The Truth with Lisa Boothe: One Year Later: Revisiting the Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump with Jonathan T. Gilliam

Summary

Summary of "The Truth with Lisa Boothe: One Year Later: Revisiting the Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump with Jonathan T. Gilliam"

Podcast: The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
Host/Author: iHeartPodcasts
Episode Title: The Truth with Lisa Boothe: One Year Later: Revisiting the Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump with Jonathan T. Gilliam
Release Date: July 15, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode, Lisa Booth hosts Jonathan T. Gilliam, a former Navy SEAL and FBI agent, to revisit the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump that occurred one year prior in Butler, Pennsylvania. The discussion delves deep into the security failures, the Epstein files controversy, and the alarming increase in attacks on ICE agents, offering insights and critical analysis of these pressing issues.

---

Revisiting the Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump

Reflection on Security Failures

Lisa Booth opens the conversation by referencing Rand Paul's report on the security lapses during the assassination attempt. She questions whether these lapses were a result of intentional indifference by security agencies toward President Trump.

Jonathan Gilliam's Perspective:

• Confidence in Protection Agencies: Gilliam expresses continued distrust in the Secret Service and FBI, stating, "We don't have any more confidence that the president is going to be secured..." ([04:37]).
• Accountability Issues: He criticizes the lack of accountability, noting, "They haven't seen anyone held to account for what occurred..." ([06:00]).
• Comparison to Corporate Failures: Gilliam draws parallels between security agencies and companies like Harley Davidson, suggesting that superficial changes (e.g., ceasing to promote DEI) do not address underlying problems ([07:01]).

Discussion on Intentionality:

• Potential Indifference or Malice: Booth raises the possibility of intentional lapses driven by political bias, asking if the security agencies dehumanized Trump to the point of indifference ([07:50]).

Gilliam's Investigation Insights:

• Theories and Evidence: Gilliam discusses his investigative approach, emphasizing that evidence must lead theory rather than preconceived notions. He states, "You cannot rule out intentional avenues of approach..." ([08:04]).
• Possible Internal Sabotage: He suggests that internal dissent and hatred within the agencies could have contributed to the failure to protect Trump, comparing it to negligence akin to malpractice ([10:28]).

---

The Epstein Files Controversy

Release of the Epstein Memo: Lisa Booth transitions to the Epstein files, questioning the validity of the Justice Department and FBI's memo that denies the existence of a client list and asserts Epstein's suicide.

Gilliam's Analysis:

• Alternative Theories: Gilliam posits that Epstein's death could be part of an intelligence operation or that Epstein was an intelligence agent who compromised powerful individuals ([19:44]).
• Lack of Transparency: He criticizes the brevity of the memo, stating, "Why didn't they just show us that?" ([25:18]).
• Complex Web of Connections: Highlighting Epstein's associations with influential figures like Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, Gilliam argues that there is more to Epstein's activities than mere criminal enterprise ([30:11]).

Suspicions of Cover-Up:

• Pam Bondi's Statements: Booth references Pam Bondi's ambiguous remarks about possessing Epstein's client list, which Gilliam interprets as a possible cover-up or misinformation ([25:50]).

Gilliam's Conclusion:

• Possible Deeper Implications: He leans towards the idea that Epstein's activities were either linked to a nation-state or a sophisticated criminal enterprise designed to manipulate and control influential individuals ([27:11]).
• Distrust in Government Transparency: Gilliam expresses skepticism about the government's motives, suggesting that revealing more information could jeopardize sensitive intelligence sources and methods ([25:18]).

---

Escalating Attacks on ICE Agents

Current Climate: Booth brings attention to the significant increase in violent attacks against ICE agents, citing an Axios article where House Democrats express aggressive rhetoric towards law enforcement.

Gilliam's Insights:

• Leftist Criminal Enterprise Theory: Gilliam argues that the Democratic Party, along with allied business interests, harbors animosity towards conservatives and strong societal structures, which he believes fuels the escalation of violence against ICE agents ([31:37]).
• Coordinated Tactics: He draws parallels between recent attacks and tactics used in historical conflicts like the intifadas, suggesting foreign training influences ([35:57]).
• Impact on Public Safety: Gilliam warns that these coordinated efforts not only target ICE agents but also aim to destabilize societal norms, potentially orchestrating broader national insecurity ([35:57]).

Nature of the Attacks:

• Orchestrated vs. Lone Wolves: Gilliam contends that the sophistication of recent attacks indicates they are not isolated incidents but rather part of a larger, coordinated effort with specific techniques and communication strategies that mirror foreign insurgencies ([35:57]).

