Republicans who come to me and say, that's
wrong what APAC is doing to you. Let
me talk to my APAC person.
By the way, everybody but me has an
APAC person. Like What's that mean, an APAC
person? It's like your babysitter, your APAC babysitter
who,
is always talking to you for APAC. They're
probably a constituent
in your district,
but they are, you know,
firmly embedded in APAC.
And Every member has something like this?
Every I don't know how it works on
the Democrat side,
but that's how it works on the Republican
side. And when they and when they come
to DC, you go have lunch with them.
And they've got your cell number,
and you have conversations with them. So I've
had, like That's absolutely crazy. I've had four
members of congress say, I'll talk to my
APAC person.
And, like, it's clearly what we call them,
my APAC guy.
I'll talk to my APAC guy and see
if I can get him to, you know,
dial those ads back. Why have I never
heard this before?
It doesn't benefit anybody.
Why would they wanna tell their constituents that
they've basically got a buddy system
with somebody who's representing a foreign country?
It doesn't benefit the congressman for people to
know that so they're not going to tell
you that.
Welcome to the daily wrap up, a concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last twenty four hours.
Sunday, March second twenty twenty five. Thank you
for joining me today. It's good to be
back. I've been under the weather dealing with
God knows what, but I'm definitely feeling better.
So I'm happy to be back to kinda
get back into everything.
At first, I was really trying to keep
up on a lot of it, but it
was kind of it worked out to kinda
be a dual kind of mental break for
me as well to where I kinda just
put things aside for the last couple days
and just, you know, clear my head, which
which I'm glad I did. So I'm I'm
still feeling a little odd, but I'm I'm
happy to be back and I'm gonna I
you know, you know me. I can't let
this stuff sit. It drives me crazy. So
I wanted to get caught up on a
lot of these different points that we've been
discussing.
The ceasefire in Gaza, the conversation has evolved,
the Biba's family dynamic. And sadly,
as a lot of anybody
honest and paying attention was predicting
the violation of the I mean, it's violation
is a bad word, seeing so Israel's violated
the ceasefire pretty much every day since this
started, pretty much the same as Lebanon,
but the breaking of the ceasefire
as planned. It's one of these moments where,
again, you know, it's it's demonstrating our value,
and it's not just TLAB. There's a lot
of people out here that were saying it
because it was that clear.
Trump gave them this deal. At least that's
what Israel's own government was proudly,
openly saying in different conversations
that they were allowed to break it right
at this moment. The Beavers family played a
part in that, but there was other dynamics
we're gonna get to that allowed this to
at least give the illusion of some kind
of justification.
It's it's like it's been every other time
before. And it's sad to see that we
were right about that because we paid attention.
And if you look, you saw it too.
It was very clear. It was all planned
out. And I think it's
along pretty much along with everything else that
seems to be happening right now. Now we're
gonna start with an interesting point.
Shout out to strategic culture culture foundation for
the both the image we used as well
as the article we're gonna touch on to
start,
which I kind of jokingly coined the the
Doge deep state or the deep Doge state.
Funny enough, by the way, on a side
note, which you'll see a few times today,
for some reason, I had a little
some of the things I put out today
were a little bit cheeky or a little
bit, you know, ironic or rather, sarcastic.
And it's just funny the way people respond.
I swear Twitter the Internet truly killed sarcasm.
There's a few different things today that I'm
gonna laugh about that I just don't think
people
just can't seem to get out of the
Internet dynamic of things today, but a couple
of jokes that we'll talk about and different
things we said. But
it's important to see
an important point coming out of all this
in regard to you'll see what what I
just said there made sense as we go
through some of the things today. I don't
wanna dive into it to start. But important
to see back to the point about Doge
and the concerning dynamic around that. And that's
why I mentioned the the article we're gonna
talk about as they frame it essentially as
this like, the kind of a paraphrase in
their title, is this just not the deep
state or a new deep state or however
you wanna look at it based on what
we understand it's supposed to be? Now
I
encourage we should always question and push back
on ideas.
Don't blindly accept anything, including from what you
already think might be the case. But as
always, consider
what they're putting out. Consider the points they're
making about whether this is functionally exactly what
we've been fighting. Even if it's the peep
even if they are actually the people that
you think they are. Doesn't it not still
represent the same kind of consolidation of power
that, yes, I mean, in very obvious ways.
But I the conversation we've had more than
once, you know, maybe in a broken system,
that's the only way to find out. I
mean, I'm always willing to consider these arguments.
But as always, it's about the outcome. Right?
Where does it end up? What happens tomorrow?
What happens at the end of a year?
What happens at the end of four years?
What happens when a new administration comes in?
Is that even on the table anymore? We
should be considering all these. And I I
get the sense that most people are
as confused as ever, especially in the partisanship,
definitely see the problem.
But that's gonna be an important thing that
carries over and the obvious overlap with one
of the things I've been most concerned with
this regard to the ethics pledges and the
different obvious conflicts of interest and the many
different kind of opaque dynamics around most of
this administration.
All of which are just, like,
can't stop fighting to be the first one
to scream how important Israel is and how
the first phone call they make and the
first trip they make more than once before
we even talk about America concepts.
I don't know how anybody could miss this
right now. That's just me. And as usual,
you get the grifters out there that I
think try to emulate the corp the the
genuine independent mediocrity rushing to get documentaries out
to be out.
In my opinion, the main thing we're seeing
today is the carefully crafted
deception using truth. I mean, it's everywhere. It's
always been there. Just my opinion, obviously. But
I think it's important to recognize that there's
a lot of people out there, one big
point we'll make today, who are using things
that are either already being seen, sort of
like the what I think is the stick
of the current administration, using the things we
already thought we wanted or that we saw
failing and wanted to stop and then acting
like they're changing it. Really, they're just shuffling
in the new thing they already had planned.
That's my opinion, of course. The evidence backs
it up. But the interesting point being that
I think a lot of people out there
in this mainstream alternative media are using things
they see that we already recognize and trying
to co opt that movement. It happens all
the time. And in many cases, just trying
to hide what is the most important central
part of it. By showing you, yes. Yes.
We see this, but it's over there, and
it's not Israel, for example. Or it's not
Trump that's involved or Biden or whoever is
in that current seat. It's about trying to
deviate from that truth. Then we're gonna talk
about that and important,
you know, that it's all
the the current power structure
is trying to put you in a place
to where your
awareness of what they are no longer matters.
That's my opinion.
A bird flu point that I think is
very important we're gonna get to, the just
development on that story, trying to get caught
up on some of these. Of course, the
Epstein conversation we're gonna touch on, as well
as a brief point about the Zelensky meeting.
Not a lot of attention on that because
I, one, just still trying to get caught
up, but I wanna ultimately focus on what
I think is most important. And some of
these theater shows going on today don't scream
what is immediately the
you know, what's most relevant to what's currently
happening. Not to say that that couldn't spin
out and do a hundred different things, but
it's about what I think is currently,
you know, gonna have the most effect on
what's happening. The Epstein part is really important
because of how clear this is. It's another
extension of another lie, another I mean, it's
the same thing that happened last time. I
will go into all of it, question it
as usual. Left, you know, nonpartisan
style, not left or right, but really that
all of your government seems to be constantly
trying to get you thinking. And this that's
a good example of what I was just
saying. Pretending that we have change because they
yelled that we were gonna do something, and
then it doesn't really materialize. But it's okay
because we're we were already celebrating three days
ago. It already kind of happened because they
said they were going to. They'll get to
it. Give them a chance. Just trust them.
They might get there. It's crazy the kind
of placation we get. But, of course, an
important overlapping point to that that goes into
the larger Israel conversation, as you might imagine,
the easy connection there. But really showing you
the Israel First nature of his cabinet and
ending with the conversation of the ceasefire, which
is just absurd. I mean, the idea that
now not only are they
claiming Hamas broke the ceasefire, which you can
prove step by step that Israel been violating
it,
But on top of that, that ultimately, they
were at a point where everything had been
at least they were at the same spot,
right, where there was no violation or anything.
They just yelled about something else and claimed
that they wanted new things added to the
agreement. And because they didn't want that, which
in and of itself was a violation, you
don't get to insert new things and and
claim that they because they didn't accept what
they demanded that suddenly it's Hamas' fault. It's
insane.
And right now on top of it, you
can clearly see that they're going right back
to what the plan was always going to
be at the exact moment we told you
it would happen. It's pretty obvious. And even
worse, they stand up and say, no food,
no water, no fuel. Oh, yeah. Just like
last time. You know, showing you that it's
a switch.
Not not this game they play about how
we're not we don't have control over that.
We're not occupying this territory. Then just like
that, they can shut it down. Turn it
off. No more. And at a point in
which we're supposed to be of the mind
that they killed most of Hamas. Right? So
now what's left objectively are mostly civilians and
their own hostages. Right? So let's starve them
all because they didn't give us what we
want. Who? The group you're fighting or everybody
that's in Palestine?
This is why everybody sees through this. If
there's any honesty in the world, people are
acknowledging this is a criminal act. No matter
what the truth is around it, and the
truth is they've been lying about everything.
So let's start, of course, of course, with
an interesting point around cryptocurrency that you might
find interesting and a few other opening points
I think are relevant to include.
This is an interesting point for multiple reasons.
We've been talking about the cryptocurrency
part in all this.
The res reserve
strategic reserve and all of that. We've had
many podcasts on it, a couple of different
IMA panels. On that note, by the way,
still waiting on the new website to come.
We just touched base with Odysee.
It's it's just these things take time as
we recently said, you know, and it's
you're building something new, essentially. So
we'll we'll when it gets there, we'll present
it to you. We're kind of hold in
a holding pattern until we have something to
place a lot of this, but more panels
will be coming, by the way, just as
an update.
But we talked about a lot of this
more than once.
And the concern about what that might mean,
Catherine Austin Fitts had a lot of very
important perspectives on why this is not what
it appears to be and how really it's
the same problem in a different it's sort
of like the stablecoin private dynamic as opposed
to the CBDC.
It may you may go, yay. It's not
a CBDC until you realize the private version
is far, far worse. And it's exactly the
larger point we're always making, which very clearly
seems to be happening. And if this plays
a further part of it, even more, obviously.
But it's not just about where this goes.
And the weird omission of the Bitcoin point,
which I don't think is fleshed out yet.
We'll have to wait and see what the
response is or whether
it was just I'll read it in the
tweet that or the
truth that High Impact Flix shares.
But before I get into that, the interesting
point is what I wrote here. And I
want you to really think about this. The
the I mean,
it certainly could just be that they have
a different reason they do the same thing,
always ask questions, objective, question everything, but the
continuity
of so many different points around this. And
this is just one example that show you
whether they're aware of it or not. There
has been a continual agenda through a lot
of these things that span back well before
me from multiple left and right administrations. I
simply wrote, how long has the genuine independent
media called XRP
Fedcoin?
Now it's a whole conversation, but it's obvious
because of the way you could see that
at this point, when this first kinda came
out, XRP represented a very obvious you know,
most of these things seem to be pushing
back against the system, in some way, at
least ostensibly
represented to be sort of a challenge to
the current financial system or a challenge to
certain, you know, mainstream
functionality because not all of them are currency
necessarily.
And this one just plugged right into the
system. And so a lot us were like,
woah. I mean and it's, again, it's much
more complicated. But to make it simple, it
just stood out as an example of what
seemed to be
not what everything else looked. It seemed to
be like the Fedcoin, the one where they
were trying to go you know, picture Steve
Buscemi with his hat actually like, hey, fellow,
whatever he says, kids at the high school,
whatever that meme is from that movie. This
is that's what XRP represented. Like, we're not
totally just another x cryptocurrency
like you. I'm kinda making it funny. But
the point is that we were concerned,
and we went through multiple administrations. And now
Trump rolls it out as part of the
received reserve currency.
And I simply said, believing it will be
used just like this. So much that so
much that is happening today shows you the
long term continuity of the agenda through multiple
admins left, right,
or simply known as your government. Now as
I'm saying this, I probably should've read this
first because those of you that didn't haven't
seen this might not know exactly what I'm
referring to. That's my fault. So
Donald Trump writes this, True Social, and it
is exactly, but it's I didn't grab it
today for I forgot, but you can grab
this on true social, which I usually grab
for you. A US crypto reserve will elevate
this critical industry year after years of corrupt
attacks by the Biden administration, which is why
my executive order on digital assets directed the
presidential working group to move forward on a
crypto strategic reserve in and of itself is
an interesting
not necessarily has to be a bad thing,
but rife with potential corruption of problems we've
talked about.
That includes
XRP, SOL, SOL, and ADA.
And I think that's Cardano and, I'm blanking
on the other one. Give me the chat
what the other name is. I just forget
them. I usually go out and see the
acronyms. But the point is,
where's Bitcoin?
Now it says includes.
Maybe he means those three, and that's what
it is. Or it could simply be on
top of rip Bitcoin. I mean, either one,
I think, you could argue and con kind
of conversationally would make sense. So we'll have
to wait and see. But even I think
it was oh, I think I got it
right here. Bitcoin Magazine
shared the same thing and said, Justin, president
Trump announces he's creating a a crypto strategic
reserve with no mention of Bitcoin. They do
say no mention. So I think they get
the same feeling like we'll have to wait
and see how this goes,
but it is not
a good
it's an indication it's going some like, or
potentially the wrong direction. Like, I mean, talk
about a bait and switch. If they don't
use Bitcoin,
this is I mean, there's that's like that's
like spurning the entire maha part of their
of their administration right now. It's a whole
separate dynamic within the Trump administration
that is basically a part of it because
of RK Junior. So in the same way,
there's a huge part of this that are
people that believe that he would bring this
golden era of
cryptocurrency. He's using that same kind of thing
everywhere. The golden age of this
and doesn't include it. So if it doesn't
get included, man, what a bait and switch
are people that were invested because of that.
And on top of that, they already made
millions
just by the hype around Bitcoin. And I
guarantee you, if you don't see it and
if that's what I had this for, look
at what happened today with XRP.
And I think it's gone up from there.
I think it's, like, $2.60, and it could've
changed since I looked.
If you knew about this before, I mean,
minutes before,
you could make billions.
That's a that's a huge jump.
So I guarantee you, and I think that's
what Brian says here, somebody did. He says,
Trump just announced the creation of a crypto
reserve. Crypto immediately pops, and certain ones, not
all of them. Wonder who made huge purchases
before the announcement with their insider information. Now
you can find that out. In in in
many cases, you can only see the actual
anonymized aspect of who bought it, but some
in many ways, you can usually trace that
back to somebody who hasn't publicly posted. For
example, like, I have mine posted on all
my posts, but I'm aware of that. And
I'm not trying to hide anything. That's why
I do it because whatever we get donated,
you through that, you guys can look and
see for yourselves. Hasn't been really that much
over the years. Feel free to make that
more. The point though is that in also,
in some ways, it's not always anonymized depending
on what it is. I'd love to find
out who. And if somebody in his inner
circle somehow made a lot of money off
this trade, that's a big deal. So So
it's worth pointing out. So let me know
what you guys find. I'm very interested to
see in that. But, overall,
if XRP has always kind of been ready
for this and we've always seen that in
the wings and it just gets used at
the right moment, obviously, this seems to suggest
this has been the plan through multiple administrations
left and right. That needs to stand out.
And let's wait and see if Bitcoin's included.
Now on that kind of general conversation,
the AI overlap, which again actually, I should
have even grabbed those for you. I, you
know, did get two really good interviews recently
on Bitcoin.
1 with
where is that? Mark Goodwin,
and the other one with Mitch Hepburn, Mitch
Hepburn. That's funny. Mitch Shebergam.
This one, Mark Goodwin, was Bitcoin a government
operation and can't still be used to fight
back?
This one entitled, the how the government commandeer
Bitcoin and its dense decentralized future. Both are
really good, slightly different points for some in
some aspects. Largely the same idea that they
both think it's can still be used to
fight back. And also in different ways, but
the nuance I won't get into now. But
the point is that this is
interesting to think about because Mitch in particular,
we talk about the AI overlap to it.
And Bitcoin as as not the currency aspect
of it, but the technology.
It
it there's ways that this can be used
that overlap with artificial intelligence that are like,
he even argues, like, for example and they
even mentioned this in the past, like, a
carbon tracking dynamic.
And it gets very dystopian the more you
see this go forward. That's why he's very
adamant about trying to fight against it.
So just a thought points out,
a more perfect union post in the twenty
seventh, and this is a a piece of
legislation.
Republican congressman David
Schweickart has introduced a bill to begin the
process of letting AI prescribe drugs. Now this
is all happening wildly fast.
Now this is what they meant. And if
you can't see that by now, and they've
told you this, they've been clear. They even
said it explicitly.
Someone like David Sacks from both AI and
cryptocurrency,
Elon Musk himself, that this is what they
mean by efficiency, that they're going to use
artificial intelligence on everything.
I mean, that's been basically stated. And so
here, we're just talking about prescribing drugs or
I mean, you know where this goes. The
the law of conclusion is that everything you're
interfacing, the government is AI. And somebody even
made a point about this.
Actually, I should have held back on this
until this point we're gonna get to in
a second, but they're being very shadowy about
what Doge is and who you can know
and where the names are.
Somebody made a good point. What if it's
literally artificial intelligence? What if the actual administrator
that we're not being named or maybe it
has been, I didn't missed it? But I'll
show you the clip of her acting like
we're not gonna tell you from this podium
who the actual administrator is. What if they're
just referring to an artificial intelligence program?
Just a thought. I somebody else deserves credit
for that, but that's a very alarming way
to look at this. But even that aside,
just the general idea of rushing into this
in ways that we don't even understand yet,
at least from the average person.
Prescribing drugs, who's accountable for stuff like this?
What if there's a problem? This get the
it's we have not even begun to map
this out, and they're ramming it through. Now
it says instead of investing in US health
care systems, the bill paves the way for
doctors to be replaced by AI.
Now you may be okay with that.
I'm not. Not in any context. Not especially
because of the people, and I don't mean
left or right. I mean, our government, currently
both sides of it or all of your
government,
who do not care about our interests. And
that's been transparently clear for decades.
To then replace
these dynamics with artificial intelligence, the point is
how do they are they gonna make sure
it's safe for you? Are they gonna make
sure that these things are I mean, it's
all the same points. If we know that
or or even the other point is the
information they're using through artificial intelligence.
Right? If they're if they are the ones
entering in the data, well, then they can
ultimate like, we're seeing with Elon Musk today,
can ultimately control things through that. Something Gwyneth
and I've talked about more than once. Now
just AI or just a thought says, we
will be we all be replaced by AI.
Be forced to take u universal basic income
of which Elon Musk has roundly supported via
stablecoins and will be digitally controlled and tracked
if we don't start paying attention to what's
happening. It's obviously your opinion.
I I mean, I it seems like a
very unfortunately likely scenario worth where this all
goes. This is why I won't include it,
though. She's a great post from her.
But here,
Donald Trump's first week in office administration has
begun to demolish what the foundations for ensuring
that artificial intelligence in The US is safe
and responsible.
No. Of course. Because the moment I show
you the the source,
certain people will reflexively dismiss it, and all
of us should reflexively question it. And that's
for everything no matter where it comes from.
Now the ACLU, of course, has been very
clearly
politicized
without question. That doesn't change what you can
understand about the root
facts in this. Not the now what you'll
notice that I'll leave out the parts that
they get into about the racial discriminatory points
even though they're valid. It doesn't mean it
both all sides will use it for their
own interest or what they think. But that's
not the point for me.
The point for me in this is about
whether this is gonna be used
in ways that are
I mean, I'll read the article, and you'll
see what I mean. The obvious part of
this is to of, you know, the woke
aspect, if you wanna call it that, which
is fair. The idea of using this to
effectively you know, from the Democrat perspective, they're
worried that the AI will be used to
make sure that only people they want will
be in those positions. Whether you think that
means a certain color or a certain whatever.
There's some level of of honesty to that
or man versus women. And now on the
right, the idea is that they'd be more
concerned that they would make sure it's all
DEI and woke and lesbians and and there's
some truth to that too.
That's what the that's what's interesting about it.
Now but that point aside,
I'd like to believe that if we get
to an honest place where the
you could make an AI program, hypothetically, that
could make it the best for the job,
somebody who has the most merit to be
there. Now you you would need honest input
for that to be the reality. But you
see my point? I put that aside for
a reason. Because that's what the article really
really
focuses on the idea of how this could
be used to discriminate against people. For me,
I'm more concerned about the privacy dynamic or
the
I mean, there's so many ways to look
at how this could get out of control.
The article is simply Trump's effort to dismantle
AI protections.
Now we're again, aside from the,
pull it or I guess just the the
left right perspective,
At a point in which artificial intelligence is
rolling out faster than ever, why would you
roll back things that are not about left
and right, but just simply protection of people
in a system in which AI is rolling
out?
It's a good question. Now I'm gonna include
these articles in here that we talked about
from the Bitcoin dynamic.
Here's what this article says.
His administration has begun to demolish the foundations
for ensuring that artificial intelligence in The US
is safe and responsible.
And just that Satan's alone.
Of course, you could politically, you could debate
whether that's what's really happening. That's the way
they view it. Always question this. But if
you go to the mean of it and
and look at the actual things that are
moving, whether Biden rolled them out or not,
Hard to deny that these things don't make
sense. Now it says further accelerating the spread
of unchecked AI across American life. Now maybe
you're okay with that because Elon and Trump
are the ones doing it. If you weren't,
if you wouldn't be, if it was anybody
with a d by their name, then you're
being a hypocrite. And especially since you can't
stand back and ask yourself whether it could
be then used by somebody else later.
Why we would allow this unchecked is a
concern.
Or, you know, doing so is a concern.
Now it says president Trump has an has
undone existing AI protections at the at a
breathtaking pace. Now first point in this is
whether those were even being adhered to. I
doubt they were. There's a lot of so
called protections and regulations and laws and that
they never follow.
Still matters though that it's there, and we
could point to it as something they're violating,
but consider that. But it's an executive order
on safe, secure, and trustworthy development of use
of artificial no. Okay. Here's a point that's
under Biden's administration. Exactly why the executive order
dynamic is meant to manipulate you. Because if
all they if he could just roll it
on back with nothing but a pen, then
it never really meant anything in the first
place, and that's exactly why it's not actually
real, like a lot of the things they're
doing. And some of them, we would want
to be real, like the woman's sports dynamic.
But he I guarantee you, it'll be flipped
around next time somebody comes back. But the
executive order was about that exact idea.
Now it says instructions to review a presidential
directive known as the national security memo governing
national security use of AI. That's what they
they basically repealed.
And it says days later, Donald, president Trump
issued his own AI executive order directing the
Office of Management and Budget,
which coordinates agencies across the federal government to
overhaul its existing directive on federal uses of
AI.
Trump his president Trump's goal is is clear.
Undo anything that could get in the way
of of breakneck AI development and deployment. Now
I agree with that. That shouldn't be a
political stand. They've been clear about that. And
what they're doing is just like Trump has
done in the past, they're in other business
dynamics.
Remove the regulations. Get things out of the
way. Let them profit. Now in some cases,
that might be the, a a a good
thing.
But we're talking about the idea of big
business or even something like this that's almost
unprecedented.
You the idea that you're just removing you
you know who's gonna suffer? The average person
in every way, even if he has good
intentions.
Do you think these corporations do? These people
are I mean, you can look back any
anytime throughout history that you see a large
corporation that gets given some kind
of carpe launch.
