950 – Transcript

Just Right Episode 950
Air Date: February 4, 2026

Host: Bob Metz

The views expressed in this program are those of the participants.

Bob Metz:
Welcome everyone. It is Wednesday, February 4th, 2026. I’m Bob Metz, and this is Just Right, broadcasting around the world and online. Join us for an hour of discussion that’s not right-wing. It’s just right.

Thanks to the recent arrest of journalist Don Lemon, numerous issues that we’ve been discussing recently on the show have suddenly found themselves all entangled in a single mesh of contradictory arguments whose contradictions can only be understood and disentangled under the light of the political polarity of left and right. But until that happens, when you’re stuck with a lemon, just make lemonade.

The issues I was referring to included illegal immigrants, ICE deportations, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, journalism, artificial intelligence, stupidity, racism, white supremacy, and above all, the polarities of left and right.

Lemon tree, very pretty, and the lemon flower is sweet, but the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat. Unless, of course, you’re another fruit. And if you thought that joke wasn’t bad taste, it’s even worse when identity politics is being used as an argument to justify criminal behavior.

Hear all about it right after our reminder that you can write us feedback at JustRightMedia.org. Hear us on WBCQ on Channel 292 Shortwave. Follow and like us on your favorite podcast platform and visit us at JustRightMedia.org where you can access all of our social media links, archive broadcasts, and the support button that makes it easy for you to support the show. Because as always, your financial support is appreciated and is what makes this show possible.

Many, particularly on the right, were quite pleasantly caught off guard when it was announced that Don Lemon had been arrested for his part in what I would call an act of terror arbitrarily directed at a group of church-worshipping Christians in the middle of their church ceremonies. The sheer audacity of their actions was itself a phenomenon to behold, to say nothing of the stupidity on which their actions were based.

There is a lot to cover here. So let’s kick off the show with two different accounts of the arrests, both posted on January 30th. On this side of our upcoming bumper featuring Viva Frei’s David Freiheit and on the return side of the bumper, Sydney Watson. If you’re not familiar with what the whole controversy is about, between the two of them, I think you get a pretty good idea.

Clip (Vivafrei – David Freiheit, January 30, 2026)

David Freiheit:
The news of the day is Stinky Fingers Don Lemon has been arrested. This was after a failed attempt to arrest him, which resulted in a magistrate not signing off on the warrant because they didn’t find probable cause. I personally believe Don Lemon should have been charged. I believe that what Don Lemon did was a crime on video and the meltdown that the left is having as a result of this. They say unprecedented.

Unprecedented. Don Lemon, a journalist, is arrested in Donald Trump’s America. Anybody saying that is an idiot. If you use the word unprecedented to qualify the arrest of Stinky Fingers Don Lemon, you are an idiot. You are either stupid, you are a liar, or you are a perfect combination of both stupid and a liar.

There is nothing unprecedented about arresting Don Lemon, even if a slew of other journalists hadn’t been arrested, harassed before Don Lemon. There would be nothing unprecedented about it on its face because he literally posted video of him in the process of committing a crime, in my view. Maybe he’s got defenses and maybe they will be successful. Maybe he’ll find a judge that will toss these charges. Maybe he’ll find a jury that will nullify these charges.

Don Lemon arrested by federal authorities after protest in Minnesota church services. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a Friday post on X that Lemon was arrested alongside three others in connection with the coordinated attack on city’s church in St. Paul, Minnesota. Lemon, 59, was taken into custody by federal agents in Los Angeles where he was covering the Grammy Awards.

His attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement, details of the charges against the four were not immediately available. However, the Justice Department promised to pursue charges against Lemon after the journalist covered the protest at the church on January 18th. Instead of investigating the federal agents who killed two peaceful Minnesota protesters, the Trump Justice Department is devoting its time, attention, resources to this arrest. And that is the real indictment of wrongdoing in this case. This unprecedented attack on the First Amendment and transparent attempt to distract attention from many crises facing this administration will not stand.

Abbe Lowell, you’re too smart to call yourself an idiot. So you are just a liar.

Now you want to know why I think that Don Lemon should have been charged, that the allegations were there, the evidence to support the charges were there. Don’t take my word for it, people. Take Don Lemon’s words for it.

Don Lemon (clip within):
Acknowledgement that they were intimidated, terrorized almost. This is a hug and a skid. I imagine it’s uncomfortable and traumatic for the people here, but that’s what protesting is about.

David Freiheit:
Uncomfortable and traumatic. That is what protesting is all about. That’s also what documenting your own criminality is all about. But again, don’t take my word for it. Take Don Lemon’s words.

Don Lemon (clip within):
This is an operation that is a secret that they invited folks out. This is Operation Pull Up, more of a clandestine operation. We show up somewhere. They don’t expect us to come there. And then we disrupt business as usual.

David Freiheit:
Then we disrupt business as usual, people, after terrifying and terrorizing the people at the church to leave the church. But don’t worry. There’s more. And if you had any doubts about his intent behind what he did, I present to you Don Lemon.

Don Lemon (clip within):
I’m going to go back into Minneapolis a little bit ago and did some reconnaissance on the ground. I did some reconnaissance on the ground.

David Freiheit:
He is on camera saying that he did some reconnaissance on the ground as part of his conspiracy to intimidate and disrupt church services.

