Well, one of the four principal functions of
the CIA is to gather intelligence and
and ideally forward it to the
the president, the users of information, the policy
makers, as they say. There are other functions,
however, some of them more legitimate than others.
One is to run secret wars, the covert
action that's written and talked about so much,
like what's happening in Nicaragua today from Honduras.
Another thing is to
disseminate propaganda
to influence people's minds.
And this is a major function of the
CIA.
And, unfortunately,
of course, it overlaps
and to the gathering of information.
You you have contact with a journalist.
You will give him true stories. You'll get
information from him. You'll also give him false
stories. Did you buy his confidence with true
stories? You buy his confidence and set him
up. We've seen this happen in, recently with
Jack Anderson, for example, who who has his
intelligence sources, and he has also admitted that
he's been set up by them. You know,
every story just simply being false.
You also
work on their human
vulnerabilities to recruit them in a classic sense
to make them your agent, so that you
can control what they do. So you don't
have to set them up sort of, you
know,
by by putting one over on them. Them.
So you can say, here, plant this one
next Tuesday.
Can you do this with responsible
reporters? Yes. The church committee brought it out
in 1975,
and then Woodward and Bernstein put an article
in Rolling Stone
a couple of years later.
400 journalists cooperating with the CIA,
including some of the biggest names in the
business.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality. Reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours
breaks free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of the day.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Tuesday, 06/10/2025.
Thank you for joining me today.
Definitely
exactly what we expected.
The the reality of where this is going
is so infuriating for people that continue to
fall away from the two party illusion. One
of the main things I'm gonna discuss today,
or rather kind of the overarching point that
goes through all we're gonna discuss today,
is how the two party illusion,
the prem the main point we're always highlighting,
really does stop people from seeing the bigger
picture. And through that, stops you from ever
truly solving the problems causing, you know, the
problem or what we're dealing with today and
the the government manipulation and so on. And
so today, for example, we're gonna discuss the
the riots,
protests, the intermix of both, what's going on
in LA.
If you and and we've which we've recently
I shared, actually. I didn't get the chance
on to show it on the last show.
I saw it right afterward. Catherine Austin fits.
It highlighted some things that are circulating. A
lot of people are pointing out, which is,
by the way, the same thing we said
last time. I forget what the story was.
It's net it's always the case. In every
circumstance like this, you will find people, whether
it's because they saw the opportunity afterward or
because they made it happen from whole cloth,
that you will find political entities who are
funding and involved with
everything like this, whether it's causing the chaos,
just wanting their signs out there, or the
absolute, you know, destruction of this country. But
what's important to consider
is whether or not that's part of the
government agenda and not necessarily the one side
trying to trap the other, which there are
obvious points that you can frame that may
that that that's there are times in which
there are people within these elements that are
going after each other. The reality, though, is
what we can see in LA,
as really, I'm actually really surprised to see
how many large prominent accounts on left and
right are seeing this and calling it out.
But the reality of, like, let's say, Palantir
or the surveillance state or any number of
ongoing developing agendas
that very clearly
are being eclipsed by this story. Now that's
not to say that it has to be
one versus the other. They can both exist
at the same time. But recognize how even
real events are used to hide very important
and uncomfortable stories in the establishment,
in in in the government.
And so when we see things like this,
you obviously ask about the in the the
local sort of immediate
outcomes or agendas involved,
but also stand back and ask yourself whether
this is feeding into a all of government
agenda. If they can divide people at party
lines, if they can create this kind of
chaos, what does it always lead to? From
left or right, calls for reduction of rights
or rather the lack as, you know, acknowledgment
of your inherent rights. They could call for
more more unconstitutional
legislation.
Or in this case, we can see more
militarization.
We can see I mean, everything we're talking
about, the rationalization
of the very Palantir story that even Republicans
were upset about.
I mean, even like we'll point out, right
in the beginning, actually or actually no. I
think that's later, but we're gonna talk about
some points that relate with her from the
very beginning of Loomer saying, bring out Palantir
to go after the immigrants.
I just it's it's transparent how obvious this
is. Now I'll even say it again. Even
if it's exactly what you think and somehow
the left, George Soros funded, going after, I
guess, the right,
when I guess it's even may feel silly
even saying that when you recognize that it's
all the government is clearly involved with the
agenda from left and right across the board.
That's why I it's hard for me not
to call it naive and childish because it
is patently obvious where you can look and
see that both sides of this paradigm are
completely invested in what's going or what's building
or what's happening. But so when you if
you if you make it or if you
wanna make the argument that it's just the
left going after one of the other sides,
you also have to recognize all the different
moving parts within this that really, also the
the different parts you're ignoring to make that
make sense. But realize how that, even if
it's just one side, is achieving the agenda
that is in all of government
goal,
which has to be acknowledged and really isn't,
as usual, by the partisan conversation. So we're
gonna go through all of that and discuss
the the different
overarching points and different agendas that are coming
through this,
you know, a mix of things. You have
people creating violence.
Now I the re I don't know if
whatever the word riot means to you definitely
makes a difference.
If it's one person doing something that's violent,
is that a riot? If it's 10 of
them, is that a riot? That's that's my
point. There's violence. That's clear. If there's a
mass mob of people all running and causing
a breakaway, I'm not really seeing it the
way that that would be normally described. Nonetheless,
it shouldn't be ignored that there are people
creating violence, and that could be people that
are out there doing it because they hate
Trump or because they think it's a left
versus right paradigm thing.
But there's also a whole lot of people
out there who are protesting because whether they're
right or not, by the way, I and
they are right, but whether they are or
not, that ICE is committing crimes or that
your government rather is committing crimes against the
American people, which is how you should really
see it. And, again, whether they're right or
not, they're protesting these things in a way
that they're allowed to or, you know, within
their constitutional rights. And now we're getting the
same thing we see, the same point they
made about the trucker convoy.
You know, because you wore red hats and
one guy waved a Nazi flag, suddenly you're
all Nazis. You're all domestic terrorists. And now
we have to shut this down. And to
the rightful cries of that's unconstitutional.
You can't just broad stroke everybody here and
say that we're all the same thing. You'd
imagine that that logic would cascade into any
other conversation. Sort of like the exact same
thing now happening in reverse. Homan and the
rest saying that the speech is causing violence
and we have to shut that down. We're
sending in the military which is a violation
of the Posse Comitatus Act. And, yes, it
is what's happening. Despite the screams of people
even saying, I swore to the oath of
the constitution. I know better than you. Well,
you can swear an oath to something. It
doesn't mean you understand the reality of it
or that partisanship
won't blind you to what's real.
The bottom line, as always, is that this
is a group. You're not allowed to deploy
the the,
deploy the military
domestically,
but unless it is within the constitution or
within, a congressional act, which is the specifically
cited the Insurrection Act. An executive order simply
saying you can do this does not make
that legal. Now even if they're just standing
around, but reality being that if you're gonna
pretend and the nuance is that if they
are not that they have to be enforcing
the law to somehow make that the case.
If we're gonna pretend that you've got thousands
of National Guard, which still applies to that
as well, and hundreds, if not over a
thousand marines that are just milling around and
directing people on what to do. I mean,
this is the game we keep playing with
even, like, the immigration point. We'll talk about
Garcia today. This idea that somehow we all
don't know what's going on. Like, we all
don't know that you knew damn well you
could do that. You're pretending that you don't
know how and I can't smuggle Garcia back
into the country. Like, we all knew what
was happening there. They're playing a game, a
game of chicken with the Supreme Court, which
they clearly lost and still pretending like they
won. We'll talk about it again today with
some additional points. This but it's the same
thing here. And I think we all can
recognize this and be honest with ourselves about
the game. Maybe you maybe you're on his
side, but, nonetheless, recognize and acknowledge that they're
being quite childish about the way that they're
playing this game. You know, the way I
mean, I can go off on a lot
of examples. But
that
entire kind of story, the LA
riot protests, how it's being dealt with, is
absolutely
being used in many different ways to achieve
pretty much the main agendas we've been discussing.
And so it behooves all of us to
call this out to understand how it's being
used. And weirdly enough, the people on the
right would be the ones that would call
this out with far less evidence in any
context if it related to the Democrats.
Same kind of point we made back and
but I I'll give I'll call it credit
to the conservative side being more willing to
consider things that the left might be more
willing to ignore when we should be considering
everything. That's my point, is that you'd expect
them to be a little bit more, you
know, aware of this one guy waving a
Mexican flag and how weird it is now.
It's surrounded by a bunch of media. No
one else seems to be around. Very seems
it seems odd, doesn't it? Now, ask yourself,
if it's a funded left thing and they're
doing this because they're trying to orchestrate
something,
how does that make sense to you? How
does the left orchestrating that
make sense
to benefit the agenda that you you claim
the left has, which is fighting for these
immigrants to be there, to use them, to
vote? Right? Like, take a and think about
the absurdity of the partisan back and right
now. How does that make sense to you?
My point is it is being orchestrated like
we have we can see in almost every
situation, but it's being done from a government
perspective. And the wedge issues are being thrown
at you by the usual culprits.
So we'll talk about that. We're gonna start
with a point about a channel called the
MEMRI,
and I'll give you the acronym acronym in
a or the what it stands for.
And, apparently, Al Qaeda is threatening to assassinate
Musk and Trump and all of this, which
wouldn't surprise me. But even if it's the
case, let's recognize Al Qaeda as a proxy
element of Israel and United States. So, basically,
Loomer and Jones are reporting that Israel and
United States are threatening to assassinate
Trump and Musk, which even to you, that
might make sense. But realize how silly it
is to point to this channel that is
a propaganda entity and keep telling us that
what they're saying is the reality about Palestine,
about immigrants, and how Israel is propagandizing us
through these channels to create the very hatred
that they're using to drive all this into
reality, to get you to hate your neighbor,
to attack people who have been here legally
for a long time fighting for citizenship or
already have it and are being thrown out
of the country because they said something bad
about a country that we're not allowed to
talk about,
and how that overlaps with the immigration conversation
in general and some important developments around the
Alien Enemies Act and how a court has
now argued that it was
unlawful,
which it is and or was and it
is. And that's what's so infuriating about the
defense of people acting like you just don't
understand or you're you're too much of a
coward to call these things out. When it
is basic, as Bruce Feine has discussed, you
can walk through the legislation or the, you
know, the law and make it we'll go
through it today.
There's not an invade you you can't prove
it by the by the requirements of this
law that there is a state actor,
of all, behind what's happening. Secondly, that there
that is a mobilized armed force who is
invading this country as one as, you know,
one entity. Even their argument is that it's
the scattering of immigrants because Biden did it
all. But then somehow it's Venezuela, and that's
why it's allowed within this act. It's completely
clumsy. And so we're gonna go over the
court ruling on that and why it's important
and end with some important stuff around
a few different things. But let's go into
this channel that I really think you should
see. Now I've talked about this already. I
actually the reason I actually didn't already do
a focus on this is because, Robert was
gonna do an article, and I think I
forget what happened. Something else came up, or
we we pulled back on writing in general.
And this channel is a I mean, you
you will recognize it right away. Every one
of these major videos you get of, like,
a leader of the Hamas movement saying this
or of Al Qaeda saying that about what
they wanna do or and it all is
exact like, you might as well be hearing
what Israel wants you to think about what
they're doing and saying. And that's not to
say that they're not videos of people doing
things.
The point is it's like taking video out
of context of anybody out there, a preacher
somewhere in the world that says this is
what we all wanna do and then claiming
that represents every peep everybody in the Republican
Party. It's it's that's the abstract nature of
all this. And on top of that, don't
forget, again, that the people we're discussing, Al
Qaeda, ISIS, all of these discussions, even Hamas,
for crying out loud, was funded by Israel
up until October 7. We've talked about this.
So you have to understand the influence,
which is that they are feeding these narratives
through people like the Lumers of the world,
to get you thinking that this is your
biggest enemy. When in reality, it's the one
who is stoking all these things to get
you to attack yourselves under the guise of
fighting some invading force. Not to say that
there's not illegal immigrants. Not to say that
there's not an overlapping issue to be discussed
within that. But we are being weaponized against
ourselves by somebody who is being framed as
our chief ally. So this clip here
is shared by Loomer.
It's not worth it's really not saying it's
a minute long. It's it's a guy sitting
here saying, as the
practical and immediate measure,
I call upon every Muslim in in the
infidel,
criminal, and arrogant United States,
and it and it does not matter if
they are Arab American or of the descent.
I mean, and, basically, kill everybody. And it
mentions Trump. It mentions Elon. The the absurdity
of pretending like, think about how that even
makes sense. So now you're telling us that
this religious effort that is only about going
after the the other is now saying kill
everybody, including people that
it's about irrational
fear. It's about creating the kind of idea,
and I'm gonna get into what this channel
is, the m e m r I channel.
Well, again, it's, actually, I forgot to
I'll give you the acronym really quickly.
I forgot to write that down.
The Middle
East Media Research Institute.
Typical. Right?
