You're a terrorist, and you're part of October
7. We're coming after you, and we don't
care if you're in Qatar. We don't care
if you're in Lebanon, and it could be
even if you're in England. We'll
it 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.
Wednesday, 09/10/2025.
Thank you for joining me today.
Very interesting arc to today's show. Some sad
news to start, which I'm sure everybody has
seen,
causing a lot of chaos in the partisan
field today, which is very much it's it's
an interesting addition to a lot of the
stuff that's going on in the world today.
Horrifying, alarming, sad. Human beings being killed is
sad regardless.
And we'll talk about that to start. But,
honestly, it's not the biggest story we're gonna
discuss today. There's a lot of incredible things
going on in the world.
And tomorrow is September 11.
And I really think it's an interesting time
to think about what that means in the
way that Israel has
engaged with that concept.
And you can go back to the beginning,
and Israel's are really
how well, I forget what exact time frame.
However many decades after the fact, Netanyahu,
you know,
Milan
Netanyahu said
that nine eleven was
see, now I'm forgetting the exact framing, that
nine eleven is good for Israel.
That yeah. I'm just butchering the points. I
can't remember exactly what it was or what
he actually said. It jumped into my head,
but you guys are probably familiar with this.
That Netanyahu had said that Israel was that
nine eleven was good for Israel. Now, yes,
I mean, you know, you could argue there's
nuance that he meant because it exposed x,
y, and z. Well, and then but you
add more of it. You go through the
story. You continue to this day, and you
recognize many, many, many examples
where Israel was involved, Israel was documenting, Israel
was, you know, wildly benefiting.
The US has fought Israel's wars continually ever
since. You know, it's it's very interesting to
see. And I think we've noticed many times
over the years that Israel has used nine
eleven, has threatened things like nine eleven, has
pointed to you know, has
carried out different events to drive people to
certain positions.
It's not conspiracy theory. But we're gonna go
through that keep keeping this in mind, knowing
that this is tomorrow, even starting with with
Charlie Kirk and asking yourself if there's more
going on in the world that relates to
some of these points. But we're gonna talk
about some really big stories today that are
you know, as I think as always, you
watch this show, you know, there's almost always
some larger kind of underpoint
to everything we're pointing to. There's always the
individual topics in the different categories. But I
I mean, I do my best anyways. Not
every single show, but I think more often
than not, there there's kind of an unspoken
point behind it that I don't even, you
know, maybe fifty fifty decide to even point
out in the show. So just always think
about that. The way these things connect, the
way that these stories align, there's usually a
common thread. And so today, a lot of
the things we're gonna talk about and and
and so you know that Charlie Charlie Kirk
being shot and as as I can see
now, at least being reported that he was
pronounced dead, we'll talk about that to start.
For for, you know, in for a lot
of reasons. And it's a large story. It's
it's, you know, as being a human being,
it's a sad story. And I always think
it's important that we show decorum, which I've
said in any context. The same way that
the right comes out and shows how disgusting
they are when there's something bad happened to
the people on the left they don't like.
We're seeing the same thing happen right now
with people on the left being really disgusting
about this story. And we're also seeing a
lot of right wing people using a lot
of really disgusting you know, using what happened
to progress their personal agendas and to create
more violence and negativity and division amongst Americans
because it's the left evil people that are
doing all of this. We'll get into that
at the start.
But we're gonna talk about a lot today
that overlaps with some, you know,
ongoing stories in the world today. One of
which I think is health that I really
have been. I think it's important with the
way I think Trump's administration is pivoting into
some really alarming things in health that we
don't lose sight of that. It can be
easy too with all that's going on, but
I'm happy to see that the Maha community
is,
rightly so, very much fixated on that conversation,
and it doesn't seem to be missing much.
There's plenty of them within that that seem
to be willing to pull punches wherever it
suits the interest of the team. So it's
they're not really Maha in my opinion. They're
really team Trump or team US government as
it were. Maybe they don't realize that, but
it's all the same thing. But we're gonna
talk about a few more additional points around
the health discussion and make sure you didn't
miss some of the important things I think
we're developing around, like the Comerity shot, for
example, which I still don't think people are
acknowledging is actually there.
But overlapping this with the Bill Gates conversation
of yesterday, but I think for points that
are important to see how I mean, just
the hypocrisy around it all, but I think
as it relates to the way that this
is conducting itself that, you know, Gates is
an immersed part in this. He's very adamantly
and outspoken working with Trump in regard to
the vaccination direction. And I just almost can't
make sense of how crazy that is with
what has I mean, I always say this.
I know the people, the team sport politics,
top of these paradigm manipulator, they aren't gonna
call it out. They don't care. But I
know I believe there's a ton of honest
people. Even though they may pick one side
of the left paradigm, right paradigm that I
may not agree with, why don't they scream
about this? It just blows my mind because
it's such an obvious according to Jones, he
should be in prison right now, but now
he's on the inner circle. It just feels
like a very weird deviation.
But where I think those are coming from?
The floated idea that Fauci may now come
back before congress. I I certainly hope so.
Or that Obama,
Tulsi Gabbard came out, which is oddly, I
do agree, getting very little attention, which I
do even even though I don't feel it's
gonna happen, I still think it's weird as
getting little attention that Gabbard came out and
once again
discussed the idea that, you know, that Obama
is committing a coup or who had and
is treasonous.
I don't think it's gonna amount to anything
because I think they're all part of the
same team, but it's an interesting development And
and where this all goes, I personally think
it's more largely distraction.
We're gonna talk about some overlapping points of
of,
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Epstein. Just wanna keep you up on the
developments as they go on day by day.
It's important to see where this goes and
that we don't, you know, when these stories
start to flounder and they don't go the
way that the partisan teams promised they would,
they tend to fall by the wayside.
Surprise, surprise. And so it's important that we
keep up on, you know, how it's not
going that direction and that we be honest
with ourselves about what's happening. Some over some
parts that overlap with that in in regard
to immigration, but largely sort of like the
technocratic change in this country.
And just the you know, really, that part
of it, but, like, with the ICE kind
of gestapo
national police force feeling that it's, you know,
what's developing,
it's pretty alarming and an update on a
story that you're really gonna wanna see about
the family that was shot at and what
ultimately happened to them. Even though they were
proven to have not done what they said
in regard to running over the police officers,
you're gonna be upset with the way the
story ends. We're gonna talk about
sorry. That was just offer oh, that's right.
Sorry. I included something that I had forgot.
I'm just going through these. But one of
the main things that I wanna make sure
we talk about that I think is really
important to where this goes for the bigger
picture is an important article that's breaking down,
which largely what we already knew, but really
insightful about Silicon Valley, the technocrats as I
see it in particular, not all of them
who we're talking about.
Basically building out the whole dystopian digital control
structure in China, which we all know. We
know about how that setup goes, the surveillance
and the biometrics and the social credit. Well,
it turns out that Silicon Valley was the
people we Oracle the same people we talk
about. The people that are currently involved with
what's happening here were involved with creating that
there. And so what I think is an
important part of the story is how it
seems like that was sort of an incubator,
a test bed, to bringing this into the
West, which then shows you if you look
at it that way that it really is
just this technocratic blob that's just taking over
part. I mean, that's what it starts to
feel like. Either way, it's important to see
that the people who are now screaming about
freedom cities and democracy over here were the
ones that built that over there. And weirdly,
they're building this freedom area over here with
the same tools. They built that dystopian
terror over there.
So the point is it's the same thing,
obviously. And I think it's alarming to see
how clear that is, and people in the
partisanship don't wanna call that out. We're gonna
talk about some foreign policy, and depending on
how much time we have, this may go
the part that we
trim down. But and and, actually, this part,
I wanna make sure we get to. I
wanna talk about Nepal and what's happening there.
It's over the last so many days. There's
been what appears to either be a coup
or regime change or revolution.
We'll get into it. I think it's an
interesting point to make about the larger conversation
today and how there's a lot of moving
parts.
You know, like, we're we've like, we fixate
on, you know, the US government and and
the larger powers,
which in many ways we should. But as
this stuff continues to
let me put it this way. As I
see things change the way I think they're
changing, I think we're seeing more, you know,
the front lines move a bit in regard
to what makes sense and what needs to
happen, AI data centers, all these things that
are shifting. And so we'll get into, you
know,
that as a larger point for, like, kind
of the springboard for other conversations of regime
change. We're gonna talk about Venezuela. We're gonna
talk about,
the Freedom Flotilla
and the attacks on it. If you really
think about it, as we'll make today in
the show, make clear, and all all these
interconnect
very clearly if you think about it. And
we're gonna talk about and we're gonna get
into Israel in the next show quite a
bit more, but just the the overlapping points
there with Israel and what's going on and
the
threats
from
Netanyahu from, as we started with the rabbi,
saying, of course, anybody involved with October 7.
But that's a pretty broad way to say
that, first of all. But if it meant
just people they think are terrorists,
well, they think you're a terrorist. They think
I'm a terrorist. They think that person with
the Palestinian flag is a terrorist. So if
that person is saying we're gonna go after
those people
anywhere in the world, England, sure, which is
what we've already told you. The Israeli government
very much feels that they are not bound
by international law. They publicly said that more
than once. So I think it's interesting to
think about all of this. Coming back to
the beginning point, which we'll start with on
Kirk and what else is going on in
this country, how much of that is being
driven?
K. You know, like and that's not to
say that, you know, individual actions are all
part of some larger plot, like, deliberately so.
But that chaos that spins out because of
what's happening very much looks kind of like
what's going on in this country and what
we can see in other countries where things
like this start to spin out. And I
think it's concerning
because we have this mindset these things just
never come back to this play, never come
home to roost. Right? It doesn't come back
to the comfortable locations. You know, it's all
over there in some other distant place even
though we're paying for it and our governments
are doing it in our name.
And so what I see here is how
this can kind of interconnect with something that
is
creating the conducive situation for transition and power.
Simple way to look at it, but, hopefully,
you can decide for yourself based on what
we're looking at. So let's start with
this point.
And I'm gonna play a clip for you
only because it's pretty,
it's a long it's really not graphic because
it's hard to see. And I it was
clear to me when I zoomed in when
I first saw it that you could see
that he was shot in the neck. And
and and again, oh, actually, we should start
with the obvious point, which I found this
really interesting.
So let me bring this up so you
guys can see what I'm pointing out here,
and we'll get into the clips.
Now this is obviously a very he's a
very, very prominent character in this conversation. Right?
Charlie Kirk is well known. Very, very influential.
