Articles \ Satanic Ritual Abuse: Debunked… or Covered Up? REACTION to Latter Daily Saints

Satanic Ritual Abuse: Debunked… or Covered Up? REACTION to Latter Daily Saints

Posted by Ben McClintock, Friday, 27 Feb 2026.

TRANSCRIPT

Generated using A.I.; please forgive any mistakes.

So recently some LDS podcasters have did a episode where they were going through and trying to debunk the idea of satanic ritual abuse within the LDS church. And what they ended up doing was trying to debunk it as a reality in general, in or outside of their church. And so what brought on Justin Riggs, so thank you for joining me tonight, and I thought it'd be good to have us go through and react to the claims that they make, and maybe show some things that show that maybe they're wrong, or that they're possibly even being dishonest in some cases. But in some cases there's actually points that they bring out that I completely agree with. And so I like having Justin on because we are both coming from a similar position on things, but we also don't always agree if you remember our interview on Skull & Bones and Russell and Nelson. And so it's nice, I don't want yes men, but I also want to make sure that we're dealing with people that are going to be at least, you know, intellectually honest even if we come out with different conclusions. And so I appreciate you joining us. And so what I want to do is going to go through and show some clips. And so just as full disclosure, Justin and I haven't gone through and said okay which ones do we both want to go through. This is all me, I've picked out some clips. We're not going to go through for you with the entire show. But there are some, some key clips, the points they bring up, it's about an hour long episode.

But they really just seemed to focus on the same points over and over again, and not really address certain things that I, you know, that I would have expected somebody trying to debunk this would have. So, let's just get into it. I'm not sure there's any, is there any other kind of background we want to give them before we get into it. No, I would just add that I mean like you said it's it's the same old arguments, right and I think that unfortunately Jonah Barnes, you know, felt like he could just come on a show and regurgitate the same things that they used to say in the 90s, right, and unfortunately there's a whole new group of researchers who devoted, you know, several years of our lives into looking into this and that's just not going to work anymore, you know, we may not have the same reach but we are quietly increasing our reach and I think it's important that we do shows like this so thanks for having me on. Yeah, yeah, you bring up a good point that I forgot to bring up is that we both have researching this for, it's not like we just all of a sudden came we watched a podcast that somebody did and we're like, oh my goodness, you know, and with this is something that I've been actually looking into for 15 years now, I actually personally interviewed Glenn pace of the Glenn pace memo, two weeks before his death so in depth research, reading other people's research, going through and saying myself just like, is this legitimate, trying to debunk it myself, coming to my own conclusions, saying, I believe this but I don't believe that. And, and so, been. This is not, we're not Johnny come lately. And, but this is something that we've seriously looked into. And so you've spent several years yourself. I'm not sure how long you've been looking at this year's. I'm not sure how long you've been looking at this year's both it's not, it's been over, at least over a year for both of us that we've been looking into this and looking at the facts and looking at the data. I don't know what I haven't asked you what some of your thoughts are. But as on different aspects of it. And so I think that there are some aspects of this SRA issue that are more believable and more reliable than others.

And so I'll bring that up when we, we talk about it so. Let's start with just share just going over the, the first clip from the latter day. Letter daily saints podcast. Since the 1980s claims have been thrown out that members of the quorum of the 12 apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and even the prophet himself have been involved in satanic ritualistic sex abuse pedophile rings. Is there any evidence to support these claims, not a big deal just just introducing what the show is going to what their show is going to be about, I don't know if you've got a whole lot to comment on that just wanted to let folks know can I have that background on it. Yeah, I mean I would say Ben real quick I mean there is this, I mean you notice how Jackson takes a broad subject and narrows it down to, there are allegations against the quorum of the 12 and the first presidency and makes it like extremely difficult to have a conversation about right because he takes satanic ritual abuse and he narrows it down so much that it's almost impossible to have a conversation about. It's like a three minute conversation right so I would just point that out really quickly. Yeah, yeah. And that that is a theme that is going is the straw man that they've set up where you either want to attack everyone that they name or everyone in the world, or you don't believe it. They do both in this episode which is funny, right. I mean, so anyway, it goes. Go ahead. If you're not aware, you know, we have people like Tim Ballard late lately, who has been making some posts on Facebook and if you want to post that will pull that one up here.

Yeah, we'll read it. Yeah, so in this one. I'm not reading the whole thing right you want me to read the whole post. No, basically he's been alluding to a lot of this if you don't know the situation with Tim Ballard. He was excommunicated. I think, two years ago or a year and a half ago now. And now he's been coming out and saying that one of the reasons that he was excommunicated is because he was going to expose some leaders of the church. Yeah, so he said on September 25 2023, the day of atonement, the deep state of the LDS church lied about these undercover operations undercover operations that he was on took undercover text out of context, so as to destroy my life and mission. They knew I was getting close to exposing what they had been hiding child satanic ritual abuse inside of its ranks. So they lied and defamed me to vice news and desert news and others. Yeah, just going off of that clip right there just, they want to bring up the Tim Ballard's accusations against the church, and that they represent that one unofficially but that they're a part of, and they bring up his kind of claims this is back in 2023 that he made those claims. And to me, you know that's interesting with the ones that the, the examples that they pick are very much to be able to make a certain narrative. And of course they pick you know maybe I'll make some enemies here but Tim Ballard for the last three years, maybe four has been the videos he posts, and the, the text that he posts on social media appear to be unhinged unstable in some ways and I'm not trying to, you know, just the fame or to try and discredit the things that he's saying by just saying that, but that's just my opinion of what he's how he comes across because of the way that he states things. It's been a long time. He's not come out with names and I think they, they bring this up to and that's part of what I agree with is that he's he's saying these things in vague generalities, but doesn't actually name names name specifics. And so they, they want to focus on that, because that's the narrative that they want to put forward and so they pick those narrow examples to be able to have as their straw man destroy the entire argument of what's really going on with SRA.

Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think it's really troubling that they would bring Tim Ballard into this conversation and I very publicly have asked Tim Ballard to sort of stay out of this conversation because as far as I can tell he hasn't contributed anything to this research, right or to the conversation at all, except that he said that he talked to a member of the quorum of the 12 and told him that he was going to study this and that member of the quorum of the 12 told him not to go down that rabbit hole. And but as Jonah and Jackson and I think Hayden is the third person said, like some, some people do speak in vagaries, when it is and that person just happens to be Tim Ballard, right. So, you can notice they've already slipped from the intro is members of the quorum of the 12, you know they're accusing members of the quorum of the 12 and the first presidency. As far as I know, Tim Ballard has never said that what Tim Ballard has said is that he knows about SRA in the church, and he was going to expose that so we've already in that show we've already slipped from, here's what we're going to be talking about, and now we're going to be talking about SRA again, like you said it's just narrative shaping is all they're doing right and their handpicking like people who haven't been involved in this at all, and using them to strengthen their argument. Right. Right. Strange thing. Yes, yes. Okay, let's go back to. I asked, help me understand because there's just a lot of allegations being said a lot of people that are going on these shows, saying that members of the quorum of the 12 apostles were sacrificing children and all these things.

Do we have anything more substantial than just allegations. And what they say is, you know, evidence will come out in due time right now, all we do have is allegations but there's too many correlations in these witness testimonies to for them to be false and so they're, they have, they have to be true. And what's troubling about that is that one of these people that went on we are the people Utah, that made some pretty strong allegations that will look at one of them here. And she actually was able to get in contact with one of their family members and ask them more questions in regards to this person's, you know, mental health history and also if they had actually suffered abuse, and we'll roll this clip, and then we'll kind of talk about a little bit more but this is one of the people that went on we are the people Utah, and what she had to say. There were seven. She's a child prior prior me getting married. Okay. Which is very common. Yes, conceived in secret, born in secret, murdered in secret. All prior to the marriage. But reenacted as these body memories are coming up. Over the last 25 years. Yes.

And so it was a beautiful experience. Okay, pause this. So to give a little context to what they're saying here is that she got married at 19. Okay. And that she's claiming that she was forcibly impregnated by church leaders, and then made to have these children, and that when she had been children, seven children, and that when she bore these children they were sacrificed in front of her. Okay. And then I reached out to one of her family members that they shared with me that their heart breaks because they strongly do feel that it is highly likely that she suffered some sort of child sexual abuse, but due to a verified, you know, mental illness that has been diagnosed of paranoid schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, that it has now turned into this thing that is far more elaborate than it actually was, because he's like, they're like, look, you're claiming that you during your childhood before you were 19 you were pregnant for over five and a half years. And I'm like, we grew up with you we know that that's not true, right and we don't want to make light of this because you see a lot of pain in this woman and so I believe there is a lot of pain being had that is real, but to claim that she, you know, went through that when her family they grew up with her is like, this is verifiably not true you were pregnant for five years during your, you know, during your childhood. So that was a bit of a long clip I might have to edit that a little bit shorter but it brings out two or three different important points, a couple, and that they actually make over and over again as if if you say the same thing, five times you've made five different arguments. The first one is that what people say is that you sure there's no evidence but there are so many people that have said it, that it must be true. Okay, that's a strong man because a. There are people that have come forth with physical evidence, and we have actually admissions, we'll talk about that a little bit later as well. Or maybe I can show a clip in a second from something else but. But someone else makes that same conclusion is that they're that they treat the accusations as legitimate accusations because of the amount of people that are not related to each other don't know each other from different regions in the United States as well as other countries that they all tell the same exact story.

