We'll go ahead and we'll play that intro music because it's really good. We'll go ahead and we'll play that intro music because it's really good. Alright welcome to surreal politics. This stage 1 episode 41 I titled this today token appearance because I am I'm in no shape of a pretty good show and tonight I don't expect that to be much the case but since I was able to you know put myself in front of the camera and talk to you I figured I should try to do that since this is my job after all. And if you'd like to call in you're welcome to do that at 217-688-1433 if you'd like to be on the program and will you tell the less I have to so please do give us a call. I should not you know I actually I know better to than to do what I'm about to do because I should not be giving these people the time of day much less any mention. Another reason I decided to do this today is because I banned the guy from my telegram chat last night and the guy the guy had been recently given me some money and immediately after I banned him from my telegram chat because he was completely out of line. He was disruptive. He's calling people feds. He's really he's really behaving inappropriately. And so upon my observation of this I removed him from the chat and I said hey you know I don't care if you do he's this is a common occurrence that people say people will go and create a problem and then while they're creating the problem note that they pay me. Okay and I hold that in a great deal of suspicion because you know the people who try to harm me are not short on cash okay it's not it's not at all lost on me the potential that somebody would give me money in order to do me harm as a matter of fact that's the easiest thing in the world for them to do and so I'm conscious of this. I think that they're the minority of my problems of course but they exist these people. And so as soon as I ban him from the chat and I inform him of this this guy who's been giving me money and thinks I'm great until I've kicked him out of the chat goes and accuses me of being high on the prior show. And I'm like what the hell is this about what are you talking about high I was sick I told you and then I and then because I'm anticipating this guy's going to go now. It's a real politics it's the word I want to you. S up the comments on Odyssey I go over there and he has not yet taken to this and I see somebody else as commented on two different videos saying no offense but you look stoned. Now you know maybe some people just assume stone means not sober I think of stone just being high on marijuana and one thing you know for sure is that I'm not doing that I'm on pro I'm on federal probation like a probation officer shows up at my apartment with a drug test you know they don't do it so often anymore because I don't I don't get high and they know that but like I had to take a drug test like a couple of weeks ago. And so you know I'm not doing drugs if I look like I'm not in such good shape yesterday Friday or today because I'm not. And you know I've been managing to deal with that through. At this show up very well with my background removal application these are my suit of feds these are my Zaycam's the second bottle I've gone through by the way I can't recommend these high enough. I actually don't recommend these gummies but Zaycam if you've never tried this if you like come down if you start feeling like you've got a cold. Zaycam it's basically just zinc but I take like whenever I start feeling a cold coming on I'll go get the Zaycam I usually get the laws and just like rapid dissolve things they taste pretty good too. And there those things work miracles like if you you know I you never know how long you're going to be sick without them obviously but I notice that you know I take them and you know you figure cold is going to keep you messed up for a couple of weeks. I start taking this I can as soon as I think I might be having something resembling a cold and I'm usually back up and running in a couple of days and so they they work there they're a miracle thing. So but anyway so like I see this and there was a something that happened you know a few weeks ago that somebody it was December 31st as a matter of fact somebody commented I don't like drunk can't well on a telegram comment I'm like what are you talking about like I'm not. I'm not drunk on the air what are you talking about you know and so I start to notice this pattern developing oh I didn't I didn't think I finished saying what I was saying is not scripted you might gather. And when I came over to Odyssey I noticed that some other guy who had just created his account said I think you're stoned on two different videos and I'm like well what the hell you like no offense but I think you look stoned here. Okay so you created an Odyssey account for the purpose of call me a drug addict on my streams and so like you know. While people are running around spreading rumors like that which I take pretty seriously I thought it would be prudent that I show up and you know present myself to you and yeah