She was sane enough to redirect her husband while she was doing this and he had a trouble getting over that and that's where they saw reasonable doubt i guess first question for us i'm not old enough to remember oj uh or you know many high-profile american uh criminal trials like this is it do they always come out and do these these uh interview tours after a big a big trial

i mean they do these days i mean that's a fu a function of our social media age I remember that Murdoch case got blown up because the clerk was busy preparing to write her book.

Basically, everybody's looking at it as an opportunity to cash in, particularly when cashing in often means celebrity and notoriety and attention.

The Instagram, social media era has created a new form of currency.

And it's to be recognized.

It's to be identified.

It's to be publicized.

fun with

So if they've been militarily defeated now, then what were those missiles that flew into Jordan yesterday? And what's probably coming even who knows before we even get off the air here?

Yeah, I mean, I think what it represents is you see almost with Trump's transition, like he's first saying that he was in fact contemplating it.

And then he gets angry at himself for contemplating it.

And so he takes out his anger on her for contemplating it.

So you're seeing a version of Trump's a lot slower in his speech than he used to.

His locution that he used to really obsess over is diminished.

He now slurs words.

Is he providing a door there? Is there any chance that Trump will go through it?

Hasn't really gotten them much.

Yeah, exactly.

I mean, the Qataris gifted him the plane.

All of those things, all it did is land him on the receiving end of a war with Iran.

Now, they're not being fully forthright in that the Emiratis were cheerleading that war.

The Saudis were sporadically supporting the war.

The Qataris never were for it.

that.

Will he actually sit down and write 300 pages himself?

Yeah, exactly.

It's so, so it's gonna be AI slop, the, is what it's gonna be.

And so I think you, you, you, you have this systemic fraud problem that we have to look at sort of broader solutions, but it might be a policy area by policy area.

I mean, take for example the food rancher dispute.

If you w- if you would just remove the government from intruding and interfering with the ability of the farmer to reach the, the purchaser and the purchaser to reach the farmer, true farm-to-table food like we had for almost our entire history, American history, until 1967 when they, they disguised this law as something other than what it was.

They said they were going to allow a, the, a broader exception for selling food directly from the farmer, and in fact they then w- wrote, wrote the rules to shrink the exception.

Sweet

Do you know from your sources if President Trump, who ostentatiously signed the memorandum of understanding with Iran in the Palace of Versailles outside of Paris, ever intended to honor it?

At the time, that's what he communicated to other people, yes.

That in fact, that he thought it was his exit plan.

That's why he was even rationalizing it publicly.

He was saying, you know, sanctions backfire on the US because it undermines the use of the US financial system globally.

Said it's Irani- Iran's money, we can't hold onto it forever.

Said he didn't wanna become like Herbert Hoover, uh, and have the economy go off a cliff.

Is he seriously considering using nuclear weapons against a country that poses no threat whatsoever to the United States of America according to his own CIA?

Is there any way for him to off-ramp here?

I mean, there is.

I mean, Vice President Vance has got an off-ramp like seven different times during this.

He got it in late March.

He got it in early April.

He got it in May.

He got it in June.

Will you repeat that please for folks? Because I totally agree with you.

That is sick.

And basically, the Iranian public is now more hardline in support of the regime and the government there and the republic there than they ever have.

You'd have to go back to maybe 1979 to find this level of enthusiasm amongst a new generation of Iranians.

Those young kids who make Lego videos critiquing the West and supporting the government were anti-government people just a year ago.

So that's what we've done.

We've hardlined the Iranian public.

We've uh made we institutionalized a more hard line of people in the military and the political apparatus so no amount of pressure is going to lead to capitulation that shifts us to where israel is now the problem with israel is they're going to be more desperate and more crazy because bb netanyahu is behind and badly behind in the polls for the upcoming election in october And for Bibi, that isn't just losing an election.

Is there any way for him to off-ramp here?

They are

...

they put little Larry Johnson, even with a, uh, Hawaiian shirt in a Le- in a Lego, uh, warning about it.

That led to somebody in the White...

I- in the Oval Office asking Trump about it.

