YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Ep. 6153 - Matt Taibbi on Censorship, Russiagate and Why he’s Suing a Congresswoman - 4/4/25

Ep. 6153 - Matt Taibbi on Censorship, Russiagate and Why he’s Suing a Congresswoman - 4/4/25 — Transcript

by Scott Horton · 6,495 words · 937 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00[Music]
0:09All right, y'all. Welcome to the Scott
0:10Horton Show. I'm the director of the
0:12Libertarian Institute, editorial
0:14director of anti-war.com, and author of
0:17Provoked: How Washington Started the New
0:19Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe
0:21in Ukraine. Sign up to the podcast feed
0:24at scottorton.org or scott
0:26hortonshow.com.
0:27I've got more than 6,000 interviews in
0:29the archive for you there going back to
0:312003. And follow me on all the video
0:33sites and X at Scott Horton Show. All
0:36right, you guys. Once again, I got on
0:38the line the great Matthew Taibbei from
0:40Racket News,
0:42racket.news. And of course, he wrote a
0:44bunch of great books, including Hate,
0:46Inc., which I think you'll really like.
0:48And he does a podcast with Walter Kern
0:50called America This Week. and uh and
0:54he's suing a Congress lady and I think
0:58it's hilarious. Welcome back to the
0:59show. How you doing, Matt? I'm doing
1:01great, Scott. How are you doing? I'm
1:03doing good. Really happy to have you
1:04here, man. So, why would you sue some
1:06lady who's elected to the Congress by
1:08somebody?
1:10Well, I mean, I don't want to go on too
1:13much about it because, you know, it's
1:15it's litigation, but um I I testified in
1:19a hearing earlier this week about uh the
1:23global engagement center and sen
1:24censorship and and at the very beginning
1:27of the hearing, the ranking member of
1:31this house subcommittee uh who's a Los
1:35Angeles Democrat named uh Sydney Kamler
1:38Dove
1:40uh wanted it entered into the record
1:43um that the the star witness was a
1:47serial sexual
1:49harasser. And um at the time I was I was
1:51sort of fiddling with something in my
1:53bag um while she was talking and I heard
1:57that out of the corner of you know out
1:59of my corner of my ear and
2:02uh couldn't believe it. you know, it
2:04I've never been accused by anybody of um
2:08you know, even one act of sexual
2:10harassment, let alone serially. So, uh
2:14but I also knew that that members of
2:16Congress have an immunity. Uh it's in
2:19the Constitution, believe it or not. I'm
2:20sure you know this, right? The speech
2:22and debate clause. Sure.
2:24So, I didn't uh I felt like it wasn't um
2:28going to be productive to say anything,
2:30but uh on the way home, I saw that she
2:34had retweeted the exchange and then and
2:37then implied that because I didn't
2:39answer that was uh tanamount to to
2:44um sort of endorsing it. And uh so I
2:50filed suit for liel because I can. and
2:54you know, we'll we'll see how that goes.
2:56Yeah. Well, and I read the lawsuit. I'm
3:01sure your lawyer doesn't want you to say
3:02too much about it, as you sort of
3:04implied there earlier, but I read the
3:06lawsuit and I already know the story
3:08anyway, that it's a bunch of crap. It's
3:11all something that Mark Ames wrote that
3:14was always make believe. and you know
3:17your old writing partner from back when
3:19in Russia and all this stuff as everyone
3:21knows and
3:24uh and not only that but this has been
3:27brought up and officially debunked and
3:30retracted and rescended and apologized
3:32for by numerous publications over the
3:34time. I guess I don't know what I guess
3:37but they keep bringing it up. Uh and so
3:40good luck to you. They got it's
3:42completely crazy that they would try
3:43that. Um, but uh it's surely actionable
3:48as described in the lawsuit which
3:50everyone can read at racket.news. And so
3:53good luck to you, man. And uh I hope you
3:55bankrupt her. Although now that she's a
3:57congressman, I'm sure she's filthy
3:58stinking rich. So I don't know if 10
4:00million will even make a dent in her
4:03earnings or you know potential near-term
4:05future earnings here. But we'll see how
4:07it goes. We'll have to see. You know, I
4:09mean, and the one thing I will say
4:10though, Scott, is that
4:12um what's so surprising about this and
4:15and you know, I was treated in a pretty
4:19roughly the first time I testified
4:22before Congress by Democrats. Uh you
4:25know, they called me a so-called
4:27journalist. Then I was threatened with
4:28jail. Um you know, I had the IRS come to
4:31my house and
4:34uh you know, I I was a Democrat. Uh, I'm
4:38a liflong civil liberties advocate, free
4:41speech advocate. Um, if they had, you
4:45know, asked me questions about other
4:48issues, I might have even agreed with
4:50them about a few things, but instead,
4:52you know, they they they continually
4:54treat people like me or Glenn Greenwald
4:57or um, you know, or you as enemies when
5:01I I don't know why that's necessary. Do
5:03you?