Don Lemon (clip within):
I’ve been pleasantly surprised to see the community coming together. The diverse community. If you see this when we first pulled up, we’re like, wait a minute, which operation are we at? And as it turns out, because we were like, well, this is kind of mega-coded, right? So the American flag or whatever. But these are resistance protesters. They’re planning an operation that we’re going to follow them on.

David Freiheit:
Resistance is the new word for domestic terrorists. And he helped to do some reconnaissance for them. So good for you, Don. That’s definitely not incriminating.

Don Lemon (clip within):
I can’t tell you exactly what they’re doing, but it’s called Operation Pull Up. And it’s Tsukima Armstrong, and she has been doing this since George Floyd, Dante Wright, and others, where they surprise people, catch them off guard, and hold them to account.

David Freiheit:
Catch them off guard and hold them to account. Almost sounds like forcible confinement, but I will not get lawyer-y.

Don Lemon (clip within):
After we do this operation, you’ll see it live. These operations, the surprise operations, again, can’t tell you where they’re… After we do this operation, we can’t tell you about this operation until it’s done. After we do this operation, we’re doing it live.

David Freiheit:
Oh, but I’m just documenting it. After I do a little recon for them, after they invite me, after we document it, I will tell you about it after we do it, because it’s going to be live. And I’m just a journalist doing recon for domestic terrorists who are targeting churches.

Don Lemon (clip within):
And if you had any doubt as to the intent of Stinky Fingers Don Lemon. And there’s a certain degree of entitlement. I think people who are in the religious groups like that, it’s not the type of Christianity that I practice, but I think that they’re entitled. And that entitlement comes from a supremacy, a white supremacy. And they think that this country was built for them, that it is a Christian country when actually we left England because we wanted religious freedom. It’s religious freedom, but only if you’re a Christian and only if you’re a white male, pretty much. And so, yeah, absolutely 100%, but it’s an intimidation tactic.

David Freiheit:
And, you know, I said, I don’t understand how I’ve become the face of it when I was a journalist. I do understand that I’m the biggest name there. Can you imagine the ego of all of this? Like, this is what he needed for self-validation. I’m the biggest name.

You’re the face of it because you’re the idiot that thought, by the way, the other guy’s the face of it too, the one with the beard who also got arrested because he also live streamed his own criminality. You’re the face of it because you are so stupid, you actually post it to the public while narrating in real time all of the elements of the crime in which you were participating.

But no, it’s racism, Don. And I’m also, as I was on with my producers this morning, my producers were saying, I said, how did I become the face of this? And my producers said, Don, you’re a gay black man in America.

Clip (Sydney Watson, January 30, 2026)

Sydney Watson:
Don Lemon, the former CNN host, has been arrested for his participation in storming a church in Minnesota on January 18, 2026. Nobody is above the law.

To catch you up if you didn’t hear about this, anti-ICE protesters went into the Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota during a Sunday service on January 18, 2026. They disrupted the service by chanting anti-ICE slogans, calling for justice for Renee Good. They confronted attendees and the pastor.

The protesters targeted the church because they believed that one of the pastors was connected to the St. Paul ICE Field Office in one way or another. All of this is obviously very well-adjusted behavior.

Prior to all of this, Lemon talked to the camera and said that the people involved were resistance protesters. That was the language that he used. He said that they were there to surprise people, to catch them off guard and to hold them to account. For what? We don’t know.

Don Lemon (clip within):
The diverse community, if you see this when we first pulled up, we were like, wait a minute, which operation are we at? And as it turns out, because we were like, well, this is kind of MAGA-coded, right? Saw the American flag or whatever, but these are resistance protesters. They’re planning an operation that we’re going to follow them on. I can’t tell you exactly what they’re doing, but it’s called Operation Pull Up. And it’s Tsukima Armstrong, and she has been doing this since George Floyd, Dante Wright and others, where they surprise people, catch them off guard and hold them to account.

Sydney Watson:
It should also be noted that during this little pre-church raid chat, Lemon utilizes the word we, which indicates, at least to me, that he is associating himself with the group and its goals, which if you’re Lemon’s lawyer, is a really unfortunate event.

Following along with these people, Lemon ended up at the center of this church protest, sticking his little microphone in the face of the pastor of this church, and honestly being incredibly rude to him.

Pastor (clip within):
Because that’s the hope of these cities, that’s the hope of the world, is Jesus Christ.

Don Lemon (clip within):
I want to be very respectful, please don’t push me, though. We’re here to worship Jesus. That’s why we’re here.

Sydney Watson:
Lemon also questioned the church members in the video that I’m about to show you, that honestly made me really sad. He narrated the scene as it unfolded and filmed everything for all of us to see.

Church Member 1 (clip within):
I’m a Christian here that wants to praise the Lord with my son, and now I gotta go home. I’m sorry that you guys are so angry.

Church Member 2 (clip within):
I’m just very chronically, I’m not with the group.

Don Lemon (clip within):
What do I have to say? Can you understand why they’re angry?

Church Member 2 (clip within):
I don’t understand any of this, because I’m a simple man. I’m a simple man who loves the Lord and is a good father.

Church Member 3 (clip within):
This is what we look forward to, is coming being with our family and praising Jesus, and that’s not something that we have to run away from.

Don anticip Lemon (clip within):
So, this is kind of a bad day for us. Do you understand that some of these folks feel voiceless?