And there has to be some credibility to it you know who says that Bishop Glenn pace of the church. General Bishop you know presiding Bishop Rick in his Glenn pace memo. And so he acts like that's that's not a reasonable thing well you have this professional you have a guy that's been given the job by the church they must have trusted him to be able to be a reasonable rational person that understands how evidence works that. And that's the same can kind of conclusion that he came to. So the, the idea that they're just missing that right off the bat, tells me that that there is a bias that they don't accept forms of evidence that is actually something that police, except that's what there are lots of crimes that have zero evidence that are actually tried and convicted, based on multiple people telling the same story. So the idea, why would you dismiss something that professionals and in in in the church, people that are given the calling to be able to gather this information came to that conclusion, and then also dismiss that when we actually have law enforcement, using that same type of evidence to be able to try and make people thoughts on that. Yeah, so I think there are a couple things about this clip that are really troubling to me, I, you know, I happen to know Jill and Michael but and, you know, I don't want to go too deeply into it but these guys say that they verified some things that I don't think that they verified. And I think they materially misrepresent what Jill and Michael said on the show. Nobody ever said that those babies were all brought to full term and you hear Jackson saying they were all born, and then sacrificed. So they're just factually incorrect. And I think that like in situations like this when you're talking about things that are so sensitive it's important that we be factually correct and I mean, I will tell I will say this that like it goes both ways.

And this is something that I've been talking to victims about a lot lately, which is for the first time in a long time. Victims are going to get some attention that they don't necessarily want when they tell their stories. And if you're a victim, and you come forward and you decide to tell your story, you need to understand that people have a right to look at your story but why would you go and contact Jill's family when you could just contact Jill herself. Okay. I know that those guys know how to get ahold of Jill and Michael and I'm not going to say how I know that but I know that they know how to get ahold of her. Okay, but they chose to go behind her back and contact her family. And then I would just say that I think they need to be really careful about what they put out there into the, the public sphere about people's mental health and diagnoses, without actually doing the work and verifying that and I highly doubt that they've ever seen any paperwork. Right, or anything from a doctor, they would allow them to make the claim that they made in that video, some people I would just. Yeah, I would just call for, I would call for a little bit of caution. Right, if they're going to ask for caution in the claims that we make, and I would just ask that they reciprocate and be careful about what they say about people who are coming forward and telling their stories. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, that's, yeah, that's an interesting point that I didn't even, you know, think about that they could be accused of defamation as well.

You know, with those types of claims or violating HIPAA laws and whatnot. So and then, and the other thing that I don't know, you know, for, but with the, the point that they make with these things of, you know, people in family, saying that I knew them and they were never pregnant, you know, what do you think about that. Yeah, so there's a couple things about that. And again, like I know some things about this that I don't feel comfortable. I haven't been given permission to share right and so I want to be very careful but I will just put it this way. Anybody who has had a wife that's been pregnant knows that you don't know that she's pregnant for some amount of time. Right. And like I said earlier, nobody ever claimed that this woman was pregnant multiple times and brought those babies to full term. Right. So I don't know that I really want to say any more than that. But I just, the point that I want to make is, if you're going to demand accuracy, then you need to make sure that you're being accurate in what you're reporting, particularly when it has to do with an alleged victim. Right. Because as they point out, over and over again, there are comorbidities involved here like a lot of times there are like there are mental health issues, and I don't think anybody would say that there aren't. But the last thing you want to do with somebody that like Jackson acknowledges he can see the pain and I really appreciate that, that he can see that. But if you can see the pain. The last thing you want to go do is publicly accuse somebody of being mentally ill. Right, without having the evidence or accusing somebody of not having gone through pregnancies that they may very well have gone through. Right. So, yeah, it's it's it's hard to prove a negative, prove you didn't get pregnant right that you can't do that. But there is some due diligence that could have been done there beyond what what he appeared to have to have done. But at the same time, and this is I think we'll get into a little bit more. I think it's very important because I think that there is a mix and that there is a purposeful muddying of the water now, I want to make sure that I am very clear I'm not saying that that's what's going on with with with this, this woman that was just quoted from, but in general, that there is a muddying of the waters that there is either because of the network that they put out people that will tell fake stories that can be proven false to try to say oh look at this one false story. That's all not true. Right. And then you have people that are mentally ill that either hallucinate right they have false memories, maybe implanted, or that they just are they they have a mental disorder and they, or they think that they had something happen to them that never happened.

And I think that's a big part of psychiatry, that if that was the only thing we had that that would be not enough. You know, there are lots of people that I have interviewed that I've never brought forward because I didn't have enough not that I didn't believe that there. I had no way to say whether they were accurate or not and I didn't feel like I wanted to muddy the waters because I don't want to be responsible for it coming out later that the person that I interviewed and came out and said I trust this person, and something came out later on that provably you know said that they were mistaken. Right. Or whatever it was, because then we, we, they'll bring it up later is the boy that cried wolf I, I don't want to be getting ahead of our, I don't want to get ahead of ourselves but that is, that is a, that is a thing that I've been very careful of, and that I think that there is a problem out there of individuals and and groups of people and podcasts that do give too many people, a platform that does money the water and does make it and so that we dismiss the entirety because of a few bad apples. And I think we need to be weary. I'm really glad you brought that up I mean we're entering into a really interesting period of time regarding this research for a really long time. Nobody wanted to talk about it and you've been doing it for much longer than I have and I'm sure you can attest to the fact that is a very lonely place, right. But then you get some other people who are involving themselves in the conversation and it's growing and people are starting to talk about it. And I think the thing that we need to recognize on our side of this argument is that we do have to be careful about who we put forward and then one of the things I've been talking with victims about quite a bit is look, if you choose to come forward. Everybody has every right to examine your story and try to disprove it. When you choose when you take that step to become a public witness, then you are opening yourselves up to criticism, right. So I think your point is really well made.

Yeah, absolutely. Yep. And I think that if Jackson and if Hayden and if you know Cardinalis and if Jonah Barnes all want to do that hard work and verify and falsify things then I think they have every right to do that. Right. Absolutely. 100%. It'd be helpful, you know, if they're honest about it, it could be helpful because we could weed through the real stuff and the fake stuff, which is just essentially would be very essential in the work that's going on. Let's check out this next clip from the show. Jonah help enlighten us with. Yeah, I understand you've done a bunch of research into the origins of where all these things kind of started and the. Yeah. Help us understand. That is a very important thing right there is why did they go to Jonah, right. Why, why is he and I don't want to make this about because that's what they do a lot is they, they want to just smear someone and say, because of xyz we can't believe anything else they said. And so, you know, we don't want to do that but at the same time, a witness has to be credible for us to want to listen to them. And this individual has been, you know, caught many times on on important issues, right. I think there are the other show that he is on a lot of the stuff that they do is, you know, they're to me like the, the clowns, and they, they're just there to be funny and, you know, be silly and whatnot. And some of the things that he brings up are very serious issues. And he's just wrong, like demonstrably wrong not just like he's, oh, I have a different opinion to him, but demonstrably, you know, actually wrong, and in some cases, I don't know if I can prove it but he's either lying or just dangerously ignorant. And I think that in some of the cases.

It's pretty clear that he's not telling the truth he's being dishonest knowingly. Yeah, just using him as a witness and the expert that's done research on this topic and. Yeah, I take, I take real issue with the fact that they introduced him by saying he's done a bunch of research about this. I would be very very interested to know how many hours he put it in, and I would bet it's less than four, who's he's who's the interview Yeah, right. And so like I do take issue with that. And Jonah has many issues in this very show, he shows a forged forged government document right so he can add that to the list of things that he's going to get called out about. And, but yeah so I think it's I think it's very odd that they would bring Jonah Barnes on and present him as an expert in this topic because he's very clearly isn't. And let me just give one really quick example of this okay. If you've done any research in this, then you know that the church has an official position on ritual abuse right okay because in 1991 and 1992 in the Deseret News the public affairs department published a statement. Right. And the first presidency of the church, also published, like they said they sent a memorandum to all of the priesthood leadership in the church, where they acknowledge that this is a problem international and scope it's been going on for hundreds of years that there are victims, and that the church, like has charity and they're concerned for those who have been affected. Right. So you get this weird thing where Jonah Barnes comes on here with these guys, acting like it's not real at all, which means he didn't take the time to go find out if the church has an official position on that which should be. They're defending the church.