5:05Well, it proves their purity to people
5:07inside their cult, but they find
5:09themselves in a shrinking cult. That's
5:11the way that goes. And by the way, I
5:13want to stipulate here in parentheses
5:14because I was probably unclear the way I
5:16stated that. So, just to be clear, Mark
5:18Ames did not accuse you of anything. He
5:21wrote a funny story that was a fictional
5:24satire thing that had you saying
5:26something funny in it, the fictional
5:28you, and that was it. So I'm it may
5:31someone might have misinferred there
5:33that I was saying that that Ames had
5:35said that you had done anything at all
5:37when the whole thing was a joke in the
5:39first place is the real point. But
5:41Right. Yeah. Right. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah.
5:44He was he was recounting a fiction a
5:46scene from the office that was let's
5:49just
5:50say massively exaggerated. There it was
5:54there was never any workplace
5:56harassment. There were there there were
5:58conversations about um you know whether
6:01or not uh we were always
6:05uh professional in the office in terms
6:07of like some of the jokes that we told
6:09uh even to each other. Uh but that
6:11wasn't it was never anything
6:13like harassment and I you know in my
6:17personal life
6:19I'm an extremely reserved uh quiet
6:22person and you know raised like to to be
6:26a gentleman towards women. So that it's
6:28been it's been tough that whole thing.
6:30Yeah. Well good. Stick it to her man.
6:32She deserves it. And you know legally
6:35I'm not saying say mean words to her.
6:37I'm just saying let your lawyer handle
6:38it. Right. Exactly. So good for you. And
6:42anyway, what were you doing on Capitol
6:44Hill again, Mr. Ty? You be there. So,
6:46this was a hearing about the Global
6:48Engagement Center. This is the House
6:50Foreign Affairs Committee, and they were
6:53essentially meeting to decide what to do
6:55about this this uh wing of the State
6:58Department that um does counter
7:01messaging and content moderation issues.
7:05Uh they were a big character in the
7:08Twitter files. The Washington Examiner
7:10also did a bunch of stories about them
7:13funding
7:15um foreign agencies that do media
7:18scoring, right? So essentially they're
7:22it's the United States government kind
7:24of deciding who gets to have advertising
7:26revenue and who doesn't. And um so we
7:30were testifying about that because they
7:32were supposed to go to be defunded, but
7:34they didn't. They just scattered the
7:36employees throughout the building and
7:37renamed it. Uh, and but that's how it
7:41goes.
7:43Cool. And then but you have a couple of
7:44good congressmen on your side trying to
7:46do something about this and I guess in
7:47the majority party, huh? Or not? Yes.
7:51Uh, and this has been a thing that's
7:53been going on for years now across
7:55multiple committees. Um, this global
7:59engagement center was signed into law by
8:01Obama at the end of his presidency. It
8:04was meant to do counter messaging
8:07against ISIS and al-Qaeda uh and ended
8:10up being directed almost entirely at
8:12Americans in English uh you know
8:14tweeting in English. So you know that's
8:17kind of the point of the of the
8:18exercises we like we can't have the
8:20State Department doing counter messaging
8:23against Americans in America. Like that
8:26doesn't make a whole lot of sense I
8:28don't think. Yeah. Well, and
8:32importantly, always to enforce lies,
8:36things that weren't true at all. All of
8:37their ridiculous narratives about uh
8:40COVID and Ukraine and I'm sorry, I'm
8:42skipping one. After the terrorists, what
8:44was first? Oh, Russia Gate, of course,
8:46Russia and then COVID and then Ukraine
8:49and then what were the other major
8:51themes where it was all about kicking
8:53off people for telling the truth and
8:55bolstering voices that were steering
8:57everybody wrong? Yeah. Brexit was won.
9:01Um, you know, there were they were a big
9:04partner in what they called the the
9:06election integrity partnership with
9:08Stanford University. So, there was a lot
9:11of lot of content about
9:13um, you know, Trump in the 2020 election
9:17with Biden. Um, you know, I I don't know
9:21exactly what their role was in the
9:23Hunter Biden story, but uh I would
9:26imagine that that that came into play
9:28there, too. So, um, but they were a big
9:31they were a big player in the Twitter
9:33files. They were one of the main groups
9:35that was, uh, you know, liasing with the
9:38company along the FBI. So, Matt, where
9:41does that leave us really with all this
9:42censorship regime? I mean, is it you
9:45know, kind of mummified but still
9:47waiting there? or is it still active
9:50against us or is is anybody doing
9:53anything about it enough that it's you
9:55know really set back or even canceled
9:57somehow?