And I would also argue very, very, very
much on the right side of things. Like,
in the in, like, in the the the
conversation of the left right paradigm, he's far
right on that conversation. Not the same as
saying far right and, like, some Nazi in
the world. But in the left right sphere,
yeah, he's on the far right side of
that. Like, you could say people on the
left pushing back against him are in the
same position. And I think an on an
average person in the political sphere that sees
both sides as crazy, he pretty much acknowledged
that. That's not to say that I disagree
with him on everything
or that I did.
But But what's important to think about is
that this person is going to have a
lot of inflow like, a lot of there'll
be emotional in,
reactions everywhere, which is is not what journalists
should be doing, but already we can see
that kind of pouring out through Twitter. I
found it interesting the way that this immediately
happened that it really did overtake the conversation.
I'm not following 90% of the people that
are showing up my feed saying things about
Charlie Kirk. I found that interesting. So at
one point, I think it's important that the
system make sure that this is what we're
talking about. That's not you know, I I
I wanna say that we think about this
in a sense that, you know, it's important
to have decorum and have, you know,
empathy
for a person and had a family and
that people are dealing with these things. It's
a sad story. But also at the same
time that we are
it's
in our interest
for what we do to be analytical about
these things. It's the same point though. I
was talking about this to somebody else earlier
today. When we when the conversation happened with
Israel and and the the allegations of rape,
that's a horrible conversation.
And it was a very serious and very
emotional conversation. But what did I say? I
said, well, we should demand evidence. I'm not
gonna say I'm not gonna say they're lying,
but until we can have this proven, there's
no reason we should be blindly assuming that
regardless of how emotional it is. And so
the similar point is that we should do
our job in any situation like this. So
come at it and ask, you know, is
there something we should be asking? Is something
missing? Did they fake the whole thing? I
don't think any of that. But it is
okay that we ask these questions.
And and it's it's a very early point
in this conversation. It's probably gonna outrage people
that have been saying that, but it's the
same thing every time. It is the principle
of it all that we should be able
to ask everything. If you think that looks
wrong, call it out, but don't
say that as an absolute fact when you
don't know that for sure, especially that you
should have some level of decorum for the
families and the people involved and everything
because we're human beings, so we have empathy.
Regardless of whether they feel that for you,
you should be bigger than them and do
it back. Anyway, all that aside, I do
think that's important, guys, because we tend to
lose all of that in this extreme partisan
conversation.
Now this as he's sitting here speaking, apparently,
what it looks like is he was shot
in the neck.
And you can see it if you zoom
in even on this kind of out of
focus video. He was rushed away and not
too long later pronounced dead. At least, that's
what the reporting is. I even I hate
to even say that, but these days, you
know as well as I how many gross
people are out there that would jump to
and say things to get reported, and then
it gets kinda thrown through. But it does
appear to be the reality.
And so I'll play this first so you
guys can see that. They arrested somebody
right away or at least they had somebody
in custody. And this is this is largely
what I'm gonna talk about around this is
the ridiculous,
disgusting way that these things
cascade through the partisan conversation and are used
by both sides. And as they are right
this moment, by all the people you think
we we talk about every day. They're all
out there doing it. It's horrifying to me.
The point though is that they immediately said,
liberals, lefty, maniac, which certainly could be.
Wouldn't be any more of a, you know,
obvious assumption that a radical left is a
radical right or maybe anybody who was wrapped
up in in in extremist politics. And I
mean, again, in the context of our actual
thing, not like the real, you know, terrorist
maniacs out there. I'm talking about people who
are extreme in the version of our political
system, and they are it drive people crazy.
But it turned out that guy was not
actually the guy. The guy was somebody that
they arrested for whatever reason or detained, and
it turned out not to be that guy.
But before we even get to that, people
were already going, look. You can tell. He's
a liberal. And it just makes me sick
that the people with the largest reach in
the conversation were the first ones to jump
out and go get all the lefties. We
knew it. We told you the left are
bad, including people
who I I that I disappointed me to
see.
Whether or not it's a left person, guys,
how in the world are we gonna use
this conversation to jump into
lefties are bad or all left are crazy
or leftist violence or yes. There's extreme left
violence all over. And even if you wanna
argue that it's more so than the right,
are we gonna pretend that we don't have
the same problem on the right? The point
is it's just people who are crazy and
acting irrational when it comes to political
manipulation.
And most of us that are starting to
recognize how gross the two party illusion is
are starting to kinda see that, that anybody
on either side of this paradigm wrapped up
in the same way, the woke left, the
woke right, all of them are susceptible to
political manipulation, to social engineering, to even far,
far worse things.
So let's play this first, and I'll add
a few more points, then we'll go over
some of the things that I think are
important. It's very
short. And counting we're not counting game wireless.
Great.
So if you wanted to zoom that down,
I'm not going to. You can see it.
You can clearly tell something happened,
and then just kind of zooms off to
the side.
So here was the guy
and always saying is I have the right
to remain silent, which by the way, on
a side note, good for him.
Because because the point is that
it especially since he turned out not to
be the guy, that anything you say in
a situation like that will almost guaranteed be
used against you. Most lawyers will tell you
that. You know, cops have a job, try
they go after what they can find, and
if they are you're the only one in
front of them, well, they're gonna do their
best to make that the case. Not even
necessarily in a dishonest way, even though we
know that happens. Anyway, that these reports go,
so far, since it's happening as we speak,
that this guy turned out not to be
the guy. That's what the reports are saying.
And yet, it did spin out
in the ways you might expect.
So
on one side of it, five times August
says mainstream
MSNBC, CNN, the coverage of Kirk is truly
disgusting. And, you know, again, we don't even
need you all know how these cartoonish characters
on the left and the right, CNN and
Fox News, react in these conversations.
They it it's you know?
You can go back ten years ago, and
you would have found far more decorum than
you do today. It's got, like, a rapid
change in this country, in every field, in
every, you know, the power structure at the
very least. But it but disgusting.
He says even in a moment like this,
they have absolutely no shame.
Now I agree. Look for
yourself. You know? And and it's not about
saying, well, here's his opinions or here's that,
but it's about trying to go after this
person at a time when this is what's
going on. Now look. If you wanna make
an entire go after you know, like, look.
You can do whatever you want. This is
what I mean by decorum. Is it necessary
to make an entire hit piece on Kirk
today? Not really. But it's up to you.
You could do what you want. But the
point is this is the kind of political
drive because they see it as an opportunity
to go after the other side, and all
that really comes down to is driving us
against ourselves.
Now this guy says a crazy liberal boomer
shot Charlie
Kirk. In the close-up video, see, because he
looked at the video, saw a white guy,
and assumed it was a crazy liberal because
Charlie Kirk. That's the mindset that's going on
around these conversations.
And it says,
and, you know, blood blood, and it was,
you know, bad. It's all the blood. It's
all we keep seeing. They are coming for
you and your family.
Pretty sad. They want you kill your children.
I mean, guys, this is like George Bush,
neocon nine eleven stuff. And that's I'm just
it's just what comes to my mind, but
it's not unique to left and right. It's
just your government. And the point is simply,
they're coming for your children?
What? You mean lefties are in the corner
scheming about going after you? It's just disgusting.
Yes. There is clear examples where you can
show that there's weird left leaning things that
were focused on trying to indoctrinate your children
or transit. Yes. And guess what? You can
show just as many examples in the right
of similar ways that they were trying to
get that same influence. And, yes, there's different
versions of those manipulations,
but the indoctrination,
right, the brainwashing, the control over their lives,
same conversation.
I mean, I you I've called out these
things on both sides as long as I've
done this, but it just kills me that
you make it into every single left leaning
person. I'm using these examples,
but you look around, it's chaotic, the conversation
right now. They're literally demons, this person says.
Yeah. Really really objective in this conversation. They
will shoot us without warning. They'll stab us
on trains. You see how we're just now
just warping in everything? So what? Is it
now Democrats, or is it immigrants too?
See, it just becomes like they're just the
other. Right? Anybody but our team are now
all villain terrorists, monsting rapists, NS 13. You
know, it's it's just there's we're lacking some
kind of discernment here, guys.
And it says they will kill our children.
They'll hate you. The war has started. And,
see, this is where I'm most worried about
because that mindset is coming from the people
that we're always talking about. Because from from
their perspective,
this is a war. This is a culture
war. Right? The problem is that they blame
that on the one side, but they're, if
not equal, far more right now than the,
the culture war is a two part game,
and they're both playing it. Now Doom says,
serious question. How do you know for a
fact that it was a lib crazy liberal?
It's just because they already caught the guy.
And, again, the point is, at least reported
as of now, and last last I checked
when I went live, it it does not
appear to be the guy.
Right here. This is just the disclose points
out, but I did look this up as
well. Police confirmed the old man initially detained
was not actually the shooter. But, you know,
for all we know, that could spin out
next day and say turns out he was.
Just question everything is the only point I'm
trying to make. As of right now, the
information shows us that was not the guy.
So the point there is to recognize that
people are assuming based on what they see
because that's what they've been fed. Not everybody.
There's plenty of intelligent people out there going,
why is everybody so crazy when it comes
to politics? You know? But you have people
like this instead.
Now that I mean, there's people like this
that I'll start with, Ashley. Like, this is
the point I think is important.
If you wanna pretend like the left's crazy,
you know, the crazy lunatic liberals, right, they're
out there doing crazy acting violent race. Okay.
If you could look at Laura Loomer with
what she does on a daily basis and
the things that she says, the insanely disgusting,
vile, manipulative,
incorrect,
false things that she does every single day
and pretend that they're not the same
in principle, in action, like what they're doing
is just as manipulative and disgusting in the
extreme opposite way, then you're lying to yourself.
And there is plenty of rumors on the
right of the conversation, just as many as
there is on the left.
She says it's time for the Trump administration
to shut down, defund, and prosecute
every leftist organization. Right. Because we'll just make
up things to prosecute them for. Right? Or
the argument would be, well, we know they're
guilty because they're liberals. Right?
Funny thing is, even saying that, there's probably
people out there going, well, they are. Even
people that I wouldn't expect, even though that's
a really stupid, ignorant, shortsighted thing to say
because that can't be the truth. I mean,
obviously, everyone in the world could be guilty.
It's like the bottom line is that if
you pretend that every leftist organization is the
problem, you have gotten trapped in the culture
war. You've gotten absorbed into the political manipulation
that's going on in front of you. Now,
that's whether or not you think that this
was some other plan or somebody shot him
because it was part of an organized organized
effort because somebody faked it. Whatever you think,
it doesn't change that all of this is
leading to the direction that they've all the
power structures have been trying to drive us
to.
