Best of the Program | Guest: Elijah Schaffer | 12/8/21

Carl's Jr.

is the only place to get the classic Western bacon cheeseburger.

Those onion rings, all that bacon, that tangy barbecue?

Well, have you tangoed with spicy western bacon?

Can you ride out the jalapeno heat?

Take a pepper jack punch.

For a limited time, it's high time for a spicy western reintroduction.

Rankle the best deals on the app.

Only a Carl's Jr.

Available for a limited time.

Exclusive app offers for registered My Rewards members only.

Today's podcast, we talk about the Kyle Rittenhouse hour-long interview that happens tonight on Blaze TV with me.

He's an interesting kid.

We also talked to Elijah Schaefer, who was a friend of his and one of the first people on the scene.

And the first interview Kyle Rittenhouse ever gave, it was before the shooting.

All of the politics involved in this, quite incredible.

Also, we talked about inflation and the great,

the great meeting between Putin and Joe Biden.

That's where we begin on today's podcast.

And don't forget to subscribe, blazetv.com/slash Glenn.

Promo code is Glenn.

Get access to everything and subscribe to this podcast as well as Studos America.

In fact, back to back tonight.

Yeah.

What about the socks, dude?

Why aren't you talking about the Blaze socks?

At BlazeSocks.com.

Yeah.

You can get your Let's Go Brandon socks for 100% full cost at blaze socks.com.

Don't think that's a good marketing, eh?

No, you have.

It's they're

just you'll pay all the money they request, you'll need to pay no discounts.

It's really

you're listening to

the best of the Blenbeck program.

The holiday season.

Oh, I'm so full of joy.

I went Christmas shopping last night for my wife for Christmas.

Oh, it was delightful.

Delightful.

Wonderful.

Wonderful.

Didn't get a damn thing.

Didn't get a damn thing.

Everything I, you know, do you have this in a size?

No.

Okay.

How about this one?

Nope.

Do you have this in a size?

No.

How about this in a black?

Oh, let me...

No.

I mean, it just

supply chain thing or supply chain thing.

Jeez.

Supply chain thing.

And the guy told me, he said, you know what, the real problem is, is people are coming in and they're buying things in sizes that they know are wrong, but they're just buying them because they want to put something under the Christmas tree and they figure, well, she can exchange it for the right size when her ship comes in.

Yeah.

If it ever comes in.

It's crazy.

Yeah.

It's crazy.

And most people are really really having a hard time.

I kind of actually like this because we've way downscaled Christmas this year.

Just way downscaled it.

We're doing, you know, we're giving gifts to other people and whatever and not in the family.

We're just keeping it very, very simple, which is nice.

Should we be Pat and I expecting something nice?

Nope.

Nope.

So that's the part of the

scale deaf.

Are you needy?

Yes.

You're not getting a darn thing.

Not a darn thing.

You know what you get?

Socks from shop.blazemedia.com.

Socks.

We have the name.

Can I get them?

Are we selling those?

We are selling those.

How do you know?

I know.

I don't.

I just.

So these are the Let's Go Brandon socks.

Yeah.

And have you seen, have you actually seen them yet?

Well, I've seen them from the

49 emails I got yesterday.

They're fantastic.

Now, some might look at the Let's Go.

Can you bring that full screen again?

Some might look at the Let's Go Brandon one on the far right and say why is there a butt and then poop on that that was my question as well was it when i held i they they gave it to me and they said look at those do you know what it is i did find out when i asked yeah you have to ask but do you not figure it out that's from biden's trip to the to see the pope

oh the rumor that he pushed his pants was it a rumor like el rocker did well i mean it was a rumor until it was confirmed on these socks.

Yeah.

Now we know we have the socks to tell us.

And we didn't make them.

Right.

Sock company made them.

BlazeSocks.com, BlazeSocks.com.

And sock companies can't lie.

No, they can't.

So you know it's true.

You know it's true.

So I have Kyle Rittenhouse on tonight.

I want to get to a couple of cuts with him.

But I also, this is really important that we talk about something that happened in Dallas yesterday.