I don't look so hot because I'm sick. But you know here I am in any case so thank you for tuning in those of you who have I don't expect this show to go on for very long this evening because as I said I really haven't prepared one but I want to present myself in any case. Two and seven six eight one four three three like to be on the program and where you told the less I have to so please do give us a call and part of the reason that they do that actually is like they they have some they have enough awareness of the show to understand that you know that that be a pretty significant you know that that's something that you say in order to discredit me right somebody who comes on here to do that. That understands enough about the history of this program to understand that that's discrediting you know they're not they're not they're not making that comment in good faith at all. Which is pretty infuriating. But I'll go to some news. As a recent filing in the in the Trump case in Georgia. Finally alleges improper relationship between Fulton DA top Trump Trump prosecutor Fannie Willis hired alleged romantic partner as a special prosecutor court motion says. This week to turn a Fannie Willis improperly hired an alleged romantic partner to prosecute Donald Trump and financially benefited from their relationship according to emotion filed Monday which argued the criminal charges in the case were in constitutional. The bombshell public filing alleged that special prosecutor Nathan Wade a private attorney paid for lavish vacations he took with Fannie with Willis during the using the Fulton County funds his law firm received county records show that Wade who has played a prominent role in the election interference case has been paid nearly 654 thousand dollars in legal fees since January of 2022 the DA authorizes his compensation the motion filed on behalf of defendant Michael Romane former Trump campaign of. The official seeks to have the charges against Roman dismissed and for Willis Wade in the entire DA's office to be disqualified from further persecution of the case. Palavi Bailey a Willis spokesman woman said the DA's office will respond to Roman's allegations through appropriate court filings. Wade did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It is unclear if the explosive issues raised in the filing undermine the validity of the indictment against Trump in the remaining 14 co-defendants were simply muddy the waters by questioning Willis's professional ethics. The ethics expert said that the allegations of true race serious questions. Stephen Giller's a professor emeritus at New York University Law School who has written extensively about legal and judicial ethics said a closer look at Willis's decision making is needed before it can be determined whether the indictment should be dismissed. If the allegations are true, Giller said Willis was conflicted in the investigation and the prosecution of this case and wasn't able to bring the sort of independent professional judgment or position requires. The filing alleges that Willis and Wade have been involved in a romantic relationship that began before Wade was appointed special prosecutor. It says they traveled together to Napa Valley in Florida and they cruised the Caribbean using tickets Wade purchased from Norwegian and Royal Caribbean cruise lines. Although the filing did not include documentation of those purchases. The document offers no concrete proof of the romantic ties between Willis and Wade but says sources close to says quote sources close to both the special prosecutor and the district attorney have confirmed they had an ongoing personal relationship. Roman's lawyer Ashley Merchant also said the she reviewed the case file in Wade's ongoing divorce proceedings at the Superior County Clerk's office and made copies of certain documents but the case was the case but the case file was later improperly sealed because no court hearing was held as required by law. The case remains under seal Merchant said she is not sharing the information she obtained from the divorce file until the seal is lifted. She also said she is asking a judge to unseal the case file. The motion said the checks sent to Wade from Fulton County and his subsequent purchase of vacations for Willis could amount to an honest services fraud, a federal crime in which a vendor gives kickbacks to an employer. It is also possible this could be prosecuted under the federal racketeering statute the motion said Merchant who wrote that the motion is not filed lightly nor is it being filed without considerable for thought researcher investigation. But the issue had to be raised and must be heard because the issues strike at the heart of fairness in our justice system and if left unaddressed and unchecked threatened to taint the entire prosecution of this case invite error and completely undermine public confidence in any outcome in this proceeding. Willis and Wade the motion contends have been engaged in an improper clandestine personal relationship during the dependency of this