It always ends in a terrible reality, whether
it's Teflon, whether I mean, you can name
the amount of groups that have allowed to
murder people through poisoning. How about just the
current government we'll exist under? COVID nineteen shots.
But the problem
is that very clearly
rushing this in is for the benefit of
the people doing it and the control structure
that it creates.
Not for you. Even if they can pretend
like, oh, look. Now you can do things
on GROC, or, oh, now you can have,
you know, some I mean, I don't even
know. What does it immediately translate to the
average person? Think about it for a second.
Now it says that emphasis on speed is
dangerous. Artificial intelligence and other automated tools have
already been rapidly adopted in the private and
public sectors without first ensuring that the tools
are fair and appropriate. Now fair is not
what I'm worried about. I'm not concerned about
this AI being used to make things unfair
for people. The world is already unfair. Not
to say that we shouldn't consider that in
other dynamics. But in this point,
Chris, we live in a way in a
world right now where your government is constantly
creating situations where you are constantly being I
mean, the world is not fair. And the
idea that this is somehow using the air
AI is gonna make it fair. It's as
simple as them not using it and lying
about what happens or what it says. The
government will always abuse you. Not that we
should accept that. The point is that what
we should focus on are the immediate concerns
about
privacy,
about about ongoing you know, the digital,
biometric dynamic and how that's being applied or
how how these things could be used to
invasively control the way you see the world,
the way you think. Even when you get
into the neuroscience overlap, which gets way, way
alarming to me,
it becomes very dystopian.
I don't see how this doesn't end up
there with what I mean, look at the
past and what your government has always done
or any government for that matter. When you
get a when they get a tool,
it gets used
usually against you.
And, usually, we we don't find that out
until thirty years later. We look back and
go, oh, it looks like you were the
focal point the entire time, like the war
on terror.
But it says the emphasis on speed is
dangerous.
They've already rolled these out. Now it says
right here, Trump is already rolling back many
of these different dynamics that were placed at
least ostensibly
to give you some level of protection. Robust
public transparency and internal oversight,
one of the things that are essentially arguably
being removed,
and they say such as chief AI officers.
But see, I don't think many of us
even know how this was already being applied.
If even at it was even if it
was just it wasn't in practice yet. Maybe
it was just written down. But maybe that
was the whole point about feigning this direction
and then removing it without even happening. But
it says, as well as regular testing requirements
to ensure that AI tools follow existing laws,
protecting civil rights and civil liberties, such as
free speech.
So if these are being applied
in any number of these ways and suddenly
you're being removed or cut who do you
go who who's accountable?
Simply the law point, I think, is the
most important.
This is accurately perform the task they're given
and don't waste agency resources. Now isn't that
interesting? So if you were gonna make this
done properly,
right, if it's rushed out, it could ultimately
be wasteful. But maybe that's the process they
want. This is an experiment to see how
this plays out. But in a time when
you're talking about cutting costs and being efficient,
it seems like the this is kind of
the wild west of the artificial intelligence dynamic.
It says there's no reason for the Trump
administration to jettison those protections. Now that's sort
of the question I want you to ask.
I I mean, what else would be the
logic for that? Why would you remove things
that would arguably be just to make sure
that the things you're doing are in in
line with the law and in line with
your current constitutional rights?
Well, I think the answer is obvious seeing
as how we can point to many other
examples where those things are just passing acknowledgments
and really just get in the way. We'll
do our best to acknowledge privacy if we
have to, but we're gonna do it anyway.
That was directly from the Trump administration that
got leaked. Talking about exactly all but rolling
these things out, that was the Doge part
of it, and being concerned about our privacy
rights. And they said, well, we'll consider it,
but we're gonna start anyway.
Didn't think that would be leaked, but it
did.
Now it says rolling back AI protection signals
the pronounced power big tech has in the
new administration. That's obvious. This includes deploying AI
to probe and slash critical government programs and
grants. Now that's interesting. Right?
Because if we're talking about something that is
it's not a sentient AI. It's a program,
something that they're inputting data into. Right? So
if they're making it focus on certain left
leaning things, you can easily see or the
left and right leaning things, you can see
how that would be not accurate, not honest.
So if they're deploying Elon Musk's AI program
to go out and get rid of the
things that they don't like, even let's just
even say only woke and DEI things. Now
I think almost all of those things are
manipulations, are not actually are a,
abuse of their power. But there's plenty of
Americans that disagree with that. And there's plenty
of things that I argue are even far
more problematic that they won't go after because
it's on there. You know how this applies.
So it's concerning to see how this would
be used.
And, also, the bigger point is how it's
already being used in Israel with Palantir who's
embedded in this administration, which is that they
can kind of off
kick off the accountability.
Right? That we already heard from them with
the nine seven two magazine articles where they're
saying, well, you know, we're simply applying the
the bomb the bombing where the data system
points to. And even then, the point was
they were being told they were telling the
nine seven two magazine that we're being pressured,
we're being challenged,
like, that we have to meet certain,
you know, certain metrics. We have to be
done by a certain time, and they could
be they're being pressured
and be and and comparing to each other.
And so they're almost forcing an interest to
just press the button. Don't don't compare. Don't
look even though they claim they're supposed to.
And they made that statement. They were they're
bombing things without even looking into it for
themselves because the AI program told them to.
That's what this is really about. They can
always go, well, the AI said it it
wasn't our fault. Yeah. We killed a hundred
civilians, but, you know, that was the we'll
we'll we'll do better next time.
That's where we are with this. It can
apply in a hundred different ways.
Now the main point, obviously, is just removing
regulations
around an unprecedented
rollout of something that we know is going
to play an outsized role in the future
of the world. That alone should be alarming,
and it's happening a lot I mean, countless
different ways in this current administration. All under
the guys, and maybe you're right, I don't
think so, that they have to do it
this way because they're fighting the deep state.
It's kinda crazy that we just accept that
even though the reality is that almost everything
they're doing is
eerily
the opposite direction of what they ever promised
they would do. And eerily exactly in the
direction of what all the things they said
the deep state were doing. But as long
as they say they're fighting it, apparently, that's
enough.
I I hope more than anything that I'm
wrong about this because it is so alarming
to see how much is being ignored.
Now
one of the points Derek wrote about is
just the digital ID part of it. But
the reality is whether it's the NY School
of Law or the ACLU or different groups
that I guess some often perceived as being
more left leaning.
In some cases, obviously, like, I think the
LC ACLU is very clearly more leaning to
the left. The point is that it doesn't
change the fact in this case as they
write the digital ideas because there's there's their
quote.
Quote, paving a digital road to hell.
Since that's just that's that's very seriously. I
mean, it's
you know, it's it's like I remember Michael
Yeaton using the word evil to describe what's
happening. Like, it it just it shows you
that there's beyond the normal.
But this is just one aspect of how
digital IDs will be used or artificial intelligence
around all of it to put you in
a place where you're in a digital prison,
And everyone seems to be able to see
it.
Now overlapping that with the larger point about
vaccinations and and the larger program. And this
is it's all overlapped. Right? So if we're
talking about AI programs
that they're removing regulations for, that they're that
are going to be and here's the largest
point and the whole point of all this,
creating vaccinations
or injections, mRNA based, and whatever else.
Don't we want some sort of regulation to
make sure they're not, I don't know, using
gain of function, which we already know they
are? That's my point. That right there would
be why a regulation would be put in
place to say, Buzz, that's violating this law.
But they already don't care about that. We
saw that across multiple administrations that were doing
the same gain of function research. That was
under Trump's administration too, by the way. But
so here we are, where they're literally telling
you we're gonna use your health data that
we scooped up during our pharmacovigilance, which by
the way means they know for a matter
of fact that they killed all those people
because they never showed you that data from
Oracle and the rest. That's that's Larry Ellison
right there. And they're now using that health
data that Larry told you to make these
shots for you
using the same AI that they're
you know, get rid of all the regulations
for. Pretty concerned about that. Stargate project or
as I titled, the AI biomedical control grid.
As I said, rolls out the AI biomedical
control grid backed by Israel and the deep
state.
Now this, shout out to Strategic Culture Foundation,
is a very interesting article.
And that's where I got the the image
from, which I thought was pretty funny.
But this is concerning as hell. I mean,
I really and we're just, again, outside of
the political sense of all these things. Think
about
if there was a deep state and it
wanted to try to convince you to pick
it as you thought you were fighting it,
what do you think it would do?
And that's not to say that that improves
that this is what I think it is,
but just really think about that. If you're
honest and objective,
play the game. Just just for the hypothetical
exercise. Right? If that's where we were
and there was a deep state power structure,
which I think we all acknowledge
some degree you know, we just a lot
of people vary on what we think it
means and how it is formulated.
It's the unelected power structure that ultimately continues
regardless of the so called selections and is
there
seemingly in, you know, indefinitely.
If they decided they wanted to step back
out and take control, what would be the
best and most effective way to do it?
It's quite obvious, isn't it?
To convince the people that thought they were
fighting it to side with you. In fact,
to convince you that they were the ones
fighting the deep state.
I think and that's not to say that
that proves that's what it is, but isn't
that pretty obviously what would make the most
sense? And then to get you essentially fighting
their enemies
to solidify that control over and that's not
even to say that their enemies are people
that weren't in line with that control, but
just people that maybe wanted that control for
themselves.
And all you're doing is helping fight that
down. It's very much worth considering. And I
think the Doge aspect to all of this
really does add a very clear layer,
just, like, the functionality
of what this represents.
I mean, you could I mean and this
is what's actually interesting when you get into
the whole Andreessen,
Pat Peter to Alex Carr, Peter Thiel,
kind of Machiavellian,
the mean the ends justify the means after
Trump literally just tweets that out about the
law in the same point.
Their their mindset
is literally that they are so called counter
elites. Like, they're they're not fighting for you.
They're fighting for their control against the other
elites, or at least that's how they're framing
it. For all we know, they're all working
together. But think about that in this context
and realize that they are ultimately
another
deep state.
Then there's battling for that same control. And
maybe that amounts to a better situation for
you or some people in certain political standings,
but it's still the same centralized control structure
that still has the same unaccountable dynamic that
still continues the same agendas in in the
direction they like. And they expect to everybody
else, as always. I mean, are we really
pretending we're having some benevolent altruistic deep state
counter elites that are fighting for you?
I certainly hope so. The evidence seems to
point otherwise. Now this is from 01/23/2025.
It's entitled
Doge, aka the deep state made official.
It says the an acronym for department of
government efficiency. The Doge represents an initiative in
the administrative
landscape of The United States entrusted to the
leadership of Elon Musk. This entity was conceived
as a body external,
remember this detail,
to the federal government. So it's not a
part of the federal government,
operating as an advisory
board with the purpose
of providing strategic guidance
for streamlining government spending and reducing bureaucracy, which
is hilarious seeing as how it's the most
obvious example of a bureaucracy in this conversation.
But what's interesting, as I said before,
it's an advisory
role. So
legally speaking, all this represents as people that
are giving advice to people who have actual
authority. And we all know that that's not
what's happening. If you have Elon Musk with
his little lackey team going in places with
nobody else around and effectively
ordering things,
then you're already very that's transparently not the
same thing. Because you have to understand if
this is re and that's what they're selling
you, advisory role, that he's not the administrator.
Right? But we won't name that person. I'll
show you that in a second.
Then, ultimately,
he's breaking the law. Because what it would
really be is that he's advising. Probably not
most of these people don't go along with
this thing. You would advise somebody and they
would go and take action. But ultimately, you
would be somebody there who has that authority,
who is then Elon's by his side going
this is what we should do. And then
they would go, okay. Now we do this.
And ordering those things. Him doing that is
a very clear
deviation. Now because
the fake paradigm left right control structure has
convinced people on the right that anybody that
thinks that is a Democrat, suddenly, regardless of
how much logic applies to it, we can't
consider that. If you start suggesting that he's
just the other that's that's because that's what
the Democrats said on CNN.
Or
the obvious evidence suggests that regardless of what
the fake media was saying back and forth.
It's obvious that they keep playing this very,
very basic reverse psychology game with the partisanship
as seems to work more than ever for
some reason.
Now it says, Doge then is not set
up as a traditional government agency, but rather
as an advisory entity working in synergy with
the White House
and the Office of Management and Budget to
drive large scale structural reform. Now why that
it's one deviation there. It's interesting.
Technically, they just renamed the digital services.
Very clear. As much as a lot of
the republican conversation doesn't wanna acknowledge that because
it's uncomfortable, the digital ID, which is part
of that, the Obama I think it was
a was it Obama creation? You know, the
point is simply,
they didn't create something new. They just renamed
it, and they are do and and carrying
out the same digital
AI direction transport. That's what that's really about.
So but my point is, though, that is
already a group.
So then is Elon even technically part of
that group since he's only an adviser? No.
He'd be adviser to whoever whoever's actually got
the authority within that group or even then
the group above them that's actually making decisions
until you see my point? So it's interesting,
though,
whether or not this is any of this
is even like, it just seems like a
bunch of smoke and mirrors.
But the point no no matter what is
that you as the American taxpayer has the
have the right to know how this is
being applied. At least that's the game we
always play. Right? I don't think they've cared
about these things for a long time, but
if we're pretending we have this democracy or
whatever we're supposed to call it these days,
regardless of any of them are true, that
they're supposed to be doing what you say
or what they say or they're at the
very least, what
the constituents believe they voted for, and none
of that seems to be happening. Now it
says that's right. Something external paid for with
taxpayer money that will have influence on the
inside.
This is a curious fact. Some believe that
the potential impact for this department could be
compared to that of the Manhattan Project with
an expected end date for this activities by
07/04/2026,
which then that's when the so called time
runs out. But the idea we already showed
you is that the legal argument is that
even if they just kept working, there's it
doesn't really matter. It seems wild. The Manhattan
Project was a top secret research and development
project contracted between The US, UK, and Canada
to develop the atomic bomb during World War
two. What did the outcome of that project
mean? Now this is important. Not necessarily an
atomic overlap, but the change. It says simply,
so to speak, the change of the course
of war and the appearance of the whole
world
with the nuclear arms race, nuclear deterrence, etcetera.
So a paradigm shift.
Now it says, what do Trump's people want
to do? Following this logic, a full fledged
atomic revolution of the US administration, metaphorically.
And maybe that is exactly what they succeeded
in doing.
And they said something doesn't add up. Now
it says, let's repeat. An external entity with
internal influence
at the helm. That's Elon Musk. Now my
point my mind always goes to the many
different conflicts of interest, whether it's even just
from US intelligence,
which he is absolutely
immersed with, or foreign governments, which he is
absolutely immersed with. So the idea that we
have somebody with wild conflicts of interest who
have who has not pulled himself out of
his companies, that has not signed any ethics
pledges, that literally with more power than anybody,
it's amazing that we can acknowledge whether you
like him or not, whether he has the
best of intentions or not, that that is
not what we think we not what anything
they promised and definitely not what intelligent people
should want from a powerful government. Now it
says assuming that the deep state would be
nothing more than the bankers telling the state
and its apparatuses apparatuses that, what to do
and how, does it not seem to you
that this is the same thing,
only normalized
by the state?
Now, this is not about whether you think
he's got good intentions or whether he's even
do whether he's doing everything you think he
promised. Let's just even say for sake of
conversation that they are. He's he's met every
promise he's made and that he has the
best of intentions for you.
That's the point I was making before.
Even if that is the case,
doesn't this then represent in maybe in a
good way, the same kind of thing?
The same outside influence from powerful in in
insiders
being just normalized. Right? So the deep state
is sort of the unelected power structure. Right?
So now, basically, turning it into kinda like
Matt Ehret has always been told, telling you
that they're gonna step back out of the
shadows,
and now, basically, just normalizing it as the
state.
Now it says it is it is it
is a legitimate question.
Why would one accept a billionaire tycoon
in transhumanism,
finance,
military research, telecommunications
as an outside influence on the government?
Isn't that what so many other overlords of
transitional,
put what is that? Pot potentates?
What is that one? I didn't read that
earlier.
The, a monarch or ruler. Funny, they use
another word I'll show you here that I
wasn't familiar with. And it says,
what they basically, other warlords and and rulers
already do. Then what changes?
I mean, think about the the the the
we've played that clip so many times. I've
even just got a lot of reach because
David Ick shared I pointed pointed shared it
again that Elon checks all the boxes.
Right? I mean, the crazy part about this
is that
every single thing that we were telling what
everybody was talking about is now being done
by Elon Musk, but it's barely even being
discussed in the inner republican dynamic, which shows
you that they don't really care about the
outcome. They care about the excuse, the win,
the immediate benefit.
Now here,
since I might as well,
is that clip.
Nobody will be safe
if not everybody is vaccinated.
Are you vaccinated, if I may ask? Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I'm very pro vaccination.
I mean, we've, it's the science is unequivocal.
Can you imagine, sir, in ten years when
we are sitting here, we have an implant
in our,
brains
and,
I can immediately
feel because you all will have implants. Just
think of sensors
planted into our brains. Basically,
implanted in your
skull. So,
but it would be
flush with your skull. So you basically,
take out a chunk of skull, replace put
put the neurolink device in there.
You you put the
the electrode you insert the electrode threads very
carefully into the the brain. It doesn't change
what you are doing.
It changes you if you take a genetic
editing. It's a fusion
of the physical,
the digital,
and the biological
world.
That's
really
the essence of the fourth industrial revolution. A
merger with
biological intelligence
and machine intelligence. An effort for man to
merge with machine in a healthy way. Yes.
To beat machines, you basically have to merge
with machines. Most likely. Yes. As work is
changing, is a universal basic income,
really a a a solution to the to
this problem? I I think, ultimately, we will
have to have some kind of universal basic
income. And I think some kind of a
universal basic basic income is gonna be necessary.
Decarbonization
of the economy. Where are they traveling? How
are they traveling? What are they eating?
What are they consuming on the platform?
So individual carbon footprint tracker.
Stay tuned. We don't have it operational yet,
but this is something that we're working on.
I mean, my top recommendation, honestly, would be
just to have a carbon tax. Cisco will
reset
is necessary.
I'll include that. I just grabbed it really
quickly. Just it's got some pretty good reach
on it. 208,000
views. It's Elon checks all the boxes. It's
definitely worth considering.
Now back to the article
saying, you know, the point again is that
he, you know, transhumanism,
finance, military, and all the different all the
different overlaps. He says that what then what
changes? And is is that the right question
to ask? Elon Musk, who is the largest
private contractor,
remember that, for government entities of our time,
well through left and right administrations.
So if you're pretending that as he's been
pushing,
you know, Democrats are evil, and it's only
the Democrats, and Biden did well, you worked
with them the entire time.
That's the government. There's not some disconnect there.
It's not like he worked for part of
them that weren't part that was the Biden
administration.
Whether Biden personally checked off or whether he's
senile or not, the same people that you
claimed you were fighting were allowing Elon Musk
and paying Elon Musk to help build the
satellites for the for the same administration. Right?
The same dynamic.
I just don't know. It's amazing to me
that people can't recognize that.
This is the, the article that Derek wrote.
I just can't type right now.
That shows you that, you know, this was
going back. I mean, this was being built
during Biden's administration. Here's the National Reconnaissance Office
literally saying, you know, now you can't hide
because you're constantly being looked at. That's from
the that's a Biden administration state. Then it
rolls into Trump's administration, and they're still using
the same
that's the continuity, guys. That that's the real
system, not the game of the wedge issues,
the screening people in congress.
The game has always been there. I shouldn't
even call it a game. It was very
serious. Elon Musk and SpaceX are helping the
intelligence
build the world's largest spy satellite network. Fantastic.
Back to the article.
Elon Musk, largest
contractor for government entities of our time, mainly
of US defense and security with Starlink.
Remember, since 02/2010, I think the satellites I
mean, it's basically majority a majority of one
for Elon Musk owns these satellites. That's just
it's the consolidation of power is beyond we
can even recognize right now. It says,
mainly of US defense and security with Sarlink,
but also of China.
Same point. What about that? With Biden, they'd
be screaming, CHICOMS.
Right? Right, Alex Jones? Now it says from
which Tesla receives substantial funding.
Now he will be the one who will
have to say how to manage the federal
agencies.
Right? The guy who was cheap is benefiting
from them more than anybody on the planet
as they write clearly the nature of the
process that goes beyond the concept of conflict
of interest. Makes a parody of the what
it even means.
Now it says we are witnessing a formalization
of a deep state or of the deep
state. A state, a step that will blur
the fine line between public and private even
more. And you know what that sounds like?
Public private partnership. What? World Economic Forum and
Klaus Schwab and all this was and what
Whitney Webb and I have been talking about
for a very long time since the COVID
nineteen forward. You're creating
essentially a fascist overlap,
where if you want the information, well, that's
the private side. Right?
If if they use that however they would
like. They use the benefits of both to
keep you in the dark.
Now think of the same thing we keep
I keep seeing is, like, from the COVID
nineteen time frame. Right? I'm of the mind
that Trump was put in that position because
it would pacify who would be the most
resistant.
I think the same thing's happening right now
with the transformation of our country
or the coup of the Zionist technocratic or
whatever you wanna call it. So what's interesting
is the same point
is that the public private partnership and all
these different things, whether it's the mRNA based
shots, whether it's the the reimagining of our
society. Right? They gave it to you in
the ridiculous version with the James Bond villain
and the Democrats,
so we all went, no. And then they
roll it out with your side, so we
go, that's the right one. So it's it's
always how this goes.
So you don't recognize it when it's your
side, or they they or you think, well,
good. The bad one's out of the way.
This one's less bad. Lesser of evils.
Always.
It's still a public private partnership. It is
still a deep state dynamic. Now it says,
more importantly, why should Americans and colonized peoples
accept such a thing?
Oh, and well, just I I wasn't gonna
mention it, but the point is they it's
hypothetical.
They simply say the word doge
symbolically refers to the head of the Republic
Of Venice, which was an oligarchic mercantile republic.
And it says, is this an allusion to
alluding to what what this ministry or more
broadly the Trump two government will be?
Hypothetical to question. Right? But I think we
do know is a lot of these symbolism
the way, you know, what they wear, the
you know, what e Elon puts on that.
There there's symbols in these things. The one
that means something or meant it, it's up
for you to decide. But the point is,
maybe that's what they're alluding to. Now this
is more importantly, why should Americans and colonized
peoples by these entities
accept that?
So many years of fighting against the deep
state only to find it in government,
becoming the actual government, or you're gonna show
as really as Matt would write stepping back
out of the shadows. Always really pulling these
strings. Now deciding now is the time. Rolling
out Technocracy Inc. Starting with Technate. Starting with
the, you know, all the different things that
the North American Union and all the people
that are fighting it or ignoring it. Now
it says, for now, as we wait to
see DOGE come into operation,
we can share some observations. Now what I
would argue as I'm just kinda giving you
the parts that I was highlighting, they're being
clear. This is just hypothetical.
Right? What they do over the next year,
four years, will that's what matters.
And I both the article and I've been
saying the entire time is that if they
roll out all the things that change everything
for the better, still would be a positive
outcome. But the point always applies that if
you do it in a way that can
be reversed, then maybe that's how it's supposed
to go. Still, nonetheless, would be a positive
outcome. So we have to wait and see
action. I said this this morning to somebody.
The only thing that matters to me right
now more than ever to a fault at
this point are principles, integrity, and the outcome.
Everything else is noise at this point, and
they're very clearly showing you that. Now here
are the observations from the strategic foundation culture
foundation.
Number one.
Those are these are their observations. Political power
in democracies is based on the principle of
representation.
Now you know my opinions about what we
really have, but this is a a hypothetical.