It was actually on the second, so it was six days ago.

Okay.

But it doesn't lessen the severity of this.

They're praising a canine dog because a canine dog hit on some luggage, on a passenger's luggage at Dallas Love Field.

The dog, they even named the dog Ballantyne, alerted on an individual-checked suitcase.

It turns out, get this,

it turns out that the suitcase belonged to 25-year-old, a 25-year-old woman from Chicago who was carrying $106,829 on her.

And And

that's illegal

from her.

As you know, in the United States, it's illegal to carry cash.

No, it's not.

Well, no, it's really.

Really?

So they took it.

No, it's not.

So they took it.

But she got it back.

No, she did not get it back.

Well, they charged her.

No, they didn't charge her with it either.

No, but they suspected it.

They don't even suspect any, at least as far as the article is concerned.

They don't even mention suspicion here.

There's no allegation.

There's no charge.

There's no suspicion.

A dog hit, they took.

That's it.

You're talking about insanity.

Such insanity.

Especially insane.

You have $100,000.

I can guarantee there's some $20 bills in there that smell to a dog very much like cocaine.

Yeah.

You know what I mean?

Can I play the role here, though?

Well, why was she carrying $106,000 to carry on?

Yeah.

No, it doesn't matter.

No.

That makes no never matter.

Yeah, but what was she carrying that money for?

I don't know.

Probably something nefarious.

Could be, but we don't know, so they shouldn't have taken it.

No.

Yeah, well, but the dog knew.

The dog knew.

You hear this all the time.

Serial killers, the neighbors will always say, I didn't see anything, but my dog.

Smelled it.

My dog knew.

Every time he'd walked by, he'd bark.

We should have taken all of the things that he had in his house.

Should have done it.

Bees know, and dogs know.

Dogs know.

And so they arrested.

They didn't arrest her.

She's not been charged.

And again, she's not even on vacation wherever she was going.

Have a good time.

We don't write.

I mean, this is extra money now.

See ya.

This is a little blip in the road.

Go have a good time.

There's another story, too, in Massachusetts where a woman lost her car.

Was there something like a kid's car?

And this was a car.

He was suspected of something.

Was suspected of being

years ago, right?

By

someone who was dealing in, was suspected in dealing in drugs.

Now, that was not proven.

The car was taken on March 4th, 2015.

We could all celebrate she got it back this year.

Yeah!

Wow.

Well, she had to fight.

It only took her five years.

That's not bad.

She had to fight for it in court, and she said afterwards,

you know, the Massachusetts law allows innocent owners to seek the return of their assets unless they knew or should have known that such conveyance or real property was used in and for the business of unlawfully manufacturing, dispensing, or distributed control substances.

But

like the federal government and most states, Massachusetts requires the owners to prove their innocence.

So she had to prove her innocence, and she did.

And it only wow, it only five and a half years.

Jesus Grace, how are they getting away with this?

I know.

Over and over and over and over and over.

Because it doesn't affect most people.

And most people will say, why was she carrying $100,000 around for?

Right.

No, and look, that is an odd thing to do through an airport.

So what?

So what?

So what?

She gets to do whatever she wants with her money as long as

they don't prove a case against her.

This case with the car,

luckily, the Goldwater Institute got involved in this.

The only reason that she got her car back.

Get the number of the Goldwater Institute and write it down and put it in your wallet because someday you may need the Goldwater Institute.

No kidding.

In the motion, they say Massachusetts does not provide any deadline, any deadline from which the Commonwealth is required to initiate forfeiture proceedings.

That's unbelievable.

They could just hold on to it forever and never have the proceeding at all.

And think about a car for a second.

You have a 2015 car and you don't have it until 2021.

Number one, you have to pay for six years of transportation after you've already purchased a car.

You have to figure out how to get yourself around for six years.

Then you get the car back, which is now six years older.

What happens when a car ages six years?

And it's not even being driven.

It's a classic.

It's now an ante.

It's a classic.

The value of the car goes down.

It was an infinity.

It's now a 2011 infinity in 2021.