When they're actually going against what the church says, yes, that's right. And so I just, I think people need to be very very aware of the fact that they can say that he's done a bunch of research on this, but it's very clear that Jonah Barnes has done very little research on this time. It went to Wikipedia and maybe he looked at the false memory syndrome foundation website, if it's still there because they're debunked right they're gone. They went out of business but yeah I mean no it's like Jonah makes like the it's like Jonah went to a couple websites like gray faction maybe right. And he took the major points off of that and then he tries to use that as his own argument, which is a problem that Jonah has I mean he's already been found to be a plagiarist, and it looks very much like he kind of played the same game here where he took some people's research kind of mushed it into a ball and then presented it as I've done a bunch of research on this and then he tried to play it off this here's the final like you mentioned, yeah it's just not intellectually honest to do that. Right. So did the church, later on, did they come in like maybe have a different position or that is that what they did in the 90s was that is that the standing position. Yeah, great, great question and so I actually I don't know if they ever came out but this week, I wrote a letter to the church newsroom asking for comment on that, because it's now an issue that I think we need to get some clarification on and what I asked them was I found these documents that appear to to tell the church's official position on these issues, is this still the church's official position and if not, could you provide me an updated statement. And today was the day that I asked him to get back to me on I don't anticipate that I'll hear back from them they don't really care about me. Right. But I just, I want people to understand that we're trying to do our due diligence on this side and so as far as I know, we're not going to be changing the church's official position I've never found any other documents, updating that position. Okay, good, fair enough. And if there's an update, we will definitely post it we will pin it to the comments on this video will post this we will make sure that it is any updates on that will be put into the article as well. So, okay, now that we've introduced Jonah.

Let's, let's see his expertise that he starts to share with us. So, what Hayden said, Hayden, thank you so much for saying what what they're out what they're accusing is, is rape is of children of minors is sacrifice and cannibalism. A lot of this thrives on vagaries. There's something going on. Isn't that suspicious, doesn't that look strange and you say well what what are you getting at what are you getting at. Now I just want to remind everybody that this is exactly what happens to Joseph Smith. This is what happens to members of the Church of Jesus Christ, oh they want 10% of your money huh. What do they now. Oh, and these guys at the top of the queue 15, they don't, they don't have to work their secular jobs anymore huh. How convenient. So there's, there's several logical fallacies that Jonah brings up there. And you have one where he contradicts himself, where he's like, let's talk specifics they are specifically accusing them of xyz. And then he says, oh they're dealing in vagaries, like, well, right, which is it. They're not dealing in vagaries. There are people that deal in vagaries but I, why focus on them when obviously there are people that deal in specifics, and he named some of the specifics.

So that's that's the first one. The next one that he uses is the false equivalency. They're just like Joseph, these people that are being accused of SRA are just like Joseph Smith. Maybe you and I have a different view of the Prophet Joseph, but it is definitely and clearly a false equivalency. So that way you can say well, Joseph Smith was accused of this, therefore anybody else accused of bad behavior is just like Joseph Smith. And that is a intellectually dishonest. What I'm thinking and logic, and it is something that diminishes real crime. If we say that everyone that is accused of a crime which is really what he's saying here is that anybody that's accused of something is just like Joseph Smith falsely accused and being persecuted. Any thoughts, comments. Like I don't, I don't even know like I don't even know how to respond to Jonah Barnes, I really don't because so much of what he says is, is like couched in logical fallacies that we could spend literally six hours, going through every individual statement and so much of what Jonah does is performative. Right, right. Like you'll notice, it's all like scrunching up my face and throwing my hands around and like, and, and then he is voice squeaks when he gets excited right and it's like, so there's like it's, it's very performative and it's not based on logic and reason and so I don't really feel like the need I'm going to be doing another show where I'm going to go through like step by step, and I have about 20 things but like, like you pointed out the logical fallacies there I don't know that I really have anything other to say, else to say other than because other than be careful when you're watching somebody when it's so performative. You have to be really careful and make sure that what they're saying you're not just being entertained, like word radio and Jonah Barnes are in the edutainment industry, right, they're pretending to educate you, while really trying to entertain you.

And that's fine like people can make a living however they want to. But if you're going to step on this turf like you got to be really careful about edutaining because this isn't a game like you mentioned earlier, right, this is very serious stuff. Yeah. Yeah, and we have to be savvy to these things. Are we watching edutainment. Are they using emotion to get us to dismiss something because it makes it more like, oh, they, they said something that makes it so I don't have to worry about this anymore. Problems, you know, relieved I didn't have to think about it. They solve the problem for me. But what did they do, they just like you said they use that they use the performance didn't use facts, they just simply entertained you into being able to go back into complacency. So, for abuse victims, we want to have sympathy for abuse victims. Okay. But it does not help abuse victims. If we make false allegations. I'm not saying these are false. What I'm saying is, if the boy who cried wolf. The reason they didn't come wasn't because the last time he cried wolf when there was a wolf. It's because of all the other times he cried wolf when there wasn't. That's why the boy got eaten.

I've talked to the boys before, and I don't want to fall into their trap of bringing the same thing up over and over again. But at the same time, I think it's important for us to really state our position that I agree with this. I do not. And that's why we're you know I think responsible reporters on this subject are ensure that we are not bringing forth individuals that are crying wolf because to me this is a, this is real and it's deadly serious. I do not want to have anybody in the space that is going to be a boy who cried wolf. And so that way when we have the real evidence, they just throw it out the window. And so I just want to make that very clear that that I work very hard to make sure that that's whenever I talk about this, that we're not doing that, and that I don't give a platform to those that I think might be doing that, or that we can't prove aren't doing that. And that I that I am that it is me it is a detriment that when others in the space, do that. Yeah, great. Yeah, so I'm sort of have two minds about this, Ben. One is, I will agree that anytime somebody makes a false allegation it weakens our argument. Right. The reality is, though, that we live in an information age when anybody can say anything on multiple platforms. Sure. And so I think that the responsibility lies in two places. I think the responsibility lies in those who have shows that are choosing to bring on victims, and there needs to be a vetting process I think, right. And then the second piece is that it's on the consumer of information. And this goes back to what we were saying earlier like, look, I consume all kinds of information all day long and like probably 90% of it is incorrect.

Right, especially like when I hang out on x and stuff like that. Right. So whose job is it though to make sure that I don't in like, like imbibe that and make it a part of my own philosophy and worldview. Right. That's my responsibility. And in the gospel of Jesus Christ we believe that we are all agents. So, I would just say, we should expect that in an information age we're going to have a lot of boys who cry wolf. Right. But we can't blame the boy who cried wolf, we need to each be wise consumers of the information that we choose to to watch or read or bring into our lives in any way, shape or form. Right. The other, the other piece of that for me is that I would really love our side of the argument here to be able to mature into finding a place and a way for victims to have a voice without exposing them to legal jeopardy. And I think that right now sometimes we're not doing a great job of that, but I will say this. I didn't know that Jonah Barnes had a degree in therapy and he states categorically that it's not good for to allow victims to make false allegations. Like, I'll just say this, like several people that have been on some of these shows have come at their therapists urging, right, because it is good for a victim to find their voice and be able to share their stories. But we have to be responsible about that and we can't expose these victims to legal jeopardy by naming names that they ought not to name or claiming things that are going to put them in a position to be sued. Right. And so I would love to see us mature on our side of this and give people a place to tell their stories, but make sure that they do so in a responsible way. So, at the same time, what, and he brings this up later on, I don't know if we want to wait till then, but I'm going to say anyway so we're not going to wait till then. Um, we have with the Epstein files, people that have come forward, you know, they end up dead by suicide or other means.

And so we they do when they do come forward they they if if it is real, they put themselves at a real risk of life and limb not just lawsuits. Um, they haven't tried to sue me but they have tried to kill me with a no knock warrant. And so, after, after, after reporting on these things. And so, you know, that that is a real consequence to that but at the same time, what if we don't know specifics and I and that's one of the vagary, if people are engaged in vagary, I understand on one side we have wanting to protect people from lawsuits we want to expose evil and names and so that we're not trusting evil people. And so, finding that balance I don't know the answer. But I think it's something that we do have to consider. If, if we have names to name. There has to be a place where we we help people be able to know who is guilty and so that we can start to move forward with with justice individuals. Yeah, I mean, like you said I don't have an answer for this either it's it's it's a question of time and place. Right. When's the right time and what's the right place to share specific pieces of information. And I mean, I think that we are a nation of laws and I know Ben that you like really like you understand this better than almost anybody. Right. And so, but like, there are defamation laws there are libel laws. And as we allow victims to come forward we have to make sure that these people who may be in a place where they don't understand those things are protected by those of us who bring them on to shows and allow them to tell their stories.

