Big News, Old News, Confusing News: A 2 Week Review
March 26, 2025
Host: Hon. Sam Rohrer
Guest: Leo Hohmann
Note: This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program aired on 3/26/25. To listen to the podcast, click HERE.
Disclaimer: While reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate transcription, the following is a representation of a mechanical transcription and as such, may not be a word for word transcript. Please listen to the audio version for any questions concerning the following dialogue.
Sam Rohrer:
Hello and welcome to this Wednesday edition of Stand In the Gap Today and today I’m glad to invite back Leo Hohmann, author, researcher, independent investigative journalist, and author of the 2017 book, stealth Invasion. He’s not a stranger to this program, as you know, so glad to have him back, but since he was with me just two weeks ago, so much has happened and continued to unfold here at home in America and also around the world. You just can’t keep up with it all. As I’ve said many times, and I said during the month of January, I know just looking ahead into this year, even prior to the inauguration of Donald Trump at that point, at the end of January, I said that one thing I knew for certain was that we were entering a time of major change and transition. In addition, the other thing I said we knew for certain was that the days ahead in 2025 would be uncertain because of the enormity of the change and the unpredictability of so many factors totally outside the ability of any one person or persons to control.
What was unknown then was just how accurate that was. And I wasn’t the only one who said that many was, and certainly Leo’s with me today, we certainly anticipated. But the volume was, I would say from my perspective, not anticipated, the Blitz Creek of executive orders, the actions of Doge, the threats of economic sanctions and tariffs on literally all nations, enemy nations as well as allied nations is literally astonishing in scope. And that being, not just that just said, since Leah was with me last again two weeks ago, he’s been very busy. He’s written at least six investigative articles on significant policy initiatives or statements made not directed at the president, but it’s coming out of that in some respect because it’s impacting the entire world. And you can find all of his articles on Leo hohmann.substack.com, and I’m going to refer to them as we go through the program today. But if you would access that, you would be able to see and read all of them in their entirety. I would encourage you to do that. So the title I’ve chosen for today’s program is this Big News, old News, confusing News, a two week review, and we’re going to take and go walk right down through the articles. Leo, you have written, and thanks for being on board. Again.
Leo Hohmann:
Thank you for having me back, Sam, a lot to take in over the last couple of weeks.
Sam Rohrer:
I’ve complimented you before on being so robust in your writing, and I think you’ve come back and said, yeah, the problem is what you choose not to write about because there’s so much. But one of the things you wrote about, I’m going to start back and just kind of walk down through the list of some of these that you’ve written in these last couple of weeks, but on March 6th, you wrote an article entitled, Trump Says the US is taking back the Panama Canal, but is that really true, intriguing title you wrote in the first paragraph of that article, Donald Trump pledged on day one to retake the Panama Canal peacefully or with force, whatever it takes, we’re taking it back then within days, according to Bloomberg News, Larry Fink of BlackRock Investments was on the phone with the White House. Now, as far as the White House is concerned, seems to me the Panama Canal is once again US controlled it’s mission accomplished and now old news. But as you stated in your headline, is that really true? Here’s my question, relate what happened with the Panama Canal who may own it. I say that may because I think that’s the case who may own it and why the US actually may not be in control of it.
Leo Hohmann:
Absolutely. It has been under the ownership and control of a Hong Kong based company, Sam called Hutchinson, AK Hutchinson. And as we know, Hong Kong is under the direct control of communist China, the mainland. And so people have said that Oak China is running the Panama Canal. And to an extent that is correct because it was this Hong Kong based private entity, private that owned it. And we know that all major corporations like that in China and Hong Kong are controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. And so Trump made a big deal out of that in his pre-election campaign stance saying, China, China, China runs this thing and we need to take it back. And so I think a lot of people envisioned some sort of military operation or in lieu of military operation, the threat of that and then somehow it coming back into US ownership. Well, that has not been the case.