Now, luckily, because of supply chain issues, it may be worth $500,000 right now.

So good luck.

Here's what Elon Musk said yesterday, and this is absolutely right.

He was talking about another subject, but this one goes right to

asset forfeiture.

Elon Musk, quote, it doesn't make sense to take the job of capital allocation away from the people with a demonstrated great skill in capital allocation and give it to an entity that has demonstrated very poor skill in capital allocation.

Think of the government as essentially a corporation to the extreme limit.

The government is simply the biggest corporation with a a monopoly on violence and where you have no recourse.

Amen.

It's true.

Amen.

This is why you have small government.

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

This is going to be really good.

Now, Stu,

how would you describe what I said

ESG scores were going to mean in the banking industry?

ESG environment

governance and social justice, right?

That's the ESG, what they stand for.

And the basic concept.

And I know you go into much more depth on this in your new book, The Great Reset, which is coming out in January.

But in the basic...

For a general, what your take is on that.

Basic concept is you just being a profitable business is not enough.

You need to hit these

standards that make the world better by their view.

And the ESG standard is like basically going to give you a score.

Do you do the things that essentially the left wants you to do with your business or even in your personal life?

So if you are, for example, buying a gas guzzler car, your ESG score would be lower.

If you're donating to anti-LGBTQ causes, you would be seen as, that would be a negative in your ESG score.

And so these things would punish you and maybe you would get rejected by banks.

Maybe you wouldn't get the loans, the banking services you need.

Maybe you get higher rates.

That's crazy.

Does that,

that's it.

That's it.

But that's, remember, that's crazy.

Because I said this about Merrill Lynch.

Merrill Lynch is now posting ESG scores.

Your ESG score.

Did you know you had one?

Posting it?

Posting it.

What does that mean posting it?

Posting it.

You go sign into your Merrill Lynch account and you will see your ESG score.

ESG score.

Oh, my God.

Based on what you are investing in.

Okay.

So

if you want your ESG score to go up, you better reallocate some of the money and get out of some of these brown industries.

Right.

And then you get this thing that goes on where people now will start lobbying to have positive ESG.

This is happening with nuclear energy right now, where they're trying to get nuclear energy to be a good thing for your ESG.

Because it is.

Because it is, at least for the environmental part of that,

no emissions and everything.

And they want to develop new nuclear energy, but they can't do it until they get this

stamp of approval from the ESG mass.

Okay, so back in March, I said Merrill Lynch had put this up and they were going to use this now to start judging you.

Merrill Lynch

and Bank of America responded immediately, the fastest response to anything I've ever seen, in literally, in anything we've ever done.

It was an immediate response.

And they said, many of our self-directed clients have expressed an interest in implying an ESG lens to investment opportunities.

And I'll define ESG lens in a second, but a lot of clients say they want to look at investments that they're considering making and looking at them through the lens of environmental, social, and governance information.

And this is just to help them assess the opportunities and the risks if they want to.

It's completely optional.

These ratings are available.

Not everybody uses them, but I mean, they have absolute no impact on any individual's credit or the ability to access any of our other services at all.

Okay, that was back in March.

Now, that's Bank of America.

Let me give you this story from Citigroup today in Bloomberg.

Citigroup will eventually expect borrowers to have a credible plan for for measuring and reducing their carbon footprint as part of the bank's pledge to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions.

So they have made a promise to the globe, I promise you,

that we're going to have zero net emissions on all the loans that we make.

We will not hurt Big Blue.

We're not going to do it who loves his hurt.

So

for them to have no emissions, zero net emissions, that means they can't loan any money out to people who are investing in

brown industries.

Do you, what's your ESG score?

Who are you investing in?

Because we can't invest in you if you're investing in anything brown.

The firm says they are still formulating plans for how it will go about pulling off its pledge.

Chief Executive Officer Jane Frazier said Tuesday at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council Conference, when asked how the firm would respond to

a natural gas driller looking for a 30-year loan to build infrastructure, Frazier said, well, it'll start with a conversation.