Church Member (clip within):
I don’t understand, because right now I’m so upset right now.

Don Lemon (clip within):
Don’t you think until we go to heaven, if you believe in that, that there should be some sort of peace here on earth, and that people should have agency, and we shouldn’t be beating people up off the street, and we should be abiding by the Constitution?

Church Member (clip within):
I think that’s just a little bit loaded for me right now.

Don Lemon (clip within):
Why so?

Church Member (clip within):
I don’t want to interview right now.

Sydney Watson:
There’s probably nothing worse on this planet than feeling distressed and having Don Lemon ask you racially charged questions.

What do the people in the church have to do with any of this? According to the indictment, Lemon has been charged with two felonies: Count One being conspiracy against the right of religious freedom at a place of worship, and Count Two relates to the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, also known as FACE, which prohibits interference with religious worship, among other things.

Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said that this is a free speech issue because Don Lemon was simply acting as a journalist in this capacity.

Church Member (clip within, repeat):
I’m just pretty chronically, I’m not with the group.

Sydney Watson:
Again, as with anything like this, a lot of people out there have a lot of opinions, and so far there has already been a ton of misinformation and confusion and wonky reporting on all of this, and also responses from all the regular players about how this is an infringement on civil liberties.

Anyway, then we had Chuck Schumer saying that this arrest is a dark message to journalists everywhere, suggesting that criticizing the administration means you have to watch your back. The administration is behaving no differently from police states and authoritarian regimes across history. They’ve arrested a journalist for the crime of doing his job. And let’s be very clear, this arrest is not just about one journalist in one incident. The arrest is a dark message to journalists everywhere. If you dare criticize this administration, watch your back.

I really do find these responses ironic and honestly sort of funny in like a depressing way because I have been on YouTube for quite a long time, I have been participating in the independent media space for quite a long time, and I know that all of us here on this platform, and again, a lot of independent journalists, have been subjected to years of genuine censorship. So when liberals and Democrats talk about this, I know they don’t care. It’s obvious, but they really only do care because it concerns somebody who is ideologically aligned with them. But you know, that’s just everything in 2026. It’s everything’s partisan all of the time.

Bob Metz:
The observation that everything is partisan all of the time is, to borrow a phrase from philosopher Marina Karlova, not a bug, but a feature. Everything about all of this is politically driven with one side playing offense while the other side is forced to play defense.

Some of the things that Stinky Fingers Don Lemon was proselytizing about during his so-called journalistic endeavor reveal a very dark and sinister agenda. He confronts a church goer who has no idea what’s going on by asking him, do you understand that some of these folks feel voiceless? Which is an odd question to ask in the midst of the din of those voiceless voices.

And then, citing what he calls the degree of entitlement in these Christians, he proudly boasts that these Christians are not the type of Christianity that he practices. Their entitlement comes from a white supremacy. My God, I can’t believe the guy says stuff like that. Lemon is so racist and so openly blatant about it that it defies credulity, unless you see it as David Freiheit does, sheer stupidity.

Why does Lemon push the fact that he’s gay and black? If he actually thinks that that has anything to do with his arrest, he’s stupid, gay and black.

Regular listeners to this show may recall a recently recurring voice heard among our selected audio bites, that of Amir Odom, a blogger who also identifies as gay and black, and whose opinions on this issue are the exact opposite of Lemon. So what differentiates these two gay and black individuals? It’s not the color of their skin or their sexual preferences. It’s the political polarity of left and right that distinguishes them.

And to use your identity to hide your evil ideology is a despicable tactic that unjustly associates others of your race or culture with that same ideology, whatever it might be. Yeah, identity politics, which if you stop to think about it, is not politics at all. It’s mere intimidation to which Lemon attests. It’s an intimidation tactic and I don’t know how I’ve become the face of it as a journalist. Once again, as a journalist, no less yet another identity trait.

It’s traumatic for the people here, but that’s what protesting is all about, proclaims Lemon, in a statement that all but confirms that this is about terrorism, not about protest. If what you’re doing is causing trauma to anyone, then you are a criminal.

Our focus now shifts slightly towards the issue of free speech. As once again on this side of the upcoming bumper, Sydney Watson questions whether or not this is a free speech issue, while on the return side of the bumper, Jimmy Dore features the outrageous comments of Israeli billionaire Shlomo Kramer, who argues that America’s First Amendment should be limited to protect the First Amendment.

Clip (Sydney Watson, January 30, 2026)

Sydney Watson:
Now, I actually really haven’t had enough time to think about this and to download it and to tell you whether or not I think this is actually a free speech issue or not.

Don Lemon (clip within):
It may look like MAGA coded, but there’s a reason they have so many white people here, I’m just going to be honest, it’s because of what they’re the operation that they’re doing today. It’s important to have allies, as they said, white allies here. So that is what I could say. I turned our camera off of them because they’re giving some critical information here.

Sydney Watson:
I would like to know why you are protecting these people, because if you are there as a reporter, wouldn’t you want to report as much information as you can, not shield people from potential information that might be useful to them as viewers and as audiences?

Anyway, for all the people who have been moaning and groaning about how this is some sort of attack on journalistic liberties, I think it’s worth noting that situations like this have absolutely played out in the past, but towards people and journalists on the right wing. And the same people who are currently crying about Don Lemon so clearly had absolutely nothing to say about cases concerning people on the right wing, so are you surprised? Once again, probably not.