Now what they won't report, Lumer
or Alex Jones or all the rest of
them going, oh, you know, clutching their pearls
and screaming about how we're about to get
attacked by somebody, you because according to him,
we're already in World War three with Russia,
but we forgot about that, apparently. Don't don't
mind all the nuclear bombs flying everywhere because
that's happening over there, but we're just not
talking about it. Or it's not, and it
was a bombastic story that was used to
distract from Palantir. You know, you can decide
all that because clearly we're in World War
three. The point
is that this platform
is created by an Israeli intelligence officer and
was largely completely run by Israeli intelligence officers
for a pro Zionist outcome until a lot
of that was scrubbed off the Internet. You
could ask Rok, by the way. That I
guess that part slipped through his cap his
reporting. He forgot to include it. Right? But
as Laura says, it's time for Republicans to
crack down on Islam in America. Don't forget
that she said the same thing about the
recent protests,
saying, see, I told you it was gonna
be a jihad summer, except we're talking about
now
Mexican invasion, I guess, even though thirty seconds
before that, it was all
Americans protesting about ICE. Right? But now it's
now it's Mexicans invading the country, and we're
talking about the same thing, though. See, moments
later, the partisan narrative shifts to whatever, you
know, sounds very Israeli propaganda like.
The the report says, Al Qaeda leader called
for American Muslims to wage jihad and also
for the assassination of American officials, including Trump
and Vance and Elon.
Right.
So
obviously possible,
realizing again that these are people that they
funded for a long time, and ask yourself
why that makes sense in any context and
what that will do, what that will do
for their agenda. It'll allow they can point
to this just like she is and call
for more action. What does that look like?
It looks like everything we're seeing today. You
know, whatever the the the point is, whatever
the issue is, it seems to always take
the same solution form. Probably Palantir, probably
less rights, probably a censor you know, all
the things we're talking about through Israel, through
censorship, antisemitism, all the same stuff we're talking
about.
Or, of course, you know, biometrics and surveillance.
Then again, Jones, Al Qaeda leader calls on
Islamist to catch, to launch terror attack. Now
just don't the reason we're including this today,
one, is because of the Israel overlap with
the ongoing immigration crisis in this country, but
recognizing
that this is exactly what they're trying to
use to form to foment this the kind
of pushback against anybody with a different skin
color in this country. And I'm not saying
that racism is the point. That's that is
the the ploy, you understand. This is not
a left versus right, woke versus that's not
what we're talking about here. This is about
the idea of creating the threat,
the other, to rationalize what comes next. That's
that's that's Iraq. That's Syria. That's everything we're
talking about here.
Now just in case and we're gonna go
through this. You could read this. It's not
very hard to find. But even just in
case it matters oh, actually, I did write
that to him. Even Grok, which is the
point, and this is something you should research
everything should be researched before you start looking
to the
AI plot the AI information. But it says
that platform was founded by Israeli intelligence, Alex.
Even Grok will tell you that. Did your
sources not give you that important tidbit, or
do you just not
care? Now here is what even Grok will
say. The Middle East Media Research Institute,
which operates the m e m r I
t v, which is what they were just
showing, that's that red logo, was cofounded in
1997 by Yigal Carmen, a former Israeli, you
know, former Israeli military intelligence officer and counterterrorism
adviser to Israeli prime ministers.
Now there's a lot more you can read
on that. The main point of
this is and this is even this is
from The Guardian. It's twenty two years ago.
Clearly a different conversation today from all corporate
media. Here's what their report said back in
02/2002.
The organization that makes these translations and sends
them out, that's what they argue their main
point. We just translate what Muslims are saying
in the world. And it says, is the
Middle East Media Research Institute,
m e m r I, based in Washington,
but with recently opened offices in London, Berlin,
Jerusalem.
It says the the
what is it? Just memory, m e m
e m r I? That's actually interesting. Memories'
purpose. M e m r i's purpose, according
to its website, is to bridge the language
gap between West, where few speak Arabic, and
The Middle East by, quote, providing timely translations
of Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew media. Of course,
to most people that are of the mind
to watch these channels, see them all as
one thing.
Despite these high minded statements, several things make
me uneasy
whenever I'm r asked to look at a
story circulated by MEMRI.
of all, it is rather mysterious organization. Its
website does not give the names of any
people to contact, not even its office address,
which is ridiculous for a group that's claiming
to want to absorb information or re you
know, a a media platform. If it's a
group that would be taking in people people
you know, things that are being sent to
report on, then they would have a way
to reach out. It says the thing that
makes me uneasy is that the stories selected
by MEMRI
for translation
follow a familiar pattern.
Either they reflect badly on the character of
Arabs or in they in some way further
the political agenda of Israel. I am not
alone in this unease.
Ebrahim
Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations
told the Washington Times, MEMRI's intent is to
find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim
world and disseminate them as widely as possible.
Now even, of course, that alone will be
disregarded as, well, that's just because they're all
terrorists. Typical from people that would think that.
Evidence from MEMRI's website also cast out on
its nonpartisan status.
Besides supporting liberal democracy, civil society, and free
markets, or at least stating that, the institute
also emphasizes, quote, the continuing revelence of relevance
of Zionism to the Jewish people and to
the state of Israel.
That is what the website used to say,
but the words about Zionism have now been
deleted. That's back in 02/2002, mind you. The
original page, however, can still be found in
the archives.
The reason for MEMRI's Arab secrecy becomes clearer
when we look at the people behind it.
The cofounder and president of MEMRI and the
registered owner of the website is an Israeli
called Yigal Carmen.
Or or it says mister, or rather, colonel
Carmen spent twenty two years in Israeli military
intelligence and later served as a counterterrorism
adviser to two different Israeli prime ministers.
Retrieving
another now deleted page from the archives of
the of the website also throws up a
list of its staff. Now ask yourself why
they would delete that. Of the six people
named as the staff before they deleted the
page, three, including colonel Carmen, were described as
having worked for Israeli intelligence.
Now you know this story. This is the
same point of the prince and the spy
that Whitney wrote for TLAB, the conversation of
how Israel publicly, if you actually look to
what they discussed,
use intelligence to start companies that work for
Israeli intelligence
using former intelligence when they still work for
they're not former if they're still working through
that company as intelligence. And I'll I'll grab
that story if you wanna read it. It's
important. The link in the article is is,
there we go, is about Israeli,
IDF members
openly telling you that. This story, The Prince
and the Spy, is about Erik Prince being
used as sort of the foot in the
door American to allow The United States to
ignore the fact that it's an Israeli intelligence
company working through him and in regard to
many other things. Not and we're not that's
not even in regard to academy. This is
about Comframe is one of the points to
discuss, but it was about a few different
things. Here is the actual
quote.
It says the stunning revelation that many Israeli
companies, including Black Cube, have been founded as
fronts for intelligence operations since 02/2012.
It states that since 02/2012, cyber related and
intelligence projects that were physic previously carried out
in house in the Israeli military and Israeli
and Israel's main intelligence arms are transferred to
companies that in some cases were built for
that exact purpose. It goes on to say,
in some cases, managers of development projects in
the Israeli military and intelligence arms were encouraged
to form their own companies, which then took
over the military and or intelligence project.
That the article is right here. This I
mean, it's I think it was, I'll include
that too.
Yeah.
The c CTech.
I just think these things are profoundly important,
especially as we're talking about the infiltration and
how this is working.
But continuing.
So
the who founded it, Israeli intelligence. The team
behind it, Israeli intelligence.
And it says,
colonel Carmen's, Carmen's cofounder
at the website
is Merav,
Wurz Wormser,
who is also director of the Center for
Middle East Policy at the Indianapolis based Hudson
Institute, which bills itself as America's premier source
of applied research on enduring policy changes.
The ubiquitous Richard Perle, which you guys will
know,
chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, recently
joined Hudson's board of trustees. So you see
this incestuous background relationship that ends up tying
through the US government, and it says, miss,
miss Werners
miss Wormser is the author of an academic
paper entitled, can Israel survive post Zionism?
We're finding out today, in which she argues
that left wing Israeli intellectuals pose, get this,
quote, more than a passing threat to the
state of Israel, undermining its soul and reducing
its will for self defense.
See, this is my point today. They don't
they're very quiet about this conversation now, but
they were flirting openly with the idea that
Israeli Jews who didn't believe in Zionism were
a threat to Israel, which is exactly the
point we're making today is that it's about
Zionism. And a Jewish person doesn't blindly believe
in the apartheid
supremacist Zionist mindset is a threat to their
control because that's what they use to control
the Jewish religion and people around the world.
It's insane that it's so publicly written. The
article is just simply highlighting very clearly for
you that this is a platform that's used
to disseminate Israeli propaganda,
founded by Israeli propagandists in intelligence and run
by Israeli intelligence.
It is
transparent.
Oh, and this is, from sourcewatch.org,
Middle East. This is, source watch is looks
like kind of a Wikipedia, like, setup, but
it says, MEMRI
is an Israeli propaganda organization that selectively translates
materials from Arab, Muslim, Iranian press, reportedly demonstrating
hostility against Israel and Jews. And it's it's
just straight up propaganda.
Oh, and you might not be surprised to
find out that, guess what, they were also
showing you. You know, all the videos that
are coming out like this
almost always come through this platform. And this
is the this is Mohammed,
Solomon. Right? The one that was throwing the
cocktail you know, the,
Molotov cocktails
right on right on the kinda the tails
of the two people that were shot in
regard to the embassy. There's I mean, every
one of these stories, guys, and it's not
because people are trying to make the case,
have obvious concerns that overlap with Israeli
propaganda,
intelligence, lies.
And I just think it's always important with
all that we have to know how often
it is that these things are proper manufactured
by Israel. And I'm not saying that we
can prove that in every case. But it's
undeniable
that that's happened many times. The ADL has
been called out for faking Nazi marches in
the past. One in Skokie, Illinois in Chicago,
we talked about this many times.
On the record, called out by The Guardian
in the past. So think about this when
you get two party illusionists out there, rather,
you know, people stuck in it, who are
using these channels to propagate the idea that
these people want to kill you and, you
know, steal your freedoms. They hate you because
of your freedoms. Like, we're not there's nothing
new in all of this, guys.
And, of course, what we get from
all of them,
ban all the world immigration,
legal or illegal.
There should be a moratorium
on all illegal immigration. Yeah. Charlie Kirk, Matt
Walsh, Jack Posobiec. I mean, this is just
a few of them, but people are sharing
this around. It's this kind of thing you
get, and it's the same sentiment and nearly
the exact same wording. That's not by accident,
guys. There's somebody who is seeding these things
through them, and maybe they don't even know
that. That's the point. I keep saying this
because I think most of them out there,
whether willful ignorance or not, may not even
be aware that they're being used. But that's
not that I'm saying for sure you can
consider that for yourself. But it's time to
ban bullet no. If as a country that's
the decision, then I mean, I there's no
requirement in that regard. And I I I'm
even the one that would argue that until
we can, you know, get a handle on
what the hell is actually happening, maybe that
is important. But just recognizing the
narrative and how it's seeded through the certain
kind of conversations
and using basically that they're all a threat
to your family, the same kind of stuff,
the same idea, even though the vast majority
using statistics, using I mean, everything we have
shows you that's just simply not true. It's
not. But see, facts don't matter when it's
an emotional partisan argument.
Now let's talk about two very important stories
around this, around just this large conversation before
we get into the development of of the
Alien Enemies Act. We'll talk about the what
I think is an obvious orchestrated manipulation taking
place in LA, which there's plenty of events
I don't think are orchestrated for those that
may always think that that's just how we
go. It's not the case. It the facts
matter to me.
We're gonna talk about some overlaps around this
in LA and finish with Garcia,
which is important to this. But this will
probably I mean, it shouldn't say it's gonna
blow your mind. We already floated this was
the most likely, and, like, this is what
we expected. It's almost hard to see that
in a world that this wouldn't happen with
what's going on.
A man has pretended to be an ICE
agent, went into a business,
tied up the woman working there, and stole
a thousand dollars from them. This is what
people have feared.
I mean, is anybody surprised? I mean, this
is being reported for, from a local channel.
The bottom line is that if you recognize
that there's no warrants being presented, they're now
they're now even stressing that that doesn't matter.
Go out there and go to Home Depots
and seven Elevens and start grabbing people. That's
Miller saying that. But yet simultaneously telling you
we're going after the worst of the worst
because that's just what the that's the reciting
of the narrative.
But if we know there's no warrants I
mean, we saw that in the beginning with
Khalil, with Ozturk,
masking themselves up, having none I realized before
this ever kicked off for real,
they were wearing masks already. So this argument
that somehow that it's because evil Democrats trying
to attack them. Well, right when they started,
they were already doing that. So this is
just a coordinated
effort using the two party illusion like everything
we're talking about. But because they're not identifying
themselves, because they're not showing a warrant,
he has an ice jacket, which you can
buy on on Amazon for 30¢ or whatever.
It's ridiculous.
Then goes in there and and, you know,
who knows what else could've happened? Who knows
what else did happen? How how do we
who knows how many other places this is
happening?
It's just it's a foregone I mean, you
have to recognize how obviously this is going
to happen because they are, understand it, guys,
whether you agree with it or not, breaking
the law,
unconstitutional
everywhere they act.
By their own admission, whether or not you
agree with it, being an honest person, being
objective, you can acknowledge that what they're doing
by definition,
text book examples of unconstitutional acts.
Now, again, if you the goal but but
I agree with it, and I think it
should happen anyway. I can even respect that.
Like, no. I shouldn't say that because I
think it's crazy that you wouldn't. But, I
mean, look, we all have our opinions. Maybe
you don't care about the constitution. My point
is that you don't have to believe just
what I believe. As long as you're being
honest about your opinion, give me your argument.
Tell me why you think this should be
happening and why it's okay that's breaking the
but see, the difference is you get these
partisans today that are just either unaware that
it's unconstitutional, which is terrifying,
or just don't care. And the ones that
don't care, I think it's half and half
that are pretending it's constitutional or the ones
that are just I I it's a it's
an unlikely argument, I think, to come out
and say, I don't care about the constitution,
people arguing that this is all about protecting
the constitution.
