Press Statement re: Epstein Mansion

741B90FB-2AB7-42DF-AAD0-8E38F9022328

In the course of my documentary filmmaking during the past couple of years, I have been arrested more than half a dozen times and I’ve been raided twice by the FBI. 

The first in the series of incidents was for an arrest at a non-Trump rally. I asked, “did you know I was roughed up at your previous rally?” Trump responded, “you look healthy to me,” and then his goons proceeded to throw me over a table and rough me up with the police. Remember— it wasn’t even his rally. Later, I asked to press charges, and the Manchester police performed a retaliatory arrest. I now have a federal lawsuit against Trump, the police and all the others involved. Dozens of mainstream journalists filmed the incident, but barely anyone reported. 

For passing out flowers at the RNC, I was falsely accused by the FBI of throwing urine at “the Alex Jones riot.” They showed up with twenty agents carrying AR-15s. All for being a documentarian.

At the inauguration, I was falsely accused of having a bomb. More nonsense for being a documentarian.

In August, I was falsely arrested while filming the protest to the Straight Pride rally in Boston. Two days later, Youtube permanent deleted my account for exposing the group who put on the parade. I was then arrested in the court for asserting my first amendment right to a religious covering. The case went up to the supreme judicial court and I won. Now, the judge from the lower court is being investigated. 

I was kidnapped by mercenaries at Standing Rock. That was a case of a corporation taking over a small police army. Barely any reporting by the corporate news about that either. I won that too. 

Nearly every incident in this time frame, has been caught on video, and each and every time, we can see that I am arrested for doing the job which is supposed to belong to you, and those who call themselves journalists. However— as Noam Chomsky would point out, “there is an acceptable spectrum of discussion which is allowed, and no more.” 

When someone like myself asks tough questions, I am forcibly silenced. Even through the reporting on the Art Basel story, we can see that dozens of news outlets simply parroted the “official” narrative put out by the police. If this is what passes for journalism, then we have entered a dark age of disinformation.

I don’t know for certain what happened with Jeffrey Epstein, but the meme is a symbol. The government has proven over and over again that it cannot be trusted. So, why should we believe the “official “narrative put out by the government? Shouldn’t it be the job of journalists to keep this story hot? Shouldn’t it be the job of any citizen of earth to be asking these questions for the sake of fellow humans?

My arrests have been for no more than speaking truth to power. But, since the corporate news refuses to do their job, it is now necessary for acts of civil disobedience, to keep these stories alive.

The police have not contacted me

 

New York Times swipes at YouTube journalists

The New York Times just published an article written by former InfoWars contributor Josh Owens.

For the uninitiated, InfoWars are probably best known for spreading debunked conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook shooting. Theorizing about conspiracy, on the one hand, is the cornerstone of critical-thinking. You may have noticed, it’s what lawyers are engaged in during half their cases. That said, the “official” narrative of a government with such a long history of lies and deceit should absolutely be challenged for every statement they make, so long as you don’t start spreading those lies yourself. Those who push dangerous narratives which don’t align with available evidence rightfully should be treated with extreme skepticism. Alex Jones is the perfect example.

The article itself is a confessional, portraying Jones as a blowhard and a drunk, which by all accounts he is. The thing which is troublesome about the article is that The New York times are using Owens and his experiences at InfoWars to paint YouTubers with a broad brush as conspiracy nuts— and The New York times as some kind of moral arbiter of truth. It doesn’t come right out and say it, but they invited Owens to write the column so they could take a swipe at independent journalism published on YouTube.

Let us not forget The New York Times and their lies about weapons of mass destruction, or the myth propagated that Hillary Clinton was electable, or that Donald Trump’s bloviations and empty podiums were more important than Sanders’ speeches attended by thousands. And how could we forget the lies of omission, which are omitted every day? The US’s extraterritorial reach in the Julian Assange case— it’s probably not worth much coverage— according to the Times.

I vaguely know Josh Owens because in May of 2016, at a rally in Lawrenceville New Jersey, he asked to interview me regarding who I thought would win the 2016 election. I initially said, “no, you’re InfoWars, you’ll take me out of context.” Then I said to him, “on second thought, if I did, will you show the whole video in context?” 

He said, “yes,” to which I responded, “okay, I’ll do it, but I’m going to film you filming me to prove that InfoWars takes interviews out of context.”

Sure enough, when I watched the video later, they cut me off right after I said Trump would win. I still wholeheartedly stand by my statements, but Owens cut out my explanation as to why I thought this was a very bad thing. It wasn’t as bad as CNN has done to me— but getting into that would be getting into the broader discussion of manufacturing consent… And I would post the video, but my Youtube has wrongfully been terminated for “hate speech.”

I still keep in touch with one of the other field reporters, who I just finished texting with regarding the article. I’ll call him Bob. Bob, (like Owens), is also young and conflicted, and I’ve been very clear with him from day one that Alex Jones is full of shit. He’s expressed regret that Trump won, saying, “he promised peace, and he hasn’t made good on that.”

I don’t want to disclose too many of Bob’s secrets, but according to him, Owens was an enthusiastic participant in his work at InfoWars, getting excited to take down the Muslims in the Detroit story, and many other pieces he contributed to.