Right, right, because there is a time and place to share names, and it may not be the podcast it's me maybe okay. Even though it's frustrating to people like Jonah Barnes, it may be okay to tell your story with some vagaries to alert people to the problem, where it may not be appropriate to share specific names or crimes allegedly committed because it exposes you to legal jeopardy. Right. Yeah. Yeah, and not everybody is willing to pay certain prices, they're like, Hey, I'm willing to come out and say this happened to me but I'm not willing to sacrifice xyz for that cause. Yeah. There was a thing now, this sounds weird to people who don't know about I was trying to explain this to my kids they wouldn't believe it the satanic panic of the 1980s, where the exorcist comes out on VHS and horror movies are a big thing there's a couple murders Three Rivers, Massachusetts MTV comes out Dungeons and Dragons comes out and people start getting really worked up about nefarious things that could be going on but the people who got worked up were the Christian right. I want everybody to remember this, the Christian right, the evangelicals were very worked up that there could be satanic things going on. Okay. It didn't help that one of the murderers in the Three Rivers, Massachusetts case said satanic cult. She told the authorities or satanic cult that kicked off this huge thing. Then it coupled with so they had that that religious hysteria.

So there's two things right there that I wanted to bring out. Okay. The first one is, I want you to remember, it was Christian hysteria. So, like, it was like this dog whistle to to Latter Day Saints that, oh, it's, it's people that don't like us that are the real problem. You know, it's, it is a way to discredit it because it's these guys that we think are weird or crazy that are always going after us that are making these accusations or that are causing this satanic panic. And so, you know, we can dismiss it because it's these guys. The next thing is to talk about the the Three Rivers murders and how it was a problem that one of the victims that a victim said that it was it was a Santa was because of a satanic cult. Just a little problem Ben it's just that they admitted that it's exactly what we say it is. And he acted as if it was a problem like oh I can't believe she said that that kind of ruined everything for us. And so I wanted to, there's a, there's a couple of things that I want to bring up on that. So what is the background of this so we go back to this is a report on on those murders. And this is in February of 1980 at 20 year old sex worker, Karen Marson Mars Marsden was sobbing in a police car, the officers who picked her up, wanted her to take them to the sites of satanic rituals, she claimed to have attended in the woods near Fall River, Massachusetts, but she was panicked and incoherent. She claimed that her pimp, whom she referred to as Satan would kill her. If he found out she'd been taken talking to police. She asked them to drop her at St. Mary's Church so she could talk to a priest. The officers left her at the rectory door. Two months later, part of her skull and other remains were found in the forest outside town.

And Jonah Barnes wants to dismiss this because, heaven forbid that we actually talk about it so, and then the people that were convicted of this murder was actually part of. So I want to show a news clip, just a section of a news clip that talks about the murder. In the late 70s and early 80s three killings in Fall River shocked the community. Doreen Levesque, Barbara. Let me go back. Okay. Fall River woman involved in a series of murders linked to a satanic cult gets paroled after several attempts. The board thinks that she deserves to be set free 40 years after the crimes. In the late 70s and early 80s three killings in Fall River shocked the community. Doreen Levesque, Barbara Raposa and Karen Marsden were murdered as part of a satanic cult and prostitution ring. These aren't wild accusations of some prostitute right I mean she was a prostitute, but they were proved this is part of the case this was like the reported in the news about it that it wasn't like accused, let you know, satanic cult no. These were satanic cult members that were engaged in murder and when they found out she was talking to police, they killed her. Jonah Barnes, trying to dismiss it all dang it, I can't believe the whore mentioned that it was a satanic, you know, satanic panic, that it was a satanic cult that was a part of this.

The fact that he was trying to downplay that reveals the intellectual dishonesty the fact that he's trying to make sure that we don't give any credibility to the idea that there are satanic cults out there doing these things. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, so later on in the show Jackson asks does it happen with like why would you ask if it happens if Jonah Barnes just showed you that it happens. So like, I mean I think like I don't want to be. I do want to be hard on these guys because they chose to come out and do this, but like on the other hand like I think it just shows how new they are to the conversation, which again is funny because coming up, I don't know if you have this clip but Jonah Barnes will talk about coming in, in the middle of a conversation, right, which is what they've done here is come in into the middle of a conversation that they have very little knowledge about, and then say things like, oh there's this little problem where the perpetrators say that they were in a satanic cult. Like that's not a little problem that's like a nuclear bomb going off in the middle of your argument. Right. Right. And you presented it. So like, sometimes I feel like we don't even have to do these shows because anybody who can rub two brain cells together should watch that and be like, wait, what did he just say, like satanic panic isn't real but these people were Satanists that murdered this woman. I should set off like major red flags in people's minds. Right, right. Right. Yeah.

Then the other piece of it you had psychology and therapy culture. And you had therapists come out talking to children and asking children, have you been, have you been molested. Now the children would say, no, and they'd say that for like six months. But after six months of not letting them go to the bathroom or not letting them have a snack or putting all this pressure on these kids sometimes the kids would say yes. Well, you don't get you're walking in the middle of a conversation. These kids also said, and daddy was riding on a broomstick, and he took me up into a spaceship. When he did it, and all these, you know, wild claims. When it's brought before a district attorney or a judge, this is this is true I, this isn't hyperbole this that actually happened. When these are brought before a judge or for before criminal prosecutors investigators, they leave out the broomstick, the levitating the hypnosis, the tunnels that lead to Philadelphia, they leave out all those things. And all people here is daddy abused me. And that is brought to trial, then halfway through they say, oh, and also here's some other evidence that the kids said you were, you know, riding on the back of a dragon.

When you did it, and they're like, okay, well get this garbage out here. This is what you call poisoning the well right you have first of all he's trying to say, oh, it's the Christian right that brought up this panic, because they were worried about Satan, crazy Christians, worried about Satan. And then he goes into, oh, and then it's also it's crazy Christians, worried about Satan and then it's also this big memories that were, you know, going on. And so, the, it's this this poisoning of the well that these are the only two options out there. You either got crazy Christians or you got false memories. And, you know, every dad has been accused of, you know, he misses one football game and all of a sudden he's the worst dad in the world. And I've got nine kids, and I guarantee you, none of them have ever and will could whatever accused me of any of these types of things. And so, like, you know, my kids have never even said that, like, you're the worst dad ever. I mean, that's even when they're upset with me for saying, you know, you've got to go do your chores. This kind of drama isn't something that I've ever experienced. I'm sure other people have had false accusations and all that kind of a thing. But to blow it up as if, like, every, every kid blames their dad for molesting them or for being part of some satanic ritual cult, that we, we have to just dismiss every single accusation because every parent gets their kids accusing them of something. That is such a ridiculous logical fallacy that I can't believe that he even thought to use it. Yeah.

Yeah, well look, I mean that clip that clip shows me is that Jonah thinks everybody's wrong but him. Right. So let's let's think about, let's think about what he said. Okay, so he starts off saying that children were being interviewed and for six months, they would say no I wasn't abused. But these therapists were withholding snacks and not letting these children go to the bathroom. Right, right. Right. If a therapist did that, they would likely be disciplined for operating outside of professional boundaries right so the children are wrong, the therapists are wrong. Then he moves on to the prosecutors, who he says, we're removing information from cases right wasting the judiciary's time right, which, if it were true and he can bring documents he wants to maybe there are some cases where this is true I don't know, but he doesn't present evidence so there's no way for me to know whether it's true. Right. He just says it, but if a prosecutor were to do that and withhold evidence on purpose, and then it only came out during trial, then that prosecutor would likely be disciplined, because that's against their code of ethics. Right. So what prosecutors are on judges are wrong therapists are wrong children are wrong but you know who's right. Jonah Barnes is right. And don't question Jonah, and don't ask for documents because he says this is real. So since he says this is real we're just supposed to expect it we're expected to say, Okay, Jonah, thanks. So I would just invite Jonah to bring some documents and let's see how many cases. This really involves right where children aren't allowed to go to the bathroom. It takes six months for allegations to come out, they don't get snacks, a prosecutor withholds evidence, and then it gets thrown out later, I'd love to see the number of cases where that applies. Right. Yeah. And it's funny because he uses that line of logic to be able to make his point, and then he accuses the other side right the people of doing the exact same thing you don't trust anybody later to. And so that's exactly is accusing others of doing what he is doing himself.