They want people to freak out and call
these things out. They wanna create the immigration
war. They wanna create the destabilization.
And you right now, the one thing I'm
seeing more than anything is people calling for
something to start. This was a moment. Charlie
they took out Kirk where war has begun,
and they're all doing that.
I don't know why anybody thinks that makes
sense right now. What do you think you're
at war with?
The left?
You mean the same people like you mean,
Bill Gates? You mean Larry Fink?
You mean all the people sitting next to
Trump? Or you just mean Biden and the
ones you don't like? You know, it's just
it's just an insane world view, and I'm
hoping that I'm speaking to the majority right
now because it is all over the place.
She says,
prosecute every organization. If Charlie Kirk dies from
his injuries, which it appears he did, his
life cannot be in vain. Right. So now
you're making a martyr. You're gonna make a
martyr of a man to go after blindly
people who have a different opinion than you
because we're the right side. Right? We're the
ones fighting against the bad guys
even though you're doing the exact same thing
in principle. Okay.
We must shut these lunatic leftists down.
You know? Okay. So if someone commits a
crime, then we can arrest them for that
crime, but that's not what they're talking about.
They don't care about the constitution,
the law, anything
if it blocks them from going after the
ones they don't like because, well, they're doing
it first
because we're in kindergarten, apparently. And it says,
once and for all, the left is a
national security threat. Ah, and here begins the
insurrection. Here begins the narrative of some kind
of internal emergency conversation
with whichever way you look at it, then
somehow magically rationalizes everything Trump's trying to do.
Maybe it's coincidence. Maybe not. Maybe she's giving
him the idea. I frankly don't care. I
see it building in front of me. I
see the reality that claiming the half the
country is a security threat creates the idea
that this is some kind I mean, look.
They're building the argument as they already did
that Obama tried to commit a coup. Now
I'm not
disputing the obvious nature of the flimsy garbage
they throwed out as the Russiagate case.
But if you think that they're actually, like,
at odds and it comes down
to the US government is one thing,
and there is more evidence than anything in
this conversation for you to truly understand that.
This, to me, is about trying to create
either the chaos that divides this country so
they can roll out the transition that is
in place or that another country can come
in and take advantage. This is what my
gut tells me and what the evidence backs
up, but you can decide. But here's Loomer
trying to initiate
a martyr, a war, a religious,
ideological war because, you know, that's supposed to
be bad. And, you know, it's only bad
when Iran does it, even though that's not
really what's happening. But when we do it
and call it freedom and western stuff, we
ignore it. It's just everywhere you look, it's
hypocrisy. These people are trying to start what
they always claim everybody else is doing,
and it is alarming.
Benny Johnson with a softer version says, Charlie
Kirk was answering a question about rampant left
wing violence. It's largely because that's most of
what these events are about when he was
shot today.
Now, Freeman right there, you could argue, yes,
that could have been a lefty.
It would make sense.
But it also could be somebody who wants
to start something like this. Right? Anybody objective
could consider that because the reality is
there's a lot of people who are pretty
upset about a lot of things. And if
you look at somebody like Johnson and Kirk,
who, by the way, have the right to
say and think whatever they want, and I
would die to protect that even though I
think they're pretty disgusting and and manipulative and
not because of an ideas, but because they're
deliberately lying to you regardless of their ideas.
But there's a lot of people out there
who look at the things they do,
and it angers them, which in no way
would justify
people committing violence. That person, whoever it is,
should go to jail, should be charged with
that crime.
But when you think about what's going on
in the world, my point is that you
can see an obvious counter effect where putting
people in positions where you're claiming they're terrorists
even though they're fighting for their families or
going after people because they are standing up
for the constitution, you tell them they hate
America, or any number of alarming overlaps, people
can go crazy. And I think that's by
design. I think with the antidepressants and the
pharmaceuticals and the chemicals in our water and
everything else that's going on, people are breaking
and it's like they have been for a
long time. The shooters and different things. The
point is that people like this are the
fuel on the fire, and then they turn
around and act outraged and righteous when they
are the ones that get attacked. And I'm
never saying I think it's justified. The point
is that people commit violence should be charged
for it regardless of how virtuous and righteous
you may think you are. Not but it's
spinning around.
If Rachel Maddow was shot today, how do
you think they'd respond? If Biden was shot,
what do you think they would say?
Let me just be real about it, guys.
We've already seen this happen more than once,
and that doesn't justify it in reverse. They're
both ridiculous. Both sides doing the same thing
are ridiculous. It's the only adult argument in
this conversation right now. And he goes, you
can hear the crack of the rifle in
this video
I'm burning with righteous anger.
Righteous anger.
You know where this goes.
Watch. Watch as they roll this out and
spin this into some kind of momentum
that causes more of this.
Here's the guy that they originally had, as
I said, turned out not to be the
guy.
This was just the first example I saw,
but unless you guys have seen anything different,
it does appear that Kirk was pronounced dead.
And, again, I mean, I think that's sad.
He has a family. He has people that
care about him regardless of whether he has
been very dishonest and manipulative with his coverage
in many, many, many ways. I still think
it's sad. And they they're the reality should
be that as a human being, we can
be able to understand that.
But I think it's important to be honest
about the reality just like we would be
about John McCain dying and make sure we
go, yeah, but he's also a war criminal.
You know? But, yeah, he died, and it's
sad. But, overall,
the bottom line here, guys, is this is
going to lead to something where action's taken.
I mean, Donald Trump has been spearheading.
I I mean, I shouldn't say spearheading, but
more so than many I've seen on the
right at least, going after guns.
Bump stock bans, the conversation of
the due process
second, guns now due process later. I get
the sense this will roll into something something
that it appears to be rational,
but it's still an undermining of the second
amendment that'll get ignored by the people on
the right or any number of different shifts
that will take place because of this, including
what Laura Lure is pointing out, that Trump
somehow makes it illegal to have certain mindsets
or certain ideas or and all that becomes,
it's not about actual left ideas. It's about
the government being able to control ideas anytime
they want. That's always what it comes down
to. You always fall for the, oh, they
wanna force in pronouns. No. They just wanna
use that as a way to get the
shoe and the the foot in the door.
So then later, they can go after you
for anything else. You know, k. Look at
it like this. They're all censoring people out
there before for hate speech and pronouns and
whatever else. Okay. And the right thought that
was bad because it was bad, because it
was
unconstitutional.
Then the right comes into power. What do
they do? Well, you can't be antisemitic. You're
censored because you're a racist. You're a terrorist.
Okay. What's the what's the outcome?
Censoring
based on hate based on speech, and they
both did the same thing. But the narrative
is sure different, but the outcome is the
same. That's how all of these things work.
USAID,
either side. You have to start seeing this,
guys. It's never been more obvious in my
opinion that whatever they're doing and why they're
doing it has made this clumsy and bombastic.
It's time that we start calling it out.
Now Jay Derek makes a good point about
this. And if you got any more updates
on something to add to this, please let
me know. I think that that's what I
wanted to address today was overall just the
way that this sis the way that this
is built.
And, I mean, like, the the partisan manipulation,
the partisan dynamic. It's just it is so
obvious to me that it is about emotion
circumventing circumventing logic.
And let's just say for sake of conversation
that this was just a random guy who
got radicalized by whatever, which is happening on
both sides of the paradigm and both sides
are reusing it
and carried out a terrible thing. And then
then immediately, the system jumps into place. Everyone
knows we're okay with this is how we
can use this,
and it drives that division even harder. Instead
of going, that's a sad story. The crazy,
just, you know, demented person that did this
will eventually be found, hopefully,
put in jail, and that should be the
end of the story. It's a sad story.
Somebody died. Somebody got caught.
Until somebody gets caught, that'll be the ongoing
story. But
that I can promise you it builds well
beyond that, shows you the political manipulation within
it all, as usual.
But somebody mentions in the chat, Gideon, for
example. Right? How much you wanna bet Donald
Trump,
which I have right here.
This is actually I'll come to this later
in a, you know, few more segments.
This this part for we'll get into health
in a second, but the, you know, The
US' new Israeli made AI precrime system called
Gideon.
That
that millennia millennia
Trump and everybody else forced that out after
that last year. Okay. How much you wanna
bet this continues that? I mean, it's almost
guaranteed, guys. He's gonna say we can't allow
these lunatic leftist, which will get the right
on board no matter what he says next,
to
plan these shootings of our loved right commentators.
And then all of a sudden, you are
using an Israeli spy network that's simply you
and it's not about stopping shootings. It's about
them having that control. It's the same thing
every single time. And they've been trying to
roll this out long before Trump, but he
was aggressive about it in his first administration,
precrime.
Here we are.
I hope I'm wrong as usual with stuff
like this, but I think you know this
is where it's gonna go. And watch as
you have all these fake libertarians and fake
patriots out there
screaming it on because the left sucks. That's
all that matters, it seems, to some of
these childish people.
But on some partisan points in general, as
Jason pointed out,
the past week, MAGA sycophants called transparency a
hoax,
pushed surrendering self defense if you're trans. That's
the gun discussion of trans. Even everybody
consistent in the principles simply said yes, but
like anything else, that's a violation of the
constitution.
Other than the fake MAGA people that said
that you know, when I say fake MAGA,
I mean, not MAGA is fake, but the
people pretending to be MAGA. Because my mind,
it's not MAGA because you support Trump. It's
MAGA because you wanna make America great again.
And by doing so, you wanna support the
constitution than what you thought they were doing.
Those are the real maggot, guys, and they're
out there.
The point is that the trans point was
another way to undermine that just before this,
interestingly enough, and trampled due process if on
a suspected drug boat, of course. We'll talk
about that. This is exactly why aligning with
them after COVID was a huge mistake.
They always cheer for authoritarianism. Now,
I wanna make it clear, at least from
what I'm saying, is that I I read
this as the that not all MAGA, but
the ones that are doing that. Right? But
there's a lot of good people within this
that are joining with, like, the Republican party,
and I think that's what the I would
take that point as.
Jace Derek simply says, Jason is right. The
libertarians and freedom minded folks should never align
with right or left.
They are both authoritarian status. Exactly.
He wrote an essay that you can read
about right there.
Now, one last little point on this. It
just this is the kind of stuff that
we're all, you know, always talking about. And
I'll just by the way, going back to
that point a second ago, just the idea
of the
fake I mean, like, the the right leaders
of the movement, Kirk being one of them,
who have completely undermined all the points that
they promised would be taking place right now.