You may be asking yourself, why do I keep in contact with these people? Simple. Bob and all the other frenmeies I have made on the campaign trail instinctually understand that there is something wildly fraudulent about the “official” narrative which is pumped out by the corporate media/government propaganda symbiot. Bob’s conclusions are worrisome, but without the conversations that we have had, the entirety of this little InfoWars media cabal might legitimately think we’re all lizard people. That I got him to admit that InfoWars’ support of Trump was a mistake isn’t nothing. It’s not an avalanche, but it isn’t nothing. I do not believe the narrative that “none of these people can be reasoned with.”

Regardless of Owens’ motives, the fact that he wrote this article is proof that there is hope for all people, even if the corporate new/ government propaganda symbiot swallows us all and drowns us in the lake of fire. Moreover, a free and democratic society mustn’t make limitations on speech, so long as it does not incite violence. YouTubers as a whole, are not working to incite violence— but this article by the Times, (in my opinion ), most certainly is an attempt to marginalize their free speech. It is certainly their “right” to do so. But as corporate media and government continue to merge, think critically about articles like Owens’ piece in the Times, and what is it the Times is attempting to achieve.

 

 

Become The Glitch

741B90FB-2AB7-42DF-AAD0-8E38F9022328.jpeg

December 3, 2019

War, by its very nature, is a task which should not be undertaken lightly. In theory, when the possibility of war is upon us, it is the job of the government, (in a democratically-elected society), to present the options to the people. What might be the cost of the war? What tragedies may await us for inaction? 

In theory, all of this would be debated by elected officials, and in the most democratic society, voted on by the people themselves. However, the people are offered no way to participate in this decision-making, nor even are their elected representatives. Arguably, it is questionable whether even the “commander in chief” of the United States government makes such decisions. 

There are those who would immediately jump on this line of thinking to remind me that United States government is a constitutional republic and not a democracy. True, but you were just helping to make my case. Madison didn’t believe that the people were intelligent enough to govern themselves, and was a big fan of each state getting two senators regardless of that state’s population. This is not representative democracy.

It is supposed to take an act of Congress for the United States to go to war. When was the last time that this happened? Ever? How is it that no one cares? Where are the torches and pitchforks? I have not seen one thrown chair in Congress. 

There are no thrown chairs because there are no pitchforks. There are no pitchforks because the media fails to convey truth or basic reality. Failure to convey reality results in an apathetic public who realizes their concerns will not be seen or heard. The media fails to convey such things because they are subservient to their corporate overlords who themselves are in a symbiotic relationship with government. 

Strong criticism by the media, (going beyond the standard dog and pony puppet show), leads to removal of the media’s access to politicians. Loss of access equates to loss of revenue. This will not do, and therefore the media acquiesces and capitulates, bowing deeply in order to get that “scoop.” It is no scoop. It is propaganda, plain and simple. 

Now we must ask ourselves, how are wars declared in a fascist dictatorship? The leader says, “we’re going to war,” and everyone drops what they are doing and goes to war. That’s it. 

So are the United States government’s wars those of a democratically elected society, or are they those of a fascist society?

I would argue that we are much closer to living in a fascist society. Our Presidents may not seem like Leopold or Hitler to us— but tell that to an innocent mother in a foreign nation not knowing when one of the US’s predator drones are to take the lives of one of her children. 

How does all of this stop? Become the glitch in the system.

Miami Art Week: Dec 4-7

688ECB25-9C0D-4CEB-A178-A7EE0B47C4CA

I am EpsteinDidntKillHimself 2020. I am the man who prays with politicians with flowers in his beard. I am the midget whisperer. I hauled Trump into federal court for the sake of the universe. I beat Straight Pride in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. I have dodged tear-gas canisters and saw protesters disfigured by a mercenary army at Standing Rock, where I was kidnapped by paid oil company thugs. I have been raided twice by the FBI. I have been beaten, bruised, and lied about by federal agents on TV and the internet. I have been banned from YouTube for exposing hate speech.

Now with no platform, I bring you my truth through stencils and wheatpastes. 

I represent Dave Tree, Vermin Supreme and myself.

Dec 4-7: our art will be on display at Fridge Art Fair/ Miami Art Week. Downtown Miami Southeast First Street at Eurostar Langford Hotel.

02BC9796-791B-485F-9AEE-F3DFE66FCB27.jpeg98707A96-A182-4CAA-97C9-22667A86896E.jpeg9CB7F561-6400-4815-8F4C-D75CC43BD0D8.jpeg2382E61E-8309-443D-B51D-73364BDEF738.jpeg

 

The YouTube problem

 

45F72B79-D532-4027-A253-87EF93CD32F9What is the solution to the YouTube problem? Channels which have done no wrong are deleted for no reason, while plenty which are full of distasteful content remain. If that wasn’t worrisome enough, there is no one on the left nor right who see the point of any kind of boycott— myself included. YouTube is The “public square.” Furthermore, it is owned by Google, which is owned by Alphabet which is government subsidized to the tune of $600 million. For all intents and purposes, YouTube is a public utility, effectively overseeing government censorship. 

They are able to circumvent this conflict of interests and continue to decide what is appropriate or inappropriate content by playing the “private” company card. By projecting the perception to the public that such “private” companies have no government participation, they gain consent of the masses through sleight of hand. 

With these Government/corporate hybrid companies taking more and more control of the news diet, how can the general population know what is real in the world and what is not?