So, what we learned during the 1980s 1990s with this whole satanic panic thing is that oral testimony, I witness testimony can be a little faulty, especially in children who have been who have been suggestively questioned by therapists. There are more protocols in place now because of what happened that keep that keep these things from taking over so just just for context for everybody. If you start from, I believe the children, I believe anything that children say everything the children. If you start from that, then every parent in the world is going to be the worstest, the worstest mommy ever at some point. Yeah, you believe the children, every daddy in the world is going to be never ever ever spends time with me. Every parent listening to this is like yeah I've been accused of that too. Yeah, yeah, right, child, I'll be gone for one. I'll miss one soccer game and it's like daddy you never knew a soccer games like are you kidding me I come to all of your side is one soccer game. So, so if we're going to believe everything that children say that every parent in the world is guilty of the most heinous crimes. So that's kind of a continuation but he he makes this logical fallacy as well of, you know, we either believe them all or we don't believe them it's like it's this weird thing where we know the kids can't nobody that I know nobody I'm sorry I didn't mean to interrupt. But he's arguing against something that nobody's ever argued. Right. I've never heard anybody say that we should believe everything that children say I have not even worked with children in all the years that I've done this, I've not worked with children these always been adults victims who come forward. Right, saying so like, I just don't even know where he's at in his head on this like he's arguing against things that nobody's argued. Yeah, I mean, I think that's a point without distinction as far as I'm concerned, like, if he wants to argue about that that's great maybe he needs to find somebody who's making the argument that he wants to debunk but nobody over here is making that argument.

And then the first thing that he makes that clip the first point is that memories are faulty. It's like, right so no memory is good like that means that every testimony without video footage has to be thrown out of court, it's because because memory is faulty. Yeah, well so and let's let's give him credit where credit is due in this case. I mean, so the memory and eyewitness testimony can be faulty. Absolutely. Like, you can go out and you can do a bunch of research. That's the biggest nobody saying that. So but the but the fact of the matter is is that despite the fact that it can be faulty. The American justice system as you mentioned earlier is largely built on eyewitness testimony. Right. And many cases as you mentioned, are settled only through eyewitness testimony, or maybe not many, but there are cases that are like that and so if it's good enough for the American jurisprudence system, it's good enough for me. But again, we have to be responsible to take that eyewitness testimony and verify what we can and falsify what needs to be falsified, but to say that, like to just throw a blanket over it and act like we should never listen to anything that anybody says because it's eyewitness testimony is like fundamentally un-American, really, like, I want to take it to an extreme, I guess, right. And Joseph Smith as a child is he going to say that we can't, we can't trust the eyewitness testimony of the Prophet Joseph. You know, it's, it's, it's, he is not intellectually honest with his own arguments, he doesn't apply them equally to himself, that he wants others to live up to. So like whether it happened or not is immaterial but like you said, it's just an internally inconsistent argument that Jonah's making over and over and over again. This is asymmetric warfare. Just like, just like John Lennon at Mormon Stories. John Lennon at Mormon Stories, his channel is just anti-Mormon anecdotes. He sits and gives people a microphone, and they get to say whatever they want about whoever they want.

And no one can fight back. Bishops can't fight back, state presidents can't say anything back because these things are, because they have scruples, because they're honest, because they have integrity. So you can spout whatever you want about the Q15. The Q15 are never going to fight, they're never going to come down and say, "On this day, I was in this place at this time and you're lying." You can just kind of say whatever you want, and as long as you're vague, well there's nothing to falsify anyways. I don't like this asymmetric warfare. If these people have a specific accusation they want to bring, bring it. Same thing, mudding the water. Everybody that is bringing up satanic ritual abuse is the same as every anti-Mormon. We're trying to mix the two together, they're the same thing. And that, again, saying that, "Hey, if you've got specific accusations, bring them." You know how many specific accusations there are? Like, has he not read the police reports? Has he not read, you know, listened to the accusations of naming names, naming locations, you know, naming actions and specific things that happened? It's crazy. Yeah, no, the clear answer is that he has not read those things. And, but yet he feels emboldened to show up on a show and act as though he's done a bunch of research on this, right? But no, he clearly hasn't read that. The other thing I'd point out is that it's, again, it's like, it's very much a black and white, "They are bad, we are good," kind of a thing. So, they can come on and they can say anything they want to, but we can't fight back because we have scruples, right?

Right. And that's not true at all. So, let me just give you two, like, so first of all, they can, they can fight back, okay? They have agency. Any bishop who gets accused, any state president who gets accused, any member of the quorum of the 12, any member of the first presidency who gets falsely accused of something on any of these podcasts has the ability to go out and fight back, okay? Especially, Jonah wants to talk about asymmetrical warfare. Let's talk about what's asymmetrical, okay? You have victims who have no money, who have no time, who are struggling with mental health issues, who have fought for years and years and years to the point of exhaustion to have their stories heard against men who have the best lawyers, who have all the time in the world to pay those lawyers, who have all, like, I mean, you want to talk about asymmetric, right? The asymmetry lies in the overwhelming odds of any victim ever being heard, okay? And so, like, it's just, again, I mean, like, just the intellectual dishonesty of this man is, it really drives me up a wall a little bit, right? And so, but yeah, I mean, it's, you can't let yourself be persuaded by arguments that are theatrical but lacking foundation, I guess is my major point. Unless you have zero faith in the criminal justice system of the United States of America, if you have zero faith in your county, state, local law enforcement, or the FBI, if you have zero, absolutely zero faith in these things, then I hope you never call 911 in your whole life. When you get pulled over by a cop, just go ahead, speed off, just speed off, because they're all part of this big cabal, right?

Straw man, I mean, completely straw man. First of all, you can understand that, and I've documented this, that every level of government is involved in this. The sheriff's department is helping to cover up and intimidate those that come forward. You have the judiciary that prevents prosecutors from prosecuting. You have the state legislature refusing to pass legislation criminalizing ritual abuse. You know, the list goes on and on, that every level of government is involved in this, first of all. But nobody says that every individual, and he's going to, he talked about this later on, the garbage man is in on it, right? And so, either everybody's in on it or nobody's in on it, and that if you think that there is a conspiracy going on, then just run away from the police when they try to pull you over. Never call 911 for help. And, you know, I don't think I would, because there's a lot of reason not to, but at the same time, if I'm in the Soviet Union, or if I'm in the National Socialist Germany of the 1930s, am I going to run away from the Gestapo, just because I think that they're part of some criminal enterprise?

If I want to get shot, sure. Like, it's, it's, or, you know, do I think that that cop is going to try, is because I'm speeding, is just going to pull me over and try to make me, you know, a victim of ritual abuse? No, it's, it's, it's a ridiculous argument to make. Most of the time when a cop pulls you over, it's because he's going to give you a warning or a ticket or whatever it is, and you're going to go about your day. And it's a ridiculous argument to say that if you think this is, everybody in the conspiracy is, everybody in the world is part of this conspiracy, that you should just run away from the police. Otherwise, no, otherwise this isn't happening. You either run away from the police, or this isn't happening. It's a ridiculous argument. Yeah, and I just would point out to people like how many of Jonah's arguments involve extremes, right? If we believe this, then all parents are the worst parents ever. If you have zero faith in law enforcement, right, not like 20% or 30% or 40%, no, it's all or zero, right? And of course, if you're coming at this for the very first time, it's very easy to be like, oh, well, I don't have zero faith. I have some faith in law enforcement, so I don't have to pay attention to any of this. Right, right. It's a very dishonest way of forming an argument. Yeah. Yeah. And the other thing that he gets into with this, you know, what we can see is completely false is the Epstein, I think, because of all the connections that we have with the similar stories between Epstein victims and SRA victims, and the fact that we know that there is a criminal enterprise going on with Epstein and his co-conspirators, and the Department of Justice and the FBI is complicit with the, you know, the executive branch, and the Congress is complicit, you know, previous administrations across political parties have all been complicit or, best case scenario, or in outright protecting this criminal enterprise.

And so the idea that this isn't happening is ridiculous. We can see it on a national level, that it is clearly happening. And so the fact, the idea that it wouldn't happen on the local level is insane. Sure. Yeah, I mean, there's a conversation to be had about how much we should trust government. Right. You don't start the conversation by saying, if you have zero, finger wagging, if you have zero faith in government, that's not how you start a responsible conversation. You trust it all, you don't trust any of it. There's no, there's no thing in between. That's right. Yeah. So if Jonah wants to have the conversation about how much we should trust government with evidence, I'd be happy to have that conversation. Right. Now, what people don't, might not realize, back in 1989, at the height of the satanic panic, this is a real thing, 384,000 sex abuse allegations were brought to law enforcement from therapists or from whomever. 384,000 in a single year. It was bananas. Okay. How many of those actually resulted in people serving time? Can you guess? 0.89%. 0.89%. Less than 1% of those actually ended up serving jail time.