The US government didn’t own the Panama Canal before Donald Trump took office, and the US government does not own it now, even though the US government did at one time own it and actually built it at the cost of, as President Trump points out at the cost of many lives, hundreds of men lost their lives building that Americans. But now it is owned by a transnational corporation, transnational being the key word called BlackRock. It’s the world’s largest asset management company with something like $9 trillion in its portfolio. Now, who is BlackRock? Not only are they big, they’re very influential. The CEO is a gentleman named Larry Fink, FINK. Larry Fink is a globalist of the first degree to the extent Sam, that he even sits on the board of trustees at the World Economic Forum and is one of the main movers and shakers at Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum, which we know what they’re all about, depopulation, surveillance, society, big tech being in control and surveilling everything with artificial intelligence, even transhumanism where they’ve called outright for humanity 2.0 where we will digitize every human being, have a digital biometric, digital id. We won’t be able to go or travel anywhere without having it. And eventually, I believe we won’t be able to buy or sell according to Revelation chapter 13 without this digital id. This is Larry Fink, and this is the man who’s now in charge of the canal. And by the way, he also is very tied in closely with China and is really transnational in his outlook on the world,
Sam Rohrer:
And I wanted to bring out that connection and you made it. He is tight with China. BlackRock has been very tight with China, so it’s kind of like, all right, what did we actually get? Now I see in this, according to it was a Fox News article that in the purchase that BlackRock made, it’s saying that he has also as a part of this, seeking controlling interest in 43 other ports in 23 other countries, which tells me that it’s not about the Panama Canal, it’s about controlling of global shipments, but you’re not controlled by the United States. Ladies and gentlemen, this guy’s tied in with China and the World Economic Forum. So Leo, your article was quite right, a sale, but frankly not really a sale. And is the US really in control? I don’t think so. We’ll Quebec, and we’re going to go to another part of the world.
Ladies and Gentlemen, stay with us. Well, if you’re just joining us today, thanks for being on board. This is our Wednesday stand in the gap today program. Our theme today is big news, old news, confusing news, a two week review, and you say a two week review of what? Well, it’s a two week review of what’s happened since the last time I’ve had my guest on who’s with me today, Leo Hohmann, and basically walking down through and looking at articles that he’s written since the last time that he was here, all on major themes, all of which if you’re looking and aware of what’s taking place, all of these things are headline related, which is really why I like to have you on Leo among other. But with that, let’s move to another, because another area where Donald Trump said that if he would have been in office instead of Joe Biden, that a war would’ve never happened.
That’s obviously Russia, Ukraine, he said that he, well, he also said about Israel too, but we’re talking Russia, Ukraine now, but he said that he would bring quick resolve Now on March the 18th, just about a week ago yesterday, Donald Trump, the president, did call Russian President Putin. The call highly promoted and its results were greatly anticipated from March 6th or so though, when the meeting was announced, you wrote three articles on major changes that were big news based on either the president’s statements to European leaders or Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. And then to rush himself on March 18th point being that there were a lot of things leading up to this long awaited meeting between the president and Vladimir Putin. And so we’re going to wrap these together. But in that article on the March 18th, it was in the afternoon of the Trump Putin call. You did your article very timely, very good, which is why I encourage people to go to your site and get these, but you said, no ceasefire deal comes out of Crump Putin talks, but here’s what they did agree on.
Alright, now we’re going to end up there. Let’s go back to March 6th, the article. Then you entitled, amid Talks of Peace, the pale horse of Revelation appears ready to make its bloody ride through Europe and the world. I subtitle, both Western and Russian leaders are openly engaging in a war of words, each accusing the other opposing a threat to the post-World War II established order. Alright, so that sets it up perfectly. Give a brief recap. First of all, that first article, who was involved in this War of words? Give some examples and the likely reason for doing so, which I think clearly played into the days leading up to the Trump Putin phone call.
Leo Hohmann:
Yeah, I think this segment of your program really is the one that fits your title of the overall program spot on, where you talk about big news, old news, confusing news because with every, you can get lost in the weeds when we get into this conversation about Russia and Ukraine, if we focus on each little turn of the screw and the verbose language back and forth between the Russians and the Western powers. But I think we need to take a look at history to fully understand what’s going on, and that will remove some of the confusing news that can happen day to day. Basically, we’ve got the UK under Starr and France under President Emmanuel Macron really ramping up their rhetoric against Russia. They’re talking about forming a European army in the absence of the United States, and they need to confront Russia, continue to support Ukraine wholeheartedly with military support, and they want to even put boots on the ground.
Starr and Macron have both talked about putting British and French troops on the ground in Ukraine, but they also, as Starr noted, know that that can’t really be successful unless the United States is backing it. Well, Trump keeps hinting that he’s not in favor of that and is taking Putin’s side on that particular part of the peace talks. No Western troops on the ground in Ukraine. But if you look at history, it is repeating itself. It’s amazing how history repeats itself. Both the uk, Britain and France actually fought Russia in 1854 to 1856 in what was called the Crimean War. And what were they fighting over? Russia’s access to a warm water port in Crimea? Well, Putin annex Crimea, it was under Russian ownership back in the late 17 hundreds under Catherine the Great and so on and off, it has been under Russian control. He annexed it again once again in 2014.
