Transcript of Top Prosecutor of Trump War Crimes Is Killed in Street New

The prosecutor investigating US boat strikes and torture allegations in Ecuador in connection with the Trump war crimes blowing up those boats off the coast of Venezuela, the prosecutor was assassinated. In a courageous scoop by Camila Lourdes Galarza, she writes about how she uncovered NASA images and videos of the US Coast Guard corroborating testimony of victims.. And then the prosecutors working on the case and the main prosecutor was shot and killed in broad daylight. Crystal Ball talks about this deeply disturbing story about how these survivors of the US boat strikes, Operation Southern Spear, as Trump and Hegseth and Southern Command are calling it, how these survivors were kidnapped when they returned to Ecuador. They were tortured for days by the military. The prosecutor investigating their claims was just assassinated after the prosecutor's boss, who effectively was like the attorney general, was telling the prosecutor, stay away, just say it was a random disappearance, don't dig any further. And this prosecutor, her name was Alexandra Bravo. She continued to investigate. The allegations by 36 survivors who say that after they survived US strikes, they got back to Ecuador. They say they were tortured, that they were kidnapped, and she was trying to get to the bottom of it and, uh, killed over there.

Upon arriving at the crime scene, officers say they found 5 9mm shell casings and Bravo's injured driver, but no sign of a police detail that was supposed to be assigned to protect her. The police director Directorate, which operates entirely under the executive branch, launched a probe to determine was there an internal security breach, according to this article. Now, who sits at the top of that government? None other than a guy named Daniel Naboa. Who's Naboa? He's from Miami. He's a Miami-born billionaire who Trump put in Ecuador. Remember, we covered the Naboa election over there. Donald Trump is doing ground— and a lot of people don't talk about this, but there are currently active ground invasion and wars. The Trump regime and Naboa. There are lots of people who raise allegations about Naboa, his family in the area, and that Naboa could be using these troops to just further cement his dictatorship and his control in Ecuador, saying they're going after narcotraffickers. But really just going after people who they believe are enemies in the way that Donald Trump has labeled anybody who disagrees with him. Now think about the language. Very similar. Anybody who doesn't agree with Trump, he's using the language of Naboa.

He's using the language of his other dictators that he puts in Western Hemisphere. You're communist. He says it's the biggest threat, bigger than the Nazis, right? What's Trump's speech that he gives lately? The communists are here. This is more dangerous than Hitler, more dangerous than 9/11. They're amongst us. And you know, that's how he refers to people who just don't agree with him politically and people, you know, who want access to healthcare and affordable housing. He says worse than the hijackers on 9/11 and Adolf Hitler. And that's the dehumanizing language that's used to kill whole classes of people. Fernando Bastidas, a renowned human rights attorney, with, uh, one of, uh, with a Geneva-based world organization, says, I can't make any assertion yet regarding this being a political assassination, but even evidently when a prosecutor is killed because of the investigation they're conducting, that's something we've learned from our experience in Ecuador. Um, and, uh, the Operation Southern Spirit's already killed 221 people have been killed when the Trump regime kills these fishing boats. A lot of the data that we come out— that comes out, just so you know, is that the criteria for attacking the boats— there's not a criteria that, that the boats be proven to actually have drugs on them at all.

Just think about that. That's not a criteria. The criteria is very murky. There's no due process and the Trump regime just kills people, just kills one after another. You will also recall that the former commander of, of Southcom resigned, did not want any part of this, and the Trump regime put in a new person at Southern Command. I want to bring in— hat tip, DropSite covered this, and the, and the reporter Camila Lourdes Galarza. Again, it's a very courageous scoop, of course, obviously, where journalists just like prosecutors are targeted for doing stories like this. Let's bring in Howie Littman from the Talking Feds YouTube channel, Talking Feds Substack, and Talking Feds podcast. Howie, I think it is important to give the same disclaimer that, you know, the human rights lawyer who watches what happens there, like, you know, at this point what we do know is the prosecutors on these cases get killed. Definitively, when you're run by a dictatorship that then does the investigations, I put that in quotes. It's often murky at best to find out what actually happened. But I think this is a broader conversation that we should be having. I think we should not ignore what's happening in Operation Southern Spear, which to me is just something that we'll be talking about a lot in future generations as one of the darkest things that, along with USAID and killing all of these people so cruelly, so cruelly.

Um, but Harry, also, this is what Trump wants. This is Trump's view, in my view, of the legal system, of, of, of what unfavored prosecutors have happen to them and what favored people get. What do you make of all this, Harry?

Yeah, it makes the head spin, Ben, doesn't it? And but, you know, starting with Trump, these are the kinds of tyrants who run their countries where anyone looking into anything the government does winds up getting shot again in broad daylight. That's only something that can happen where the lawless control the streets. That's the kind of thing that it seems like it's in the movies. And also a key difference between a free society and not. We've seen all these struggles to the south of us mainly. Mexico, et cetera, when a prosecutor— it's happened once here and it was a total crisis— but if a prosecutor gets killed based on the cases she or he is working, you have a system in breakdown. Look, the stuff you're talking about, the murders in broad daylight and, you know, all the apparent corruption and gunrunning, et cetera, let's just say without any further proof. Okay, that's all, you know, Ecuadorian stuff. But it really doesn't take too much surmise or flights of fancy to think that there's some connection to what's going on in our attacks that are still happening off the coast. It's a, it's a really important theme.