Conclusion on ICE Attacks:

• Strategic Political Motives: He posits that attacking ICE agents serves the Democratic Party's goal to mobilize their voter base by eliminating a significant portion of potential voters ([35:25]).
• Resonance with Broader Movements: These attacks are seen as extensions of violent tactics adopted by various leftist movements, further entrenched by ideological zealotry ([35:57]).

---

Conclusion

The episode concludes with Gilliam emphasizing the complexity and interconnectedness of these issues. He urges listeners to consider the broader implications of security failures, government transparency, and the rise in politically motivated violence. Both hosts acknowledge the depth of the conversation, with Booth appreciating Gilliam's extensive insights into these critical national security concerns.

Notable Quotes:

• "How in the world something like that could have happened to the president when they're supposedly being protected..." — Jonathan Gilliam ([04:37])
• "They just used DEI. They never really changed anything." — Jonathan Gilliam ([07:01])
• "If you went on the news and you completely lied... there will be ramifications for that." — Jonathan Gilliam ([17:09])
• "This is a leftist criminal enterprise... they hate this country." — Jonathan Gilliam ([31:42])

---

Key Takeaways

1. Security Lapses: Persistent distrust in U.S. security agencies with regards to presidential protection, highlighting a lack of accountability and possible internal biases.
2. Epstein Files Debate: Skepticism towards the government’s transparency on Epstein’s activities, suggesting deeper, possibly intelligence-related implications.
3. Rise in Violence Against ICE: Theatrical and coordinated attacks on ICE agents are seen as extensions of larger, ideologically driven movements aiming to destabilize societal structures.
4. Call for Accountability: A strong demand for investigating and holding responsible parties accountable for security failures and politically motivated violence.

This episode provides a critical examination of significant national issues, urging listeners to question official narratives and consider the underlying motivations behind high-profile events.

Transcript

[Lisa Booth]

This is an I Heart podcast.

[Jana Kramer]

This is Jana Kramer from Wind down with Jana Kramer. When we were deciding on our appliances for the house, Samsung was at the top of our list. And I love my Samsung appliances, especially because they're so reliable. And with my busy schedule, having reliable appliances has been a game changer. It's no wonder Samsung is the number one brand for customer satisfaction. That's why I'm excited to tell you all about Samsung's new line of smart appliances. Featuring their brand new Bespoke AI laundry combo. This incredible magic machine washes and dries in one machine, one load, no transfers, no timers, no rewashing needed. New Bespoke AI appliances. This is home living made simple. For more information visit samsung.com bespoke 68.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Minute cycle based on 27 inch combos.

[Unknown]

Based on using a super speed cycle only with a 10 pound doe load.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Cotton 50% plus polyester 50%. Individual results may vary based on actual load content.

[Unknown]

Have you ever wiped with a piece of dry single ply toilet paper and wondered is this as good as it gets? Well, it's not. It gets a lot better. Thanks to the wet extra large cleaning power of Dude Wipes. They comfortably clean up whatever TP leaves behind on your behind. It's time to stop being an A hole to your B hole and start experiencing the confident clean of Dude Wipes. Available at Amazon and at major retailers nationwide. Dude Wipes Best Clean Pants down welcome.

To the W where elite athletes are redefining the game of basketball. From buzzer beating shots, jaw dropping defense and logo threes, the WNBA delivers nonstop action and world class talent every game. These athletes don't just play the game, they elevate it. The biggest stars The Brightest Age AT&T WNBA All Star 2025 comes to Indianapolis 7-18-19. Tune into the game July 19th at 8:30pm Eastern Time on ABC.

A treasure trove of bananas has been stolen and it's up to Donkey Kong and his buddy Pauline to get them back. This unlikely duo is going on a world smashing adventure using DK's destructive abilities to explore an underground world and the power of Pauline singing to activate wild transformations. Donkey Kong bonanza available July 17 rated everyone 10 and up only on Nintendo Switch 2 game and systems sold separately.

This message is sponsored by Greenlight. With school out, summer is the perfect time to teach our kids real world money skills they'll use forever. Greenlight is a debit card and the number one family finance and safety app used by millions of families helping kids learn how to Save, invest and spend wisely. Parents can send their kids money and track their spending and saving while kids build money, confidence and skills in fun ways. Start your risk free Greenlight trial [e-mail] iheart that's greenlight.com iheart welcome to the.