But it's everywhere you look. This is gonna
get worse because they are not doing what
the law requires while claiming to enforce the
law. Here's another example. This was an older
one, but I just haven't got a chance
to point it out. June 4. It turns
out this you've heard about this. This was
pretty broadly important. A birthday party that they
raided. Right? Turns out the so called Trende
Arago gathering was a was a bir the
birthday party they claimed, the Trump administration apparently
broke up in March, was a birthday party.
And you realize this is flushed out now.
The evidence has come out. It says none
of the people that were arrested
at the party seem to have any criminal
record whatsoever. And none have been charged criminally
in the months after this.
So, no, there's no way to spin that.
They raided a birthday party for based on
erroneous information and didn't take anybody. Didn't arrest
anybody. Didn't charge with a crime. The point
is that this is how flimsy this all
is. And imagine had what if they had
taken somebody like they did right in the
beginning? Because they said, take him anyway because
he looked that way, like they did with
a teen who's currently in El Salvador.
They would already be there.
An honest person would be able to acknowledge
how obvious this is.
Now the Alien Enemies Act, law and crime
reported this, hereby declared unlawful.
This is a
probably the easiest thing to prove in this
whole conversation. You could read the act for
yourself, and unless you're just a dishonest person,
you can acknowledge that at best, even if
you like, let's just even say you agree
with the really abstract flimsy air. I don't
know how you can even prove this, but
you know, this is an invasion because of
illegal immigration that Biden orchestrated.
Look. Let's just take let's just say that's
the case. That, even if proven, would still
not apply to the Alien Enemies Act. And
that's the whole point here, is that even
if everything they're saying is true, it's still
an illegal use of this act. That's what's
so frustrating about people trying to go back
and about this, arguing that we're somehow missing
the point. No. It's it's that you're locked
in on an argument that you think applies
to this, and you have likely not even
actually read the the language of the act.
It says, judge finds severe deficiencies in Trump
admin's use of Alien Enemies Act, permanently blocking
future deportations. Doesn't mean they're gonna care.
As I said, Bruce Fine on, Fine Points
on on BitChute that I joined with them
has discussed
this many times over. And he he's an
expert at the topic. Oh, look. I lost
oh, oh, no. That's right. I I didn't
need to highlight it because I'm gonna pretty
much go through most of it. So this
is Trump today.
Here's what it says. A federal judge in
Texas, which I think is relevant. I believe
the judge was appointed by Clinton in the
nineties. Nonetheless, it's in a in a Texas
courtroom, I think. They've been really trying to
gravitate towards certain locations because they think it's
gonna benefit them. So I just, you know,
realize that there's been many Trump appointed judges
that have pushed back including in the Supreme
Court. And many times, the Supreme Court has
ruled against them when four of them, I
think, or it was a four or five,
I think, four of them are are,
Trump or is it six?
I just it's slipped my mind all of
a sudden, but many of them are Trump
appointed judges or rather conservatives. Excuse me. And
and three of them, I think, are Trump
appointed. I'm just continuing to show you this
narrative of radical judges and activist judges and
judicial coup. It's just these are just emotional
arguments from Zionist Stephen Miller and others to
get you ignoring the facts. It's very simple.
Now a Texas judge has blocked the Trump
administration from summarily deporting migrants in the state
under a rarely used century wartime power with
little or no due process, becoming the latest
in a growing of a line of jurors
to hold the president Donald
that president Donald Trump's invocation of the act
was unlawful.
Now just because this happens, they could just
go to another state. You understand? That's why
he has to go to the Supreme Court,
which they still don't seem to care about.
Or I shouldn't take I mean, it seems
like they do understand it to a limit
because they clearly have They're still playing the
game with Garcia, which we'll touch on again
at the end, acting like, you know, we're
doing this not because of the Supreme Court,
but they are. And they know they're trying
to work. They're trying to do it and,
like, somehow comply to put it away by
still pretending like they're not complying.
It's very childish.
But it says US district judge David, I
think it's Brian's,
on Monday granted request for the permanent injunction
barring the government from removing Venezuelan migrants accused
of being members of Tran de Aragua. Now
realize that even the people they claimed were,
the vast majority of them have now been
like, I've let me put it this way.
I don't wanna say the word proven be
only because the they're
I mean, I look. If you I think
I think Proven is accurate. I'm just I'm
hesitating only because I wanna be very clear
specific about the the words and how it's
used in regard to this topic. Because at
the end of the day, like with Garcia,
the only real point is that and from
my perspective is that they were not given
their constitutional rights. They were not there's no
due process here. They didn't have a chance
to argue that you were wrong or that
maybe you were an American and got caught
in the wrong room without your ID. You
know, it's how simple that could be. We've
already seen that. My point though is that
through this process since it happened, their lawyers,
pea their families, and in some cases, people
that have been moved around, they've got chance
to not approve that that's that's not the
case. Even the New York Times broke down
what they could find, and over 70% of
them were no criminal record. Now I pointed
out that the vast majority of those were
here legally,
And that's whether they had a Visa, a
green card, mostly Visa, or were in the
process of seeking citizenship or in the process
of going through asylum, all of which give
them the legal right to be here while
that's happening.
So it's just so gross and dishonest how
this is being abused. And I think mostly
people supporting this are either they don't know
that or because they're they're invested in the
gross discussion. They want those things. And somewhere
there no like, the fact that they pretend
it's not what it looks like shows you
that they somewhere know at the least that
you know that it's wrong. You know, it's
the same kind of thing. I see these
overlaps
in a lot of different places in the
conversation of the world.
Now the judge on Monday granted a request
for permanent injunction,
and it says, for accused of, you know,
it being sent to Seacock was the last
part of that paragraph in El Salvador. In
a 56 page order, Brian's
wrote that Trump's proclamation was, quote, hereby declared
unlawful,
reasoning that the administration's
implementation of the executive order was inconsistent with
the AEA
and its statutory requirements, Alien Enemies Act.
Listen to this, guys. And, please, if you
disagree with this, look at the act, and
you tell me how there's any air in
this conversation.
Under the AEA, the act, the Alien Enemies
Act, Alien Alien Enemies Act, a president cannot
unilaterally, this is their quote, anyway, define what
constitutes an invasion.
Summ summarily declare that a foreign nation or
government has threatened or perpetuated
an invasion
or predatory incursion
of The United States, identify alien enemies subject
to detention or removal, and summarily remove them,
the judge wrote. Now Trump, on March 15,
began the president
became, excuse me, the president since World War
two to invoke the act, which authorizes him
to summarily remove, quote, native citizens, Densians, or
subjects
of, quote,
a hostile nation or government.
point.
When there is a, quote, declared war,
point, against it or when it has
perpetrated,
attempted, or threatened against the territory of The
United States, and, quote, an invasion or predatory
incursion.
point.
In a constitutional
or excuse me. In a controversial and novel
use of the power, Trump declared Tran de
Aragua had committed or attempted
an invasion
or predatory incursion such that any member of
the group was summarily removable under the act.
Now the administration asserted that the gang constituted,
quote, and this is an important deviation,
a hybrid criminal state
for purposes of invoking the act. They realized
in the beginning
that's not what they said. They were they
said this is an invasion. That's a force
invading our country. And, again, the absurdly obvious
point of claiming that Biden allowed them in
through kind of scattered immigration over four years,
but then somehow it was Venezuela in a
coordinated effort invading this country. You can't have
both those make sense at the same time.
Even if you wanna argue they worked with
Biden, it's not a it's not a one
group thing. Now you can argue that they
were surreptitiously sending them in for some kind
of background effort. Yeah. That's certainly possible. That
was still not applied to this act. That's
the point.
That's it it's very clear.
Now it says the court and so, again,
the point was when they rolled it back
to a hybrid criminal state, that means they're
acknowledging
that what that that the reality of the
circumstances are not met for this act, and
so they tried to water it back and
say, well, it's a hybrid criminal state. So
that's why it applies. That was their kind
of pushback.
The court rejected the administration's interpretation of the
act and emphasized that proper evocation
of the power,
important, requires an executive order I I hate
that she said that, by the way. I
don't think executive order should be even in
the conversation, but the point is legislation or
an order or something like that. But in
this case, that's what he wrote, executive order.
An order that includes
sufficient factual statements
and other references enabling courts to determine whether
the conduct and events satisfy the conditions that
support the invocation of the statute,
which they didn't do. They just state that,
you know, that this is the kind of
thing we've seen through this administration so far.
Like, forceful,
righteous indignation.
Unjust.
Says, quote, this court need not look beyond
the four concerns
four corners, excuse me, of the president's proclamation.
So his statements itself. The court need not
look beyond even what he wrote to find
its severe deficiencies in comporting
with the AEA.
Even accepting
every assertion in the proclamation of Trump's what
Trump wrote as true, it does not rise
to meet the plain ordinary meanings of the
statutory terms.
That, again, if you're an honest, objective person,
that you can't deny.
You could try to contort them into making
making sense, but, again, then you're leaning into
a partisan side. Nonpartisan objective, this is simply
obvious. And it says following a brief overview
on interpreting the language of the centuries old
statute,
Brian's
explained that to the that the terms invasion
and predatory incursion
as used in the statute require
a militarized effort against and militarized intrusion
intrusion into a territory of The United States
with the specific
purpose
of conquering or obtaining control over territory.
Clearly, you can't make that case
in any for for all of them, really.
Right? So if we're talking about the invasion,
I even that, I think, is an obvious
point to point out how where that where's
the invasion taking play? Like, a not the
abstract behind it. Like, the point is if
you wanna make it the abstract over the
time, well, then that the point is you
can't verify that. That's the abstract opinion. The
facts don't make that clear.
Right? Because you can there's just people there.
You're not you can't prove that they're all
working together for that outcome, that you can
claim that. You can't prove it. In this
case, the point is continuing
that a militarized effort so I don't see
that.
They they will make arguments for why they
try to make that case, but that's not
there. And intrusion into United States with the
specific purpose of conquering or obtaining control.
Again, you could broadly argue with the whole
country they're going for, but you can't prove
that that's the intent right now. And it
says, the alleged actions of the Tran de
Aragua of Tran De Aragua, according to the
judge, were well outside the definitions of those
terms.
If they even are Tran de Aragua, they
keep getting caught for accusing people of that
that aren't.
And it says, this court also rejected the
administration's request to broaden the meaning of these
terms. So they know they're losing this, and
they're just trying to go just how about
we just stretch this out to meet what
we want? So in some cases, judges might
go along with it because they're on their
side, I guess. That's where politics do play
a factor in appointing these judges, which that's
my point. They're all politically motivated in some
way. It doesn't change the reality of the
facts.
They requested to broaden the meaning of the
terms in light of modern warfare tactics. No.
That's not an unfair argument. Right?
Asymmetrical warfare, no one in The U no
one else The US knows that better than
anybody. But it says with Brian's
writing that doing so would effectively render the
AEA irrelevant.
So that same point. Right? If if you
could argue
that that is the case, that it's a
modern warfare dynamic,
but even making that case, that invalidates that
that act would be the appropriate one to
use. It's very simple. The AEA was clearly
this is what she wrote. Was clearly not
or excuse me. It is a guy
it was, yeah. David. Excuse me. It's David
is the judge.
It says the AEA was clearly not meant
to be all encompassing.
As such, this court declines the to stretch
the the meaning of the word so broadly
that mass migration or criminal activities by some
members of a particular nationality could qualify as
invasion, and virtually any group hailing from virtually
any country could be deemed alien enemies. That's
the whole point, you understand? That's why they
did it that way. So it would apply
wherever they wanted it to. It's very clear
to me. Brian's,
analysis cited heavily to the order of another
federal judge in Texas.
Trump
appointed US district judge, Fernando, Fernando,
Rodriguez,
who in April
similarly
found that the Amer the administration's
use was illegal of this act. So you
gotta Trump appoint the judge in Texas saying
it's illegal. You gotta Clinton appoint judge saying
it's illegal. Kinda hard not to see how
clear this is. Quote, the court properly recognized
that the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime
measure that cannot be used during peacetime, much
less without due process. That's my point. To
send people to a gulag type prison in
El Salvador, that's according to the deputy director
of ACLU's
Immigrants Rights Project.
So I personally find it to be very
relevant. But, of course, the problem is that
anything going against their agenda is now you're
on the other side. You're just it's othering
everybody. You're the other. You're dehumanized. You don't
matter if you don't agree with us.
Seems very common for partisan politics. Now here's
the actual,
court document. You can read through this for
yourself if you wanna check it out. I'll
always include these for you if I can.
That's how we roll on this platform.
Now let's talk about the orchestrated event.
I really wanna stress that the evidence is
pretty damn obvious as I might I wanna
also stress it always seems to be that
there's a political entities involved with trying to
either take advantage of this, drive the chaos
for something else, which kind of the same
point. I mean, in some cases, I think,
like, for example, there'll be an event that's
getting a lot of attention, and groups will
try to work their way in to get
some kind of recognition or be able to
write down later that they were there and
we did that or, you know, there's a
lot of moving parts to how corporations,
military, intelligence will find ways
to influence, take control, or simply use these
events. It's just simply always how this goes.
And, I mean, I you can look back
through events and you'll find it. Look at
January 6, for example. You know, it's obvious
to see there's just scattered throughout the whole
thing.
Now I simply put this out in the
ninth. This picture is just you know, for
me, it's that it's not proof, things like
this.