384,000 frivolous, well not, 383,000 frivolous lawsuits are brought against, accusations are brought against just regular people in your neighborhood. It was crazy. It was absolutely crazy. And then when law enforcement gets involved and says, okay, let's find the evidence. Okay, let's dig into this. Sure. Let's, let's, let's do this. Oh, I don't want to testify. Oh, well, actually I misremembered. Oh, there's no physical evidence for the thing. They recant. And it all, it all falls to pieces. 0.89%. Horribly offensive to an intellectual, an honest person. The idea that every single one that didn't result in a conviction was frivolous is insane. And, you know, people don't want to testify. You know how often right does that mean that, that the mafia doesn't exist because we have informants that changed their mind and don't want to testify against the mafia, it's the logic, it doesn't exist it's really it's it is dishonest at its very, very core. And there are lots of reasons why prosecutors don't bring forth cases. There are prosecutors that believe that a victim is telling the truth, but they just don't think they can get a conviction so they don't bring it forward that doesn't make it frivolous. The idea that that all of them were frivolous that didn't get convicted. It's so insane I can't believe he even made that one as well.

Yeah, well let's I mean let's just back up a second, like, we're talking about satanic ritual abuse, and I this really jumped out at me like part of the problem is Jonah makes claims without presenting any evidence, and he'll say this is real, this is real. So, okay, like I tried to sort of source this, and I didn't spend a ton of time on it because I don't have a ton of time to spend like refuting everything Jonah Barnes says, but I was not able to find any kind of evidence that there were ever 384,000 cases of satanic ritual abuse ever, not to mention in one year. So did we jump tracks, all of a sudden, right, are we now not talking about just satanic ritual abuse but all sexual abuse, right, or all physical abuse domestic violence I don't even know what he's talking about at this point. Okay. Beyond that so I'd love for him to source it and it's he sounds very certain. So I'm not saying that there's not a source, I just want to see it. Yeah, I mean, I think Google search for crimes that were not convicted. So, but the other part of the problem here is that in a lot in a lot of ways he's making our case, because if you have 384,000 people who claim something and only point eight 9% and in convictions, right, what that doesn't tell me is that only point eight nine were convicted. And so if that doesn't happen. It tells me there's something wrong with the system. Right, you have 300 and he needs to do his math a little bit better and I'm not going to do a great but like it's let's say you have 348 or 300 whatever it is, like, if you have over 300,000 people lying about being sexually abused. You have a different problem that needs to be addressed. And, but apparently, nobody wanted to address that which tells me that Jonah's probably not correct in his assumption, or his conclusion. Right. So anyway, that whole part of the argument I mean it really did catch my, my eye because at least he throws out a number. Right. But like he says if you're once you put down a post, you have to defend your argument. Right. Okay, so all I'm going to ask is for Jonah to defend his argument here, show us where he got his numbers, show us like why he came to the conclusions that he comes to, but as far as I'm concerned, I don't believe the number that he gave us and I don't believe that it means what he thinks it means. Right. Yeah, to me, even if the numbers are accurate. It does not mean that they were all frivolous that's a crazy argument. Of course not. Yeah, like I said, if you have 300 over 300,000 people falsely claiming and making frivolous claims.

That's a huge issue in public policy. Right. And I went to graduate school for public policy, we would love to latch on to that and start making like all kinds of rules about people who do that right but it never happened. This right here is my completely fake over 19 vaccination record card that I made by myself and laminated. Look, I'm with you. I'm with you. Okay, it was bananas. Okay, it was absolutely crazy yeah you can see I tried I wrote with my left hand. So, I had a minimally compliant mask was a fishnet mask. I'm with you. I'm with you on COVID it was crazy. Okay, it was a total shakedown right okay you and I, you know, on that beginning part where he talks about his vaccine card. I'm all for nullification all that kind of stuff. My thing right there with that quote. And with that clip right there is that he calls it a shakedown that it was absolutely bananas. And he's there to defend the church, the church says that it was real church said to trust the doctors the church said that the vaccine was a literal God sent Why would you get a fake vaccine card. If your leader that you support says that it was a literal God sent that it was a miracle, and that we should all be good global citizens and take our job. You're bananas and your, and your profit is, is a part of this bananas, you know fraud that you just said was a fraud because you got a fraudulent card, because the, because the issue was a, you know, the, the need for a vaccine was fraudulent. Like, are you defending the church or are you against them. His, he is so inconsistent with his principles. It's mind boggling.

Well look I mean we have a problem here. I mean Jonah Barnes just flashed the evidence of a crime that he can read on screen. Like, so and I think it's, I'm always concerned when I see members of the church who are amused by people who break the law. You saw the other two guys laugh and giggle about it. Like I don't think that's funny at all like I chose to lose a job that I was being paid about a quarter of a million dollars a year, because I didn't want to get vaccinated. Well Jonah Barnes forged a vaccine card so that he could keep his employment and not stand on principles. Right on that like I really don't understand. I'm assuming Jonah Barnes has a temple recommend, which tells me that he's answering questions about being honest in all of his dealings with his fellow man in the affirmative. And yet, he's on camera flashing a fake a forged document. So like, I think all I can say about this is like Jonah should be grateful that this happened like three years into my research, because if it had happened on year one, like his bishop and law enforcement would already have this evidence in their hands because I don't think it's funny at all when people break the law. But I'm like three years into it and I don't really feel like playing that game. So, I mean, but, and it just goes to Jonah's credibility like why would you listen to somebody who admits to breaking the law about anything that they want to argue about. I don't, I don't understand why you would take that person as an expert in anything, personally. Okay. I'm a nullification guy I think you should disobey bad laws but that's a different story.

Who sincerely knew that COVID, you know, who was, who was plotting behind the scenes. Part of the grand conspiracy to force COVID on the world. It wasn't 10s of millions hundreds of millions of people. At best it was a couple people. I think it was government and competence, most of it. With all the documentation that's come out like any kind of research. This guy's a research guy and he's like, it's government and competence and it's just a couple of guys involved. Who would trust this guy's research it's, it's crazy. I mean, and it's not about ritual abuse I so like I don't even really have a comment about it. Sure. But I can't see what COVID was at this point and you're not going to ever see. That's very different than thinking that three out of four houses in your cul-de-sac that your bishop and your state president that millions that all law enforcement officials the mortician the ambulance driver the firefighter, the district attorney and the judge and the jury. That your primary teacher that everybody's in on this heinous thing to cannibalize babies that they're all in on this together. And they know that it's horribly hurt and there's they're they sincerely are just lying through their teeth. That's very different than a bunch of government and competence and hysterical news reports that spun people up into the into the COVID hysteria. And again, the false equivalency of you either believe you're three out of four houses on your block are involved in this. Otherwise it doesn't. Yeah, three out of four.

Who is claiming three out of four houses on your block are involved in this, who find me a person that is claiming that I'd like, I'd like to listen to that podcast, it might be good entertainment because it's so insane. It's like a weekly world news bat boy type of nonsense, saying three out of four houses on a block are in on this. Yeah, I mean it's just, it is what it is right i mean so he goes to the extreme again. It's three out of four houses, and it's, it's not the rape right that he brought up earlier. It's not the abuse it's the cannibalism that he wants to talk about now. Right. And sure like if you want to drive the argument to its extreme numerically speaking like the church says in their official statement cannibalism is likely not a problem numerically speaking for most members of the Church of Jesus Christ, what are you saying, why does Jonah want to focus on that part of the article it's because he wants people to shut their eyes and go back to sleep right away. Because people are concerned, because we're making a better argument, and people are starting to think about this logically and rationally, not with the illogic and irrationality that Jonah Barnes wants you to think about. Right. Right. And to say that cannibalism doesn't happen is dishonest as well because we have, we have evidence we've got you know you got spirit cooking you've got the pizza gate files that came out. You have the Epstein files that have come out you have the Franklin cover up in Nebraska, the same stories are being told and and and with evidence, we have admissions and I'm going to get into that a little bit later kind of debunking a lot of the stuff that that he that he claims just at the very end putting it all together. But to say that it doesn't happen at all is just is dishonest as well. But, and so you're just linking all of these things together you think that three out of four people on your street are eating babies, or you don't believe it happens at all. It's madness.

I actually think from watching a lot of these interviews with these people that are making these allegations and claims. A lot of them I will admit they do seem sincere. Oh sure. It's coming from people that have a verified history of mental illness paranoid schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. And so I feel that it's irresponsible for the people that are making these allegations to say that this is only coming from people with mental disorders, schizophrenia and bipolar, that's, this is not coming from anywhere else just that. How honest. Yeah, look, I want to give them a pass if I can because like, again, I just think they're new to this and I don't know that they really realize that when you open your mouth and say something there are people here who are going to hold you accountable. And when you say something like that and you pin it on two specific mental illnesses. Right. Like you've just made a position, you've just taken a position that you have to defend. So now Jackson you have to go back and find me all the cases, all these interviews that you supposedly watched, then you need to bring me their diagnoses which you're never going to find. So you can't you can't just come out and say stuff like that. Now, the other piece of this is, I would really be interested to know what they think happens to people who are abused in the ways that these people are claiming to be abused. Yeah. So like, it's not it's not a great argument to claim that they all have mental illness because you would expect that many of them would have mental illness, based on what they've experienced. Right. Not to mention that we don't even really know what mental illness is. There are no tests, there's no blood test for bipolar. There's no blood test for schizophrenia. Okay.