If you happen to live in a place
that was like that, it says, which is
the process by which citizen delegates
delegate some of their decision making capabilities,
making political decisions, legislating, governing to their representatives
through elections,
Without the legitimacy of representation in in a
world where we live in a hypothetically in
a democracy, which I don't think we do,
but they claim we do. Right? The point
is, if we don't have that representation, then
there is no democracy.
Representation is based on popular sovereignty,
citizens' freedom of choice, and the accountability and
responsibility of elected representatives.
In doing so, DODGE, Elon Musk, through him
through that or Elon Musk and DODGE through
him, could truly legitimize a form of outside
interference
that arbitrarily nullifies, if if so facto, the
need for the effectiveness of representation.
In a way, we'll finish in the sentence,
falsifying democracy to the point may of making
it aesthetic
an aesthetic virtualization.
The the point, though,
you already see people essentially arguing that.
I mean, coming from the so called counter
elites. Right? Didn't Andreessen? I said, Anderson? Didn't
didn't he just make an argument on on
Joe Rogan about how there is no such
thing as democracy? It's religious oligarchy. We're here
to save you.
It's very it's what they're doing.
They're trying to convince you that we don't
really need that old style. We need to
make
sure we need to lean in to this,
the good elitist, the good dictatorship.
And if by and whether you agree with
it or not, on one side, they hope
you just want that and call for it.
On the other side, they want to convince
you it really is democracy, that what they're
doing through this is essentially removing like, if
you vote somebody in and then the Elon
Musk is superseding that or by the way,
it's the same point about executive orders.
If they can just write it out with
a pen, then representation has become null and
void, and that's where this is all going.
Now it says admitting that democracy does not
interest us, it's their second observation,
and also
admitting its eventual termination or falsification
through the activity of the Doge, a kind
of political hybrid would be formed,
almost like an oligarchic.
And this was the this was the the
one I was talking about.
It's, it's patriciate.
One word I haven't seen before. It essentially
just means the the
hierarchy. Basically, politicians and aristocracy
is a good way to put it. Now
it says,
what kind of political hybrid? Almost like an
oligarchy,
a patriciate.
Now the fact that it is an external
political entity
suggests that there will probably there will probably
not even be a need to be accountable
to the government, and that perhaps the government
will have no decision making power over Doge,
literally
a parallel republic
or a shadow government.
That's exactly the point.
Now, again, this is hypothetical about where they
what they go on to do next, not
just saying things or rapidly being caught lying,
which I haven't even got into over the
last week of all the many and more
more than we even seen already. Some I
haven't even covered, which maybe I will in
the next few shows,
of many examples of them being caught lying
about what they're doing on that Doge platform.
Major. Not just the 8,000,000, 8 billion 1,
but many of them. Because the people that
like what they're doing don't seem to care
if it's actually factual. The people on the
other side wanna pretend that everything is wrong
even though some of it might be a
positive thing. It's always how partisans works.
A parallel
republic.
Now it says this forces us to ask
questions about the legal system and political practice
of this configuration.
It is unclear what kind and how much
power Doge will have in American politics. I
think it's pretty becoming pretty clear. It is
unclear what legislative backstop there will be, if
any.
The threefold separation of state powers as defined
by the fathers of the modern era suddenly
collapses.
Now this is what it looks like to
reimagine everything,
sorta like we thought we were fighting.
Now since the president, we ask, what will
become?
Donald Trump or the pow rather, the
position.
If a potentially limitless external entity
will be able to influence the government,
then who will really have the power?
The Doge or the president?
And I mean, you know, of course, doesn't
that begin to seem like some kind of
a transition of power? Ask yourself who seems
to be influencing that more than anything, and
who benefits from that more than anything.
There's no small question, it says.
This is no small question. The election elected
the election elected the president. Now, frankly, I
don't agree with that. I think we know
by now there's been,
I think you arguably, I believe these people
in at this platform understand and in some
ways agree with the larger point about how
we've been, you know,
manipulated. And if not, our whether our vote
even technically translates anymore, not to say that
it is not important in an actual representative
government. And then even more so to say
whether we would even want that structure versus
something more liberty, more free.
But the point still being
where was it? The oh, the you know,
so in regard to the selection process,
that it's worth considering whether that even is
the case. But for the sake of argument,
the point is that if that was the
case,
they were put in that position by people
deciding that,
not Doge
or Elon Musk. Now whether or not that
was picked by the person picked, it doesn't
change the fact Musk was not directly voted
in by anybody.
Yet he finds himself with enormous power, unprecedented
it seems, which we can also interpret as
an extension and reshaping
of his financial power.
I just I mean, look. Again,
there were peep there will be people who
just do not want to consider this for
many reasons.
But an objective perspective from a nonpartisan lens,
this is obviously
concerning.
Now if it continues in a in a
positive direction, I would still argue the structure
is concerning because how it could be abused
by him or somebody let next. But it
would at least be going in a positive
direction. We'll wait and see what happens.
The point remains that this kind of centralization
of power is the opposite of everything that
was promised and needs to be called out.
And here is just a
many more examples of what add to that
very picture. Now you know my opinion of
how I mean, we'll get to the
shockingly obvious nature of Israel's influence over this
administration. That can't be ignored with what's going
on right now, especially as we see an
unprecedented
transition
altering ever. I mean,
we have to be considering whether that's because
of somebody else destroying this for their benefit.
But at very least, whatever it is, this
has to be concerning that we're at a
point where they almost don't want you to
know
what's really happening here, especially from a group
acting like they're giving you unprecedented transparency
and then hiding everything.
Now this is from ACYN that says
the reporter asked, who is the Doge administrator?
And she just basically says she won't reveal
it from the podium at this time. But
we'll tell you later if you wanna come
off off the camera.
This is somebody who is supposed to be
acting with American tax dollars and the American
interest, and we don't get to know who's
in charge. Now in the chat, let me
know if there's been any,
now this is from the twenty sixth. There's
another follow-up we're gonna talk about
from yesterday, talking about the same kind of
dynamic. But let me know if they have
just divulged this. I didn't see it today,
but in case I missed it.
Caroline, I wanted to ask about a federal
judge yesterday was saying that they didn't know
who the Doge administrator was and was asking
the the lawyer for the administration who it
was, and the lawyer responded, I don't know
the answer to that. Can you tell us
who the administrator of DOGE is? Again, I've
been asked to answer this question. Elon Musk
is overseeing DOGE. They are career administrator. There
are no. Elon Musk is a special government
employee, which I've also been asked and have
answered that question as well. You've been There
are career
officials at Doge. There are political appointees at
Doge. I'm not going to reveal the name
of that individual from this podium. I'm happy
to, follow-up and provide that to you.
But we've been incredibly transparent about the way
that Doge is working.
John. Very interesting.
Now, nobody commented, but I just just did
a quick brave search to see if there
was any update on on, you know, from
what they scooped up from the Internet. And
And all it simply says and you guys
let me know if this is, you know,
backed up. It doesn't seem what's stated anywhere,
any articles beneath it, but it simply says,
Amy Gleason, who I'm not familiar with, is
the acting administrator of the Department of Government
Efficiency. So if that's the case,
what's the point of doing that? I mean,
you could very easily just simply which I
guess we're all starting to understand is like
a very childish tactic that has really no
benefit
other than just mixing things up and confusing
everybody for the interest of what I think
is the the distraction
for the to the to the detriment of
all of us, including those that think they're
on their side, which is just trolling everybody.
Right? Acting like it's see, then putting in
what that that is
counterintuitive
to literally everything other than them keeping you
in the dark or keeping you thinking. Like,
if all you're doing is just trying to
troll everybody and make them look stupid, well,
they're behind the scenes while you're acting like
that's all that's happening, they're building a prison
around you.
Yeah. See, Danielle appoints SAW as well. Thank
you, Danielle. Yeah. Let me know, Danielle, in
the chat whether you know anything about this
person. I'll look I'll look more into it.
Again, as you guys know, I'm just getting
caught up after being gone for about a
week. But
isn't that interesting, the way that she even
said that? Why would you not want to
say that publicly? Why you just explain why
there's logic to that in any possible way,
or even more so, shouldn't we have a
right to know that? Shouldn't it be wrong
of her to even act like she shouldn't
be able to tell us?
I'm gonna come back to that later.
Now here's another example of this. Oh, oh,
here. And this is what I said, by
the way. Whether or not we we should
point it out later,
I said a nameless, faceless, unelected power structure.
Sure wish there was a name for that,
which even then, some people didn't seem to
get what I was saying. It's funny.
I mean, I I feel like my it's
not even really humor. It's more of so
like a a kind of a cheeky way
of framing the you know, deep state is
the point. Deep state. That's what it's really
about. It's funny that they act like they're
fighting that when what they do seems to
continue to represent that very thing.
Now this one is fun. Now I the
Elon Musk is the one that shared this.
I captioned this
so I got the actual context. Otherwise, you
only see Elon's little thing where it shares
it. But the point was Elon's the one
that got this reach.
On the February 27, it says the New
York Times is putting the lives of Doge
employees at risk. That's literally what it says.
I'm not familiar with this person, but it's
an independent journalist.
Two hundred eighty nine thousand followers, probably because
they're in the circle. But it says, you'll
notice that they have no problem detailing the
individuals cutting fraud and wasteful federal spending while
hiding the names of the so called reporters
who worked on the hit piece. By the
way, as far as I can tell, neither
of those are true.
The
reality even this even this fat even this
update, it appears the New York Times have
added the names. No. As far as I
could tell, and I I looked at this
before this even popped up, it was there
the whole time. So another example of that
kind of follow-up to hide the thing, and
may an important point for what I'm gonna
point out later, which I think is embarrassingly
obvious,
is this is 10/22.
This post is
09/28.
So a lot of time passed before that
post. So clearly, it wasn't like a you
know, the point is it was like that
from the beginning as far as I can
tell, and it says the names are on
the bottom. Now that's not the point, though.
Not that, you know, the the new what
more Rainstream alternative media Elon version. It's more
so about the idea that we're saying that
they're risking their lives.
Their names
are supposed to be public if they're working
if they're even as a special adviser, even
as a employee of a special adviser. How
in the world they pretend like this wrong?
I mean, this has been going around as
doxing. And I'll even show you, by the
way, which you you won't find Elon's in
there even though it's there. It says,
there was a time when doxing was frowned
upon. Why? Because all they did was take
it face value what this person said.
Musk named the judge's daughter the daughter that
was oh, that was a different one.
Nothing to do with Musk, but he wanted
to intimidate the judge. Oh, he's just criticizing
Elon Musk. That's not my point either. In
this case, it's
well, that that's what I thought it was.
Why are you doxxing employees but hiding your
reporter? Didn't even read it. Didn't even look.
Now a lot of these are very large
accounts that got this reach,
which that's why it has 11,000,000
views.
So the
point? I just said the Republicans are literally
fighting to protect an unelected faceless bureaucracy.
Like, why would you be defending trying to
attack them for pointing at people that are
working supposed
extensively in the interest of the American people
with your tax dollars? And says and I
said, what most would call a deep state
while pretending to wage some epic battle with
the deep state. They sure but but sure,
they dunked on those Democrats, didn't they?
And Elon Musk shared this as if that
was done. It's they're trying to deviate you
with nonsense.
I'm not so and then, of course, that's
the oh, you're fighting for the New York
Times? How would that be your response, which
is down there? No. That's not my response.
It's not fighting for the New York Times.
It's fighting for whoever the point is that
they are trying to act like pointing to
people that we have a right to see
is somehow doxxing. Meanwhile, over here where there's
been examples of that exactly happening that they're
okay with because it's on the other side
of the argument.
It's constant.
But here's the other point, max maximally transparent,
Elon Musk says.
Doge now tells Federal Court its records are,
quote, not subject to FOIA requests. All of
this connects back with the same point of
what the of the Strategic Culture Foundation article
or the larger point about whether this is
actually the very thing we think we're fighting
or even bigger, whether there is an outside
force that's actually doing pulling the strings, using
the finance, I mean, everything.
Let's not forget, BlackRock already essentially took over
a lot of this fight the treasury dynamic
during COVID nineteen under Trump's last administration.
Not subject to FOIA? Well, that's the way
the public private partnership works. They can always
claim, like, nope. That's that's you can't because
it's we're not technically part of the government.
Now it says, while standing next to president
Trump in the Oval Office earlier this month,
billionaire Elon Musk, the then, the de facto
head of the so called so called Department
of Government Efficiency, even though that's not true.
If he's not not the administrator, he's not
the head.
It says claim that his team had been
maximally
transparent
as the Trump administration seeks to gut the
federal workforce.
I mean, just because you I mean, the
game is we've stated a lot of things
that many of which we've proven weren't even
true. But that's transparency.
As they just I mean, realize even on
the website, the so called page with the
receipts wasn't even there until weeks ago.
And and before that, people were still pretending
like we knew everything, and they proved it
all. I got a whole back and forth
with somebody about it, and they realized it
wasn't there. And and then now that they've
added them, I've proven since then that a
lot of them are false. But who cares?
Right? Because they're saying things.
He tried, seemed to be transparent. It's not
the same thing, guys. That's just simply dishonesty.
This is but in recent court filings, the
government said it will not provide Doge records
to the public under Freedom of Information Act
request claiming that they're exempt from the law.
That sounds familiar too, doesn't it? Justice Department
attorneys on Thursday filed court documents in connection
with a FOIA lawsuit in Washington DC, wherein
they state that Trump's executive order
red, redesignated The US Digital Service as a
US Doge Service. Right? Removing the organization from
the office of management and budget to make
it a free standing component of the executive
office of the president.
That's terrifying for so many reasons. With all
the things we see happening,
especially now that they're acting like we're not
gonna give you information about this even though
it is a component of the executive office
of the president.
We don't have a right to see what's
happening there?
Doesn't that scare you, especially when we're seeing
a Zionist overtake of our country? It says,
as such, the government claimed that Doge is,
quote, not subject to freedom of information requests.
Now it says the government's claim
came in response to a complaint filed last
week by government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility
and Ethics in Washington.
It is in its lawsuit, the group accused
DOGE of unlawfully refusing to comply with their
FOIA requests
because they just weren't responding for records associated
with the government group's actions and ignored repeated
demands for DOGE to preserve its records under
the Federal Records Act. So not only are
they not giving they're not even keeping track
of what's happening apparently
based on these court engagements. The point here
is that if you're so remember, he's going
into things like the the, you know, what
was the IRS or the these different major
institutions
and combing through data, which is a huge
privacy indication, which we've already seen with people
that clearly are, at the very least, unaccountable,
if not the guy posting about eugenics and
whatever else. Somebody who doesn't seem I mean,
that real. That's just a side
point. Really, it matters to me because of
where we are. But overall, people, these 25
year olds that are working with Elon Musk,
with a group a person who's very clearly
acting out in very juvenile, childish ways with
information that is not being protected. They've even
made this clear. Given them read and write
access to major databases.
And you're gonna tell us that we don't
have a right to see what you're doing?
I mean, in what world, in any context,
does that make sense? Other than we we're
hiding something.
You tell me.
So the project on government oversight,
another watchdog group, filed another civil action against
Trump and Doge last week over the claim
that Doge records are covered by the Presidential
Records Act. I mean, come on. That's a
no brainer.
No. And this is why they tried to
create this weird, opaque, stand alone,
new, you know, advisory role. You renamed
the digit the government entity.
And on top of that, you were do
and there's only two ways to look at
it. Either you renamed and made it into
something where there wouldn't be accountability. And if
that's the case, they're not allowed to do
what they're doing. Or you're giving them this
influence, and we have a right to see
what's happening.
Pretty simple. Now it says the public must
have insight into the operations of the Department
of Government Efficiency. Elon Musk and the Doge
team have been granted
sweeping access to the federal agencies. And the
records of their activities should be well preserved
and made available to the public. I mean,
how can that possibly not be the case?
Read and write access on $6,000,000,000,000
databases, and we're not able to see what
they did?
And for all we know, they're put in
backdoors for Israel or China or Russia. We
would never even know. The fact that that's
pushed back on what we don't know is
what scares me today.
Because it is. I guarantee people right now
are going, oh, he hates Israel. Oh, he
just need to hate Donald Trump.
In some cases, you're right. But all of
them are bad to me. But realize even
if that is the case,
you don't know either. You're taking their word.
It's just wild where we are right now.
Now it says the the, group's executive director,
Daniel O'Brien, said in a statement accompanying the
lawsuit, quote, the Trump administration has inappropriately tried
to hide Doge's actions from the public. Why?
By declaring it is subject to the President's
Records Act and the courts must intervene.
That's just incredible. That speaks for itself.
Now,
weirdly, day by day, this gets more important.
I told you about this when it came
up at the time.
Man, I went it's like three or four
shows I reiterated this and followed up right
until it mattered, right right until they were
inaugurated, which is that most of the people
in his administration do not have signed ethics
pledges or the ones they meet they they
altered did not meet all the requirements or
Trump or Elon themselves
literally ignored rules they put into place during
Trump's last administration.
He removed ones that Biden had there that
he acted like he didn't have to do
any for I mean, it's it's all these
data points clearly add up to a very
big red flag.
And on top of that, when you have
hundreds of billions of dollars coming in from
or rather hundreds of millions of dollars coming
in from Israeli oligarchs,
It's it's the I don't even need to
say anymore. Anybody that's not completely biased is
gonna go, yeah. That's obviously we should at
least at we should at least get to
know. We should at least have asked that
question.
As the person said in the group at
the in the office that was facilitating this
conversation
I forget the name of the group. It's
a government office saying that manages this process.
They were saying that he could be funded
by a foreign government for all we know.
And that applies to anybody.
Obviously, that's the case.
I mean, again, as always, if you somehow
still don't see it, if this was a
Democrat who has very shiny ties to China,
you know what Alex Jones and everybody else
would be screaming about right now. Whether there
was evidence or not. Why that can't be
applied logically or whether right now if it
is suddenly making sense to you, it's because
you have honesty. Because you're you're not you
have objectivity.
This concerns the hell out of me right
now, and nobody wants to talk about this.
As well as the general point is this
is what I think is happening. The new
Trump administration and the technocratic Zionist coup of
the United States
right in front of you day by day.
Now another aspect of this before we get
to the Epstein point,
and this is just this is but really,
I wanted to include this. I I probably
could've put it first, but right there, the
next logical connection is the Epstein overlap to
the same conversation, showing you how compromised these
people are. Before we get to that, though,
I didn't want you to miss that this
is still also happening. This is just a
kind of a side point to show you
the Trump administration, in my opinion, is not
meeting damn near anything it's claiming to accomplish
other than certain I mean, even even the
things I mean, again, I said this last
time to somebody or on the show, I
think, couple times ago. I would love to
hear from people what you think the actual
current accomplishments are.
Right? I mean, Ross Albright, for example. That
that's good.
That that that is a he's free, period.
Or, again, the executive order is the one
problem, but the aspect of the women's sports.
I think it's very clearly a positive thing.
But the larger the pictures I mean, there's
a lot of big claims flying around about
changing everything. And, I mean, realistically, I don't
see other than statements and claims that might
come to pass or the action, we'll have
to wait and see how it plays out
to know whether it's a positive thing that
I don't see much.
So this seems to be a huge deviate
or the Stargate project
alone. That that's enough should show you that
we are not going in the right direction.
So Trump and we already showed you this
in the February 16. Trump admin approved his
poultry jab for avian flu, which got a
lot of pushback because we talked about this
before basically anybody other than Ag Webb that
we got we showed the original article from.
And then it flushed out to be clearly
what happened, and the people that said we
were wrong didn't say anything about it. But
the point is
a jab for the for poultry,
not for humans, but for poultry. On the
on the seventeenth of, January,
right before Trump was inaugurated, they approved a
hundreds of millions dollar dynamic for mRNA flu
shot,
bird flu shot for with Moderna for humans,
which I'll show you in a second.
The money went to them.
So, clearly, that is Trump's administration continuing that
process, which shouldn't surprise you since they are
using an mRNA platform, guys. It's not hard
to see. This was about going forward with
a shot for the chickens, which is going
to add the mRNA shot to these or
rather, let's just be clear. I I get
the sense that's what you'll get. But a
vaccination,
which I guarantee that most Republicans are not
okay with right now. Not not with calling
birds either, guys. It's not a binary world.
Those are not the only two options. They
always trick you into thinking of that or
this. It's not. Neither of them should be
acceptable right now. Then we followed up the
next day. Trump admin reveals new biosecurity and
medication plan. Suddenly, the thing I was being
called a crazy for turned out to be
real. Surprise, surprise, because we did our due
diligence. And that's where they are currently. Biosecurity
and medication.
Is that Maha?
Is that what we wanted? Clearly not.
Now Peter McCullough adds a new point to
this. This is from today.
USDA,
Trump's administration. And, again, don't take that as
one versus the other. My point is they're
all doing it left and right.
Approval imminent, not yet, but seems to be
built they seem just about to approve h
five n one bird flu vaccine in cattle,
which if they just did for chickens, I
don't see much of a difference here, guys.
So he says, breaking, their approval imminent for
this injection.
MedGenes by the way, if you got any
insight on MedGenes, I was looking a little
bit into it today, but let me know
what you think about this group. Medgene's protein
based. It's
basically,
like, animal focused. Let's think of, veterinary focused
injection dynamic.
It says Medgene's protein based prescription platform vaccine.
I mean, guys, think about this is what
we've always been fighting.
The protein based prescription platform
vaccine. That's m r that is your mRNA
platform dynamic, and it says NEARS USDA approval
for cattle vaccination with meat and dairy from
field tested
vaccinated cattle.
Likely already in the food supply.
Hard not to see.
Now it says MedJeans, that's what we just
read, likely already in the food supply. And
he has the actual document here you can
read for yourself. They're advancing the h five
n one vaccine availability across animal species platform
technology. And it says here,
the Imetgene h five n one vaccine is
a protein based subdue it vaccine developed using
the company's prescription platform technology.
Now here are the main points to take
away from this. Nonsterilizing
immunity is what they are, what they offer,
it says, allows the virus to replicate
in vaccinated
hosts,
applying selective pressure that can lead to antigenic
escape mutations.
Some would argue by design, including doctor P
and R. Cola in some cases. Now it
says and the increased spillover, it says mutations
under immune pressure could enhance the virus' ability
to bind human receptors,
raising the risk of cross species transmission and
human infection. Okay. Question all of this, including
the very premise that this is even possible.
Question all of it. But
consider
whether it's,
you know, this is the cover for whatever
they're gonna make happen, or we just consider
the idea of what they're doing and whether
it's meant to drive the very problem that
we're fighting. That's this general point. Now it
says in conclusion, approval of mass cattle vaccinations
against h five n one using a nonsterilizing
vaccine poses significant risks.
And, again, if you're of the mind that
this is not they're not fighting any viral
problem, again, the real core point for me
is that it's going into food and animals
that are then gonna end up in the
food supply. We all agree on that.
It says,
including the potential for accelerated viral evolution, antigenic
escape, and the creation of silent viral reservoirs
in vaccinated cattle.
Given those dangers, moving forward with a mass
vaccination campaign
could worsen the current outbreak,
leading to more resilient and transmissible h five
n one strains.
Fantastic.
That's current administration.
Now I'll include this one since we talk
about the protein based. I just think it's
important to consider this technology and how obviously
this is this is not some hypothetical. This
is
countless different peer reviewed studies
proving that this is what they're working on.
This was 01/16/2024.
And that is gain of function's newest brain
virus
they made
and genetically engineered proteins to control
everything.