They lie about it. All of them. Benny,
Joe, they all pretend it's all we're winning.
It's all great. But anybody with a brain
and two you know, any mock of honesty
was like, well, that's not true at all.
Stargate platforms, mRNA shots, self amplifying,
transhumanism,
I mean, everything. All the different transitions, all
the things we'd said we would stop. All
the CRISPR pig meat and I mean, not
just even health.
Right?
Violated the constitution, police state. So the point
is there's a lot of people that are
very unhappy about that, including left and right,
that might decide to irrationally act out about
it, and that wouldn't be okay regardless.
Another example is the political manipulation of stuff
like this where you have the idea
that they had to stop the Democrats from
doing exactly what Nick is cheering on.
Breaking. The Missouri house has overwhelmingly passed their
new congressional map. Look at this map. 90
to 65, cutting Democrats down to one seat.
Because that's that makes sense. Right? I mean,
we say first, it says Republicans are set
to gain another seat in the house.
Every Republican state should follow suit. Okay. Regardless
of what you think about or even if
that is exactly to a tee what they
were all clutching their pearls about. How dare
they? They're gonna change everything, and they're gonna
cheat, make sure the Democrats and then they
got they went and did the same thing.
Freedom.
It's just it's so childish. It's just so
that this person is like the embodiment of
the childish, you know, kind of,
sycophantic nature of the people in this field.
But, you know and so the guess what?
The the Canadian comes in and lays it
straight and says, why is this not illegal,
you know, for both sides?
Hey, somebody with a brain can read you
know, it's just because they don't care. They
don't want anything. They want it to they
wanna be able to do whatever they can
when they're in power. That's very sociopathic, guys.
That's what we're always talking about.
Point is partisan politics
is
spinning people out, and it's kind of obvious.
Like, right now, it is beyond cartoonish, and
that's really hard for people to digest when
their whole lives are wrapped into it. That's
just one more element of 75 reasons you
could argue people might lose their mind and
act irrationally.
Now we're gonna get into a few different
points today.
A couple more points about
kind of deception.
But I want you to think about as
we go through all this, like, the argument
of what I started with, the idea of
manipulation,
and what just happened with Kirk whether organic
or not. And I mean that really in
from my mind, you know, question everything, but
it seems pretty clear that this is what
happened, at least so far with the there's
a new evidence
that it could be either something that randomly
happened or that somebody was, you know, put
to it. It's kinda where my mind's going
with it. But let me know what you
see. And so the idea would be there
is that, you know, if whichever way that
went, it will be used like any one
of these events do by people in power.
We're already seeing the sycophant team sport politics
use it whoever they can. And so think
about how that relates with these other stories
we're gonna go through and how that video
we started with, how we'll end with in
regard to the kind of building towards tomorrow
and destabilization
and we're overlapping with the claim of Hamas
and what that means and going after people
that they claim are associated with that and
that they can do it anywhere in the
world. I find that very interesting.
So one more point on just things that
I think are meant to you know, as
with everything going on in the world today,
like, even before what's happened today, just everything.
And not even not even the genocide, which
he pretends isn't happening, but things that they're
talking about. Here's what he comes out with,
and a lot of people are pointing to,
and I think it's it's a typical the
reason I point to it is because you
see this year, and then it's the, you
know, the usual, like, 17 people in a
row. Live to TikTok, and then this guy,
and then that guy, and they all share
it. And, oh my god, point to the
same thing.
New York Times.
Elon Musk's why is white always in lowercase,
but black is uppercase. Yeah. That's ridiculous. That
should be the end of the story. They're
pretty stupid, and you call them out for
it. It's obvious what this what is going
on there. That's dumb. It's stupid. Because if
you're gonna do one, it should do the
other. Obviously. That is that clearly suggests that
they're putting more favor towards that word. Yes.
My point, though, is this really what we
care about right now? Let the New York
Times write whenever they want. First of all,
isn't that free speech? Secondarily,
it's just obvious and kind of, infantile.
So call it out. Put it away. But
you're seeing this go I mean, look at
this, guys. It's 16,000,000
views, and I've seen people make entire articles
about this. And, of course, it matters to
a certain degree. Right? The but the this
is when you fall into the left right
paradigm and say, oh, I see. It's this
long term Soros UN plan to make
us hate white people, I guess, which I'm
yeah. There's points to be made, but it's
like, if you think that's the where they're
really going with this, again, you're missing the
point. You're trapped at level one, guys. These
are means to an end.
Even if you wanna pretend, which I do
see very clearly, there's, like, a a level
of kind of, and I I don't think
it's necessarily about white people, but I think
it's about the larger demographic manipulation of the
world. My point though, and I I honestly
think it largely stems from Israel.
The the point is obviously there's a real
thing there,
but it's not I don't think it comes
down to some kind of, like, the petty
arguments that are made around it at the
core level of the conversation. It's about bigger
conversations like I'm talking about in regard to
destabilization,
in regard to the weird prophetic,
you know, religious Zionism,
and and all that. Anyway, the point of
other than what it could be is the
idea that this gets so much tension.
One thing.
Based on I mean, I think it's about
trying to distract people from the obvious nature
of this to go look at the woke
lefties. Look at how dumb they are. Yeah.
Enjoy it. Enjoy it while the world crumbles
while you laugh at left lefties with their
woke politics while you're being just as woke.
Another example,
died suddenly, of course, some account that I'm
not I'm only pointing to it because of
this bad point, to be honest. Just remember,
we just talked about this, by the way.
This is Stu Peters and the died suddenly
whole thing with the quotes.
Very clearly did then hide all the results
of people that said died suddenly. I thought
that was very on purpose. Not to mention
the documentary was riddled with misinformation,
and I mean, like, legitimate lies about things
that even doctors called out that were in
it. But, you know, aside from that, the
point is they highlighted the FDA is now
saying that it's okay to take ivermectin if
you got COVID.
He goes, so it's not horse dewormer after
all. I mean, again, you know, anybody that's
not a child was pretty obviously that was
already resolved. Right? Yes. I know that you
got your token morons in the highest level
of power and the people in media, but
the we're just like we're watching with Israel,
the whole world knows what's going on. Right?
We're beyond this fake construction where the media
and the power structure somehow control what we
think. We at least right now, that's not
happening. I think it's obvious to clear that
the f d that the awareness of ivermectin
I mean, look at those search results. Look
at how people it's clear everyone got wind
of what it was.
So now that this comes out, they're going,
oh, turns out now they say you can
use it. Doesn't that feel like a weird
thing to do right now? Why?
I think it's because it gets people are
going like, oh, my god. Ivermectin was such
a buzz thing. Everyone wanna talk about it.
Things like this just seem kinda planted right
now. That's my personal opinion. It could just
be that they're just quietly putting it over.
But my point is always is, why are
we supporting big pharma drugs at all? Let
people choose for themselves. This game where you're
like, I'm t by ivermectin. No. I'm t
over there. Like, you're you're, you know, you're
you're, you
know I can't remember the names now. You
know, Twilight or whatever. I'm team so and
so. The it's just it's just it's a
let people decide for themselves. Give the information.
It is a big pharma drug, and I
don't think it's as safe as any drug.
I mean, there's side effects. So decide if
you want. Definitely does have positive effects. They
did try to hide that from you. Either
way, I think it's one more example like
this, for example, as well. COVID razor throat
variant now found in 15 states. This is
Zero Hedge reporting from Epoch Times.
Okay. Well, you know, they were very skeptical
like we all should be and were of
the COVID nineteen illusion.
Okay. So now that they're going you'd think
this this article's gonna be like, don't buy
it. Keep an eye out for the lies
or, you know, about any okay. Well, guess
what? Not at all. This is literally like
a government report.
New states found. COVID. Here's what you should
know. Here's the variant. Here's how bad it
is. Here's where you can
okay.
So now we're just promoting the government agenda
now on corporate yeah. Well, because this has
always been the reality I was trying to
show you, the at least from within the
partisan game.
So how does it in your interest to
report so they would tell you this was
largely a hoax. Right? So why would they
then report the re the upcoming narrative of
where this is getting bad with no discerning
point in no,
of of and no point that I can
see that says question this,
or maybe this isn't happening. I don't know.
I just think that was pretty interesting. Either
way, COVID's back. 15 states.
Like I said before, don't do their work
for them. If this be if if it
is even there at all, it's probably just
a a flu if that's even what's happening.
If, you know, the reality is I don't
believe we should take these narratives at face
value. And if there's something going on, you
can make your own decisions.
You know? You don't need their hype, which
they always do about every single thing, flu
and otherwise. So I just think this is
building up at an obvious time. Now health
related, I think, is important. We already played
this for you, which I think is important
to point out again that Donald Trump
walked back this the you know, Florida came
out with the talking about mandates removal, and
he came out and said, I think that's
pretty dangerous. I will play it again. It's
only a minute, but we played the other
day. Everyone's seen it. President Trump pushes back
on Florida dropping mandates
and and kind of countersignals the entire idea.
Well, Aaron Siri, who by the way had
some really well done presentations recently in front
of congress that just destroyed
some of these arguments of, like,
the placebo. Like,
in this case, on the right side of
what the RFK was saying because he was
right about the placebo trials and so on.
But my point is always before it gets
too confused, what I'm saying is Aaron Aaron
Siri sat down and
and called out the lies that all they
had 600 plus
shots that were placebo control tested.
They were lying.
He broke it down to where there was
only three of them that actually complied with
that point, and they didn't even use a
placebo. They had other things. He they they
completely lied about it. The point is, RFK
was right about that. However, RFK is still
doing the wrong thing, and we can prove
that. People like Mary Talley Bowden and others
have called it out. The last one we
just talked about, the last COVID shot was
not placebo test. So it's yes. Good. He
called it out. He's right, but he's still
doing it. So that's confounding to me. But
Aaron Aaron Siri said, mister president,
Florida merely seeks to preserve liberty. Removing mandates
will not prevent anyone from getting a vaccine.
Like, do you not find it strange that
of all people, Trump, the one you're told,
but he didn't do a mandate, is the
one now pushing back on removing the mandates?
These are all being played if you believe
these people are on your side. That's my
opinion. It says, surely, we don't want to
have less liberty than the following countries that
are reported to have no school mandates, Norway,
Sweden, UK, Ireland, Finland, Australia, Russia. The list
goes on.
You know? I'm glad he pointed it out.