case which has resulted in the special prosecutor and in turn the district attorney profiting significantly from this prosecution at the expense of the taxpayers. A problem with Wade's appointment is that it was not approved by the Fulton Board of Commissioners as required by law of the motion said. The motion also questions Wade's credentials contending is never prosecuted a felony case. Wade was a prosecutor in Cobb County but was not immediately clear what cases he handled there. Wade entered into this political prosecutor contract. I'm sorry. Wade entered into his special prosecutor contract on November 1st, 2021 just one day before he filed for divorce in Cobb County. The motion said. Roman's filing also resurfaces an accusation previously made against Wade that his two oaths of office were not filed in court prior to his work on the case so he misrepresented himself as a duly authorized special prosecutor. Judge Scott McCaffey previously rejected that argument stating that the requirements don't apply to contractors working on a single cases and that the defendants didn't establish a constitutional violation or structural deficit to the grand jury process that warranted dismissing the case out. Right. If this parrot of emotion is somehow not yet dead, the defendant has failed to establish how Wade's actions resulted in prejudice. McCaffey wrote alluding to the famous Monty Python sketch. Merchant Technology McCaffey's ruling but said in the larger context of various issues surrounding his appointment will this lack will this is lack of authority to appoint him and the conflict of interest issues addressed below. The fact that we did not file his oath before beginning work takes on new new and more significant meaning and indeed constitutes a structural deficit in the indictment. Merchant filing came on the day McCaffey had set a deadline for the most defendants to submit pre-trial motions in the sprawling criminal case. Roman worked as a director of election day operations for the Trump campaign in 2020. He was charged with seven felony counts and falting. Most of them conspiracy charges in conjunction with his role in helping organize slates of Trump electors in battleground states when by democratic obidant including Georgia. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges and his legal team previously turned down a plea offer from the DA's office. Notably Roman was the only one of the 19 people will as charged who had not been recommended for indictment by a special grand jury which spent eight months investigating elections of version efforts in Georgia after the 2020 election. A separate grand jury handed up criminal charges. 217-688-1433 if you'd like to be on the program and I'm more you talk less I have to. So please do give us a call so that I would say is something if you're like banging the guy. If you're banging the guy that you're hiring to go and do the case and you're like I got an idea. We're going to screw this guy that I really hate and because I really like you because we've been screwing each other. I'm going to pay you hundreds of thousands of dollars to go ahead and do this. Which sounds exactly like something that they would do frankly you know. Whether or not it's going to result in any justice for that might say that's a entirely different question of course. 217-688-1433 you'd like to be on the program and speaking of travesties. I recently filed something with the federal court in the science v. Kessler's lawsuit. The appeal of that case as it were. Pardon me. I'm just receiving word right now. All of the prosecutors were disqualified in Virginia today. Virginia is going to appoint a special prosecutor now that all of the judges and all of the prosecutors have been disqualified. It should be only a matter of time before the case is dismissed. This is coming from. This is coming from Augustus in Victus. Hang on a second. I might be able to get him on the air to talk about this. That's very interesting news. A totally separate case obviously. He's talking about the burning to intimidate charges against some fine folks. The only the only fine people in Virginia that day. To attend the United right rally. But I recently filed I just sent this in the mail. There's oral arguments in the appellate case for the science v. Kessler trial on January 25th. And it's been this like constant problem that these people are keeping me in the dark on purpose. They know what they're doing. If you've been following that case at all. When I got arrested in January of 2020, I promptly updated my address with the court. And the court was sending documents to me during the litigation. The plaintiffs when they wanted me to answer their interrogatories, they sent me their interrogatories. But all of the other correspondence and litigation they were continuing to send to my Gmail account knowing that I could not check it. And when this was discovered after 14 months, I said, hey, you know, this completely screws me. I've been in the dark for 14 months. And in the course of that 14 