For example, a journalist employed by a right wing outlet called The Blaze, whose name the journalist is Steve Baker, was covering the January 6th event while it happened at the Capitol. He was inside the Capitol filming the people who were in there as well and reporting on the events as they unfolded. Naturally, Baker was exposing the event in a way that Democrats didn’t like, and the Biden administration didn’t like, and he was ordered by the FBI to appear at a Dallas field office in shorts and flip-flops where he would face charges.

What charges, you may ask? No one knew, because the charges were sealed. But the bottom line is that he filmed inside the Capitol and did journalism in the Capitol for over 30 minutes, and this was enough four years later to ask him to surrender himself and then manacle him and perp walk him because reasons. Where was everybody’s concern about free speech then? Chuck Schumer, where were you? Hakeem Jeffries? What were you all doing?

There are actually a bunch of situations that unfolded during the Biden administration’s time in power that refer to the FACE Act and had people charged and serving jail time under the FACE Act. Like, I’m sure some of you remember there was a situation that took place in 2021 where a group of pro-life protesters sat outside an abortion clinic and sang hymns and tried to counsel women who were there and trying to go into the clinic.

The protesters were inside an office building where the clinic was, but blocked access to the clinic’s front door for several hours, and this was the illegal part. Now, obviously, this is not remotely an apples-to-apples comparison. I’m not saying that it is. I guess I’m just trying to demonstrate here that the FACE Act has been used and is used against people in all sorts of different environments where some people would probably argue that it is a free speech issue. While others will argue that you can’t block people from accessing private businesses and private pieces of property.

I really don’t want to get into the weeds on all of this and if it’s moral or immoral or sort of make any commentary about any of that, but I do want to demonstrate that usually, also what feeds into somebody’s perception of these issues is quite clearly how they swing politically.

So many media outlets and politicians and other journalists are sprinting to defend Lemon’s claim about the First Amendment, but none are acknowledging that his rights and the rights of protesters cannot impede the rights of churchgoers.

But what I think is the most frustrating part of this entire situation and conversation is how everything about it is already being distorted. This is not just a situation where a journalist is documenting events that they are witnessing in a neutral way. Lemon was directly involved, encouraging the operation, justifying the actions of other protesters, and referring to this as a resistance operation. He lumped himself into it by saying, we will do this and we will do that.

It’s not really a surprise that this is all being spun as an attack on the press as a whole, but boy, is it disappointing to see the media yet again proving how incapable they are of real journalism.

And although I am quite right-wing or I guess moderate right on a lot of issues, this is something that I just absolutely hate about our culture. It’s like nothing can be right or wrong. Everything has to be politically bent and everybody has to perceive it in a certain way that fits with their tribe. And I just think that it encourages the behavior that we saw from Don Lemon in the first place.

In the end, though, I am very interested to see that action was taken here at all. And going forward, I am very curious to see what the net effect of all of this will be.

Clip (Jimmy Dore Show, January 4, 2026)

Interviewer:
Network Shlomo Kramer also one of the founders of Checkpoint, another big cyber company. Shlomo, it’s great to have you here. Welcome.

Shlomo Kramer:
Thank you for having me.

Interviewer:
How is AI cyber warfare shaping geopolitics right now?

Shlomo Kramer:
So AI is going to revolutionize cyber warfare from critical infrastructure to the fabric of society and politics and undermining it, giving unfair advantage to authoritarian governments against democratic countries. First amendment type of…

Interviewer:
That’s already happening?

Shlomo Kramer:
That’s already happening. You’re seeing the polarization in countries that allow for the First Amendment and protect it, which is great. And I know it’s difficult to hear, but it’s time to limit the First Amendment in order to protect it and quickly before it’s too late.

Interviewer:
What do you mean?

Shlomo Kramer:
I mean that we need to control the platforms, all the social platforms. We need to stack rank the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online. So every person who’s online, you cannot go online unless you are already verified by the government who you are. That’s what they’re saying. So no more anonymous posting, nothing.

Interviewer:
Really? Does that even pen names? So like Mark Twain would have to say, I’m really Samuel Clemens if he was writing today?

Shlomo Kramer:
Yes, according to… You’re left with polarization of society and inner fighting and you have to control it.

Interviewer:
But guess what his solution is? I have to control that and you see that…

Shlomo Kramer:
You have to control it. Meaning the government has to control what people are posting on social media, meaning the government has to police your speech.

Enterprises are buying by themselves more and more cybersecurity solutions, but they can’t afford all these solutions by themselves. So they are looking for ways to deliver more efficient consumption.

Interviewer:
And I assume you have some of those ways, obviously.

Shlomo Kramer:
So that drives really the next generation of companies such as Wiz, CrowdStrike, Kato Networks on the network that are platforms and are able to deliver this extended need for security in an affordable way for enterprises.

Interviewer:
For enterprises, not for governments.

Shlomo Kramer:
Not for government, but governments need to start building their programs and the same tools can be used also by governments.

Interviewer:
But the two leaders in AI. One is China, which obviously already is using AI to control the population. And here we’re all out in a race with China and so we’re not as interested in regulation right now. Certainly not at the state level, for example. First of all, Trump just signed an order saying that the states cannot regulate AI. So they’re taking the control away from people in their local municipalities and giving it to central government, the federal government, which is the opposite of what conservatives are supposed to be for.

