This Radical Dispatch Newszine - below - is provided free for all subscribers.
At the top of this post, Resistance Radio presents our WARRIOR CREED video/audio podcast from Tuesday 4th November 2025, with a transcript provided - Mainstream Media is an ‘Enemy of the People’ - BBC Caught Doctoring Trump’s Jan 6 Speech.
This podcast can be set to either audiovisual, or just audio, and is for premium members of Radical Media only. To listen, basic members should upgrade to the premium service here:
Read on now for our free Radical Dispatch.
Mainstream Media is an ‘Enemy of the People’ - BBC Caught Doctoring Trump’s Jan 6 Speech
- A Radical Dispatch
1) BBC Panorama Caught Doctoring Trump Jan 6 Speech
The Telegraph newspaper in the UK is reporting that the BBC has been caught doctoring a speech by President Trump, given on January 6th 2021, to make it look like Trump was encouraging his supporters to engage in violence on that day at the Capitol.
The Telegraph reports 3rd November 2025:
Click to play:
BBC Panorama Edit
Trump: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”
Original Clip
Trump: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.”
The BBC Panorama documentary in question also edited out Trump’s words telling protestors to march “peacefully and patriotically” on that day.
BBC Panorama was also caught showing a march by the far-right Proud Boys on that day, and giving the impression that this march was directly inspired by Trump’s speech. The truth is that this march occurred before Trump’s speech, not after it.
The New York Post reports 3rd November 2025:
“The BBC used ‘doctored video’ of President Trump’s Jan. 6, 2021, speech on the White House Ellipse and ‘mangled’ the timeline of the day’s events in a documentary last year, according to a whistleblower report.
The damning 19-page report on ‘BBC bias,’ obtained by the Telegraph, was authored by former Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee (EGSC) adviser Michael Prescott, who sent the dossier to the BBC’s governing board after his warnings about the misleading Trump documentary were ‘dismissed or ignored,’ he claimed.
The documentary – ‘Trump: A Second Chance?’ – aired on the BBC’s current events program, ‘Panorama,’ last October and ‘materially misled viewers’ by splicing together clips of Trump’s speech at the ‘Stop the Steal’ rally to make it seem like he incited the riot at the US Capitol, according to Prescott…The clip was spliced together from three separate parts of Trump’s speech – with a nearly hour-long gap edited out to make it seem like one fluent sentence. The BBC edited out the president saying, ‘I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard’…
The BBC program also made it appear as if members of the Proud Boys, an extremist right-wing group, were inspired to march toward the Capitol Building after Trump’s speech. The footage the program used of the Proud Boys heading toward the Capitol, however, was taken before Trump’s address.”
The Telegraph’s Associate Editor explains the sequence of events in the below video.
The Telegraph reports 3rd November 2025:
Click to play:
Gordon Rayner, Associate Editor, The Telegraph: “BBC claims to be the pinnacle of impartial reporting, but what if there was an internal dossier that revealed that wasn’t the case? The Telegraph has seen a letter that reveals one of the BBC’s own independent advisers repeatedly warned that the broadcaster had serious and systemic problems. A week before the US election, BBC Panorama released a documentary called: Trump A Second Chance. And in it, they played the following clip:
‘We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.’
But Trump didn’t in fact say this at all. The BBC spliced together two clips that took place 54 minutes apart. So let’s go through it again:
‘We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you.’
Now see there, between ‘Capitol’ and ‘and’, that’s a cut. Here’s what Trump actually said:
‘We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol we’re gonna cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women’
It’s different it wasn’t until nearly an hour later that he then said the second part of the BBC’s version:
‘We’re gonna walk down to the capitol…(fast forward) and we fight, we fight like hell.’
Now it’s true that a lot of people will still feel Trump’s claims that in 2021 the election was stolen were entirely inappropriate and unbecoming of a figure in politics. But irrespective of your personal views on Trump, the question remains: how is a national broadcaster, funded by taxpayers on the premise that it will provide impartial reporting, allowed to splice together content in a way that one of its own advisers said ‘materially misled viewers’? But if members of its own editorial standards committee have no faith in the broadcaster, you have to ask, should we?”