We talk about the ferrit and nanoparticle dynamic,
which, by the way, there's multiple shots that
are still happening under Trump and Biden's administration
that are using these dine the the basically,
think of it as something that can be
used the ferrit and iron particles in your
body can be manipulated to actually end up
causing action,
causing deviations from your in your movement, the
way your mind works. It's all very clearly
proven. It goes back years.
Optogenetics,
magnetogenetics, the bottom line is they argue, you
know, control.
But in this case, more than that. Using
these and they're testing on how they can
find different protein based. That's the subscription platform
idea. We'll make a protein that will make
it do this or we'll make it accomplish
that.
It sounds crazy, but you read it for
yourself. It's it's the hypothetical, but I think
it's where we're at. Does it usually frame
the future when it's being done in the
military?
It's everywhere you look right now. Now, under
Trump's bird flu strategy, just kinda generally showing
you what we've already talked about. The plan
also involves developing a bird flu vaccine
for poultry and addressing the rehiring of previously
fired bird flu employees. We've addressed that recently,
which, again, I I think that was very
obviously to make it look like they were
fighting it while they rolled this out, which
pacified the people that were gonna scream about
it. And in effect, it did. And then
they just kinda well, we're gonna hire all
back. Oops. We made a mistake.
Oh, even if that's not what happened, the
point is that there's still not even just
not they're even feigned firing people. Now they're
wait. Wait. Wait. We need we need them
all back. Hire back all the bird flu
people. What do you mean the people that
were telling you to kill all the chickens
and are pro vaccine? Yes.
Not hard to see what's happening. Now it
says agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, announced that the
administration will budget $500,000,000
for biosecurity measures. I guess, what is with
this number?
Is what everything seemed to be 500,000,000, 5
hundred billion? It seems a strange overlap. But
the point is, hundred billion dollars already going
immediately to research and development for biosecurity measures.
That's injections. That's lockdowns, control. They made that
clear using AI at this point, though. That's
what he just said.
Now vaccination and tighter biosecurity measures is the
main point.
Moderna, by the way, as we pointed out,
is developing a bird flu vaccine for humans
and, by the way, has already received about
767,
60 6 million from the US government.
Now realize if that was signed on the
January 17, that money was effectively given during
Trump's administration, which no one's even talked about
it. So I kinda think it's obvious where
this is going. I can't believe RFK Jr.
Has not get gotten more pushback from the
community for doing
what?
That's the point. Now, yeah, there's maybe everything
will change tomorrow.
But can you imagine
before they got selected, the idea that we
would talk about mRNA cancer shots or any
number of other overlaps that we're seeing from
the Trump administration in the health dynamic or
the health field,
people just said no way. That'll never happen.
He's got RFK for a reason. Well, here
we are.
Birds bird,
chicken vaccinations,
mRNA shots for bird flu. Here, this is
what's happening.
Now just to add to this, 02/27/2025.
This is from the USDA,
which says
agriculture and government leaders applaud the USDA's plan
to address avian flu. So they're praising Donald
Trump's actions
for what they're doing. You might be surprised
by who? Following the US Department of Agriculture's
announcement, the new measures to combat highly pathogenic
avian influenza, I hardly. The idea that there's
so much propaganda around this, it's incredible. Elected
leaders and industry stakeholders from around the country
are applauding the five pronged strategy.
That's Trump's new biosecurity
control measures.
US Secretary Of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, joined Fox
News to outline the department's strategy
to strengthen biosecurity.
Now check it out. Now it says down
here, you can see, following the plan following
Trump's cabinet meeting. That's it's all it's Trump's
current administration.
Well, look at this.
You've got what appear to be a whole
bunch of Democrats. There's Klobuchar
saying, yay. Good job. Here Klobuchar says the
Department of Agriculture, Avian, and Bird Flu is
an important step to support our farmers. Basically
saying, good job, Trump. You're doing a good
job. That's what we all wanted. Now that
doesn't have to mean anything to objective people.
Just because they say it's good, it doesn't
bend for me. It's bad. Just because they
think it's bad, and therefore make it good.
That's the weird reverse psychology that seems to
have overtaken partisanship lately. My point though is
that right now, Republicans would argue that because
they're on the my I guess, really, my
point is, if you wanna pretend like this
is this
good versus evil, Democrat versus Republican battle for
humans feet humans future, they're all in line
with this, guys. They're all going, good job.
That's what we all wanted. Or just simply
seeing that this aspect of it has always
been in one direction. It's all been narrative.
Trump still supports the shot. He rolled out
the actual plan.
Everything about it. But you can look for
yourself. I think it's pretty crazy. Hey. Look.
There's McCain.
It's funny.
Anyway
so
in the same vein of conversation, last couple
points, Liz Churchill says, we must arrest the
mRNA biological
terrorists or they will destroy everything.
They're pushing mRNA vaccines
for our cattle now. How many cattle have
you heard of that are dying from bird
flu? And that's this guy quoted at the
bottom, but that's what she's saying first.
Good. I agree. We should fight this. And
this is just my Mimi saying,
Kennedy has the power to stop this now.
He has the power to remove the mandatory
childhood vaccine into optional.
He has the he has the power to
remove the COVID nineteen flu shots until further
investigation. Instead,
crickets.
That's where we are.
Right?
Okay. And I simply added, well, they
currently being the Trump administration. Right? In case
that was unclear to anybody, hashtag two party
illusion.
I mean, think of it. It's it's kinda
crazy to me. Now, obviously,
a lot of people
are very clearly benefiting from the current Trump
fervor,
and it's alarming as hell to me. A
lot of people that are have continued to
call this stuff out from COVID nineteen
seem to be incapable
of making it clear that it's currently the
administration that's there that's behind all this. But
somehow looting or the assumption background being that
it must be some holdover Democrat or the
holdover FBI agent that did everything. Is there
any evidence to any of these things? We'll
get to the Epstein point. Anything? No. Of
course not. It's a narrative floated like they
do all the time, and the Joneses in
the world come out and blindly tell you
that's what happened because my sources tell you.
Despite how they're wrong or get caught lying
over and over and over, people still seem
to buy it.
Now, one last point on this I just
wanna make sure you didn't miss.
A new study came out from Yale.
Immune markers of post vaccination
syndrome. Oh my god. We've heard of that
before. Indicate future research directions. Wow. Glad they're
finally catching up after all the damage has
been done. Right? Well, as I said, T
Lab and many others were telling you that
long COVID,
in very big quotes, was a mix of
COVID injection side effects and psychosomatic illness, and
being attacked for it, by the way, back
in 2023 and before.
And the reality is far greater than even
the study shows you my opinion. But here's
just the art the the
post we put out back in 2023.
Another, at the time, peer reviewed study, which
is funny how people always try to push
back down below. It's like, look, I'm not
even claiming this. I mean, I do think
this at this point based on the evidence,
but at the time, I'm like, this is
just what a study showed. You're attacking me
for showing you what a peer reviewed study
showed? Will you scream trust the science? It's
just just again, it's insane. Partisanship
breaks logic.
But it says he's largely psychosomatic,
not real.
Largely was the point in this, but they
were very clearly saying that. And it says
the newest study finds that long COVID is,
quote, and I even quoted it, associated with
factors other than SARS CoV-two infection, including
psychological factors, which then and that includes COVID-nineteen
or injection side effects.
Point is though, they were arguing a large
part of it was simply psychosomatic, which I
agree with. But it's both.
Because you can see the psychomatic we can
see that effect every time. When they tell
you there's something going around, there are people
out there that just get sick because they
heard it. That's that's actually medically proven. It's
a very clear thing.
Not everyone all the time, but some. And
it says and I think that can be
cultivated too. Here is the one that I've
been trying to draw attention to since November
of twenty twenty one.
That's why I said 2023 because it's the
only tweet I could find at the time,
but long time. And what does it say?
Association of self reported COVID-nineteen infection,
persistent symptoms among basically,
it it's as it says right here,
the results of this cross sectional analysis of
a large population based French cohort suggest that
physical symptoms persisting ten to twelve months after
the pandemic first wave may be associated more
with the belief in having experienced COVID, and
not even that you actually did, with actually
being infected.
Isn't that pretty damn obvious? And there's more
there's three of these that I have in
here. So I just wanna point that out.
It's in case you missed it.
And what's funny is this is even, like,
despite that, they will the people that were
telling us we were crazy will still never
acknowledge that we were correct, or anybody for
that matter. That's how this goes. Partisanship
left and right ruins logic, destroys logic. Now,
before we get to the other part of
this, there's an important middle part to the
Zelensky aspect of this.
Now, I'm not gonna get too deep into
this because frankly, I mean, I I watched
it and I I think it's embarrassing. I
was embarrassed. I was embarrassed for all of
them and and especially for people that look
at that as representations of Americans.
I mean, it was silly. Now for like,
a lot of people pointed out, I've seen
both left and right pointing it out that
it seemed like it was very scripted, very
clumsily so.
Like, like, first of all, if you wanna
claim that Zelensky was doing what Vance was
kinda screaming about, well, then you just did
the exact same thing in reverse.
You just you you made it into some
big if you were really gonna care about
what you meant right there, then you would
have waited until afterward and talked to him
then because all you did was do the
same thing, which seems to suggest that it
was the point.
To make it seem like Trump and Vance
are angry at Zelensky, and we're totally not
completely doing the same thing as real United
States funding this, controlling this for a very
long time. I mean, we already forgotten about
the major deal that's gonna be made.
Really? Like, so you literally just made a
deal to basically
occupy and control Ukraine. It wasn't just minerals,
guys. It was very clear.
And then this happens, like, we're gonna end
nothing changes. It's a script, guys. My opinion.
Or or or maybe Zelensky didn't even know
about it. Now they just either way. Or
let's just even say it was all organic.
It was still childishly stupid.
To be done in front of everybody shows
you that they wanted to flex.
That we're in control, we're in power, which
is the
the typical response of a weak person.
Powerful, strong people do not need to constantly
flex and show people how strong they are.
But in this case,
it wasn't just about
whether it was an illusion or the idea
that I mean, again, to start, integrity, principles,
and outcome.
Who cares what Vance and Trump were were
talking about? What actually happens? Do they keep
funding Ukraine like they already have? But But
it's just so funny to watch the partisan
responses to this. Trump has already funded Ukraine
more than once since he's been elected. More
than once. Not only that, they're funding Israel
we'll get into, and that continues to go
from Israel to Ukraine, also proven. So the
game that you're somehow you know, Zelensky is
so bad, and he's all here's why they're
the problem. Okay. Well, then Trump's part of
that problem. Right? Which means all of them
because Biden and Trump have both funded them.
Obviously, a lot more from Biden since that
was the time frame it began under.
This won't go away. If you think this
is over, you're not paying attention.
But this is the point I wanted to
talk about. AF Post pointed out since taking
office, the Trump administration has committed $16,000,000,000
to Israel.
That includes 12,000,000,000 in weapon sales, partially financed
through
FMF grants along with 4,000,000,000
in military aid.
Now before we come back to that, which
I think is the largest part here,
High Impact Flick says while people are occupied
with the Zelensky show,
another $4,000,000,000
was just handed over to Israel.
Miriam's
getting a good return on that I think
it's over $200 million dollars that he they
gave Trump.
And they've already got what they wanted. West
Bank is being destroyed.
But isn't it's always it's never distraction is
not always the only thing, if ever. Or
if if you know, sometimes it's not that
is the point. But it's interesting to consider
how you can see this right now. And
plenty of other partisans made the same point.
That that really did deviate from what was
happening. We got all got pulled in, and
that's the way this works right now. It
takes all the air out of the room
when they decide to make something a big
point, which really had no actual immediate consequence
on what was going on. And yet they
dumped more billions into the hands of a
genocide committing government that they're also doing alongside
them.
The peace president?
I just don't know how you can keep
making sense of this without recognizing that you're
being
played. Now as Sal Diagris points out, why
doesn't Zelensky ever wear a suit? Oh, that's
right.
Yes. It's an older picture, but it's funny
though, isn't it, to see the interesting tie
in to what we keep seeing? I mean,
the the simple idea that Zelensky comes dressed
like that shows you this is a theater
show. They want you to remember he's the
military guy in the middle of a battle.
It's just sad. That's obviously my opinion, guys.
But if you don't understand and have not
been following the provable work that shows you
how obviously that they have been funding this
group as far back as you wanna look
I mean, oh, I I I was gonna
almost grab it earlier than I didn't. Let's
see.
This one first.
Israel has been funding the Azov Movement, which
is what is basically running this country at
the point before at least.
That's that's
the neo Nazi elements, the right wing Azov
militia, and the art title is rights rights
groups demand Israel stop arming that group. So
they've always been doing this. It goes back
a long way, and the one I was
just telling you is this one,
which is that since, you know, not just
the Azov movement, documents prove that CIA has
been cultivating fascism in Ukraine since at least
1948.
Project,
air, aerodynamic, I believe. And the bottom line,
it's been a long time coming. They've been
building this problem.
Right? So what we could see is that
if you're gonna try to pretend that there's
some kind of deviation or some kind of
schism between these two,
it's certainly possible,
but you have to stand back and acknowledge
the full picture.
It's not unique to Trump or Biden. The
US government and the Israeli government have been
building this thing, have been funding this thing,
and now just got a huge return from
it.
Billions
of rare earth minerals of of I mean,
everything. It wasn't even just minerals as I
think Michael Tracy pointed out. It was about
ports and I mean, they basically now control
this country, which they already have, but now
in earnest.
So we're talking about more occupation,
more technocratic overtaking of areas. I've been talking
about this for a while now, whether it
was Honduras and Prospera, all these different ways
they're trying to basically encroach
and build out what they're building out.
So on the point of Epstein that overlaps
to this,
another aspect of I mean, look, it there's
two things main things of this. One is
the this didn't happen.
Kinda like a lot of us honestly told
you we would because we not that we
knew, but because
with what we know, it seems wildly unlikely
that the people that are involved in all
this are gonna highlight the problem. Or even
the point about when when Trump said he's
not gonna admit what he knows about it
because that would make the government look bad.
Why what's the difference here?
I mean, it's it's all narrative, guys. Outcome
is what matters. So what we got here
was this claim, and it's and it went
on for a a week before that. The
disarmed my desk, and we've got all file.
Okay. Then why didn't you just release it?
Because clearly, they were hiding something.
So now jump forward to February 28. DC
Drano, big surprise there. It comes out as
I regret nothing. Justice is coming for the
Epstein Pedos.
What do you mean regret nothing? It's a
weird thing to say. But they come out
with they binders.
Cause it's, you know, really totally not patronizing.
Of course, right next to what's lived with
TikTok and all these really great journalists. Right?
Who constantly lie and are showing for Israel
every thirty seconds.
Well, I said you're being played. I mean,
it's kinda sad. Here's what I said to
make my thoughts more clear.
I said, how cute. They even printed little
titles for you. Epstein files phase one.
Seriously?
That's embarrassing to me. Like, it feels silly.
They're either you're either being played or you're
part of the play. Now I could obviously
be wrong and maybe even looking for something
that's not there.
But with how it actually seems to have
ended up, I think you all get the
sense already.
But, I mean, it just it just seems
kinda silly, doesn't it? Like, this is information
that's been there for a long time. So
now they're just gonna print these files and
make you binders and and just get but
then they didn't weren't allowed to say anything
though. Because, you know, journalism. Right? We're not
gonna divulge the crimes of people that could
still put okay.
Well, as David Icke simply pointed out, once
it actually came the information was shown in
these silly binders, It says the Epstein files
handed to pro Trump influencers are completely blacked
out and unreadable.
That's the full transparency
you get from the Trump administration or your
US government. It's not left or right here,
guys. It's about the fact that they're always
playing you using that paradigm.
As David said, anyone who is even slightly
surprised by this has simply not been paying
attention.
Why would an Israeli owned lifelong
fraud president
expose himself and how his master's intelligently controlled
Epstein to his DNA?
Now you may disagree with that, but the
evidence seems to be pretty clear to me
that this is immersed that our government's compromised,
which is why we're seeing what we're seeing.
And,
Derek followed up on this and said the
Epstein documents released so far by Pam Bondi's
office have not been anything new.
I know there's going to be lots of
hype, but it's not black pill to acknowledge
that these files have been out since at
least last year and longer in some cases.
That's the black pill point. It's just it's
that's true. If the information they released, which
it was, was already there, was already accessible,
and then other things were blocked out, it
was a limited hangout.
But there you'll find them, like, everywhere going,
oh, you just can't accept a win when
you get it.
Whether that's a bot or an in a
very in uninformed person, it's kind of irrelevant.
I said, as anyone who understands the full
breadth of the situation, meaning who's actually going
to be implicated in this, are as we
already expected.
But I fully expect TeamSport Republicans to act
like this changes everything. And you'll see those
out there too.
But surprisingly, I've seen far more people
in the honest conservative field, which I think
is the majority, who aren't okay with this
because they have integrity.
Five times August says, so they handed out
these binders and instructed not to post about
its contents
until after they do an official press briefing.
That's crazy in its own right. And then
never had a press briefing.
That was yesterday.
Then Bondi said all the Epstein files needed
to be handed over by 8AM the next
day,
and then we never heard anything about it
again.
Got it.
That is now it's a day later.
It's just crazy.
Then Jason Bassett put this image out, which
is funny, for of Trump, Elon, Alex Jones,
and Tucker all laughing like that picture of
all the presidents laughing. And it says, then
we told them we would give them $5,000
checks right before serving up the Epstein files
nothing burger and conveniently blaming the FBI.
Because the point is if you if you
already saw, is that they were claiming the
FBI. I mean, we talked about this before
it even happened. Remember that? That we're showing
here Alex Jones conveniently coming out and saying
that there is the insider says they're deleting
the files, which of course is possible. I'm
not saying I know it's not.
But didn't we also didn't we used to
want evidence? Didn't we when did we stop
caring about evidence in lieu of just partisan,
convenient narratives? Guys, we don't know for sure
what happened because we never got any proven.
It's very convenient to come up before
what now we see didn't happen and go,
well, it's because the FBI well, it's not
but it's that's Trump's FBI. Well, it's a
holdover from the Democrat.
Okay. Then you know who it is apparently.
Can I have a name? Can I have
any indication we know that it's a Democrat
or we know I doubt that's gonna happen?
Now if it's already happened, let me know.
Happily talk about it.
But then you saw the follow-up where they
said, no. No. Now that after the illusion,
the hyped idea that it may happen or
secretly is happening behind the scenes, then we
got the actual claim. They know the FBI.
Now they're there's there's somebody not giving us
all the files.
Surprise. Surprise.
Which, by the way, amounts to Trump's administration
stopping Trump's administration from showing you what Trump's
administration has. Now James Lee
importantly highlights this.
When asked why he gave Jeffrey Epstein a
non prosecution deal in 02/2007,
Former US attorney Alex Acosta under Trump's administration
said he, quote, had been told to back
off,
that Epstein was above his pay grade. He
literally said, quote, I was told Epstein
belonged to intelligence
and to leave it alone.
Very public.
And he simply says, not which intelligence?
I think we know. I think it's both.
I mean, I think it's obviously both. There's
no way to just I mean, the idea
of Ehud Barak, former prime minister of Israel,
going, what, was it, 16 times? Or, was
that the right number? Many times.
Going in there all hiding his face and
sneaking in to see Epstein. There's just no
way you misunderstand this, guys. So what you
need to hear from this is that the
Epstein blackmail sexual network that Israel was con
was conducting on The United States is clearly
involving the CIA as well and clearly spans
across all
your government.
And why okay. If the game is to
control a country or any outcome, why would
you go after only one side? I mean,
you see, there's so many ways to see.
Those don't prove things, but it's a logic
point. Okay? And you stand back and you
begin to recognize
there's a reason this went the way it
did.
Now the patriot voice says tags FBI,
Kash Patel,
and says,
there this is the, yeah, Kash Patel, the
main account.
He made a post on Twitter
talking about the new and this is on
the, this is yesterday.
Talking about the new era at the FBI.
And in the original post, he said this.
Actually, I think I even have that right
here.
I'll just keep it there. I'll show it
at the end.
And he says, there will be no cover
ups, no misleading documents, and once and no
stone unturned.
And anyone from the prior or current bureau
who undermines this will be swiftly pers Isn't
that a little prescient? Right? I mean,
if if if you have people in your
positions that you think might undermine your authority,
why would you leave them there? And it's
and and but the I I think it's
interesting that that gets floated along with other
insinuations that all lead to the
I mean, I you just see, like, if
that was the case, why wouldn't you have
gone in there personally? There's so many ways
you could point this out. It's all as
if they let this go the way that
it was obviously going to go or they
lied about all of it.
I I I think there's so much around
this that is raising too many red flags.
But he says, if there are gaps in
the Epstein investigation, we will find them.
Then
inexplicably inexplicably
edited the post thirty three minutes later and
removed
two things,
Brought to justice and Epstein investigation
from the original post.
Why would he remove those details?
He says, let me say this. It is
a huge red flag that Cash decided to
edit this statement, removing two of the most
important key points that point to there being
any form of justice forthcoming.
It says many are wondering why I have
been questioning things a lot more lately, and
I've been cynical about the whole thing. Yeah.
That's getting pushback from Republicans who don't like
that he's pointing out obvious truth and objective
concerns.
It says, when I see things like this,
it's impossible not to. There you go.
But you can see let me see if
it's on this one or this is once
they edited that's the problem with how this
works on this platform.
Supposed to say edited,
but you can see right here.
Now what now what I believe so there's
actually let me show you this first.
So you can see brought to justice, Epstein
files, if there are gaps.
See, it's not there.
But what did what, Ho Tap Jesus says
down here,
he says, did he delete the original post
and then post a new one? And this
go this this person's basically saying,
maybe it sounded too aggressive and too specific
or no. The response was basically yes.
Yes. He had quoted the post in the
original. So I think it's in in the
original post here, it might just be a
little mistake on what was being stated. The
point is that you can see this,
and the new post says something different.
Either way,
I think that's pretty interesting.
The idea that ultimately
removing
and I'll read it with I'll read it
with it. The bureau who undermines this will
be swiftly persecuted
and brought to justice.
If there are gaps in the Epstein investigation,
we will find them.
Why would you leave those two things out?
Why would you remove them? I maybe it's
just maybe there's an a harmless explanation.
Personally, I think it's quite obvious.
Now here's a clip that I want you
to see from Pam Bondi speaking with Fox
News. So this is basically today, yesterday, bay
or the discussion about
why we're at where we are despite all
the promises of all transparency,
the binders blacked out. I mean, it's one
of those I told you so moments, guys.
And it maybe it doesn't have to mean
that we were right about their intentions. Who
knows?
But that's the point we always make. Most
people were saying that we're objective about this
and nonpartisan is this is where we'd end
up because they're all compromised. And here we
are.
Welcome back, America. We're here with, and I'm
very excited about this, attorney general Pam Bondi,
a good friend,
especially good friend of my wife, and a
wonderful lady, a great lawyer.
Welcome to the program, madam Don't you love
that? This is this overincessuous
overlap in your government, the media. Fantastic. Attorney
general. I wanna get into this Epstein thing
a little bit. I think the American people
are very curious about who's on this list
or these lists.
You Isn't it funny the way they're even
framing it? Where were you a year ago,
bud? You you don't care? I mean, this
was a very public conversation. It's just funny
how now they act like we're all gung
ho about this list. Let's get this list
out.
It's just like anything else. They're opportunists.