But when I see things like this and,
you know, if this was during Biden's administration,
all conservatives would already be telling you this
was false. It's it feels hard not to
see how easily this is
why is there this one guy who was
in all the pictures,
ray waving a Mexican flag, mashed up? Why,
you know, why is the foe if you
look at these pictures half the time, he's
literally surrounded by media, and there's not even
anybody else really there with him. That doesn't
that feel strange to you? It really should.
Even if it's organic, there's something there. He's
it feels like he's being used. Right? Now
the main points are even if it is
all organic,
why does it make sense to focus on
people who are making committed crimes,
people who are vandalizing,
people who are there let's just say, sir,
there are legal immigrants. They're fighting to take
over the country. Okay. Let's just give you
that. That's what those people are doing. Why
does then that invalidate
everybody else there?
Do you know what there are are there
people there protesting because at least they think
ICE is breaking the law? Yes. Then you
damn well know that. So if you don't
respect their right to protest because this person
over here did something violent, then you're the
same thing. You are just like the left
who was doing the same thing to you.
I know you're not gonna admit that, but
that's the reality. And I'm hoping to reach
honest, intelligent, objective people who can acknowledge and
call that out because it's damn near everywhere
right now. So I simply said, you're being
played. Manufacturing consent. Elon Musk is the one
that shared this. And a weird side point,
by the way, isn't it interesting how suddenly
this event starts and they're not they're not,
like, high fiving each other all of a
sudden, but him and Trump are just they're
sharing each other's content. They're not fighting anymore.
Now I'm I'm I'm not even trying to
insinuate. I don't know. I'm not you know,
it's you could name off possibilities. It could
be that that's, you know, them trying to
use this to hide that they were fighting.
I you know, who knows? But I just
think it's very telling that suddenly everyone's like,
okay. We're good again. Ignore that he just
said Trump's on the Epstein list. Let's just
move beyond that and start.
That's partisanship for you guys.
Now this person says they are not violating
the constitution.
Grow a set of balls, he says, which
is just an interesting statement, isn't it?
Like, okay. Let's just like, so the insinuation
is somehow and this is my point of
a partisanship.
Not that I have a different opinion. Right?
Not that I simply do think it's a
violation
of the constitution, but that somehow I'm afraid
to say the truth.
Right? That I'm just lying because I don't
wanna admit how, you see how the hell
would you know that? That it's the kind
of assumptive,
naive, partisan game that gets played every day
on this platform.
And it says marines are sworn to protect
America from enemies foreign and domestic, and we
don't take our vows
lightly. Right? So because he's a marine and
because he swore an oath, he knows better
than everybody.
Well, it is a violation, bud, and it's
very clear. You can read the Posse Comitatus
Act. You can look at the entire thing
going on. The point is that the problem
is that people take partisan
narratives
or the argument of what they claim is
happening and somehow try to make it make
sense. For those that are objective and nonpartisan,
I would call it out if it was
Biden, and I would call it out if
it was Trump. I'm willing to bet you
if this was happening under Biden, you'd be
singing a different tune, but I can't know
that for sure. It says, the military does
serve a purpose. Stop being a fearful propaganda
coward. Right. Because I'm just afraid to say
the truth like he is. What a shining
beacon of truth. And I simply said, so
you either don't understand or don't care about
the constitution.
It's really that simple. Stop being a blind
naive follower. And I posted with the the
Roosevelt quote, to announce that there must be
no criticism of the president or that we
are to stand by the president, right or
wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but
it's morally treasonable to the American people. And
I also wanna point out, by the way,
that there's a lot of pretty prominent Republicans
who are also pointing this out. So this
person, if you're saying that are you calling
them cowards? Are you saying that they don't
understand? Other marines, by the way. Someone or
or someone I or holding on much higher
regard, somebody like,
oh, I'm just I'm just all of a
sudden blanking.
It's so crazy.
I don't know why. I just my name
just slipped. Yeah. I greatly respect him. Had
him here for many interviews. You know, the,
airborne, you know, refused to take the shot.
God darn it. That frustrates me. The point
is that he is a very he's, you
know, prominent military person who was left because
he has principles in regard to the COVID
shot or forced out, and he's calling this
a complete manipulation.
God, that drives me crazy.
I'll remember it. Somebody in the chat will
say it. But I think I think there
was a response, and I simply the point
was simply,
yeah, yeah, saying I swore an oath to
defend the constitution. Did you? Grow a spine.
Same thing. And I just said, so it's
that you don't understand it then. Well, that's
embarrassing.
Here.
Oh, it's right there. I mean, Brad Miller.
I hate I I hate that I did
that because I have immense respect for this
man.
The two images below, he says, don't represent
different sides. Stop assuming engineered problems and reactions
leading to predetermined solutions. Present two different sides
of a solution. These crafted dialectical traps are
used over and over and over again because
people keep falling for them. And this person
says, Choose a side.
And it's somehow Trump in that orchestrated event
and then this guy with the flag in
an orchestrated event.
Interesting.
Now, Jason Bachelor points this out and says,
identity politics equals brain rot. Statism.
Not even once.
Now it says well, basically, one side says,
we hated January 6 but love riots. That's
the left side. And over here, it says,
we hate the CDC, but we love ICE.
And he just says, LOL. You're both just
awful. And it just the contradictions are everywhere
if you're willing to be honest about how
blind this seems.
Now Catherine Austin fifths pointed this out, and
this is very important, guys. This is this
is one of many things you'll probably find.
I'll go over just a couple that I
noticed.
And she she just says, surprise, surprise, it's
an op.
Laura Powell, actually, I think that's just right
here. Yeah. Here,
says, if you're a Californian,
the current LA riots are an example of
your tax dollars hard at work. The Coalition
for Human Immigration Right, CHRLA, is one of
the key players in fomenting the violent response
to immigration enforcement actions. Now it's very easy
to just go and maybe it is the
case. I'm not saying I know for sure,
but it's very easy.
Just go, oh, they support the immigration. Oh,
that means that's left fighting. But think about
it for a Why does it make sense
for somebody who's fighting for this to continue
to create chaos that's used to make them
look like they shouldn't be here?
Doesn't that seem a little bit backward? Now
yet what my point is, that's why I
started with the MEMRI point, is that we
have these there are groups
that exist within the paradigm or even groups
like that, I mean, the news fake news
channel that are run by Israeli intelligence that
are simply here to parrot and promote the
things that keep us divided, the things that
keep you propagandized in just the right ways.
So very much consider whether this is a
left leaning thing and they just wanted to
set do this for, I guess, you know,
whatever narrative you think somehow makes that make
sense. But also consider that this could be,
one of many partisan groups meant to create
the chaos that the government uses to justify
where it's going.
Now, you know, I know far too many
out there who do understand how that works
choose to overlook this. There's somebody who I
just said that to recently about that. I
said, you know, I I I've talked to
them in the past, and I know you
know these things. We discussed the two party
illusion, And yet, every day, I see them
tap into the two party illusion. Every day,
using partisan narratives to, you know, why the
left? It just it's it saddens me because
I know they're smart to see through it.
And that tells me they're choosing to stay
tapped into it for whatever reason.
It's it's upsetting
because that keeps their audiences tapped into
it. Now it says it's an LA based
nonprofit with a history of taking radical positions
on immigration. For example, it led a 2018
campaign to abolish ICE. It currently leads the
Los Angeles rapid response network, which gathers intel
about enforcement actions and deploys activist respond. Yeah.
So is that to fight for immigration, or
is that to create the chaos that then
is used to to stop you know, to
call them all criminals, which is not about
immigration even. That's the that's the that's the
the woke ideology in USAID. It's about the
regime change. That's simply the tool being used,
in my opinion. And so, in this case,
ask why if that was their objective,
to fight for immigrants to be in this
country. Like, illegal and unfettered with no restrictions.
Why would they create chaos?
I I just I can't stress that enough.
And if you've got a valid argument for
why you think that makes sense, post in
the chat. I'll I'll pay attention. I'll try
to see it. I think I'm genuinely curious
for how you think that might work. And
I'm sure there's somewhere you could, you know,
a way you could turn it to make
it make sense. And I'm not saying that
facetiously. Like, let me know.
And it says, Chirla has strong,
strong ties to Democratic Party in California and
has supported the election of Democratic candidates through
its lobbying arm, obviously, partisanship.
I've that's that to me means
this this entity has strong ties to the
government
and has supported partisan candidates. That's what that
reads to me. You see the difference? And
you see why and, again, maybe you maybe
I'm wrong, but I really just wanna stress
everybody out there to at least
use that, consider it. As you're reading all
these things and you're watching the the partisan
hair on fire people like Alex Jones, maybe
it makes sense to you. But stand back
and go, okay. At the same time, what
what what is Ryan saying? Now look at
both those things. Hold it up with the
light and ask yourself which one feels like
it makes more sense. Which one has more
rooted history in everything we're dealing with?
I if you're honest, you it's obvious to
me. Or yeah. I I to me, obviously.
But if if you're honest, I would believe
it's obvious to you as well.
Now it says they also close relationship with
the organized labor in the state, which in
turn is a major I mean, you get
the general point. It's very immersed with the
democratic party with, my point, partisanship
and the government.
I'm trying to make sure there's nothing super
there important. I obtained the final audit that
showed that the yeah. So, basically, they received
$34,000,000
from the state, mostly through the Department of
Social Services accounting for 72% of its total
revenue. This is nearly a threefold increase over
the previous year. It also received $404,150,000
dollars in federal contracts, which the mayor publicly
took credit for helping secure. Eisenhower warned of
the military industrial complex. Now we face a
nonprofit industrial complex. Well, it's really the same
thing if you understand how it's used. But
the bottom line is you can see the
funding for many different overlaps to this conversation.
Now she also adds
more details and receipts in the thread.
Or is it right there? And it says,
taxpayer
funded nonprofit behind the anti ice riots in
Los Angeles. And I I I very much
agree with that. I think that's very clear.
Here's another example of a clip that somebody
showed,
breaking it down. And you and, again, you
tell me you don't see these every time.
Now it's also worth considering that these could
be fake. I mean, people do this. They
post things on Craigslist while things are happening
for this very kind of purpose. But
I think there is an element to this
that is how this works, you know, where
you just kinda put something out. I'll give
you a $50 a person to go out
there and say these things. It it happens
all the time.
This is Shipwreck. It says Craigslist ad for
LA riots and and no Kings, which we'll
point out in a I and everyone seems
to be pointing in this people, you know,
coming from the same overlapping groups. It's building
to their their their just you
know that they're framing this, like the Stephen
Millers and this upcoming protest, as a revolution,
a rebellion,
an insurrection. You I mean, and thinking back
to the alien alien enemies act we just
discussed,
do you not see how important it is
for them to actually turn what's happening into
what they you know, an invasion? Like, to
turn this into what they can frame as
an actual invasion?
Because then they can everything will line up
for them. You can't I mean, if you
even if you don't agree with that, you
know you see the logic in how that
works. Now it says follow the money. It's
all a show for destabilizing the administration while
simultaneously,
possibly, could he be could be used for
to push Palantir tech and the big beautiful
bill. Now when you when he says destabilizing
the administration,
you you know, it's interesting because if you're
arguing the use to push Palantir and the
bill,
you you feel like that's more of, like,
a nonpartisan kind of overlap, but this destabilizing
administration to me suggests you think that it's
about the left kind of hurting the Trump
administration. But, yeah, all these things can exist
simultaneously.
There are personal agendas that that exist through
these people. Right?
But my major opinion is this is a
beyond partisanship is what this is really about.
Do this and then I'm gonna go make
strawberry scones. But when we talked about how
this thing that was going on in Los
Angeles was paid at agitators, this is what
I meant. I remember back when the Black
Lives Matter riots were happening as well. They
had very similar Craigslist ads looking for the
tough And by the way, let let's not
forget the plenty of examples that overlap on
the right. We've gone through these and even
overlap with January 6 points. And my point
the same is that's not that you guys
were doing that, but you were being set
up for it. It's the same
point.
This badass is in the city of Los
Angeles seeking extremely tough, brave men for a
new crew on building. Compensation is 6,500
to 125,000
per week. Get paid every week no matter
what. Physical strength needed, mental toughness.
Now k consider with other things we've seen
that this is, you know, may maybe it's
intelligence.
Maybe it's just some random, you know, rabble
rousers out there trying to cause chaos. Maybe
it's Israel.
All things we should consider, but all of
those things do make sense with what's actually
going on. They all have an interest in
creating what you're seeing, not for
exposing evil Muslims. It's about very clearly rationalizing,
justifying
whether it's immigration OS with Palantir, right, the
the suppression of your rights, the the justification
for future legislation, the ongoing continual funding of
Israel because they're fighting the Muslim threat. It
all is the same thing in my opinion,
at least from their perspective.
Ready for confrontation when necessary. However, we train
you if necessary. Savery, reliability, strength, team discipline.
They'd like you to have military experience, but
if you're a marine, then they do not
want you in their group because it's apparently
a long story. Dab title is listed as
operator, and there's no experience required, and it's
contracted work. And they were looking in the
greater Los Angeles area. Obviously, they're not gonna
tell you exactly what it's for. Wait for
you to call and then explain it. This
is what happened during the Black Lives Matter
riots is they would put out these Craigslist
ads and then all these people would call
and then they would recruit these people to
go be agitators at these events. They would
turn what was initially a peaceful protest of
just marching
into a full blown riot, and that's the
very same thing that's happening here.
