t look to see if it was yours. And 50 people have the same suitcase as you. Okay? That’s happened. That can happen. I think it’s actually happened to a member of our team, as a matter of fact. But most people upon realizing that they’ve done this, they immediately turn around and return it because they’re mortified that they did this.

They didn’t mean to inconvenience someone. They wanna rectify this immediately. They don’t rip off the name tag of the person whose bag it actually belongs to, stuff it in their purse, and run away. That shows me that this is, well, deliberate or something. This is what the Washington examiner says. The victim who police described as a known adult female, reported the bag missing and identified it from a video of the carousel. She said the bag in its contents had a value of $2,300. The report said police have a video of Brinton later at the Intercontinental St. Paul Riverfront hotel with the bag. Two days later, Brinton returned to the airport with the allegedly stolen luggage and even checked it for a flight home. Exactly three weeks later, Brinton was seen in surveillance video returning from Europe to Dulles International airport with the same luggage. That prompted the Minneapolis St.

Paul Police to call Brinton about the alleged theft in September. Initially, Brinton denied taking anything and then admitted to taking the bag, said police, oddly Brinton said the clothes inside the bag were his. This is his quote. If I had taken the wrong bag, I’m happy to return it, but I don’t have any clothes for another individual. That was my clothes when I opened the bag. That’s what he supposedly told police. The Washington examiner says, two hours later, Brinton called the police back, according to the report, admitted the theft, claimed he was tired at the time and thought the bag was his, though he didn’t check one when he was leaving Washington. Okay, I don’t believe that for a second. First of all, you don’t steal because you’re tired. I’ve been tired a lot. I have an almost two year old, like my last two and a half years have been just a consecutive me being tired.

And I’ve never once stolen a gaudy piece of luggage off of the carousel just because I felt sleepy or didn’t get enough sleep the night before. I call major BS on this. So the police say, defendant said when they opened the bag at the hotel, by the way, they’re using the word they as the pronoun for this individual. I’m only direct quoting what the police report says. I don’t validate him using they them pronouns. Defendants said when they opened the bag at the hotel, they realized it was not theirs. Defendant got nervous. People would think they stole the bag and did not know what to do. Defendants start stated that they Left the clothes from the bag inside the drawers in the hotel room. Weird as for why Brinton still took the stolen luggage back to the airport to check in as if it were his Brinton told police that it was weirder to leave a bag than the clothes.

The clothes were never recovered. According to media reports, Brinton has since been charged with felony theft that could result in a five-year sentence, a $10,000 fine or both. Okay, what do you guys think? Because to me, this seems like the behavior of a deranged psychopath. And Matt, can we see those? Can we see the dress picture again, the picture of him in the ballgown once more? Because it seems to me, I look at this picture and I think to myself, I don’t know this is, I would never guess that someone as clearly stable as this would commit a deranged act of stealing someone’s luggage and yanking off the tag and then hiding the clothes of the hotel room and taking the bag as your own. This is clearly a stable individual. And the same with the pup handler photo. This is clearly someone who’s psychologically sound, who is in no need of a psychiatrist and serious mental health counseling.

What did Chris Rufo say on Twitter? It’s always the people you know that you’re most, that you least suspect, that you’re most surprised about that commit these things. Let me tell you, first of all, oh, oh, oh, wait a second. Wait a second. Let me interrupt myself. Get this. He has not been fired for this. He is still an employee of the federal government. He’s just been put on leave. Oh, he’s been put on leave. He’s not actually been fired. Okay? This is what happens when you hire someone and then elevate someone as sort of a celebrity in their position in the government based on weirdo woke brownie points, neo-Marxist metrics versus their qualification for the job. This is your diversity hire, ladies and gentlemen. This is your LGBTQ hire. This is what the Biden Administration gets.

So here we have the first non-binary senior government official, Sam Brinton. And this photograph is the first openly transgender army officer. As my producer Matt said, when we were looking at this picture right before the show, this guy didn’t even, he’s not even trying, he’s not even trying to look like a woman. Like this is the manliest man. Hilarious. And but the point of all of this is not to mock this individual’s appearance, not to mock this man’s appearance. It is to show you to demonstrate that these individuals who behave in this way, whether they suffer from gender dysphoria or some other comorbidity, these are seriously disturbed individuals because the first non-binary senior government official has been accused of stealing luggage. And the first openly trans army officer sold military secrets to Russia. Ho-Ho, funny how you don’t often hear about that, do you?