You could see Trump's embarrassment by how he re- he was like, "No, no.

No, n- we would never do that.

AI.

Right.

Also, your social and et ce- And what people were describing, people who have been around the president for 10 years, back in January, was they, they were describing someone who no longer wanted second opinions, never liked hearing negative information, would get enraged if somebody would share a negative...

And these were all complete reversals of his prior 10 years.

So, so the other argument that there was a reversal, Trump has undergone a radical methodological shift as to how he makes decisions, what information he solicits, what information he processes, what information he accepts, how he responds and reacts, is what they were all describing.

They were saying he used to love killers and sycophants, now he only wants sycophants.

That he used to l- have very positive thinking, but it was tethered by a hardcore objective realism.

Expect the best, but always plan for the worst.

And all this is documented

Your understanding that he did try, Donald Trump tried to fire the vice president, J.D. Barnes?

He was actually asking people that question to give you a sense of his state of mind.

This was about in April and May after everything that Vance had said would happen happened in Iran and that everything Trump pretended was going to happen didn't happen.

And so the first reaction of Trump was not, hey, I should have listened to him.

It was how annoyed he was that Vance was right and Trump was wrong.

And then when he went to China, he's like, look at how everybody's differential to Xi.

That's the way Vance should be.

All the journalists, all the editors, all the writers believe that Zelensky is somehow winning What do you think of how the war is being covered in your country and the wider NATO nation societal illusions about the Ukraine conflict?

Is Trump's inner circle afraid to, uh, displease or challenge him?

Yeah.

Well, that's been confirmed by the Regime Change book that just got published by the two New York Times authors, Maggie Haberman and, uh, Jonathan Snow, and that is unfortunately has been the case for the last year or so.

It hasn't alway- It, it's, it's unlike his first term, it's unlike the beginning parts of his first six months of his second term.

Uh, but since at least the fall of 2025, he has shrunk the number of people he allows access to give him information and advice.

He now routinely and repeatedly rejects anything he doesn't wanna hear.

Uh, he goes out of his way to avoid negative counterpoints or s- or, uh, criticism or any kind of, uh, information he doesn't like.

himW- why did he threaten to visit the gates of hell, I'm using his phrase, on the Iranian people, not the government, the people, and then back down? A, why is he talking about attacking innocent civilians? And B, why did he back down?

What makes you think he delayed it for that speech, not for negotiations? That's

crazy.

Anything big comes tomorrow, comes Saturday night.

There's about a 75% chance he goes in and hits Pickaxe Mountain this weekend.

There's a 25% chance he doesn't do anything.

He really thought they were going to capitulate for whatever reason.

I don't understand this.

not Ukrainian.

So how far is he going to freaking go? Or is this all a bluff? I just don't fucking know anymore.

Some of it's 75% bluff.

He really convinces himself that if Iran believes he'll take out all their infrastructure, that Iran will capitulate, even though he's been told repeatedly and seen repeatedly that that does not happen.

The other thing he convinces himself of is that really they're so degraded that he just needs to expand the attacks on their perceived Hormuz defenses.

And that's the problem.

If people want to get a sense of where Trump's at in terms of He doesn't really listen to his intelligence and other people.

He listens to Fox News.

out.

How free and fair are America's elections?

Well, I would say they're particularly unfair in qualifying for the ballot.

So this is an issue that arises with Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massey and others considering a third party or independents.

presidential challenge you saw with Robert Kennedy.

Overwhelmingly, a majority of Americans wanted Robert Kennedy to be included on the ballot.

And he got as much as 20% of the vote, depending on the time in the state, for the presidency in 2024.

And yet he was being excluded systematically from ballots on all kinds of bogus grounds.

The recent leaks point in that direction?

Mm.

Trump was convincing himself of things that they kept telling him weren't going to happen.

He was like, "Nah, the Strait won't be closed.

Nah, they won't hit the Gulf.

Nah, they, you know, they'll, they'll fall apart, apart in four or five days.

Nah, they won't be able to resist.

There'll be mass Democratic, uh, overturning.

Yeah

us.

Oh, yeah.