Bob Metz:
You are listening to Just Right, broadcasting around the world and online.

And what a pile of contradictory horse manure that was. Shlomo Kramer is talking in the Marxist language of fools. That was possibly one of the most chilling and horrific suggestions anyone could put forward to solve the imaginary problems Kramer was addressing. His plan smells like COVID 2.0, but instead of aiming to kill the body, it’s intended to kill the mind.

It’s time to limit the First Amendment in order to protect it, and quickly before it’s too late, he says. Well, when you see or hear a contradiction like this, you know that what you’re dealing with is a very dishonest and predatory individual or group. And what’s all the urgency about? He thinks he doth protest too much.

It is not possible to protect the First Amendment by limiting it, which means to abolish it, and to allow free speech only by permission, not by right. Ends and means are always the same. The so-called ends never justify the means, because the means ARE always the end. They cannot be separated. You can’t force a free society to come into being by using tyranny to do so. And this is literally what Marxism always promises.

It promises some kind of withering away of the state, once communism has fulfilled its mission of equity and egalitarianism, or whatever other nonsensical whim of the day happens to catch their fancy.

But just listen to Kramer’s ridiculous justifications for limiting the First Amendment. And how interesting that he should begin by bringing up AI, artificial intelligence, which was the focus of our show last week, entitled Intelligently Artificial, and talk about an artificial argument.

AI is going to revolutionize cyber warfare from critical infrastructure to the fabric of society and politics, and undermining it, giving an unfair advantage to authoritarian governments against democratic countries, the First Amendment types. Wow, an unfair advantage to do what? And why would an authoritarian government have the advantage over a free government when that has never been the case on any kind of comparison?

And consider what all this means in light of Yuval Noah Harari’s threat that anything made of words will be taken over by AI, as he announced at the Davos World Economic Forum.

If China has a single narrative that protects its inner stability and the US allows for multiple narratives, it puts the US at an unfair advantage. That long term is going to cost the stability of the nation, argues Kramer, as if China is something to emulate. Obviously, Canada’s Justin Trudeau and Kramer would find a lot in common on this.

We need to control the platforms and all the social platforms. We need to stack rank the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online. Otherwise, it will lead to polarization of society and infighting.

Well, this is an utterly false and demonstrably disprovable assertion. When so-called infighting and disagreement is openly allowed, such societies invariably become more stable and more civilized, and certainly less racist and divisive.

And again, let me sound the bugle on this. Beware of anyone who tells you that polarization is a bad thing, especially since polarization goes a long way in helping to distinguish one thing from the other. The only people opposed to polarization are the ones whose evil would be exposed in the light of polarization.

And once again, let me remind everyone that Ayn Rand’s very first essay in the Ayn Rand letter, Volume 1, Number 1, October 1971, was entitled Credibility and Polarization. I quote:

Polarization is a term borrowed from physics. A dictionary defines polarity as the presence or manifestation of two opposite or contrasting principles or tendencies. Notice it’s two.

Transplanted from the realm of physics to the realm of social issues, this term means a situation in which men hold opposite or contrasting views or ideas, principles, and goals or values, tendencies.

When used as a pejorative, this means that men should not differ in their views, ideas, goals, and values, that such differences are evil and that men must not disagree.

In the absence of intellectual polarization, we are witnessing the growth of the ugliest kind of divisiveness or existential polarization, if you will, pressure group warfare. The country is splitting into dozens of blind, deaf, but screaming camps, each drawn together not by loyalty to an idea, but by the accident of race, age, sex, religious creed, or the frantic whim of a given moment, not by values held in common, but by a common hatred of some other group, not by choice, but by terror.

End quote.

And welcome to the world of 2026, as accurately described in 1971.

And when Kramer talks about objecting to polarization, he is literally telling us, as Ayn Rand warned so many years ago, that men must not disagree. So that’s his bottom line. No disagreement allowed, or to be more specific, no disagreeing with him allowed.

Then he goes on to explain that enterprises are buying more and more cybersecurity solutions, but they can’t afford all these solutions by themselves, so they’re looking for ways to deliver a more efficient consumption that drives the next generation of companies. Networks that are platforms and are able to deliver this extended need for security in an affordable way for enterprises.

Well, beyond blathering a bit like Mark Carney, the way Kramer framed this argument made me wonder what this possibly had to do with merely expressing one’s opinions or insights online, because why all this talk about a need for security? Oh yeah, COVID 2.0, yeah.

But this might make sense if you were talking about doing banking or financial transactions online, you’d want some security for that, but just for talking and writing? And what does it mean to deliver a more efficient consumption of information? Faster? Increased volumes?

I think the average human being is already getting his information efficiently enough, unless you might be referring to say high-def videos delivered in smaller files. But of course, none of this, in any way, relates to suspending the First Amendment in order to preserve it. That apparently is the point of urgency, because you know, polarization.

None of this makes any sense on its own merits. And Jimmy Dore incorrectly reacted that polarization is what the likes of Kramer want, when that is simply not the case. What Kramer wants is censorship and propaganda, not freedom of speech, which requires a polarized environment to allow for disagreement.