You get the sense that he's saying, like,
hey. You're wrong. You know? It's what he
is saying. But a lot of people try
to, like, act like Trump doesn't know when
you're trying to inform him. Like, he knows
exactly what he's doing. He's not on your
side. That's what I believe. Not Biden. Not
Trump. Not any of them. Now, again, they
shared this video.
Oh, it's interesting.
For the podcast so first of all, this
was a post that Trump put out that
we all saw where he he said they're
all poison and played that thing about the
therm aerosol, you know, and which is right.
I agree. It's dangerous. But my point was,
oh, look. Trump posted a video saying all
vaccines are poison. Meanwhile, Trump rolls out more
poison.
Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Typical. Because they're rolling out
the Comerty shot, which is by the way,
that's what I was just mentioning earlier. August
27, they've up they've approved
the new
COVID nineteen Comirnaty shot, mRNA, the twenty twenty
six new variant. So that's not just the
same as continuing the other one. That's a
new approval for a new shot,
Comirnaty l p eight one.
How are you gonna tell us you're ending
this and then go back to the same
old mRNA shot with a new add antigens?
Insane to me. But on top of that,
we also saw the self amplifying discussion.
They are leaning into self amplifying mRNA there.
Arc Arc Arcturus, Amplitude Therapeutics,
which there's a few other ones. Amp Amplitude
is trans amplifying shots. Way worse in my
opinion. They're actively working on those right now.
It's a game under the guise of ending
mRNA, as well as in food, which no
one talks about. There are very few.
But it's back to the point.
This for the podcast, it looks like Twitter
added an update. It says the video has
been altered. The video was in fact posted
by Trump, but I don't think anyone says
otherwise. It literally says Trump right there. And
it says, however, the claim of they're all
poison, every single one was added to the
original video
posted by Trump. Yeah. I don't isn't that
exactly what it looks like? Anyway, so everything
they're saying there is exactly what you already
know because you can look and tell right
there, unless I'm missing something. Anyway, this I
saw this for myself, so I know it
was supposed to bite Trump on his true
social. Anyway,
the point is that he's still supporting these
shots. So is RFK Junior. I don't know
how you reconcile that without recognizing that they're
not really doing what they claim they're doing.
And even right after that, today later,
Kellyanne Conway admitted or was it not Kellyanne,
believe it,
said publicly that they had now four new
mRNA COVID shots that were underway, not
new ones after they claim they stopped the
old ones.
It just never stops.
And don't forget, the Stargate platform
will continue
for mRNA cancer shots under private funding. That
was clear. And the Pfizer's new shot we
just showed, you got approval.
Now here's the one I wanted to get
to on this point. You saw this you
already saw this in general, but watch again
Bill Gates talk about the vaccine program.
Spiro says Trump posted a video saying all
vaccines are poisoned because they contain thimerosal. While
he is correct, don't fall for this. This
is part of the mRNA vaccine gene editing
rollout. And it says no. MRNA vaccines
do not contain Thermirosol.
See? So you get you on the side
of thinking, oh, good. He's stopping the bad
thing. Well, this is what I've been trying
to tell you. They're they're rolling in. Even
as they poo poo, let's say, on the
old COVID shots, they're rolling into a new
self amplifying, trans amplifying patch mRNA that Gates
supports all of it. We all all of
this is public.
But I think it's more than that. I
think that they are in some way rolling
these old ones back. But even this, it's
all about creating the idea that, you know,
the perception that it's going the way you
think it is. So remember this is what
Gates said. Now remember the people they were
sitting there with, Zuckerberg,
Gates,
Sachs.
You know, it's just it's it's the technocrat
oligarchs that they that Jones told you would
be in jail right now.
Looks like I didn't grab that. One second.
All you're gonna hear him say is kind
of outline the the plan for the vaccine
rollout.
And I think it's really important that we
understand that this is not like, again, I
don't know how you can make sense as
a supporter of Trump with all that's been
said of Donald Trump sitting next to Bill
Gates. This is the fourth time.
Either the fourth or the fifth, actually. I'm
not sure if they included this one in
the meetings they listed. But at the very
least, the fourth time he's met with Bill
Gates,
specifically
about vaccines,
shots,
gene editing,
CRISPR all the things he's working on, guys.
Gates says it himself. In the second phase
of my career,
giving away all the wonderful money that Satya's
good work has
helped,
multiply
a lot. But I think the the thing
that ties,
my first career, that I still spend some
time on because AI is so phenomenal,
and my second career is innovation,
innovating in
health,
in areas like,
vaccines or gene editing. And,
the president and I are talking about taking
American innovation to the next level to cure,
and even eradicate,
some of these diseases.
He mentioned polio, which is one that
Oh, good, guys. Because we all agree that
we should keep doing that. Right? Or or
or am I missing something?
How in the world does that float by
with all these conservatives out there? Yay. Oh,
it's 40 it's all because oh, well, he's
tricking them. It's all 40 chess. Many of
them said that. Look at how Trump got
it all to say thank you. Oh, he
won. Now they're all making shots. They're gonna
kill your children.
He got them. You know? I mean, it's
just insane to me. That is obviously not
what we were told. Now a point the
point the of course, the point he's making
there is about
the AI created drugs. That's what he's talking
about. The data centers are not just for
your AI systems on Grok, guys. This is
AI created drugs. That's Stargate. That's what this
is really about.
You're you're just be they're just dangling old
things in front of you, telling you they're
stopping them while they're rolling out the structure
in front of you. They're just not seeing
it. It's right there. Catherine's been calling this
out for a very long time.
We're close. We don't need new science on
that one.
For some like HIV and, sickle cell, we
do need new science, but The US,
has the seeds that in the same way
that,
Warp Speed took those seeds and put them
together,
I think something fantastic can be done.
Yeah. Because Warp Speed was great, wasn't it?
We all agree that Warp Speed was fantastic,
don't we?
I'm kidding. For the new people. You know,
AI,
for our foundation is that we wanted a
doctor for everyone,
in Africa through
AI.
We want farmers to have incredible advice and,
you know, kids to have a chance to
learn. So Well, okay. Those first two, do
they want those things? I mean, you see,
it's funny how we never have that conversation.
Do they want your medical help? Do the
farmers want your advice?
I'm sure some of them do. But you
see, in the way this is going, the
way Trump is rolling these things out, it
there's no choice being given.
And yet the the people screaming they're fighting
for liberty and freedom and rebels by the
deep state are the ones that seem to
ignore it right now. The left made the
left are already okay with that. But what's
funny is I was just talking to somebody
about this. If you really look at what
Trump has rolled out in this country,
outside of, like, the core things they focus
on, he has rolled out far more socialist
type programs than anybody I've seen. But Trump
did it, so it's easy for them to
ignore it.
The work being done by the people at
this table is is changing the world. It's,
you know, coming fast, so it's great. You
know, we all get together and talk about
how The US can
lead in this key area and apply it
even,
to the poorest outside The US as well
as to our great citizens. So thank you
for incredible leadership,
including getting this group together. Yeah. Thank you,
Bill. That was very nice. Oh, they're best
friends.
Yeah. It's just strange.
There's always an excuse. There's always a narrative
for why it's not what it looks like.
But consistency is what I'm always talking about.
Right? Consistency.
He continues to be on his side. He
continues to support him. They continue I mean,
you can go back to the first thing.
It was, oh, we have to work with
Bill Gates and shut the Internet down.
We just talked about that. They'll call that
I mean, I why not? Let's just play
it real quick
since
it's funny. But the sad reality
is that this is consistent.
Because we're losing a lot of people because
of the Internet, and we have to do
something. We have to go see Bill Gates
and a lot of different people
that really understand what's happening. We have to
talk to them maybe in certain areas closing
that Internet up in some way. Somebody will
say, oh, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
These are foolish people. We have a lot
of foolish
people. Right. Because you're you're foolish for knowing
that he's wrong. Right?
That's insane.
Nothing changed. Would accept the the narrative from
Benny Johnson about how great it is that
we're all winning, you know, whatever it is.
Somebody mentioned this in the chat. I just
was gonna look at it since we're on
the health point. I think this is the
one. Okay. This is the one mentioning the
chat. The Russia cancer vaccine,
what to know.
Doesn't say mRNA. Somebody in the chat said
that.
I'll include this. Let me know in the
chat if that's, what you were talking about.
Doesn't seem to suggest that it's mRNA. But,
you know, there seems to be a lot.
My what I thought it was relevant if
it did connect was that, you know, it's
a global thing we see. You know, like
with glycosyl with lockstep during COVID, they're rolling
into this direction. And then that's cancer mRNA
shots, and then, you know, I I'd I'd
imagine they're probably working together with that. I'll
include this,
but continuing on this point.
My point was to talk about this with
the Bill Gates overlap. Right? So health is
one thing. I wanna include those points so
you didn't miss it. The shot and the
self amplifying. It's all very real and happening.
But, you know, we get so suppressed that
it's rare that it breaks through past the
people that already follow this platform. So help
us share that.
But it's the bigger point. Right? So Gates,
which the right would tell you should be
in prison, but will ignore that he's immersed
with Trump, is actively
building a world that is counter to what
most Republicans think that they are fighting for.
I guess I forgot this one too, but
let me play this clip for you.
And as Spiro rightly points out, like, hey.
Or excuse me. It was,
five times August.
Hey. Let's let's get this guy in for
let's get this guy to have dinner in
the White House. Oh, oh, wait too late.
He was already there, and you'll see why.
Place that India leads,
but there's a lot more that all of
you can be involved in driving forward is
this digital,
public infrastructure.
You know, no country is Otherwise known as
the digital control grid. It's more able to
take government benefits and get them out
efficiently and effectively
to their citizens,
than India.
You know, you would have expected rich countries
or others to do that, but in fact,
they did not.
And so that basic structure that starts with
identity and bank accounts and payments
is is just foundational.
And as part of this visit, I'm now
seeing how that foundation
is being built out, built out in
agriculture,
with profiles of farmers to understand
what they need and give them advice,
built out with health records,
so that we can help people not only
with infectious diseases, but,
the challenge that's coming in the future
with the growth of the noncommunicable
diseases
being a huge thing.
And,
that digital public infrastructure will help us,
with these,
climate
problems.
I was in Odisha,
yesterday and and what they showed is that
they've registered the farmers
and,
registered what type of crops they grow and
what land they own. They literally have a
control center. You know, when you walk in,
you think, wow, this is agriculture, but, you
know, you've got Yeah. Is that great? A
surveillance control structure to make sure you're doing
the right thing on your farm. You know,
it's just it's just it's they all it's
always about, oh, it's gonna be great, and
you have more information and and more distribution.