Glad to be here, Alex.

The effectively the evidence from a week long preliminary hearing, which is extraordinarily detailed and more than normal, is that the prosecution presented substantial and convincing evidence that Tyler Robinson was the trigger man.

In terms of the evidence of his connection to the gun, the gun's bullet, one big question was how does the .30-06 not have an exit wound? They presented that the particular ammunition he used, that Felix ammunition and others looked at, could explain that because it was designed to almost explode within the body, if you will.

The kind of weapon that was used that they have him showing up there earlier on the day, coming back.

Different walk.

Visit SpinQuest.com for more details.

Robert Barnes, take over, and you're back with me at noon tomorrow, my friend.

Absolutely.

So the wrap-up of Tyler Robinson is that Tyler Robinson is likely guilty.

The outcome of the case is most likely a plea deal that takes the death penalty off the table.

But that does not close out the possibilities of other culpable parties, including other people that were connected to the Trantifa movement, his lovers, the people that tried to distract and helped him exit that day by falsely claiming to be.

Guilty, the various Trantifa, the Salt Lake City-related movements that have NGO, governmental, and other ties in funding, sourcing, and assets used.

All of that is yet to be developed, but I think people that... go down the blame turning point path, have gone down a rabbit hole, incriminating the most innocent participants in the process.

Visit SpinQuest.com for more details.

Thank you so much.

Sure.

No problem.

So I think there's been broad based confusion about what this is.

This is just a preliminary hearing to establish whether there's probable cause.

He committed the crimes that he has been accused of committing, which include but are not limited to.

There's some obstruction of justice and other charges in there mixed in with the death penalty charge for intentional murder under aggravated circumstances under Utah law.

Robert Barnes, take over, and you're back with me at noon tomorrow, my friend.

Is that how you read, uh, what we just saw?

Uh, yeah.

And I think what the judge is trying to balance is the defendant's rights to an impartial jury, which is influenced by pretrial prejudicial publicity, against the victim's rights to substantially participate a- and to observe all meaningful hearings under Utah constitutional and state law, as well as the US and state constitutional rights of the media to have access to public court proceedings, and the public's right to have open access to the courts under the First Amendment's rights to petition the government for redress of grievances in which that constitutional right encompasses that.

So he's balancing those two.

I think courts usually make the mistake of favoring secrecy and favoring sealing proceedings over public transparency because they're more worried about the defendant's, uh, pretrial publicity prejudice than they are the prejudice to not allowing full, complete, open access to particularly high-profile cases where it is really necessary for the public to have confidence in whatever outcome is procured through that judicial process.

And I think he, for a very young judge, he's actually doing a better job than is normal, honestly, for, for judges of that type.

Like, isn't the defense conceding that they believe that this evidence is really damning, damning by, uh, by, by constantly throwing up objections and fighting full transparency? Isn't that kind of the, the subtext here?

Yeah, I think so.

Is that how you read, uh, what we just saw?

Uh, yeah.

And I think what the judge is trying to balance is the defendant's rights to an impartial jury, which is influenced by pretrial prejudicial publicity, against the victim's rights to substantially participate a- and to observe all meaningful hearings under Utah constitutional and state law, as well as the US and state constitutional rights of the media to have access to public court proceedings, and the public's right to have open access to the courts under the First Amendment's rights to petition the government for redress of grievances in which that constitutional right encompasses that.

So he's balancing those two.

I think courts usually make the mistake of favoring secrecy and favoring sealing proceedings over public transparency because they're more worried about the defendant's, uh, pretrial publicity prejudice than they are the prejudice to not allowing full, complete, open access to particularly high-profile cases where it is really necessary for the public to have confidence in whatever outcome is procured through that judicial process.

And I think he, for a very young judge, he's actually doing a better job than is normal, honestly, for, for judges of that type.

Like, isn't the defense conceding that they believe that this evidence is really damning, damning but, uh, by, by constantly throwing up objections and fighting full transparency? Isn't that kind of the, the subtext here?

Yeah, I think so.

Is that how you read what we just saw?