And Dore also misguidedly objected to Trump’s prohibiting of state regulation of AI. But Trump wasn’t regulating the people of those states, he was regulating their governments, the state governments themselves, to prevent them from brainwashing their residents and to make sure that everybody’s playing by the same rules.

Now, getting back to the comments of Sydney Watson, she was certainly on the mark in concluding that the whole ICE versus the violent mobs is a free speech issue. But to her credit, she also raised the fact that it also was a private property rights issue.

And while every individual has a fundamental right to freedom of speech, that doesn’t come with the freedom to violate other fundamental rights, such as life, liberty, and property.

But remember, communists and those on the left, like Karl Marx, advocate the abolishment of private property, along with establishing the fiction of public property.

Private property rights, if you think about it, are actually a personal version of national sovereignty. And just because you have a right to do something, doesn’t mean you have the freedom to do it wherever you want. I can’t just walk into your house and force you to listen to my take on left and right because I have a right to express myself.

Property rights are all about the right of exclusion. You can keep people out of your property. And that is why the left is all about inclusion. They don’t want anyone to obstruct them.

When I was a young kid, my mother used to tell me how her generation viewed its politicians of her time as socialists preaching, what is mine is mine, what is yours is mine. Still the same today.

So having a right to freedom of association and to freedom of speech also means having the right not to associate or not to listen to a speaker.

But when it comes to censorship, speakers are rarely the object. The real target of censorship is the listener, which brings us back to that unavoidable left and right binary, said Sydney Watson.

Although I am right wing or moderate right on a lot of issues, nothing can be right or wrong. Everything has to be politically bent and perceived in a way that fits with their particular tribe. And this encourages the behavior we saw from Don Lemon in the first place.

For all those saying this is an attack on journalistic liberties, it’s worth noting that situations like this have been common to those on the right, she says. And she’s right in more ways than one.

And when she lamented that nothing can be right or wrong, everything has to be politically bent, she was, knowingly or not, longing for the political polarity that could identify right from wrong.

So with that thought in mind, now let’s take a quick break for a smile, while on the return side of our upcoming bumper Natali Morris in conversation with Kurt Metzger, whose name looks a lot like mine but has a grrr on the end of it, talking about left and right in a way that only demonstrates each of them has no idea of what they speak. It’s a veritable train wreck, but not so unlike the political train wreck in which most people find themselves trapped.

Clip (Redacted – Natali Morris with Kurt Metzger, January 31, 2026)

Kurt Metzger:
Me personally, I’m pro-immigrant. How could I not be? It’s how I was able to be born in this country. But if I hang out with immigrants for too long, I’ll get a little republican in me. Only because immigrants who are the same race as you, when they find out you were born here, they’ll shame you for it. You’re on their side and they’ll shame you for it.

They split us up. They’d be like, oh, you were born here? Hmm. Must be nice. They’re like, so you’re not full-blooded, or they hit you with a, maybe you’ve had some struggle, but you’ll never understand what it is to be an immigrant.

Every time they’re giving me all that, I’m like, bro, go home.

Natali Morris:
Kurt Metzger is an acclaimed comedian and writer, one of my favorite independent voices in geopolitics. Not only does he have a measured take, but he usually has a funny take, which is needed. You nice to meet you. So how are you?

We’re talking in the beginning of January. We are one year into the Trump administration. We have more war than ever. We have more debt than ever. What did we think this week?

Kurt Metzger:
I voted to take Greenland. So what I voted for was to kidnap the president of Venezuela, and kidnap Greenland. So promises made, promises kept.

Natali Morris:
Exactly right. The thing is, our show sort of got going during the Biden administration, and that was so comical that we thought, well, can’t do any worse. And so we aligned ourselves.

Kurt Metzger:
And so I think that the American right really sees Redacted as a right wing show. And then the Trump administration part two got started and we have more war than ever. We have more debt. We have these distractions around ICE raids and things like that, which I don’t think are actually the agenda of the powerful. And so then people are confused like, wait, are we right or left? We’re neither really. And that is a weird place because it’s supposed to be unless you’re stupid.

Listen, unless you’re stupid, or you’re in on it, you should not be on right or left.

There’s my bench appear. I find like he goes, this large she is, you know, conspiracy. That used to be the left, but it wasn’t in the right. And the right needs to move away from conspiracies and the left. So that is get back in your pen every all the livestock back into your pens where you belong.

Jimmy, I’ll get upset when he sees like, because Rogues, everybody gets to get past left and right. He said that on one of his and you can tell who’s no good by who’s against that. It’s going to get real weird, man. And Greenland thing’s part of it. And the Venezuela thing is, oh, Professor Jang, have you had him yet?

Natali Morris:
No, I don’t think so.

Kurt Metzger:
On my show, he made this prediction. It’s not my prediction. It’s like, maybe, he said, he thinks that Maduro is a CIA asset the whole time from the previous administration. And Trump’s blown and he’s in on being kidnapped because they took him and his wife. I realized when I think about it, they took a bolt and he’s so Trump’s disrupting whatever that old opp was.

And this guy’s going to testify when they put him on trial that the DNC and the CIA and whoever else had, how’d Venezuela rig the 2020 election in some way?

Natali Morris:
You know, my experience is that I was left wing. And then when I started this show and had to do all the research for myself, because I was no longer in the mainstream media, I really began to detest the American left. I felt more comfortable among the right.

