← Redacted News
Redacted News
"This is war!" Trump and China on a collision course with 104% tariffs, Iran and US in direct talks
01:04:52
Loading summary
Transcript154 lines
- [00:01]
Clayton Morris
And Alan in our chat says be prepared, not scared. In our rumble chat. Exactly. Be prepared.
- [00:06]
Natali Morris
Cat says they're never gonna shut me up.
- [00:08]
Clayton Morris
Good.
- [00:09]
Natali Morris
Us either.
- [00:10]
Clayton Morris
You're not shutting us up. Welcome into redacted on this. What is today? Tuesday. Good to see all of you. Yes. Economic wars, real wars, kinetic wars, all of it. We just got the. The story about China right now is evolving minute by minute right now. And what is actually happening with their reserve currency? How much US Dollars does China actually have in reserve turn? Not very much at all. And that's going to be a absolute devastation for China. And 104% tariffs from the Trump administration on China. China looks like it's ready to go to war economically here. And then you had Pete Hegseth down in the Panama Canal just a little over an hour ago talking about the ownership of the Panama Canal and that China will, will not own the Panama Canal. So we are watching all of these pieces right now as it relates to China. That seems to be the center of attention in this tariff fight.
- [01:01]
Natali Morris
All right, we're also going to talk about a bombshell showing that the flu vaccine may not actually prevent infection of the flu. You know that old wives tale when people say, oh, if you take that, you get the flu.
- [01:12]
Clayton Morris
Yeah.
- [01:13]
Natali Morris
Turns out that's true. Oh good, the old wives. Once again, we're gonna talk about that. Plus RFK Jr. Finally announcing that he is going to recommend that the CDC stop putting fluoride in public water in the United States. This is something he said would happen on day one of the Trump administration. He's a little late, but I'll take it. We need it. It need to have happened yesterday.
- [01:35]
Clayton Morris
All right, we got a lot of news to get to on this Tuesday, so we're going to get to all of that and more. Tell us where you're joining us from. It's free to subscribe here on Rumble, on YouTube, on X on Twitch. Thank you guys for joining us today and being a part of our great community here. We really appreciate it.
- [01:52]
Natali Morris
Well, before we get to our news though, we want to remind you that Redacted is brought to you by Moink, which is an awesome place to go for some truly delicious meat. Now, not only do they have delicious meat, they also have US sourced meat. Did you know that only four companies control over 80% of the US meat industry? And of course, China controls the largest portion of US Pork. Who knows what's going to happen with these new tariff wars happening? And the fact that we trade so much actual meat from China. But if you want to make sure that your meat is safe, then MO is where you go. Because Moink's meat comes from animals raised outdoors, where a pig is free to be a pig. They're as happy as a pig in pig. You know what? Pigs, the right type of pig. So their farmers are given an honest day's pay for an honest day was work. And they deliver meat straight to your doorstep at prices you can afford. We had some. What was it? It was rosemary beef slices the other day that I just served to my husband and son. And it was delicious. So check them out. Go to moinkbox.com redacted and you'll join the Moink movement right now. You'll get free wings for life if you join in this meat delivery. That's M O I n k. Moinkbox.com redacted One more time. Moinkbox.com redacted yeah, and their bacon is unbelievable. It's so delicious. It's so delicious. Their roast. We did a roast chicken the other day. Like, no complaints.
- [03:22]
Clayton Morris
And the chicken thighs. Yeah, the chicken thighs. Oh, they were delicious. Really, really good. And you're supporting American farmers, by the way, and not China. Okay. Well, the biggest story in Washington right now is that neocons are pushing President Trump into a war with Iran. Former UK Ambassador Richard Dalton said this morning that the threat of war with Iran has never been higher. Watch. How seriously do you take this from President Trump?
- [03:47]
Richard Dalton
I do take it seriously. The risk of a war between Israel and the United States on the one hand and Iran on the other, has never been higher. And that's because it's been Israel's aim for many years to strike Iran. And they've always wanted to attract the United States to their side to do it because of limitations in Israel's capabilities, particularly in sustaining a long war. This is chiefly about weakening Iran as a state.
- [04:22]
Clayton Morris
Iran, yeah. So doing Israel's bidding. That's why Benjamin Netanyahu was in Washington yesterday. Neocons would love nothing more than carrying out Netanyahu fantasy of destroying Iran. Well, Trump may have just thrown a monkey wrench into those neocon plans. Just yesterday, Iran was of course, brushing off the idea of sitting down with the United States, saying direct talks were basically pointless because according to them, Washington can't go five minutes without some sort of a threat of military action, which is actually true. We like to do that. But then fast forward to today and then suddenly the script is totally flipped. And just wait until you see Netanyahu's reaction. That's priceless. On Monday, Donald Trump dropped a surprise announce that high level U.S. officials will be meeting directly with Iranian leaders this coming weekend. And they've actually, Iran confirmed this and actually released the date and time of where this was going to happen, not through a proxy, not through Israel, but directly talking to Iran. He made it clear that the nuclear issue is still front and center, saying flat out that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, even though Trump's own intelligence community says that there is no. Iran's not developing a nuclear weapon. And Tulsi Gabbard in front of Congress confirmed that on the record.
- [05:39]
Natali Morris
And Barack Obama spent eight years trying to prove it and never did, never could. But sanction sanctioned them to within an inch of their life.
- [05:47]
Clayton Morris
So watch this, he admitted right in front of Netanyahu. And watch. He said, I'm gonna, we're gonna be holding talks with Iran this weekend, direct talks. And I don't know, this looked like a total blindside to Benjamin Netanyahu. Watch Benjamin Netanyahu's face when Trump let the cat out of the bag. Watch.
- [06:03]
Richard Dalton
We're having direct talks with Iran and they've started. It'll go on Saturday. We have a very big meeting and we'll see what can happen. And I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is not something that I want to be involved with with or frankly that Israel wants to be involved with if they can avoid it. So we're going to see if we can avoid it. But it's getting to be very dangerous territory and hopefully those talks will be successful. And I think it would be in Iran's best interest if they are successful. We hope, we hope that's going to happen.
- [06:46]
Clayton Morris
He looks like, you ever see that Will Ferrell character where he's like a cat with a, with a ball. He's like, like, it's just like Benjamin Netanyahu's face the whole time. Like, yeah, like, it's really weird, you.
- [06:56]
Natali Morris
Know, in him saying, look, Israel doesn't want a war with Iran. And Netanyahu is like, I do.
- [07:02]
Clayton Morris
I've always, he's like, don't say for me.
- [07:04]
Natali Morris
I've wanted my whole life. I will want for no more as soon as I get this. But it occurred to me that Trump is actually speaking on behalf of the people of Israel. Sometimes we think that Benjamin Netanyahu represents them. He doesn't. The people of Israel do not want a war with Iran for the most part. They want peace. Who wouldn't what crazy person would not? Right? And so in that moment I was like, huh, Trump is a better president to Israel that he continues to say I'm the best president Israel has ever had. That might be true if he is able to supersede the war that their president, that their prime minister wants so badly.
