“Go to the Store To Buy Milk” Means “Attack the Capitol” 

Hello, welcome to The Liz Wheeler Show. I’m Liz Wheeler. We have a lot to talk about today because the January 6th committee referred President Trump, former President Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal referral. We’re gonna talk about that, but before we do, please subscribe to my show. If you have not already, just hit the subscribe button on Apple Podcasts on Spotify, wherever you listen to your pods. If you prefer to watch the video form, you can go to YouTube and hit subscribe. Also, hit the bell on YouTube so I can notify you every time we have a new show, every time we have a new interview or a new video that I think you’ll like. On Rumble, go to Rumble.com/LizWheeler. Hit subscribe over there. There’s also a red button on Rumble next to the subscribe button that allows you to join the Liz Wheeler Show community on locals I cordially invite you to join us over there.

Also, I have a promo code for you. If you want a great deal for 2023. There is a promo code, MERRY, M-E-R-R-Y. If you use that promo code, then you get three months for free of being a VIP on The Liz Wheeler Show community on Locals, and I might be biased here, but I highly, highly recommend that you do that. Promo code MERRY. Just go to LizWheelerShow.com/Locals, or go to Rumble.com/LizWheeler and hit subscribe. That’s so many URLs. That is probably confusing, but I think you’ll figure it out. So what are we gonna talk about today? The January 6th committee, this very serious, very valid committee. Not at all. Ridiculous, not unserious people referred President Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal referrals. So we’re gonna talk about what is going to happen, what does this mean exactly?

What will happen to Trump specifically, what will happen to our country as a result of this, and what will happen to us? Because make no mistake, you and I are certainly part of this. This is, of course, corrupt stuff, right? We talk about this all the time, you guys know that. But it’s also just so very badly done. You almost can’t help laughing at it. Some of the video from this committee announcement today, I mean, it’s not funny. So like funny, not funny, but I gotta tell you, I actually was laughing watching this because these people are just, I mean, if they take themselves seriously, that’s even funnier that they don’t recognize that they’re basically circus performers. The mainstream media, of course, is latching onto this in, I mean, it’s embarrassing the way that they’re latching onto it. And so I wanna just talk today about how I’m thinking about this. In addition, you know, to maybe laughing a little bit l lol’ing a little bit about some of these videos, but I, I wanna talk in a, in a more serious way what our reaction should be to this announcement and to whatever comes next, how we fight back against this, because it is really nasty corruption. It is really, I mean, it’s political targeting. It is Banana Republic stuff. All that’s true, how we fight back and how we defeat this. So let’s get to it.

Okay, so this big, like don don don headline of the day just isn’t hitting me with the, the same foreboding music that headlines sometimes do or that stories when they break, they give you that jolt of adrenaline. You’re like, oh, this is bad stuff. Like the Twitter files stuff. When we hear about each new Twitter files drop, sometimes you’re just like, wow, this is bone-chilling. What we’re seeing, like this level of conspiracy and corruption that’s being inflicted on us by Big Tech colluding with the FBI, like that’s really chilling stuff. But this January 6th committee referral, when they make this announcement saying that they’re referring former president Donald Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution, like honestly, my reaction is, what does this even mean? Like, what does this mean? This carries no weight. You’re a congressional committee. You don’t just get to like, refer for criminal prosecution.

Like, I can sit here on my computer now too and write and write criminal prosecution referral. Like there, I just, I just wrote a criminal prosecution too. A, a referral for criminal prosecution. And it carries the exact same weight, by the way, as this one from the January 6th committee. So anybody can bring up a word document, a text message, a note on iPhone and write referral for criminal prosecution. The January 6th committee is not special. They have no weight. This is nothing, it’s nothing in the way of legality. It is a glimpse into the minds of what the left has planned for us, what the left has planned for our country. And those who are operating the January 6th committee, when they were making this announcement, they tipped their hand a little bit in this particular area. It was actually Congressman Jamie Raskin, who officially announced what the four charges, or not, they’re not charges, what am I talking about? What these four things that the Democrats on the January 6th committee want the Department of Justice to charge Trump with. But these are the referrals. Jamie Raskin was the one who announced this. And you’ll see, you’ll see, take a look at this.