Right. So I I I'm glad that that's,
you know, the objective bottom line being left
whether left or right, that what she's discussing
and this is the truth whether you like
it or not. Like I said, yes. What
was hap like, black lives matter. There there
were
objectively
rioting. Like, it's very clear, breaking windows and
burning thing. But there were also people that
weren't doing that. I mean, there were people
that were there protesting because they believed they
were fighting for racial you know, to stop
racial, you know,
racism.
That that was part of the conversation. And
whether they were misguided or not, you can't
just continue to protect but that's the same
thing every time. And it's so frustrating that
people can't continue you know, be honest about
how that works. And so what she's simply
telling you is they did that then, and
it was not that they were all just
rioting because that's what left does, but because
they were people that were designed to make
that be the the case. So the right
could turn around and say, see, they're all
a bunch of rioting maniacs and we can't
it's it's just it's the same thing back
and And, really, the American people are the
ones caught in the middle of all this.
You got a bunch of grifters and mainstream
alternative media and paid agitators and Israeli spies.
They're all fighting each other and acting like
they're the congress fights back and And most
Americans are like, what the f is going
on? Like, you know, it's that's what I
believe anyway. That there's a lot of people
that are just un disconcerted by all of
this.
And we're living through this fake assroturf manipulation
where they're, you know, showing you this theater,
and people are enjoying it in some cases.
They think it's funny. They think it's entertaining.
But it's real in the sense that it's
affecting your life or will be used against
you.
Who can afford that kind of bankroll? Well,
no kings.org
can. Apparently, this whole thing has been planned
for a really long time. They're trying to
get more in different days on different states.
Specifically, June 14 seems to be a pretty
big hot button. They're looking at Phoenix, Atlanta,
and a handful of other major cities. You
can go to the map on the website
and just No.
This
is being really pressed by, well, everyone that
I can see. Lumer, Jones, Ben, everyone. Like,
this is the revolution, the communist overtaking of
our country. That's what they're all pushing with
this. Consider it, but also consider that this
is just one more example of how they're
trying to create the illusion that this is
a rebellion in this country so they can
use it for the obvious reasons. Take a
look. Here's some of the organizations that they're
working with, and there's a lot of them,
but I'm gonna go through a couple. There's
Bend the Arc, which is Jewish action. Bernie
Sanders, which I don't I don't know. Americans
United, Blue Anchor, CAST, Demlist, Families In case
you missed it, there was an Israeli in
influence there. Rebellionaires,
Faithful America, Fair Share America, Face the Music,
Federal Workers Against Doge, Fun Federal Unionist Network,
The Feminist Majority, Bulletproof Pride, Catholics Vote Common
Good, Care in Action, Center for Common Ground.
I mean, there's tons of them. That's who's
paying for it. This has been in the
works for a really long time. That should
be really nothing new to you. But here's
what I will say, okay, with all the
paid agitators and all the things going on,
there are gonna be very real people who
believe this is a very real march for
justice that are gonna be boots on the
ground down there thinking that they're doing something.
So if you, your family, your friends are
thinking about getting together and heading down there
and sticking it to the man, don't. Because
all of those paid agitators, they have protection.
Right? They'll get lawyers. They'll get bailed out
of jail. But guess who won't? You won't.
You you will not. Just like January 6.
Right? The Ray Epps and all the rest,
all the grifters, manipulators, or, you know, the
point is that they had the grandmas walking
through those ropes making their, you know, making
the videos, which then they get sent to
jail. Right? It's it is an orchestrated event
to to create the outcome that they can
use to say you're all evil insurrectionist. You
know, it's
the same thing in reverse now.
I know I know enough of you are
honest out there to call that out and
to see how clearly this is being used.
You will be left on your own. Here's
to hoping you learn the time with the
BLM stuff. Don't do it. Don't ruin your
life. Don't ruin your life over this. Don't
ruin your job opportunities over this. Don't do
it. This is all staged. It's all orchestrated.
It's all political. Right. I gotta go. We'll
see you later.
Here's another clip that James Lee shared.
Now this one is, you know, my opinion
is it's a bit more partisan. But I
just think it's interesting that what she caught
with the video, it it you know, it
the whole thing my overarching point continues to
be that regardless
of the partisan
overlap,
that that is how this works. Right? Where
they take, you know, right leaning groups or
militias, and they use them to create. It's
the same kind of thing. And all it's
really about is dividing you and fighting you
know, making you fight each other for the
larger agenda. So when she's highlighting this, consider
that point as it's going through. But I
I think it's important to overlap with the,
where it's coming from, the protest itself. You
know? I think it's very clear that this
is being stoked. And James says Walmart is
funding this, which, you know, I think that's
a bit of a, a you'll see how
it connects. I don't think it's as you
can just say that that's the outcome. I
think there's more of a a leap, you
know, a bit of an assumption, but it
certainly could be. And even if it was
Walmart, I don't think that that's Walmart. I
think there's much more going on that that's
just a, you know, it's a powerful background
entity, and there's somebody using
using those resources to achieve this as opposed
to just the Walmart brand being upset that
Trump said something about tariffs, which is her
kind of point. But, yeah, consider that too.
Is wild. A mysterious black truck just passed
out all of these expensive
bionic face shields to protesters in LA, and
the news caught it on camera. I zoomed
in and found out this is the Uvex
bionic shield.
You know why that worries me more than
anything? It's because you know I've been generally
worried about the kind of,
the, what intersection of some of these previous
agendas
and the worry that there's gonna be some
kind of an overlap with you know, like,
for example, and I'm not trying to say
I have any evidence to this. Don't wanna
scare anybody, but just just the thought to
consider it. Then let's just say there's a,
you know, some m e m r I
Palestinian, you know, I think the lie is
my point, comes out and decides to throw
some kind of a thing that's a biological
problem.
That then
I mean, everything spins into place, whether it's
the biological pathogen overlap, whether it's the domestic
terrorism overlap, whether it's the foreign policy overlap.
I mean, everything. Immigration,
and they're passing out what appear to be,
like, gas mask kind of things. I mean,
I can't tell if it's gas mask or
you have to look it up, the bionic
shield. I think it's but it's more of
a you know, it it gives the impression
of some kind of a militarized,
weird
you know, you get what I'm going with
it. Like, I wonder whether that's even just
the presentation of that worth considering.
These are not cheap. They're around 45 to
$65,
and you can't just get them in bulk.
But one place that sells them is Walmart.
And why is that important?
Because they're So so you see I feel
no. Because it sells them and then because
Walmart might be upset about something, this is
the kind of thing that I always that's
a possibility and nothing more. Right? It's a
bit of a I mean, I'll let it
finish out because there you know, but the
point is simply that it's a lot of
times, there's a very quick jump to make
it connect when it really just is, oh,
they might be there. You know? There's a
new protest being promoted called No Kings on
June 14, and even celebrities like Chrissy Teigen
are posting, and it's in magazines and newspapers.
And guess who's behind this message?
Christie Walton.
That's right. One of the billionaire heiresses a
part of the Walmart family. Now I don't
know Same point. Right? You you could argue
that she did that, but does that by
does that prove that that's Walmart doing it?
Aurelia, that Walmart had those until she has
access to them? I'm not denying. I mean,
very well could be. It's just I just
think it's important not to you know, you
can connect the dots when with like, if
you come at it with a foregone conclusion,
the dots will connect themselves for you, and
it's not always the reality. Why they would
be behind that protest
against president Trump,
but remember, just less than three weeks ago,
president Trump tweeted about the whole tariff situation,
saying Walmart should stop trying to blame tariffs
as the reason for raising prices throughout the
chain. Walmart made billions of dollars of last
year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and
China, they should, as is said, eat the
tariffs and not charge valued customers anything. I'll
be watching, and so will your customers.
Just aside from the fact that everyone everywhere
who was honest and had a brain already
knew that that was gonna go. You know,
the idea that you're supposed to you're you're
I'm no support of Walmart. I hate that
I hate that place, but the point is
to say that they're it's their fault. Now
they're doing something wrong by not doing what
every business would do. Right? The tariffs are
why the prices go up, not the fact
that they're adjusting to meet what's net you
know, I shouldn't I mean, I don't think
any of these corporations are, like, skating by.
Like, they're they're they're robbing you all the
time. My point is that from a company's
perspective, you knew that was gonna happen. And
then when they do it, he he comes
out and
criticizes them for doing what everyone is also
doing. He didn't criticize the republican leaning platforms
and companies that did the same thing. I
mean, maybe he did. The point is simply
that it's just it's obvious where that was
gonna go. That's just a side point.
So is it possible that maybe the Walmart
family didn't like that, and now they're finding
ways to Yes. Make their voices heard? But
that's not that there's that's a massive leap
to make that conclusion.
At best, you could say that she is
responsible, you know, behind this. I just think
that's, you know, that's usually how that goes,
but it's worth considering. Or is this just
a big coincidence?
As always, let me know what you think
about all of this
down below.
You know, because there there's a lot of
people that are, you know, playing it fast
and loose with things that just make a
good argument.
You know? But it's and I'm all for
considering possibilities.
I'm not gonna say she so that's the
absolute fact. She didn't do that. So that's
why I played it. I think there's some
important things in there. Just be objective as
possible today. People are trying to trick you
all over the place. But so the mask
itself, which just has a look of something,
like, gives you a certain
perception, you know, it's it's just very interesting.
But so the Walmart overlap and all of
this, same point, guys. I think it's obvious
that all we're really seeing is massive moneyed
interests
playing a role in destabilization,
division, problem reaction solution. I mean, conquer divide
and conquer, guys. We all know how this
tends to work. You know? And so with
where that goes and the no king protest,
which I think is interesting. I'll I'll show
you the actual website.
You know, it's essentially
oops.
Oh, that was the end of it. Sorry.
Thought I removed it. That
it's interesting that as we can see, from
a nonpartisan perspective, that what the what the
government is doing happened during Biden's administration, but
it's clearly on steroids right now with Trump.
I I think it would have been no
matter who's in presidency,
that they are rapidly showing you the lawless
nature of what they are, doing things that
are verifiably against the law. And so when
people are making you know, whether the intention
behind the protest was about that or
destabilization or left fighting Donald Trump, there are
people within it that protest or wanna be
there because they see the reality
of that happening.
You see what I'm saying? And so it's
this it's so dishonest to claim that we
automatically know it's a weaponized he's a just
left versus the right just because it says
the thing about your chosen ID, your your
leader. Right? Trump can't be called that because
we're on his side, but he is breaking
the law just like Biden broke the law.
You know what I mean? Like, it's so
infuriating that we can't just be adults about
this,
but it's everywhere.
Now going forward,
here's the old here it is right here.
No kings. In America, it says we don't
do kings. They've defied our courts, deported Americans,
disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil
rights, and slashed our service. Is that not
accurate?
You see what I'm saying? Like, it's just
interesting. I'm not I I don't. These kind
of things, I never support because I don't
like, we're like you could point out. There's
moneyed interests that are using things like this,
even if it's just to promote their own
name. So I'm I'm just never even when
it comes to protesting in general,
it takes a lot. There's it it's very
specific for me to wanna be involved in
any protest. And usually don't because I don't
really I feel like it's, especially today, largely
fruitless, but I'll never say people shouldn't do
it. There's plenty of times when I do
see an effect. I just think it's very
interesting that this is being pointed out, and
it's now being used as you would expect
by people like Jones to say, are you
ready for the communist uprising on June 14?
You see what I'm saying? Like, if you
wanna try to pretend that this is them
trying to, you know I mean, I what?
So is your argument that this is a
protest that is is a secretly hiding a
revolution? Are you gonna tell me that they
would publicize the day they were gonna revolt?
You see how dumb it is when you
just apply the smallest amount of logic? Clearly,
this could end up being chaotic, and I
guarantee it will be because either left or
right, the government makes that the reality, and
sometimes the people do it for themselves.
But to say that, you mean, there there
are people who are not partisan. There are
people who are on the right who agree
that something's wrong. People who support Alex are
saying that. But that's the way you frame
that because you're a cartoon. It's hyperbolic, everything.
World War three, communist takeover, instead of acknowledging
exactly what's happening in front of us with
some nuance.
Official communist party USA.
It's just it's just kinda sad to me,
and people fall for this stuff, though.
You now just to show you how interesting
it is that Alex Jones is on the
same side as John Fetterman, left on the
same side as the right. And it says,
I unapologetically
stand for free speech, free demonstrations,
and immigration.
But
you know, as you've heard the saying before,
everything before the word but is usually meaningless.
And he goes, this is not that. So
basically, you don't believe in those things if
it goes against what you say or what,
you know, that if they're now, look. Same
point as always. If people are committing violence,
that does not then invalidate people protesting
around the same conversation, in the same area
even. Those people commit crimes, they should be
arrested. Oh, and look, it's the same guy
with the same flag. Funny how that's what
they all are highlighting. Or the guy riding
around the motorcycle with the same flag. Doesn't
it seem a little bit orchestrated, contrived?
He says, this is anarchy and true chaos,
showing his ignorance yet again, seeing as how
the word anarchy does not mean chaos. It
simply means no rulers, not no rules, and
they know this. That's why the government has
no place for the only ideology in the
world that has no place for them.
My party loses the moral high ground when
we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire.
I think it's just very telling to see
that
no it's it's a government agenda,
creating the justification
to shut down
whatever they want whenever they want.
Interesting statement by Donald Trump. Now this is
I this he it says a, military parade
upcoming. My point is about whatever the context.