If they don't have a credible plan and they're not able to come up with targets and metrics and disclosures, then it'll be a shorter conversation.

Citigroup's climate plans are a key push for Frazier, who made the pledge to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 on her first day.

Frazier was one of the many financiers who descended on Glasgow earlier this year for a climate summit, where she called for global leaders to set consistent sustainability standards that would make it easier for clients to invest in green projects.

She said her firm isn't a fan of the idea of simply asking clients to dispose of any so-called brown assets, which would just shift the problem to a new owner.

She cautioned that banks also have to consider the ramifications of quickly pulling support for carbon-laden industries without any backup plan.

If we're shutting down a lot of brown assets in certain communities, and then we're not providing alternative employment sources and driving finances into local entrepreneurs and building out the alternatives, this is going to be a very unpleasant and socially unpleasant transition that we all have to go through.

No, we actually don't all have to go through that.

No, uh-uh.

No, you're deciding, you and those of you in Davos.

This is the Davos plan.

You know, you always say, oh man, they're all just these great guys going to the ski resort, you know, talk about money and things.

And it's great that they're all getting together in Davos.

This, the great reset, is from Davos.

It is the Davos plan.

I don't know about you, but I haven't been invited to Davos in quite a long time.

Oh, in fact, never.

Have you?

Your voice isn't being heard in this.

You're just going to have to go through that

really socially unpleasant transition that we all have to go through.

Because why?

Why do we have to go through this?

Oh, that's right.

Because they've decided.

You don't have a say in it.

So when they said, you know,

we're not going to do do this, you know, on loans,

that's ridiculous.

It's not going to have an effect on anybody.

Yes, yes, it is.

Yes, it is.

This is one step closer now

to the great reset.

This is one step closer to you not being able to get a loan

for something you want to do.

And if you want to buy a dirty old house, oh my gosh, what are your plans to make sure that that's a greenhouse?

What are your plans to make sure that that doesn't take all that oil to heat that house?

I mean, we'll help you.

You just have to take out a loan, you know, to make sure you do all that.

That might be a loan you can't afford, then maybe you shouldn't have the house.

But we can sell it to somebody like BlackRock who has the money.

And they have the credibility with the bank to be able to turn that into a green, green house.

And then you can rent it from them.

See how this is working?

It's

It's insanity.

But let me give you this from the New York Times.

I love this.

Saul Amarova, a Cornell Law School professor whom critics painted as a communist after President Biden picked her for a key banking

regulator job.

She withdrew from consideration for the post on Tuesday.

In a letter to the wife.

That's sad, by the way.

That's sad.

Is it?

Yeah, I mean, because we talked so much about her, and it didn't seem like anybody else knew anything about her.

I don't remember

this audience by itself basically made this one happen, and thank God it did.

She is,

well, you just look up some of her hit quotes.

I'm just going to read what the New York Times said about her.

In a letter to the White House, Ms.

Amorova said it was no longer tenable for her to seek the position of comptroller of the currency.

Mr.

Biden, who said Ms.

Amorova had lived the American dream by escaping her her birthplace in the former Soviet Union.

I'm sorry, did she escape?

Did she escape?

No, she was over here on an educational visa.

She was over here when the Soviet Union fell.

So she didn't escape.

In fact, she loved the Soviet Union.

She thought it was a pretty great place.

Saul would have been,

she would have brought invaluable insight and perspective to our important work on behalf of the American people, he said.

But unfortunately, from the very beginning of her nomination, Saul was subjected to inappropriate personal attacks that were far beyond the pale.

Oh, my gosh.

What were some of those personal attacks, Du?

Oh, my gosh.

Well, I, first of all, the New York Times in their tweet about this story, I think, nailed it.

They said she's a Cornell law professor whom President Biden picked for a key banking regulator job.

She's withdrawing.

Bank lobbyists and Republicans painted her as a communist because she was born in the Soviet Union.

Yeah, it's xenophobia.

It was just because she was born there.

Now, it's weird because I don't remember painting Melania Trump as a communist because she was born in the Soviet Union.

Maybe you thought it.