The first criminal statute we invoke for referral, therefore is title 18, section 1512 C, which makes it unlawful for anyone to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding of the United States government. We believe that the evidence described by my colleagues today and assembled throughout our hearings warrants a criminal referral of former President Donald J. Trump, John Eastman, and others for violations of this statute. The whole purpose and obvious effect of Trump’s scheme were to obstruct, influence, and impede this official proceeding, the central moment for the lawful transfer of power in the United States. Second, we believe that there is more than sufficient evidence to refer former President Donald J. Trump, John Eastman, and others for violating Title 18, section 371. This statute makes it a crime to conspire, to defraud the United States. In other words, to make an agreement to impair, obstruct, or defeat the lawful functions of the United States government by deceitful or dishonest means.

By the way, before we get to the second two, that guy, Jamie Raskin journey back to 2016, when Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton and Jamie Raskin contested the certification of the electoral college, he called Donald J Trump’s election illegitimate. And then journey back, 16 years before that 2000, he called George w Bush’s election illegitimate. He claimed he was a court-appointed president, which illegitimized him. These people are not serious people, right? They’re not serious people. They’re clowns. This is a clown show. If they were at all serious in this political effort, they’d at least pick someone else to do the reading because it’s such an obvious display of elitism. It’s not hypocrisy because they know we’re gonna notice this hypocrisy, remember, is when somebody violates a law thinking that they won’t be caught thinking that they can get away with it violates a rule, a standard, whatever, some norm.

But elitism is different from hypocrisy because it’s not that Jamie Raskin doesn’t think that we’re gonna call him out for doing exactly what he is now trying to refer Donald Trump for criminal prosecution to the Department of Justice for. It’s that he doesn’t think he plays by the same rules. Elitism believes in two separate sets of standards or rules or laws, one for me and one for thee. And so he doesn’t, he doesn’t care if we’re calling him out because he’s an elitist and he believes that Donald Trump should be held to a different standard than he is. Those are the first two statutes, and these are the second two. Take a look.

Third, we make a referral based on Title 18, section 1001, which makes an unlawful to knowingly and willfully make materially false statements to the federal government. The evidence clearly suggests that President Trump conspired with others to submit slates of fake electors to Congress and the National Archives. We believe that this evidence we set forth in our report is more than sufficient for a criminal referral of former President Donald J. Trump and others in connection with this offense. As before, we don’t try to determine all of the participants in this conspiracy, many of whom refuse to answer our questions while under oath. We trust that the Department of Justice will be able to form a more complete picture through its own investigation. The fourth and final statute we invoke for referral is Title 18, section 2383. The statute applies to anyone who incites, assists, or engages in insurrection against the United States of America, and anyone who gives aid or comfort to an insurrection.

An insurrection is a rebellion against the authority of the United States. It is a grave federal offense anchored in the Constitution itself, which repeatedly opposes insurrections and domestic violence, and indeed uses participation in insurrection by office holders as automatic grounds for disqualification from ever holding public office again at the federal or state level. Anyone who incites others to engage in rebelling assists them in doing so or gives aid in comfort to those engaged in insurrection, is guilty of a federal crime. The committee believes that more than sufficient evidence exists for a criminal referral of former President Trump for assisting, or aiding in comforting, those at the Capitol who engaged in a violent attack on the United States. The committee has developed significant evidence that President Trump intended to disrupt the peaceful transition of power under our Constitution. The President has an affirmative and primary constitutional duty to act, to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Nothing could be a greater betrayal of this duty than to assist in insurrection against the constitutional order.