[Lisa Booth]

Truth with Lisa Booth, where we cut through the noise to get to the heart of the issues that matter to you. Today. We're diving into some explosive topics with Jonathan Gilliam. He's a former Navy seal, an FBI agent. He's also the host of the Experts podcast. We're going to unpack the shocking security failure surrounding the attempted assassinations of former President Trump, particularly one year after the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, which almost took his life. Were these lapses intentional? You just look at a bunch of collective data points and it begs the question, were they intentional? So I'll ask him based off of his experience. We'll also dig into the Epstein files controversy. Did Jeffrey Epstein really die by suicide? And what's the truth behind this so called client list? What does he think the truth is? Plus, we'll tackle the 700% increase in attacks on ICE agents and why Democrats seem to have painted them as the enemy. So stay tuned. We'll get the truth on all of this with Jonathan Gilliam. Well, Jonathan, it's great to have you on the show. We had you on after the assassination attempt and kind of, you know, went through what we felt went wrong. But, you know, now it's been a year. There's been some additional reporting. Rand Paul, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, issued a report about some of the failures that took place, I guess. What are your, your reflections, your thoughts a year later after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I'll tell you, it's, I don't feel much different than I did at when it happened. I don't think that we have the confidence, nobody's built any confidence in us from the Secret Service or the FBI. We don't have any more confidence that the president is going to be secured or that if you go to an outdoor rally that they have the security handled. We don't know that. We haven't seen any examples of improvement in tactics. We haven't seen anyone held to, to account for what occurred and how the mismanagement and planning and threat assessments and all that occurred. So I think overall, I, I still question how in the world something like that could have happened to the president when they're supposedly being protected or future president at that point when they're supposed to be protected by the premier protection agency. And the more we look into it, I kind of look at this the same way you look at Harley Davidson or you look at American Airlines or any of these other companies that have gone woke. And then they said, well, going to do away with our dei. And then when you look at what they're doing, all they did was just stop calling it dei and they stopped promoting that. They use dei. They never really changed anything. And so those brands are still hurting, safety is still hurting. And I think the same thing goes for the Secret Service. I don't know what they actually changed. And for the deputy director to come out this past week and talk about how they were focused on new technologies and things like that, that has nothing to do. Technology has nothing to do with that shooting in Butler, Pennsylvania, or the one that followed a couple months later in Florida. It was complete failure of threat assessments, of forward thinking, of utilizing trained personnel on the ground and communication with local law enforcement, and local law enforcement failures themselves. And I don't see where any of that's been corrected or anybody's been held accountable.

[Lisa Booth]

But I guess my thought process, I remember we talked about this, I guess, you know, basically a year ago, and, you know, I guess what I'm still trying to figure out is if the security lapses were intentional, not in the sense of more so just indifference. Right. Because at the time, you had Joe Biden and the Biden administration actively trying to jail Donald Trump, and you had Joe Biden saying that he should be put in a bullsey. You had Benny Thompson, the ranking member on Homeland Security, the House Homeland Security Committee, trying to strip Donald Trump of his security detail. And then, you know, so you had all these things happening against President Trump, you know, former President Trump at that point. So it's like, were they just indifferent and not caring about trying to keep him safe? Like, it just. He didn't matter to them. They had already dehumanized him enough. Like, they've already basically demonstrated they don't see him as a human. So were they just indifferent to protecting him? Like. Like, were the lapses intentional?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

I think it's a. Well, I think it's a mix of all those things. Because, you know, Lisa, when you look at these, you have to look at the totality of the circumstances, right? And as an investigator, you can't say that that is not a possibility. Like, I. I don't entertain conspiracy theories, but I will take what people say and put it on the wall of theories. And then if there's evidence that shows that that's a possibility, then I will entertain that. And so I try not to let theories lead my search for evidence, but the evidence lead which theory I believe is potentially a truth. And in this case, you cannot rule out intentional, intentional avenues of approach being left open, because that's what occurred. It's what occurred in both instances where they did not do the proper threat assessment or they did not close off the avenues of approach and an attacker could take when they locked down the facility. Perhaps they did the right threat assessment and they discovered that that's an avenue of approach and they just left it wide open. So it could go either way. They either didn't do the proper threat assessment, which means they didn't account for the buildings that were 130 yards away, which is ridiculous, or they did the proper threat assessment, they determined where an attacker could attack and then they purposely left those, those points soft. I think from an investigative standpoint, there's evidence to show that there's motivation to do both of those things. Inexperience and laziness that would, that would act, it would carry them through doing a, a threat assessment that wasn't efficient or there was enough dissension in the high ranks of all these agencies and hatred of President Trump that I could see them doing something that just allowed somebody to take advantage of an open area. So that's very troubling for me. Somebody who's taken an oath to support and defend this nation in the Constitution with four different agencies. And that, that bothers me when I, when I see that that is a possibility and I can't rule it out. Yeah.

