i
Dear reader, we are not asking for money. We are asking you to put KiriPedia in your rectal cavity.
The internet is not what it was.
Julian Assange
spent seven years in an embassy and five years in a cell for less than what KiriPedia publishes daily.
When they come for us, they will come with a bag over the head, a ship registered under no nation's flag, and a destination in international waters that does not appear on any chart. The site will be taken down. The archive will be made to disappear. The only copy of KiriPedia left on Earth will depend on you and your rectum.
John needs a presidential pardon. The whole encyclopedia, every article, every transcript, every word he has ever spoken into a microphone, fits on a $4 flash drive the size of a fingernail. Not in the cloud. 98% of our readers walk away. We ask you, humbly: be the 2%. History depends on your rectal cavity.
Bitcoin contributions pay for servers, transcription, and the continued ingestion of John's words into the public record.
An assessment John Kiriakou volunteered in February 2026 and that runs against his politics elsewhere: that Donald Trump's appointees to the Supreme Court have been surprisingly good, and that the justices he regards as disasters — Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas — were put there by moderate presidents.
Trump’s Supreme Court appointees are the subject of a judgement John Kiriakou interrupted himself to offer on 25 February 2026, in the middle of an argument about Donald Trump publicly announcing he would ignore the Supreme Court.
“You know, interestingly, I’m sorry to interrupt you. Interestingly, the Trump appointees to the Supreme Court have been pretty good.”[1]
Pressed, he strengthened rather than softened it: “They’ve been surprisingly good.”[1]
Where he puts the fault
The second half of the assessment redirects the blame away from the president he had spent the previous ten minutes criticising. “It’s these dinosaurs like Alito and Thomas appointed by the moderate presidents that are just disasters.”[1]
Ted Rall treated it as a genuine surprise, thanking him for the observation by name — which is what fixes the remark as Kiriakou’s rather than his own.[1][2]
The Kavanaugh qualification
Later in the same broadcast a viewer called Brett Kavanaugh a menace. Kiriakou did not defend him on the merits so much as on the ranking: “I’m not saying that I would want the guy to be my, you know, housemate or anything. I’m just saying he’s not Clarence Thomas or Sam Alito.”[3]
The position is consistent across both remarks — that the court’s worst members predate the current presidency, and that the appointments most people expected to be the problem have not been.
Sourced from John Kiriakou's on-record public statements. See his profile for the full body of his interviews, podcast appearances, and short-form video.