So like there's a much larger there's so many like larger conversations that these guys just don't seem to want to have. Right. But they just want to jump to everybody that's doing this has bad intent. Everybody is not telling the truth and they're all mentally ill. Right. Right. They're all of those things. It's crazy. Yeah. Yeah. And it's, I was gonna say something trying to remember what I was gonna say. Whatever. Next, we'll just go to the next clip. It's just the dishonesty is just. Well, and at the same time, well, this was gonna say is that if we just find you know a quarter of the people don't fit that that that narrative. You've drawn the whole thing that their whole case is gone. What if people don't have I mean, I think it's from the evidence that I've seen there it's actually not a small majority, you know, it is not a small number that don't have that I think it's a large number of people that don't have that that have not been diagnosed with that at least that have actually come out and have said it before any kind of diagnosis has been made. Interesting. Yeah. So, we have like with the the Hamlin case, and you know, the individuals involved in that.

There's no. Well David Levitt gets up though and called them tragically mentally ill. And I don't I mean I don't know I don't know if the Hamlin. David Levitt, he contradicts himself to my opinion is, is that he is knee deep in this stuff. And that, because in an interview he says in one instance they're tragically mentally ill. And the next instance he says, I believe them. Which is the unbelievable because they're mentally ill, or does he believe it, and then he laughs about how you train someone to be abused. It's just disgusting. Does it happen, I believe that somewhere in the world. Yeah, there probably is some sick freaks that do some heinous stuff, possibly cannibalistic things or whatnot. I'm not naive enough to say that it's never happened in the world or doesn't happen, but then to force that type of allegation onto the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and say that the quorum of the 12 apostles that Thomas Johnson was one of the evilest people on earth, and all of these things. I think it's extremely irresponsible to give these people that have a verified history of mental illness, a platform to unchallenge make whatever claims that they want. And I think that's the same thing again that he makes this false, you know, he's like, anywhere in the world, like as if like this could never happen in a first world country United States this can't be a thing. Cannibalism sure do we have some tribes in India and Africa that and in South America that might be cannibal sure, but you know, it's irresponsible to claim that leaders of the church are involved in this. And I would say it's irresponsible to claim that anybody's involved with it, if it's not true.

So, if it's not true absolutely I agree with you, it's irresponsible to name people that aren't involved. 100% agree with. Yeah, so I think, I think Jackson, you know really tips his hand here about what they're really offended about. He starts the show by telling us, and then he circles back to it after making an argument has nothing to do with what the show is supposed to be about. He circles back to the thing that they're really offended about is that people like Thomas S. Monson were named. Nobody cared and nobody paid attention to any of these stories until people started naming the prophets and the apostles. And because of that cultural conditioning that all Mormons have the first you have to defend the prophet to the death. Right. And that's when they care, all of a sudden, and that's fine. Like, if that's when they want to jump in the conversation, that's fine. They just need to be aware that like we haven't played all of our cards yet. Right. Right. We haven't. And I don't know if we'll ever be able to play all of our cards, because some of it is stuff that like is going to be very difficult to substantiate, but I think he really tips his hand here, right, and what they really want to do is just make sure that nobody that leads the church ever gets tied to this kind of thing. And that's fine, except that like Glenn Pace, right, and you can probably speak to this better than I can, but Glenn Pace was pretty clear that it went pretty high up in the hierarchy of the church, according to his belief. And government. And government. Right. And so again, you're sort of fighting against the very people that you said you would sustain when you start making these kinds of arguments. But beyond that, like, we really have to start it at, like, because they're members of the church, we have to start this argument at what is the official position of the church. If we start there and they say that it's numerically not a problem but it is a problem, then what we're talking about now is not a problem of does it exist, we're talking about a problem of what is the scope of the problem. Nobody knows that. Nobody knows. But what we know is that it's a worldwide church that claims to have 17 million members, and I don't know the number maybe I can't remember what the number is I think it's, well I won't even say, but there's a certain number of words there's X number of words.

Right. And what if one person in every third ward had a problem with this. Yeah, you're still talking about a problem in a church that claims to care about like 99 and one and going after the one. Okay, so when you start the argument from the correct place, it becomes very difficult to argue that there's no issue, or that the issue is something that we shouldn't be paying attention to. So, this don't start the argument at the right place, because that allows them to tell everybody to go back to sleep and just move on with your lives and go to your nine to five and take your kids to soccer and go to the lake on Saturday and pretend that nobody out there is being hurt. Right. And they actually I think hurt their own case with this because in their overzealousness and trying to protect leadership in the institution. They actually are harming the leadership in the institution because they are putting it into this either or scenario, where it's true, which means they're involved, but because they can't be involved, it can't be true. And so if it's so they they are putting forward this false dichotomy of it is either if it's true, that means they're involved. And so but it's even. Yeah, go ahead. It's even worse than that, because, because the church's official position is that it does exist. You now have a situation where they either have to argue that the prophets got it wrong by saying that it does that it does exist. Right, right, or the prophets got it right but Glenn Pace got it wrong and Satanists don't abuse, in which case, I'll probably look into being a Satanist, right, that would be the only group of people on the face of the earth who don't abuse people. Right, so it's even more like their position is just untenable, but nobody's going to take the time to think about that they're just going to watch this and be edutained.

Right, and then move on with their lives and that's the real danger. That's so for me that's the real problem is that it's a disservice to the people who watch these shows to present these kinds of arguments. Right, it's just it's not fair to the people who have an interest and want good information to get their information from people who are so intellectually dishonest and and and misinformed. Right. Well, and their, their, their scenario actually leads to destroying testimonies because somebody that digs into it when they have this false dichotomy set up for them. They have to, they're then put into a situation where they have to then think that their leadership has to be involved in it. And so, because if it's true because if it's if it is a real thing that means, according to these guys, that means the leadership is involved. And, and I think that there is there is wiggle room you know that I don't know about wiggle room, but there is room in this right because according their own position they are saying that it's real. And so, if you then in an effort to protect the institution of the leaders of the institution, say that it can't be true because if it is true they're in trouble they're involved in it. Then you put people that recognize that it is real into a position of saying, then that must mean the leaders are involved in it, which is what they want. Yeah, I agree. So that, so there's much more to the program. I didn't want to keep rehashing the same points over and over again as they do.

But really what it boils down to is they like to say either all of this or none of this. And, and that's a big big problem like I just, I've just been mentioning and so is it all just vagaries, is it is there no physical evidence involved. It's all just regressed memory that's being brought forth later on. And so I've done a presentation on this, and so there are some points that I want to bring out, and I'll, I'll share this on the on the screen. There is a lot of people that have done serious and real investigative work and this isn't just about Mormons. This is widespread we have the Epstein's I mentioned the Franklin scandal out in Nebraska and we have the Glenn pace memo. And as much as I hate to give card in any credit. He in the word radio show on this topic that he they uninvited you from, interestingly enough. He does bring up Glenn pace memo whereas this program with Jonah Barnes totally, totally ignores the existence of the church having an investigation into this, and a member of their presiding Bishop Rick saying, this is real, and it is going up into positions of authority that he as a member of the presiding Bishop Rick, someone that was faithful in the church, his entire life says that people in the Mormon tabernacle choir were part of it, patriarchs were a part of it state presidents were a part of it, etc. And that that did not ruin his testimony that he actually said that it actually validates his testimony in the Book of Mormon, but this program wants to completely ignore that because it gives credibility the issue whereas you have work radio saying, yeah, they recognize that Glenn pace did this report, but Glenn pace was a nut, or was you know suckered in by whatever, for whatever reason. And so, to me at least they were honest enough over on a word radio to address it, even though I think it's a pretty untenable position to have to say that the church's member of the presenting Bishop Rick had it wrong. But, so you have the Glenn pace report, you have two very respected individuals, investigating the Franklin cover up, you have john decamp who is a member of the Nebraska legislature you have Nick Bryant also writing a book on it, interviewing victims, going over the, the, the material and the evidence of it.

And there was a video that a documentary that was made called conspiracy of silence regarding the Franklin cover up in Nebraska. And so talking about physical evidence is what Jonah Barnes kept them bring up, why is it all vagary there's no physical evidence. So let's just play this just this clip about what happened with rich satanic ritual abuse in Nebraska. Despite the investigation, Larry King remained free to feed his pedophilic parties with child victims. In 1988, a routine review brought the boys town cases to the attention of Nebraska State foster care review board. The information presented to the foster care review board, either via the telephone reports, the personal reports, or the reports we reviewed Larry King's name was consistently present as someone that the youth were making allegations against. When I turn that information over to authorities, and nothing happened. I would say we handed over at least a foot high amount of material. Generally speaking, the allegations were ignored. Omaha police now accept that Larry King may have been abusing children. But it's my senior detective claims he never received any evidence. It is certainly possible that Mr. King was involved in illegal acts with children. If there was sufficient evidence evidence of those types of allegations, he would have been prosecuted by the county attorney's office. For me it was very clear that the case was not investigated and not pursued because of the alleged perpetrators. Those perpetrators named by the children formed a ring of rich and powerful pedophiles in Omaha, and from industry, politics, the media, even the police.