Trump just said, if you protest, you'll be
met with heavy force. Welcome to The United
States 2025
where you can't even protest if he sells
you. So are we gonna pretend this is
constitutional,
or are we just gonna
do little precrime protest here and say, well,
because Democrats, we know they're gonna be violent,
so we'll shut them down ahead of time.
And all the pretend constitutionalists in the Republican
Party will scream about how that makes sense
because we know Democrats are terrorists.
We just can't be this easy to fool.
We can't be this stupid.
Big on Saturday. We're gonna have a lot
of and if there's any protester wants to
come out, they will be met with very
big force. By the Now the people will
try to argue, he just meant like the
ones before, but he didn't say that, did
he? You know, the it's it's this blind
support as Roosevelt told you, which is servile
and literally,
oh, what was it?
Now I'm gonna look it up again. So
I really I really do like the the
the wording of that quote
and morally treasonable to the American people. That's
what Roosevelt that's what, Theodore Roosevelt said. To
announce that there must be no criticism of
the president or that we must stand by
them right or wrong
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but morally
treasonable to the American people.
A lot of people need to hear that
right now.
And if and if there's any protest that
wants to come out, they will be met
with very big force, by the way. And
for those people that wanna protest, they're gonna
be met with very big force. And I
have He just he he very clearly just
I that I didn't start that over. He
repeated that twice in a row. Haven't even
heard about a protest,
but, you know, this is, people that hate
our country.
See? But they Oh, so now if you
protest, you hate the country by default. So
now if there's protests, they're gonna say, but
they hate the country. They're a bunch of
jihad racists who wanna destroy the country. You
mean, everybody anywhere? Anybody decided to wake up
that day and go, I wanna go over
the
you know this is wrong, guys. You know
it. If you're honest and you believe in
the constitution, then call it out.
Now recognize those that do not, either don't
understand the constitution or don't care about it,
despite what they may say out loud. It
will be met with very heavy force.
Three times he said that. No qualification.
No if they're violent. Just if you protest,
you will be met with force.
I I'd I can't you know, the people
like Jones will ignore that because there's really
no way to make it make sense and
still pretend like you support this country.
But it's everywhere, guys.
Now here is Nick Sorter
highlighting
violence against an unarmed protester
and just going, yeah. More of this.
I could watch these videos on loop, he
says, literally gushing over violence against protesters. You
know why? Because the guy touched the horse.
I'll play this for you. You tell me
what you think about this, and you tell
me if this is
a guy hitting the police horse. Now understand,
even if this guy had hit the police
horse, the way if it was if you
wanna call this a hit, which I'll show
you, what they continue to do
is not new. I'll show you a video
that already happened in the street where these
cops, which is why he's acting the way
he is, in my opinion, are running people
over, and it's not new in the slightest.
And you know, Will's eye, if this manipulator,
Nick Sorder, was seeing this and it was
the Democrat side doing it to a January,
he would be screaming about it for weeks
about how they
tried to murder him. The typical bombastic hyperbolic
framing of a partisan outlet. Let's watch the
clip really quickly. You can see it for
yourself.
Okay. So what the point is, this guy's
surrounded. K? They surround him.
Now if you already know, like, you can
see,
they're running people over. In fact, let me
play that
So this was widely covered. This guy's laying
on the ground. Watch what they do to
this guy.
And this is really not new, guys. If
you paid attention, they've been doing this for
years. Derek's been covering this for so long.
He runs over the guy more than once.
They're hitting him with a stick. The guy's
just standing. He's sitting there with his arms
in the air. These people are angry and
wanna take it out on this guy. That's
what's going on, and everybody sees this. Look
at that. You think that makes sense? You
think that's constitutional?
And you realize they're not breaking the law
by protesting.
That's just because they decide to arbitrarily say
you're all one thing just like they did
to people's trucker convoy.
So remember, Nick Nick wants you to believe
more of this. He could watch it on
loop as this guy, knowing what's been going
on,
pushes the horse. Didn't hit him. He pushed
it away from himself. He's trying to back
away, and they just start hitting the guy.
Right? If you're if you're gonna get run
over by a horse, I'm pretty sure I
pushed away from it too.
Okay. Just to be clear, that's the whole
video he shared. K? Let's watch it again.
So this guy, as they surround him, is
probably worried he's gonna get run over by
a horse. I would be too. I'm this
is my opinion. I can't speak to what
he thinks.
But right there,
that right there. That's the only time. He
says that's hit hitting a horse.
The horse is coming his way, and he's
trying to push back from it. That to
me, that seems pretty obvious.
We'll play it all the way through.
Look at that. And he strikes him in
the head.
I mean, it's just you guys, it's just
insane. These are people that are
openly supporting
police violence, openly supporting authoritarianism,
openly supporting
unconstitutional
actions
while screaming their America while screaming that we're
pro constitution, while screaming that we are fighting
off an illegal invasion even though these are
Americans protesting against crimes committed by your government.
It just makes me sad. It really does.
Because so many people look to people like
this be acting like they're somehow informing them.
Again, he says,
an LAPD officer beat the crap. He's he's
openly acknowledging that out of a rioter,
a rioter. You see, because they know the
buzzwords. It's sort of like calling you guys
invaders or insurrectionists. You all had a problem
with that. Right? Because it was wrong. Because
you weren't insurrectionists. You weren't invading the but
you rightly called it out. But now you're
showing, Nick, that you are the same exact
thing, that all you were waiting for was
the opportunity to do the wrong thing back
to them because it's childish.
And he says, who was hitting the police
horse? Now even if you think you even
if you think that that was meant to
hit him, is does that justify what's happening
because you claim you know, it's it's just
obviously not what was happening there. And he
says, more of this.
Assaulting officers and their horses should be met
with huge force.
You know, just recognize how dis absurd it
is for these people to act like they
actually care about people's rights.
And then Gunther Eagleman says, this is the
way. And Nick says, I could watch these
on loop.
It just honestly just makes me sad.
People like this getting beat up in the
streets, they don't care about that. Why? Because
they dub democrats.
I mean, that's that's my opinion about what
they may be thinking in that moment, but
look at their work. That's everywhere they do
it.
Now Stephen Miller,
right, mister Zionist, comes out and says, what
is the correct term to describe foreign nationals,
okay, waving foreign flags, rioting, and instructing federal
law enforcement, attempting to expel foreign invaders?
See my point? So okay. So when did
it become all foreign nationals?
Yes. It's clear that there are people that
are there who are brown. Have you checked
all their immigration status?
This this this ignorant and racist assumption that
everyone there who's not white is some I
mean, aren't there people I was just watching
a video from isn't aren't there people from
Denmark?
In fact, one of them is currently in
prison because he had a paperwork miscommunication in
02/2015.
He's a Trump supporter, by the way. He's
still in prison. And I think in Louisiana,
that's how it's working today. Care they don't
care about that because it makes the narrative
look bad.
But
what about the people from Russia? Or the
people from Poland? I mean, well, they're white
people who are clear illegally here. There. We
we don't focus on that. Right? The point
is, as Stephen Miller already pointed out and
Trump even made clear, Stephen hates people that
don't look like him. He want if he
said Trump said verbatim, if it was up
to him, there'd be a 100,000,000 people here
and they would all look like him.
How much more do we need to hear?
I think it's just this guy is a
very clear
apartheid loving Zionist, all about racism. He's open
about it. And the point is foreign nationals
again. So brown people,
how do you know they're foreign nationals? They
had the Mexican flag. Maybe they were born
there. Now maybe they have citizenship. You guys
are assuming everything because it's easy to do
so. And on top of that, the main
point I made earlier, how did it go
from a bunch of Americans protesting ICE to
being foreign nationals,
all of it. You see what I'm saying?
Like, that's even if you wanna say they're
all people that are brown, how do you
know they're all foreign? But the point is
these were mostly Americans, and then because they
started showing flags, now it became an invasion
of Mexico.
You realize that was a thirty second difference.
You can't just shift into an completely different
narrative in the middle of protest and claim
that you're all Mexicans invading this country because
it meets the narrative you need to make
this work.
These people are disgusting.
I mean, they don't care about you. These
people
are absolutely
trying to hurt you. They're trying to destroy
this for them. They don't care about American
interests.
Now Erin Melnick says, specifically,
$800,000,000,
we already talked about this actually, for retention
and signing bonuses and $8,000,000,000
for hiring 10,000 new ICE officers over the
next four years.
So one of one of the immediate repercussions
is rationalizing more police force, more enforcement,
more surveillance over your life because clearly, we
need to look at what's happening.
That's the point. Trump, White House this morning,
big beautiful bill will give ICE agents raises
and bonuses and more. They're they're with the
plan that at least as Kurt stated and
we'll see if the bill passes, is to
turn ICE into the largest agency more than
anybody. More funding, more people,
over everything, over the FBI, over everything.
This is the new Gestapo, guys. I mean,
how do you not see how this is
being built?
Of course, we also know that they've sent
thousands of actual troops. Now we went over
the passed the commitatas act yesterday. I mean,
I mean, let me see if I can
just
bring
that
up.
Here it is.
Now this is important. I mean, it's very
simple too.
US 18 USC one three eight five. Use
of army, navy, marine corps, air force, and
space forces.
Now all it really means is a posse
of people that you put together to enforce
the law as you see it. And so
that's illegal with the point. You can't do
that unless
it's it's allowed within the constitution or it
is,
under a congressional like, the Insurrection Act. So
as it says already directly, whoever ex whoever
accepting cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by
the constitution, that's not what's happening right now,
not even they're arguing that, or act of
congress, which is what their I argue this
will go to, but that that's why they're
trying to create the argument that it's an
insurrection, so they can claim they can use
the Insurrection Act. But it says, whoever willfully
uses any part of the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, Air Force, or Space Force, so marines,
have been deployed, as a posse comitatus
or otherwise to execute the laws
shall be fined or imprisoned. That's the that's
why they're pretending like, oh, no. They're just
advising.
You could if you're that you would send
a marine to advise. You wouldn't send 700
over a thousand marines. You wouldn't send I
mean, it it's it's just this is my
point. We're being ridiculous by not just being
obvious about what that means. They're lying to
you. We all know they're lying to you.
So if someone somebody should be literally be
waiting for any indication that they're enforced. What
they're doing is enforced law by simply being
there. This is an escalation, and you know
it. What they're doing is being aimed at
Americans.
How is this not concerning for people? I'll
include this as well.
Now last couple points I wanna go over.
Oh, excuse me. Two more points that we're
gonna finish with Garcia.
This is an article from the Philadelphia
Philadelphia Inquirer. I thought it was interesting to
go over a couple points of the what's
going on in LA. Now it simply says
masked men burst from a van as a
100 or so mostly brown skinned men and
women ran frantically in every direction. This was
this is at at the Home Depot in
Wilshire Boulevard, Downtown Los Angeles. It says, quote,
they were just grabbing people.
The name they gave was Zoe Chittle or
however you say that.
And it says, they don't ask questions. They
don't know if any of us were in
any kind of immigration process. Now we don't
need to hear or say we already know
this. Miller and the rest have made that
publicly clear. It says masked, plainclothes officers of
the state, cruising America's largest city in unmarked
vans,
snatching individuals off the street without warrants and
whisking them away to locations unknown or detention
centers where members of congress have been barred
unlawfully from entering.
Sure sounds like a constitutional America, doesn't it?
And realize, regardless of how you your perceived
intentions that you pretend you know they think
from congress or whatever, congressional members have the
legal right to spontaneously
go through these these detention centers.
Look it up. They can literally show up
whenever they want and spontaneously do a walk
through. And they're just refusing that. Now whether
they then get violent with them because they're
mad about that, which is also a crime,
is a different conversation. The point is they're
refusing to allow them in, which is a
crime, and people don't wanna acknowledge that. But
the overarching point for me is just how
lawless this all is. No. You know, these
people are literally screaming about the constitution, America
and then ignoring the fact these people are
the current embodiment of an unlawful, unconstitutional force
in this country. No. No.
Faceless, nameless, no warrant, no charges provided.
Many say many cases just being locked away
until they figure it out. Oster, Khalil
or actually, I think Oster was released, but
then you have the case of the the
Danish father. I think it's right here.
I don't know. Where was that?
Oh, I guess I forgot to grab it.
Alright. It's right here, I think.
There we go. I did mention a few
times, so I'll include it today.
ICE unjustly imprisons Danish data four. And and
look it up. He's a he's a MAGA
supporter.
He was, you know, calling for Trump, calling
for Biden to be arrested. Like, it's I
think that not that that should necessarily be
relevant other than to show people on the
right that this is what's happening.
I mean and he he was literally showed
up for his final meeting to get citizenship.
Not a green card, citizenship.
And they arrested him based on a 2,015
paperwork miscommunication.
He's been in prison ever since. They they
went through a hearing and they they ruled
he had to stay in prison until they
figured it out. He didn't break any laws.
I mean, it's just it's so wild. And
understand that that's a previous both Trump's and
Biden's administrations that have looked at these documents
and let him continue.
And now suddenly, they get is this the
most dangerous people in the country?
We're being lied to, guys.
And you know it. Somewhere in you, you
know
it. Masked, plainclothes officers, not getting warrants.
Now it says the aggressive Southern California raids
led by U by ICE, which which not
coincidentally
came just days after Donald Trump's right hand
man, Stephen Miller, barked at ICE leaders, and
he did. The the link's right in here.
Yeah. I've I've posted it myself. He barked
at ICE leaders to hit an arbitrary quota
of 1,000,000 arrests this year, yelling, why aren't
you at Home Depot?
Think about that. Was the flash point for
tumultuous,
week life, few others?