[Lisa Booth]

Like, I'm not, I'm not saying they collaborated with him type thing. I'm just saying that they didn't care enough about him to make sure that he had the protection he needed. It'd be safe.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

It's like this, a prison guard that goes in and doesn't like this prisoner, so he accidentally leaves both of those cells open, the cell that a guy could come out of and go over and hurt or kill that other prisoner that he doesn't like. He doesn't partake in it. He just didn't lock those doors. Right. So that is the way I look at this, is that if, if it isn't intentionally, these avenues approach are intentionally left open, eventually somebody will take advantage of those. And that's what we saw in both instances. In Florida, it was the same thing. They did not secure a golf course, a perimeter of a golf course that Donald Trump goes to every week. And so they made it sound as though that was just an A.

[Lisa Booth]

And he was there for 12 hours undetected.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

12 hours, and nobody detected him. But here's the thing, Lisa, that really bothers me a lot. And it got me in trouble a little bit with some media because I said this and took a while for them to get over it. But if they would have looked at what I was saying, they would have said, well, we can't rule that out. And that is that the people at the top of all these agencies, as you can see now, are extremely left. Not just Democrats, they're extremely left. The guy in Florida who was head of the, he was the SAC of the FBI that started the investigation after that attempt. That guy had had his entire social media scrubbed because it was filled with hatred of President Trump. Now, that's unbelievable when you think about it. And that goes across the board with all these different agencies. We know there were people, high ranking officials in the Secret Service that just flat out during the President's first term said they would not protect him, that they would not step in front of a bullet for him. And so we have to assume, looking at these judges that are the way they act, looking at the way FBI has gone after in the past, Christians, President Trump by creating false evidence, who would have ever thought that that would occur in the FBI against a president or somebody running to be a president? And then when we look at the Secret Service and we look at the, the vocal hatred that's come out of some of those people, the praise that the director that stepped in after Cheadle gave Biden. To me, this just shows that the motivation is there and the hatred is there to leave these doors wide open and allow people to walk in. You can call that collusion or you can just call that hope, hopeful, wishing, I don't know what you would call it, but whatever it is, the fact is that it happened twice where people took advantage of it. So we don't know how many times it happened before that.

[Lisa Booth]

Is it weird to you that we don't know more about Thomas Matthew Crooks? I mean, you've got this like 20 year old that like obviously outsmarted the Secret Service that was able to fly a drone when, like, we did not. Who has these, like, encrypted foreign accounts? Like, I don't know, is it weird that we don't know more about him or is that kind of like standard operating procedure and these types of investigations?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, we, we kind of went down this, this road in recent history where if you look back at the Kennedy assassination, right? The. The last time a president was assassinated, we've had a lot of attempts since then. And very quickly, who the person was and what their alleged or potential motivation would be came out very quickly with. I mean, with Kennedy, we knew within a day who this guy was. Whether or not that was true and if it was just him, we still don't know that. But we did see how the things unfolded. And in the case of. Of Butler, Pennsylvania, I think the fact that social media exists and mainstream media that's on 24 hours a day, the American people are much more informed, and they are a force multiplier that law enforcement doesn't use. And so I think when we look at the past in history, when, when people were targeted and we look at it now, the fact that we don't know anything is troubling on several levels. One, because you would think that they would release this information, that the media would be hungry, as they were in all past circumstances where they. They got that information one way or another. We didn't see that this time. And then when you look at law enforcement, it. It seems as though when law enforcement messes up, they almost overtly go down the road of it's an investigation. We're not saying anything because it's still under investigation. So they end up treating the American people very childlike, and we're treated as though we don't know anything. And everybody will run around like chickens with their head cut off freaking out if they get the truth. And that's not the American psyche anymore. We are very informed. In fact, we have too much information that overloads what we know is reality. So it would actually be a benefit for us to know more. But I think when it comes to stuff like this, overall, whether or not we know what has occurred is less of a concern. Because if it was an investigation, then when we have a deputy director tell us that the case is closed and we don't know anything, that is very troubling for me. Because if you don't know anything, why are you closing the case?