9:59I think it's still there and uh you know
10:02probably since the last time that we
10:04talked the uh the situation abroad has
10:08um gotten a lot worse. So, you know,
10:11there's there's this huge global uh uh
10:16European law called the Digital Services
10:18Act, which when I started working in the
10:21Twitter files was kind of in a tadpole
10:25stage, but the whole idea of it was to
10:28create a panuropean censorship law um
10:32that would apply to every member state
10:34in the EU. and uh that you know it also
10:39applies to every internet platform that
10:41does business in the EU. So companies
10:44like Facebook, Meta, Twitter, um you
10:47know Instagram, all all of them have to
10:50spend enormous sum staying in compliance
10:53with the DSA just for starters. And
10:56that's one of dozens of laws like that.
10:59Now, the United States has some of these
11:02things still in the pipeline, and some
11:04of them are still there, but not
11:07necessarily active, but that doesn't
11:09mean they can't be started up at a
11:11moment's notice. And and you know, if
11:12the Trump administration decides it
11:14wants to go that way, it can. Okay. And
11:17now that Nina Jenkowitz from the
11:21Ministry of Truth showed up at this same
11:23hearing as you, did I read that right?
11:25Yeah. She was the other witness. This is
11:27the the former would be head of the
11:29disinformation governance board. Mhm.
11:32And what she have to say and how funny
11:35was it?
11:36Well, uh, you know, she she she talked
11:40about how the Twitter files were fiction
11:44and conspiracy,
11:46uh, conspiracy theory and that the
11:48disinformation governance board, uh,
11:51that was about protecting civil
11:54liberties and protecting freedom of
11:56speech and not not about um, you know,
12:00censoring anybody at all. And um look,
12:04she's she's uh people make fun of her.
12:07Uh I mean that sounds like
12:08disinformation.
12:11I would say so. Call me honest, but like
12:13isn't that a lie? What she just said
12:15then?
12:17Yes, I think so. Uh the the whole idea
12:21that there needs to be something called
12:23disinformation governance is I don't
12:26know, Scott, would you say that that's
12:27an anathema to the First Amendment? I
12:29think um the whole idea of the
12:32constitution is that the the government
12:34doesn't have a role in um in preventing
12:38misinformation. And of course the
12:39beginning of political wisdom is that
12:41everything that the government says is a
12:44lie. They are the worst liars out of
12:46everybody. Always George Carlin says so.
12:49Everybody knows that, right? And that's
12:52that's why the first amendment is so
12:55valuable because the most damaging lies
12:58are always official. All right, you go
12:59back to a million years ago to remember
13:02the main to um you know the the missile
13:06gap, the Gulf of Tonkan story, uh
13:10WMDs, Russia Gate, COVID, right? And CO
13:14was a great example because what
13:17happened there was kind of the dystopian
13:21future example of what happens when you
13:23don't have a vigorous first amendment.
13:25When the government has a monopoly on
13:29information and can impose an incorrect
13:32version of reality and also can suppress
13:36people who are saying things that are
13:38true, you you know it's it's a recipe
13:41for disaster, right? And you know, we
13:44had a situation where people like Jay
13:46Bacharia were trying to tell us, no, the
13:49disease is way more infectious than we
13:51think. Lockdowns aren't going to work.
13:54Um, the risk factor for people under a
13:58certain age is almost nothing if you're
14:00healthy. Um, you know, we're pursuing
14:03all these terrible policies, but you
14:05couldn't hear that because there was a
14:07basic basically a monopoly on
14:09information control. And that's what the
14:11first amendment is supposed to designed
14:13to avoid. Yeah. Now, so great transition
14:17into a uh a anonymous writer that I know
14:21that you admire, Undead Foya. Sleuth
14:25News is the uh Substack there.
14:28Sleuth.N. And I subscribe to him as
14:31well. And he has one here from
14:33yesterday. Exclusive Clinton plans long
14:36in the making. And so this is a new
14:40development in the Russia gate story.
14:42And um by the way, so then I had read I
14:46guess it's just in the margin of this
14:47one is one called
14:50[Music]
14:51um new shocking from Taibbe and it was
14:55one of the um Twitter gate uh files that
15:00you had posted about uh Russia gate and
15:05a recommendation from someone named
15:07Lindsay that we want to kick these 14
15:09accounts off of Twitter because they are
15:11Russian controlled. old accounts and
15:14undead foyer here. The reason he's
15:16saying shocking is cuz he's saying,
15:17"Wait, three of these guys are friends
15:19of mine and I know them and they're
15:21Americans and they're patriots and then
15:23they're just like independent
15:24investigator Twitter sleuth type dudes."