They recognize that's the way this is going,
so we're gonna act like it's new. Like
we've all been told many times, they they
were all aware of this. Like, what's her
name said publicly? We all knew.
Well, why didn't you do anything then?
Well, you know why, guys. Because either they
go along to get along or they didn't
care. None of that's okay with anybody. Anybody
that wants actual justice in this conversation.
And once again, it seems we kicked out
We have been doggedly trying to get all
the information.
And now we learn, thanks to you,
that you've been stonewalled,
by people in New York. No. I I'm
sorry. I'm I'm gonna wanna play. I just
wanna say one more thing before we get
get keep going.
This is a supposed journalist for Fox News
who is,
like, the premise, the starting point of the
conversation
is what you said is fact without ever
proving that.
We haven't seen any information.
We don't know. Like, you've been doggedly working
hard to get all the information.
So and so handed you a file? What
are you, digging through file cabinets? What are
we talking about? I I don't even think
that's true. But the point is that you
don't know what happened or why. You're taking
her word for it, but that this is
the current state of mainstream media as well
as mainstream alternative media. Just look at Jones'
show. It's basically they said this, and I
back it up over and over and over
and over all the time. You wanna explain
that?
Yes, Mark. So as you know, we released,
about a 20 pages of documents,
and I started asking for these documents
right when I came into office
and before Kash Patel was in there. So
I ended up getting about a 20 pages.
We carefully redacted them, of course, to be
sure, the 254
young girls, women who are victims of sex
crimes and sex trafficking, their personal information was
redacted and out of there to protect them.
So I'm going through it, and I kept
saying there has to be more. There has
to be more. I'm assured that's it. Cash.
Ask the same questions.
Assured there's no more. Last I I found
out, you know, this week that
a source told me New York, SDNY, they're
sitting on thousands
of pages
of documents regarding Epstein.
Thousands.
Thousands. And, of course, you've seen the very
strong letter.
We will get everything.
We will have it in our possession. We
will redact it, of course,
to protect grand jury information
and confidential witnesses, but the American people have
a right to know. And Donald Trump is
the most transparent president
in our nation's history. So not only will
America get the full Epstein files, they will
get JFK. They will get Martin Luther King.
Well, that's fantastic. But I assume the Southern
District in New York
is or has been holding on to this
information for a reason. That is they don't
like the names on the list.
And, of course, we know New York is
a hotbed of the Democrat party, and that
includes in legal
circles. Do you think that's part of the
issue here that they're trying to
I mean, just look at the broad,
blind assumptions.
You you literally built an assumptive narrative, and
then now you talk about that as if
you have any information to back up anything
you just said.
It's just this is the typical democrat versus
rep it is your government.
All of your government is absolutely completely immersed
in this. I mean, I'm thinking let's not
make it hyperbolic.
It's certainly possible there's not every single person.
The point is it's not a left right
dynamic.
The idea that what she's just frame what
she's framing there is lazy.
Wait. Listen to this again.
People have a right to know, and Donald
Trump is the most transparent president
in our nation's history.
Oh, is that true?
I mean, it I I mean, the idea
that you could even make a statement like
that, in what context? As they're literally hiding
the Doge dynamic from you or refusing to
give you information about it or hide not
signing ethics pledges? I mean, these are just
meaningless words because it gets people to go,
yay.
It's words. Did you did you investigate? Is
there any facts behind it? It doesn't even
matter these days anymore, at least in the
partisan field. So not only will America get
the full Epstein files, they will get JFK.
They will get Martin Luther King. Well, that's
but this is the point, though.
We already know. I already went over this.
Martin Luther King dynamic, the civil trial already
showed you government government was involved. We're in
a guarantee that they won't show you that.
Or JFK in Israel
or Epstein in Israel. They these are the
main obvious points. The one thing they don't
want you to see is where this all
stems back to. And I'm gonna show you
that with a point in a second. Fantastic.
But I assume the Southern District Of New
York
is or has been holding on to this
information for a reason. That is they don't
like the names on the list.
And, of course, we know New York is
a hotbed of the Democrat party, and that
includes in legal circles.
Do you think that's part of the issue
here that they're trying to protect a lot
of names and individuals?
You know, Mark, I have not reviewed the
information
yet.
And and as a lawyer, as a prosecutor,
I wanna review everything before I
make a firm conclusion, but I think it's
very interesting that that they withheld that from
us. And I will find out who withheld
it, and they will not be working for
us anymore.
So once all that's gathered, you're just gonna
put it out in the,
in the public with the obvious,
necessary redactions,
including the people who were the victims and
the phone numbers and so forth. But for
the for the perpetrators,
I assume that we'll see those names. Yes?
Well, certainly,
there there's
nothing can be withheld on that. Of course,
as you know, grand jury information, anything confidential
will be withheld under the law.
Okay. So that was a double answer, but
the question to we will know. So when
this inevitably happens, she's made you a promise.
We will know who did it. So if
there's
let's find out.
It'd be interesting if it turns out to
be some Democrat student. It would certainly that
that would be interesting to find out, and
we reported ourselves.
But if and when it doesn't, which I
think you get the sense is what I
think is gonna happen, we need to call
that out.
The point is, historically, we rarely ever get
this information. And what the one side that
wants to take it will argue is that
they're gone, and now you got the data.
Who cares, right?
Well, you would if it was in reverse.
I mean, the point is it's obvious that
this matters.
I think there's nobody there. I don't think
there's anything holding this up. I think this
is a game of words and narratives. But
who knows? We'll have to wait and see
what happens. This is my opinion. But the
point is she told you that she would
tell you
unless x, y, and z, which is what
I think will happen, whatever that means.
And we're gonna do everything in our power
to protect the victims so they're not further
victimized also. And and that point is basically,
of course, that makes sense. But when you
look at the binder and the information we
could see, you don't block out entire pages
for phone numbers and names. You black out
the phone numbers and names. It's an excuse,
like, fixing somebody's arms for Elon's neuro. Like,
they just give you the they gave you
the thing. That's why Levin very carefully repeated
that more than once. But then we gotta
make sure that's not an interview. That's you
stating a narrative for people to absorb. Interviews
are you asking them questions. But the point
is keeping this narrative going, in my opinion.
So we're to believe
it's all only redacted because of all the
victims, but guess what? We never get to
find out why, or we can prove that.
Just like we said, even if they gave
you an entirely blank thing, we would still
not even know or, oh, unredacted whether or
not it was even the full information. These
are always important questions.
May I ask you a question kinda in
this vein?
And it may be too early to know
because you literally you just got to the
Department of Justice.
Sorry to stop it again. It's the same
thing.
These people are so dishonest.
You're literally starting the point by giving her
an out, by going, well, probably won't even
matter because you weren't even
that doesn't make anyway, you get the point.
It's infuriating to me how dishonest, how transparently
manipulative these people are today.
This guy, Jack Smith, his team of,
lawyers and so forth and so on.
Do we know yet and I happen to
know that is a big damn department with
a lot of people, and so it just
takes time to figure things out. But do
we happen to know yet
whether they comply with all the requirements of
the presidential records act and the espionage act?
That is,
did they store all their materials
for you folks to look at when you
choose to look at it? Do we So
this is so perfect.
You know, the very thing that Elon Musk
is refusing to do. The very thing he's
saying you're not allowed to look, that we
don't have to do that.
He's asking that about the other side. Do
you know that, or did they remove or
destroy any of it? Mark, that's what we're
looking at now. We're going through all of
that. And now that I just got Cash
Patel in as FBI director, he's, of course,
a tremendous help.
I've been in office, what, barely two weeks,
and it feels like two years. We are
going nonstop.
We will get to the bottom of that.
And as you know, the first thing I
did was fire the Jack Smith team. That
was the ultimate weaponization of our country and
our government.
Or maybe we should depose them and find
out what happened. But no. No. No. Just
kick them aside and pretend like it's all
solved because that's how that works because they're
all on the same team. But interesting point,
isn't it? That's exactly the the dynamic that
was being applied saying, well, Elon Musk, you're
supposed to be showing us the work you're
doing. You're supposed to be demonstrating your actions.
That's the same exact law.
Now if it turns out that's the argument
or even the fact that he's floating this,
like, saying, while this is happening, were they
doing this? Impossible to tell. Even though you
don't know. Give him all the outs.
I feel a narrative being built here, just
my sense that it's gonna come out that
that's how they were secretly doing x, y,
and z. Well, it's the same applies both
ways, but I guarantee it won't get applied
to Elon Musk.
Now, here is one person highlighting this. Pretty
large count. I'm not familiar. Simply a 77
followers, 77,000
followers. It says, Pam Bondi finally breaks your
silence on Saturday night on Mark Levin.
This isn't sick 02/2016
anymore, and your non answer isn't good enough.
There's a lot there's a lot of Republicans
out here that are calling this out.
Simon Goodeck points out, knowing that Epstein was
a Mossad agent
is
on,
Dan Bongino
and Pam Bondi's loyalty to Israel the reason
why the Epstein client list has not been
released?
It's a good question. And here's Fox News
where it says Pam Bondi, Israel's our greatest
ally in the world. Or the more important
points, which are excuse me, which are that
she's, like, a very clear pro Israel Zionist,
that she is very clear oh, I think
she was one of the main culprits that
didn't truly sign the ethics pledges, the the
ones that the full picture coming from the
Biden administration forward that Trump put forward in
the last administration, same points.
I think it's important. The obvious overlaps or
the one you probably already seen that I've
already played, Dan Bongino literally saying this. That's
right. What what cause is dear to your
heart?
Cause is dear to my Israel,
the offense of Israel. Mhmm. What is number
one?
Oh, simple.
We're we're the we can't even finish the
sentence. It's Israel.
That's interesting.
Quite the America First administration.
And he says, what are they trying to
hide? Why haven't they released the list yet?
Who are they protecting? And who's pulling the
strings?
It's important to think about. Right? It's being
called up from all over the place. Now
here
is Kash Patel. Now remember, this is the
one that he deleted and reposted
removing the important parts saying the FBI is
entering a new era, one that will be
defined by integrity, accountability. I who cares? I
don't care. I don't care about words and
texts and sentiments. I don't care anymore. I
want outcome. So do away with your dumb
tweets and everybody else, whether you need it
or not. It's meaningless.
Show us. Go out there and do it.
And I will be the first one to
jump up and praise you if you're actually
following through left or right. Because as you
might know by now, I don't care.
But my point is we're already seeing that's
not true with Kash Patel telling you right
out of the gate, Israel needs to be
prioritized by Americans.
Quite the America first administration. So if that's
the case, add him to the list of
whether he's part of this. I simply responded
with the, you
know,
what's the what's the emoji called?
Not, you know, not buying it. Just like,
yeah. Come on, man. Just get I just
get hired of this game.
But here's part of how this keeps happening.
Okay?
There's a reason
that everybody
everywhere is recognizing that Israel and more specifically
Zionism
is the
common thread here, guys.
It's not my opinion. This is the thing
of our time that we're fighting and it's
very transparent that it is strung through everything.
If you try to make that about only
Jewish people, well, you're part of that problem.
Now this is what I think is happening
here. Now there's there's some important information here.
First of all, not new, not even remotely.
Typical Loomer dynamic to share things as if
she broke the story. But more so, which
I'm gonna for the podcast, I'll go into
it in a second.
It's about
trying to take something that we're all seeing
and act like you're
breaking the story, but deviating from the most
important part of that story. She did the
exact same thing right before October 7 with
the Israel Azov movement story. You begin to
see how relevant that is to what's all
happening right now? And what did she do?
She acted like she broke this news story
about things that people like myself, and even
more so before me, Alex Rubinstein, for example,
covering the Azov movement CIA connection, the a
very clear overlap to the Azov I mean,
the basically, the formulation of these it's the
same way they're using these groups like a
patriot front in our country. The truth is
Israel and The United States have been cultivating
these very same things for a long time.
So when you find out that the rise
above movement that marched through Charlottesville
was literally The US arm of the Azov
movement, it becomes clear that that very thing
was being created by the CIA in Israel.
And they use that to be the that
was the whole, but they will not replace
us. And the right is the red hats
and they're Nazis and antisemites.
It's where it's where it all comes from,
guys. And this is these were fake entities.
You very clearly proved this.
So my point is she stepped in there
before this was gonna become a very prominent
conversation
and left out what?
Very carefully crafted around what part of the
story? Israel.
Very clearly left it. Go look for yourself.
Clumsily, I would argue, but very clearly, carefully
tried to keep that part out of the
story while showing you things that basically anybody
in this field was already looking at.
Here's a good example of that. She's this
this was from
the second. And I'm gonna point this out
in a second. Apparently, palm
palm Pam Bondi blocked her, which for all
we know, they're collaborating on why this and
how this works. But the point for me
is that that matters, obviously. She's a government
person, and then, apparently, you're not supposed to
be able to block somebody. It seems kinda
silly to me anyway.
Laura Loomer says, everyone knows I don't make
claims unless I've got the hard receipts.
Wow. File that under the ridiculous statements of
the day. She lies about things constantly. But
it says, Pam Bondi and The US Attorney
General was a registered foreign lobbyist on part
of half of Qatar. It's true.
It's not new information. She was compensated 1,501,000
hundred and $15,000
per month by Qatar.
Qatar has given over $1,800,000,000
to Hamas over the years. Oh, wow. Can
you can you point out the huge, gaping
silent the what is it? The the silence
is deafening, like, the the lacking part of
that story? I'm sure you can. We've been
talking about it a lot, even using and
citing the same $1,800,000,000
and say, I can hear the guy saying
it in my head.
It's just embarrassing.
But, well, before we get to that,
let's be clear. Oh, wait. This is, oh,
well, first, this person's responding to that and
saying, so you're saying Pam Bondi was working
on behalf of Israel? That's exactly where it's
going. They get it. To arm an enemy
to arm the enemy as part of the
justification for the current genocide?
Makes sense when they're called the IDF or
we called the IDF away from the border
on 10/07. I will point to the end
today just briefly pointing out the Hannibal directive
again. Probably should've put it right here. Took
hours to respond and then can kill their
own citizens with the Hannibal directive. You're not
fooling anybody anymore.
Very, very clearly see it because the point
is, we'll show you again, the cutter aspect
is just an extension of the Israel funding.
And she's not stupid enough, even though she's
not very bright, to see to miss that.
This is a clear a careful
crafted, don't look at this obvious part because
we're all looking at this conversation right now.
Now here's the bigger part. Note this says
11/22/2024.
Here's the actual document of which she does
not link to. I'm I'd be willing to
bet she doesn't even have the document. Who
knows I'm right about that? But here it
is. Here's the actual document, which I'll include
in the show notes for you to look
at for yourself. The claim is true. That's
not the point. It matters. That's not the
point either. Why the reality is she is
compromised by Israel like the rest of them
are. That's the point. And she, Loomer, is
trying to deviate from that clear point.
Ask yourself why that would be. I think
it's quite obvious with what they're all doing
right now.
Oh, and also trying to kind of frame
this as fighting against the, you know, calling
out the people that we support.
You're the what you support is Israel, and
that's what you're working on behalf of. And
so too are the rest of them. I
think it's embarrassingly obvious.
But so the point again is about trying
to use something that we see, that we
know, that they know we're seeing, or try
to
kind
of co opt
the movement, co opt the momentum.
And in this case, I guess, lay it
at cutter, like that changed something. Or really
the point being that Bondi is trying to
hide the information because she just works on
behalf of somebody else.
And they know that we're all thinking that,
but it's real. And so deviate the obvious
point.
I'll include these so you could check them
out for yourself.
But here's the there's the point. So she
says $1,800,000,000
to Cutter. You guys everyone is all I've
probably played this a hundred times. But because
she even uses that number, let's listen to
it again. And this
is what she's referencing.
So are you saying Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately boosted
Hamas to try to prevent a Palestinian
state? Yeah. Sure. He deliberately and systematically
even even told this on record
whoever wants
to avoid
the threat
of a two state solution
has to support my policy
of paying protection money to the Hamas. So
what we did, with the permission of our
prime minister is to
let
Qatar
to transfer
a huge amount of money in cash,
probably more than
$1,400,000,000
By doing it, we increase the power of
Hamas.
We
did everything in order to make sure that
Hamas will go on controlling Gaza,
and Palestinian authority
will control the West Bank so they will
fight each other.
Now it's closer to 1,800,000,000.0
when you look at the with the breakdown
from from I think it's.
So it's obvious what's happening here, guys.
So the point is clearly about trying to
hide that. Now, here is another article, and
this this is all reasonably new information. This
or not not new,
the pulse I'm highlighting. So we've been sharing
this. It's been a very prominent part of
the conversation. It's been around for a while,
but it's become very recognized.
This is from Times of Israel from February
of this year,
fifteenth.
Shin Bet launches inquiry into Netanyahu aids ties
with Cutter.
Premier's office calls allegations that his advisers did
PR work for dough. The point is you
can see going back a long way that
they've worked along hey, actually, I'll grab this
one too. I I included in that tweet,
but I'll give you the actual article
that they that what he was referencing is
also documented by rats. They sent the Mossad
chief to Doaa, to Qatar,
to continue Hamas financial aid. That's very clear.
Takes a special kind of dishonesty to not
point this out. You think she didn't realize
that the money was being directly facilitated through
Israel? No. That's the whole point of the
deviation.
And as Sal Diagris points out, you were
never gonna see the complete unedited list.
Now, Trump is only one aspect of this.
I think he what? I forget the number.
17. There's a higher number of times seven,
I forget what it was, of times that
he was on the flight logs or whatever
else. My my point is that those things
don't prove you committed a crime. But at
the very least, you're associating with a sex
trafficker, and I think that should matter. But
here's the just,
what, nine pictures of Trump with Epstein or
Epstein related characters?
No. That doesn't have to mean he's compromised.
I I believe it's the case with a
lot of other evidence. But overall,
his point is that's why many of us
fought we felt that it was never gonna
happen. And here we are.
Typical how these things go. If it happens
tomorrow, I'll be happy to see it. But
this has been the continual way this goes.
Now the Israel overlap, guys,
I mean, it's just I don't even need
to convince anybody, it feels like, anymore. It's
just about whether it's about debating the degree
to which this is happening.
Here's Philip Giraldi,
former CIA operations chief in Europe, Middle East,
Veteran, PhD, European History, says FBI director, Kash
Patel, affirmed that, quote, America will prioritize
Israel, and we stand by our number one
ally, he says. Nice one, Kash. If is
that your real is that he says, is
that really your first name or just a
pseudonym? Maybe you should be looking into
the various internationally binding agreements entered into with
The US guaranteeing
the arrangements
that are being violated by Israel in Lebanon,
Syria,
Gaza. You see, they don't care about any
of this. It's not even an important talking
point in the Republican party
or the Democrat party, quite frankly, but they're
the current power structure. The the problem with
that is that it obviously matters, but because
of the current agenda, they just go, nah,
whatever.
Just ignore that massively international law violating dynamic,
the genocide that we're all supposed to yeah.
Forget about it.
If you could brush off a genocide, pretty
clear that nothing means anything.
And it says they are war criminals and
Washington is complicit, but I guess you're not
interested in that stuff.
They as the FBI head, right, would that
matter? Yes. It really would. They would be
the ones that would be actually going after
the people. Of course not. That's not gonna
happen.
Now he he he links to the anti
war article,
Israel to remain in the Philadelphia Corridor in
violation of the ceasefire. Surprise. That's February 27,
by the way. So before as we get
into the conversation that's happening now around why
Hamas violated the deal, guys, there's endless evidence
showing you the how absurdly
wrong that is. Now but this, by the
way, is an Egyptian type dynamic. This is,
as we've been saying, illegal occupation of Egypt,
illegal occupation of Syria, illegal occupation of Palestine,
illegal occupation of Lebanon. As somebody recently pointed
out, there is no definitive border for anywhere
in Israel.
Every single one of them are in in
flux in question, not because of somebody else,
because Israel is advancing.
Again, outcome.
Take away all the BS narrative. What does
that show you?
Doesn't matter though because people will tell you,
you know, that really what seems to stem
back to a Zionist like Muslim bad perspective,
which is seemingly not even buried today.
Now Phil Turaldi also says, congressman Massey of
Kentucky has declared that every Republican in congress,
excuse me, but himself has among their staff
and at least one minder.
He calls them babysitters,
who is present to monitor and report on
how the representative votes in support of Israel.
The Israel Israel First staffer is often an
employee of the lobby, commonly either connected to
the Amer to APAC or with the even
more virulent Anti Defamation League.
Here's the article he highlights.
House Republican claims every GOP colleague has an
APAC Babysitter. I'm playing that to open today,
but I'll play it just part of it
really quickly.
How do I mean, there's no way you
misunderstand this kind of stuff.
It's not. It's you if if the only
dynamic, only
situation that it happens in is when it
applies to Israel,
well, at the very least, you have to
acknowledge that's a special circumstance. Maybe you agree
with that special circumstance.
But that's what a lot of us are
calling out. Why is it different?
Why is this the one thing? Now especially
while they happen to be committing genocide and
starving and torturing and raping people, but side
note. Okay? Why is anybody allowed to be
have a caveat to international law, to any
law? I mean, it it's everywhere you look.
And in this case, we're talking about an
invasive
Israel entity. Now that's not debatable. Despite all
the games and the a standing for America,
it's easily proven that this was an Israeli
entity that extended from their government that was
simply renamed after the death of JFK
for obvious reasons. Because JFK was going to
make them register under the foreign registration act,
and they changed their name. And that was
APAC we're talking about, guys.
Now the point is, I think, briefly right
before that, because this was already happening. Either
way, the point was the entity, Israel, was
supposed to represent was supposed to be called
out for that, and then JFK went away,
and then the problem went away.
This is still happening today.
Republicans who come to me and say, that's
wrong what APAC is doing to you. Let
me talk to my APAC person.
By the way,
everybody but me has an APAC person. Like
What's that mean, an APAC person? It's like
your babysitter, your APAC Babysitter,
who,
is always talking to you for APAC. They're
probably a constituent in your district,
but they are, you know,
firmly embedded in APAC.
And Every member has something like this?
Every I don't know how it works on
the Democrat side,
but that's how it works on the Republican
side.
And when they and when they come to
DC, you go have lunch with them. And
they've got your cell number,
and you have conversations with them. So I've
had, like
That's absolutely crazy. I've had four members of
congress say, I'll talk to my APAC person.
And, like, it's clearly what we call them,
my APAC guy.
I'll talk to my APAC guy and see
if I can get him to, you know,
dial those ads back. Why have I never
heard this before?
It doesn't benefit anybody.
Why would they wanna tell their constituents that
they've basically got a buddy system
with somebody who's representing a foreign country?
It it doesn't benefit the congressman for people
to know that, so they're not gonna tell
you that.
So interesting.
You know what I mean? It's it's actually
I've never said this before. I'm just thinking
about it now.
Isn't he seem a little cavalier about that?
Like, shouldn't I mean, it's actually kinda crazy
to think about it. And maybe he's just
trying to do it in a way that
he thinks will reach people. I'm I'm agreeing
more than ever today with Thomas Massie. But
just
isn't odd that he's literally describing a foreign
country having a guy that handles every politician.
Shouldn't that be, like, a much more concerning
conversation?
And, of course, as so many boys out
in the chat, Tucker does play dumb very
well. I think it's ridiculous to think he
wouldn't have some insight to that conversation. It's
it's it is
dishonest.
But as I pointed out, very importantly,
if you didn't see this already, which gives
you know? Oh, look at that. He's already
put he's he hid the comments there. So
Greenblatt from the ADL,
he says, this morning at the ADL's National
Leadership Summit, I spoke about when we where
we are now. A turning point for American
Jews.