months, you've introduced expert witnesses. You've completely shifted the burden of this. And because of that, like I want to, I want to, it changes by defense strategy that I have to now depose and call as witnesses Thomas Massey, Thomas Keenan, Emily Gorsenski, Christopher Goad. And the court was like, no, you're not prejudiced at all. Shut up. And so they sum this up to, oh, is it administrative effort? Because we've got so many people working on the case. Well, we've got so many people on the working on the case that one of them should have been able to say, hey, we're sending this to the wrong place. We've been updating the court every time he has an update in his case. We know that he's in jail. We keep on emailing him. Okay. They were lying and it's obvious. They make it more obvious now because they just filed a motion with the court, with the appellate court asking for more time for oral arguments, which I have no problem with as a matter of fact. The only problem I have with it were about to detail as I read to you this motion. But what they did was they filed a joint motion saying the parties have consented. And then they notified me of my consent by serving me with the filing that they were sending to the court. Well, no, I didn't consent. You never talked to me about this. I'm finding out about the hearing through your motion. What are you talking about? And so I just filed this with the four circuit court of appeals. Comes now defendant of Pellent Christopher Cantwell, pro-say in his response to the joint motion to increase time allotted for oral argument. Though the plaintiffs in their filing have stated that the parties consent, I discovered the date of the hearing through an email from plaintiffs counsel Eric Bolton on January 4th when he served me with this motion by email. Nobody had ever consulted me about such a motion. This is a familiar pattern. It constitutes part of my appeal that the plaintiffs have willfully and repeatedly neglected to confer with me throughout this litigation and that the district court allowed their misconduct to continue unpunished, prejudicing my defense. While the plaintiffs stated their reason for excluding me for 14 months while I sat clueless in jail as an administrative error, no such excuse exists today while I have access to email and they have no trouble getting to me those things they wish me to get. That said, my only objection to the motion is the preposterous idea that there are two sides to this argument. The plaintiffs get one allotment of time, the defendant's another. This happened at the trial in the district court and the insufficiency of this was demonstrated then. I have not heard one word from my co-defendants counsel about this case since the appeals process began. They have not served me with any of their filings. They do not confer with me when they did not confer with me when they consented to the instant motion. A trial, Mr. Kalenik, went so far as to question defendant Spencer as an adverse witness. Defendants, other than myself, pointed fingers at one another throughout the trial and closing arguments. We are not a team and Dutrito says one runs contrary to fact and prejudices us all. The last I heard about an oral argument was when this court sent me a letter stating that a previous hearing date for oral arguments had been postponed. The letter stated I had been notified of the date being postponed. This was untrue. I had never received any notification, but was glad to know the hearing I had no idea was to occur had been delayed. A time will come when this case is reviewed by historians. We have taken the time to understand what happened in Charlottesville, Virginia in August of 2017. There is ample video and documentation to show that the plaintiffs have deceived the court and the public and the jury beginning before the events took place. This was a plan by them and all who cared to know the truth today are well aware of this. If this court continues to allow this jury to go on while they flaunt the rules and try to exclude me from the proceedings it will be judged harshly by history. So that went in the mail today. 217-688-1433 if you would like to be on the program and the more you talk the less I have to. So please do give us a call. Oh yeah, there was somebody links me to a story. I saw this on Baroque used channel. I'll probably talk about this on Friday. There was a tunnel that was dug under a synagogue so that the attendees of the synagogue and you know you have some idea of who attends a synagogue. They are looking at this video right now. I'll show you this actually. Like, mattresses hidden in the wall without what's out of it. But those of you are listening to audio. It's like a construction scene around the synagogue and they're showing all these things. Not entirely certain what all of it is or I describe it to you as a better verbal. So anyway, what happened apparently was that they were using this underground tunnel to attend synagogue during the lock-up. And now there's some significant structural damage to