- [07:42]
Clayton Morris
So watch Netanyahu's face close up when he made this announcement.
- [07:46]
Richard Dalton
We're having direct talks with Iran and they've started. It'll go on Saturday. We have a very big meeting and we'll see what can happen. And I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious.
- [08:05]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. And as John, John Spen in our chat says, yeah, that's true. That, you know, most Israelis do not Support Benjamin Netanyahu. October 7, he says was because one half of Israel without protesting. Bibi. Right. Yeah. That was the story again that no one was covering in the west, which was the thousands of people across Israel out in protest of Benjamin Netanyahu. And here's the part that should actually be making headlines everywhere. Somehow it isn't. If this breaks down, the threat of another endless war in the Middle east becomes very real. In Iran, conflict, especially one backed by the usual neocon voices in Washington, would be catastrophic for the United States, not just for that region as well, but for American forces and America itself. Here's what Tucker had to say about this. Whatever you think of tariffs, it's clear that now is the worst possible time for the United States to participate in a military strike on Iran. We can't afford it. Thousands of Americans would die. We'd lose the war that follows. Nothing would be more destructive to our country. And yet we're closer than ever thanks to unrelenting pressure from neocons. This is suicidal. Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy. And by the way, talk to members of the military, the US Military. I was on a flight this weekend and had the pleasure of speaking with a United States member of the army and said, oh my God, these guys agitating for war with Iran, they're crazy. They're crazy. It would be devastating. They know it, we know it. Our military experts we've had on this show, like Colonel McGregor and others have pointed out how devastating it would be thousands of miles away. You're going to go right into a hornet style nest. You've got 50,000American troops that are sitting ducks right now in this region. It would be devastating. But yet you have all these B2 bombers which are now have Been put on high alert. They're more now in this region than ever before in Diego Garcia as of this morning. So they are agitating quickly to get us into this war.
- [10:00]
Natali Morris
Have you read the comments on Tucker's.
- [10:03]
Clayton Morris
Post on this post? I read a lot of them, yeah.
- [10:06]
Natali Morris
Some of them are so crazy. So crazy. People saying, well, we couldn't win a war, so we shouldn't get in it. Yeah. Yes. That people.
- [10:14]
Richard Dalton
Yeah.
- [10:14]
Clayton Morris
People are like, yes. You don't think we're strong enough to win a war against Iran? No, we're not. We are absolutely not. You want to know what happens if we enter a war with Iran? Russia steps in. We've already proven that we cannot win a war against Russia. We've tried for, you know, more than two years with US Arms using, and by the way, not even using our own soldiers using a proxy. And we can't do crap. We've lost massive amounts of territory. We would absolutely lose in a war with Iran.
- [10:43]
Natali Morris
I don't understand, understand that logic that even though we know we'd lose, we should do it anyway. Like, should I, should I go do MMA fighting knowing that I'll lose now just to see what it makes of me?
- [10:52]
Clayton Morris
Yeah, that'd be fun.
- [10:53]
Natali Morris
Take those people down. Like, where does that. I don't understand. Please try to.
- [10:57]
Clayton Morris
I'd pay to see that, by the way. Me too.
- [10:59]
Natali Morris
I'm pretty scrappy. I might, I might get by for a little bit.
- [11:03]
Clayton Morris
Tiny Hawaiian, Latina mix, World face, global face. That would be your ring name and welcome to the ring Global face. Yep. You never know.
- [11:13]
Natali Morris
I've got it.
- [11:14]
Clayton Morris
She might throw a pineapple at you or come at you with something else. You never know.
- [11:18]
Natali Morris
Okay. I hit below the belt if it comes to. Okay, well, President Trump just launched a devastating tariff attack on China this morning. Now sitting 104% tariffs, all hell may break loose. So buy all those, all that cheap Chinese stuff while you can, because that's not going to last. It says Trump awaits call from China, but aides say a deal not likely before 104% tariffs hit. Now, meanwhile, China is talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, perhaps ready to talk with President Trump. And on the other hand, they say they are ready to fight to the end if it comes to it in a trade war with America, increasing their own tariffs against the U.S. now, yesterday, a series of Chinese memes started making the rounds, sort of poking fun at the fact that most of the things, unless acknowledge this, let's be honest, most of the things we're using, our computers, our clothes, they are made by people who work very hard and are a lot more adept at it. And we are the beneficiaries of that. And so they're kind of poking fun at the fact that they're not kind of. We may not be able to do it this way. Watch this. Yeah, it's rude.
- [12:31]
Clayton Morris
They're basically saying, you guys are all fat and lazy and the United States cannot compete with our manufacturing because we're the best. You watch this. This is not like a veiled comment.
- [13:14]
Natali Morris
That hurts my feelings.
- [13:15]
Clayton Morris
And you hear the little Chinese music in the background.
- [13:18]
Natali Morris
Does it hurt your feelings?
- [13:20]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. I mean, basically calling lazy and fat. Right? Like, we don't have the capacity to do it. And because it's all been offshored, they literally have a lot of these factory workers that live, like, right on site.
- [13:33]
Natali Morris
Yes.
- [13:33]
Clayton Morris
So they work. What is it like? I don't know how many hours a day? Not eight. Well, look, then they live in the place where they're working.
- [13:40]
Natali Morris
One of the reasons the Silicon Valley became the Silicon Valley is because the access to so many Asian immigrants. And in the book what the Dormouse said, they, the chip makers admit that they need small Asian ladies with small hands. Yeah, we still have those. We got some. But the question remains, those are immigrants. Could we actually do it ourselves? I guess we're about to find out. And put our money where our mouth is, huh?
- [14:04]
Clayton Morris
I mean, we're literally going, this is a war. You know, it's maybe not a kinetic war yet, hopefully, but this is a war. Treasury Secretary Bessant said this morning that China is playing the wrong hand here. There's only. They're only holding two pair of twos right now. He said. And he said it was a. It's a major mistake for them to escalate.
- [14:21]
Richard Dalton
Watch many of, as I said, many.
- [14:25]
Clayton Morris
Of our trading partners, they have queued up and they have kept their cool. They have not escalated and they will get priority in the queue. I think it was a big mistake, this Chinese escalation, because they're playing with a pair of twos. Traditionally, if you look at the history of the trade negotiations, we are the deficit country. So what do we lose by the Chinese raising tariffs on us? We export one fifth to them of what they export to us. So that is a losing hand for them. So, you know, as a professor of economics, him, not me, he points out that the debtor always has a stronger hand in a trade surplus. Trade surplus, trade deficit. And because they export so much to us, they are, they are holding a pair of twos in their hand right now.
- [15:28]
Natali Morris
Right.