You know? I mean, look. Maybe
rarely doesn't amount to what they claim it
does, but at the end of the day,
the one thing that usually that, you know,
pretty much always ends up being there for
sure is the the the structure, the control
element.
You know? The idea that you now have
to check-in. The I I I wanna go
have a plot of land and do what
I want. I wanna grow what I want.
I you know? The idea that this is
the way they're building the world, it's not
a secret, and it's all about this. You
know? Again, the collectivist mindset, which is largely
being driven through the current administration. It's not
new. It's all of them doing the same
thing. Different narratives. Sure. But look at the
outcome. Half the time, these things happen under
the part the side that you don't think
it'll happen under for that very reason.
A command center and maps and people doing
queries and sending out messages. And so that
all starts,
you know, with an ad hoc identity,
listing those farmers.
I see. Some people may not realize, like,
it may not even like, okay. If the
idea that you even have to, like, register,
put you know, identify, have some kind of
tag number, like, that's what I'm talking about
to start with. Whether or not it becomes
some kind of controlling factor, I don't want
that. As with my choice, whether I want
to be involved or on some database,
but they don't care about that anymore. They
act like you're crazy for even having that
thought. Getting the information, making sure it's up
to date.
So as I said, we should invite this
guy to the White House. Right? You know,
can you imagine that? Like, what he just
listed off? The digital control structure. And that's
what as as, White Awake Media writes, Bill
Gates praises India's digital and public infrastructure, a
combination of biometric digital ID, bank accounts, and
payments as foundational
for keeping tabs on farmers, monitoring people's health
records, and helping with climate problems.
Yeah. And he was right there with Donald
Trump and their like, you know, the game
is always gonna be that he's just using
him. Well, you you could that could be
possible for you to assume that would be
a self serving assumption. My point is I'm
not assuming what's coming next. I can simply
see what's already happened. All the narrative. Last
time you met with him, oh, he's secretly
doing x y and z. Okay. Where is
that? What I see is coordination, and they
met again. And they do more, and they
coordinate. They meet again. They coordinate, and I
mean, this is the fourth time. And so
far, they've been working together and coordinating. So
unless I'm missing some 40 chess move, you
know, but the game is always like, oh,
you're missing the bigger plan. But you're just
blindly trusting the government. That's what's happening. The
reality is that this is being built out,
and the person who's wanting who's been telling
him his whole life he wants it is
currently sat right next to Trump.
As David Icke again points out, I said
that Trump would put in power would was
put in power to front up the l
AI oligarchy oligarch takeover of society with artificial
intelligence, and that's exactly what he's doing. Win
the oligarch's driving the policy and direction with
them. Here are many at the White House
dinner. Yes. It was, on the
fourth,
including
Trump AI czar, of course, David Sachs, which
is weird in general that he has that
position or that there's even that position. And
it says
Zuckerberg,
Tim Cook from Apple, Bill Gates, Microsoft,
Israeli invested, OpenAI founder Sam Altman, Google CEO,
Sundar Pichai. You know, all all the good
guys. Right?
Sad. Sad that we're this willing to ignore
the obvious for team sport politics.
And, again, of course, here's Jones telling you
that Bill Gates, Fauci, Hillary,
Klaus Schwab,
that if we get Trump in, if we
can keep him alive,
they'll be in prison for sure.
Right? This is what they do. You You
know, they mislead
you. And now, again, we're being told there's
gonna be more. Now, hey, you know, if
it happens tomorrow, I'll cheer that on. Happily
accept that I was making fun of him
and I was wrong. I would happily accept
that. To recognize that Obama's in prison for
to do crime, yes. Regardless of whether it's,
you know, equally applied. He's a criminal. He's
in jail. Good. But I think Trump should
be too, and I think all of them
should be because they're all clearly breaking the
law. And I don't even mean an abstract
conversations. They're all war criminals committing war crimes,
even just the last two administrations
in particular.
But here's slow news day, Steve saying ten
months later, Trump is having dinner with Bill
Gates, and Hillary approves his handling of the
Russia Ukraine. That was epic Jones is just
pathetic.
Now you because he's wrong. But at what
point do you then go, okay. Either I'm
making these things up or the people telling
me these things are constantly getting it wrong.
Wouldn't you adjust?
Well,
I think it points to the latter, the
former, if he keeps doing it.
Either he's making it up or it's in
his interest to keep lying to you. They
it keeps going this way. Now again, though,
if it happens,
I will address it. Trust me. But I
think where this is going is this constant
they just like we were told that Hillary
would be in jail by him, what, 17
times already. Clearly, it doesn't seem to be
happening, but tomorrow, it certainly could. It's the
reason I'm saying it is because it's always
possible. Here is a clip, if you we,
let me see if I grabbed it or
not.
I guess we'll watch it real quick.
Gabbard,
and this has to do with
Obama.
Now think about what's being said here. How
many times they've said the word treason?
And,
I I mean, if you have a a
package of, you know, a dossier of evidence
that shows that he's literally committed treason,
and if to the point to where you've
stated that, not hypothetically,
not maybe, but stated that many times,
how is he not in prison?
Oh, they've got to investigate. Okay. Well, shoot.
It's been what? It's been months now. You're
telling me they haven't started that? That this
is the you know, this is a weird
drip forward kinda thing where she steps back
out and goes, I've got this new thing.
It just feels weird that not to say
it's not gonna happen. Maybe there's parts that
I don't know. I'm
always very much considering that because I don't
think we all know in everything in any
situation.
But I just get the sense this is
clearly not gonna happen if history is any
judge,
but fingers crossed.
Chelsea, and we do wanna take questions on
this topic while, the director has time for
this topic. She will leave. I'm happy to
take questions on other matters after that. But
if anyone has questions for director Gabbard, you're
welcome to ask them. We'll start with our
new media seat as always. Emily, go ahead.
Thank you. And Okay. We'll start with the
token fake media the token independent media seat
first that's weirdly taller than everybody else. I
can't believe they're still doing that. I mean,
I don't I don't I don't even watch
these things half the time anymore because there's
such a exercise in futility.
But I just like,
I don't
know. Would you I mean, it feels like
you're being I mean, I I feel like
I might accept that if they ever actually
would never would happen. Offered me to go
in just so I could try to ask
something that would actually matter. But it just
feels like you're being used. Like, you're just
a token.
Why not let you sit with everybody else?
Like, this seems very weird to me. I
made this point last time. I think they've
lowered it at least. Before, it was like
you were this weirdly different level chair or,
like, lower, I think it was last time.
Very weird. Anyway, back to the token
mainstream alternative media question. Questions for director Gabbard.
You're welcome to ask them. We'll start with
our new media seat as always. Emily, go
ahead. Thank you. And director Gabbard, this one
is for you. Do you believe that any
of this new information
implicates former president Obama in criminal behavior?
We have referred
you know, again,
this is my point about this. So
pretty sure this is an ongoing criminal investigation.
Right? I'm pretty sure they're comp they're compiling
an investigation about him committing treason. Pretty sure
you can find out that's a crime. You
know, this is about her asking a question
that's like, say out loud Obama's a criminal.
That's very mainstream alternative media for you. The
point is that question's already been answered. They're
just trying to get this stated, which I
will say sometimes that's all this job could
be for them is getting them to say
the thing on the mic. Either way, I
think it's funny. Partisan media is gonna partisan.
That's what they do.
And we'll continue to refer all of these
documents,
to the Department of Justice and the FBI,
to investigate the criminal implications of this. For
even for the evidence Obama? Correct. The evidence
that we have,
found and that we have released,
directly
point to president Obama
leading
the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment.
And that's been said before. That's not new.
Right? But either way, I think it's interesting
that where it's already gone and what's already
happened seem to suggest to me that there's
really probably nothing going to happen. Or they
march these people out and have them
say things back and forth in front of
congress, and then nothing actually happens, which is
usually how that ended up with Clinton more
than once.
I I don't mean some kind of, like,
briefing about an event. I mean, like, with,
like, the investigation of pay to play for
the Clinton Foundation.
Nobody ever went to jail.
Nobody. And same thing every time. There are
multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence
that confirm that fact.
Ed, go ahead.
Director Gabbard, thank you. So just to,
two questions, but to begin on that.
The president yesterday, you've inferred that the former
president helped lead a coup. Based on what
you now see,
do you believe president Obama is guilty of
treason?
I'm leaving the criminal charges to the Department
of Justice. I am not an attorney. But
as I've said previously,
when you look at the intent
behind creating
a fake manufactured
intelligence
document
that directly contradicts
multiple,
assessments that were created by the intelligence community.
The expressed intent and what followed afterward can
only be described as a years long coup
and a treasonous conspiracy,
against the American people, our republic, and I
mean, think about saying that and then having
this per reason. That almost exactly what they
said months ago. And here we are.
Not in jail.
I just don't know how you make sense
of that. I mean, to me, like, imagine
in any other context, somebody with with the
evidence enough to say that. And, again, this
is not a new story. It's not like
they started the investigation last week. They've been
doing this with bodies of evidence for, I
mean, years.
So
I think it's pretty easy to sense that
this is not going the way you think
it might. But her stepping out and saying
that sure as hell gets a different ball
rolling, doesn't it?
And then Rand Paul comes out and says,
we uncovered new evidence suggesting Anthony Fauci tried
to evade FOIA request. Woah.
I'm so shocked. I mean, it's I think
it's important if you can prove that, but
I think we all knew this is how
this was going through multiple administrations, by the
way, and even instructed NIH staffers to delete
emails after reading them. Now it's amazing to
me that this can be stated and somehow
doesn't seem to implicate Donald Trump. If this
happened under Biden, it would be absolute without
any you wouldn't even bring it up. Oh,
and clearly that means Biden because he was
the president. But after Trump, he's somehow always
like this third party that's like, well, I
was just without you. I didn't know. It's
mind blowing to me how weird that separation
is. The point is always if you're in
control, if you're the president, then you're responsible
even if you didn't know. That's what real
leaders do. Either way, we're talking about a
time when Trump Trump's the one that put
Fauci in position, guys. And, really, the idea
that this happening has to at least be
considered or even my point again, either way,
is that is their responsibility.
That's Trump's administration.
But
Fauci is the one that should be held
accountable for this in particular. And, ultimately, if
we can prove that, I hope he goes
goes to jail. This guy is a very
clear manipulator going back well before COVID nineteen.