the building. And that I guess is the consequence of all this construction stuff going on. And so that's kind of a kind of amusing. Two on seven six eight eight one four three three like to be on the program. And the more you talk to less than I have to so please give us a call. Increasingly it sounds like you need to separate yourself from your co-defendant says no Ava brawn with five dollars in a super chat. Thank you. Yeah, I mean that's obviously the case. I'm getting to a point where I don't trust their lawyers. And that's really I really I started to come to that conclusion during the trial frankly that like. I really try not to I try very hard believe it or not. I think most of you know this that like I try not to be one of these like completely paranoid conspiracy knots. I tend to frown on people who think that everything is some kind of plot you know. But it's not the craziest thing to say that like you know my argument in the case has not been raised by any of the other attorneys. Okay, my argument is I have several arguments but among them is that you know they sued us for a violent conspiracy. And they did not in the jury did not find us liable for violent conspiracy. And it's liable under the Virginia hate crime statute which could which allows us to be found liable for harassment. Okay, now in the lead up to the case like there are all these motions to dismiss citing our freedom of speech and stuff like that. And the judge kept on throwing out our freedom of speech argument saying you're being accused of violence. You know there's not there's not about your speech. Well, if you found us liable not under the federal statute, but under the statute that allows us to be found liable for harassment. Actually, you're you're finding us liable under a different theory of liability. It's something that we weren't sued for. And it's something that where we sued for that we would have had freedom of speech arguments, right? Now that's a very solid argument. I've run that by a lot of different attorneys. All of them tell me that's a very solid argument. And none of the attorneys in the case none of them have raised that argument. That is suspicious in the extreme. Okay, that's an obvious argument. It's so obvious that I was like, how is this even possible that that that they haven't brought it up? And every attorney I've talked to is like, yeah, it's obvious. Well, why have none of the attorneys brought that up? I don't know. But I hold them I hold them in suspicion. And so the idea that like I'm going to share a time a lot with allotment with them and they're going to, you know, through through up there are greater numbers, have more time to argue than I, is unpleasant in the extreme to consider. Like I'm really pissed off about it. And it's like, you know, the temptation to just, you know, not respond to the thing is tremendous because I don't have any expectation of justice here. But what I said about the historical record, people are like, you know, people commented about this. Like, you know, they don't care about the historical record. You know, I'm like, yeah, well, you know, I do. It's the only reason I'm answering, right? I don't have any expectation that justice is going to proceed from this. The only expectation that I have is that I'm adding these comments to what will amount to the historical record. Like, you know, someday somebody's going to go look at this and like, you know, yeah, we were telling you the whole time what happened. So hopefully there, you know, there comes a time when this gets straight now. I don't have any expectations. It's going to get straight now on January 24th, 2004, 25th, 2024. But I'll try, you know, I'll put up enough effort to say, you know, that I tried, you know. But I'm suspicious of the lawyers. Like, it doesn't make any sense to me that they don't bring that up, you know. And, you know, all of the commentary I've read by people outside since I came home, you know, about the litigation. You know, rhymes with what I witnessed in the courtroom is that like, the other attorneys really weren't like trying to like win the case. I don't know what the hell they were doing. What was the purpose of what they were doing, you know, just like, yeah, you know, there's no evidence of a violent conspiracy. Yeah, of course there's no evidence of a violent conspiracy. So, you know, attack the credibility of the people who say that all of these things that are not evidence of conspiracy are. Now they didn't do that. I was really upset about it. I remained upset about it. And so, you know, anyway, 217-688-1433, you like to be on the program. And I'm warning you, it's all the less I have to. So please, it gives a call. It doesn't look like Augustus Invictus is going to call us, unfortunately, and that's sad. But it is good news. All of the prosecutors were disqualified in Virginia today. Virginia is going to appoint a special prosecutor now that all the judges and all the prosecutors have been disqualified. It should be only a matter of time before the case is dismissed. That's