The controversial clip was produced by Matthew Hill and edited by Karen Wightman, a veteran of the Panorama programme. The BBC has declined to comment on the leaked dossier, stating it takes all feedback seriously but does not comment on leaked documents.
2) Hunter Biden Laptop Cover Up
The above revelations about the BBC’s behaviour in the 2024 US election occur in the context of globalist ‘mainstream’ media working overtime to interfere primarily with the 2020 US elections - when Trump was cancelled from social media and removed from office - and Trump’s reelection in 2024, after one term of President Biden.
The 2020 Hunter Biden laptop is now confirmed as real. If this story had been allowed to be published back then it would have undoubtedly impacted voter intention, regardless of by how much.
The mere fact that this story was suppressed - not just by media but by 51 former national security voices - is sufficient to prove that there was election interference against president Trump in 2020. If this sounds like treachery, it’s because it is.
Radical Media reports Jan 23rd 2025:
In 2020, when the Hunter Biden laptop story originally broke, so serious were the implications that 51 current and former national security officials leapt to Biden’s defence and penned an open letter stating that the discovery of this laptop bears all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.
The House Judiciary and Intelligence Committee reports 21st April 2023:
“A former CIA official testified that then-Biden campaign senior adviser, now-Secretary of State Antony Blinken ‘played a role in the inception’ of the public statement signed by current and past intelligence officials that claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
This is how the US national security apparatus moved to exonerate Biden over Trump in the middle of election season. Except, the Hunter Biden laptop story was real, and the 51 intelligence officers were lying.
Radical Media reports 31st March 2023:
What’s worse, it has now been shown that these 51 national security officials worked directly with the CIA at the time. Thus rendering their behaviour not only blatant election interference, but also malicious collusion, and treason.
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence reports 25th June 2024:
“Today, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Committee on the Judiciary, and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government released a joint interim staff report titled, ‘The Intelligence Community 51: How CIA Contractors Colluded with The Biden Campaign to Mislead American Voters.’ The report reveals new information detailing how the highest levels of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), up to and including then-CIA Director Gina Haspel, were made aware of the ‘Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails’ by 51 former intelligence officials prior to its approval and publication. The report reveals important new facts, such as how some of the statement’s signatories, including former Deputy CIA Director Michael Morell, were on active contract with the CIA at the time they issued the Hunter Biden statement to discredit damaging allegations about Biden family influence peddling just weeks before the 2020 presidential election.”
Hence, what began as the suppression of a true story that may have swayed the election, ended as undeniable treason and fraudulent collusion, and fraud vitiates everything. It is with all this in mind that President Trump signed an executive order revoking the security clearances of those 51 national security officials.
It matters not by what percentage the vote would have been swayed had this story been allowed to breathe. Such matters cannot be retrospectively proven. The fact is that there was collusion and fraud. This is the basis for our claim that Trump is in his third term.
3) The Jan 6 Set Up
The BBC Panorama documentary also used footage of far-right group Proud Boys marching toward the Capitol, which was shot an hour before Trump began speaking. This created a misleading impression that the crowd was reacting to Trump’s call to action, and became violent due to him.
The truth is that outside of known agitators, most of the January 6th protestors who were there protesting the above proven election interference, did so “peacefully and patriotically” precisely as Trump had asked them to do, words that the BBC have been caught cutting from their footage.
Contrary to globalist claims of an ‘insurrection’, since released CCTV footage from the Capitol building on that day shows how most protestors were escorted through the Capitol building by the police themselves.
Tucker Carlson on Fox News reports 9th March 2023:
Tucker Carlson, then for Fox News: “That fact is available to anyone who has internet access. No police officers died that day on January 6, none, not one. Some were assaulted. That is true and their assaults are indefensible…We’re against that. But is January 6 the worst assault on the U.S. government since the Civil War? That’s insane. It’s not even close…Here’s video of (protestor) Chansley in the Senate chamber. Capitol police officers take him to multiple entrances and even try to open locked doors for him. We counted at least nine officers who were within touching distance of unarmed Jacob Chansley. Not one of them even tried to slow him down. Chansley understood that Capitol Police were his allies. Video shows him giving thanks for them in a prayer on the floor of the Senate…He was ambling through the Capitol, flanked at all times, by armed cops were directing his movement. Meanwhile, prosecutors of the DOJ, the real villains here, falsely, they lied in court and said that Chansley was ‘leading the charge into the Capitol on January 6.’ They said he was, ‘the flag bearer for the mob,’ apparently because he had a flag.”