- [15:28]
Clayton Morris
Which is really interesting. But there appears to be, though, some softening on China's side, and it appears that they might actually be willing to talk. And President Trump just posted this on Truth Social. It's, it's long, but I'll cut to the end here because he's talking about other countries, but he talks about China, wants to make a deal badly, but they don't know how to get it started. We're waiting for their phone call. It will happen. God bless the United States. But in the meantime, these 104% tariffs are going to hit. So while they try to figure out how to get on the phone, call.
- [15:58]
Natali Morris
President Trump, someone in our chat says, yeah, we don't have small Asians, but we have kids. No, no, that's not what we're advocating.
- [16:06]
Clayton Morris
Child labor. Out. Oh, my God. Upton Sinclair.
- [16:10]
Natali Morris
Are you rolling over his.
- [16:11]
Clayton Morris
Yeah.
- [16:12]
Natali Morris
All right. Also, we got some news this morning over the Biden administration's handling of China during COVID It turns out they went out of their way to protect China during the pandemic. This should not be a surprise to you, but it is a surprise to see it in writing, other people admitting it. I guess when you've received millions of dollars, you're gonna defend the person who was sending that money to you. The Biden family is. According to news in the Free Beacon, the Biden administration may have quietly sat on a military document from 2022, suggesting something pretty major, that seven US service members might have come and come down with COVID just months before China even acknowledged that the virus existed. This traces back to 2019 in Wuhan at the military games. What's wild is that this report was supposed to be made public by law, but it never was. The Biden administration buried it. So why, why do you think they did that? What do you think?
- [17:10]
Clayton Morris
Could it be all the money. Could it be all the money that the Bidens received from China?
- [17:14]
Natali Morris
Very curious an idea.
- [17:15]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. And, and you know, so that it was a lie. It never saw the light of day. It throws a wrench into the official story that we've been told. Of course. Especially the claims that no U.S. troops were affected during those games. That was a lie, A bald faced lie by the Biden administration. Shocking, I know. And if it holds up, if this report holds up and it appears to be legitimate, it lends more weight to the theory that, yes, the virus did come from the lab and, and something that the CIA has now confirmed and admitted to be true, although quietly. So why bury this whole thing?
- [17:48]
Natali Morris
I don't know.
- [17:48]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. All right, well, remember this guy? You guys remember this guy? What a handsome. What a handsome devil this guy is. Ryan Routh. Well, skinny Gary Busey. A more sane Gary Busey. Well, perhaps, maybe. Pam Bondi's DOJ has just revealed that Trump assassin Ryan Ralph tried to buy military weapons from Ukraine to kill President Trump, including a rocket launcher. So just if a gun didn't work, a rocket launcher would have. Um, according to the indictment. Take a look at this. Ralph asked the Ukrainian military for a Stinger RPG to take out Trump because Trump would be, quote, bad for Ukraine. He communicated all of this, by the way, using the Signal application, which we now know. You know, you use Signal. It's like lots of criminals using Signal. Right. He attempted to acquire anti aircraft weapons as direct evidence of his assassination attempt. All done on Signal, by the way. That month, Ralph sought to purchase the devices online from an associate believed to be a Ukrainian with access to military weapons. The two discussed this all over Signal in that In July of 2024, the attempt on President Trump's life in Butler, Pennsylvania was, quote, he wished that he was the one who had carried it out and that he. That he wished that he had been assassinated. It also talks about in this, in this rule, in this indictment that it includes, it proves planning, motive and the intent to kill President Trump. And they want this information made admissible during a trial because it shows that he app, you know, actively was trying to assassinate him. And they found this on his phone. Of course, they, the two went back and forth, began discussing Ralph's purchase of a weapon. In August, Ralph told his associate to, quote, send me an RPG or Stinger and I'll see what we can do. Trump is not good for Ukraine.
- [19:52]
Natali Morris
How do you just ship.
- [19:54]
Clayton Morris
Then he asked them to ship it to him.
- [19:55]
Natali Morris
How do you just do that?
- [19:56]
Clayton Morris
I mean, I guess from Ukraine, possibly like a CIA asset. Right? Because my question is no one was in Ukraine, no American. And we've talked about this with CIA whistleblowers and military experts on our show. There's no way that he was in Ukraine when he was and that RCIA and Deep State didn't know that he was there. They absolutely knew that he was there. So then here's a question. Did Ukraine know about this plot in advance? We know the CIA totally controls Ukraine. Even the New York Times has reported.
- [20:33]
Natali Morris
According to this crazy dude, Ukraine is really important and the United States needs to continue to support their efforts to go to war with Russia, but not so important that they can't spare a weapon or two for him to kill Donald Trump. That's what. That's how he would think.
- [20:52]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. Well, yeah. Basically says in this. He says this in his signal messages that they won't know where they are. He said that. The. He said. He admitted that Ukraine receives our weapons and then sells them off to the highest bidder. He basically acknowledged in these documents that they get lost all. All of the time on the battlefield and no one would miss them. He said Tucker recently talked about Ukraine's selling of these weapons. Watch. Second, fact. Fact, not guess. Fact is Ukrainian military is selling a huge percentage, up to half of the arms that we send them. Half. And I'm not guessing about this. I know that for a fact.
- [21:28]
Natali Morris
A fact.
- [21:28]
Clayton Morris
Okay. Not speculation. And they're selling it. And a lot of us winding up with the drug cartels on our border. So this is the. This. This is a crime. What's happening? Our intel agencies are fully aware of this. You tell me they're not profiting from this. Of course. You think CIA is not profiting from this. Yes, they are. I can't prove that, but I believe that.
- [21:48]
Natali Morris
What?
- [21:48]
Clayton Morris
They don't know this. I know this, but they don't know this. They know this, and no one is saying it like no American seems aware of this. We're sending these arms to Ukraine. Billions and billions, hundreds of billions of dollars, and it's being stolen and sold to our actual enemies. Like, what the. I'm trying not to swear. What is this?
- [22:05]
Richard Dalton
Yeah. Well, the reason why is because you have Zelensky.
- [22:08]
Clayton Morris
It was about three weeks ago, I think, was specifically asked this question. So he went at some length in one of his interviews to say, oh, no, absolutely not.
- [22:15]
Michael Connett
There's no truth to that at all.
- [22:16]
Natali Morris
We've implemented all this.
- [22:18]
Clayton Morris
That.
- [22:18]
Richard Dalton
But the media just reported what he said.
- [22:21]
Clayton Morris
The New York Times could get on the web and order Ukrainian weapons. That's a fact. I'm not guessing. It's a fact.
- [22:27]
Natali Morris
Yeah.
- [22:27]
Clayton Morris
And they can be used to assassinate President Trump. Very, very easy. So many of you asking in the chat room, when is this guy's trial gonna take place? Is that scheduled? It's scheduled for September 8, 2025. So he's got a long spring and summer to be sitting behind bars. If he's sentenced. He could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted.