This is what this war in Ukraine is really over stopping Russia from getting access to a warm water port and without a warm water port Russia is a second rate power. It will never be a great power. And the West knows that without Crimea, that’s what they’re fighting over. And so we may end up with a temporary piece. Donald Trump is working for a ceasefire. I predict we will get one, but the question is how long will it last? I think it is only going to be temporary and that Europe, predominantly Britain and France are going to use that ceasefire to build up their European army that they have talked about and want so badly in order to confront the Russian bear.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, and I’m just going to leave it right there. I could follow up with a lot of things, but let’s move into it. I think that’s a great summation, a great parallel to be made. History repeats itself. We just can’t get away from that. Let’s go to the next one. Five days after that, March 11th, you wrote another article based on, again, a headline news event regarding this issue there. And you said this Russian MP member of Parliament, a Russian MP, urges Putin to launch hypersonic missiles against Kiev capital of Ukraine against the Kiev regime following deadly Ukrainian drone attack on civilians in Moscow. So if people are listening to us, these things did happen. Now your subpoint was this Kyiv launches biggest drone attack yet on Russian territory as the war continues to spiral out of control and defiance of Trump’s deal making powers. Now here’s the question. What was the thrust of this article and how did the Russian statement factor into the developing narrative? I think perhaps on March 18th, because leading up to this thing, it was very, very hopeful. Ukraine’s agreed to stop, and then Russia’s agreed to stop. And then lo and behold, bang, things happened. What happened? Yeah,
Leo Hohmann:
The thrust of this article, Sam, yeah, they sure have happened. The thrust of this article was basically to point out that this is not the 1850s, and this is certainly not 1854 Russia. Russia now is in possession of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, and it also has hypersonic technology outpacing even the United States ability to deploy hypersonic missiles, which are much faster and much more maneuverable than traditional ballistic missiles. They’re impossible to shoot down. The west has no defense against these hypersonic missiles. And yet you have Western powers, particularly as I mentioned, Britain and France, engaging in basically playing with fire, engaging in high risk diplomacy, diplomacy, challenging Russia, making inflammatory statements, accusing them of things that they have no proof of. They want to take over all of Europe. And basically, like I said, acting like we’re in the 1850s and we’re just dealing with a traditional military power here.
No, we are dealing with a country that has the ability to take out London, take out Paris, take out Berlin, and engulf them in flames and utterly destroy them within 20 minutes, 20 minutes from the time of launch to the time of total destruction. And so I believe the Western powers, especially those in London and Paris, but the Germans haven’t been a whole lot better, are acting recklessly right now in propagating these lies against Russia trying to get their populations in the mood to go to war with Russia by continuously pounding these inflammatory attacks against Putin, saying that he wants to take all of Europe. There is no evidence of that. He’s never stated that. And the only, he’s been very strategic in what he has taken, meaning Crimea, which I already spoke about, the significance of that and the warm water port and three or four western far eastern provinces of Ukraine, which are populated by 70% or more Russian speakers.
Sam Rohrer:
Before we finish here,
Leo Hohmann:
He needs,
Sam Rohrer:
Before we finish on that, let’s add, so the final was no ceasefire deal comes out of Putin. Trump talks, you did allude to it. What do you think is actually going to come out of that meeting? Are we going to see a piece you thought it may be short-lived, but just a little bit more explanation?
Leo Hohmann:
Well, since then they’ve come to quote what they’re calling partial ceasefires. They’ve agreed not to attack each other’s energy infrastructure, which that’s already been violated at least once by each side. And now just yesterday, they’ve agreed to not attack each other’s ships and other countries ships in the Black Sea. And because of this, Ukraine can now restart its grain shipments to Africa and other countries where it was selling grain. And so it seems like it’s a drip, drip, drip. We haven’t had a general overall ceasefire, but we are getting these partial ceasefires and I do believe we will come to overall ceasefire soon,
Sam Rohrer:
But
Leo Hohmann:
It will not last
Sam Rohrer:
Forever. Okay. Alright. And with that, ladies and gentlemen, stay with us. We’re going to move into the next segment with another article, but an issue that happened yesterday involving the president and King Charles. Okay, we’re midpoint in our program right now. Again, if you’re just joining us, welcome aboard. Leo Hohmann, author, researcher, independent investigative journalist, is my guest again, and he has a website, Leo Hohmann. There’s two Ns in his name, Leo Hohmann.substack.com, and there you’ll find all of his articles. He is independent, which means he’s not controlled by some larger flow of dollars, and that also means that it’s helpful if you subscribe to him. And there are some places information is given that you can trust very few. His is one of them. Most of them you have to have a really big filter on. But that being the case, I’m going to move on here.