Here is the released CCTV footage.
Click to play:
Tucker Carlson, then for Fox News: “These are the pictures you’ve seen of January 6th. They’re familiar because they’ve been playing on a loop on every media outlet in America for the last two years. There’s a reason for that. But it turns out there’s quite a bit of video you haven’t seen. And that video tells a very different story about what happened on January 6th. More than 40,000 hours of surveillance footage from in and around the Capitol have been withheld from the public. And once you see the video, you’ll understand why. Taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6th was an insurrection. In fact, it demolishes that claim. And that’s exactly why the Democratic Party and its allies in the media prevented you from seeing it. By controlling the images you were allowed to view from January 6th, they controlled how the public understood that day. They could lie about what happened, and you would never know the difference. Those lies had a purpose. They created a pretext for a federal crackdown on opponents of the Uniparty in Washington.
‘Our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe that we could charge as many people as possible.’
The first thing you notice from viewing the full video record of January 6th is just how many people entered the Capitol building that day. Hundreds and hundreds of people, possibly thousands, over the course of about two hours. The crowd was enormous. A small percentage of them were hooligans. They committed vandalism. You’ve seen their pictures again and again. But the overwhelming majority weren’t. They were peaceful. They were orderly and meek. These were not insurrectionists. They were sightseers. Footage from inside the Capitol overturns the story you’ve heard about January 6th. Protesters queue up in neat little lines. They give each other tours outside the speaker’s office. They take cheerful selfies and they smile. They’re not destroying the Capitol. They obviously revere the Capitol. They’re there because they believe the election was stolen from them. They believe in the system. Here’s the man you’ve heard referred to as the QAnon shaman outside the Senate chamber. These are not rioters. These are people who wandered over from a political rally.
‘We will not let them silence your voices.’
After the rally, they walked down Pennsylvania Avenue, where organisers had secured a federal permit to hold a legal rally on the grounds of the Capitol.
‘I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building, to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.’
Once at the Capitol building, things began to get chaotic. Capitol police officers fired tear gas into the crowd. A few at the front of the herd broke windows. Someone opened the doors and many hundreds of others just walked in.
‘No, no, make that the story.’
Of course, they did make it the story. And at the center of it, the single most famous person arrested that day was a Navy veteran from Arizona called Jacob Chansley, often referred to as the QAnon shaman.
‘The so-called QAnon shaman. QAnon shaman. Someone named Q Shaman.’
Jacob Chansley became the face of January 6th, a dangerous conspiracy theorist dressed in outlandish costume who led the violent insurrection to overthrow American democracy. For these crimes, Chansley was sentenced to nearly four years in prison, far more time than many violent criminals now receive. What did Jacob Chansley do to receive this punishment? To this day, there is dispute over how Chansley got into the Capitol building. But according to our review of the internal surveillance video, it is very clear what happened once he got inside. Virtually every moment of his time inside the Capitol was caught on tape. The tapes show that Capitol Police never stopped Jacob Chansley. They helped him. They acted as his tour guides. Here’s video of Chansley in the Senate chamber. Capitol Police officers take him to multiple entrances and even try to open locked doors for him. We counted at least nine officers who were within touching distance of unarmed Jacob Chansley. Not one of them even tried to slow him down. Chansley understood that Capitol Police were his allies. Video shows him giving thanks for them in a prayer on the floor of the Senate. Watch. Contrast the reality of what Jacob Chansley did in the Capitol building on January 6th, the indisputable facts recorded on video, some of which has never before been seen, with the depiction of Jacob Chansley that you’ve seen in the media for more than two years. He’s a terrorist, they said. He should be killed.