We forget there's a scandal, it comes to light, there's a little bit of hubbub, or somebody in Congress says something, or there's somebody's on cable TV. Then we move on. I mean, it's almost a kind of technique or strategy. We move on to the next scandal. And then there's a reprisal prosecution, or then there's, you know, an elective war. Those— the other things, illegal as they may be, continue. And yeah, every time I've gone back and checked, and I've done it a few times, You— it remains the case that we are doing these absolutely illegal under international law murders of people in boats off the, off the coast of South America. You may not— we proffered this at the time when it became a big thing, this extremely weak justification that, remember, with the, with the second strike and the innocent people who were killed, But the overall justification for these sorties is that these people are literally, that's what it has to be under international law, making war on us. They seek to take the drugs and we don't know where they're going. But the argument is, and they can just, if get away, come to the United States and for some reason never tested by a court, and I think doesn't hold water at all, That is tantamount, literally, because otherwise you couldn't try to make this legal under international law.

That is tantamount to an act of war against the country. The same thing as, you know, we're doing in Iran. It's now, is it the narco-terrorists who constitute a kind of nation by any other name? That doesn't seem too good. Is it Ecuador itself? But whatever these, these things that are going on and we're just blowing people out of the water. And certainly there's reason to think, yeah, these guys— well, even, even some of them are— don't even— don't seem to be involved with drugs. But the ones that are, yep, they're running drugs. They are not making war on the United States. They are not whatever Castro in 1961 and, and the like. They're, they're, you know, trying to eke out a living and it involves narcotics. That's just not a justification for the United States of America to go in and blow them up. And again, there is a, there's, you know, all this, including assassinations in broad daylight on the one hand, and this ongoing American effort on the other. I'm not, I spent a lot of time in the Department of Justice trying to talk people down off the ladder of conspiracy theories.

And I'm not even in deep into the, into Trump 2.0 ready to say that we're like, behind, you know, the assassination of the prosecutor. But I just think it's clear that there's some connection here, that there's some overlap with the players. There's some, you know, kind of knowledge on our part of what's going on. And that itself is a sort of corruption. Now, you can hear international folks say, oh, that's the way it goes and you guys are naive, etc. But I, it does seem to me just like with the operations themselves, is this now what the government of the United States of America, you know, where they, what, what sandbox they now play in down in South America? What does that mean for our standing in the world and that part of the world, et cetera? Not questions you would have quickly jumped to a few years ago or 10 years ago. But man, oh man, just look at what— just look at Venezuela, or, you know, how he has thrown around his weight. 50% tariffs on Canada 2 days ago. You know, it is not— I think the niceties of international law don't deter the administration at all.

And again, I want to end where, you know, where I sort of started, which is to say, with even just— I— if you posit, it's isolated, one has nothing to do with the other. We have to affirm again, again, this is illegal acts of war. You're not permitted to just boom, assassinate people off the coast who are, you know, basically doing what in the United States you would arrest them, etc. If this were right there, you could just go and, you know, shoot drug dealers in cold blood. We've taken liberties there for political reasons or personal reasons of Donald Trump. That are just not consistent with the law.

You know, uh, hypothetical that was given during the absolute immunity oral argument— oh right, yeah, were these types of hypotheticals. Donald Trump orders these types of murders. Has SEAL Team 6 do certain things? Has the CIA do all of this? It's uncovered that he's doing these things. Do you get absolute immunity, Donald Trump's lawyer? 'Absolutely, he gets absolute immunity for sure.' Then the liberal justices said, 'Well, isn't that concerning?' To which the far right-wing justices, for which there's 6 of them, said, 'No, he's never going to do any of that. We're worried that you're going to chill his decision-making on routine matters. He's never going to do that.' To which the liberal justices said, 'You got to be kidding me. You don't think— of course he's going to do that.' Why do you think his lawyer is saying he's gonna do that? That's what his lawyer's putting in the fricking paperwork, that he's gonna do it. Nah, we don't wanna chill what he's gonna do. Okay, then you grant him absolute immunity. Harry, I mean, it's all perfectly foreseeable. History can seem so complex, but at the end of the day, you can boil down it sometimes to a true or false multiple choice question on a history exam about how a democracy or a justice system was ultimately destroyed, huh?

In any event. Yeah. And it looks really different from one side and the other. Remember that great hypothetical was first offered in the Court of Appeals, Judge Pan, as the kind of killer argument that obviously defeated immunity. And now it was— it goes up to the Supreme Court and it's the actual, you know, crazy notion that shows how far out there the immunity decision is. We've done that, this big switcheroo and jiu-jitsu move on it. Between the Supreme Court and Donald Trump. So, so the inconceivable has in many different instances quickly become conceivable and then probable during Trump 2.0 in particular.

WTF, man. That's why I wake up and I go, what? That's what I mean. That's the title is What the F. That's the book from me and my brothers wrote. Preorder it now. It comes out in October. Harry and I are going to work work on doing an event in San Diego where I'm going to come to San Diego and speak with Harry. So we'll figure out when we're going to do that. But make sure you subscribe to Harry Littman's YouTube channel. It's called Talking Feds. Search on YouTube, Talking Feds. And then the next Harry video, say, uh, WTF, Harry, Ben sent me here.

I don't know what it means.

Yeah, I'll know what it means.

Thanks.

And hit subscribe here as well.

Weekend.

Breaking news right now, my brothers and I wrote a book. It's called WTF America, and well, doesn't that just say it all? It comes out officially this October, but you can pre-order your copy today. Just scan the QR code or click the link in the description below.