Just two days ago, Leo connected to the announcement of a state visit by President Trump to the United Kingdom. I think it was on invitation of King Charles. There an amazing invitation from King Charles. A lot of folks, if you’re listening, you may not have heard this, but listen to me, this is pretty amazing and we’re going to give some discussion about this, but King Charles extended an invitation to President Trump, but it was really to the United States, and it was an invitation inviting the United States to join, to join the British Commonwealth of Nations. Did you know that there was such a thing? There is the British Commonwealth of Nations to join as an associate member, whatever that means. And by so doing it would become the 57th Nation in what’s referred to as the British Commonwealth of Nations. Now, what is that? Well, the British Commonwealth of Nations effectively is a reflection of the former, these are my words, of the former global footprint of the once globally dominant British empire.
When they were dominant around the world, it was said that they were the only empire upon which the sun would never set. You got the idea. So that being the case, that’s where the invitation went. Leo, in your article you just wrote, you entitled it, and it was just literally a day ago you wrote this, Trump makes astonishing statement about us joining British Commonwealth of Nations as associate member. And then you went on a subpoint under that by itself. This comment could be dismissed as mere trolling, but taken in context with other comments about Canada, some believe that we should take Trump at his word, and then he went on to say, finish it. There is also then the Curtis Arvin factor. A lot of people have no idea what that means. We’ll get into that. So from your further investigation, Leo, just exactly what is King Charles’s invitation for the US to join this British commonwealth of nations? Is it to be taken seriously or perhaps of a similar nature to Trump inviting Canada to become the US 51st state? Is this all just a big joke or how are you looking at it?
Leo Hohmann:
Yeah, I don’t see it as a very funny if it is, and there’s no way to know for sure because of the nature of Trump. He says a lot of off the wall things. He once said that he loved Kim Jong-un, the dictator of North Korea. So you just never know exactly what his intentions are. But he did tweet out or put on truth social, I love King Charles. Sounds good to me about the offer made to him by the king that the United States should join the British Commonwealth of Nations as an associate member. Canada is a full member, meaning in at least a ceremonial sense, they consider the King of England to be the ceremonial head of state, even though he’s not directly involved in any of their government functioning. So what is going on here? I do think we should take it seriously. The question is, is it impending in any sense that it’s, it is going to happen anytime soon?
No, I don’t think so. But we do know that the Bible warns of a restored, resuscitated European empire coming together in the end times, how do we know that that isn’t what is going on here and that it’s something that could take shape over a period of years, perhaps in the aftermath of a major war? World War iii, world Wars tend to make things that sound impossible into reality. Maps are redrawn after world wars, things that ordinarily don’t happen. Governments are changed, maps are redrawn, and we do know that we are on a trajectory towards World War iii. The only question is how imminent is it? I think that it’s going to happen possibly on Trump’s watch, meaning over the next three or four years, possibly over the next one or two years. But I think Europe is trying to reestablish itself. We’ve already covered that earlier in the show, talking about building a European army, and now we’re hearing about the King wanting to expand his reach and include another superpower, the United States in the Commonwealth of Nations.
And Trump at the same time is talking about incorporating Canada’s the 51st state and also taking Greenland, which is rich in natural resources and strategically located. And he was just, again, today Trump President Trump talking about the necessity that we must have, Greenland, we must have it, he said, for the security and safety, not only of the United States, but of the world. So he is thinking in a global sense. People say Trump is not a globalist, that’s false. He just wants the United States to have the head seat at the table of the coming global empire, whereas Biden and Harris and those want the United States to take a backseat to China and some other countries. So this is what I believe is going on. It’s not going to flesh out in the next week or month or two. I think it’s going to take a few years, but we are going to see the emergence of a new European empire and exactly the United States role in that empire is yet to be seen. I think it will be determined by the outcome of World War iii.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, I think that’s a good point, and again, ladies and gentlemen, we comment on things like this because this is headline news. It is a major statement as an example, made by a head of the empire. He’s the king, king Charles. And yes, it has moved to more ceremonial over time, but it is nonetheless foundational. And what was the world’s largest sprawling empire, the British Empire. And we did come out of that. And even from a Prophetical perspective, Leo, there have some have suggested that when the scripture refers to the lion in its cubs that we are a cub of England, of the lion of England, and may that fit together. I don’t know, but transition and change, but we started this about is the time that we are in and that is what’s unfolding before us. It’s worthy of note. I think we’ll find that probably a little bit more when the President actually visits. I would suspect that something would further come out of that. Ladies and gentle, we’ll bring you back up to date at that point. Okay, just because of time here. I’ve got to go here. In your subtitle, you threw in this line that I think is worthy of discussion. I don’t have enough time for all of it, but at least mention it. You then conclude by saying, and then there’s the Curtis Jarvin factor. Who is Curtis and what is that all about?