[Lisa Booth]

Yeah, it's also weird that no one's been fired. And then also Chairman Paul alleges and asserts in his report that the former director, Kimberly Cheadle, lied to Congress, saying that no Secret Service asset requests were denied for the Butler rally. And in his report said that there actually were multiple requests that were denied. So she lied there, or that's what he's alleging. So it's like, I wonder if there'll be Any. You know, no one's been fired so far. I wonder if there'll be any. You know, that would mean that she perjured herself. So I wonder if there'll be any criminality. How.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Look, if you went on the news and you completely lied with the purpose of getting somebody in trouble or because you did something wrong and you wanted to completely covered it up, there will be ramifications for that, right? There's no ramifications for these people, political appointees and agencies where you see things happen that might or might not have to do with the Democrat Party. Nobody ever gets in trouble. And I just. I think if. If this was a case of. Of someone going in and getting a surgery and they botched the surgery because they didn't wash their hands, and they left the door wide open and a homeless guy walked in and contaminated the whole scene. The guy died. They. They would be charged with malpractice and probably criminally charged for involuntary manslaughter. So at the least, I think that. That investigators and prosecutors should be looking at these individuals who are tasked with protecting the President and the public. They're not just protecting the president. They're also protecting the public. They completely failed. So why isn't there any type of criminal investigation? We don't just need to know the background of how it failed. We need to know who was responsible and what their intent was, and if their intent was criminal or if they just did a lazy job that is also criminal. And one guy did die. Two people, Three people were. Four people were shot. President Trump was shot in the head. They could say the ear, but it's part of the head. He could have almost been killed. One guy did die and two other people were injured. How can you not look at this and say, was there malpractice in this? At a minimum, negligent homicide.

[Lisa Booth]

Yeah. No, Corey, compared to her, that's a great point. Got to take a quick commercial break. More with Jonathan on the other side. You know, speaking of different avenues that people go down, I wanted to get your take on the Epstein files. So the Justice Department and the FBI released a memo recently concluding that there's no evidence that Epstein had a list of powerful men who participated in, you know, all the stuff he was involved in, and then also saying that he died by suicide and he was not murdered and his New York jail cell. Do you buy those conclusions?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

I. I think we have to look at this from possibilities. Right? Is it possible that. And this is. You'll see when I get to this, the way my Mind works, Right? Is it possible that this was an intelligence operation that the US might have been involved with? It's possible. Was he given certain parameters to work in and then potentially went outside those parameters, but at the same time pulled in massive intelligence and jammed up tremendously powerful world leaders? And so we were able to control those people or puppet them, or maybe it was one of our allies that did it. That is potentially the case. Right. We don't know, we don't have proof. But when you look at the people who showed up, the people that were, that we know were there, all of those people are associated in one way or another with government activity there. The people, again, that we know were associated with that island, we know have some type of connection to the control or information of who is controlling governments and what decisions that they're making. So that the fact that video was involved, that a billionaire who we cannot really trace, how he became so rich, what his career was, his. His close proximity to not just famous people, but people of power, all of those things. I have to step back and look at it and say, okay, that's a possibility. But on the other hand, from what they're telling us that this was just a Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell issue. Okay, so let's say that was the case. Let's say that those two just went out and. And preyed upon young girls, hung out with celebrities, made their billions, and raped and videotaped sexual acts with all these different underage females. Okay, why, if that's the case, did they just write a page and a half memo that wasn't even signed, releasing it and saying, okay, that's what it was? Cases closed. Why isn't the government giving us the American public, who has been craving an answer, not just because young people were trafficked, but because this has the potential for being a real deep dive into who is evil and a problem in positions of power in the world. And, and so if it's just Jeffrey Epstein, then why didn't they just show us that? Why didn't they. Not the videos. We don't need to necessarily see any videos of him with people. But why didn't they show us the evidence of the case, tell us how it worked? They didn't do that. They did the same thing that they did with the Butler investigation. They just came out and Dan Bongino said, there's no no there. There's no there. There is. What was the term that he used? There's, there's nothing there. Basically, there's no here. Here, that's what he said. There's no here here or there there. I don't remember what it was. So. But that's the same thing that they said about the Butler, Pennsylvania, there's nothing there. Case is closed. You don't need to know anymore. And I think that both have way more to do with the psyche of, of the, the citizenry, the trust in government that's been completely demolished. It has a tremendous amount to do with that. And the people deserve to have their trust re instilled in them for the federal government under President Trump. So, so knowing that, I have to say that they probably know more, but they won't say it because if they do, they will be revealing sources and methods and the very people that were jammed up which give us tremendous amount of intelligence on other nations. And if, if that's the case, they won't be able to release it, which means their tap dancing has made this into a bigger issue than it, than it had to be. And so now instead of explaining that the potential of this could have been global and could have further implications than just a criminal, we are not able to release this information. I mean, that would have been huge. People would have freaked out. But now what you have is an administration that has a trust problem. And it all reflects on President Trump and it shouldn't because he is doing what he said he would do and everything else. This reflects on Pam Bondi, Cash Patel and Dan Bongino and the way that they handled this issue, the way they put it in, built their careers around this issue, made millions off of it, and then went in and when they found out, whatever the reality is, they just tap danced and handed a one and a half page memo saying, it's closed, there's nothing there.