- [22:46]
Natali Morris
Well, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez was trending this week because someone snapped this photo of her flying first class on her way to a Bernie Sanders rally, all about to fight for, wait for it, fighting the oligarchy and income inequality. Now, I sort of assume that, you know, representatives may or may not take first class from time to time. They may get a bump or what. You know, we, we see them as these elevated statures. And she though, sets herself apart as someone who is very much against wealth while living a life proving that she has it. I think that the narrative here writes itself is that Democrats are the elites, that it's clear that they are right. So I don't begrudge her a first class seat any more than I did Eric Adams in his indictment. I absolutely think that Eric Adams should not have been indicted for it. It just is a bad optic when she's going off to take this, this picture so iconic is fight the oligarchy, tax the rich. It's one of those moments where people start to question the message if it really matches the lifestyle. You know, she often talks about we shouldn't have gas stoves, but then she'll do a cooking video where she's using a gas stove, that kind of thing. You know, she's one of those climate activists who is willing to take a private jet. And so that's why this was trending. Let us know what you think. I mean, I think maybe it's not the worst thing in the world, but it points out she has access to a lot of things as an elite that she speaks out against.
- [24:18]
Clayton Morris
It's hypocrisy. It's ironic. Right? So she's asking you to take power to the people, fight the oligarchy, fight those that are in power, that have consolidated the wealth at the top, the people that take first class flights.
- [24:31]
Natali Morris
But you don't see any Democratic elites amongst the people. And when they do go amongst the people, they look like fools. They don't know how to hold a shovel.
- [24:43]
Clayton Morris
Well, I mean, when Bernie Sanders has made millions of dollars, he's made millions of dollars, he pushes for socialism, and yet he's made millions of dollars off of capitalism. I mean, his selling of his book, right? That's the American dream. You work hard, you write a book, and people buy it, and you are rewarded. In a capitalist society, if people find value in your work, if they don't, they don't buy the book. That's how it works, right? Socialism props up losers and they pick winners and losers. And so Bernie doesn't see the irony here. And I think that's why this is so ironic. I've Seen. I've definitely seen like, you know, individuals on first class seats, but I've seen actually plenty of politicians sitting in coach when I've flown.
- [25:21]
Natali Morris
You know, I've seen a flight attendant responded to me on X and said a lot of them do not want to be seen in first class. They won't do it no matter what.
- [25:29]
Clayton Morris
No, I've sat. I've sat and I've sat. I've sat a few rows behind different politicians and coach. And so I see it regularly. So you have to make the choice to sit in first class in this situation. You're on your way to a Bernie Sanders fight the oligarchy rally and you choose to sit in first class.
- [25:48]
Natali Morris
But she's always a contradiction. That's why I feel like. But yeah, she's a fraud. That's the way.
- [25:54]
Clayton Morris
Have her explain economics. I watched a video the other day, Thomas Sowell just was watching her try to explain the horrors of capitalism and he just was like shaking his head. He's like, what? She literally said nothing of value at all. Not one word that came out of her mouth made any sense. She's just like regurgitating platitudes that have no meaning in reality at all. And that's what she does. She gets up on stage and she's invited to these speeches and she just rolls off a whole bunch of Democratic talking points that mean nothing.
- [26:25]
Natali Morris
Yeah, but she's got the riz. That's why they like her. I guess they're not listening to what she says clearly.
- [26:30]
Clayton Morris
All right, we got more news to get to here. On your Tuesday, we're going to talk about fluoride in drinking water. We're gonna be joined by the lead attorney who fought the EPA and won. In fact, he was really the impetus for RFK Jr. To go after fluoride in 50 states. That lawyer is gonna join us because we've got some big movement from Maha on the fluoride in our drinking water across this nation. We're gonna talk about that. Plus, bad news for the flu shot. You know, if you went out and grabbed a flu shot, you may wanna pay attention to this new research that has just come out.
- [27:00]
Natali Morris
Plus, at the end of the show, we have constitutional scholar Jed Rubenfeld from straight down the middle on YouTube and he's gonna explain to us about these Trump deportations, why President Trump had this big win in the Supreme Court and what this means. And I think actually it's a big win for all of us. So stay tuned for that. Cuz first time redacted guest I'm super excited about.
- [27:20]
Clayton Morris
All right, but first we wanna tell you about our friends, Ed Bunker, because you might have heard all these stories lately about like Signal and all these, like bad guys using Signal and all of these leaks and everything. I just want to tell you about our friends at Bunker because Bunker has been a great sponsor for Redacted. They're having a tremendous growth thanks to viewers who've downloaded the app, gone to the app store and picked it up. High net worth families, law enforcement agents, professional athletes, tactical response trainers are trusting Bunker to protect their lives from surveillance, from cybercriminals and other threats. If you join them, here's what you get. Bunker is an uncompromised private messenger together with a password manager, a secure vault and notes that work seamlessly together, all of it tied into one. In over 130 countries. Bunker customers enjoy peace of mind. They travel with greater ease. They have more energy to focus on what matters most because you can create notes for to do lists, your travel, your banking, all of that stuff is in Bunker and protected. Download Bunker today from the app Store, the Play Store, or visit their website. Just go to Bunker Life. Use the offer code redacted to get 25% off. Live life to the fullest. Protect what matters most. Download Bunker today. So many of our viewers are using Bunker instead of like, you know, Zuckerberg owned WhatsApp messenger and stuff like that. So check them out today at Bunker Life.
- [28:43]
Natali Morris
All right, well, bad news for the flu shot because a new Cleveland study found that the vaccine did not prevent influenza. Quite the contrary, actually. Those who took it were more likely to get infected. So you know when you talk to people that old wives tale, oh, don't get the flu shot. It causes the flu. Turns out that, that the data supports that. Here is the study. Seek it out for yourself. It was published by doctors from the Cleveland Clinic, but it has not yet been peer reviewed because the data set goes through March 26th. So it's only a few days old. It pertains to the 2024, 2025 vaccine that you can still get if you want to. The employees of the Cleveland Clinic were required to get the flu shot, so 82% of them did and they followed 53,000 employees. Here's what they found. It shows that at first they were all getting the flu at an even pace. But over the course of the study, the cumulative incidence of influenza increased more rapidly among those who took the flu shot. In an analysis, adjusted for age, sex, clinical nursing job and employment location the risk of influenza was significantly higher for the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Now, they do say within the first 70 days, pretty much no one was getting the flu. But that's not to say that the vaccine wanes because the unvaccinated were also not getting it. So we can't sort of take that away. When they discuss their limitations, they say this, that the vaccine was the 3 valent inactivated influenza vaccine in about 99% of the study. And it's possible that other influenza vaccines may have been more effective and cannot be excluded. The problem is that this is the case for every flu vaccine because vaccine makers come up with the formulation of the vaccine in the spring before each flu season, season, which is the fall. And they make their best guess as to which strains to include that they think will be prevalent in the future. They're, they're forecasting they can never accurately predict what will be that strain, like the COVID vaccine. Every time they pushed out a new one for a new variant, that variant was no longer present. They could never really know. Now, a few weeks ago, the FDA approved the 2025, 2026 vaccine. And the FDA recommends that it constraint contains these strains here. Well, if you pause this and then compare it to the strains that are circulating now, this is the data for April of 2025. They're basically saying that in 2025, 26 put the strains in that are circulating now. They're using the ones that are in effect now that people are getting right now, so they can't vaccinate for future mutations because they can't travel to the future yet. So we never really know. And it's worth noting that the annual flu vaccine does not go through clinical trials. Also, it is not tested, it is never tested as to whether or not it stops influenza. All they ever do is test the antibodies in the blood of the creatures that receive it. So from this study alone, it's clear we need more research about why do we mandate the flu vaccine if it is this ineffective and may in fact make people more likely to get the flu. So let us know what you think of that.