Now I do see that the right, a large faction of them are willing to criticize the Trump administration and the way the left will not do for their leaders. So I find that progress, but on war and government expansion, the two things that hurt America the most, they are aligned. They are the same. That’s why you only get two parties and they’ve done these studies when you only think in binary, your brain does less work. So it reserves energy. Human brains are very expensive.

Kurt Metzger:
Right. So I gotta eat a lot. Whenever I’m writing for a show, I’m eating carbs all day because I get tired, more tired from that than physical labor. Because it’s exhausting.

You have to think of this naturally through a partisan lens.

Natali Morris:
Let’s just use the example of the woman who was shot in Minneapolis by an ICE agent. And how two different parties were seeing this completely different. It was almost like one of those, if you see the woman’s shadow here, then your right brain or something, it was like a new practice.

Kurt Metzger:
That’s a very, well, and that’s why it’s set up that way.

Never mind that woman. That’s the one that’s made, that’s the paid influencers by ICE are pushing around. So all these things are the same. They’re all programming and that partisan thing you called it. That’s probably a nice secular way of talking about what I’m talking about. I gotta split your brain so that you can only see in either or except about gender. By the way, there’s a multiverse of gender. There’s only two parties and there’s only left and right, but gender could be…

So do you see the Psyop. You’re gonna sit there being confused about a thing that is binary. And then you’re gonna things that are complicated. You’re gonna go, are you left or are you loyal to MAGA? I watch imbeciles say this.

So it’s not am I, I was never loyal to Trump. He is supposed to be loyal to me, the voter.

So you see how they flinch you so quickly. And now you have, oh, there’s a rift within the right. No, a bunch of people aren’t getting the promises kept that they needed to survive. So they don’t have nothing really to do with left or right. MAGA is not really a thing. The important part of it was nobody can buy a house or healthcare.

Natali Morris:
Now, how do you talk to normies?

Kurt Metzger:
Okay. Now I noticed that sort of leftist friends have noticed that I am disgruntled with the Trump administration, even though I stood against the Democrats. And so they’re like, Oh, well, then we’re aligned.

Natali Morris:
Yeah. Then we’re aligned now because you’re seeing this and I’m like, well, yeah, this is like Obama’s kill Tuesdays. Every Tuesday.

Kurt Metzger:
This is not pleasant. Well, I’m a clown for a living. So it’s not like I start out respected. I don’t have no respectability to lose. So I don’t care. And you don’t have to be smart. I’m not very smart. It took me 20 years for it to dawn on me. A lot of stuff that should have dawned on me right then, such as at 9/11, when we went to Iraq and I was like, shut up, we have to go.

Couldn’t trauma mind control. All the things you mentioned before about the stupid leftism, it’s an agenda just like everything else, just like Occupy Wall Street, when people that I never liked, I was on their side, because of how bad Wall Street screwed up. I saw these dirty hippies hitting drums. I hope those guys jump out the windows of their buildings in depression from hearing and smelling them. I hope they die because of it.

So now I’m sympathizing with the hippies. Can’t have that. Now we’ve got identity politics back.

Natali Morris:
Very sad days. I just want some of the stick their principles and not switch.

Kurt Metzger:
Yeah. And like if you have the principle, you have them, they really have nothing to do with a left or right at all.

Bob Metz:
Right. No, wrong. So very, very wrong. And so very indicative of why the left continues to win the political war against the right.

But before continuing, I do have to make the following observation. One of the most disturbing parts of Kurt Metzger’s conversation with Natali Morris was not played on our selection today, because it had nothing to do with politics, but with how each of them was raised as a Jehovah’s Witness. And each seemed to interpret it as a cult from which they escaped in their early twenties.

Now I didn’t know that about either of them. And quite frankly, I didn’t understand most of what they were talking about or the people they were referring to. But it occurred to me from what they were saying that they were severely traumatized by the experience. Hence Metzger’s constant reference to terms like trauma mind control, or all these things are programming phrases he used in reference to his religious upbringing.

So with that basic understanding in the background and as a possible source of their political views and cynicism, all that aside, you know what’s so funny about all of this? The only people who say, forget about left and right, are people on the right. Although they’re usually unaware of their own political polarity. You’ll never hear a person on the left talk like that.

To a lefty, these labels are a powerful weapon that those on the right allow themselves to be destroyed by because they run for the hills whenever the left accuses them of being something like right wing or extreme right or alt right or fascist right. And these are all extremely effective weapons to use against the right. The right is denying its own identity.

Do you see the irony here? Neither Natali Morris nor Kurt Metzger have expressed a single statement that would suggest they know a single thing about what left and right represent. Never once did they offer a definition of either term. They simply dismissed them outright as if that was something to be proud of.

Are we right or left? We’re neither really and that’s a weird place because that’s where you’re supposed to be unless you’re stupid. And just what weird place are you actually in when you reject the only two possible places open to you? It’s political non-existence.

And if you say the center or middle of the road, well, what is it you’re in the center of? Well, apparently two stupid options according to Metzger. And that’s too stupid, no matter how you spell the word too. Just another manifestation of the fake political spectrum.

Now, Metzger pointed out how Jimmy Dore always gets upset and asks when will the world see beyond left and right? And then he says that you can tell who’s no good by who goes against that. Beyond left and right? Where the hell is that?