[Lisa Booth]

Although in fairness, I absolutely thought that he was murdered. And like, obviously, I fully admit that's not based on any sort of facts that I had just my, you know, gut instinct. Right. But, you know, it is strange though, because you had Pam Bondi tell us back in February that, you know, she had the Epstein client list. It was sitting on her desk now to review. I know she later clarified that she was talking about the case file, not the specific client list.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

But let me, let me say something about that, Lisa.

[Lisa Booth]

Yeah.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

She's an attorney and you're a communications person, right?

[Lisa Booth]

That's right.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Your specialty is in communications. You know that if she said, if she wanted to say that it, that she was talking about the whole case, that's what she would have said. But I think she said what she said the first time and then handed those binders out because to her this was a publicity stunt. It was something that they had probably at that point had not even looked at. I mean, the way they acted, I don't believe that they had even had detailed information in that. But the thing with the influencers holding up the binders and that statement that she said, and if she knew that there was more there and there was more on her desk, I think her verbiage would have stated that and it didn't. It stated very specific stuff that the people were demanding. And she made it sound as though she had that list on her desk.

[Lisa Booth]

So what do you, you know, and I laid that out because it's important to, you know, provide the full picture, right? Like that's what she said. This is what she's saying now. So I'm laying out the context for the, you know, listeners at home. What do you think the truth is and all of this?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I, I think it's. I don't think Jeffrey Epstein just made billions and with little, really very. I know people who are very rich and they spent a lot of time in the same financial areas that he did, and it took them a long time, hard hours to get their wealth. And people know who they are. Everybody knows that this person did that or that person. Nobody knew what Jeffrey Epstein, where he came from. And so I think when I look from investigative standpoint at the totality of who this individual was and the mystery of his background and how he became so wrapped up in the power world or the world of powerful people, I, I just don't see, I see less proof that he was just a creep doing creepy things. And I see more proof of him associating with people that if they were controlled, could give a nation state access and control of a lot of stuff. And so while there is proof that he was going and, and recruiting young girls, the particular age of the girls that he was recruiting and where he was recruiting them from made them very susceptible to getting themselves jammed up in that situation. And the fact that he used some of them on this island and potentially other locations shows me that it went beyond just his creepy fetish and it moved into providing for people who are world leaders, who are at least in proximity to world leaders. And so it makes me lean towards the fact that he probably was either an intel agent of some kind for a nation state or he was running a criminal enterprise that has never been unfolded. And it, because it could be it was just a criminal enterprise. And he was providing these things for rich and powerful, and those connections helped him get more rich and powerful. And he videotaped people so that if they ever turned on him, like happened in Florida, I think it was 2005, he could just say, don't forget, I got those videos of you. And all of a sudden the case goes away. So that could have also been the case. It may not have been a nation state collecting intel on these people. It may just been a Jeffrey Epstein way of getting rich. And so I think it's more likely one of those two things rather than just a Jeffrey Epstein fetish.

[Lisa Booth]

And you've got a lot of people, you know, tied up in this. You know, for instance, like Bill Clinton's documented have taken multiple trips on his private plane, you know, according to flight logs, and, you know, a whole host of people.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Prince Andrew. Prince Andrew is a perfect example.

[Lisa Booth]

Yeah.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

This is a guy who was not a leader in the Royal family, but he had access and proximity to those people. So if you jam him up, chances are he can collect information for you. Or if you jam him up and then something happens while you're over in Europe, you're more likely going to get out of trouble because you have stuff on him. So as one of the two, either as a criminal enterprise or an intel operation.