Was the flash point for oh, it was
a finish in the sentence.
Basically, just saying, you know, that it's a
crazy moment for this country. And the bottom
the bottom line is, I think he said
seven eleven and Home Depot.
How are you gonna pretend that that's the
same as saying go after the worst in
this country? Other than just those who are
in front of us that are easiest to
grab.
Which means, by almost by definition, not the
most dangerous.
And it says, meanwhile, Washington attorney general Pam
Bondi announced that the regime would finally comply
with court orders and bring home the wrongly
deported Garcia, but only because the justice department
threw its massive resources into a nationwide witch
hunt that resulted in a braco Garcia's indictment.
If the provocative
ICE raids and the charges against the Salvatori
Salvadorian refugee were meant to change the national
conversation away from the ugly dogfight between Trump
and his former seeming co president and biggest
donor, the world's richest person, Elon Musk, the
ploy worked. I just I included that only
because whatever it is, clearly,
it did have an effect of really, you
know, redefining the current conversation. Now it says
even though the confrontations were largely confined to
a handful of blocks in the nation's most
sprawling metropolis,
the black smoke from the skeleton frames have
burned out EVs,
the stray Mexican or Palestinian flags emerging from
the thick pea soup of tear gas, and
the urban warfare pop of flashbang grenades proved
catnip to two TV news producers.
Yeah. It's a good way of framing that,
seeing as how these are very kind of
buzz things that are happening as, you know,
in many ways, the anomaly of the whole
situation. If you stand back as usual and
look at everything else, this is the standout
that was fixated on and for obvious reasons.
Now it says the story of what's really
happening in Los Angeles is the story of
Trump's American
authoritarianism.
Now to be clear,
it's no different than left or right. Biden
was the same building block in exactly where
we are now. So make sure you understand
that. It says it's it's it, it starts
with a big lie. The fallacy that mass
deportation would only target murderers, rapers, and other
hardened criminals, which are very that's verifiably false.
The majority of them have not been. That
hides the true purpose. And, again, remember, the
majority of them were here legally
in regard to the specifically, in regard to
the earlier block of those to El Salvador,
and largely those followed as well. But that's
the main point I'm making. And here, let
me include that, actually.
I did a I did a specific show
on just that point, and it's entitled Trump
deportations revealed to be full of innocent people.
Very clearly stating again, legal immigrants with no
criminal record despite the argument always being, but
they were here illegally. It's like, you didn't
you didn't listen. That's not the case.
Continuing.
Yeah. It says,
the fallacy, the mass deportations only target the
worst that hides the true purpose of bending
some laws and totally ignoring others for the
sole purpose of amassing more power for the
regime. Now you could disagree with the why,
but I think that's part of it. Now
it says there is a common thread to
the thuggish intensity of the expanding ICE raids.
The White House's over the top response to
federalizing California National Guard troops and now even
sending in marines and its aggressive investigation of
the brave Garcia.
It's important to highlight regardless and this is
how this has always played.
Because Newsom is like the number one bad
democrat in minds of most people,
you don't care that it's a violation. You
don't care that there's an issue with states'
rights. You you know, it's it's interesting to
think about.
Now if you wanna if if Newsom was
doing something you could prove was in the
real time a crime,
then then you could make an argument for
why the why there's an authority point to
where they could step over and enforce the
law. But to argue that he simply just
not do it like, the argument of deploying
national guard, that's a state's right issue, guys.
That's the governor. But nope.
Because they just wanna do what they want.
Now Gavin is just as much a criminal
as the rest of them. So it's not
about one versus the other. You see, that's
what they want you to fall into. It's
about giving you the tools or rather the
ammunition
to go after each other, left versus right,
so they can all, probably Trump and Gavin
Newsom together, roll out this agenda. Now I'm
not saying I think that's the case. I'm
just trying to make a point. I think
half the time, they don't even know they're
on the same side, but the reality is
what's actually rolling out.
It says the it is it is the
the common thread. It is this. The so
called government exists only for the purpose of
attacking its many enemies,
real or perceived,
or rewarding its small circle of friends, and
then it invents lies about make believe insurrections
and a fictional rule of law to justify
its crude retribution.
Now I'm willing to bet you the person
writing this is not making that point about
January 6, but I am.
I completely agree with that. Then it lies
about make believe insurrections. And guess what?
Just like they lied about January 6, now
you've got people like the Bennet Johnsons and
Nick Sorters and Marjorie Taylor Greens calling the
smallest sit in an insurrection.
Because and and not like a joke, not
trying to make a case because you see
they did it to us, but openly trying
to make the case because well, now you
see why. Now you see why, both because
of the Alien Enemies Act and whatever else
they're they need to make the case that
this is an actual rebellion, an actual insurrection
so they can then do what they're trying
to accomplish,
at least without less restriction.
It says, in recent weeks, the number of
undocumented immigrants arrested by ICE and other federal
authorities has roughly doubled. Think about that. After
he goes, go to seven eleven's at Home
Depot. In fact, I think it says that
in here.
But the number with no previous criminal record,
not even a traffic violation, has also risen
to more than forty percent. So that's all
said and done. Remember, in the beginning part
about the over 300 or almost 300, that's
where you had over seventy percent of them
that were here legally with no criminal record.
But based on what they're reporting, which I
can't necessarily say I can actually prove in
the moment, because I you know, they I
I don't their investigation claims is the way
to frame it. But that 40% of all
of it so far has been not even
a traffic ticket. And I agree with that.
I think the evidence has clearly shown that,
that they are grabbing just about whoever they
can. And it says, as agents scramble to
meet Trump's and Miller's arbitrary ratings, rantings about
arresting more than 3,000 people a day.
Now it says, surely, Trump and Miller knew
that Los Angeles isn't only the home to
more undocumented essential workers, and that's how he
frames it anyway, than any other US city
that the American citizens were there were would
also likely erupt in outrage.
Now the point to make there is the
same region Donald Trump, which is interesting is
you call them essential undocumented workers and you
get the right people in the Republican party
would oh, that's so well, guess what? Donald
Trump already made that case. He already told
you that there are people in the restaurants
and golf courses and and, you know, and
and different, you know, farmers.
That if they write a letter, we'll we'll
we'll make that oh, so you're making an
exception for the people that you know. And
you and we're not talking about we're talking
about illegal immigrants that they know are illegal,
that they're going, well, it's okay. They can
stay.
So then Trump made the same point then.
Right? So there are some essential to them.
I just think it's important to think about
that for those that wanna make the case
when a democrat says it, but don't wanna
see it the same thing when Trump does
it. My point is, if they're here illegally,
that should be a crime. Period. Deport them.
Put through the process. Prove that's the case.
Present your evidence. Remove them, which can be
a
blip, a momentary
you know, it doesn't have to be some
trial and hearing with the and the idea
that there's even, you know, jury. It's just
people have made this into something so cartoonish.
All it requires is the simple acknowledgment of
the evidence presented to some kind of authority
that shows here is the evidence we have.
He is an illegal alien. This is the
case.
Otherwise, as we've already shown, people are getting
grabbed who are saying, I'm an American citizen,
and they arrest him anyway. And had they
not been forced to give due process, they
might already be in El Salvador. And it's
that's that's not even my opinion. That's logic.
It's obviously already happened to more than one
person, including American citizens.
Now it says,
the president's decision to cite a so called
rebellion to federalize the National Guard in the
golden state against the wishes of of Gavin
Newsom, a power play that hasn't been pulled
since 1965,
back when the federal government actually opposed racial
segregation, they write, lacks any threat of legal
justification.
If the National Guard called up with hundreds
of soldiers forced to sleep on concrete floors
and so far having little to do while
they're awake, which is important to think about,
was an overreach. The point they're making is
that it was more about a show of
force than not not that they needed it.
It says Monday's news that the White House
has summoned more I think it's now over
700 marines
was beyond ridiculously right. The move defies both
history and legality. I agree. Since the military
can't be deployed on US soil without invoking
the 18 o seven Insurrection Act, which has
not been done.
You can't just try to pretend like they're
not enforcing law is just that's embarrassing. It's
like claiming you can't bring back Garcia. We
all knew you were lying. We all you
you knew that we knew you were lying.
It's all this tap dance we do. We
pretend like we don't know.
But it says, but nothing has truly defined
the utter lawlessness of the 40 president and
its and his minions, he writes, more than
its handling of Gregor Garcia's case.
After judges, including the Supreme Court with its
three Trump appointees,
important to think about, ordered the White House
to facilitate the return of a man a
of the man a federal prosecutor conceded was
wrongly deported to notorious Gulag in El Salvador
and then was fired,
Rather than comply with the rule of law,
Bondi's justice department worked frantically to backfill a
case against Garcia,
stretching to prove he is a gang member
and a human trafficker after he was stopped
in 2022
with a carload of fellow immigrants. Now I
I've argued very the same. What was going
on there seems like something strange. I I
would I would argue based on what we
have and the logic, it seems most likely
he was simply bringing whether illegal immigrants or
people that were simply from Mexico who bought
Visa, but, you know, probably illegal immigrants
to work for the person he worked for.
Construction.
You know? And and, yeah, that that arguably
is a crime, not even arguably. Yeah. Those
are illegal immigrants and you're moving. That's why
they're trying to force this into the human
trafficking side of it. But you understand how
clearly that is a much less reality of
bringing people to go work at his boss's
construction site. But, you know, again, if you're
gonna make an issue about that and claim
that's the biggest story, then then you should
be calling out Trump for allowing the same
illegal immigrants to work at this the farms
and the restaurants that he likes.
You know, it's the same point. How you
can't just pretend they're all criminals because this
is the case you wanna call out.
So if we're gonna be equally applying the
law, then if they're illegal over there at
the farm that Trump likes, then they should
also be illegal here. If they're not, they're
not. The bottom line is you don't know.
And that's why due process is important. And
that's why now having him back to go
through this is a win for the people
calling for that, whether or not he turns
out to be a criminal. But they're never
gonna frame it like that. They're gonna pretend
that we just wanted the criminals in the
country because that's how the two party illusion
works. They lie.
But
where was it? Oh, yeah. And so the
'22 the '20 the case is that he
was coming with them in that car, but
the end of it was released with a
citation.
So how in the world they work their
way back to make this all up? I
mean, I'm willing to bet you anything it's
rooted in just a few people who are
stating all of these things. And with what
we've seen, how can we take this at
face value at this point? It says in
the, Gregor Garcia case, a Tennessee based federal
prosecutor resigned because according to ABC News, he
came to see the investigation was politically motivated.
That's he resigned. There's another guy that got
fired for simply pointing out that what they
did was an a mistake, and Bondi fired
him for that. It says this is one
lawyer for the Salvatore native saying, quote, they'll
stop at nothing at all, even some of
the most preposterous charges imaginable,
just to avoid admitting that they made a
mistake, which is what everyone knows happened in
the case. It says the rising tide of
protest is showing that a lot more everyday
folks can see through the over the top
lies. I agree with that. That than either
the White House or a complaint pundit class
had counted on.
I really believe that. And that's the problem
with a lot of this for people that
want the partisanship to be the point.
I think people from all sides are seeing
this. Now a few more things to go
over around Garcia since we did focus on
this a lot in the last show
and plenty of others. I'll include the one
I think is most important that goes back
to the origin of this, and I'll include
this, which has all the links right here
to every court document that proves exactly everything
I'm saying. And the the show is called
the unprecedented gaslighting and lies around a break
Grego Garcia.
And this is just the one hour part
that's focused just on that that I broke
down on Twitter.
So this is from a few days ago,
the seventh,
and it's, in a NBC, the questions raised
by the new charges against Garcia. And I
wanted to include this. Gotta give you a
quick little background from things that we've covered
in the last show. And it says, Gilmore,
Barbara Garcia's sudden return to The United States
on Friday to face federal charges of smuggling
migrants across the country
was a messaging triumph for the Trump administration,
which is what it was about.
The news deflected public attention from a series
of unanimous court rulings,
including a Supreme Court decision that president Donald
Trump did not have the power to unilaterally
detain and deport individuals to foreign prisons without
the review of a judge. That's a different
ruling.
Right? They're they're the the the they're not
winning in most of these. So over here,
one of the articles is saying it's distract
from Elon Musk and then breaking up. That's
more partisan, my opinion. And this one's saying
it's distract from these court
you can decide. But clearly, seems to be
a pretty common concern or possibility that these
things are being done to make you stop
looking at something else. Now whether it's the
partisan media saying that or not, that is
something that happens. And so I think it's
interesting that that's a valid point. There's a
lot of these rulings that are pretty un
you know, it's not makes them look really
bad. Now it's a former senior law enforcement
official who spoke on the condition of anonymity,
citing fear of retaliation,
which is telling, said he was struck by
the large amount of resources the DOJ put
into the investigation of Garcia.
Quote, they came hard at a relatively low
level guy, which does not necessarily make it
improper,
just odd. Perhaps they wanted the last word,
which seems childish, said the former official. Typically,
you work up the chain, not down it.
That said, at least he gets his due
process rights this time around.
There's nothing that that everything I believe I
agree with every single thing he said. On
top the idea
that you would retroactively
in in the understand why when they started
the investigation based on the sealing date,
they were out they were already publicly saying
that's never he's never coming back. That's never
gonna happen, knowing they were building a case
to try to do that. It's It's just
flatly dishonest everywhere you look. It's all politically
motivated. They'll lie about anything to make themselves
not look like they lost or that they
somehow were, you know, it just it's petty
in every sense of the word.