15:27Uh, one of them was a POA mentor of his
15:31and he's saying, "What? How dare they do
15:34this? Accuse these Americans of being
15:37Russian controlled. Where's the
15:39accountability for that?"
15:41Well, right. And and this is right. And
15:46if I remember correctly, that person
15:49that that Lindsay person was actually a
15:52a global engagement center employee, uh
15:55who I I I think identified himself as a
15:57Republican at GEK. Um, but either way,
16:01it's a government employee reaching out
16:03to Twitter, asking them just willy-nilly
16:07to take down some accounts, which, you
16:10know, it doesn't get more direct than
16:12that. I mean, that's that's that's
16:15clearly censorship or that's clearly an
16:17attempt at censorship. And and this is
16:20the point I was trying to make at the
16:21hearing is that uh you know or agencies
16:26like GEK their method is to try to
16:29justify removing somebody by claiming
16:31that they have some kind of tie to a
16:33foreign hostile power when they don't.
16:37Right? They in some cases they even
16:40don't even assert that there's a
16:42relationship. They just say that the
16:44their point of view aligns. Um, and
16:47that's bad enough. So, I I don't know.
16:49Do you I think that's nefarious, don't
16:52you? I mean, to me, that's like
16:54McCarthyism, but digitalized. Oh, yeah.
16:56It's totally evil. And of course, again,
16:59in service of suppressing people who are
17:02getting to the truth about how Russia
17:04Gate was a lie. And so it was in order
17:08to enforce this disinformation on the
17:10most important thing again where the
17:13president of the United States of
17:16America had been framed for treason with
17:19the Kremlin. I mean you couldn't make
17:21that up. It's the most unbelievable
17:23thing. And so here's where I got
17:26questions for you because you're the
17:27most important journalist that I cite in
17:29my Russia Gate section of my book. And I
17:31cite a lot of great journalists. And I
17:33omitted a lot cuz I only got so much
17:35time in the world and I already had 75
17:36pages on the dang thing. I'm by the way,
17:38great great book by the way and I think
17:41you're the most important journalist on
17:43this topic. But go ahead. Oh well that's
17:47a quotable quote right there. Thank you
17:48very much. Um I desperately seek your
17:52approval on this issue. So um I hope you
17:54enjoyed all your cameos in there. Um,
17:56and especially on on Russia gate because
17:59what you report on Russia gate is just
18:01crucial. I don't think anyone else had
18:03this where you have I think sources and
18:07documents saying that we know what we
18:10had long suspected and there were other
18:13indications already, but I think you
18:15really nailed down. you know, and
18:18therefore we know that John Brennan
18:21kicked this thing off at the end of 2015
18:25and that was the origin clearly of the
18:27the frame up of Papadopoulos and some of
18:30this other stuff where um but then I
18:34think that means I don't know exactly
18:36what that means for who hacked the DNC
18:39if if you know or what but it means that
18:44even this story here about what we're
18:48learning about the role of the Democrats
18:50and the Clinton campaign in in getting
18:54started earlier than we knew for sure
18:56before. A new email um about from March
19:00of
19:012016. That would still mean that this
19:04really was begun by the CIA andor FBI.
19:08I'm not exactly sure when the FBI first
19:11is involved with the counter
19:12intelligence division or whoever
19:14involved, but then the Clinton campaign,
19:17they must know about this. I don't know
19:19if we know how they know about this, but
19:22they've decided that they're going to
19:23make hay on the same narrative. We're
19:26framing Trump for some kind of
19:29relationship with the Russians. So then
19:31when the DNC leak comes out and
19:33whatever, it just falls right into place
19:34for what they're already saying is that
19:36this is all a Russian plot to help Trump
19:38cuz that was how they were going to try
19:40to cheat to rig the election against
19:42him, right?
19:44Yeah. I I look the timeline for this is
19:48all as as you've pointed out and you
19:50point out in your book, it it's all
19:53messed up. So, the official explanation
19:57for the official investigation, which is
20:00the FBI's Crossfire hurricane um
20:03investigation of Trump and Russia, and
20:05that was started on July 31st
20:09uh of
20:102016. And the official predicate for
20:14that was this weird conversation between
20:18an Australian diplomat who just walked
20:22into the American embassy in London and
20:25told a story about a conversation he had
20:27with Papadopoulos. But that was way way
20:30after all this other stuff had already
20:33taken place uh with Russia gate. You
20:38mentioned that letter in March. There
20:40was also um an informant who was at um
20:45Oxford and Cambridge and who was asked
20:48to uh essentially spy on Michael Flynn
20:52uh way before any of that stuff. If you
20:56look actually there's a story there's a
20:58profile of Christopher Steel that was
21:00written by
21:02um the New Yorker uh I believe it was
21:05Jane Mayor was the was the author. She
21:09uh talks about how Brandon and the CIA
21:12heard from the Brits and G and the their
21:16counterpart GCHQ, which is more like the
21:19British NSA, but they said they had a
21:22stream of illicit communications with
21:25Russia dating back to somewhere in the
21:28middle of
21:292015. Now, we were never told what that
21:32was. Uh Brennan later testified that he
21:36had alerted the FBI to some of this
21:39stuff, but we never found out what that
21:41was either or how that related to the to
21:44the uh FBI
21:46investigation. So kind of the origin
21:48story of how this all got started, it's
21:51never been clear. And to me, that was
21:53always the most important thing about
21:54Russia Gate is what do you have on him?