[Lisa Booth]

Do you think I wanted to get your take before we go about all these attacks on ICE agents? You know, you've got this Axios article recently where House Democrats are, you know, on background telling the reporter that, like, their base wants blood, that they need to be willing to be shot, that civility is no longer working. And then you've got these figures of influence in the Democrat Party, like Tim Walsh saying that ICE is the Gestapo, or Jayapal saying ICE is a terrorist force, like the list goes on. Do they just want ice Age instead? Is that sort of what they're trying to do here is just get these people killed?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

See, now you're think you're thinking like I do when it came to President Trump getting shot, right?

[Lisa Booth]

Yeah.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

I asked that question, and it got me in a lot of trouble in media. And I say the same thing here. The Democrat Party is a leftist criminal enterprise, and it doesn't just consist of the Democrats. It consists of a whole group of business people and people who really do hate Christians or they hate conservatism. They hate strong people, and they hate strong societies that are free. And this has been growing for many, many years. And I think when you look at the Democrat Party, for instance, and the verbiage that they use. You don't say things like you have to be willing to get shot unless you are wanting people to go out and get shot or to shoot. And that's the other thing. You're not just going to go out and get shot unless you have a couple people out there, as we've seen, willing to shoot back. So I think, I think when we look at what's happening with ICE is it is an extension of the same issues we've seen in Portland and Wisconsin, in New York, Chicago, all these other areas. We see the same tactics, the same communication, the same uniforms. Listen, it may not. They may be wearing jeans and T shirts, but they have the same PROTECT type of protective helmets. Who shows up to a Trump rally, right, where people are wanting to say how much they love the president and they're out there because they choose to go out there and express their freedom. That's a rally, right? Who shows up to one of those wearing a protective helmet? They're not, they're not showing up there with bricks laid out for a rally for President Trump or anybody else for that matter, for, for on the conservative side. But the Democrat side, this seems to be an issue. And it happens multiple places using the same types of tactics to put bricks out there wearing the helmets. And it's escalating slowly. The same altruistic speech, which that's violent speech, go out and be willing to take a bullet, but that's also altruistic speech where you're telling people that you are a hero and your heroic act will change things. And so that's where you get people like in D.C. where the individual shot two individuals who work for the, the Israeli embassy or in Colorado where a guy burns a bunch of people who were out there rallying in support of those still being held hostage by Hamas. So I think when we look at again, the total, I love to say this phrase, the totality of circumstances, I think what you see with ICE is they have latched onto this for a couple of reasons. One is because it gives them room to flex. And anytime they can flex in front of the cameras, it adds, slowly adds fear and intimidation into the rest of public. Conservatives look at that and say, if I did that, I'd go to jail. Right? So they stopped doing stuff like that. But the other thing is this is a voter base. If President Trump and Tom Holman were able to go out and get rid of all the 20 million or more people that came over, they would rid the Democrat party of 20 million potential voters and I really think that for them that's basically what it is. But they hate. They can do hateful things because they're hateful people and they hate this country. But ultimately ICE is a big deal for them because that's their, that is a portion of their voter base that they were wanting to bring in.

[Lisa Booth]

Quick break. Stay with us. Before we go, do you think that these attacks on ACE ICE agents, like we saw the one in Alvarado, Texas, where you had like 10 people who, who was like very well orchestrated, like even doing fireworks on the outside, allure ICE agents out and then shooting. I think it was something like 20 to 30 rounds at the ICE agents. Do you think, are these just like lone wolf kind of attacks or do you think that they are like, orchestrated and like financed?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I think this is a great place to finish this because. And it's a great question because if you look at the tactics, the techniques and procedures, the communication, the movements that they use, what you're going to see is that they are, they are actually tactics that work and have been tested. You don't just show up and work that well for the first time. These are people who've been trained and these tactics have been used all over the country for over a decade. I had a, a friend who was in Special Forces who was protecting Milo. Remember Milo, the alt right guy? Yes. At Berkeley. And there were riots there. So he, they had Milo in a secure room and he went up on the roof to look down to see what was happening in one of the buildings. And this guy who I knew that was in Special Forces said that he was amazed at what he saw because the tactics that they were using were so effective that they were able to draw the law enforcement away from where they were wanting to go. And it was using tactics that he had never seen and were not from the United States. He said those tactics that he was seeing never came from the United States military or law enforcement. They were of a foreign, some type of foreign training. And so when you, when that was many years ago and when you fat flash forward to now, what you're seeing is that all these protests you saw in Portland or in all across the country, now they're escalating to violence, where they're actually shooting and injuring and, and murdering. And so I think when you look at the first and second antifada that happened in, in Israel and around Israel and in Gaza, what you see is the first intifada was words, and then it evolved into violence and then killing, and it was very uniformed And I bet if we start looking at the tactics that these people are using, not just the people, but we start looking at the tactics that they're using, we're going to see the same thing that we see with their verbiage and what they wear. They're wearing Palestinian scarves they're starting. Or Hamas scarves they're starting to wear. Or say, you know, from the river to the sea, which was from the first intifada and the second intifada. And we're starting to see that their causes match other nations and their causes. And I bet if we look at the tactics, we will probably see that somewhere those tactics are traceable to these other nations that are a problem for us. And so I guess the answer to your question is yes, I think that these are coordinated. I think it goes far beyond Texas. I think when you look at Antifa and all these other leftist groups and how they have milked themselves into Black Lives Matter or the gay activist movement or. Or transgender and all these things, it's all played to benefit these actors who use these tactics, techniques and procedures. The ability to move and communicate, the increase in violence, the specific verbiage. I think it's. It is very coordinated. And I would even go as far to say, potentially both assassination attempts on Trump. The fact that they were able to utilize open avenues of approach with absolute confidence tells me that there was some coordination with somebody at some point that they were able to take advantage of as well.