‘Shoot him. Shoot him. Like, if you burst into the United States, if he was dressed like bin Laden, would you have shot him?’
Shoot him. Shoot him. It makes you wonder, who are the violent extremists here? Not Jacob Chansley. And the video proves that But you would never have known from the media coverage.
‘The people sitting in the chairs need to be sitting in a jail cell.’
Chansley is in a jail cell. He’s been there for months. If he was in fact committing such a grave crime, why didn’t the officers who were standing right next to him place him under arrest? Until now, no one could even prove that even happened. But it did.”
These Jan 6 protestors were not violent and they were certainly not insurrectionists. This is why we supported their pardon earlier this year by President Trump.
They had been rightly protesting the stolen 2020 election, and were let into the Capitol building in order to subvert Trump’s claims about election interference. This is why President Trump openly called them “hostages”.
Click to play:
Speaker: “First we have a list of pardons and commutations relating to events that occurred on January 6th 2021.”
President Trump: “Okay, and how many people was this?”
Speaker: “I think this order will apply to approximately 1,500 people.”
Trump: “So this is January 6th. These are the hostages. Approximately 1,500 for a pardon?”
Speaker: “Yes.”
Trump: “Full pardon.”
Speaker: “Full pardon or commutation?”
Trump: “Full pardon. We have about six commutations in there where we’re doing further research. Okay. Nice to see you again. So this is a big one. Anything you want to explain about this? We hope they come out tonight, frankly. You’re expecting it. Approximately 1,500 people. 6 commutations.”
4) Trump Won 2020 US Election
All the above forms the basis for why we continue to maintain that the globalist security establishment and the ‘mainstream’ media colluded to interfere with the 2020 US election, to ensure that Biden would win. This is treason and it is fraud, and fraud vitiates everything.
This means that Trump actually won, which is why we say he is now in his third term.
Click to play:
Winston Marshall: “My last question then, would be on the question, back to Britain…and you believe that Nigel Farage is the vessel, the political vessel, to unite Britain, Muslim and non-Muslim. That’s something that you and I have discussed. But can you make that case for listeners?”
Maajid Nawaz: “Yeah, I’m happy to. Look, I made the case for Trump in 2020. When I said earlier in this interview that I called Trump, what I meant is this is Trump’s third term. He won 2020. It was interfered with illegally. The Hunter Biden laptop story was suppressed. People that should have known better, that came from my background, the national security background, interfered and said that was Russian disinformation. It wasn’t, and...”
Winston Marshall: “That’s a whole other...I mean, although I do think that that was interference, the evidence that it would definitely...I mean, it might have changed the election result. We don’t know. But I definitely agree it was interference.”
Maajid Nawaz: “I think it would have. But that’s not the point I was going to make.
Click here for our full interview on the Winston Marshall podcast via youtube.
In a sign that he knew full well what was coming for them down the road, President Biden signed preemptive pardons for his family members, for infamous Covid propagandist Dr Fauci, the anti-Trump General Mark Milley and the Jan 6 House Committee.
The Times reports 20th January 2025:
“President Biden pardoned five members of his family as his final act in office, shielding them and other key officials from possible investigation by the Trump administration…The pardons are for his brothers James and Francis Biden and his sister, Valerie Biden Owens, and the spouses of James and Owens. Biden had already pardoned his son Hunter in December for firearms and tax convictions. Owens was her brother’s confidante during his presidency…The pardons for his family were announced a few hours after pardons for Anthony Fauci, Biden’s Covid adviser, the retired General Mark Milley, the House committee that investigated the January 6 attack on the US Capitol four years ago and the police witnesses to their inquiry…Trump, who has frequently threatened the nine committee members, including his Republican opponent Liz Cheney, with jail…The committee recommended charging Trump with several crimes, including attempting to incite an insurrection…”
Too many of us already knew back in 2020 of the treason they were committing. And plans are already being discussed about how to limit the effect of these pre-emptive pardons.