No, no, no, no. You only hear about them praise for being breaking through the glass ceiling and being ground breakers. You never hear about what they actually did, which is deranged lunatic behavior. Also, our audio engineer, Robin kudos to this. I was laughing my head off like two minutes before we came on air, because take a look at this picture. This is Will Ferrell playing Janet Reno on SNL. It’s the same person. I swear, it’s the same person. It is dead on. Dead on. And that was just off the cuff, Robin just pulled that one off the cuff, like that’s SNL worthy off the cuff to see that resemblance, but oh my gosh, oh my gosh, so funny. Okay, so the Left has shown us over and over who they are, right? They refuse to celebrate child pornography being eradicated on Twitter.

They elevate these deranged lunatic weirdos to positions of power in the name of just earning some kind of points on their weird, neo-Marxist, woke privilege pyramid, whatever it is. And then of course, we have the trial of the oath keepers and the mainstream media is not really following along with this. Even a lot of conservatives don’t wanna talk about it. And I understand why the Oath Keepers are a group that took part in the protests on January 6th, and members of the Oath Keepers, including their senior leadership, if you wanna call it that, have been accused of conspiracy against the United States government. Now, that sounds serious, but is it serious? Well, these are charges that came from Merrick Garland’s, department of Justice. So let’s actually break down what happened here. Wo of the members of the Oath Keepers, including the founder whose name is Stewart Rhodes, was convicted in a DC jury of Seditious conspiracy.

Seditious conspiracy. He’s the first person in 30 years who has been convicted of seditious conspiracy. It’s actually a very, very rarely used Civil War era statute. Stewart Rose and Kelly Megs were convicted of attempting to overthrow the United States government. But the thing that’s strange to me, because I don’t take this accusation lightly. I don’t take this charge lightly, but the jury that found Stewart Rhodes guilty of Seditious Conspiracy, did they ignore the fact that Stewart Rhodes never actually entered the Capitol? That he didn’t have a weapon? That this so-called conspiracy to overthrow the government consisted of text messages between he and one other person talking about how they wanted to stop Joe Biden’s swearing in if Trump directed them to do so?

That’s it. That’s the basis of this case that Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice brought against the Oath Keepers. Now, keep in mind the F b I had embedded in the Oath Keepers, at least five undercover informants, including the number two in command at the Oath keepers, which also makes us question, well, was it the same as the g Gretchen Whitmer fed napping where the FBI actually constructed the entire plot and then orchestrated these individuals into appearing to possibly consider committing a crime suggested by the FBI so that the FBI could then arrest them and charge them. Makes you wonder because there were five FBI agents involved in the Oath Keepers and they didn’t do anything to stop the Oath Keepers before January 6th, which means did they think that what the Oath Keepers were saying wasn’t true? Did they think it wasn’t a serious plot or did they let what they considered to be a seditious conspiracy actually play out against the United States government?

It seems to me that there’s not a third option here. And here’s what I will say. Are you tired of talking about this? Many of you are, I know this many conservatives are, many Republicans actually don’t want to talk about January 6th ever. Again, I understand that this is an unpopular issue with independent voters. I don’t care. I don’t think that you and I should self, self-censor what we talk about based on what we might, or how it might be received by centrist voters. I don’t think so at all. I think we should sit here and we should make our best case, our basis case for the values that we hold dear. And we should make that case to independents. We shouldn’t try to morph into an independent to try to relate to independence. We should say, I see your independentness, your independence, and I raise you why my policies and my values serve your interests.

This is, of course, something the Republican Party is terrible at, but I don’t care if it’s an unpopular with independence, I honestly don’t care if we’re tired of talking about it because we don’t have the luxury of being tired of talking about this. If we don’t untangle this corruption to its core, then these swamp creatures are going to do it again. If we allow Mary Garland over and over and over to get away with weaponizing the Department of Justice against us because of our values, then it just emboldens him to do it again, and to do it worse, and to be even more blatant about it. So we have to untangle this. These Oath Keepers understand are the canary in the coal mind because it’s kind of a hard group to defend, right? It’s, it’s like Alex Jones on Twitter. Remember when Alex Jones originally was kicked off Twitter?

There were actually very, very few of us who said, you know, Twitter, you really shouldn’t censor Alex Jones. Most people didn’t want to defend Alex Jones because the content, what Alex Jones was saying was horrendous. And by defending his right to say it, we knew the Left would immediately conflate the defense of his right to speak with a defense of what he was saying. Now, in my case, I defended his right to speak, but I wasn’t defending what he was saying. But of course, the Left doesn’t care about that nuance. That’s kind of the same as the oath keepers. They engage in a lot of conversation and activity that I wouldn’t, I don’t want to be associated with. But Alex Jones was the canary in the coal mine because it allowed Twitter, at the time, to move the Overton window closer to what I would call mainstream conservative thought.

