Posobiec said that what's going on is that "the federal government is setting themselves up not only as the arbiter of truth, through the disinformation censorship complex, but also now through courtrooms, by doing this through the judicial system."
"It's also essentially criminalizing dissent if we allow this to continue. Is that basically what your theory is?"
"Yes, and really, it's not a theory," Beattie replied. "It's an obvious conclusion from a careful look at the charging documents, not only against Trump, but as people will see when they go to Revolver News and read the whole piece, which is right on top, it's also reflected on the civil side in none other than Ray Epps' lawsuit against Fox News for Tucker and me."
Beattie said there are two components: "The first component is, it's clear that the indictment against Trump here is about criminalizing his so-called election denial."
The indictment, Beattie said, made it "very plain that their real complaint with him is that he denied the official account of the 2020 election, but not only denied it, which in any context is First Amendment protected speech," the Department of Justice says "Trump knowingly lied. Not only did he say what they object to, but they claim, you know, arrogating to themselves the power to read his mind effectively, which is the only way you could really say that he lied. But they maintain he lied, and they say that over and over again, knowingly lied, knowingly lied, knowingly lied, which raises the question: How would they presume to know that he lied? Well, they can't."
Because they can't read into Trump's mind using technology like Neuralink, "they have to make an inference that he's lying," Beattie said. "And here's where it really gets dark. And frankly, it really gets ridiculous."
"They say basically, they can't say for sure that he lied, but they say he must be lying because he heard the correct view presented to him by authoritative voices who were, quote, in a position to know the facts. Now here's where it really gets amazing. When I tell you who these authoritative voices are, who are so unimpeachably correct, just by definition, that for them to tell you something is tantamount to you believing it. And if you stray away from what they told you, you must be lying because deep down you know they're so authoritative, they must be right."
These authoritative voices, Beattie said, include then-Vice President Mike Pence, a "dork, loser, scum," senior leaders of the Justice Department, "snakes who have been working to sabotage Trump from day one," the director of national intelligence, a "spook, fake position to begin with," Department of Homeland Security's cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, "Now this one is the gold mine. This one is the gold mine. It's one thing to invoke Pence, senior Justice Department people, and Director of National Intelligence, all worthless, all hacks, and say these people are so authoritative you have to believe them, otherwise you must be lying."
"But for them to invoke the Department of Homeland Security CISA organization, that's just been put through the wringer by the Twitter Files and, in fact, has been subjected to a thorough, detailed report by the House Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government for knowingly violating constitutional rights for putting pressure on the big tech companies to censor information leading up to the election and then covering it up" is "amazing," said Beattie.
This organization "is what the DOJ cites as the source that’s so authoritative that you can’t be taken seriously if you claim not to believe them because they’re just the arbiters of truth. That’s what’s really dangerous."