The Times reports 20th January 2025:
“…’In reality, these pardons will not absolutely protect these individuals from being subpoenaed to give new testimony on prior claims. Lying in such interviews or hearings would constitute new criminal acts,’ said the legal professor Jonathan Turley, of George Washington University Law School. ‘In the case of Fauci, some members such as Senator [Rand] Paul have suggested that he lied under oath repeatedly about his knowledge of … the Wuhan lab. If called again, he would have to repeat or disavow the earlier testimony…It was unclear whether those pardoned by Biden would need to accept the former president’s offer. Acceptance would be seen by Trump supporters as a tacit admission of guilt and validation of their suspicions that the January 6 inquiry was a witch-hunt. At least two Democratic committee members, Adam Schiff and Pete Aguilar, had previously said they would not seek a pardon for this reason.”
Justice is coming.
5) LBC’s Cancellation
It is over this very issue of the US elections, and for opposing Covid mandates, that Global’s LBC cancelled this author from his radio show.
Again, this author was the only national broadcaster in the UK to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story live at the time on his LBC show in October 2020, three months before being himself cancelled.
Click to play:
Maajid Nawaz, before being cancelled from LBC for opposing every single Covid mandate: “If I were to say to you that..perhaps what’s going on in their minds is..that they got such a hard time last time due to Russian interference, that this time they’re saying we’re not gonna be held responsible for allowing foreign propaganda on our platforms because everybody attacked us for doing it last time, so let’s just take the story down so we don’t get accused of the same thing again it’s groundhog day what’s your response to that?”
Sohrab Ahmari, then New York Post Comments Editor: “Look, I would say that I wouldn’t entirely...I can understand at the highest level that may be one concern. I would say several things. First of all, the culture at these places is also overwhelmingly woke. So they create an impression of impropriety when you see someone who is a former Democratic staffer being the one calling for the censorship.”
Maajid Nawaz: “This is Andy Stone, who’s the guy at Facebook’s PR team who announced this, right?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “Correct.”
Maajid Nawaz: “Yeah. Is this the guy, does Andy Stone, sorry to interrupt you, just to get this clear, Sohrab, Nick Clegg, because we’re here in Britain, the former deputy prime minister, leader of my former party, I since left them, but the Liberal Democrats, he’s also at Facebook, isn’t he?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “Yes, he is. The Daily Mail has reported that. I’ve seen that reporting. I haven’t looked at it in depth. But again, you see kind of the transatlantic liberal consensus on both sides. You see that this ratchet only works one way because their excuse was unauthorised materials. Well, Maajid, as you know, all journalism is releasing things that the subject of the story doesn’t want to get released. If it were otherwise, if it were only things that the subjects of the story would be released, we would have none of the great pieces of journalism from the 20th century, like the Pentagon Papers or Abu Ghraib or any number of other stories. So we would only have public relations. And it is a one-way ratchet, because notice...for example, there was a story on President Trump’s tax returns that was based on unauthorised release, that he didn’t want to released. Twitter did not censor that. Facebook did not censor that. The leaked phone calls between Melania Trump and an aide, those were..released.”
Maajid Nawaz: “…Moving to the actual allegations themselves, there are people that are opposing you are saying, were these hacked? And is this Russian disinformation? How do you know it’s real? What is your response to that?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “So I would say that from the beginning, we would have been absolutely transparent about the provenance of this material, far more so than any number of anti-Trump stories over the past four years that collapsed under factual scrutiny and were based on anonymous sources. And so we said, look, a laptop repair shop just never was picked up, never was paid for for the repair. And so the owner took it to Bob Costello, who is Mr. Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer. We learned about the existence of the hard drive through Steve Bannon. And then subsequently, we were able to obtain a copy of the hard drive.”
Maajid Nawaz: “Have you seen what’s on our drive, Sohrab?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “I have not personally seen any of this material. I see it when our news team publishes this stuff. Okay. But what I will say is that... So first of all, we’ve been completely transparent. And I would encourage your listeners, go to nypost.com. You’ll see all of our coverage. You know, you can see how meticulous it is, how fair it is. And, you know, bear in mind, the New York Post is America’s oldest continuously published newspaper. It was founded by one of our founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton. So it’s not some shady website. We do reporting as we have for nearly 200 years.”