from Augustus Invictus, send him a text message. Let's see if there's a story on this. Prosecutors were accused. No, that's the article. Oh, maybe it was today. So there's other stories. Yeah, okay. So this was just posted. And this is by Hall's sponsor. Actually, I know this guy. I've talked to him a couple of times. He's not. He's not a complete fanatic. So Almwell County prosecutor pushed out of 2017 court case, torch case, judge rules, members of Commonwealth's Attorney's Office are too close to the counter protestors in 2017. That's really something already stung by recent recusals of two local judges. The Almwell County Commonwealth's Attorney's Office has now been sold and must recuse itself in the prosecution of one of the estimated 300 participants in the racist torch bearing march that marched across University of Virginia grounds in 2017. The ruling was made Monday after a contentious hours long hearing overseen by judge, uh, H Thomas Patrick Jr. Looking at the totality of the evidence that's been presented there as an appearance of a conflict in the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office should recuse. Patrick said in his ruling in granting the defense motion to appoint a special prosecutor for the case of Jacob Joseph Dicks of Clarksville Ohio. Oh, yeah, Jacob Dicks. I've, uh, I'm, uh, I have some awareness in that man. Shout out to you, sir. Patrick stressed that his ruling should not be seen as an attack on the prosecutor, W. Toft, it aloft and Tufts, whom he called certainly admirable. Well, Tufts, the man who has been prosecuting the torch cases and who was the hearings primary subject appeared stung in court Monday. Justin Commonwealth's attorney Tufts, afterwards declined to take the outstretched hand of Peter Frazier, the defense attorney who successfully argued the motion. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, that's pretty funny. Not after all the stuff you pulled Peter Tufts told him, yeah, of course, you know, because legal maneuvering is disreputable when the right does it, of course. As the legal combatants departed the courtroom, Jim Hingley, the commie, the commie County Commonwealth's attorney who argued the bulk of the matter and now more district court, uh, circuit court, I should say, told the daily progress. He'd be making no further comment than his already noted objection to Patrick's ruling, Frazier by contrast seemed to savor his victory. Judge Patrick made the correct decisions at Frazier. It was inappropriate for this Commonwealth's attorney to prosecute this case over the course of the nearly four hour hearing. Frazier repeatedly hammered at Tufts for his relationship with groups such as Black Lives Matter and showing up for racial justice, communicating security concerns with leaders of those progressive, um, organizations before enduring the tortured March. On August 11, 2017, which has served as a prologue to the violent United right rally turned riot the next day. Frazier showed up showed the court emails he had obtained through a freedom of information act request that appeared to show Tufts offering to research legal issues for people in groups that opposed United right. He worked with interacted with and collaborated with the counter protesters, Frazier argued. The planned United right rally never actually took place. It clashes between hundreds of white nationalists and detractors turned violent turned into violent chaos on the streets of Charlottesville on August 12, 2017. After it was decreed any legal assembly and disperse from the tiny downtown park once named Lee Park for the statue of a Confederate general at its center, a vowed neo-Nazi Jamesfield drove his vehicle into a crowd of people, killing anti-racist protestor Heather Ayer and injuring dozens of others. I don't know that where do they come up with the phrase a vowed neo-Nazi? Did he ever take a vow to be a neo-Nazi? I think that's preposterous actually. Fields is today serving a life sentence for his crimes and federal prisoners, Springfield, Missouri. Tufts took to stand as the fifth witness on Monday, noting that he wasn't a pro prosecutor in 2017 who was just looking up for the safety of his community. Yeah, right. He also bristle at the notion that his office was making a political stand with its prosecution, something that Frazier had argued. I'm not prosecuting an idea to testify Tufts. They carried it towards. They surrounded a group of people. They wouldn't let them out. B.S. Tufts was referring to the events on the night of August 11, 2017 when the torch bearing mob surrounded counter protestors at the statue of founding father Thomas Jefferson in front of UVA Rotunda. They brandished their torches as the counter protestors. Some of them students chanted. I'm sorry. Some of them students and chanted. Jews will not replace us and blood and soil. On the stand, Tufts said that the accusation he is that he's being accused of opposing Nazis and racists. He had an admission. Then Lockby said, Tufts, I'm guilty. Even before his ruling, Patrick, who