Yeah, and I think what the judge is trying to balance is the defendant's rights to an impartial jury, which is influenced by pretrial prejudicial publicity, against the victim's rights to substantially participate and to observe all meaningful hearings under Utah constitutional and state law, as well as the U.S. and state constitutional rights of the media to have access to public court proceedings, and the public's right to have open access to the courts under the First Amendment's rights to petition the government for redress of grievances, in which that constitutional right encompasses that.

So he's balancing those two.

I think courts usually make the mistake... of favoring secrecy and favoring sealing proceedings over public transparency because they're more worried about the defendant's pretrial publicity prejudice than they are the prejudice to not allowing full, complete, open access to particularly high-profile cases where it is really necessary for the public to have confidence in whatever outcome is procured through that judicial process.

And I think for a very young judge, he's actually doing a better job than is normal, honestly, for judges of that type.

Usually their lack of age, they default to, hey, let's keep things secret.

Let's keep things sealed because that's what the defendant wants.

But aren't they sort of conceding? Like, isn't the defense conceding that they believe that this evidence is really damning by constantly throwing up objections and fighting full transparency? Isn't that kind of the subtext here?

Do you think, you know, this argument is gaining more weight?

I don't think there is any grand plan.

I think this is Trump rug pull number seven and maybe the final one for his own political tenure and for the short-term, near-term, mid-term future of Vice President Vance.

I think that this needed to hold.

And now that it hasn't, as you had Philip on earlier in the day, it was becoming more apparent that the oil market manipulation that you discussed with Chris before that is the better explanation than a supposed supply glut or demand destruction.

that now that Russia's turning off its diesel exports, China's turning on its refining capacity.

You look at that, it looks like what Trump admitted two weeks ago is likely just around the corner, which is the spike in the oil cost again, which is more likely to trigger a crash economically than anything else.

Card Island, something smaller?

I think that

thatThe same people who thought that Clarence Thomas would never be seen as legitimate on the court would say that Kavanaugh is not going to be either.

Um, the same people who thought, uh, that Clarence Thomas didn't tell the truth at his nomination, uh, think that Kavanaugh didn't tell the truth at his.

Um, it's very early for us to know how that's gonna play out.

There was a telling event that Justice Kagan was at, uh, where young woman in the audience, a law student, said, "You know, maybe I shouldn't ask you this, but how does it affect the Supreme Court's, uh, reputation that two men accused of sexual harassment now sit on the court?" And Justice Kagan's quite tart response was, "You're right.

You shouldn't have asked me that.

Um, I'm a member of this institution, and I'm not gonna say anything that would harm it." Uh, and so, you know, once you're on the court, you're on, and the justices see it in their own best interest, uh, and the country's best interest, uh, to have the court be viewed as a body with integrity, uh, that makes decisions, you know, based on the law.

So what do you think the Achilles heel of of a guy like Paxton is other than the fact that he is completely hitches wagon to Trump, who is not very popular right now?

So on paper, Paxton was the ideal candidate because he has MAHA credibility and MAGA legitimacy.

If Trump had stuck with his 2024 promises, then Paxton would be in good position.

Even though, as you know, Tallarico fits in general what the elites in the West have looked for since Obama, which is they got it in Macron, they got it in Trudeau.

They look for these sort of young, telegenic, candidates who present sort of a nice veneer on their professional class prejudices and preferences.

But they learn the lingo to campaign effectively.

But you suspect that they're inauthentic and that under the surface there's nothing there.

Bless you.

2026 with you my friend you've got the floor thanks for being here

yeah glad to be here alex yeah that was uh one of my favorite july 4th someone asked me about that the other day uh what were some of my favorite july 4th and one of them was a kid in dc when you had all the you know it was open to the public and you had fireworks over the washington monument and you had all kinds of musical performers and families out and about the uh but one of my other uh favorite ones was was definitely getting to spend time out at the lake house With everybody, with the folks from InfoWars, it was a perfect day.

The weather was perfect.

Everything was great.

Some great steaks, some great cigars out chilling.

With your sweetheart daughter, it was fantastic.

As we look at the – I think two important things.

We have to inspire.