- [32:10]
Clayton Morris
All right, we've got more news to get to in a second. We're going to talk about this fluoride story, which is a bombshell and what this means for our drinking water. It's been amazing, actually, over the past 4, 48 hours to see liberals taking to social media saying that, oh, now you know, now RFK Jr. And Trump want to take away our healthy teeth in our Drinking water, fluoride. Okay, we'll get to the bottom of that in a second because this is a major story and if you've got children, you should pay attention to that story. But first, gold prices just pulled back a little bit. Back below $3,000 an ounce. Silver prices have dropped just a little bit with all of the uncertainty going on right now. We are big proponents of investing in precious metals and our friends over at le your capital can help you do that. So now might be the opportunity because they have a 4,200gold target for, for gold, $4,200 an ounce. So it just went above $3,000 an ounce, which was an all time high. It's pulled back now, but today I think it's up 11 points or 11, $11, almost half a point. So up and down a little bit. But anyway, the point is, with the volatility in the stock market, where do you want your family's future tied? You want that in a 401k or be able to actually have some investments in precious metals? Our friends at Lear Capital can help you do that. They' company, they'll just talk to you on the phone. No pressure at all. There's no pressure at all. Just have a, have a conversation with them about how do I maybe convert some of my US Dollars into gold. And this is for American customers only, by the way. So call their 800 number, 1-800-613-3557 for your free gold guide. They've got a $4200 gold target guide right now. And also ask them about silver. I think it's one of the best kept secrets right now because, because it's now down to about $28 an ounce as of, I think right now. If I just checked it a few moments ago, yeah, $29 an ounce for silver. So I mean, compared that to gold prices right now, really, really good value on silver. Just go to learredacted.com or call them 1-800-613-3557. They'll ship it right to your door. You can keep it in your gun safe as well. So our thanks to them for supporting the show.
- [34:13]
Natali Morris
Well, Health and human services secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Is making good on his promise to remove fluoride from American water systems. He says he's going to assemble a task force and stop the CDC from recommending that it be added to water. So this was a big campaign promise and it may in fact be happening. We've been waiting. TikTok.
- [34:35]
Clayton Morris
Yeah. And this is a huge Win for the MAHA movement because that dangerous neurotoxin fluoride is about to be removed from America's drinking water, hopefully for good. And our next guest was the inspiration behind this. Yes, attorney Michael Connett was the lead attorney who just won that landmark fluoride case against the epa. And the epa, of course, was forced to basically admit that it had improperly approved this dangerous neurotoxin. In other words, the United States government knew that fluoride is a neurotoxin. They knew about it for decades and actively fought to keep that data suppressed. And attorney Michael Conant joins us now. Busy, busy day because I know everyone wants to talk to you because of your involvement in this and really being the Inspiration, Michael, for RFK and pushing this at HHS first, just at a high level, 30,000 foot level. How does this feel for you? This must feel amazing.
- [35:27]
Michael Connett
Yes, it does. I mean, certainly we've been looking for this with the new administration and it was great to see yesterday that, you know, Bobby Kennedy followed through and stated that he does. He will be asking the CDC to stop recommending water fluoridation. And the CDC has been the main institution that communities have relied upon as the basis for fluoridating their drinking water. And so for the CDC to withdraw that recommendation is very significant.
- [36:04]
Natali Morris
And so does this mean then that states will have to follow through and remove fluoride from their water? Or can they still say, no, we really want it there?
- [36:16]
Michael Connett
It will remain a local decision, a state decision. You know, Utah, for example, just passed a bill to ban fluoridation. So no community in Utah can fluoridate its water anymore. Florida is currently deliberating on legislation that would also ban fluoridation across the state in Florida. We've seen dozens of communities in Florida over the past few months since the court issued its ruling finding fluoridation to be an unreasonable risk. We've seen dozens of Florida communities end their fluoridation programs. Just last week, Miami Dade county, their county commissioners voted 8 to 2 to end all fluoridation programs there, which encompasses over 3 million people. So we are seeing significant developments over the past few months with communities across the country finally ending their water fluoridation programs. And in doing so, following the lead of most of Europe, which is already rejected fluoridation.
- [37:33]
Clayton Morris
This so many questions here. And I know people in our chat are asking about toothpaste, which we'll get to in a second, but I just want to stick on the, the fluoridation in the water piece of this. So Bobby Kennedy basically saying we're going to, you know, put together a task force to really kind of look at this. So, you know, you've been fighting this for years. It's a neurotoxin lowering the IQ in our children and a whole host of issues, of course, me you can talk about how, how horrible it is, but why are we waiting? Like, why do we need a task force?
- [38:02]
Michael Connett
Well, we, that's a great question. I mean, at the end of the day, local communities and states, they don't need to wait. We know enough right now to end this program. I mean, this is a couple basic points. One, we know that you don't need to swallow fluoride, that any benefit that comes to your teeth comes topically, not through ingestion. So why are we still adding a chemical to the drinking water that you don't actually need to swallow and that doesn't treat the water? Fluoride is the only chemical that we add to water that doesn't treat the water. It treats you, the consumer, with a drug. And in terms of the health effects, the national toxicology program at the federal government level has concluded that excess fluoride exposure lowers iq. When we started fluoridating the water, that was not part of the bargain. The notion that we would add a chemical to drinking water that can lower IQ is just something that doesn't make any sense at all. And there is now a large body of scientific data showing that fluoride lowers iq. And there's many other concerns as well, including fluoride's impact on the bones. There are high quality studies finding that fluoride increases the risk of hip fracture, particularly in postmenopausal women. There's studies linking fluoride to osteoarthritis, which is the most prevalent form of arthritis in the United States today, impacting millions of adults, costing our healthcare system billions of dollars. We have data linking fluoride exposure to reduced thyroid function and hypothyroidism, which is a serious condition that can affect health in many ways. So there are many red flags right there today in the peer reviewed scientific literature. And local communities should be acting now, ending their fluoridation programs. There's no need to wait for the federal government to make its final decision and follow the lead of Europe. Now get it out of the water. And if you want to use fluoride, you can get it in toothpaste on the store chef.