The numbers don't lie. Antisemitism is at historic
levels, and too many are willing to look
the other way, but we won't.
Now, obviously, don't forget the provable reality that
they basically turned every Palestinian flag and every
protest into an antisemitic event.
They turned every flag, Palestinian and promotion
and protest into an anti Semitic event
even though they weren't. Sorta like, interestingly, if
you wanna associate it with something in your
mind, how they made every red hat.
Mean antisemitism. They made every red hat into
being some racist white supremacist thing. Remember how
dumb that was because it wasn't true? Well,
it's happening elsewhere.
Stand back from the partisan lens and realize
the same thing they were doing to you,
they're now doing to them.
And they did. They said, oh, it's all
antisemitism. The dark looming cloud, it turned 400%,
they claimed, was mostly
Palestinian
protest for for not Hamas, but for self
determination.
And on top of that, most of the
ones, they were actual things. A lot of
those turned out to be fake.
That's not my opinion. Now, anyway, we've gone
over a lot how ADL provably has faked
Nazi marches and hate events all throughout history.
I mean, reported by Israeli media and even
human rights groups.
But his point on top of that is
that, what was it?
The
oh, it oh, that's that's what I was
gonna say. American Jews, he points out. Let's
not forget Horetz just told you recently and
more than months before this that Israel is
the least safe on the planet for Jews.
Not because of anybody else but the Israeli
government. That's exactly the point they made. The
leading Israeli newspaper, but keep listening to these
manipulative Zionist propagandists. Either way, the bottom line
he's pointing out is that this rising antisemitism
is everywhere.
And I simply said, Elon, depicted below, discussing
the very high bar that the ADL is
setting in its fight against antisemitism. Obviously, I'm
making a joke. Obviously, that's him doing the
Nazi salute that totally wasn't, that it was
my heart or whatever. Again, for for those
who didn't see the coverage, no one's suggesting
that we know his intention. Only an idiot
would do that. That's most the partisanship. We
know he meant to do it. No. We
know he only meant to send his heart.
You're both dumb. Okay? Because nobody knows what's
in his head. That's a stupid assumption. Self
serving.
The point is, he claims he didn't meet.
That's not what he intended. So who knows?
It's dumb though because it's a textbook Nazi
salute. He's biting his lip. He's all aggressive
about it. But I don't know what he
meant. Maybe he's just that ridiculous. Maybe he's
that, you know, autistic or whatever the whatever
the terms they use are these days. What
do you say? Anyway, the point
is that the ADL refused to call that
out. Give him the benefit of the doubt,
they said. So it's just silly that we're
watching a group that's
gaslighting around fake events while ignoring what is
objectively exactly what that would look like, whether
he meant it or not. It's sad. But
it's all because it's a game, guys. It
is a you it is a manipulation.
This was one of the things I was
joking about today that doesn't seem to be
people's like, what? What? This person's like, wait.
What?
It's like,
humor. It doesn't seem to work anymore. But
so this one is another example of something
that was the administration.
Nancy Mace says real women have their own
bathrooms in Israel.
And I said, oh, good. Nancy's in Israel
again. Being facetious, obviously. That's not a good
thing. That's the second time. K? I mean,
this is insane to me. Rubio, first call,
flies there twice in a matter of a
month. Like, that's not normal, guys.
It's crazy.
These are rabid Zionists fighting for another country.
What's funny to me, though, she's trying to
muse this to go see
essentially going, Israel is better than America because
we don't have, know, what's supposed to be
clear is a very clear partisan agenda to
the, you know, you what do they call
it? The trans bathroom. That's ridiculous. I mean,
it's one of those things that I think
most people, even Democrats, are like, that's just,
you know, it's a partisan thing that driven
it for their sides. I don't know. I
can't tell you the truth of what the
numbers were. I think a lot of people
are like I mean, I'm speaking for myself.
Obviously, you know my coverage. That was insane.
It was wrong. It's dangerous. It was it
doesn't necessarily not medically correct. But either way,
the point is she's trying to go look
in Israel. That's not happening. So it's a
it's a dunk on the Democrats after you're
already in power for what?
For a cheap win. That's all it is.
They're trying to get you to go, yay.
They're the good side because they dunked on
Democrats. It's simple and lazy and dishonest. But
that's not the point.
She's wrong is the point. Hey, look. They
get their own bathrooms in Israel. Hey, Ask
Rock. Does Israel allow trans women into the
women's bathroom restrooms? Yes. Israel generally allows transgender
women to use women's restrooms in line with
their gender identity. There's no nation nationwide law
or regulation in Israel explicitly prohibiting transgender individuals
from using see the point?
Isn't that funny?
So Nancy Mace is ridiculous, like the rest
of them, but it doesn't even matter. The
truth doesn't matter. It's about narrative, guys.
But she won't respond to that. She won't
care. I think that's hilarious.
Now the undeniable Israel First nature of Trump's
administration
is undeniable.
I mean, watch the show if you'd like
to go more. I think today is enough
alone to show you these people are acting
for a foreign country and not you.
But lastly, this was one of the main
things I was laughing about.
This just blows my mind today, how this
platform works. I mean, the the the kind
of petty nature of people.
And, like, it drives you to be that
way. It's just crazy. So here's what I
posted.
This post, which is very clearly from I
mean, if you think today by now today
that I don't read these all the way,
I think my post makes it clear anyway.
As I'm always talking about due diligence, RFK
Jr, then MAHA, commentary only. And if you
actually look at the account itself, it very
clearly says parody account. Okay. And it says,
this tweet risks being reported
and restricted, but I see it necessary to
say it out loud, clearly playing the role.
But it says, our real enemy isn't Russia
or Ukraine. It's not even China.
It's the ones who induced
and tried to perpetuate wars
so they can launder billions of our money
into their own pockets. It's the ones who
funded revolts and instability all over the world
via USAID.
It's the ones who have committed unspeakable crimes
on children. Okay. You get where this is
going. It's the ones who manipulate people with
endless propaganda using our tax dollars.
Okay.
Obviously, in the partisan loans, it's like the
Democrats. That's what people would wanna read in
that. And I think that's what they were
going for. My point was like, well, that's
Israel. You go down the list. That's exactly
to a tee what Israel's doing to this
country. But so I wrote, and as you
know my structure, I've done this many times
where I go, breaking.
Look what's happening in in Ukraine. And then
I go, oh, wait. It's actually in Israel,
so you could ignore it. That's that's the
spacing. I do it all the time. I
said, RFK is finally calling out Israel. And
I linked to the JFK assassination conversation. Then
down here, I said, or am I misunderstanding
what he's saying? Winky face.
Now you tell me, I think that's, like,
ridiculously obvious that that was not okay. Then
to make the point, immediately, and I'm talking,
like, half a second later. It's 10:13,
ten twelve. It was less than a minute,
thirty seconds. I just followed up right away
and said, yes. I'm aware. It's not his
account. Just making a point.
Right? Before, it's intentionally because I felt like
I wanted the joke to be funny and
not include that dumb sentence in the joke.
Nonetheless,
have a good time reading through the comments
because it's insane.
But all I said to follow it up
was, oh, and just I'm just making a
point about Israel and the deep state. My
point was, this all sounds like Israel and
it's being framed otherwise. I was trying to
be funny and got wrapped into this back
and forth with a bunch of really stupid
people that were, you knew you were wrong.
I just admit it.
It's just it's crazy.
It doesn't matter. I can even show you.
You can read through it for yourself. But
the point was
the the argument of all these things that
they're doing, and if, of course, you could
look at it and go democrat, democrat, democrat,
which by the way is half the story
seeing as how most of them, if not
all, are completely influenced by Israel, is that
if you read that and look at what
Israel's doing, it's the same argument. So what's
the deep state we're talking about here if
everything applies to the group that you claim
is your chief ally? That's the point that
I was trying to make. My frustration with
today was, like, I I for some reason,
I'm feeling cheeky, making a couple of funny
jokes here and there, and it just it
was, like, flat. Maybe I'm just not as
funny as I think. But I thought that
was incredibly frustrating. This is you can see
them down below. People, like, going back and
forth screaming about how I you know, you
know you're wrong, and I've followed you forever,
and I don't believe you anymore. It's like,
for all I know it's an IDF bot.
It's just crazy. Personally, I feel like I've
done a really good job of being objective
about things and trying to be, you know,
not fall into a trap. And then if
I do, if I'm wrong, I follow-up and
try to correct it. That's just me though.
Apparently, I'm wrong all the time according to
some of these bots. Anyway, joke joke aside,
because I'm just being facetious.
The idea that how obviously Israel is I
mean,
like I said, like a tick embedded in
this administration or rather in this government.
It's important, like, everything we just showed to
finish today on the point of the ceasefire,
keep all that in mind because you cannot
decouple these things. The Israel influence over the
United States government, who is basically at least
publicly controlling the reigns of where this goes,
which I don't think that's the truth. But
Trump and god Trump's Trump Gaza and all
the different everything they've been doing since he
got into power is belligerent. It's insane.
I think you need to consider why.
Especially since
I I don't know how anybody that is
honest with themselves can think that this is
in the interest of The United States. Like,
even if you think they're gonna do illegally,
which it would be, just take all the
resources and occupy territory. At the end of
the day, from a world perspective,
you are destroying any semblance of credibility.
And who benefits from that? You know, just
off the top of my head, the group
that argues that the destruction of the West
is necessary to roll out the end times.
Meh, just first thing that comes to mind.
But you guys can decide for yourselves. Now
this is before today's conversation. This is February
23. Israel indefinitely delays Palestinian prisoner release as
hostages freed. So I just wanna show you
this because this was February 23.
Not today with the narrative about, you know,
whatever they kind of con contorted the narrative
into to make it look like they just
responded to Hamas being crazy.
They already came out at a time
when the when at the moment, basically, everything
had been met. Now the deviation was around
the Bebas family,
the mother in particular with the body that
was, you know, maybe a mistake, maybe an
intentional ploy by Hamas. Either way, they followed
up and the body was returned.
At that time, Israel wasn't crying foul. They
did. They criticized, but they got the body
and they went forward. Okay? And then things
have happened since. Releases have happened. Okay. So
the argument
is that's not they they continued with the
deal and continue to release Israeli hostages, and
Israel accept them.
So at that point, the argument that somehow
the body right there dynamic was the reason
is kind of ridiculous seeing as how they
were going forward with ceasefire.
But then
they criticized other parts of it, like the
music that was playing all these different things
and basically said, we're we're delaying all of
this.
You're pausing it based on your actions. That
was first, which everybody, myself include people were
going, that's ridiculous.
Myself included is what I was gonna say.
He's what you're just gonna pause the ceasefire
for what? What's what's the reason? And, of
course, people that defend Israel, but because Hamas,
but it's not. What's the reason? What's the
logic? Okay. But then it went forward.
Oh, and, well, actually, for this was, I
just had the wrong spot. I'll show that
last. Next, it goes forward. Now it says
on the same day,
US backs Israel's decision to delay
Palestinian prisoner release.
Why?
Now it says, the White House has backed
a decision to delay releasing more than 600
Palestinian prisoners
as agreed to end the ceasefire.
A US Official called it the appropriate response,
here it is, to Hamas' hostage handover ceremonies,
termed humiliating.
So you're not upset about the Beavis family.
You're not upset about the body. You went
all the way back to things that happened
before that, and you're arguing that the way
they released the people
is enough to you for now, do you
just pause the process after you got your
people? That seems really honest, doesn't it? Now
on top of the fact that you're not
worried about the raped and tortured, burned, emaciated
people being released in handcuffs and white shirts
from Israel who are being dragged out or
the bodies being thrown out in bags, that
that's okay.
But people coming out smiling fed and and
taken care of or the wrong music playing,
which I also thought was inappropriate
during the coffins coming up, that's see, this
is
a lazy excuse because all the other narratives
didn't work or fell apart in front of
them. I think the Piedlas family is the
main one. That was what so they're still
using it, by the way. To argue that
we just have to wait because you
before you release them, like, after you already
accept more, you would you go hey. It's
so I'm gonna be confusing
here. That happened to Bibas family. Then they
released more hostages, and Israel came and picked
them up. And they're refusing to return hostage
on their end. So they took their part
of it, and then went back and said,
no. But you did this thing before that,
and we're not gonna give you our people
now.
I mean, anybody honest. Anybody who's not a
completely bought off moron is gonna go, that
doesn't make any sense.
Okay? This is where I've been
then, one day ago actually, let me refresh
that. I think it was two.
Okay. So refreshing. Oh, never mind. Way more
than that. Hamas says no Gaza ceasefire talks
unless Israel releases prisoners. So the point was
basically they're saying, look,
we're not gonna get into an engagement about
changing the deal until you meet your part
of the agreement.
Just simply reverse the point and you know
you would be like, oh, of course. Hamas
has to release their part before that right?
Okay. So why would it be different? Why
would Israel have the moment to go, we're
gonna change the deal because
we don't like what you just did a
second ago even though we already took our
people before that?
Okay. So that's where we were essentially before
I was away for a little bit. And
the point was, that's insane to me. The
obvious, dishonest nature of that to claim that
we're gonna take everything from our side of
it, but we're gonna wait because of something
you did that even in the process of
met the obligation of the ceasefire.
So also on the February 23, Haaretz wrote
this.
Netanyahu
may exploit
latest Israel Hamas hostage crisis to nix ceasefire
deal. That was days before they announced this.
So the leading Israeli newspaper was saying, they're
going to use what just happened to nix
the deal.
Then they took their hostages back and then
did that.
And the US government was like, whatever they
say, whatever. Because they already said no matter
what they do, Trump said we're we're backing
them and gave them more money, which we'll
get to in a second.
Now on the January 15, because we already
saw this, because we had the data, and
we weren't assuming. We looked at what they
were saying out loud. And that was the
new ceasefire agreement Israel already plans to break.
And we showed you right away, as we
already said at the beginning of the show.
They were
publicly telling you Trump said we could break
it right at this moment, guys.
On January 15, we were telling you that
Israel would do what they're doing now in
January 15.
How many times that happened, guys?
It's important to recognize that, demonstrating our value
for you.
Then, of course, we followed up
on the twenty first. Israel, at that point,
had repeatedly violated the ceasefire. According to UN,
according to amnesty, human rights. I mean, everybody,
everybody everywhere was going, look, they're firing at
people. They're they're not delivering the food. They
haven't they've restricted the shipments of the houses
they promised.
And despite pointing it out, Hamas just keep
kept going forward with the deal.
Blatant violations like they do everywhere.
Even worse, on the January 30, they literally
opened fire on the Palestinians that they released
in the exchange. And that wasn't enough for
them to break. Like, because the point is,
Hamas wants this to come to an end.
Otherwise, they'd go foul and run back and
keep doing whatever you claim they're doing, but
they didn't. They just accepted it and kept
going.
I just don't know how many more things
we can prove.
And also just going back to
10/07/2024,
so one year into all this, here's the
rest. How Netanyahu
has systematically
foiled talks to release hostages.
That's just one of many covering the reality.
Now on March 1 yesterday,
here's what Israel said. Hamas says it rejects
Israel's formulation
of extending first God's ceasefire.
Okay. So just to be clear,
that wouldn't change anything.
So if you were gonna be honest with
this, that would be the ceasefire's continuing.
The point is in this point, they were
supposed to discuss
how phase two would bring an end to
the war.
Israel instead criticizes, says you did this wrong
thing, and then just kind of arbitrarily stops,
doesn't release the hostages
that they were supposed to to meet the
last phase,
and says, wait. We're not gonna do anything
more because you humiliated people. Then they go,
but now we're gonna add new things to
the deal.
Not to take it into the second phase,
which would arguably be the end eventually,
but to extend the first phase.
Now why would anybody in an honest dynamic
do that? Why would you go what you
have here. Here's concessions to whatever you want
while you haven't even met the last part.
That's how dumb this is. Now if you
read into this, that's how everybody's framing it.
Hamas turns down the ceasefire.
That's how they're framing this. It is
wildly dishonest.
And you need to anybody, anywhere who is
framing it like that needs to be laughed
at. They need to be seen for what
they are, either not informed,
blindly propagandizing,
or trying to get clicks and shares from
certain groups.
Jeremy Scahill points out, major news organizations are
making a conscious choice to frame Israel's total
violation of the ceasefire agreement as Hamas rejecting
it.
This is a I mean, to realize, that's
not even the many violations every day up
until this point. That's just the fact that
they did not meet the main obligation of
the last part of the phase.
Now it says this is a demonstrable lie
and has been through
has been through the entire duration of Israel's
war on Gaza. Israel is rejecting the deal
it signed just like every other time. Now
I should've grabbed these earlier, but I didn't
wasn't didn't end up doing it. But you
remember
these. This is the last time. Robert I
mean, there's actually, I think, probably four different
articles like this.
But we talked about this many times. This
was May 7.
This one was June 2. Hamas agrees to
cease fire. Blinken then made the rounds going,
all we have to do is get Hamas
to agree, and it's all over. And then
Hamas goes, okay. We agree. And then Israel
decides to attack Rafa, which was a bread
line. I mean, it just it was wildly
transparent. And then, Blinken,
the the fool that he made himself into,
alright, already was, but clearly just became this
he turned around and said, Hamas did this.
After just telling us that Hamas was the
only thing stopping it, and then they bomb
somebody, and then they go, Hamas broke the
deal. It's it's just incredible.
And then after that, these are only just
two examples of the previous dynamics.
June 2, Hamas, once again,
refuses or or Israel, excuse me. Israel, once
again, refuses own the ceasefire deal after Hamas
accepts.
I I mean, watch it for yourself. I
mean, if you're not a dishonest person, this
is objectively clear.
So Assad Rod, yesterday, points out the I
mean, this is one of those starkest examples
that we keep seeing. Now whatever you think
about it, people seem to be weirdly pushing
back. I think, you know, Haraz is not
the leading Haraz is clearly it the I
I think objectively with the metrics, the leading
Israeli newspaper. But at the very least, it
is a clear leading entity in the field
of news in Israel.
My point of even saying that is because
of how Haraz has been one of the
groups that has seemed
to call things out.
And for that reason, it's being censored and
kicked back on and and we they're going
after the group in general in Israel.
But the contrast between the current reporting from
Israel in Horetz
and what the West entirely is saying is
is bonkers, guys. I mean, it's like every
day, they're literally saying the opposite of what
Israel's newspaper is saying. Here's what it says.
Netanyahu stalls stage two of the Gaza ceasefire
and once again
weaponizes
Israel's grief. That is Israel's headline.
Here is NPR and everybody else, left and
right. Hamas rejects Israel's request to extend phase
one.
Now, technically,
not inaccurate, but the way they frame the
article is that that is the violation.
And that's why, as we're gonna get to,
Netanyahu has already gone back.
Well, he's gone back to publicly stating the
war is on, gone back to killing people,
never actually stopped. They've been killing people the
entire time. But publicly,
gone back to flagrant violations or just black
to the war on Gaza. Like, by the
way, was the agreement with Trump.
That's the point she makes all the time.
Israeli media, Netanyahu's
breaking the rules. Israel US media, Hamas did
it.
They don't pair it along with all the
we are the media now types.
I mean, don't don't forget, we have the
Libs, the people sitting there getting those DC
binders who are aggressively propagandizing for Israel.
Now, excuse me, Rami Abdul,
chairman of the Euromet Human Rights Group,
Israel unveils this is yesterday, late late in
the day. Israel unveils The US Steve Witcoff
plan, and we've talked about it already. One
of the many aspects of this current dynamic,
the administration that is,
you know, advisory or not. The idea of
people that are completely continuing to I mean,
these people are not in the interest of
the American what anybody in The US citizenry
think we want or fight for.
Every what you could look at the actions
and look at what continues to happen.
How is any of this in the interest
of America
other than the broad idea that if we
don't do it now, they're gonna come back
for us? Us. You know how long they've
been saying that? And the reality is they
already have, and they're the ones doing it.
Not Hamas, not Iran. It's the people who
are actively right now, doing what they claim
you're trying to stop, and all you're doing
is fighting your enemies for them who are
trying to stop there.
Or even, in most cases, just protect themselves.
I mean, it's insane to look around and
see all of Israel and The United States
have done over the world everywhere,
and then compare that to even what they
claim Iran is doing, or Hamas, or Hezbollah,
or the Houthis.
It's it is literally David and Goliath, and
you're siding with Goliath.
But he says,
having already violated the agreement's first phase, Israel
seeks its captives' release
while maintaining its siege and killings, still blocking
equipment to retrieve thousands of bodies under the
rubble.
These are children
who are suffering right now
in occupied Palestine, guys. This is in the
midst of what's supposed to be a ceasefire.
You don't even wanna look at some of
the Zionist comments down there. It'll make you
sick
from suffering children.
Now he also points out so this is
March 1. This is yesterday.
Okay? So not only have they already been
killing and bombing and so on, in in
more discreet ways, I would argue, if that's
even possible. It's probably not the right word
for that, but in the context of what
was happening.
But right when they tell you that they
did this and we're breaking that because we
broke the deal and they didn't accept our
changes,
they immediately murder a bunch of people.
Oh, actually, I'm sorry. This is the wrong
one.
That was this one.
That's right here.
I'll come back to that. Sorry. I was
I thought
actually, I didn't make a joke about it.
Sorry. I've been confused. There's so much obvious
butchery murder, and I'm confusing them. But the
point is this is a investigation
from Rami Abdul, which is why I put
it next to the tweet, following up on
something they investigated back in 12/04/2023.
It revealed Israeli drones deliberately killed 12 civilians
in Gaza,
which, I mean, sadly point that seems like
a very it happens every day in this
country in this place right now. Every day,
they're doing this. We've proven it the entire
time. What he's pointing to you is that
they did investigation with the data that they
can prove that they knew what they were
doing.
The attacks targeted the Abu El Anin family,
including women and children.
Now you
check it out for yourself. This person you
should be following,
the Euromaid human
rights group has been doing great work this
entire time.
Now Robert and MaKesh today reports Israel just
ended the ceasefire and blocked humanitarian aid into
Gaza, which we'll come to in a second.
Cuts off Gaza aid.
Nope. They never really let it back on,
quite frankly, but they're now publicly telling you
the thing they've been denying the entire time.
For the second time,
He says, while full scale war is yet
to break out, Netanyahu refuses to honor phase
two of the deal.
He declared readiness to call up 400,000
reservists,
threatens invading Damascus,
which I think is a ploy because they're
already there,
and attacking Iran.
Almost like they want you they're threatening in,
like, lunacy
in order to hope that they US and
everybody else jumps in and does that for
them. You know, however you wanna look at
that.
Jeremy Scahill says, one small detail about today's
cause of ceasefire developments. A senior Hamas official
just told me that Israel publicly announced
Hamas had rejected the so called Witkoff proposal
before
Hamas had even been officially briefed on
it.
Now, of course, they could be making that
up, but it certainly aligns what we already
know.
So Jeremy Scales telling you his source is
saying that they weren't even informed. So that
would perfectly line up, that they knew they
were gonna break it, so they knew they
were gonna blame Hamas. Why even tell them?
Why even give them an opportunity to jump
ahead of the story? That's what it sounds
like to me. Now he added that Hamas'
position remains that Israel is in violation of
the signed agreement. That's transparent.
Well before we got here.
And is demanding that mediators compel Israel to
respect the terms of the deal.
That shows you the mediators
aren't on the side of truth.