That's a dog whistle stew.

Really?

Yeah, we all thought it.

Dog whistle, dog whistle.

I don't remember

communists.

That's what we were all thinking.

No, we actually were like, this is an amazing story of a woman who was born.

Why isn't this a big deal?

Right.

Somebody's incredible.

Yeah.

And no one seemed to care about it at all, including the New York Times.

Well, the New York Times might have had a little bit in their dog whistle racism and xenophobia.

You know, they might have thought, well, if Melania is with Donald Trump, of course he has an affinity to Russia because she's a communist.

Ms.

Amaroma faced months of criticism from Republicans and bank lobbyists who cast her as a threat to the American economy.

Lobbyists began to oppose her almost as soon as her nomination was announced, saying she wanted to replace the banking industry's functions with services provided by the Federal Reserve.

They pointed to a 2020 paper that she had written about the ways the Fed could use its own digital currency with central bankers that had already begun to consider creating.

As comptroller, she would have had to coordinate with bank regulators at the Federal Reserve, but would not have the authority to make changes to the banking system's structure, dummy.

Some lobbyists, including the incoming chairman of a group representing community bankers and the chief executive of another group that focuses on big banks, also shared a Wall Street Journal editorial suggesting that Ms.

Amarova's Soviet childhood meant she couldn't be trusted.

Now, I will tell you, I read that Wall Street Journal, and it is her childhood in the Soviet Union that made me go, hmm, can we trust her?

She wasn't playing with Lincoln logs.

They weren't talking about Lincoln over in the Soviet Union.

Can we trust her?

Because she wasn't playing with a chatty Kathy doll.

Oh, no.

No.

It was a Soviet doll.

This is the craziest things I've ever heard.

Republicans

in Congress mimicked the lobbyist criticism, saying Miss Amorova's academic work and her Soviet origins should disqualify her.

Yeah, her academic work should have.

In exchange, in an exchange that drew gasps from Democrats during Ms.

Omarova's hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, demanded that he know whether or not Ms.

Omarova had ever resigned from a communist youth group that Soviet children were forced to join.

I don't know whether to call you professor or comrade, he said.

But the Republican opposition would not have mattered had Senate Democrats been united in favor of Ms.

Amorova.

Her nomination was ultimately doomed by a lack of support from moderates, making her the Biden administration's third high-profile nominee to bow out.

Okay, let me ask you this.

If your

problem came from your Democratic moderates,

then she probably isn't a moderate to most Democrats because you only have a few moderates left that you haven't taken out back and shot in the head.

And if it was those moderates, it's really not the xenophobic,

crazed callings and cat calls from Republicans.

It is really truly, you don't like a moderate candidate.

Every candidate you're putting up is saying crazy things like, we should close all of the banks and there should only be one bank, the Fed, and the Fed will just open up accounts for everybody, and all of the loans and everything can be done by the Federal Reserve.

That doesn't sound like a very American idea.

And if that is the new America, then I don't want any part of that.

And yes, I will fight against a bank monopoly held by our federal government, or worse yet, five private corporations that kind of pose as government.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

If you are ready for some really great news, keep listening.

Built Bar is back and it is unbelievable.

If you've been listening to my show this year, I love Built Bars.

It's an all-American story.

This is a client I asked to be on the show because I didn't listen to my wife again, and she'd been telling me about it, but it has protein bar on it, and those always taste like a doormat.

This is unbelievable.

The mint brownie flavor?

Oh, yes, baby.

It is life-changing.

The new bars taste better than ever.

In addition to the 12 original flavors, Built Bar just added cookies and cream, carrot cake, caramel brownie, lemon, almond cheesecake, apple, almond crisp.

I mean, it's just, it's great.

Built bar, delicious, nutritious, high protein, low calorie, high fiber, low carbs, 100% real chocolate, and 100% really good.

Plus, they've reset the code for this new launch.

Right now, go to builtbar.com, use the promo code Beck, get $10 off your first order.

Promo code Beck, BuiltBar.com.