21:57How did you start investigating him?
21:59Forget about what the investigation is.
22:00It's like if you've got something, I'm
22:02all for it. But what is it, right? Mhm.
22:06Hang on just one second for me here. You
22:09guys, I'm so proud to announce the
22:10publication of the Libertarian
22:12Institute's 14th book. It's Israel,
22:15winner of the 2003 Iraq oil war. Undue
22:19influence, deceptions, and the neocon
22:22energy agenda by Gary Vogler, former
22:25senior oil consultant and deputy senior
22:27oil adviser for US forces during Iraq
22:30War II. Remember how I wrote in enough
22:33already about how Ahmed Chalabi sold the
22:35neoconservatives on a plan to rebuild
22:37the old British oil pipeline from Mosul
22:39and Kirkook Iraq to Hifa Israel if they
22:42would only get the United States to
22:44overthrow Saddam Hussein for him. And
22:47how they bought it because they are as
22:48dumb as they are corrupt. Well, Gary was
22:51there as senior civilian consultant to
22:54the DoD and Iraqi Oil Ministry. He had a
22:57unique window and experience witnessing
22:59the Pentagon neocons and their minations
23:02on behalf of Israel before and during
23:04that war. And it turns out that even
23:06though they did not get their pipeline,
23:08as Vogler demonstrates, the neocons and
23:11their lacunic bosses figured out an
23:13effective plan B. Anyway, you're going
23:16to love Israel, winner of the 2003 Iraq
23:19oil war by Gary Vogler, available
23:21everywhere. Check it out along with our
23:24other great books at
23:29libertarianinstitute.org/books. Hey
23:30y'all, let me tell you about Robertson
23:32Roberts Brokerage Inc. Nobody trusts the
23:35US dollar anymore. Foreign governments
23:37are stocking up on gold instead of $100
23:39bills. One, they know they need to. And
23:42two, that means you need to, too.
23:45Interest rates are up, but for some
23:46reason, not much for savings accounts.
23:48Park your money there and watch Uncle
23:50Joe Biden just counterfeit its value
23:52away. You can see how the Fed is afraid
23:54to raise rates to beat inflation for
23:56fear of popping the current bubbles, at
23:58least before the election. So, more
24:01inflation it will continue to be. Gold
24:04is your shield against monetary and
24:06price inflation, just like it always has
24:08been. Now, Tim Fry and the guys over at
24:11Roberts and Roberts are recommending
24:13gold over silver since the world's
24:15almost 200 governments are putting their
24:17own pressure on the price, which should
24:19help everyone else who makes similar
24:20calls on their own. Of course, Roberts
24:23and Roberts can help you with platinum,
24:24palladium, and silver as well as gold.
24:27Don't let the Fed and the War Party
24:28inflate all your savings away. Look up
24:31Roberts and Roberts at
24:33rrbi.co. That's rrbi.co.
24:37Yeah. I mean, I have to wonder if that's
24:40just made up after the fact or what, but
24:42maybe it's wrong for me to presume that
24:45when Brennan sent I think the way you
24:48reported it, what they called it was he
24:50sent these informants out to bump into
24:53Trump campaign people and see. For me,
24:56I'm just like, yeah, see, just to set
24:57them all up. But maybe, okay, I don't
25:01want to presume too much. Maybe he's
25:02investigating them just to make sure
25:05because he heard something, but we still
25:07don't have whatever that original
25:09predicate was. As you say there, if it
25:11exists at all, seems obviously no
25:14predicate then that then that tells you
25:16everything, right? Yeah. And look, I
25:20mean, like, if you read the Durham
25:21report, the whole thing is about the FBI
25:24pretending not to know that what they're
25:26investigating isn't true, so they can
25:28keep pretending to investigate it
25:30longer, you know? And it's all very
25:33deliberate. So, it's pretty hard to not
25:35just extrapolate that backwards. You
25:38know what I mean? That that's the origin
25:40of the whole thing, too. And of course,
25:42because this is all based on all
25:45falsehoods, the rest of the way down,
25:47say they had some intelligence in the
25:49middle of 2015 that we've never seen.