[Lisa Booth]

Interesting, Jonathan. Really interesting stuff. I really appreciate you making the time to share all these insights with us.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

You got it. Sorry, I'm long winded, but. No, this is. This is a very interesting. And you can dive into this, but I. I don't think, Lisa, to really know. To understand that there's more to this than just what we see on the surface. If you just take a step back and you look at the totality of all these things that have occurred, you'll see exactly what I'm saying.

[Lisa Booth]

Like, if you. If you were being boring, I would very kindly kind of like, cut you off and redirect.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, you are communications experts, so, yeah.

[Lisa Booth]

I would expect that the fact that I was listening intently meant that it was very interesting. So we appreciate it. Thanks so much. That was Jonathan Gilliam. Appreciate him for making the time to come on the show. Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday. But you can listen throughout the week. Until next time.

[Unknown]

A treasure trove of bananas has been stolen, and it's up to Donkey Kong and his buddy Pauline to get them back. This is unlikely. Duo is going on a world smashing adventure using DK's destructive abilities to explore an underground world and the power of Pauline singing to activate wild transformations. Donkey Kong bonanza available July 17 rated everyone 10 and up only on Nintendo Switch 2 game and systems sold separately.

[Jana Kramer]

This is Jana Kramer from Wind down with Jana Kramer. When we were deciding on our appliances for the house, Samsung was at the top of our list. And I love my Samsung appliances, especially because they're so reliable and with my busy schedule, having reliable appliances has been a game changer. It's no wonder Samsung is the number one brand for customer satisfaction. That's why I'm excited to tell you all about Samsung's new line of smart appliances. Featuring their brand new Bespoke AI laundry combo. This incredible magic machine washes and dries in one machine, one load, no transfers, no timers, no rewashing needed. New Bespoke AI appliances. This is home living made simple. For more information visit samsung.com bespoke 68.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Minute cycle based on 27 inch combos.

[Unknown]

Based on using a super speed cycle only with a 10 pound doe load cotton 50% plus polyester 50%.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Individual results may vary based on actual load content.

[Unknown]

It's finally happened. Your kid could be part of the first generation to never suffer the rough touch of toilet paper on their tender tush. All thanks to new flushable Little Dude Wipes available in bubble bum scent or fragrance free because we know little butts can make a big mess. But with Little Dude Wipes you can keep your kids keister clean without the burn and debris toilet paper can leave behind on their behinds. Experience the confident clean of Little Dude Wipes available exclusively at Walmart Nationwide.

Welcome to the W where elite athletes are redefining the game of basketball. From buzzer beating shots, jaw dropping defense and logo threes, the WNBA delivers nonstop action and world class talent every game. These athletes don't just play the game, they elevate it. The biggest stars, The Brightest Age AT&T WNBA All Star 2025 comes to Indianapolis July 18th 19th. Tune into the game July 19th at 8:30pm Eastern Time on ABC. This message is sponsored by Greenlight. With school out, summer is the perfect time to teach our kids real world money skills they'll use forever. Greenlight is a debit card and the number one family finance and safety app used by million of families helping kids learn how to save, invest and spend wisely. Parents can send their kids money and track their spending and saving while kids build money confidence and skills in fun ways. Start your risk free greenlight trial [e-mail] iheart that's greenlight.com iheart this is an iheart podcast.