stepped into the gaze after Judge Cheryl Higgins recused herself, gave hints about his thinking. Do you want to continue in this case? He asked Hingley. Yes, Judge, we do. Answer Hingley, who whose 2019 election to the prosecutor's seat pitted him against an incumbent prosecutor who claimed that Virginia's clan error law prohibiting the use of fire for racial intimidation, sometimes called the cross-burting statute did not apply to what occurred on UVA grounds in 2017. Thus far, there have been four convictions among the hundreds who participated in the 2017 gathering, the two men who have been sentenced have received six months jail terms. So let me ask you this, Patrick, continued, why did it take six years to bring the indictment? Many things answered Hingley, recounting his predecessor stance, the investigation had to be reinitiated. Dicks, the man whose case triggered Monday's ruling, had blasted the delay in his case while he harbored some views some might consider white nationalist when he was 21. Dicks now 21, 28 says he has changed. I'm kind of on trial for a past life. Dicks told the daily progress after the decision was rendered Monday. It is unclear how much of his worldview has changed. Dicks maintained that it is admirable to be proud of one's heritage. He still opposes the removal of Charlottesville State of Confederate, I think that that's a tightball in their port, Statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, the decision was triggered the United Right Rowling. I thought it was an attack on my culture, said Dicks. In the wake of Monday's ruling, legal minds were wrestling with the news. It's pretty unusual that a whole prosecutor's office would be recused at University of Virginia, law professor Carl Tobias. I think that's pretty rare. Tobias said that even when there's really no conflict, judges strive for fairness. Judges are sensitive to the appearance that might rule on the side of the defendant's right to be protected and in terms of the public trust in the judicial system he told the daily progress. At least one member of the gallery, which numbered around 10, was a larger crowd than in most cases. Was a public defender, Jonathan Ray Packard, he represents another defendant who participated in the 2017 March, whose case has yet to reach a resolution. Will this ruling affect his client's case? That is unclear at this point, said Packard. The Commonwealth's attorney's office will have to decide if the decision applies to all the defendants. Hingley may need to decide soon. It's obviously slated to go back to court on motions hearings in another case on January 23rd. Well, that's excellent news. I got to say we don't get a whole lot of that out of Charlottesville Virginia. You might have noticed. And so congratulations to Jacob Dicks and to his attorneys. Rumble isn't working. Rumble is working. I don't know what you're talking about. Not sure what's going on there, Hany, or a viewing account. All right, guys. Well, I have, I said today that this was going to be a token appearance and that I didn't intend to stay on for very long. And we've actually managed to go through a few things. And I think that that's not so bad. So thank you very much for tuning in to this token episode of surreal politics. Again, if you're tuning in for the first time, don't consider this to be what you can expect from the show. Normally what I do is I put together an opening monologue and I have a bunch of stories pulled up and and I can talk better and I and I don't look like I'm sick. But today I am sick and for most of the day I like I really had a lot of trouble getting out of bed, but taking some cold meds. I feel a lot better, but I'm still not out 100%. Hopefully I should be in much better shape by the Wednesday member show, which we do every Wednesday at 930. If you are not a member yet, you can become one. It's realpoliteaks.com.slay. And of course Friday will be back cursing up a storm for the uncensored production radical agenda. You don't get that on Odyssey friends. You got to tune into the I'm sorry you don't get that on rumble, I should say. You got to tune into the Odyssey channel. You want to catch the uncensored show and I think that would be a thing worth doing. Thank you very much for tuning in. If you want to pay me, that would be a great idea. So realpoliteaks.com.slay.s.dn. Givesongo.com slash SPM. My cash app is edgy. Chris. I take Bitcoin, Minero, all that stuff. Love that cryptocurrency stuff. And you Bitcoin guys, you all got rich recently. So you might as well fork it over to me. And that would be a great idea for all of us. And so we'll see you Wednesday if you're paying and if you're not, then we'll see you Friday. Alright, thank you very much for tuning in. It's a little late to say happy New Year again, but what the hell? Happy New Year. Happy 2024 everybody. I'm enthusiastic about this. Imagine we actually got a little bit of justice. Wouldn't that be something? You're a nice change of pace. See you soon. Thanks for tuning in. Thanks for tuning in.