25:52The rest of it was all a bunch of crap.
25:54So, what does that tell you? You know,
25:57right? It didn't lead anywhere. So, um,
26:01you know, and and even the Papadopoulos
26:03story, you know, sorry, sorry to go on
26:06about this, but the, you know, that
26:09didn't go anywhere. it very quickly
26:11didn't go anywhere. So they that's why
26:13they had to readjust as early as August
26:16of 2016, like less than a month after
26:19they started the investigation, they had
26:20to switch to a new target, uh Carter
26:23Page, right? Uh because the first one
26:26was a dead end. And so that tells you a
26:30lot, too. Yeah. And especially when the
26:33new predicate, they had a memo from the
26:35CIA saying, "This is our guy. He's a
26:37loyal American patriot who tells us
26:39everything whenever he meets any
26:40influential Russians in government or
26:42business. And so don't mess don't worry
26:44about him. And they redacted it. And one
26:47of their own guys is the only guy who
26:49got in trouble in any way, a slap on the
26:51wrist of course, but was actually
26:52convicted for deleting that out of the
26:55filing to the foreign intelligence
26:57surveillance court. So what does that
26:59tell you, you know, about this whole
27:01thing being a frame up? And by the way,
27:04uh you can check the date. It was April
27:06Glasby day, July 25th, 2016, which is
27:10actually kind of late in the game. This
27:12is the controversy on Twitter had been
27:14going on for a couple of weeks by that
27:15time, I think. But I interviewed this uh
27:18computer security expert, Jeffrey Carr,
27:20who said just assuredly, he goes,
27:23"Listen, nobody can look at a server and
27:27tell you who broke into it. It's just
27:29too easy to leave false fingerprints
27:32behind and no way to if you know you
27:35really know what you're doing. There's
27:37just no way to prove whether they've
27:39been faked or not. And so no one can
27:42tell you with real certainty except for
27:45one organization and that would be the
27:47NSA. And they could tell you with total
27:50certainty because they can rewind the
27:52whole internet. They can watch every
27:54packet in the world go wherever they
27:56want. They are, you know, the computer
27:58god. So they can tell you a 100% whether
28:02it was the Russians who did it or not.
28:04And they're not saying that. They're the
28:06ones giving medium confidence, meaning
28:08whatever you guys say, we're going along
28:10with it and not causing a fight here
28:12when the FBI and CIA are taking the lead
28:14on this stuff. But it was not their
28:16claim that and and in the Mueller
28:19report, he doesn't even pretend to
28:22demonstrate a chain of custody to
28:23Wikileaks.
28:24So there's your beyond a reasonable
28:27doubt or your your failure to convict
28:30standard right there big time. No, that
28:33medium confidence thing by the NSA
28:35should have been a major tell for
28:37anybody who was paying attention to the
28:39whole thing. But oh, and I meant to
28:41emphasize about that July 25th. That was
28:43before they launched Crossfire
28:45Hurricane, right? I had debunked that on
28:47my show before they had even launched
28:50the official FBI investigation into
28:55Well, well, all credit to Jeffrey Carr
28:57to Rs. He's the guy. Mhm.
29:01I mean, and
29:03look, this
29:05is, you know, it's kind of an esoteric
29:07subject for people who don't
29:09particularly care about Russia gate, but
29:12it actually goes along with the kind of
29:14larger problem of junk science used to
29:17to convict people. Um, that h, you know,
29:21that we only recently learned was kind
29:24of an epidemic problem in in the
29:27criminal justice system. Yeah. you know,
29:29things like uh you know, bullet bullet
29:33uh casing analysis. I mean, not even
29:36casing analysis, but like which package
29:38it came from. You know, thousands of
29:40people were convicted on stuff like
29:42that. Uh and then it turns out it's not
29:44true. This is exactly the same kind of
29:47thing. It's not a fingerprint uh
29:49determining who hacked the DNC um
29:53server. It's it's a subjective
29:56determination. and you know, not even a
29:59particularly good one from what I
30:00understand. So, yeah. Yeah. And by the
30:03way, Radley Balo is the one who's really
30:05done the best on that. The bite marks
30:07and the hair matching and all that
30:09stuff. Even at even though he's at the
30:12Washington Post, he's a pretty
30:13libertarian guy. Decent guy. No, he's
30:16been really good on I mean, look, he he
30:17knows his his cop stuff very well. Yeah,
30:21for sure. Um, okay. So, uh let's see.