Israel refused well, and let if they so
far, yes. If they don't might point they
should have already said something because if they
were honest in my opinion, but we'll see
what happens tomorrow.
Israel refused to begin phase two negotiations, which
are supposed to start on February 3.
Mohammed Sheikada pointing out to the Bebas family
overlap.
Oh, is this the one to make sure
it's,
the other one I was reading. I I
thought the Biba were gonna get to be
this point in a second. He says Israeli
hostage families okay. This is the right spot.
He says Israeli hostage families are crystal clear
that Netanyahu
is the one violating the ceasefire and doing,
quote, everything to blow up the agreement.
Every time. This is the same point as
arrests, guys. This one is, it's in Hebrew,
but I can't it's the
what's the platform? I forget what it is
now. But it says, not a single US
mainstream media is quoting
Inov Zangarker's words. They're instead deliberately manufacturing consent
for genocide again.
Every single time we've had this,
where families of the hostages, in this case,
hostages themselves as well, are saying
they're the ones trying to ruin this. Mostly,
it's the families that know that they still
have people there that might die.
And they know that, what are you doing?
You're gonna kill our families. I mean, they
know it every time. Same as the Beavis
family, guys.
But you're not gonna hear that in the
West. Now, my point is the killing immediately
continued.
It's the same every time.
Not that
not that you even need to see it,
to be quite honest, but ceasefire is over.
Israel's begun to slaughter civilians again.
Time for true promise three, Iran, Yemen, Shat
D'or. You know, point is they're killing people.
Because
I mean, ask yourself, what's the what what's
the point there? Are you going after mosque
tunnels? Are we even narrows don't even matter
anymore. There's not even an effort to try
to explain away blatant murder of civilians because
they all know you see it, guys. And
they now know they can get away with
it, at least right now.
Now this is the one I thought it
was before.
Mohammed Shehada points out, I he says, I
was ruthlessly attacked when I warned a month
ago that Israel's government has been weaponizing the
Bebas tragedy.
Now again, something we've been telling you for
years now, or I think over a year,
twenty twenty three before,
which is right here. As T Love and
others have been doc demonstrating since 2023,
IDF bombs killed the Beavis family and that
the public has been has been publicly available
information shared by the father himself as he
still maintains.
Right now, which I've I've I've just did
a show on this.
Even to the point where I'll show you
next, the Biba's family is telling him not
only are we being lied to about this,
but they would that they that the Israeli
government's using them. Surprise, surprise. Exactly what we
were telling you. The point was here is
12/22/2023.
And even, Lipschitz has now has followed up
with this, the first one released and said
that she confirms this happened.
They tried to return their bodies. This is
me posting this 12/22/2023.
They tried to return the oh, this was
Elon Dave Eli David. This baby is still
being held. He's using them just like we
are today. And I said they tried to
return their bodies
after being killed by Israeli airstrikes. They tried
to return them for free. Now ask yourself,
why would they do that if this was
a ploy?
You're gonna return the body so you can
say, you know, we killed them here, take
them back. I mean, the point is that
Israel could have taken them right then and
easily then been able to do forensics and
prove what actually happened. Not fifteen months later,
which is not even possible in my mind.
Not really. Not in the sense you can
be certain about what you're looking at.
But they didn't. They called it psychological manipulation.
They turned them away and then went on
to lie about it for a year, which
everyone's calling out, and I'll show you in
a second.
Hostages have confirmed I have killed hostages
more than once, but keep telling that the
point was they're bombing everywhere in the country,
obviously. But my we knew that's why that
is what they claimed was the violation of
the deal back then.
Them trying to give them back family members
that were already killed even though it wasn't
part of the deal. And they called that
a violation. We're right back to killing people
over and over and over.
Now he says, now Harat states that the
same conclusion,
word for word, while none of Israeli's propagandists
are calling Horetz vile or antisemitic. That's not
true, actually. There's a lot of them, but
I get his point. Here's Horetz.
Here's the article.
Up to his old tricks, Netanyahu
weaponizes
grief and puts stage two of Gaza ceasefire
on hold right after they just told you
a week ago that he might do that.
Kinda hard to miss the obvious continuity here.
Now we told you this on February 22.
Again, after a year of covering this, Israel
continues to weaponize the Biba's family killed by
the IDF.
Here is the Grayzone article
be written by Wyatt Reed and Max Blumenthal.
Biba's family threatens to sue
Israeli government as official propaganda on hostage killings
unravels.
Just to read the beginning, read articles. It's
basically everything we've already reported.
The Biba's family demands the Israeli government cease
exploiting the death of their family members for
propaganda purposes as layers of evidence support claims
an Israeli airstrike killed them. As as as
sorry. Pause weird. Family members for propaganda purposes
as layers of evidence support claims.
Basically, the point is read through it. As
we've already been showing you, as not only
does he maintain it, the point is the
evidence as Dan Cohen has been covering, as
even the corporate media accidentally covered, shows that
they were killing their hostages.
The main point here
is that they are
the family they're claiming they're supporting are the
ones going stop doing that. They told them
stop speaking about them. Don't don't make this
public. They did anyway. Then they went out
in the next day and made a big
public statement about why they're
They don't care about Bebo's family. They care
about using the Bebo's family, and now they're
being called out by the Bebo's family.
We've been telling this for such a long
time, and the evidence is transparent.
Here
is the actual statement, thanks to their article,
from the family. You can read it for
yourself.
And it says, although it is is it
it is although it is surprising that it
is necessary to request and emphasize this, they're
telling them to stop doing what you're doing.
They do not believe them.
Now this is from Ynet News from the
twenty first, February.
Simply says what I've been highlighting. It says,
just six weeks later, on 11/29/2023,
Hamas' Al Qasim Brigades announced that Shiri and
her babies had been killed. At first, Hamas
claimed they died in Israeli airstrike during the
fighting, but that that was this part, by
the way. I I can't confirm this, and
I don't believe this happened. This is Israeli
media, so consider that.
Unless you have more of this, please send
to me because I'd be wondering where this
came from. But it says, at first, Hamas
claimed they died in an Israeli airstrike.
Then, and it says in a chilling reversal,
they proudly admitted to murdering them. Now I
I don't think that's true. I've never seen
that anywhere. In fact, I've seen a most
state statements have been pushing back from the
very beginning, even before they said they were
killed. So in the context of what actually
happened.
You tell me. But my point is I
think the overall the whether they proudly admitted
it or not will be very relevant to
me if you could find that. I don't
believe it happened. The IDF said that it
had informed the Beavis family of their deaths.
Then it added it could be psychological warfare
at the time. Right? That's what we already
told you. As previous people were declared dead
and then returned.
The following day on November 12 November 30,
Israel and Hamas extended the ceasefire by twenty
four hours. Hamas submitted a new list of
women and children captives just minutes after the
ceasefire expired, allowing negotiations to continue.
Reports soon surfaced that Israel was outraged. The
new list contained only eight captives instead of
the agreed upon 10. Initially,
Hamas had proposed releasing seven live captives along
with the bodies of the three, the Bebas
family.
Israel refused. That's the point I was just
talking about. At the time, intense speculation suggested
those three executed hostages were the Bemis family.
That's what that's what the evidence shows.
Pres and that's what Hamas claimed, by the
way, but we can't take it face value.
President
Herzog met with then US Secretary Of State
Anthony Blinken.
Now it says there were there are still
around 50 hostages who are in Hamas' hands
in Gaza, he told Blinken.
I would like to raise the plight of
the Bivas family. They've been using them since
the beginning. At this point, they knew they
were killed. A 10 old baby, four year
month old baby, a parent. Their whereabouts are
unknown to us, and we are demanding their
immediate release. It should be and this is
right after they refuse their bodies, mind you.
It said it should be obvious that little
toddlers will be released with their mother and
hopefully with the father as soon as possible.
The ceasefire ended that day, right, to my
point, because they then refused the bodies, and
fighting resumed. Rumors of the Beavis family's deaths
faded and Blinken returned to Washington without taking
any decisive action.
Attention shifted back to the battlefield.
See, they they let this happen.
For over a year, Israeli media writes, the
Bivas family remained a focal point.
Posters of the two red headed babies line
streets across Israel and New York and everywhere
around the world, guys. Why does that make
sense?
And it says, Demanding their release because people
in New York Times Square can help with
that, right? The hope that they might still
be alive endured.
But was it ever real? It wasn't hope
they might be alive. It was you. It
was propping you up to be outraged so
they could use that and using your emotional
outrage about the fact they were there in
the first place, which matters. Well, stop forget
that it wasn't actually Hamas that took them.
It was called the Mahujahideen Brigade, which is
not part of Hamas. Look it up for
yourself. That's a very public part of this.
And I think we even mentioned it in
this article. If not, it's we just recently
covered it. It is very clear. I was
just pointing out, Ray,
Ryan Graham was making that point. But how
dishonest it is, they can't even be that's
one of the most basic points, and they
can't be honest about that because the interest
is making it about Hamas for Israeli propaganda.
But it says, if Israel rejected the return
of their bodies, which they did, November 2023,
why did the government allow the public to
believe that they could still come home?
If the Bebas children had already been killed,
why wasn't their fate disclosed?
Why wasn't there a mission to recover their
remains?
Now they claim that they knew this or
at least suspected this, that they were killed
by them. That's not what happened.
Recently, they claimed that back in November. Right?
Not that the forensics necessarily proved that. That
was what part of what they claimed with
no evidence and never no one's even seen
that. But they said that they had insight
with that. So why did they even let
them believe that for a second?
The family's calling this out, by the way.
Now it says,
did Israel's leadership believe that keeping the Beavers
children in public consciousness would sustain international pressure
for hostage
negotiations. Their innocent faces stirred up deep emotions.
They used them.
Was their image used to keep the hostage
issue at the forefront even when officials may
have known the grim reality?
It says the drawn out agony surrounding the
Bebo's family fate only compounded that suffering.
Did Israel's need to wait sixteen months?
Did they need to, Israelis need to wait
sixteen months clinging to a false hope?
But there's more. Blinken failed to secure the
release of the Beavis children. Yet within days
of their capture, the Beavis administrate the Biden
administration
managed to bring home two American women.
Right? So the obvious point is, well, why
wouldn't that be immediately included? Well, because they
were already killed
and they refused. They don't want them. That
was never wanted from either side of from
The US or Israeli side.
It says if Biden could secure the release
of two American women through Qatari mediation,
why not two toddlers?
Why weren't they prioritized from day one?
That's pretty easy to point out. According to
report and this is Israeli media again. According
to reports from the IDF and the National
Center of Forensic Medicine, Abiba's children were murdered
by Hamas in November. Meaning on October 20,
when they were released,
they could have come home too. Now, technically,
what I was saying there is not true
because the point is they were negotiating
about this when they were technically still alive.
My point is later in the next the,
you know, the the
the the negotiations that came afterward, they they
were keeping them a lot. They were pretending
like they were alive, but then never were
part of the discussion.
That's pretty clear. That's what a point I
was kinda making. This point is important to
think about.
So if Blinken and them are discussing and
then getting two American women released
when they were still alive, why weren't they
part of the conversation?
It's very clear. I mean, the answer is
transparent.
They were being used. It was important to
Israel to use this family.
And now we see that playing out. Before
that, though, while the soul breaks down, which
is, by the way, why I think they
really didn't lean into it as much as
they needed to for the ceasefire violation,
instead making it about some music they the
humiliating releases.
Seems like a like a the the smaller
choice, doesn't it? Clearly, to claim they
violated the I mean, the I think the
point was to out get outraged about the
Beavis Family Exchange and the the fact that
they were dead when they were told they
wouldn't be. That didn't
happen. Why else would they keep that going
so long? But my point is, as that's
all happening
and we can see that they're still maintaining
to the point where the father and the
family are even calling out Israel now,
Reuters comes out with this fact check. It's
not about the fact check. It's about the
fact that this is being circulated.
A headline on Hamas, quote, protecting the Bebas
family is fake.
So this is a fake BBC article
that says,
Hamas just wanted to protect the Bebas family,
but Israel killed them, Hamas said.
So you see how easy he'll lay this
is typical Zionist propaganda for me. So they
know you're seeing this. So what they need,
they want to do, whoever they is, the
the hierarchy is slaving you, it doesn't have
to be Israel. Somebody wants to convince you
that this is not the case. They come
out with the same narrative in a very,
very lazy, clumsy, you know, that they put
a fake statement from Hamas so they can
come out and go fake. And then they
use that fact check of a fake statement
to claim that what we're saying isn't true.
Even though this is fake and what we're
saying is true.
It it works today.
People fall for it because they listen to
their mainstream alternative media trusted people.
Now
here, I wanna play just this first part
of this to make that point about who
took them. Here is Marco Rubio
interviewing with corporate media,
telling you
something false immediately.
Secretary. Secretary Rubio, thank you for the opportunity.
As we sit down today, Hamas has released
the bodies of four Israeli hostages said to
include
a mother and two children. Your thoughts?
They they really
start. An interview about the new administration, about
The United States, and that's where they start.
It's
it's just priceless.
I mean, I I should even say because
this is a serious conversation. Like, I'm in
no way. You know me by now, especially
if you know this platform. If you don't,
that's in no way to diminish the suffering
of the family.
What happened to those children? The the devious
disgusting crime that it was being taken in
the first place, not by Hamas, by the
Mahujahideen Brigade,
as well as the devious murder, whether indiscriminate
bombing or otherwise, by Israel of those children.
No one should be belittling any of that.
And whoever took them, clearly Mahushni Brigade, according
to everybody, should be held accountable for that.
Here's how he answers. I think it's a
reminder of who Hamas really is. I mean,
just think about the fact they went in.
They grabbed this family, this young woman, her
two infant children. I think one was only
four years old. The other one was one.
And then and and it says it's just
that they did it and that they died
in their captivity. Who does that? I mean,
who who kidnaps families?
And then the way Israel,
literally every day, by the way. But I
guess we're not talking about that. That they
were released, you know, with people cheering in
the streets. It just tells you who were
Yeah. I mean, do we really need to
make this point every single time?
Obviously,
the comparable point is what maniac Zionists are
doing every time this stuff happens or the
many different publicly stated comments they make about
why none of them should be alive.
None of this defendable, guys. None of it.
It's about how they only like to criticize
one side of it while anybody honest is
doing both. Dealing with with Hamas. This is
not a government. This is not a simply
an ideological movement. These are evil, terrible people.
And and the idea that they would ever
be allowed to continue to have arms, to
be militarized, and to control territory
anywhere in the world is unfathomable. So Yeah.
Right? Israel, they should oh, I've I'll talk
about Israel for a second. Now, I mean,
obviously, the point is why did you have
any say in that?
Now even if they were exactly what you
say they were,
the idea that they get to dictate who
and does and doesn't have things shows you
who they seem they who they think they
are.
They don't have any right to say what
country, what ruler. Like, so if we're gonna
pretend back to the point that they were
actually allowed to vote these people in, which
I still don't believe,
Well, that means you don't it it doesn't
matter how bad you think they are. They
are who they chose.
So you don't believe in democracy then? Okay.
As long as it's only democracy if we
like the outcome is not how that works.
But then realize Israel funded Hamas right up
until October 7. That's for this little Marco
Rubio knows that.
Or the bigger point that I'm actually making,
they weren't taken by Hamas. I mean, so
the father was taken by Hamas. The father
had the father. Right?
Why were they in two separate places? I
mean, I don't even play a game. They
were not taken by Hamas. They were taken
by the Hushadin Brigade. It's publicly stated. But
yet, he then just makes it about Hamas
because he has marching orders.
That's the way you start this disgusting interview
because it's all propaganda. It is let's lay
out the narrative on what we want people
to think going forward.
Now
this gets even worse
from the and this is actually reported on
to from today. I think this is the
first time it came out. They're now publicly.
So everything we just showed you, how that
built into right now,
Israel cuts off Gaza aid to pressure Hamas
to accept new ceasefire
proposal.
I mean,
why do we even have to argue about
this stuff?
You cut off aid to most
fund, and maybe still funded, maybe still do,
to accept a new thing in the midst
of an agreement you both made.
That's Israel violating the deal. That's all that
is.
There's no way around that, guys. And that
that's not not even they did before this.
Well, they did many times before this. But
the last point, they have not released their
side of the last release. They took theirs
and never released their side of it. If
they were upset about the previous humiliating dynamic,
why they then take their people first and
then violate? Well, obviously, because they wanted their
part of it. They're dishonest people, guys. I
mean, this this needs to be public knowledge
in every context. Let me let me preface
these remarks with I never never ever believe
Israeli figures.
I've been in the government too long to
know that the Israelis are patent liars.
So they lie about this. They violate the
deal many times. Then
per the plan we've been telling you for
a month or two months, they violate it
right in the point they were supposed to
and blame Hamas like they were supposed to.
Now the prime minister of Israel account
says with the conclusion
of the first state no. No. That didn't
happen. You never met your part of the
last aspect of it.
With the conclusion of the first stage of
the hostage deal and in light of Hamas's
refusal
to accept the Witkoff framework
for the continuation of the talks. See, they're
trying see, this is actually not that they
this is better formulated than you than what
I've been seeing over the last year, but
still pretty lazy for those that are even
paying attention, which is they're trying to conflate
the so basically, right now, which is by
the way this is actually important. When this
first came out, one of the main criticisms
was why did they then have this middle
deep discussion? Why didn't they just have a
ceasefire that came to conclusion?
They they added that because that was they
knew they would give Israel this out. So
they created a situation where they had the
exchange, then they were supposed to discuss
what phase two would be in the middle
of it, and then that would lead to
an end. That was the ridiculous
incongruent dynamic, and here we are. Right? So
they're conflating that as if they Hamas is
refusing to discuss phase two with the fact
that what they're actually asking them to do
is discuss the extension of phase one.
We just showed you that. It's very public.
They know what they're doing, guys, and dishonest
people pretend they don't see it, and dumb
people fall for it.
Now it says,
to which Israel agreed, well, it doesn't matter
what you agreed to because you're talking about
an extension a a alteration of an ongoing
ceasefire agreement that you both agreed to. That's
not how this works. It says, prime minister
Netanyahu decided as of this morning, because of
your fake construct,
entry of all good supplies to Gaza will
be halted. Now it doesn't matter what preceded
that statement, just like I didn't the first
time. That's a crime.
Unequivocal.
There are
I mean, I don't even know anymore, to
be honest. Before all this,
millions of Palestinians.
Half of them women and children, and they
are starving and hurting all of them. But
this is not new. This never stopped.
They're just proudly saying it again. Basically, taunting
all of us.
Now it says, Israel will not allow a
ceasefire without the release of our hostages.
Are you kidding me? Like, this is almost
making fun of you while they do it.
You didn't release your part of the last
segment.
And because you forced new agreements on them
in the midst of the first phase, you
now say you won't allow a ceasefire without
your you got I mean, because what they're
basically doing now because Trump gave them the
leeway is they said, just give us everybody
back or we're not gonna do this anymore.
It's it is belligerent.
If Hamas persists in his refusal,
which is where all of them are getting
their headline from, this will be there will
be additional consequence. What? Like, more genocide?
Probably.
Well, Asalrad points out, remember how many months
Biden's officials
spent telling you that Israel wasn't deliberately blocking
aid?
Yet somehow, Israel can turn off the switch
on and off whenever they choose.
This is an open public declaration of the
intent to commit a war crime.
And for the podcast, you're simply highlighting what
we just read.
Aviva Clampas, of course, one of the propagandists,
comes out and says this.
Hamas says Israel's decision to stop sending aid
into Gaza is a war crime.
Okay. Just to be clear, no matter what
preceded it, no matter what the narrative is,
like I said, it is.
Period.
But here's how she follows it up, and
this is how,
you know, lay
people get tricked.
She said, that's right. The people who took
babies hostage
and then them are giving a lecture on
war crimes. Well, it wasn't Hamas, and they
didn't murder them. But, you know, don't let
the facts get in the way of your
narrative.
But the point is irrelevant. Even if it
was Hamas, they did kill them. It does
not change the fact that stopping food ate
two people,
including your people. I mean, I don't even
I mean, I feel like we're arguing with
the Phantom at this point.
Is anybody confused about this? Tell me the
truth. I mean, I I this is ridiculous.
These people are absolute
monsters.
She knows what she's doing.
I don't I don't these are soulless people,
guys. How in the world you could possibly
be like this and act like you have
any goodness in you? Ryan Grim makes it
obvious here. Just so we're clear,
announcing that you will starve a civilian population,
both both your hostages and everybody else, in
order to alter the terms of a ceasefire
deal, by the way, that's already been signed
and agreed to, is a flagrant war crime
of the highest order.
You would not know that from US headlines.
Barak Ravid,
another propagandist
for Israel,
First Eight Hours before this says, Israel halts
aid shipments after a ceasefire expires?
Expires?
What? I mean, we see, this is, like,
fun. Now we can't even get you can't
even be consistently dishonest about it. You have
to basically throw out different variations, like strangled
with your bare hands or beat them with
your bare hands or, you know, whatever. Bare
hands. Just remember the bare hands. That's that's
whatever narrative you take. Make it about them
murdering them with the most how even though
how exactly do you prove that with forensics
to fifteen months?
Nobody on this is buying any of this,
guys.
Well, he follows it up saying the Trump
administration backed
the Israeli decision. Oh, I'm so shocked. No
evidence. No investigation. Just whatever they said, good.
Go with it. White House National Security Council
spokesman Brian Hughes told me, quote, Israel has
negotiated
in good faith since the beginning of this
administration to ensure the release of hostages held
captive by Hamas terrorists.
No have they. You know, ignoring the 75
different violations of the sis ceasefire, honest engagement.
We will support their decision on the next
steps given Hamas has
indicated it no longer interested in the negotiated
ceasefire.
No. In fact, quite the opposite. They publicly
stated they want this to continue and that
they will not deviate from the agreement.
And the dishonest Trump administration, or rather the
dishonest US government, all sides of it, continue
to gaslight for a genocide committing monster of
a government.
Simple.
Well, if you wanna take it a step
back actually and recognize that this is not
new and this is in one of many
examples, this one just happens to be part
of the government, but you'll see it all
over, especially on this platform. Palestine Palestine online
highlights that, after Israel announced the halt of
Aden in Gaza,
Deputy Speaker of the Knesset,
his name is Nassim Vaturi,
publicly called
for bombing food supplies
in Gaza.
Have the gates of hell opened? Bomb the
food supplies that have already been brought into
Gaza. That's what he said.
Here's
Sarah Wilkinson giving you the translated highlighted kick
now it's in it's in the Hebrew version
of Twitter, so it's more difficult to find.
It says on his Twitter account, Israeli deputy
speaker of the Knesset calls to bomb the
food warehouses in Gaza
to destroy life saving aid. K. It doesn't
matter the rash. That is a crime. No
matter what in there, they don't care.
They really don't care.
And your government's either okay with that because
they agree or they are compromised.
Now Ryan Grim also points out, and this
is the context of what else they're keeping
out of Gaza and have been the entire
time,
every time you hear an Israeli official he
says, say they support, quote, transfer of Palestinians
out of Gaza for, quote, humanitarian reasons,
remember that they are currently blocking doctors
from going in and block and and blocking
sick and dying patients from leaving.
Drop site news. From an Human Rights Watch
article from this February
2025,
Israeli authorities block healthcare workers from entering Gaza.
That's not new. It's been there like everything
else from the beginning. In fact, well before
October 7.
Israeli authorities are blocking vital medication
medical professionals and medications
from entering Gaza and simultaneously preventing wounded Palestinians
from leaving.