Leo Hohmann:
Yeah, that is a real interesting rabbit hole that would probably take up a whole show to adequately cover. But just briefly, Curtis Jarvin is a young technocrat who came out of Silicone Valley. I think he’s in his, maybe his mid forties. He is a close associate of Peter Thiel, the billionaire tech bro, Peter Thiel, who personally financed the JD Vance Senate campaign and is one of the biggest financial bankers of the Trump Vance ticket in 2024. And Peter Thiel is a well-known technocrat. He was one of what they call the PayPal Mafia, a group of tech people who founded PayPal and went on to start many other tech companies after that. And Curtis Jarvin, he’s very wealthy in his own right, but I don’t know if he’s a billionaire. He is more instead of on the financial side, he is more on the philosophical side of the technocratic technocracy movement.
He’s the brains behind the movement right now. He’s been mentioned in speeches by JD Vance and he’s best friends with Peter Thiel. Like I said, Peter Thiel founded a company called Paler in the wake of the Iraq invasion, the US Iraq invasion of Iraq in 2003. The only major client of paler is guess what? For years it has been the CIA. So this is a gentleman, Peter Thiel, who’s very well connected, very wealthy, and one of his surrogates is Curtis Jarvin. Curtis Jarvin has come out in favor of saying he’s come right out and said democracy is not something that we should strive for. Democracies always end badly that we should strive for a techno monarchy and run the country like a corporation with two CEOs at the head of it and forget the politicians, the pretense of elected leaders. Just turn everything over to a couple of technocrats who would run everything in the United States according to how they see fit, and for the benefit of the richest and the wealthy among us. This is a techno monarchy, as he calls it, in place of our current constitutional republic.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, so Leo, as you said, we could spend more time than we have right now. Maybe we’ll come back and revisit this because this fellow Curtis Jarvin is not going to disappear. He is actually emerging into this whole discussion about British Commonwealth and all of that. Lisa will come back and we’ll conclude in just a minute. Well, as we go into our final segment here. Now just a reminder again, this program today, I’ve referred to a number of articles of entitled as Big News, old News, confusing News, a two week review. The reason for that is simply because as we said at the beginning, there is simply so much happening, so many changes occurring, so many international and global events pending. There are too many things to write about. And so I try to cover headline news here, and I think with the Lord’s help for sure, we have some of the very most reliable and consistent guest of which one today is Leo Hohmann.
And it’s always a pleasure to have him on, but I always like to encourage those of you listen when we have guests that if you have interest, I’m encourage you participate and check into them. Now, in Leo’s case, he has a website at Leo Hohmann two n’s, Leo Hohmann.substack.com, where all of his articles can be brought up very quickly and followed. Now, I know some of you may not have internet, so that’s understandable. But for those of you who do, you can find it very, very quickly and you can then see these articles. Many of the things I’ve referred to, we’ve talked about briefly today from the President and King Charles, the invitation to join the British Commonwealth of Nations, for example, or the Trump Putin discussion on the phone. The fact that there’s no ceasefire, but maybe something will happen. What’s happening in Europe, the developing of a new army and the rise, what clearly appears to be a strong effort to resurrect the old European government of some type that the scripture would refer to that that appears to be happening.
There are more in these articles than we just touched on. That’s why if you get ahold of them, you can do it. And then this program again, and all of those that we have, you can find all of these and you can get the transcript immediately available on our website, stand in the gap radio.com or on the app. And I would encourage you to get that. And it’s easy then to take and forward the program to a friend. And that is certainly if you have friends, I hope you do. And if you are a real friend, you will forward the program to them because they will also benefit. Now, Leo, let’s move into this just as another area. We could expand on all of them that we’ve mentioned. However, you had another article March 19th that I just want to bring up as part of what you’ve produced in the last couple of weeks, and very few have written on this, but you’ve entitled it, political Violence on the Rise Across America as the Left, and then wtts swats reporters in conservative media.