30:24The Russia Gate thing. I think we beat
30:26that horse to death for for what I have
30:28on my mind about it. Anyway, I guess
30:30well I I wanted to say or give you the
30:32opportunity, I guess, to to remark on
30:34this. I'm sure you've seen this. Um that
30:36this is the new thing that I referred to
30:38that's come out. I'm not I'm sorry. I
30:40knew it yesterday, but I'm not exactly
30:42clear anymore uh where this comes from.
30:45But this is an email from Paulie
30:50uh who worked for uh Hillary Clinton and
30:53and they call it the Trump Swiftboat
30:55Project. So, what can you tell us about
30:58that about this? I didn't I didn't know
30:59about it. Oh, no. Oh, okay. I'm sorry.
31:02So, this is it has to do with the
31:03Clinton Plan Intelligence is what John
31:05Durham, the investigator of the
31:07investigation, called it. Jennifer
31:08Palmiri I mean to say by the way. Um but
31:11so so is it the Clinton plan
31:14intelligence is where John
31:17Brennan briefed Obama and we have his
31:20notes from when he briefed Obama and I
31:23think Biden that the Russians have
31:26intelligence or we have intelligence
31:28that the Russians have intelligence that
31:30Clinton is framing up Trump for a plot
31:33with Russia as though he didn't know
31:35nothing about that which is that whole
31:38thing is a little odd I think I've heard
31:41people rationalize it by saying, "Well,
31:43it was too big of a thing for him to
31:45keep from Obama." Like, he had to tell
31:47him, but I guess must have been with a
31:49wink and a nudge that like, you know,
31:52this is that the Clintons apparently the
31:54Clinton campaign is gloming on to and
31:56and elaborating our plot to frame this
31:59guy something. Yeah. No, I mean, I
32:02remember that whole thing with the
32:05intercepts and Brennan going to Obama
32:07about it and his notes about it and
32:09everything. Yeah. And so apparently that
32:12intelligence came from the Dutch who had
32:15infiltrated the uh Russian groups and
32:19that's what Undead Foyer is writing
32:21about here. Oh wow. So anyway, I'm
32:24sorry. I should have reread this today.
32:27I got Biden brain, man. No,
32:29[Laughter]
32:31I got a little bit of Yeah, too bad.
32:35Okay, so you know what? I'm gonna let
32:37you go, but first I want to ask you
32:39about the Racket News library because
32:42that seems important.
32:44Yeah. So, um I don't know when you first
32:48noticed this, but
32:49um years ago I started to notice that
32:52newspapers were no longer linking to
32:55primary source materials. Like they
32:57would mention a court case or a hearing.
33:01Yeah. New York Times always been real
33:02stingy about that. Yeah. Well, well,
33:05well, they weren't always. That's the
33:07weird part, right? They they used to
33:09give you the opportunity to go look at
33:11the source document. Well, they may have
33:13gotten worse, but I never thought they
33:15were good at it. I mean, for, you know,
33:17I started writing for anti-war.com when
33:19I started writing, and the ethic there
33:21was this is the internet. How dare you
33:24make a claim and not link to evidence of
33:26it, right? You don't have the right to
33:29make a claim without proving it. What
33:30are you doing? How could you? What would
33:33even be the point of making a claim if
33:34you're not going to demonstrate it? So,
33:37I just feel that way about every little
33:38thing. That's why my book has 7,000
33:40footnotes. Yeah. But the thing is, you
33:45wrote a book. Once you buy a book, you
33:46have it, right? Um, the problem with the
33:49internet now is that, you know, there's
33:53there's been this phenomena of link rot,
33:56right? You go to Wikipedia, you look for
33:58this the sources, and a lot of them are
34:00just error messages. now because uh you
34:04know when you're linking to things
34:07uh it's usually to a page the actual
34:11thing is not uploaded um you know on the
34:15site uh even when you go to the wayback
34:19machine which is images of things uh
34:22well it's copyrighted so if somebody uh
34:27who has a copyrighted thing goes to the
34:28wayback machine and says I want you to
34:30take that down they have to do it. So,
34:33there's been this epidemic of sort of
34:35disappearing history and uh what we're
34:38doing now is when a new stu a new story
34:41comes out, we we'll do like a timeline
34:46where we we just upload all the key
34:49videos or documents or whatever they
34:52are. And we're not linking to them.
34:53They're actually there on the page.
34:55They'll be there forever. Um and you can
34:57take them if you want. And uh we're
35:01trying to inspire other people to do the
35:03same thing. Uh because my worry is that
35:06in the f and and I don't know if you
35:08heard this but Amazon is also switching
35:10to a model where where when you buy a
35:14book you're not buying it forever.