- [40:08]
Natali Morris
Now, one thing I thought of when I heard the term task force, I thought, oh, will we get full disclosure then? Because we have to look for this Ourselves. I'm sure you're familiar with the research of Dr. Harold Carpenter Hodge, who was the lead scientist on the Manhattan Project, whose notes were kept from the American people showing that fluoride was a neurotoxin and could have been used in atomic bombs, and that was kept from the American people. So we've had this. We've had interaction with the American Dental Association. We've had all, all manner of suppression of data from government scientists and in, in order to sell us the Manhattan Project. Well, do you think we'll get that? Will the American people really get the true story of how they used us as guinea pigs?
- [40:59]
Michael Connett
Well, I certainly would hope so. At some point in time, I suspect this task force that, that Mr. Kennedy is putting together is probably going to be focused more on the current research regarding health effects, what we know today. But the point you made is a very important one, and that is when you look at the history of this issue, and I've done that extensively, I've gone to National Archives across the country, you find a pattern of data suppression where both government authorities as well as industries were suppressing what they knew about the hazards of fluoride exposure. And you referenced Dr. Hodge, who was one of the leading scientific architects of fluoride policies, not just water fluoridation, but occupational safety standards and whatnot. And Dr. Hodge did have a concern as far back as 1944 that fluoride can damage the brain. And he called for research to better understand that issue. And so there was a concern in the earliest days of fluoridation that fluoride could affect the brain. And we now know, based on the research that the National Toxicology Program has comprehensively reviewed, that fluoride does affect the brain and can affect neurodevelopment.
- [42:28]
Natali Morris
And so they've ruined the careers of scientists who have said this since the story of Felix Mullinix, for instance. They, they literally went to ruin people to keep this from us. And I don't know if there'll ever, ever be accountability for that.
- [42:48]
Michael Connett
Well, that's a story that needs to be told. People need to understand that this has been an exceptionally difficult issue for scientists speak out on for decades. And you know, those scientists that did speak out on it suffered serious consequences to their career, including Phyllis Mullinix in the 1990s, who was fired after publishing a study showing that fluoride causes behavioral problems in rats. She's not the only scientist who has suffered that type of harm to her career. I think, fortunately, today we are seeing a more a safer space develop in the academic community where you're seeing more scientists study this issue and speak out on this issue. And I hope to see more of that in the years ahead. And I certainly think that having the HHS secretary speaking out about the problems with fluoride exposure is going to further facilitate that scientific discussion.
- [43:47]
Clayton Morris
People are pointing out, like Operation Paperclip and bringing Nazis into the United States. And they were fully aware of this fluoride innovation process and we kept it hidden from the American people. But I promised our audience we'd talk about toothpaste. I was at our dentist not too long ago, a few months ago, and he said, oh yeah, we don't. I don't use fluoride at all. And he's like, I wish more people knew about this. So the freaking dentist is talking about fluoride and yet you can just go to the store. It's all in the selling our toothpaste. It's kind of hard to find good toothpaste that doesn't have it in it. So where are we at with that? And it's gonna still sit on store shelves, but it won't be in our drinking water. Water.
- [44:25]
Michael Connett
That's right. I do think that at the end of the day, fluoride toothpaste makes the most sense in terms of, for those people who want to use fluoride, that's the best vehicle to use it because you can brush it on your teeth and spit it out. But I do encourage everyone to read the poison warning that the FDA requires on the back of every fluoride toothpaste tube sold in this country, especially for families who have young children, because we know that preschool children, for example, have a very difficult time spitting out what they put in their mouths, as parents out there will know. And so if you give a two year old or a three year old fluoride toothpaste, they're going to swallow pretty much all of what they put in their mouth. And that can be a huge exposure, a very significant exposure for some young children. And compounding that is, you have companies like Colgate and Crest that market these fluoride toothpaste to young kids in a way that presents it like candy, like watermelon and bubblegum and with cartoon packaging. And I think a lot of parents out there have no appreciation or idea how toxic these products are for their kids because the product is sort of presented as, as uniquely safe for children when it's not. These fluoride toothpaste can pose real significant risk for a young child.
- [45:52]
Clayton Morris
It's a Great point.
- [45:53]
Natali Morris
Well, you can keep going down this rabbit hole. It's in the water that we give to our livestock that we eat. It's in the water that we, in many times that we water our plants and fruits and vegetables with. It's in the chemical that makes Teflon. So if you'd buy nonstick pans, it's really hard to avoid. And it's. It's just anxietizing once you start looking into it.
- [46:14]
Michael Connett
Yeah, the fluoride. We have been exposed to fluoride through many sources, including processed foods, processed beverages. It's one of the problems that comes about when you are fluoridating so many people's water supply. We fluoridate over 200 million people's water in the United States. And when you do that, you end up contaminating the food supply. And then, as you know, we also get fluoride from some pharmaceuticals. There's no body. There's no government body out there sort of monitoring how much fluoride exposure are we getting from all these different sources. And we know enough to know that some people are ingesting far more than is safe. And, you know, we really should be taking steps to reduce any source of fluoride that you ingest, because you don't need to ingest it. And there are serious health concerns from doing so.
- [47:11]
Clayton Morris
I mean, this is like what villains do in movies. As someone pointed out in our chat here. Scarecrow did that in the Batman movies. Put it in the water supply for Batman. I mean, that's exactly. It is villainous. It absolutely is villainous. Well, an American hero is Michael Konnant. And I just want to thank you for your incredible work because it takes a large amount of bravery to go up against the EPA and then win. And now we're going to see this sea change here in the United States. And so I, for one, I'm thrilled about that. So, Michael, great to see you. Thank you so much for your work and continued amazing work on your end. Thanks, Michael.
- [47:49]
Michael Connett
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
- [47:53]
Clayton Morris
He brings up a great point. I'm thinking about kids. They don't know how to spit. They're the ones that are most vulnerable and they're getting this mouthful of this stuff.
- [48:01]
Natali Morris
Think about it. Like a juice is made with water that has fluoride. Your medicines is made with water. So even if you get a home filtration system that. That will, you know, filter it out of the water you bathe and drink, it's still in the products that you buy. Philip, well, it's. And it's.
- [48:18]
Michael Connett
The.
- [48:18]
Clayton Morris
The whole thing is just really. What. Just to.
- [48:20]
Natali Morris
Because they didn't know what to do.
- [48:21]
Clayton Morris
With industrial waste, because that's the source of it is. It's just diluted industrial waste. Right. Well, let's bring up that. Let's talk about that.
- [48:29]
Natali Morris
The American Dental association actually didn't come up with this on their own. They were sold it.
- [48:33]
Clayton Morris
Right.
- [48:34]
Natali Morris
It was not their idea.
- [48:35]
Clayton Morris
So the byproduct of this. Right.