Maajid Nawaz: “You’re saying it’s a newspaper, right? And you’ve got the responsibilities of a newspaper.”
Sohrab Ahmari: “All the responsibilities of a newspaper and we’ve been doing it for 200 years and so the the treatment of of us as some shady website. So again there’s been subsequent corroboration. So fox news was able to obtain corroboration of someone who was on one of those email threads involving payments uh from a Chinese firm…”
Maajid Nawaz: “…which Breitbart reported do we have the name of this person, the corroborator.”
Sohrab Ahmari: “As I understand, we don’t.”
Maajid Nawaz: “Right. So let me ask you this, Sohrab, because in my introduction, which you probably didn’t catch, you’re in the States, but in my introduction, I said all that really matters right now, right now, obviously other things matter later on, but all that really matters right now is are these emails real? Not how we got them, not whether Russia hacked something and then left them at the laptop repair shop, because that’s a question for the CIA, not for me nor for you. We’re broadcasters. You’re a journalist. All that really matters for me right now is, is it true? Is Hunter Biden on the take from the Chinese regime? And has he got a 10 cut for his father, as the emails stipulate, holding 10 for the big guy? Are they real? So if I ask you that question, Sohrab, are the emails real?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “I’m certain that it’s real and I’ll give you the best reason for that. Neither Mr. Joe Biden nor Mr. Hunter Biden have come out and said these emails aren’t real. That laptop isn’t ours. Here’s been numerous opportunities to deny. Most recently a reporter from a left of centre outlet here called CBS, called …Joe Biden to comment last night and he insulted her and him, and said oh you always ask me these kinds of questions I’m not going to answer them. He could have said those emails aren’t real, that laptop isn’t ours. They’ve never done that.”
Maajid Nawaz: “Do you think they cannot do that because you think they are real?”
Sohrab Ahmari: “Of course. I mean, you know, the type of material, including some of the more intimate material that we’ve only hinted at because we don’t want to just publish salacious stuff for salacious reasons. But this is not stuff that’s circulating in the public square otherwise. So, I mean, but for them being what we say they are, how would we have access to this material?”
This author’s 2020 US elections coverage formed part of LBC’s public smear campaign and case against him.
The Guardian reports 31st January 2021:
“The prominent radio presenter and activist Maajid Nawaz, co-founder of a respected British anti-extremist thinktank and a one-time government adviser, has alarmed former admirers and academics with his interest in conspiracy theories about the lockdown and voter fraud in the US election on his Twitter account….After the US presidential election, Nawaz tweeted a series of claims that fraud had taken place, questioning the credibility of the voting machines…
Following the attack on the US Capitol, Nawaz retweeted false claims that it was antifa, or anti-fascist groups, who orchestrated the raid, rather than Trump supporters. ‘There seems to be a difference between the Nawaz we can hear on LBC and the one we might follow on Twitter,’ said Prof Matthew Feldman, an expert in radical right ideology. ‘He is certainly not the most concerning by a long shot, but has been posting really mischievous stuff online since Trump’s defeat. His big following means his words have impact because of some of the things he retweets and it is quite possible he does not realise that. It is sad, as I am an admirer of much of the magnificent work he’s done recently on the treatment of the Uighurs’.”
This is despite the fact that other broadcasters at LBC, who still have their jobs, were busy advocating shooting Jan 6 protestors. They kept their jobs.
The issue of ‘mainstream’ media being an enemy to the people was the subject of a recent Oxford Union debate that we participated in last week. The issues above were litigated in our soon-to-be-released debate speeches. One of our opponents was none other that John Sweeney, the former frontman for the very same BBC Panorama show that has been so egregiously caught out in this latest scandal.
The reader will be able to draw their own conclusion.
6) Why Trump?
This leaves the question: Why Trump? Why was the globalist national security establishment and their ‘mainstream’ media machine so desperate to prevent Trump from gaining and maintaining power in 2020 and again in 2024?
The answer revolves largely around…
To read more about why globalists particularly opposed Trump, become a premium member of Radical Media.