But it's time he comes and testifies before
congress. Okay. Well, seeing as how half the
situation is gonna do whatever they can to
make sure he doesn't see a day of
jail time,
I'm not trying to be blackfolded in this.
See it through. Put him up there. Call
him out. Lay it out there. Fight every
single moment to make it happen. I'm just
telling you my gut tells me it's not
going to. See, the difference is black field
will be like, oh well, there's not, we
know there's no one to even try, they're
not gonna do it, you know, you're naive
for thinking you can have an effect. Somebody
said it to me today. And I'm like,
well shouldn't we try? It's like, that's black
field. Like you're the black field one calling
us black field for not believing in the
two party illusion. It's it's,
altering the definition. But this seems to be
popping up right now. Highwire, newly released emails
show Fauci directed colleagues to delete after you
read. Good. Spread it.
The guy's a criminal,
But we'll wait and see, I guess.
Another story that seems to be
floundering even though everyone knows it's there and,
you know, it's like just Epstein,
Maxwell.
You saw another part of this, but I'll
this is, Massey on the interview
saying something just important. Like, did he said
this point blank, I think, is important to
hear. But as always, question whether or not
he's playing his political role for his own
benefit.
You know, I got I I feel like
I mean, look. I think all of them
do that, And it's in many cases you
many argue that's just the way it is.
I don't know if I can agree with
that, but
I do get the sense that Massey has
good intentions in a lot of things he
does. That's that's just my feeling. That it
means nothing for the facts. At the end
of the day, all we can look at
is his actions and the outcome. And, again,
his
he has been very consistent with these things.
His principles have been very clear. And so
but, again, it's gonna take me a very
long time to ever feel that any politician
will earn back the trust that I maybe
once had in my life. That's not none
of that's to say though that this is
not important. What he's saying, I think, is
powerful. And And so all I'm saying is
consider whether or not saying this
is, while being true, is also politically motivated.
It's an important point to always think about.
Every one of them are politically motivated. Doesn't
make the actions false, though. Just because it
is in their interest to call out Trump
doesn't mean what they're saying is false. It
could. Right? But the objective in all sense,
but this is important what he said here.
Congressman Massey, the president is resisting release.
I think it's gonna be embarrassing
to some of the billionaires, some of the
donors who are politically connected
to his campaign. I also think Democrats are
gonna be implicated in this, Democrat donors. And
when you get to the billionaire level, a
lot of these folks gift to both parties
anyway. Right. They're probably intelligence ties.
Such an important point that nobody gets into,
guys, because that's the real power. Because we're
watching the influencers, the monies, the string pullers,
the technocrat. They're get they're look. Look. Think
of Karp and Teal.
One funds one, one funds the other. Right?
It's it's the way this works.
I think most adults in the room are
starting to effing recognize that.
The big the they they fund both sides.
I mean, how does that explain in itself?
And many of those are Israeli manipulators like
Mary Adelson.
To our CIA and maybe to other foreign
intelligence, and the American people
would be shocked, I think, to know that
our intelligence agency was working with a a
pedophile who was running a sex trafficking ring.
So,
these are the reasons I think that they're
resisting this. But we've you know, we can't
we can't
avoid justice just to avoid embarrassments
for some very powerful men.
Right.
Until it's clear, he's talking about Trump too.
Right? That's the point. It's all of them.
And, I mean, I I I agree.
Now this is another representative. I just thought
I'd point out state, Danny McCormick. He says,
I'm standing with Thomas Massie to demand the
release of the Epstein files. It's funny how
they keep pretending like Moore has come out.
Trump did his best to claim that we
already put it all out, and they didn't.
Luna tried to do the same, and they
didn't. More than once, they've done that. I
mean, how does that not in its in
and of itself show you that they're trying
to hide something? It's very transparent that that
they can just go, that's an that's that's
all. Oh, it's not though. But it's all
a hoax. Oh, but here's some more. That's
all. Oh, it's not though. Oh, but it's
a hoax. It's just like it takes a
special willful stupidity to not see how obvious
that is. Mike Johnson's weak leadership, they say,
betrays our fight for justice and accountability while
risking the GOP house majority in 2026.
These files expose elites tied to Epstein's child
trafficking ring, yet Johnson's refusal to act lets
Democrats claim the moral high ground. So that's
a even from a partisan perspective, that's a
fair point to make. Right? See, him doing
this is allowing them to pretend that they're
fighting for that even though I think they're
all culpable. I mean, that's that's very well
put. Republicans stand for family values and protecting
kids, not shielding predators. Well, see, Partisan.
Some of them probably. Some of them, like,
maybe Dennis Hassard, you know, was a serial
child molester and was called that by a
judge. You know? It's not Republicans or Democrats.
It's just such a we gotta stop in
this lazy thinking.
All republicans are one thing? Come on. We
can't be that silly. There's plenty of people
who do all you know, anything we can
talk about, you're gonna find people to do
those things on either side of the paradigm.
I it's it's such amazing to me that
way you have to say that out loud.
Right?
Now Thomas Massie came out with an interesting
point.
We talked about this, and it was a
small point, but
maybe not as small as it may. I
mean, who knows? We'll see where it goes
forward. But the fact that Johnson
casually claimed that Trump was an FBI informant
and and turned out we were right about
the way this went,
it's maybe it's just more distraction. Maybe that's
how desperate they are. And maybe it's a
way way to build a new narrative to
make it sound like Trump was secretly fighting
them all the time. But as long as
they don't ask too many questions, we can
just let that stand. And turns out that
he wasn't. So that means, you know, it's
actually it's actually hurt them in the long
run. And I'll show you what I mean.
But Massey says, it was a fantastical story
for about a day. What compelled
a former attorney, Mike Johnson, to claim the
president was an FBI informant?
Because it turns out he backed off.
He said he wasn't. So Mike Johnson claimed
Trump was an FBI informant, and that's why
somehow, you know, to implicate to claim that
that's why he was not part of it.
He was actually talk trying to expose him.
Right?
Then he walked it back.
And, of course, all the people supporting them,
you know, just all went along. If it
was a a Biden scenario where he made
a wrong statement about something that big, oh,
it would be going on for three weeks.
You know? And even we also,
why aren't the, like, left going crazy? Right?
Why wouldn't there just be, like, nonstop coverage
in the left about how dishonest that was?
Now there's some of that. But I often
point out how that doesn't happen the way
you might expect if the left was all
up in arms to destroy Trump the way
that they want you to think they are.
And in some cases, that's I as always,
there's more coordination than I think people wanna
admit. Oh, wait. There was a that's what
I said, I think.
I I said exactly what we thought was
most likely on yesterday's show. Now consider all
the mainstream alternative media platforms
who were out there instantly parroting exactly what
someone they were very recently hating, Johnson, had
to say about Trump. Simply because it worked
for them. Not like you need to know
this, but those that are new, I mean,
it's points alone like that that show you
how silly these people are. The ones we
always mention. Immediately going, oh, look. He was
fighting him the whole time without ever even
verifying that. Turns out it was false in
the first place. And, again, Johnson was somebody
who they hate. Joe, he's a rhino. He'll
never be there. And then he went in.
Now he's our team, and now they'll just
take what he says at face value because
they're children.
Now here's what,
Leavitt had to say about
it. Was an FBI informant. Do you know
what he meant by that if if it's
not true?
I can affirm that is not true. I
think the speaker was referring to the fact
that president Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of
his Mar A Lago property Yeah. That makes
sense. For reasons the president has already discussed.
How stupid.
I mean, really how stupid. This is what
their job is. Your job is to stand
up there and look dumb when there's nothing
else to say.
Oh, yeah. What he meant was he kicked
him out of his hotel. You know, FBI
informant. You know? Same thing. Right? What's what
a stupid thing to say. But what else
are you gonna do?
They're they're very clearly trying to make this
make sense.
So the well, I mean, I'll go right
to the next video, which I do think
explains it for itself. And I'll make an
important point about doing the same thing. The
left right game is infuriating.
But here is,
what Moskowitz,
I'm not very familiar with him or at
all. I've I've never even I don't think
I've even seen him before, in congress
calling this out. Now look, guys. Before it
was even stay I mean, it was pretty
clear that Johnson was lying about that.
And the point in this video is that
he knows this. Everyone in the room knows
it probably because it already kinda came out
that it was walking back. And so this
is a grandstanding effort to do the same
thing back. Now this is what I'm always
trying to highlight. There is a level of
there's an in some cases, there's a reason
for something like this. I'll I mean, I
could all I should probably do this all
at the end. But
what he said you could come at this
and simply say, look. We know he does
he he made that up. We wanna know
why. At least and and that I think
there's there's used to because it matters. Right?
But to do this whole, like, you know,
is Trump an FBI informant? Let's ask the
FBI because we need to find out for
sure because now you're putting on another show
to go back and get there. This is
what Congress and politicians do. So, Johnson comes
out and willfully lies knowing it'll distract, knowing
it'll create a narrative that maybe makes Trump
look like the good guy. Some of them
might go with that.
But they know it. Right? And he and
they all know he's lying to you. And
then they come back and they go, well,
they pretending take it at face value because
the longer you can take it into it,
you can maybe make them look really done.
You'll see what I mean. And so
it's the game of politics to put on
this grand show and that they're all and
they all are childish, and they all do
the same thing, which makes them all just
as petty.
Someone is recognized.
Thank you, mister chairman.
You know, just following up on a little
bit of what the ranking member,
was discussing. There was a significant
event this week,
in which this committee has jurisdiction over.
The speaker of the house, the third highest
ranking
US Official, third in line to be the
president,
looked But so, by the way, I always
get mixed up. I think the it will
be the second in line of succession,
which is what I've said in the past.
You know? So, like, I'm I'm talking about
Dennis Hasser, who was also the speaker at
the time when he got arrested for being
a serial child molester on the right.
And it is the third position. Right? So
he's the third in line the third in
line, but second in line for success. So
president dies, the president, somebody after that, just
in case that was confusing for people in
the past.
Into the TV cameras and told us that
the current president of The United States was
an FBI
informant.
I consider that to be
gigantic news. And I'm just curious, have we
reached out to the FBI, to Kash Patel,
to confirm whether the president was at any
time an FBI informant? I only say that
because the speaker of the house obviously gets
significant briefings. He gets brief So at this
point, you already get start to sense, and
you can see some of them snickering around
him. Like, this is a show. Right, where
they already know it's not true. Right? So
what they're trying to do is put up
this whole presentation to make this kinda case
that, you know, to make the either make
force them to say I was lying or
push it even further.