So Kyle Rittenhouse has been in the studios for the last couple of days,

and he was here Monday as a guest of Elijah Schaefer, who is joining us now.

He's the Blaze TV host of Slightly Offensive and the co-host of You Are Here.

You Are Here did the interview with Kyle on Monday, and that's because you've kind of become friends with Kyle.

Yeah, very good friends, actually.

It's been a friendship I never thought I needed, but

after 2020, I need somebody who's gone through worse stuff.

And

he's at the top of the list.

I think he's at the top of everybody's list right now.

Let me play the first interaction that you had.

You were there the night Kyle, right before the shooting happened, you did a quick interview with him.

Here it is.

This is the buddy's business.

What are you guys doing out here?

We're protecting from the citizens, and I just got pepper sprayed by a person in the crowd.

So you had non-lethal, but you didn't respond.

We don't have non-lethal.

So you guys are full on ready to defend the property.

Just give you a few questions.

Yes, we are.

Now, if if I can ask, can you guys step back?

Medical, EMF right here.

I'm an EMF.

So that's the first time, and I like the way you were, because you were doing the little

camel soup can with a string on it, right?

So you were talking into a camel.

How many masks did you have on at this point?

I was like, I actually had on one of the masks that work.

It's a gas mask, military grade.

So, I mean, that thing was, that is thick, and that filter is huge.

And I could barely hear myself through it.

So you were there.

You knew.

I mean, we talked to you, I think, the next day or you were still there um and you said no no no this story is not what they're painting it is

it is to be he told me yesterday um in the interview that we'll release tonight he was in jail um or he went to um

to the police they took him downtown They

said, you better get an attorney.

And his whole life changed.

How did you stay stay in touch with him?

Did you stay in touch with him?

Yeah, I mean, from the beginning of the shooting that happened to the third one that happened, I knew that he was going to be painted as a white supremacist because I knew that around the BLM movement, there was nothing but lies.

And I knew that the victims at that time, which I called victims, were not black.

And I knew that this was an altercation between rioters and another kid.

And I knew the media was going to slander him.

And I went, I didn't know his politics.

I didn't know what he believed.

I mean, I didn't even know he was 17.

I just went, I've got to get in contact with this guy because he's got to know that people in the public know the true story.

The someone that was there knows that he's innocent of murder, that this was a self-defense, clear-cut self-defense.

I knew it that night.

I witnessed it with my eyes.

And so, you know, I quickly found out who he had retained, got in contact with his legal team, quickly was able to talk to his mother.

And, you know, I was able to get information to and from him.

And we've been FaceTiming for the last year or so and just trying to keep his spirits high, praying together, laughing together.

He likes to talk about girls, you know, typical 18-year-old guy.

So, just a normal kid.

Yeah, he is.

And

you may not have felt the same way.

But

when I interviewed him yesterday, sitting across the table from him, he is a kid.

I mean, it was like talking to my 17-year-old son.

You know, he's got the mindset of he's not political.

He doesn't want to be involved in, you know, he's not some crusader.

He's not a crusader.

He thought at the time he wanted to be part of EMS.

So he was going down to

do that because that's what he wanted to do for life.

And he's, he's thinking, you know, you say he talks about girls.

He's a kid.

He's an 18-year-old kid.

Legitimately.

I mean, when we hung out, he just wanted to, again, talk about girls, play video games, and, you know, just go eat steak.

He didn't even know what ribeye was.

you know.

I mean, this is an 18-year-old.

He was like, I don't know what steak to order.

And I was like, I mean, what 18-year-old knows the difference between prime rib, ribeye, and a Tomai.

He's like, What's wagu?

I was like, You can get it if you want, bro.

I'll buy you whatever you want.

But I mean, this is definitely just some guy who's out there.

And people say, Well, you know, how did he go out there with a gun if he was 17 or whatever?

And you just went to, bro, we've sent people to wars at that age, too.

Like, I mean, it is an age where a lot has been asked of young men.

And yes, in the age, he is a young man and he has responsibilities.

And he, again, he defended himself like a man would.

But at heart, I can't believe that that's not the kid that I would have thought would have went out to defend property.