- [48:37]
Natali Morris
Of.
- [48:37]
Clayton Morris
I think what the. The byproduct of industrial. The industrial waste and fluoride was the.
- [48:42]
Natali Morris
Byproduct of it in a lot of different industrial processes.
- [48:46]
Clayton Morris
I think aluminum.
- [48:47]
Natali Morris
Yes.
- [48:47]
Clayton Morris
Aluminum production and so forth. And so they're like these, these companies, like, what do we do with all this excess. Excess fluoride. I know. Let's get approval from the government. We'll just dump it in the water, actually. We'll sell it to the water supply companies.
- [49:00]
Natali Morris
Well, look, if you want to read a book about how it is related to the Manhattan Project and it poisoned entire communities in the manufacturing of the atomic bomb, read the Fluoride Deception. Crazy book will make you super paranoid. But you need to know this. I don't want to make you paranoid.
- [49:19]
Clayton Morris
Dupont. Yeah. People are saying dupont sold him the idea. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah, it's. It's good stuff. It's really good stuff. All right, we got more news to talk about today. We're going to talk about the Supreme Court ruling on deportations. The Trump administration is saying this is a huge victory for them as the Supreme Court has stepped in on a couple of different big rulings on the Trump administration over the past 24 hours. Professor Jed Rubenfeld is going to be joining us. Constitutional genius. He. I think he calls and his show is called Straight, Straight. Straight down the Middle.
- [49:49]
Natali Morris
Straight down the Middle.
- [49:50]
Clayton Morris
Yeah.
- [49:51]
Natali Morris
Yeah.
- [49:51]
Clayton Morris
So Jed is going to be joining us here in a moment, so give.
- [49:53]
Natali Morris
Him a subscribe, but listen to what he has to say first. But before we get there, I want to tell you about our friends over at PDS Debt, because it looks like we are on the brink of interest rates dropping. And that could be good for anyone who is carrying consumer debt, because of course, it, you know, is a monkey on your back when you have a lot of credit card debt, you have car loans, you have other debt, and it just feels like you can never actually build wealth, that you're just struggling. Well, that's where PDS debt comes in. They do more than just help you manage your debt. They empower you to take control using their platform. They go beyond the numbers to understand your unique financial situation. And they will help you craft a personalized plan designed just for you. So no more cookie cutter solutions. Just a clear path to financial freedom that fits your lifestyle. And here's the best part. There's no minimum credit score required because they're gonna help you build that credit score by getting you outta debt. Whether your credit's bad or fair, they're here to help you save more, pay off your debt faster, and start putting money back where it belongs in your savings account. So right now, head on over to pdsdebt.com redacted and you'll get a free debt analysis with no obligation. It's just an analysis that will help you out. So again, that's PDS debt.com/redacted. Stop waiting and start saving. Get yourself out of debt with PDS debt. It's PDS debt.com redacted. The Supreme Court ruled to allow the Trump administration the right to deport Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies act, but ruled that deportees are entitled to due process and notice before they are deported. Jed Rubenfeld joins us today. He's a Yale professor and constitutional scholar and, and his YouTube show is called Straight down the Middle and the place that I always start on constitutional issues. And I want to say that you should, too, before running your mouth on X. Professor Rubenfeld, thank you so much for joining us.
- [51:55]
Richard Dalton
Well, what a pleasure to be here. I'm a big fan of what you do, so thanks for having me.
- [51:59]
Natali Morris
Thank you so much. Okay, so let's get into it. Can you explain what the Constitution ruled about the Alien Enemies act and how it may be a win for the Trump administration, but also a win for due process and the Constitution?
- [52:15]
Richard Dalton
That is exactly right. You just put it perfectly. It's a big win for the Trump administration because what the Supreme Court did was it overturned these orders that were being issued by Judge Boasberg down in D.C. very controversial orders in which he, he said, stop deporting folks under the Alien Enemies Act. You're going to lose this case. You got to stop deporting them right now. The Supreme Court basically took this case away from Boasberg and said, nope, you don't have any jurisdiction. If the case goes forward, it's got to go forward probably in Texas. So that's a big win, but it's a huge win for the Constitution and the rule of law. The two bulwarks of the rule of law are judicial review and due process. Without those things, you don't have the rule of law. And what the Supreme Court said in this case is, you know what? Here's the one thing you can't do. You cannot throw people into a car with hoods over their heads on a street in the United States and then put them on an airplane and deport them in the middle of the night to some other country without ever giving them a chance, say, wait a minute, you got the wrong person. I'm a citizen, or I'm not a gang member, or whatever it is. In other words, the Supreme Court held each of them has a right to judicial review and to say, you got the wrong guy. I'm not a gang member. I am not. Not a Venezuelan. Whatever, you know, whatever it is that, that he has to say, and that will put the government to some proof. Got to have some evidence, and that's the way it should be.
- [53:41]
Natali Morris
Okay? So one of the things that maybe the Trump administration could argue is that this puts trend Aragua gang members on notice that we're coming for them, and that may slow up this process. Do you think that that's a valid argument, or am I just making that up, or is it just something that we might worry about?
- [54:03]
Richard Dalton
I. I think that's not a, a crazy thing to say at all, but that's what due process requires. You cannot, in this country, be doing things to people secretly and send them off to some other country without ever giving them a chance to be heard. And, and, you know, the rule of law has some costs. One cost is you give notice to the bad guys. In fact, you know, we put people on trial when they commit a murder. That helps the bad guys, that helps criminals, because sometimes they get off in trial even though they're guilty. You know, we have the proof beyond reasonable doubt. That is the way the rule of law works. And there are costs to it, but it's. It's just fundamentally important to this country and the Constitution that we keep the rule of law going here. You know, if we lose that, we've lost something that's absolutely precious and fundamental.
- [54:59]
Natali Morris
Now, I watched your piece on birthright citizenship, and you do a beautiful job of describing what subject to the laws of the land are and who they pertain to. And in this case, it does. Does this apply here? Because these are not legal citizens in many cases. So do they continue to be subject to the right to due process?
- [55:27]
Richard Dalton
Well, you know, you're asking a great question, and many of these deportees may not have full constitutional rights if they entered this country illegally, if they've been here a short time, you do not acquire full American constitutional rights by coming into this country illegally. In fact, you have no constitutional rights. But the one thing you do have is a right to due process. And here's why. Because if you don't give that person that you believe is a criminal terrorist, if you don't give them due process, you don't know if you're making a mistake. What we just heard, that the Trump administration deported somebody by accident, total error, to El Salvador, and he's in a prison there. There. That's not how things work. Everybody has a chance to say, look, you got the wrong guy here. I'm not who you're saying I am. And if we. If you don't have that, then you're not just depriving these, you know, potential trend Aragua gang members of due process. You're depriving everybody of due process. Citizens, innocent people alike.