Then your subpoint, which I like the way you do that, you say The pressure cooker is heating up with several brazen attacks on conservative news reporters in recent weeks amid calls for Trump administration to do something to stop the aggression from the left. Now, some may have heard about some of the actions that are taking place out there with Tesla dealerships and so forth, and you may want to put that into it, but what did you write about in this and these matters of domestic violence not getting due attention? I mean, I think they’re not getting very much attention at all. Talk to us about it.
Leo Hohmann:
Yeah, well, certainly the mainstream media is not going to mention it because they’re not coming under attack. It’s always the left that tends to get violent in this country. And we’re seeing that play out once again with these attacks on Tesla dealerships, Tesla showrooms, Tesla charging stations, even private owners of Tesla cars have had their cars defaced, vandalized. Molotov cocktails have been used against some of the Tesla dealerships. Very, very violent and outrageous behavior on behalf of the leftists in this country. And that’s not going to be reported on in any detail or in any front page impact by the mainstream corporate media. The targets also, and Pam Bondi has come out and made a lot of strong statements about this violence against Tesla, which the left is targeting Tesla because it’s owned by Elon Musk. And Elon Musk is apparently just a more squishy, easily reachable target than President Trump who they really hate.
And so they see Musk as an extension of Trump, and it’s easier to attack him because he has these properties all over the country in the form of Tesla dealerships. And Pam Bondi has said that she’s going to punish these people to the full extent of the law, not just the foot soldiers who are carrying out of the attacks, but also those who are funding the attacks. And she has put less emphasis on the swatting of conservative media journalists. I think she did mention it once, but she hasn’t come out and made any high profile arrests.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay. Alright. Let me ask you this and then go further with it. She has designated these going after Tesla as domestic terrorists that will put it into a different category, able to be prosecuted. But at this juncture, not a lot seems to be happening on that, just supporting your point. But you talk about swatting, what does that mean? People say, what does that mean? Like a fly swatter and reporters then finish this thing out here now on that.
Leo Hohmann:
Yeah. Swatting is the remarkable situation where somebody will call the police or nine one one and say that Leo Hohmann is holed up in his house and he’s got a bunch of guns and ammunition and he’s threatening to kill his family, or he’s threatening to commit, do some sort of murder suicide attack. And so the police would all flock with their SWAT team to Leo Hohmann’s house, or it could be Sam Rohrer or whoever in the conservative media. And they think that they need to get into that house to save somebody or save us from killing ourselves. And so they come with their SWAT team, they bash down the door, and you are inside not knowing what’s going on. You’ve been swatted, and this is a backhanded way of, in some ways murdering people because the police could kill you or you could shoot at the police.
There’s any number of catastrophic outcomes that could come out of some situation like this when someone gets swatted by a SWAT team based on fraudulent information. And so she says, Pam, Pam Bondi said, we have the ability to trace these calls and find out who’s doing this well, why hasn’t she done it? Nobody has been arrested so far that I’m aware of for calling the police and swatting these conservative journalists. It’s happened to two people from Infowars. It’s happened to Joe PAGs, who’s also in Texas in the San Antonio area. He’s a radio talk show host on the conservative side, and so it’s a real danger, Sam, for all of us.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay. That brings us up pretty close to the end. So this would just be an example of it. Is there anything else that you’ve found out? I mean, the swatting is one thing, these Tesla dealership. Is there anything that you have seen that kind of is into this category that you didn’t write about?
Leo Hohmann:
Well, one gentleman for Infowars, his name is Jamie White. He was actually murdered a couple of weeks ago outside of his apartment. It was set up at least it looked like it could have been a car break in a robbery of some sort. But who knows what really happened there. We only know that he went out to confront the person who was breaking into his car and the person killed him. So that could have been a politically motivated thing to make it look like it was just a robbery we don’t know yet. But yeah, I think it’s a real danger. And there’s been other people. We know that there are dark forces within our government.
Sam Rohrer:
We do. And with that, Leo, we’re just out of time. Sorry. Sorry. If we could go on much further. Thanks so much for being with us here again today. Leo Hohmann.substack.com is his website. Our website obviously stand on the gap radio.com. Thank you for being with us today. Plan on joining with me now tomorrow, constitutional attorney, David New will be with me. We’ve yet to finally decide the exact theme we’re going to narrow on, but be with us. We’ll cover something regarding the Constitution.
Recent Comments