Oka, okay, that’s all I can stand hearing from him. I’m always torn by the way, on whether we should watch these videos together because makes my skin crawl to listen to them and watch them, but at the same time, they’re very valuable because as these Democrats are stroking their own ego as the stars of their own show, they intentionally or otherwise, I personally think that they’re just doing this to try to toot their own horn to sound really smart. But they tell us exactly what their strategy is. They tell us what their argument is in this case, they show us how extremely thin their case is for each of these charges that they were hoping will be levied against President Trump. But all of that, we’ll talk about all of that in a little bit later in the show. But there, there was one sentence that Jamie Raskin said on the fourth charge that he’s detailing.

He’s talking about inciting an insurrection and we’re gonna talk about just how stupid that is and how Trump did not incite an insurrection. We’ll talk about all of that in just a little bit. But this phrase that Jamie Raskin said, he said, inciting an insurrection. This part’s a paraphrase. He said, it is a grave federal offense. And he talks about it being rooted in the Constitution that engaging in an insurrection is a automatic disqualification from holding future office. Ding, ding, ding. There we go, ladies and gentlemen. That is the root of this whole charade. That’s their ultimate goal. They don’t care about democracy, they don’t care about the electoral college. They don’t care about free and fair elections. They don’t care about rebellions or violence or any group coming in, protesting in Washington, DC outside of the capitol. They don’t care about any of that.

All they want to do is deprive Donald Trump of the right to run for political office. They’re not confident that they can defeat him if they are honest and if they’re fair. So they’re trying to use legalism. They’re trying to weaponize the power of the federal government to take him out again. This is what they’ve done the entirety of the time that he was in office, first with Russia collusion, then with Ukraine impeachment over and over again. They’ve never been able to meet him on the court of public opinion and just put to the public the competition of two different sets of ideologies as they manifest in different political policies. They’ve never been able to do that. They just lie and lie and lie. And this is exactly what their goal is. They just wanna disqualify him from holding future office. Period. That’s it.

So what is going to happen? Is the Department of Justice going to take this recommendation? Is Merrick Garland one of the most dangerous men in the entire country, if not the most dangerous? Will he indict President Trump? If President Trump is indicted, will be he be arrested. So let me tell you what’s gonna happen here. The January 6th committee was always going to find Trump guilty. They have no actual power here. They don’t have the power of a jury, they don’t have the power of a special counsel investigator that, so when I say they find him guilty, this was pre-ordained because this is the political ideology of the Democrats and Kinzinger and Cheney, who I suppose are Democrats at this point who serve on this committee, the January 6th committee. This was always going to be the outcome. I remember we sat and, and live streamed the very first primetime aired January 6th committee hearing.

We’d live streamed it together on Locals. And we sat there and we were like, what is this? Liz Cheney opened that up, opened the very first, this was like a huge televised event all over the country. She opened it up by reading from a tweet of Donald Trump that was sent on January 6th, and she selectively edited the tweet. She left out the phrase where he specifically told the protestors to be peaceful and to respect police officers. And we all knew it was gonna be a kangaroo court. We all knew it was a clown show. We all knew it was the height of absurdity. But it was from that moment that there should have been not a shred of doubt left in anybody’s mind, even people who were maybe hoping that it would be a fair investigation. No, this was preordained. This was always what it was going to be.

And the goal was always to prevent Trump from holding office again because they are afraid of him. So will Merrick Garland indict him? I think, no. I think Merrick Garland himself will not take this criminal referral from the January 6th committee and immediately indict Trump. I think Merrick Garland will do that through the special counsel Jack Smith, once Jack Smith is back from the Netherlands, apparently the guy is like having knee surgery out of the country and he is not even doing the job that he was appointed to do. Super weird, super weird. Merrick Garland will not address this, or he will pretend to be above the political bias of this committee. But don’t be fooled for a second. Merrick Garland will find a way to indict Trump. Once Trump has been indicted, a jury in Washington DC will find him guilty, not because he is guilty, but because the jury pool in Washington DC is the people who live in Washington dc The people who live in Washington DC are the vast, vast, vast majority of them.