As they sliced off the more marginal figures, they were able to move their tolerance line closer and closer to us. That’s exactly what we’re seeing right now with the Oath keepers. People might, conservatives might not want to defend the Oath keepers because they might not wanna be associated with everything the oath keepers do and say, but if we allow the Department of Justice to whittle down this Overton window, this line of tolerance closer and closer to us, pretty soon they’re going to target us. And they’ve proved already that they’re willing and excited to target us. Seditious conspiracy, without once entering the capitol without weapons, and based on text messages and videos that they sent back and forth, and they were waiting for Trump’s word, which Trump had nothing to do with this. This was, this was delusion.

This wasn’t an actual plot to overthrow the United States government. This would be the worst insurrection, the worst sedition, the worst conspiracy ever. And if we don’t speak up and untangle the corruption that led to this, then we could be next in line to be targeted here. And here’s the thing, Merrick Garland understands that in Washington, DC, the jury pool is comprised of swamp creatures. The people who live in Washington, DC, in the actual District of Columbia are by and large, very, very radically Left. It is not just majority Democrat, it is almost entirely Democrat voter registration. And the people who live there work in the government. We know what the swamp creatures, the administrative state, we know what those staffers are like. They’re very radical leftists. These are the people that comprise a DC jury. So it doesn’t matter how crazy, how outrageous of a charge Merrick Garland or the Department of Justice or US Attorney’s Office brings, how thin a prosecutorial argument is.

If the person, the defendant, the accused has right wing leanings was a Trump supporter, is a Republican, is a conservative, they’re going to be convicted of whatever they’re charged with. Just like the opposite is true. If it’s a Leftist who is charged by Durham, for example, someone appointed by a Republican President, then that leftist, no matter how cut and dry, no matter how elementary, no matter how basic, how simple that charge is, no matter how obvious the guilt is, that person’s going to be acquitted. We have seen this over and over. And so it’s not a matter of the jury, it’s not a matter of the trial, it’s a matter of where the corruption, the root of the corruption is, and the root of the corruption is Merrick Garland.

The first thing the United States Congress should do, the House of Representatives as soon as the Republicans take control, is investigate Merrick Garland. Investigate. Investigate January 6th if you have to. I know we’re all tired of talking about it, but if you do not, if we do not as a nation, understand that every single thing that the Democrats and the mainstream media told us about January 6th, the narrative that they invented about January 6th was false, false to demonize us, to vilify us to serve their political agenda, then they’re gonna do it again, won’t they? Why wouldn’t they? Of course they will. And the Oath Keepers is a perfect example. I charge you today, do not be afraid to defend the canary in the coal mine. You are not associating with everything this group did. Everything this group said, you are defending their due process of law. You are speaking out against the weaponization of the federal government, against the political opponents of the administration.

Like I said, Alex Jones was a perfect example of that. And by the way, just to expound just a little bit on the Alex Jones thing. So after Alex Jones, he was sort of the first one that was targeted for cancellation, for being conservative or saying something quote unquote offensive to the Left here. But what happened afterward? We actually have data here. So Elon Musk released the full censorship data from Twitter related to COVID-19, and I know Alex Jones wasn’t kicked off of Twitter because he said something about covid. But those who were dissenting from COVID were conservative, just like Alex Jones was right wing and therefore lumped in, or is right wing and therefore lumped in with conservatives. The radical Left hates both, right? So Elon Musk releases the full censorship data on COVID, and this is what it says. First of all, effective November 23rd, 2022, Twitter’s no longer enforcing the COVID-19 misleading information policy, which is great. But what you’re seeing on the screen right now, the total enforcement actions of this Covid misinformation policy since January of 20 20, 11.72 million accounts have been challenged. 11,230 accounts have been completely suspended. 97,674 content have been removed.

Think about the extent of that. This level of censorship from Twitter was possible because people allowed Twitter to move the Overton window closer and closer to normalcy. So by the end of, or by the peak, I should say, of Twitter censorship of COVID quote unquote misinformation, you couldn’t even question the vaccine or the booster or the side effects or masks or lockdowns, anything about COVID-19, because we allowed Twitter to move that tolerance line closer and closer to us. It’s the same with the Oath Keepers. The Department of Justice is moving that Overton window closer and closer to us because they know that we don’t want to defend the Oath Keepers because we don’t associate with everything they have done in everything. The Department of Justice Merrick Garland, the Biden administration, these are not good people. The United States Congress, they want authoritarian power over your life and over my life. The Biden administration elevates weirdos to positions of power intentionally.

They then use the power of the federal government to target us, to target you, to target our families, and they refuse to celebrate kids being saved from sexual abuse and torture, exploitation and trafficking because they’re so threatened by free speech on Twitter, thanks to Elon Musk. If those facts are not all we need to know about the radical Left, then I don’t know what is. If you haven’t already subscribed to the show, go ahead and do that. Thank you for watching. Thank you for listening. I’m Liz Wheeler. This is the Liz Wheeler Show.