Remember that whole point of Trump talking about
and the Egyptian president talking about getting was
it Egypt? I forget who. Oh, Jordanian
president talking about getting out those sick cancer
patients? How'd that go?
Anybody follow-up on that, or we just let
the narrative fly with no investigation?
It says deliberately denying life saving care for
thousands of Palestinians. Human Rights Watch, drop site
news.
Mohammed Shehana.
And
this is such a great example of the
kick the can down the road propaganda. Another
kind of way they do this, not just
reactive and clumsy, but it's kind of both,
actually.
So here you've got Smotrich, one of the
most disgusting people in this conversation, who is
using the fact that they displace these people
from other parts of Palestine
to make the argument they're not even from
Gaza.
You can't even believe the amount. I mean,
I don't even know how to frame this
properly. Is it this guy? Is he so
deluded by his own prop Zionist propaganda?
Or is he just this stupid?
You decide for yourself. He said, it's just
incredible to see Israeli leaders
shamelessly admitting 75%
of Gazans,
so many of them are actually from these
area local areas or specifically that they're currently
being forced to stay in.
But incredible to see that's admitting 75%
of the people in that forced location
whom Israel kicked out
of Hafa,
Tiberias.
Achria, I'm probably mispronouncing some of these, Jaffa,
and stole their homes.
One of the most documented part of this
whole conversation despite their flight you know, flailing
dis dis what's the word I'm looking for?
Dismissal or just acting like it's not the
reality, even though there's more evidence around this
than anything. Some of these people still have
literal keys to these houses.
But here's recess.
I heard the Spanish foreign minister,
because they've been calling us out for a
while, and understand the ignorance. I heard him
say that you can't do this.
For 75%,
he says, of Gaza's population,
it's not their homeland.
He said, do you know what you know
what their homeland is? He's trying to tap
into what they're doing to Israelis. You know,
like Benjamin Netanyahu being from Poland, you know,
not not an Israeli or, you know, not
from the local area that they've made into
Israel even though it's occupied Palestine. He goes,
you know what their homeland is?
Hafa, Tiberias, Acra, Acra, Acra, Acra, I think
it's Acra.
Let me know the chat or Jaffa.
Places, by the way, you can literally prove.
Oh, and he he says right here.
He goes.
This is a refugee population. Yeah. You're right.
That has been there since 1948.
Well, remind me, Smotrich, what else happened in
1948?
The Nakba. That's right.
So what's in what's incredible about this?
Two they're pretending why why haven't you heard
Cotton and the rest of these Zionist morons
in congress go, why do we have to
keep giving them aid? He just told you
because they're refugees from 1948.
I mean, how many way this is what
I always talk about. They're they they're using
the average ignorance of people even though what
they're pointing to is what they did. It's
like Netanyahu and Trump talking about why Gaza's
destroyed and how that we who's gonna wanna
live there? You did all of that. Like,
it's it's we are just in an unprecedented
position, guys, where
I'd really like to believe that most people
can see all of this. That's what I
think.
But it seems to keep happening.
Now CNN and all the rest of them,
Fox and everybody else,
Israel stops humanitarian aid into Gaza after Hamas
rejects
extending ceasefire's first phase. At the very least,
they frame the first phase part of it
correctly.
But what you're looking for is Israel violates
the ceasefire.
That's just crazy.
And Mohammed says, disgusting propaganda. Hamas never rejected
extending the ceasefire's first phase. Well, I see,
this it's this it's a kind of a
philosophical, I guess, just a deep the point
is they didn't the ceasefire was an agreement.
Israel's trying to change that in the middle
of the agreement. So you I get you
could make it you could argue it's correct
to say they didn't reject anything because there's
not even point of rejection. Israel is trying
to deviate from the agreement. That's the point.
But if you wanna if you wanna argue
that Israel tried to deviate it, and Hamas
is rejecting that effort,
that's what I'm saying. But I get his
point. There's nothing to reject if there's not
the pretending like there's not some new ceasefire.
Israel violated it by pretending like they could
get to add new details in the midst
of a thing before they even met their
side of it.
So I get his point in pushing back
on that, but the reality is they did
they did say what you're doing is not
even applicable to the conversation.
Now,
let let me see this.
Oh, well, here's a part that I'm not
I'm I'm I'm I'm gonna go and take
his word for this since this is something
he's really I mean, the point is,
I don't know if this is act exactly
accurate. Here's what he says. The agreement states
phase one should be
automatically extended
indefinitely
as long as phase two negotiations are ongoing.
I don't remember that, but it makes sense
to me. Because my point at the time
was I this is where you knew this
would blow up. So let's follow-up on that.
Make a note of that out there. Let's
make sure that's correct. But I would argue
it most likely is. Question everything. Don't assume.
But the idea being that either way you
look at it, that what they're doing is
a deviation from what would it be expected.
They're just going, we're new things or you
didn't do your thing even though all of
that's not true.
And especially if it should be automatically extended,
well, now that becomes even more clear that
what they did was a violation in and
of itself.
Zachary Foster, PhD in Palestinian history from Princeton
says, CNN declares itself guilty of incitement to
genocide by repeating lies of the Israeli military
rather than doing journalism.
Left and right, it's all the same. Now
the funding is the worst part of all
this.
I was to start I was I was
started with this if this was some we've
already seen 7.4. We've already seen three.
Trump has been sending
billions.
1 billion right out of the gate when
they pretended they slashed a billion from spending.
Interesting
overlap. Then
7,400,000,000.0
right about the time when they claimed they
slashed a bunch more billions. Interesting overlap, Portia.
It's almost like they're cutting DEI funding to
dump money in Israel's hands. And apparently, now
that they can just have act direct access
to this the purse strings, we don't get
to hear about it anymore. Kind of beep
I think that's probably what's happening. Point is
they just sent another what is it? $4,000,000,000.
12 Ball says they've been in office for
less than two months and have already approved
I think it's, like, 13,000,000,000
in arms for Israel.
This new ex expedited $4,000,000,000
is separate from the 3,000,000,000 they already sent.
And guess what they're doing? They're using the
state of emergency. So guess what, guys? The
emergency we declared for the border
is now being used to send Israel money
or some variation therein. They did not do
what they said they were gonna do, and
they've used these extra powers to go after
other things as we already showed you.
Surprise. Surprise. Now if you're honest out there,
you'd be calling this out.
This was the one from February 9. Trump
sending $7,400,000,000
in just weapons to Israel.
And as you pointed out, there was the
3,000,000,000 before that. There was the 1,000,000,000 before
that. That's where we are.
Now drop site news. This is reported today.
Oh, no. I'm sorry. This is the twenty
eighth.
Oh, I'm sorry. This is so I this
is about the previous funding to include, and
then this one we're gonna get into the
current today. This is from
the military or the military assistance to Israel
under the guise of an emergency.
Really? An emergency?
But so this is from the February 28.
Drop side news. The Trump administration has bypassed
congress
to approve an emergency 2,040,000,000.00.
So this is the same thing keeps happening.
If you can just go emergency and just
ignore, which, by the way,
Biden in and or even before that in
Trump's last administration, they don't even feign to
care about congress.
Right? They just make things happen. Declare bomb
bomb certain areas.
So why there's more overlap to what this
is? Who knows? The point is, there's been
a long time since they've cared about congress
approval for just about anything, probably because of
Israel's influence in my opinion, but you can
decide for yourself.
This is pointing out this has already happened.
Bypass congress to approve 2,400,000,000.0 arms sales to
Israel, fast tracking the transfer of tens of
thousands of bombs while they're breaking both US
and international law.
Whether by funding groups like the Azov movement
or any other things. They're they're violating human
rights laws, violating international law, committing a genocide.
Every one of these violate US law on
the books for why whether they're allowed to
fund these people. But don't forget, Trump removed
those human rights restrictions.
So we're good then. Right?
Anyway, you wanna explain to me why that's
a good thing, fighting the deep state by
removing restrictions that go to funding deep state
characters or people murdering children?
But it says the deal includes I mean,
it goes on a list of what they're
giving them. More m k eight four, m
two, all these different bombs you've seen used,
the one that killed the bus full of
children in Yemen. You know, those are your
merchants of death, guys. That's what you're funding.
So that was the last one. Three point
one zero one billion dollars
without congressional approval because emergency. Right? Well, it
is an emergency because without this, Israel couldn't
keep genocide in children. So they had to
step up. Right?
Glenn Greenwald, this is today,
reports well, actually, Michael Tracy reports what emergency
is happening at the moment that requires ex
expediting
$4,000,000,000
in military subsidies to Israel.
Isn't there supposed to be a solid enduring
ceasefire underway?
I mean, guys, think about how crazy that
is. In the midst of this, rolling back
this very ceasefire they claim was up in
the air, they're funding them. And you think
this happened today? This is something they've been
doing. So the point is they knew
they were going to violate this.
They don't think we're I mean, I I
know we are smart enough to see that.
They don't think you're smart enough to see
that. Prove them wrong.
That's how they think so little of
you. They think you're just gonna expect because
they posted it today that this I mean,
realize
how many points of exam how many evidence
points we've already shown you that indicate we
already knew this would happen.
Military aid to Israel, March First.
Right? So this is posted on a second.
March first is when it went out.
His point is at this moment, there was
no real deviation from the ceasefire,
and they were already emergency funding weapons
for the beginning of the next phase. Not
phase two, next phase of the genocide.
It says I have signed a declaration to
use emergency authorities.
See how we've that's that cat's out of
the bag. To expedite the delivery of 4,000,000,000.
The decision to reverse
the Biden administration's partial arms embargo so they
and, again, the simple game is Biden, Democrat
did it bad. Therefore, we doing it good.
I don't know how we can be this
stupid.
You're what whoever Biden or anybody else. The
point was a pretend embargo because they actually
kept funding them. But the game was not
the game. The reality was they were violating
the law. So they had to go, well,
they did do this. The those settlers were
killing people and they'd burn those people alive
and it was raped over here. So
pretend embargo. They don't even care. They pulled
up. They said remove that. We don't we're
funding them no matter what. That's what Trump
is at least good for is showing you,
pulling that mask off.
Now it says, which wrongly withheld a number
of weapons and ammunition for Israel.
Wrongly.
Since taking office, Trump administration's approved 12,000,000,000. Now
it's good. If you add it up, it's
a little bit more than that.
And he's proudly telling you that. Weren't we
supposed to be saving money? Was this supposed
to be the peace president? You tell me
which promise has been violated. I'll show you
all of them.
The Trump administration will continue to use all
available tools to fulfill
America's long standing commitment to Israel's security.
Does Israel do anything for our security other
than undermine
it? Including means to counter security threats.
That's just it's just so obvious, guys. And
as Glenn Greenwald said, wherever the Israeli government
says it wants something,
it automatically becomes an emergency in Washington to
prioritize that demand above all other goals and
get Israel everything it demands or even more
than what they demand
as soon as possible.
And in case you don't understand it, the
same thing happened with Biden
or Obama or anybody else.
Now if you can't by now see what
that shows you, I don't think you want
to.
All other goals,
Everything. Whatever America First, that oh, Israel. That
first. Prioritize Israel, he says. Pambani comes out
and makes a task force to go after
October 7 right away. America First.
You gotta be able to call this out.
Now as David Eich rightly points out, making
a joke of the Doge efficiency point, APAC
tracker says Trump now approved 10,400,000,000
in weapons for Israel. No. And that's again,
everyone's doing their own math. Plus 7.4 plus
three plus plus four more plus whatever else
is happening that we don't see, by the
way.
But it for Justin's taking office.
Seven point he's adding up the last two.
Seven point four and then three plus this
four plus another billion to begin with. That's
my point. So billion went right away, then
there was 7.4, then there was three, now
there's four more. That's it's play whatever they
think that's what, $1,314,000,000,000.
So So he's saying urgent, urgent, urgent. Calling
Doge, Elon Musk. I have some corruption and
waste to report. Why are you not answering
the phone?
Yeah. Good point. Because this isn't the corruption
and and spending they're worried about.
They're trying to create the illusion that giving
them everything they need is somehow saving you
from everything. As long as he posted on
Twitter and he shares a funny meme that
day, we're all good. We've saved the democracy.
Right?
Now Mario Nuffel, this is how he frames
it. Well, actually, it seems like here's what's
interesting, actually. This is the older one, February
20 eighth. Trump approves 3,000,000,000 in arms sales.
The Trump administration just fast tracked 3,000,000,000 in
weapons to Israel, bypassing congress for the emergency.
Deal includes 3,535,500
bombs.
Oh, there's one he cited in here too.
Twenty fourth, even before that. Trump kills oversight
on US weapons. No questions asked.
Now you'd think he might have some critical
reporting as a journalist of the new media.
Right? For years, the US was required to
report that the bombs were being breaking the
law, if it was violating international law. Israel
was meant to target.
Israel was the main target, but the rule
applied to all US partners. Not anymore. Trump
just wiped the books.
Senator Chris Hollins said the move was shameful.
That's it. I mean, at least he cites
somebody saying it's bad, but see the game
there is to go democrat said bad, so
we should all assume good.
You're kidding me? You're gonna remove oversight on
international law because bombs and weapons and I
mean, for a genocide community country? It's an
it is wild what people are doing.
And it just keeps going back. They they
they just keep cycling through. They're like, there's
it's just it's a game, guys. Look at
that. They keep going back, and they keep
captioning the previous one. It's it's and there
are most of these look.
US freezes most foreign aid for first time
ever. No. They didn't. They the vast majority
of the aid that was going to the
two Ukraine, Israel are the places where it
needed to continued. It was an illusion, and
we already showed you that. Ukraine didn't even
stop. That was also a lie as we
went to right afterward
or the USAID dynamic. They simply reshuffle things
around, but don't don't expect to get that
from the we are the media now.
But that's how we highlighted it. David Icke
says, this is the man who only wants
peace. Right?
You're worshiping an Israel owned, cult owned fraud
of such a monumental proportions,
MAGA, that you have to catch your breath.
The cult is destroying the old cult order
to bring in the new one founded on
total human control by AI. Right, Elon?
And you call it five d chess, and
you cheer, and you eulogize your jailers.
God help the kids.
Rob d b or Rob b d, excuse
me, says, David, I love you and and
to shreds and always will, but I don't
think anyone will ever pass your purity
test. You have a lot to say and
I'll keep listening. Unless you're being kind, but
purity test? Funny enough, I do James Corbett's
gonna be coming out with a doc a
documentary. I I just sent him what I
was doing. I might be too late. I
hope I didn't, you know, miss the mark,
but
it's about black pill, white pill. Then the
the real picture, I'm not gonna go anywhere
I said because, you know, I'm repeating it.
But
this is something we all picked up on.
Purity test, black pill, it was all right
before the selection process.
Most of it framing people that are simply
going, think for yourself. Don't trust any of
them. Don't look for a hero. It's like,
you're black pill. No. That's the white. I
mean, that works again. My my opinion is
that well, I kind of pointed out. Is
it both of them are inaccurate. Right? Both
of them are hyperbolic side. Really,
it's about
the term itself, whatever you wanna make up
a term for it. It's about finding the
the path for yourself.
You are the you are your own savior.
The white pill represents a part where you're
like, well, it's all good. You know, it'll
work out. They're they'll figure it again time.
Lock up being, no, we're all doomed. No
matter what. Like, I think both of them
are the extremes. The reality
is none of them are there to fight
for you. Fight for yourself.
That's my opinion. But purity test. I mean,
what are you talking about? A purity test?
You're talking it it what that is is
the of of cult of personality, defending a
personality. Because all he's highlighting is his opinion
about the fact that I mean, what you
can see happening is clear, but that they're
involved with basically tricking you and rolling that
out. I don't even understand how purity test
applies right there. But it's just a it's
a like we said, black pill purity test,
that's the new you're a conspiracy theorist.
It's dismissed this without further thought, and that
seems to be applied to a lot of
places.
Now this is the new one.
US fact tracks 4,000,000,000.
Don't expect to see any real criticism
because nobody is going these people are blindly
walking along.
Israel threatens to resume war as ceasefire deal
breaks down. They are just parroting.
I mean, it's amazing. May new media? You're
just parroting what the government says. You are
parroting what Israel says without any real deviation.
And this is just crazy. And this person
has
2,000,000 followers.
Michael Tracy makes a good point. This is
back from February 25. I mean, he goes
in in the DOGE spirit of shrinking the
size of government, House GOP
just passed a budget resolution calling for a
hundred billion dollars in additional military spending.
I mean, I just pointed something they were
saying about I mean, Rubio in a clip
was saying the the war focused agenda.
Like, how was that war peace time? Like,
where what are we talking about? You're you
are shifting us into a war focus
because that's what's coming, always has been
from either administration. But a hundred billion dollars
in additional spending for military is not what
we're being told.
Neither neither peace president nor slashing spending for
the obvious bloated Pentagon budget. But it says
Trump and GOP, this is from the twenty
sixth, are pushing a budget that then that
they freely acknowledge
will explode the deficit by hundreds of billions
of dollars this year.
Doge, therefore, cannot possibly be about restoring fiscal
responsibility or whatever. It's a fig leaf for
imposing other ideological priorities. Now that's his opinion,
but I agree with that last part in
particular. Like, that's just like me saying it's
a new flavor. It's the same problem in
a different flavor, but it's different so we
can act like we stopped the DEI funding
and so on. Well, good. I'm glad that
stopped. But if you're simply deviating into a
new version of the same kind of manipulation,
to me, it's the same problem. And to
be honest and nonpartisan, it's the same manipulation.
But the other part about it is I
mean, you could argue that they might find
a way to slash more and somehow come
out on top, and I I find that
really impossible to believe. But to me, it's
it's not just about slashing things. It's about
what and how you get there.
Right? And then in this case,
if you're passing a bill that's only gonna
increase the problem and just slash different programs,
I mean, we're not really we're not really
succeeding at the end of the day.
Now, lastly, like I said, I was gonna
include earlier. I just wanna include this for
you. Sarah Wilkins have put this out yesterday.
It's an it's an it's only a minute
and twenty one seconds. But the point is,
guys, if you don't understand by now
this is my article about this, our show,
June 18,
the undeniable reality of October 7, foreknowledge,
and the Hannibal Directive. Now there's been a
lot that's developed since this show, but you
it was provable at the time. Not that
we knew exactly what happened, but that there
was
people stood down.
There was so much foreknowledge that is impossible
to wrap your mind around and and that
they just didn't know it was coming.
So this is another clip that came out,
other,
documentary. It says a new report details further
evidence that the Hannibal directive was activated.
Israelis were targeted
by and killed by Israel, not Palestinians.
Now the clear reality is you could prove
that there was some,
peep there were people killed by whether Palestinians,
Islam with Jihad, or other Palestinians that were
there. That's that's undeniable. As, like, for example,
Mozhneen Brigade took the the Bebas children. These
things are crimes that that matters, to be
honest about that.
The point though is that you can now
prove that a I think the clear majority
of the death was because of what they
did.
The evidence abounds, guys. It's unreal how much
you can prove. The cars they bombed, they
I mean, everything.
The the evidence showing that they were using
people as human shields at the festival, that
they moved the festival so it would be
in the path. I mean, over and over
and over.
But watch it for yourself. And all that
is to end with is to recognize if
they're willing to sacrifice their own people for
the agenda, how do we not see
what they're doing in honesty right now? That
they're willing to sacrifice
everything,
including the country itself.
These people have lost the plot,
and these people are the ones that seem
to be driving this country into the ground
for their benefit. As always, all I want
is for you to at least ask the
question. Does the evidence back up this this
this theory this thesis, the re the the
consideration of what we might see happening?
And if not, then good. At least you
considered it. Keep it in mind. Maybe then
maybe come to your conclusion about what you
think the evidence does add up to. What
I think is pretty clear is it does
not add up to what we're being told
is happening.
And I'll end with this clip
that I played before.
In fact, you know, I might play both
of them in a row because they're both
short, I think. But I put this out
11/29/2023.
Netanyahu has been maliciously influencing the US government
for decades,
all while pushing for Americans to die for
Zionist agenda.
None of these wars have been in the
interest of Americans.
So we'll leave it there. Thank you for
tuning in today, guys.
I can't tell you for sure whether I'll
be doing a show tomorrow, but I'm really
focused on trying to get back to a
routine and, you know, just trying to keep
more I mean, from as as always, it's
really just about my mind going I cannot
my mind goes crazy when I can't get
to you know, I I miss you guys.
I miss being here and talking with everybody.
And and even though we're not conversing, but
just, you know, the community of all of
it. And and and
it's important to recognize that there's a lot
of people out there that see what you're
talking about. Just like with COVID, you're not
alone. I honestly think you're the majority.
So think about that. Consider what we discussed
today. Share the information. Clip out the show.
And we need your support as always.
I mean, it's it's never ending what we're
going through, the attacks, suppression.
But, really,
that's all side notes. If you believe in
what we're doing and you believe in the
work we're trying to create, I mean, if
if you see value in what we're putting
forward for free,
right, then then demonstrate that to me. Show
us what you think this is worth because
it will it won't continue
if we don't have enough support. I mean,
not in the way we want to see
this going. As I said in the past,
even though it's kind of counter counterintuitive to
the point, I'm gonna do this whether it's
on my phone or my room. You know,
this is important to me to get the
information out. But because of you guys, we've
we are graced by your support to be
able to have somewhere like this that we
can broadcast.
But every day, we're getting kicked back. Two
steps back, one step forward, or two steps
forward, one step back. It's always a process.
So with your support, hopefully, we can keep
pushing because I know I see that we
are making a difference.
What you're doing right now, you are making
a difference.
The comments you're making, I mean, we are
changing people's opinions, guys. You can see it.
And nothing terrifies them more.
Objective, nonpartisan
questioning.
So thank you for being here, guys. I
love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
If you take away the Soviet Union and
its chief proxy, the PLO,
international terrorism would collapse.
If you take out Saddam,
Saddam's regime, I guarantee
that it will have enormous
positive reverberations on the region. Obviously, we'd like
to see a regime change, at least I
would, in Iran, just as I would like
to see in Iraq. The question now is
a practical question.
What is the best place to proceed? It's
not a question of whether Iraq's regime should
be taken out, but when should it be
taken out? It's not a question of whether
you'd like to see a regime change in
Iran, but how do Are there any other
nations that you would recommend that The United
States launch preemptive attacks upon at this point?
The answer is categorically yes.
The, the two nations that are vying competing
with each other, who'll be the first to
achieve nuclear weapons,
is Iraq and Iran. But, a third nation,
by the way, is Libya as well. Libya
is,
trying very rapidly to build
an atomic bomb capability. So you have here
now three all stand together to stop Iran's
march of conquest,
subjugation,
and terror.
I know that
no matter on which side of the aisle
you sit, you stand with Israel.
This starts, and it's it's really fascinating to
go back. It starts in
1996
with Netanyahu
who wrote a book called Fighting, Terrorism.
And the thesis of the book is quite
straightforward
and and
very dangerous. He says, you know, there are
there's Hamas. There's Hezbollah. They oppose Israel. It's
not good for us to fight them directly.
That that won't work.
What we need to do is topple
the governments
that that back them. So what we need
is regime change throughout The Middle East. And
he actually gave a long list of seven
countries,
that included
Syria,
Libya,
Iraq,
Iran,
Somalia,
Sudan,
and Lebanon.
And systematically,
The United States has done Netanyahu's bidding for
almost thirty years now going to war
with every one of them except for the
big one, that Netanyahu
so much longs for, which is the war
directly between The United States and Iran.