Democrats, not just like Democrat voters from other places in the country, no, like swamp creatures who work in the administrative state, who have spent probably the last decade trying to subvert our Constitution, subvert the Trump administration when they worked in it and now work for the Biden administration. These are like the bad people in our government. They’re the ones who will make up this jury. So the jury will find him guilty. This is not, this is not conjecture on my part. The Durham prosecutions proved this. You can have the simplest, most cut-and-dry, black-and-white case, and if there is a shred of political interest on one side or another, then that jury will ignore the clear cut facts of the case. This happened with Michael Sussman, right? And they will render a verdict that favors the Democrat Durham.

I sometimes think that Durham did the Michael Sussman case the way he did to prove that point. Because he was like, well, this is very obvious. We’re gonna leave everything else out of it. All we’re gonna do is try him for this one tiny little thing. Did he lie? Did he withhold information? And it was demonstrably true. It was provable that he did, but the jury, because Michael Sussman was on the side of Democrats going after Trump, they found him to be not guilty. So after Trump is indicted, after he is found guilty by a corrupt swampy DC jury, he will be arrested on camera. This will be what CNN has dreamed of their entire lives. This is like their fantasy. There will be a perp walk for Donald Trump. He will then be sent to prison. So what happens next?

I mean, this is not going to be a good day in our country and we are going to talk about that. But before we talk about what will happen next, we have to do a little bit of background to lead us into what will happen after Trump has been subject to this governmental abuse. So the background that we’re gonna do here is I’m gonna pull up this executive summary, this report from the January 6th committee. It was this presentation, or Jamie Raskin, I should say, was introing this report with his presentation. But the second paragraph of this, what is it, 160 pages, I think this 160-page report, this is what the committee wrote. They go in his testimony that day, Grayden Young explained to the jury how he and other oath keepers were provoked to travel to Washington, DC by President Donald’s Trump’s tweets and by Trump’s false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

So maybe the same words stuck out to you as stuck out to me here, but how are you provoked into traveling? What does that mean? Define the word provoked, because provoked is used in a very linguistically tricky way here. It is used to insinuate that Trump directly invited them or demanded them to come to Washington DC and that the reason was so that they could commit violence in the name of allegations of voter fraud that Trump was making. But provoked, that’s not what provoked means. This is not an isolated incident that I’m picking out here. This is a trend in this entire report. The next paragraph says, Stephen Ayers testified that with everything the President was putting out ahead of January 6th that the election was rigged, the votes were wrong and stuff,

it just got into my head. The President was calling on us to come to Washington, DC. Okay? So calling people to come to Washington, DC is not even kind of close to a crime that’s normal. Tons and tons of people protest about every, every kind of thing in Washington DC on a yearly basis. I go to Washington DC to protest the March for Life every year. But with everything the president was putting out there, it got into my head. So this is why I said these people are unserious, right? Because this is what their so-called criminal referrals are built on. They’re built on nothing like it’s actually laughable to look at what they’re reasoning is here. They’re essentially saying if person A says something like go to the store and get some milk and person B interprets go to the store and get some milk as come attack the Capitol, then person A who said, go to the store and get some milk is responsible for person B interpreting go to the store and get some milk as meaning come and attack the Capitol.

What, like, you have to laugh at that because it’s so absurd. It’s so bananas. It’s not funny because this is what the Left is doing to try to tear down our country. But this is the justification for these criminal referrals of President Trump. So the report goes on. It says, this report supplies an immense volume of information and testimony assembled through the select committee’s investigation. Based on this assembled evidence, the committee has reached a series of specific findings, including the following. Number one, beginning election night and continuing through January 6th and thereafter, Donald Trump purposely disseminated false allegations of fraud related to the 2020 presidential election in order to aid his effort to overturn the election. And for purposes of soliciting contributions, these false claims provoked his supporters to violence on January 6th. So there it is again, that word provoked. So Donald Trump’s belief, his sincere belief, and you’d have to be an idiot not to believe that Donald Trump’s belief was sincere.