Yeah.

Because he's just so jovial, innocent, nice.

He's the sweetest, sweetest kid.

He's really a sweet kid.

Like to my wife, and he was just like, oh, it's so good to meet you.

Gives her a hug.

And it was like, I'm so happy to see you in person finally because they had FaceTimed.

And I'm feeling that like I'm talking to my nephew.

Yeah.

I'm going,

he's not a, this is not a murderer.

This is not a racist.

What are they talking about?

When he was talking to me, he's going to go to Arizona State.

I mean, he's going.

And, you know,

they didn't even want him on

virtual campus, let alone on campus.

And he's just got this attitude of, you know, they're going to say stuff to me.

That's okay.

I mean, I don't want to talk about politics.

Talk about my dog.

You know,

I'm just there for an education.

He really thinks that,

I think he thinks he's going to go back at some point soon to a normal life.

And I don't see that happening.

Do you?

You can't because life isn't normal.

I mean, even for people that are still pretending like it is, you got to wake up.

And if you're brought into the cultural war, if you're brought into the battles, I mean, at Arizona State, they had a protest against him screaming over microphones to maybe 100 people about how, you know, they're letting a man on campus that killed three black and brown people.

I mean, they don't even have his story correct.

No.

So

The public doesn't even know what happened.

And they don't care to correct that.

You know, even if they lost their slander campaign on him to get him put into prison for murder, which it was clearly self-defense, they still have the stronghold on the narrative that this is a white supremacist that killed black people that were in the name of the farthest thing from him.

But yeah, but this is what the media does.

They go, well, we have a loss here, but you know what?

We're not going to retract the articles.

We're going to leave the Google searches up.

And it's still, you know, it's still against Instagram's policy.

He tried to put his name in his Instagram account because he's not a criminal.

He didn't do anything.

He didn't do anything wrong by the court of law.

He tried to put his own name, Kyle Rittenhouse, in his name for his Instagram account, and it was against community standards.

He couldn't, he can't, apologies to all the Kyle Rittenhouse's out there that exist.

Wow.

You can't use your name on social media.

You can't.

What I find amazing is you can't post anything about him.

No.

Because you'll be violating.

Tell the story.

Yeah, so obviously I'm connected to the trial, to the case.

Facebook and Instagram knew that.

They

had started striking.

This is early on.

I was obviously one of the first people putting a lot of stuff up about this case.

And they started first removing the posts.

Then they started blocking the posts.

Then they started...

contacting us and then they said they were going to delete my account so we we reached out to them and they made me delete everything off of off my page of kyle rittenhouse to keep the account up and what was insane was i have other social media so i just told everyone go to this social media go to my telegram go here if you want to see updates i'm going to keep updating you just they won't let me do it here and so then they they they write us and they go to delete my account saying oh you have kyle rittenhouse uh propaganda or whatever on your account i'm like wait no i deleted everything there was an old story if you're not familiar with instagram there's like a a 24-hour post that you can post and it archives quote unquote into their hard drives there was an old post from like five months ago that was only up for 24 hours that saved onto their hard drives and they threatened again to delete my account versus a post from five months ago that wasn't even visible to the public unless I went back into their archives and had them delete it.

Like, that's how insane they are.

They had to go delete them off their hard drives, like off the archives of their servers in order to keep the account active.

And I can't even post articles with his name.

I have to blur out his name.

Still today.

Yes.

They haven't changed their policy on my account.

Other people can't.

Yes, still.

He can't.

He's been found not guilty.

And it's still

wrong for Elijah to post anything about him.

Like, hey, congratulations.

Hey, look who's not guilty not even a picture with him I couldn't post a picture from from

I'm on an interview with him on YouTube can't even put a clip up I mean you're talking about a journalist who actually conducted the first known interview basically of this entire story before the shooting who can't discuss the shooting in the case that's insanity but that's that's their stronghold on the information that's what you were saying about him can he go back to normal life i just said no dude look man we don't live in a society of truth and yes the truth is you were acquitted It was self-defense and you didn't do anything wrong by the court of law.