- [56:31]
Natali Morris
Right. And so one of the things I continue to be concerned about is when you ship them off to a Guantanamo Bay type place where the legal jurisdiction is fuzzy, we could have another situation where innocent people are in a dragnet that they can never get out of, because that is what happened under Bush and Obama. So what, what are, what is the Trump administration arguing about not having jurisdiction to get these people back? Is this another sort of Gitmo? It's out of our hands now. It's not within this tidy box of the Constitution. So sorry.
- [57:08]
Richard Dalton
Yeah, they seem to be saying that about the folks whom they've already put in a Salvadoran jail. They seem to be taking the position, look, once they're in that jail, it's out of our hands, even though we're the ones put them there. But what the, what this case is about, the current. The case that was just decided yesterday by the Supreme Court is people who are stuck in Texas or they could even be shipped to Guantanamo, that what they would still have a right to is habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, fundamental American and Anglo American legal protection. If the government puts somebody in custody, detains them, that person has a right to go to a court and get judicial review of whether their custody is rightful. That's what the Supreme Court last night said that these people are entitled to. It's not clear that that's going to do anything for the folks who are already in that Salvadoran prison.
- [57:59]
Clayton Morris
Prison.
- [58:00]
Richard Dalton
They might. We just don't know what's going to happen to them. And that's not good. That's not the right result. But we don't know habeas runs to people who are still in American custody. And what the Supreme Court said is you cannot do any more of this. You can't send a single additional person off to that Salvadoran prison without first giving them that right to habeas corpus. They get to come before a court and say, wait a minute, you got the wrong guy here. And you know, and that'll be true. Even if the government ships them all out to Guantanamo, they'll still have that right. The problem is these. There's a couple hundred they've already shipped off to a Salvadoran prison. And you're right, the situation there is very fuzzy.
- [58:38]
Natali Morris
Right. And so I also watched your piece on Mahmoud Khalil, and you take the opinion that this will fall along the party lines of whatever judge it falls before. So there'll be liberal judges who think that, that Mahmoud Khalil should get the right to defend himself and freedom of speech, and then there will be conservative judges who don't. And that's just kind of the way of it. And so do you think that these cases will continue to fall along, sadly, along partisan lines in this way? And we know which judge leans which way?
- [59:15]
Richard Dalton
I do. I do. It's a, it's something that nobody should be proud of about the American legal system at the moment, that you can identify Democratic judges and Republican judges. That's not the way things, things are supposed to be. But let's be honest, that's what we've got a lot of. We got a lot of partisan judging now that what that means is the Supreme Court's going to decide these big issues. That'll be the end of it. And right now, if I had to predict, I would, I'll predict that the Supreme Court is not going to hold that somebody like Khalil has a First Amendment right to avoid deportation because he, let's say, advocated in favor of Hamas. If you advocate in favor of Hamas, if you were a citizen, you could not be imprisoned for that. That's a, a, that's a First Amendment right. First Amendment protects the most abhorrent speech you can, you can advocate and espouse and support the worst terrorist butchers like Hamas, and you're still protected by the First Amendment. But that does not apply to a non citizen in a deportation proceeding. That's what I'm going to predict, that the Supreme Court will hold. But as I, as I said in that piece that you referred to, judges are going to differ about this. And nobody can be sure what the Supreme Court's going to say.
- [60:19]
Natali Morris
And so that must be your take then may I extrapolate that to your take on Judge Boasberg, that his opinion was predictable and now it's moving to the next judge. And whoever that is, we can predict. Because if we have partisan judges.
- [60:38]
Richard Dalton
Yeah, but you know, I know Jeb Boseberg. He's a very good judge. And when I say that our judges reactions tend to fall in partisan lines, that doesn't mean you can, can look at any particular opinion and say, well, that opinion's wrong because it was decided by a liberal judge, or that opinion is wrong decided by a conservative judge. You better look at the opinion. And you can't just start saying that Boasberg was wrong just because, you know, he tends to, you know, have more liberal views. He's a very good judge. And, and, and, and, and the position he took about his own jurisdiction in this case was not crazy. Number of justices on the Supreme Court court, liberal justices, but a number of justices upheld his jurisdiction, which he had found it was not a crazy position. So, so, you know, I, I, I don't think we can reject what a judge says just because we think that he's liberal or conservative.
- [61:32]
Natali Morris
Right. I thought you did a beautiful piece doing the, the Trump ruling on whether or not he had presidential immunity. It was not necessarily partisan. The opinions were just very well written. So I appreciate your assessment of that. Do you think that it will come to a head? Because one thing that I'm concerned about is the Trump administration continues to expand the idea of acceptable speech under the guise of antisemitism. And what if an American citizen speaks out against Israel and is then convicted of antisemitism? Do you think the Constitution is strong enough to protect those beliefs right now? And what would happen if an American citizen were actually punished under, under what they're doing now to critics of Israel that are not citizens?
- [62:27]
Richard Dalton
Well, you're not asking another great question. And the answer's gotta be that the Constitution has to defend and protect those people and it has to be strong enough. We're not living in America anymore if people can be, be thrown in prison for their political opinions. And again, I'll repeat it, those opinions might be the most abhorrent things you can imagine. I think anybody who gets out there and exalts takes pleasure in October 7th. And you see people doing that. They are repulsive, their opinions are repulsive, but they are protected by our First Amendment. And you cannot throw them in prison because of that. And I agree with you. You see some movements in this, you know, well intentioned effort to stop anti Semitism that are now doing to these people what was done to conservatives for the last, you know, four years, you know, punishing them for expressing conservative opinions. You, you cannot be punishing people for expressing opinions you don't like. That's, that's not the American way.
- [63:27]
Natali Morris
Right. Well, Jed Ribbon, thank you so much for joining the show today. First time redacted guest. I was really excited to talk to you. You can seek him out on X also his YouTube channel is called Straight down the Middle. And again on these major court cases, one of the first place places I go to study. So thank you for coming.
- [63:46]
Richard Dalton
Thanks so much for having me.
- [63:48]
Natali Morris
That's going to do it for us today on Redacted. Let us know what you think about all of this. War with Iran, free speech, deportations. It's a wild ride we're on. We knew the Trump administration would be, but not like this. I myself find myself surprised. Hey, if you like redacted, you can show the world by buying some redacted merch. We have that. You can visit redacted store.com and check out our offerings of things that you might like to signal to the world such as the fact that you are a conspiracy knower, not a conspiracy theorist. I should have coined that one. We didn't. We just put it on a T shirt. You are a non pacifist peace extremist. If you'd like that. Or just a redacted hat hat, redacted sticker, redacted bumper sticker. Check it out. Maybe you might want to buy that for somebody in your life, for yourself. We really appreciate your support of independent journalists. I like US journalism is what I meant to say, but didn't. So. Okay, that means I'm tired. I'm pretty much done with the show for today. We will see you here tomorrow, same time, same place. Be here. Thanks for being here with us today, you guys.