He actually believes that the election was stolen from him. He actually believes that there was widespread electioneering or voter fraud that impacted the outcome of the election. You don’t have to agree with him. If you’re a Democrat on the January 6th committee, you can believe that he is wrong. But to portray it like an intentional dissemination of false information, meaning that Trump knew that what he was saying was false just to get money. No one in the world is gonna believe this because it’s not true. This is the difference between the political ideology of the Left and the Right is the right. Looked at what happened in 2020 and said, huh, something’s not right. And maybe Trump didn’t know exactly what went wrong immediately after the election. So maybe some of the things that he said weren’t accurate because he didn’t have all the information, but to insinuate that he was just making it all up for purposes of getting donations?

Come on, come on. No one believes that the committee report goes on to say, knowing that he and his supporters had lost dozens of election lawsuits, and despite his own senior advisors refuting his election fraud claims and urging him to concede his election loss, Donald Trump refused to accept the lawful result of the 2020 election. Rather than honor his constitutional obligation to take care that laws be faithfully executed, President Trump instead plotted to overturn the election outcome. So this is, again, obviously a biased paragraph, but the most important part here is the last little bit of it. President Trump instead plotted to overturn the election outcome. First of all, the election outcome is not settled until the certification of the electoral college vote, right? And what President Trump was doing, and this hardly needs to be explained because it’s been explained so thoroughly, so many times.

What he was doing was pursuing avenues of recourse when he believed that there was wrongdoing and the conversations that he had with his lawyers. And you can question the wisdom of some of his lawyers, and I think that’s a valid question. You can certainly question some of their advice. But discussing privately whether certain avenues of recourse are legal and constitutional or not is the exact opposite of what someone does if they’re trying to illegally subvert the Constitution and foment an insurrection. Someone who is a despotic tyrant doesn’t care about the law, doesn’t care about the Constitution, actively tries to seize power by trampling the Constitution.

But if you look at the Constitution and you try to figure out ways that what you believe or ways to seek recourse for a wrong that you believe was done to you, isn’t that the definition of trying to operate within the boundary of the law? Of course it is. Of course it is. Again, not a commentary on the wisdom of every single person that Trump was surrounded with, but instead plotted to overturn the election outcome. No one believes that, either. Okay, then the report goes on to say, despite knowing that such an action would be illegal and that no state had or would submit an altered electoral slate, Donald Trump, correct, or corruptly pressured Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes during Congress’s joint session on January 6th, based on false allegations that the election was stolen, Donald Trump summoned, oh, oh, wait a second, wait a second.

Let me go back. Let me go back to the Mike Pence thing. So it was not, it has not been clearly delineated by the Supreme Court what exactly the role of the Vice President is in certifying the electoral vote, whether he has the power to question it, or whether he is a purely administrative staffer, if you will, in just counting this and basically banging the gavel to say, okay, it’s been counted. It has not been ruled upon at the highest level. So the fact that President Trump believed it to be one thing and Pence believed it to be the other is not a violation of any statute. Again, you can question the wisdom of Trump tweeting at Mike Pence. That’s not what this should be all about. But of course, what the Democrats do is they try to conflate the two. They want you to think a tweet that you don’t like is proof of President

Trump committing some kind of crime, which I know I’m gonna use this word a lot in this show, bananas and completely unserious. The report then goes on to say, based on false allegations that the election was stolen, Donald Trump summoned tens of thousands of supporters to Washington for January 6th. Although these supporters were angry and some were armed, Donald Trump instructed them to march to the Capitol on January 6th to take back their country. This kind of deliberate misrepresentation is what should be illegal, to act like Trump supporters, even those who were in the Capitol when they weren’t supposed to be, to act like they were armed is a lie. It’s an outright lie. This has been one of the jokes as we’ve uncovered the truth about what happened on January 6th, as we’ve seen the film that we’ve been able to obtain a lot of the film, Nancy Pelosi and the Capitol Police won’t release, but the stuff that we’ve been able to see, we’ve realized that if this was in an insurrection, it was just the worst insurrection in the world.