But the point is,
base, is that they can't the oh, that
they went to the lowest. You know, somebody
who you know, putting this much effort into
somebody who
is
based on everything they have at best. And
you could argue somebody's connected to these things.
Then their evidence is not even for that
other than what they say they're gonna present,
which maybe that'll show it. That'll be due
process, and that's all we really called for.
Down here, it says, in an unusual move,
Bondi also described the allegations against Garcia
that were not included in the indictment. Now
this is a really important point that people
skip over.
Now I'll I'll read this I think it's
it's just she said that coconspirators
alleged that Garcia, quote, solicited nude photographs and
videos of a minor and, quote, played a
role in a murder of a rival gang
member's mother.
For decades, attorney generals from both parties and
state and local prosecutors have generally accused
defendants of crimes only
for which a grand jury indicted them, which
doesn't even that's not proof you understand. That's
simply based on evidence, but an accusation
that has yet to be proven in court.
And there's plenty of indictments that prove out
to be completely baseless that have been concocted
by the prosecutors.
But the point
is that historically,
not only is it not usual that they
would point out things that aren't in the
indictment, but it is considered an abuse of
power.
So discussing other potential crimes
like they just did, accuse saying, well, these
are being accused of things that were not
even included in the indictment,
long regarded as abuse of prosecutorial
power, risking unfair harm to defendants' reputations,
which is why they do it. It's the
court of public opinion.
So what it's showing you is that with
Bondi firing people that say what we know
is now correct or them doing something that
is considered to be, like, not just lacking
decorum, but, like, wildly irresponsible, if not, like
yeah. It's not illegal, but it is
dishonest. And there's a word I'm looking for
there. The point is that what they're doing
is is manipulative.
They're doing this knowing they're not even trying
to accuse them of that or even try
to prove those things in order to get
the people out there watching to assume that,
just like they did to start.
Rapist, terrorist, gang member,
leader of the gang, Truman trafficking. And then
that all clearly collapsed in front of them,
and they started scrambling to make this case
up. But it's just so dishonest.
A former senior justice department official who requested
anonymity, citing fears of retaliation, said
that, Bondi often speaks as a partisan Trump
loyalist, not a neutral law enforcement
official, which is obvious. Whether that person themselves
is politically motivated, that is transparent.
Quote, she says the press and let's be
clear.
All sides.
I mean, it's very look at KJP and
Biden. It's the same thing, guys. These people
lie as a matter of policy. It says,
she talks she says the president's name every
time, said the former DOJ official. She talks
more like a politician stumping for a candidate
than an attorney general who was out there
talking independently. Because that's how it's we pretend
it's supposed to be. Right? They're only investigating,
going after crimes, and it's not they're not
there for Trump. They're there for the government
and for the American people, but we see
how this plays today. Now not that that's
always been the case, but at least that's
what they project. Today, that mask is off.
And it says, you can see that in
the words that she uses.
The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that people
close to the matter said the indictment pro
prompted the resignation of a veteran career prosecutor
who headed the criminal division at the office
and the case was filed. The journal did
not name the prosecutor. However, days after the
indictment and a federal grand jury in Nashville,
Ben Schrader, the head of the criminal division,
resigned.
I mean, you know, it's like with the
COVID thing. And you're seeing FDA and CDC
people resign in protest because they're calling them
out for crimes. It says something. Now it
doesn't always mean that they're right, but it
says something.
Now Michigan
Advance
Platform says federal prosecutors in Nashville asked judge
to keep Garcia detained until trial.
I you know, based on what is you
know, it's all if you're just accusing them
of terrible things, that's not usually enough to
justify keeping them in prison.
There needs to be some kind of a
background. Seems, you know, I think which this
all seems very politically motivated.
This is where Greg Garcia was returned to
Nashville
from El Salvador on Friday to face criminal
charges of human smuggling charges tied to a
twenty twenty two traffic stop. Realize, Bondi just
said twenty twenty one on a recent discussion.
It just shows you how completely they're not
I don't even think that people are making
decisions, to be honest. This is how I
feel right now. But it says he appeared
briefly in a downtown Nashville courtroom on late
Friday and is scheduled to return to court
this Friday, so coming up this week, for
a formal arraignment of the charges against him.
I'm very interested to see what happens here.
Now not in the like, as this goes
forward to the actual presentation of evidence and
the ability to push back on it.
But it says a federal grand jury indictment
issued under seal on May 21. No longer,
but that's it was there's a reason they
did under seal because they didn't want you
to know it was being built because that
made them look really stupid.
Look look for yourself. Many examples post May
21, they were claiming that, oh, never not
gonna happen. But it says it made public
June 6 the charges with, quote, conspiracy to
unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain and
unlawfully transport
of illegal aliens for financial gain.
Wait. It says unlawfully transport illegal aliens for
oh oh, conspiracy to and then the actual
act. Now it says Garcia, quote, knowingly and
unlawfully transported thousands of undocumented aliens for profit
between 2016
and 2025.
A member of MS thirteen gang, they said.
Okay.
It says the criminal charges stem from November
traffic stop.
Okay. But wait a minute. You just said
2000 so 02/2016.
You're claiming you have evidence that shows in
2016
up until 2019,
and then through that 2025,
that he was
a human trafficker.
You're claiming he abused women. You're claiming that
he was a gang member, a leader no
less.
And then for some untold reason, Donald Trump's
administration in 2019 gave him a withholding of
removal?
They investigated the case because that they must
have. Right? Because they would not do that.
And they said you can stay here because
you're not a risk. That's what they said.
How does that make sense, guys? How do
you rationalize this without acknowledging that the Trump
administration either didn't do his job or it
didn't care? Or, in a option, that that
was the reality and then they manufactured this
today and just backwardly built this case based
on the statements of people they for who
knows how that works out. I just it's
with how many times they've been caught not
just lying, but, like, forcing others to lie,
contorting information,
manufacturing
things. How do we take this at face
value? If that's the case, if it's based
on just people saying, I know he did
this and that. There's usually more than that
needed to make something like this stick.
02/2016,
it says.
I just think that's very telling.
But, of course, the people making this case
will make it all about Biden somehow, even
though it doesn't make much sense. Carol's charges
stem from November
or November 2022
traffic stop,
which they then let him go with his
citation. So the cops that were there let
him go,
feeling there was not enough evidence to make
this make sense.
Then Trump's administration, or rather before that, Trump's
administration allowed him to stay when they say
for 2016 forward, he was a criminal.
I I mean, if you're claiming all of
this stuff was happening and it was so
transparent,
how did you not know that then?
It says prosecutors now alleged that further investigation
revealed that the stop involved the Garcia smuggling
migrants.
I mean, how is it even possible that
the the Trump administration in 2025
can further investigate a single traffic stop from
2022?
They can read over the documents that were
there,
track people down,
But even then, you're gonna tell me what
they now that their recollection about something five
years ago? I mean, it just doesn't make
much sense from from a logical perspective.
It says that immigration from El Sal an
immigrant from El Salvador, Abrego Garcia, had received
an immigration court order in 2019
that allowed him to reside in The United
States and specifically barred the federal government from
deporting him to El Salvador where he faced
gang violence. That's Donald Trump's administration
acknowledging the same body of evidence and and
allowing him to stay. The prosecutor's memo seeking
Gabora Garcia's detention until trial
filed in federal court Monday, get this, alleges
there is a serious risk that Garcia and
or persons acting on his behalf will obstruct
justice and or intimidate the witnesses against him.
Should be he released from federal custody, then
why do you allow him to stay here
from 2019 until 2025?
You can't really rectify those two things, guys.
They also argued Garcia was a flight risk
and danger to the community. Again, a danger
to the community, but you allowed him to
stay there until 2025.
In their memo, prosecutors said the plan to
raise allegations that children without legal immigration status
were transported and, quote, used in unsafe ways
to avoid detention
are Garcia's illegal smuggling activities, they claim. Garcia
has not been charged with crimes involving transport
of children.
Just think about the disgusting irresponsibility
of claiming child trafficking without that even being
included in the indictment.
That's Pam Bondi for you, or more likely,
whoever's puppeteering what she says.
Here's the indictment.
You can read through it. It'll probably just
frustrate you.
We went over this in the past, Joe.
That's what I'll include again for you. It's
on my my server, so it won't go
away. Now I'll include this for you. I'll
include the show we did. I'll include the
clip here. And I really wanna stress again,
every single one of these court documents prove
exactly, not just with statements, but with evidence
presented, with the date with the data we
can with their the the documents they're claiming
make x, y, and z case, and you
can look at the document that shows that's
not the truth. It's right there. But, guys,
this is why we get suppressed. This is
why you get four retweet because this is
wildly inconvenient
for people with the with the power structure
that rely on people without brains.
Anybody who's honest out there with intelligence is
gonna go, oh, well, that's interesting. Well, let's
look at the actual data. Let's see what
it says. Here's what Jones is screaming. What
does the document say?
We see that's not allowed to be the
case. You're supposed to point to pieces of
paper and claim, you know, that's how the
world works today. But I think we're changing
that. Not we as in just me and
Tila, but us, everybody, you watching, the actual
independent media, the people out there who are
aware of the partisan illusion.
Now Jason Bassler put this out today. No.
I'm not falling for the Elon Trump circus.
No. I'm not biting on the LA ice
outrage bait. I'm still here talking about Palantir
because that's the story they're desperate to distract
you from. Now I agree. That's, I mean,
the most likely culprit, but I'm not gonna
say we know for sure which major thing.
Like, they said, maybe they thought it was
the court documents. Everybody is the thing that
they're focused on. But I agree with them.
I think this is the the if it's
the only thing, I don't know. But this
is, like, in my opinion, the most central
agenda that's being rolled out from a nonpartisan
perspective.
And, clearly, even the way Alex Jones, like,
embarrassingly tried to downplay
Palantir as some sort of small company lefty
thing. I mean, wow. That was embarrassing.
People see through it. My point, though, is
is that, money's sure you understand that these
things are being used in a lot of
ways, whether real or not, to distract you.
But since Jason, myself, the IMA, and my
just my work in t lab in general,
we've been relentlessly calling out Palantir up until
this and post the you know, highlighting the
database that we've all been calling out. So
my point was I didn't need to reiterate
all that today. I thought this was important
to cover. But I agree with Jason.
And Warren Davidson says beware of the, quote,
conservative
case for digital ID. And highlights Laura Loomer
saying time to deploy Palantir to Los Angeles
to deal with the the the illegals,
even though that's most of them, they're what
they're they're dealing with are actually not.
You know, we'd love to see it. If
you're lying you're lying if you say you
wouldn't. Just such, like, desperate projection. If you
read the comments,
it's just it's just, like, universally hated by
so many people. The point is,
I think it's desperate to need that to
be the case and and you tell yourself
that everybody disagreeing is all lefties and Soros
and, you know, because otherwise, you're probably pretty
unhappy.
The point is, quote, in conservative, like, so
understand even people that are conservative are calling
her a fake conservative because you can see
how this plays together.
But just recognize how easy it is to
see where this leads, whether it's digital ID
or every other part of the great reset
built back better that they pretend they're fighting.
Warren sees
it. I'll include
many different article or a few of the
most important. We talk about Palantir. In case
you haven't seen our coverage, welcome to Palantir
World Order. Derek wrote that on April 24.
Here is my show, the great Palantir Reset
on
April 21.
And of course, here is our IMA panel,
which I recommend you check out. The Palantir
AI Panopticon.
Very important. More of those coming your way.
And I will leave you oh, actually, no.
I forgot these were what I added. I
think I already included those in the show
notes. So I'll leave it there.
Well, thank you for tuning in today, guys.
I really do think this is an important
conversation to have. And then we keep calling
this stuff out. I mean, you guys see
it. You're that's why you're here. I mean,
it's it's get frustrated as you can clearly
tell, but I'm not gonna slow down. I'm
not gonna stop. I'm not gonna let it
distract me. We have to call these things
out. We have to continue to try
as best you can, not forceful way, not
yelling, but try as best you can to
show people that. You know, that look look
at the false nature of this. Look at
the arguments.
It's obvious that this is a whole of
government agenda, you know, or at least just
give the give the source material, show people
what we can see.
I am genuinely of the mind that most
people, like I saw with COVID, like I
see with a lot of things right now,
are pretty much aware of what's going on.
There's different narratives that get people pulled into
the partisanship,
but it's pretty clear that people are uncomfortable
with this. You know, there's a very small
grouping in my opinion. It's a lot of
people, but in the context of how my
people in this country, I think it's a
small group of people that just wanna see
it all, that this hate people that are
in this country, hate brown people, hate pea
or rather a Zionist vein that hates you
too, by the way. And are just
desperately,
disgustingly forcing this through because of what they
wanna see and are there being framed
by the illegitimate process in all this as
everybody in the parties.
Just like with just like with the Democrat
thing, illegitimately
framed for just everyone supporting everything COVID nineteen.
That wasn't true. You can see that today.
I just like on the left and right,
people were coerced and forced. But as I
said then, it wasn't partisan. People on all
sides were seeing through it.
Help me fight this, guys. We are making
a difference, and you see it every single
day. If you wanna continue to support this
platform, there's plenty of ways down below to
do it. It's a value for value. We
do this for free. We put the workout
because it matters. And it's more important to
me that you see it and that you
understand
even if you don't care to donate. That's
what I care about, and I'll do that
every single day of my life whether or
not we ever get a return. But if
you wanna see us continue and you wanna
see this grow and you want more of
this work, show us how valuable it is
to you.
Thank you for being here.
I love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.