So you have right there a lot there, lying saying they didn't get this information to investigate. And you have a professional who isn't like a therapist that is trying to dig up these repressed memories they just had them reported to them. They, they weren't part of some therapist regressed memory retrieval. They were just organically reported things to the foster care system. And this professional that deals with this stuff that, you know, is always working with people that are being abused is reporting stuff that they would that they normally report all the time that does get prosecuted, but all of a sudden when it's a part of a network of rich and powerful people. All of a sudden that the police department was like well I had, we didn't receive any information on this. And the, the idea that you know that there is no evidence. These people in these positions aren't looking out to like just get everybody in positions of power to get into prison and they're making up all these different accusations. They're just people from, you know, that are just reporting it organically. And the idea that it's all just made up is just, to me it's this, the fact that the victims of Epstein the victims of the Franklin cover up the victims of satanic ritual abuse. Through the Glenn pace memo have and and and other things surrounding that, that they are all separate from each other. They all bring forward the same testimony, we have now today with the Epstein we actually have paper trails with these people talking about these things. We have the Department of Justice, issuing a report back in 1995, where they themselves say that this is a real thing. This report that I'm quoting from characteristics and sources of allegations of rich ritualistic child abuse. It says that no significant overall differences between ritual and religion related cases, with respect to evidence of abuse harm, except that religion related cases more often involved perpetrator confessions.

However, child religion related cases were more likely to involve evidences of abuse harm than cases in any other circumstance so the Department of Justice themselves say that they have confessions. They say that there is that the ones that were involved in religion related cases were more likely to involve evidence. That's the Department of Justice so Jonah Barnes says that if we think that this is real that we can't trust the government. Well, the government that he trusts so much is saying that it is a real thing that there are confessions that there is evidence. We have the National Center for the analysis of violent crime. In January of 1992 issued a report, and a part of it says why are victims alleging these things that do not seem to be true. Some of what the victims in these cases allege is physically impossible victim cut up and put back together offender took the building apart and then rebuilt it. Some is possible possible but improbable human sacrifice cannibalism vampirism. Some is possible and probable child pornography clever manipulation of victims, and some is corroborated medical evidence of vaginal or anal trauma offender confession so again, with this isn't like in a vacuum where you just have people making accusations. You have evidence, you have confessions, and then now we're even in that report in 1992 says it's unlikely that we have cannibalism. We know that cannibalism amongst these powerful elite cabals are in engaged in such behavior. And so there is so much information out there that is easily and readily available that says that there is physical evidence that it is not simply a matter of these coming forward. We have confessions we have evidence, and that even the federal government, and those involved in these professions that you know are trusted by people like Jonah Barnes to tell us the truth is telling us that this is the reality. Thoughts, comments.

Yeah, I saw I'll try to make this my last set of comments here. I think what we saw here from Jonah Barnes and these guys. Jackson and Hayden was a very emotional reaction. I think what happened is that they didn't know that this conversation was being had and they didn't know that it was going to leak into their lives. And I think that's okay because we are starting to make some progress in presenting the types of evidence that people find credible. And when they found out that this was potentially leading all the way up to the top of the church. I think what we saw was an emotional reaction that led to some really poor arguments being made, and that's okay. Right, that happens. Sure. But what I'm here for is for people to just pay attention and recognize that there are larger conversations to be had here in good faith. Okay. And those conversations largely centered around what is the nature and scope of the problem. I'm not interested in talking to anybody who said it's not a problem because the people that I trust, like we've talked about tonight, say it is a problem. So if you're going to come and try to say that it's not a problem, I'm not interested in talking with you because that's just willful blindness. Right.

But if you're interested in having the conversation about the nature and scope, I think that there is a very large conversation to have about what is the nature and scope of this and what do we do to prevent and how do we respond to it in the best way to help victims. The biggest part of the problem right now is, like you sort of alluded to this, and I would ask people to pay really close attention to this, is a certain part of the people who want to talk about this only want to keep it inside of their echo chamber. And I was invited to come on Ward Radio last week. Jonah Barnes and I and Jason Preston and Carden Ellis were all supposed to have a conversation about this. And on the day that I was supposed to show up, Jonah dropped out and they disinvited me or uninvited me from that show. And I said, "It's not okay. Like if we want to have this conversation, we need to have it with the people who are prepared to have the conversation, not just with the people that we want to have the conversation with." Okay. So I would just say pay very close attention to who's willing to have the conversation with anybody who wants to have the conversation and who's going to build walls when they feel like their arguments are going to be refuted if they bring on a certain set of people. You're another example, Ben. Like, why would they not want to bring on the person who interviewed Glenn Pace two weeks before his death and get that testimony? In my opinion, there's a very good reason that they don't want to do that because it refutes their arguments. And they would rather just have an argument in an echo chamber that in their minds, they're defending the gospel and protecting their leaders. But in reality, they're doing great harm. They're exactly the kind of podcast that President Oaks said that people should turn off because they're misinforming people on the arguments that they're making. Right? So I would just say, like, let's have the conversation. It's an important conversation to have. There are real people who have had real damage done to their lives. And if we're going to be real Christians, we need to really do the things that Christ told us, which is to go find those people, bind up their wounds, mourn with those who mourn, and take care of them until they're healed.

Okay? Not call them mentally ill, not act as though they're acting in bad faith, not pretending that everything that they say is untrue. That is not the Christlike way of approaching this, in my opinion. And so I would just invite anybody who wants to be a part of the conversation in a Christlike manner to be a part of the conversation in a Christlike manner. We would love to have you as part of the conversation. Yep. I always think it's interesting when people say who they won't invite and who they will invite. And when they're trying to control the narrative, that is very revealing. Well, I appreciate the discussion with you, Justin. One of the things that I didn't play was a clip of Jonah saying that he's accusing our side of putting out things that just aren't true. And he says, "Now that the information has been presented to you, you can either defend it or you can repent or recant what you've said." And I would invite him to do the same thing. Now that we've provided with this evidence and we've shown what he said is quantitatively, objectively false, I hope he'll do the same thing. Yeah, I will debate Jonah Barnes on this topic anywhere, anytime on Ward Radio, on Latter-Day Saints, on Jason Preston's We Are the People Utah, on Ben McClintock's show, like anywhere, anytime, at my expense. Like even if he wants to do it live. I live in Tennessee, so I'd have to travel, but I'd be happy to have this conversation. I really would. So that's an open invitation to the Ward Radio guys and Jonah Barnes. Okay. Also in the description of this video, we will have links to the documents that I talked about in the program, as well as to videos and all the things that you can then do your own research on. And then you can come to your own conclusion, see if we're full of bunk as well. So thank you so much again, and we hope to talk to you soon.

Make sure that if you like what we're doing, please like, subscribe, hit the bell so you're notified of new videos that we're doing and support the program. So make sure that we can continue doing this and we'll see you next time. Thanks. At the Tree of Liberty Society, we're not just studying history. We're restoring the principles that built a free people. This movement isn't funded by corporations or politicians. It's built by people, patriots who care enough to act. Now you can stand shoulder to shoulder with us through YouTube memberships, a simple way to strengthen the cause of liberty while gaining access to deeper discussions, exclusive content, and direct engagement with the society. As a patriot for just $1.99 a month, you'll carry your badge of support with loyalty icons, custom emojis, members only live chats, and priority replies to your comments. At the Minute Man level for just $6.99 a month, you'll get early access to new videos and all the benefits of the Patriot Rank, a digital call to arms for those ready to act before the crowd. The Sons of Liberty tier at $9.99 brings you even closer with personal shout outs, connections on social media, and every perk from the earlier levels. And for those who wish to help lead the charge, the Founders Club at just $19.99 a month opens the door to members only live streams, exclusive videos, and all the rewards of the previous levels, direct access to the conversations shaping the future of liberty. If you believe liberty is worth defending, not only in word but in action, then join us, not as spectators of history, but as participants in its renewal.

Explore Related Themes:

conspiracy debunking satanic-ritual-abuse satanism sra

Comments

You must be logged in to leave a comment.

Ben McClintock said:

Friday, 20 Mar 2026 2:30 PM (MDT)

Shortly after this episode aired, I was told Jackson from Latter Daily Saints wanted to discuss things and perhaps even do a correction on his show. I gave him my number and told him to reach out any time. We set up 2 separate times to talk and he flaked both times. I reached out once more in good faith and asked if he was actually interested and he said he was too busy. Their side has nothing and won’t even engage in honest and meaningful discussion. I’ll be doing a follow up video soon.