What kind of insurrection doesn’t plan ahead of time, doesn’t coordinate, doesn’t plan for any violence, has no objective and doesn’t bring any kind of weapons and hurts no one because that’s what happened inside the Capitol? And so for the January 6th committee to outright say, although these supporters were angry and some were armed, Donald Trump instructed them to march on the Capitol as if, again, as if he said, okay, I see that you’re armed. I see that you’re angry. Now go get the Capitol. That’s not at all what happened. Not at all. Then they say, knowing that a violent attack on the capitol was underway and knowing that his words would incite further violence, Donald Trump purposely sent a social media message publicly condemning Vice President Pence at 2:24 PM on January 6th.

So a tweet condemning Vice President Pence was interpreted, what? By the people that were shopping for milk that thought getting milk at the store meant to attack the Capitol? Is this the same kind of thing that we’re playing again? The report goes, knowing that violence was underway at the Capitol and despite his duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed, Donald Trump refused, repeated request over a multiple hour period that he instruct his violent supporters to disperse and leave the capitol and instead watch the violent un attack unfold on television. This failure to act perpetuated the violence at the Capitol and obstructed Congress’s proceeding to count electoral votes. So now if you tweet something that has nothing to do with violence, if you tweet don’t be violent and someone interprets it as be violent, you are responsible for what’s worse is if you don’t tweet anything, that’s also according to the January 6th committee that’s also inciting an insurrection. You’ll remember Donald Trump not only tweeted, he created a video that told people to go home. And what happened? He told them to peacefully go home and to respect police officers. What happened to that tweet? What happened to that video? Twitter deleted it. Within minutes of posting Twitter removed it and then banned Donald Trump two days later, claiming that he incited an insurrection.

This is where these people, these unserious people who don’t have any more power to make a criminal referral to the Department of Justice than I do, this is where they tip their hands about what their goal, what their agenda, what their intention with this witch hunt actually is. They want to criminalize our speech, our opinions, our thoughts, our constitutionally protected actions, and they want to criminalize us if we don’t do things that they think we ought to have done quicker. Like that’s the part to me that still I know that this is a serious topic that almost makes me laugh. So they wanted Donald Trump to tweet, but because he took too long to tweet, that’s a crime. Oh no. Let’s even go a step further back. They don’t want him to tweet. They think is he’s terrible that he’s on Twitter. And then when he doesn’t tweet, they’re so mad, they want him to tweet and then when he finally does, that’s a crime.

But it’s not just Trump. It’s bad that it’s happening to Trump, but it’s not just Trump. Trump represents us. This is what the Left wants for us. This is how they want us treated under the law. It’s wrong. It’s like they’re trying to criminalize just an opinion. Are we not allowed to hold an opinion that something shady happened in the 2020 election? Are we not allowed to protest in the nation’s capital, when we believe there’s corruption at the hands of the politicians who we sent there to represent us? Are we not allowed to support a President that the Left doesn’t like?

Are we not allowed to tweet, and then not allowed to not tweet? This is authoritarianism. This is tyranny. Each of these criminal referrals, what are they, obstruction of an official proceeding conspiracy to defraud the US, making a false statement, inciting an insurrection. The goal of all of this is threefold, to prevent Trump from being allowed to run for president again, to set the precedent to us that if we engage in wrong think we will also be criminalized and they have a third goal as well. But before we even get to the third goal, I wanna talk about a third thing that the left wants to happen in our country as a result of this. I wanna talk a little bit about what this doesn’t say, what this summary, this executive summary does not say. It does not talk about why the FBI, who we know from some of these trials.