35:17You're just buying temporary access to
35:19it. They can retrieve it, change it at
35:23any time. Um yeah, on your Kindle. Yeah,
35:27exactly. You know, I swear to God this
35:29is true, man. In like
35:321983, when I was in third grade, I
35:35remember getting in an argument with a
35:36teacher because we read a story in class
35:38where it was the future and all the
35:40books were little computer tablets. And
35:42I don't know if I've been watching The
35:43Outer Limits or what was going on with
35:46me at that time. But I remember saying
35:48to her, "Aha, see, they could then they
35:51could change it and they could make the
35:52history whatever they want. You wouldn't
35:54have a permanent record of what had
35:55happened anymore." And I remember her
35:57looking at me like, "What is with you?"
35:59But I guess I've been like this since I
36:00was a little kid. But I still remember
36:02that happening. Like that discussion,
36:04that was my first impression. If the
36:06teacher is teaching off an electronic
36:08tablet, they could change the history.
36:11Exactly. You know, exactly. Look, it's
36:14Fahrenheit 451, right? Yeah. Which and I
36:18hadn't read Orwell yet. I mean, I was a
36:19precocious kid, but I wasn't that far
36:21ahead. So, I don't know where I what I
36:24was. It may have been I was watching The
36:26Outer Limits or something like that, you
36:28know. I don't know. Yeah. But you were
36:31ahead of your time. Definitely. Been
36:33stuck like this for a while now. Because
36:36I I do think I think this is the next
36:38big thing after
36:41censorship is going to be disappearing
36:43history. Hey, listen. I think this is so
36:45important. And uh not to talk about
36:47myself more, but working on this book,
36:49that was the hardest thing. I mean,
36:50there were times where I spent days on
36:53one footnote, like, I have to find this.
36:55I have to prove it. Some guy came at me
36:57uh came to me uh last week on the
37:00Twitter and was like, "Hey, man. You
37:01have this article from the London Times
37:03about the war in Serbia and the SAS
37:06train these terrorists and stuff, but
37:07where's the original?" And I was like,
37:09"Man, I don't know anymore. I'm sorry.
37:12wherever. I mean, a lot of times, you
37:14know, some of these books that I read
37:15like about the Balkan Wars, like bless
37:18those authors for including the text of
37:21the URLs in their books. And I had to
37:24take the URLs out of my book just for
37:26space, but I have a file online where I
37:28kept the URLs there for you. But a lot
37:31of these times like I would have to
37:33Google just parts of URLs and then find
37:35a message board that linked to a thing
37:37that had a archive at Free Republic that
37:40linked to another thing and then there's
37:41a you know it's really um adventures and
37:46especially this stuff from the 90s on
37:47the Balkan War stuff and then you know
37:49the further back you go the harder it is
37:52but then yeah a lot of times you know
37:55the way back
37:56machine even you know you would think
37:59it'd be easy to find on there. It's on
38:00there somewhere, but you got to really
38:02like work hard to get it to pull up the
38:04right thing and whatever. I don't know.
38:06And it's not their fault. They're
38:08they're doing the best they can, but you
38:10know, it is it's a it's a horrible
38:12phenomenon. Like, you know, the saying
38:14used to be the internet is forever and
38:16what No, it ain't. Link rod is horrible.
38:19So, that's a great project. You is
38:22forever. The stuff about the government
38:23is not forever. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah.
38:26Yeah. your embarrassments when that time
38:28you got drunk and did the thing, you
38:29know. But yeah, no, I'm trying to do
38:31this at the institute and at my own
38:32website as well. I try to reprint, uh,
38:35ancient lost articles and hope nobody
38:38makes me take them down, you know.
38:40Awesome. Awesome. Let's make it a thing.
38:43Yep. Okay. Well, uh, that's great. And
38:45that's at Racket News and it's Racket
38:47Library is the link right at the top.
38:48And that's a great new project. And
38:50check out the great podcast. I love
38:52watching uh, you and Walter and your
38:53great show. Tell them about my book. I'd
38:56like to hear what he thinks of it. Yeah,
38:57maybe we should we'll maybe we'll do a
38:59little read through sometime. That'd be
39:00fun. That would be cool, man. All right.
39:02Well, listen, thank you so much for your
39:04time as always, Matt. Good to talk to
39:05you. Scott, thanks a lot. Appreciate it.
39:07See you, man. Thanks for listening to
39:09the Scott Horton Show, which can be
39:10heard on APS Radio News at scott
39:12horton.org,
39:14scottortonshow.com, and the Libertarian
39:16Institute at libertarianstitute.org.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Ep. 6153 - Matt Taibbi on Censorship, Russiagate and Why he’s Suing a Congresswoman - 4/4/25 by Scott Horton, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 6,495 words across 937 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.