And yes, that's the truth.

Unfortunately, man, these institutions operate, I don't know, by the power of demons.

Like, I don't know what to claim that they operate by, but I can tell you that their ultimate goal is disinformation.

It's misinformation.

I mean, I mean, it's, I said, it does not matter.

I go, even if you, if I write that you were acquitted, I'll get fact-checked and said, missing context.

You know, he was acquitted, but some people think he's guilty.

And you're like, all right, well, your opinion doesn't matter because that's what we have the justice system for, okay?

But it doesn't, I just told him, I go, you know, justice is no longer by the court.

It's by public opinion.

And the evil powers at hand, the people at CNN, people at MSNBC, like Joy Reed, Rachel Modow, I guess Cuomo's out, but Don, Don Lemon, I mean, these people are not going to come to your side.

You're not going to retract.

They should.

They should be quaking in their boots.

They should be moving their money into Bitcoin or someplace offshore because they're going to have it taken from them.

Because I think this kid has the strongest case I've ever seen.

He's gonna win.

Oh, he's gonna win and I think he's gonna win big.

And if they're not going, I told him, I'll invest in that.

I don't want any money.

I will invest in that because if you hit them hard enough, big enough, there's a chance they have to change or they'll collapse.

They need to be bankrupted.

And I'm saying this because

I don't believe in cancel culture and the idea of I don't want to come after people for making mistakes.

And I don't want to to do it because I disagree with them.

Correct.

I'm saying, yeah, you make a mistake, like somebody says something, they get it wrong.

It's like, you know, says a mean thing.

Fine, you know, apologize.

The reason why this is bad, these people will not only not apologize, they double down on their disinformation.

So it's like when they're asked to retract, like with Saki, and, and, and,

hey, you will you retract this?

He said he's a white supremacist, just skirts around the question and just says, you know what?

No, yeah, I'm not going to do it without having to say no.

Just

I will not retract, will not apologize.

It's like, look, then then you deserve justice.

They're also doubling down.

They're doubling down on, for instance, all the stuff with

Ukraine and President Trump.

They're doubling down.

They're saying that all of that stuff was real.

The New York Times just took, we have all the evidence now.

They just wrote a story last week saying, nope, because of this, this, and this, we were right.

I mean, they won't stop.

Do you know how crazy this is?

So

Will Witt from PragerU.

I share one of his posts about the Nuremberg Code, you know, sort of not being ignored in Europe.

And I get fact-checked.

It says AP fact-checks this as false.

Okay, this is false.

They're changing the Nuremberg Code.

So I read it, and it was like, look, the fact-check

goes,

they never said that we're getting rid of the Nuremberg Code.

What they said is the Nuremberg Code would prevent state-enforced vaccinations.

But what the EU chief did say was that it's okay for states to ignore the Nuremberg Code and to have state-enforced vaccinations.

She didn't mention the Nuremberg Code, but said that it's okay to do what violates it.

But because she didn't say the word Nuremberg Code,

we're going to fact check this as false.

And I'm like, no, you just complicated it.

Will Witt put into 160 words.

what you tried to explain in three pages to complicate it.

You convoluted the truth with weird lies.

And I'm like, no, if the EU, if the head of the EU is saying to states to violate the Nuremberg Code and to do whatever they want, medically speaking, then we are doing away with it.

And it's like,

false.

We're not doing away with it.

We're just ignoring it.

It exists.

We just won't read it.

We just won't read it anymore.

It's like,

it's kind of like the Bible.

It's kind of the Constitution.

Yeah, the Constitution, the Bible.

They're good at that.

It's still there.

Nicholas Cage, you can still steal it.

You know, the Declaration of Independence exists.

Elijah Schaefer, the host of Slightly Offensive on Blaze TV, also co-host of You Are Here on Blaze TV.

You can follow him, Blazetv.com, you are here, or youtube.com.

You are here daily.

Elijah, thank you so much.

Thank you.

And you will see my interview with Kyle Rittenhouse tonight at 9 p.m.

only on Blaze TV.