The Oath Keepers trial, for example, we know the FBI had infiltrated some of these groups, the Patriot Front group as high up as the second in command of some of these groups. They had undercover infiltrators or informants. If the FBI was that embedded in these groups and these groups were accused, some of them convicted of seditious conspiracy, why didn’t the FBI stop them? If they knew that they were planning this violence, this subversion of the US government, this is dereliction of duty of the FBI not to act. But that’s the thing, right? The FBI didn’t believe that this was an insurrection. They didn’t believe that there was an actual threat of violence. So they let it happen so that they could stage this circus.

But this report doesn’t talk about why the F B I failed to act at all. The FBI or this report doesn’t talk about Pelosi’s role in directing the Capitol police or Pelosi’s communications with Mayor Bowser, or all of those hours of footage that Nancy Pelosi refuses to release, the footage of the capitol that paints the whole picture. None of that’s mentioned in this executive summary. This summary doesn’t talk about Ray Epps, or any other Fed who had infiltrated how many Feds were on the ground, directing, inciting, encouraging, aiding and abetting, giving comfort to the people that breached the Capitol. And this report doesn’t mention, even once the pipe bombers, this mystery that we still haven’t solved. Who placed those bombs? Why haven’t they been found? Is there no surveillance footage that shows the culprit? Well, of course there is, but you and I are not allowed to see it because it would give away the game. This report is a joke. These people claim that they care about democracy, that trump’s a threat to their democracy? Ha.

These are bad people. The January 6th committee and the Democrats are bad, bad people. They’re not operating with even an ounce of good faith. And some of the naive, the foolish people who will fully refuse to acknowledge the reality of the political enemy we’re facing, up until this point, have given the January 6th committee the benefit of the doubt. But it is at this point that we look at those people, we look at the willfully naive, foolish people who still think that there’s a shred of credibility in this January 6th committee, and they should not be on our team anymore because they have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that they do not have the fire in their belly to fight this fight for our country, to fight the culture war so that our cultural, our civil institutions are not subverted in order to topple our governmental institutions.

It’s funny because these same, these same politicians on the January 6th committee, if they actually cared about democracy the way that they say that they do, if they actually cared about the subversion of people’s votes and their voices, then they would be investigating the Twitter files. The latest Twitter files shows what happened around the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story that was published by the New York Post, that Twitter not only didn’t let us talk about, but didn’t even let us send a direct message that included the URL, the link to the New York Post story and, and the Twitter files. This one was done by Michael Shellenberger. You should read it, you should read it in its entire, it’ll only take you about 10 minutes, but it shows that the intelligence community played a role in actually grooming Twitter before the Hunter Biden story was dropped by the New York Post groomed Twitter into thinking that a story like this, that might come along, would be Russian propaganda. So that when the New York Post story did come, Twitter was all ready to be like, oh, yes sir, we remember that’s Russian propaganda. That’s right. Block.

This is what Michael Shellenberger tweeted. He said, during all of 2020, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies repeatedly primed Yoel Roth, he was the head of trust and safety. The chief censor at Twitter to dismiss reports of Hunter Biden’s laptop as a Russian hack and leak operation. This is from a sworn declaration by Roth given in December of 2020. He said, and I quote, since 2018, I have had regular meetings with the office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and industry peers regarding election security. During those weekly meetings, the federal law enforcement agencies communicated that they expected, quote unquote, hack and leak operations by state actors might occur in the period shortly before the 2020 presidential election, likely in October. I was told, in these meetings, that the intelligence community expected that individuals associated with political campaigns would be subject to hacking attacks.