To say that you reject the right polarity is to say that you reject freedom and capitalism. To say that you reject the left polarity is to say that you reject tyranny and collectivism. So according to Metzger, I’m no good because I’m just right on the side of freedom and capitalism.

What both Metzger and Morris failed to understand is that all of the left and right policies they observed to be the same are all on the left. They’re confusing political labels like conservatism and democrat and republican and maga with the terms left and right when these are not the same categories, even though they are related. Left and right pertain to ideas and ideologies only. Political parties and other movements pertain to people who themselves usually don’t know what left and right are.

Which raises another interesting but very wrong observation made by Metzger. All of these things are programming. A partisan split, you call it. That’s probably a nice secular way of talking about what I’m talking about. I got to split your brain so that you can only see an either or, he says. And even when programmed to see an either or, Metzger still does not see it. The political binary.

And the irony is that the last thing dictators and totalitarians want the public to see is that binary of either or. Remember what we just heard from Israeli billionaire Shlomo Kramer who was terrified at the prospect of polarization.

I wonder if Metzger was really relating to his religious upbringing where everything was presented to him as a moral imperative as an either or because in the world of politics this is not how issues were presented. In fact when it comes to politics most of us were taught not to see the binary but to see a spectrum and to think in terms of left and right wings. With two ideologies of the left at both ends of the spectrum. Communism on the left and fascism on the right. That was no binary, that was a singularity.

In my case I had to train myself to see the binary which after doing I realized should have been as obvious in politics as it is in gender sexuality.

And as Natali Morris explained my experience is I started left wing and when I began to do my own research I began to detest the American left and felt more comfortable among the right. Now I see that a large part of the right are willing to criticize Trump in a way that the left will not do for their leaders she says.

Now that’s a very honest observation and it’s another testament to the oft-repeated bromide. You know if you’re not a communist at age 20 you haven’t got a heart. If you’re still a communist at age 30 you haven’t got a brain.

The process of moving from left to right is one of political maturity from the emotional and unrestrained to the rational and disciplined and that is why so many people on the right like myself generally see Natali’s show Redacted as a show with a perspective coming from the right.

Now here’s another one of those democratic myths that so many people believe. I was never loyal to Trump he’s supposed to be loyal to me the voter.

Well how naive can you get? Has Kurt ever thought that through? Does he actually believe that he’s the only voter out there he’s talking like it?

Now take any two voters and let’s assume that they both voted for Trump but their reasons for doing so might be over something completely unrelated to the major issues and to each other. One might want abortions banned or restricted the other might want abortion free on demand or doesn’t care one way or the other. To which of those two should Trump be loyal and on what possible grounds?

Many voters want Trump to remove illegal aliens from the country. Many want a wide open border to which should Trump be loyal.

Now if you’re going to say well to the majority well then you’ve got the process backwards. Trump has already earned his majority meaning that they’re supporting him irrespective of any unconditional loyalties.

Now voting on domestic issues is one thing but with respect to matters of foreign policy bear in mind that the American voter and his government are not the sole player in that game. External forces are at play that you just can’t domestically vote away overnight just because you want to end wars doesn’t mean you can simply lay down your arms and wait till an enemy attacks especially when the foreign enemy is already attacking from within.

Trump does not have to be loyal to Kurt Metzger. Trump has to act according to what he thinks is right and to betray his own principles just to placate some disloyal supporter is the worst thing you’d want a country’s leader to do and in the end if most voters continue to agree with him they’ll give him another majority.

For voters their loyalties must be exercised through the political process an unavoidably binary one given how the electoral process must operate and of course paper ballots with only citizens voting is critical to any such legitimate process.

But says Metzger when you only get two parties and they’ve done these studies you only think in binary your brain does less work so it preserves human energy. Well that’s an interesting argument but it’s totally incorrect we do not think in binary we choose in a given binary and it doesn’t matter how many actual physical political parties or candidates are on a given ballot and the reason you only get two parties is because that’s what the voters are choosing but the binary of Democrat Republican is not necessarily consistent with the binary of left and right on that scale both parties sit predominantly on the left which is why so many people refer to them as the uniparty.

So remember everything that we’ve discussed today was about some kind of conflict related to the political polarities of left and right.

True left and right are symbolic abstractions that are made necessary by the natural political polarity of any voting process. Properly understood identifying with left and right is the means by which large masses of people can unite under some kind of basic common principles and without these labels no such unity is possible.

For example freedom of speech is a principle of the right censorship is a principle of the left terrorism and violence are tactics of the left restoring law and order through the use of objective force are tactics of the right and it bears keeping in mind that as representative political ideologies left and right represent fixed positions not merely directions in which to turn so in a political context to say that one is turning left or rightward often expressed as left leaning or right leaning is to suggest that they are heading towards either of those two fixed points and that always boils down to a binary option no matter how many political options and political nuances present themselves along the way and just guess which of those two points will be heading towards when you join us again next week as we continue our journey in the right direction and until then be right stay right do right act right think right and be right back here we’ll see you then.

Clip (Alex Assoune – Comics Roasting Immigrants, December 22, 2025)

Comedian:
The governor of California wants to swear in illegal immigrants as police officers can you imagine getting pulled over by an illegal alien. Do you have a driver license? No? Oh. Me too.