And that material obtained through those hacking attacks would likely be disseminated over social media platforms, including Twitter. These expectations of hack and leak operations were discussed throughout 2020. I also learned in in these meetings that there were rumors that a hack and leak operation would involve Hunter Biden. Oh, there were rumors that a hack and leak operation would involve Hunter Biden, so maybe, just maybe, the FBI knew about Hunter Biden’s laptop because they already had it and they knew that the allegations on it were true. That Hunter had profited tens of millions of dollars from foreign countries profiting off of his dad’s power and influence of position at the top of the United States government that Joe Biden had profited from Hunter Biden’s corruption in his name and the FBI knew that this information was going to be made public because the FBI knew that Rudy Giuliani and the had been given this information by the owner of the laptop repair store, who gave it to the New York Post. The FBI knew, and they indoctrinated Twitter into believing that this was going to be a hack and leak operation, that a foreign government hacked it and leaked it just to harm their opponent.

This is diabolical. And yet these fools on the January 6th committee who claimed to care about democracy, they claim to care about people’s voices being subverted and their votes being protected.

They don’t care about this at all. The FBI knew the laptop was authentic. Every claim the New York Post made in that original article was accurate and has been proven to be true. Twitter’s suppression. This is the sentence that YouTube won’t even let me say. Twitter’s suppression of the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story impacted the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. But democracy. Indict President Trump for a tweet that he did send and then didn’t send quick enough. Now we get to the question, what happens next? The Left wants a civil war in our country.

The Left wants President Trump to be indicted. They want him to be arrested. They want it to be public, the walk of shame, humiliation of perp walk. They want him to be convicted. They want him thrown in prison, and they hope that that sparks civil unrest. They hope that people are so angry that someone commits violence. This is what the Left wants to happen because they wanna prove that what they have been calling us for the last five years when they’ve called us terrorists and extremists, when they’ve told us our words are actual violence. They want this to be quote unquote proven.

And as soon as even one person loses their head and does something stupid and illegal, the Left will crush us. They will use that behavior that they want to happen, that unrest that they’re hoping will happen as justification to stifle our free speech completely, to squash our freedom of religion, to relieve us of our parental rights, to seize our economy and restructure it, to obliterate our borders, to impose a social credit score system on corporations and on individuals, all in pursuit of their Marxist utopia, in which they will install themselves as the elitist who play by a different set of rules than you and I are forced to abide by.

This is what the Left wants to happen next. So let me tell you, do not take the bait. Don’t even think about taking the bait. Channel your righteous anger in a productive way, in productive recourse. There are things that we can do, things that we will do, things it is our duty to do, to accomplish. We have to reform the leadership of the Republican Party, and we are, we’re working on it. We have to pick as our representatives, people who acknowledge the reality of the political enemy that we face so that we can stand a fighting chance of winning elections.

We have to build up the early voting apparatus. Where it’s legal, we have to build up the, the ballot harvesting apparatus to compete with the Left. As we continue to fight for election season to be restored to election day, we have to compete where the Left is winning. We have to keep fighting for parental rights because the battle for our children is the final frontier of these Marxists. And let me warn you here, this is not a short fight. This is not something that happens overnight that we win by the time the next election happens.

What’s happened in our country up to now, the Left’s subversion of our constitutional republic, the fact that they’ve embedded Marxists in every major cultural and governmental institution across our nation. This did not happen overnight either. It took decades, in some cases, almost a century, of infiltration into our nation to accomplish what they’ve accomplished. That’s not something that you can just throw in the washer and it’ll come out clean. This is something that takes patience, it takes planning, it takes time, and it takes fortitude. It’s not gonna happen overnight. But this fight is far from over because look at who we’re up against. We’re up against the unserious, absurd clowns of the January 6th committee, who are so wrapped up in their own ego that they tip their hand and show us what their plan is for Donald Trump, for our nation, and for us. And if we listen to them and believe them, if we acknowledge the reality of the political enemy we’re facing, then we will win. Thank you for watching. Thank you for listening. I’m Liz Wheeler. This is The Liz Wheeler Show.