So what you're doing is you're wasting everybody's
time. You're continuing the game because that's what
these people do. It's all about winning little
political points for TV, for clips, and so
on. That's what they do. So but, anyway,
look. You know, sometimes you want sometimes you
it's easy to fall into it. Be like,
you want that person to be called out.
Right? So a good part of me is
kinda like, good. You know? Make them feel
stupid for lying.
Either way, left or right. But if you're
being objective, you have to recognize, like like
I said, he could have easily started and
been like, look.
If there's evidence for that, then present it.
So far, it seems like that's not the
case. We want clarification.
It's the same point. Right? You're still calling
out the game, the lie from his side,
but you're presenting yourself as the, you know,
intelligent, discerning person that's not gonna play the
game back. But god forbid, we have adults
in the room. We have to play the
game. Things that we do not get,
as regular members. And so
I I think this is something that we
need to hear definitively
before Kash Patel comes. We should clear up
maybe that we should send a letter to
him to find out if the president was
an informant. And if he was an informant,
is that because
he was working with the FBI
after
he was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein?
Did he turn because
he got caught with Jeffrey Epstein? You see,
which is a fair point.
Right? But the way you're playing it out
is meant to be sort of a game.
You know? And, like, you you explain for
us, if he is, then why was that?
Forcing them like, creating the narrative to where
you're gonna force them to have to come
back, which they did already, and say, it
turns out it wasn't true. Otherwise, this will
get out of control.
But now you're confusing everybody. Right? Everybody has
a different idea because you're throwing out all
sorts of things that nobody can verify. Like,
this is not what they're supposed to be
doing. I mean, it is when you understand
the way the world actually works, but the
way we're told it's supposed to work, they're
supposed to be the representatives who care about
their constituents and only say what they you
know, it's just that's just not how this
works. You know, when you're an FBI informant,
there are lots of questions about how you
became an FBI informant, and then how long
was he an FBI informant? When did his
service to the FBI stop, you know, being
a member of the deep state? When when
did he See what I mean? Like, that's
the game. Right? Which is frustrating in its
own way too on the other side of
it because some maybe maybe we should care
about these claims. Maybe we shouldn't just dismiss
this as a joke and push back. Maybe
he was actually.
And if he is, then that's actually pretty
important as to assess to the other side
of the conversation. I said, well, hypothetically, let's
just say he was for some reason. That's
crazy to me. What are the implications of
having a FBI informant serve as the president?
You know? It's like there's just so many
weird overlaps to that.
So maybe the whole point is to put
it to bed like it's all some gay.
You know? I don't know. The point is
you can consider it for yourself. I think
that it's important to recognize how off the
cuff the statement was in this conversation
and, you know, all the very clear interconnected
points of Trump to Epstein.
And
this whole thing is sort of a a
spinning out narrative that kind of, you know,
you you there's a lot of ways you
could look at it.
I think none of them in this room
actually want something to come of any of
this.
He stopped doing that. I mean, look, any
event If a regular member had said this,
I would discount it.
But the speaker of the house
is the one who said it. And then
he said afterwards, well, I may have misspoke.
What what what was his misspeak? Instead of
informant, did he mean agent? I mean, what
is the misspeak for informant?
Right. So, obviously, calling him out for lying
because he didn't misspeak. There's not a misspeak
there. You just lied. Right? And that's what
he's trying to really draw out and make
clear
in a political manipulative way. I mean, I
don't know another word that we use when
we're describing
an FBI agent or FBI informant or undercover.
I mean, what what was the misspeak here?
And if he was lying then,
is he lying now? I'm just confused. Perhaps,
maybe the speaker should come to our committee
and You get it. It goes on for,
like, another three minutes. It's the same ongoing
thing.
I mean, it's a it's a valid point
to be made.
But, again, like speaking from decorum,
the best thing to do would just be
to call it out. Put them on the
spot, call out a lie.
But people in this field today are all
small, petty, power driven manipulators.
Sometimes
those manipulative directions line up with what you
may want,
but other than that, none of them seem
to care about what you want. Now Derek
says, now that more Epstein files have been
released, now that, again, that was the, you
know, dumped out things, a lot of which
was blacked out. Most like, the the vast
majority of which was already public according to
everybody.
And, you know, you can go through it
for yourself. It's pretty clear. But he says,
it's hilarious watching MAGA screech and squirm, excuse
me, to deny, and this has to do
with the birthday card,
that the birthday card includes a signature from
Trump that sure looks a lot like signature
signatures he made in the nineties. It does.
Being honest about the signature doesn't mean he's
guilty of anything,
but it does add to the enormous pile
of data showing his extensive relationship with Epstein.
Not to mention that there's a photo of
Epstein holding an oversized $22,500
check made to look like a payment from
Trump to Epstein. It reads, Jeffrey showing early
talents with money and women. The text reads,
sells
fully depreciated, redacted to Donald Trump for 22,500.
Gee, I wonder what that was. Even though
I handled the deal and didn't bet any
of the money on that girl on the
girl.
I mean, kinda hard to read. Like, funny,
I will read into weird confusing words on
other things, but this is stating,
like, as if you're buying a girl from
him, but, oh, maybe it's a joke. But
it says, finally, what I find most intriguing
is that according to Fox News, one entry
in the birthday book appeared to make a
joke about Epstein being a US intelligence asset.
Below, a photo of Epstein next to a
woman with her face redacted reads a note.
He is the boyfriend of redacted. We think
he works for the CIA.
Fascinating stuff, he writes.
I will be diving into the remaining documents
this evening. What else have you found?
Interesting.
There's the one he's talking about.
This just it's it's so wild how this
story clearly taps into something really central.
You know? I mean, that's why Whitney's work
is so important because it is a central
pillar. You know? It is a linchpin to
a lot of this. And just
this the the the card is such a
small thing, but that's what happens when you
lie and you put yourself in a position
to claim it's not true because he said
so, and you never you had no way
to know for sure at the time, and
then more information comes out and then just
then you just you're stuck going fake news
because
Trump puts you in that position.
Here's Kellyanne, leave it. Or is it Kellyanne?
I'm or, I'm forgetting her name now. Leave
it, last name, where she says the president
did not write that letter. I think I've
got it right here. And the birthday card.
He didn't do this. He also didn't do
the check. Those were in documents from the
estate. So what is the working Right. So
you understand these came they came from the
the documented information from the Epstein estate.
So, yeah, you could make up an argument,
which is possible that somebody put it in
there, like, what they've kind of been setting
up before this came to pass.
But prove that
for either side of it. Right? I mean,
the all all we have is a bot,
which by the way, that's something that they
have access. But why wouldn't he have removed
it before they put it out? You know
what I mean? Like, it's just very clear
that this is something that is not going
the way they want it to. So it
has come out, and it comes from the
place that seems to suggest that it's valid
other than somebody faked it and put it
in there or, like, well, with democrat or
something way back then when Epstein did it
to be a joke. You know, you could
make up a story. But without making things
up, the evidence clearly suggests that Trump lied
about this. Theory as to why he's in
the The president has one of the most
famous signatures in the world, and he has
for many, many years. You know that, Maggie,
you've Yeah. That was the ready to go.
Canned response. For him for a long time,
long before he assumed this office when he
was a businessman in New York. The president
did not write that letter. He did not
sign those documents. He maintains that position, and
that position will be argued in court by
his lawyers. The president is very confident he's
going to win this case. Right.
So winning meaning that you if you can't
prove he did it, then he wins. Right?
I mean, argue in court for what? What
are we talking about? You're he what the
point is, he's trying to sue somebody for
suggesting that is the case. In what world
is that
there's evidence to point to this, and the
evidence shows that he's involved. You know, it's
it's just it's a very clear effort to
keep this out of in fact, what he's
doing is forcing it into the public view.
I I think he doesn't realize that to
be quite honest, or at least I think
he's desperate.
I think that's pretty clear. I think all
of this is very dramatically going against what
he wants. And so he does things like
this, which I think makes it more obvious.
But so this is just funny. This person
points out, which you can see, here's a
signature in a book for Rudy Giuliani,
and that's pretty clear. Here's the one that
says,
to Jeff, you are the greatest.
I mean, you could look for yourself, guys.
That's pretty damn close. It I mean, that's
looks like the signature signature to me.
So you guys can, you know, deny it
all you want. I'll I look at it
as the evidence.
Is there something to suggest that it's not
other than you telling you Trump said no.
You know, it's
sick of
hands. Oh, and then here's an article. Trump
wasn't the only one only president who wrote
I've seen a birthday note. Yeah. Exactly. That's
the whole damn point, guys.
If you pretend people out here are pointing
out Trump or just out to get Trump,
that does exist. I'm start I mean, more
people than I can see in this conversation
are out here trying to point out the
Epstein situation as it pertains to the US
government.
So ever the the effort to try to
ignore things that prove the government's involved because
it connects to Trump,
It's just it's lazy, and everyone tries to
act like you just hate him, and you're
going after your lefty or whatever. The truth
is, it's connects to all of them as
we've been saying from the beginning. And I
mean that in the sense of, you know,
let's say, a lot of them. I can't
know for sure that it's every single person,
but I think it's pretty clear based on
their actions, based on other evidence that this
is a whole of government problem.
So this this article in an effort to
try to say, it's not only Trump. It's
like, well, yes. Exactly. That's what anybody who's
not a partisan liar, or I shouldn't say
it like that, but trapped in the partisanship
is already kind of seeing. And many of
us have been calling out for a very
long time. Yes, Bill Clinton. Yes, Obama. Yes.
You can show that they were absorbed in
this through Israel, through the network. It's pretty
obvious.
And don't forget, by the way, that it
already came out through O'Keefe Media
that the what, the DOJ deputy chief admitted
to it to the date that was actually
working for him through, media
O'Keefe Media.
He said, quote, the government will redact every
Republican while leaving all the liberal Democrat people
in the Epstein files.
And maybe he's lying. Right?
Same thing, though. He said it. That's a
data point.
Everything else seems to back up. That's the
way this is going as far as I
could tell. But keeping this in mind, right,
just knowing this is gonna continue, I think
it's shockingly obvious that there's something much more
going on, which makes all these team sport
politics sycophants very uncomfortable, which is why they're
all like, look over there. Look at Fauci.
Look at the Muslims in Europe again. That
thing again. You know, it's it's very obvious.
And that's not a small story, by the
way. Now I'm planning on going into that
in a larger sense in a near future
show.
Just this very and we've gone over it
many times on the show. The weaponized migration,
the way this side of organized, like, race
war along the around the world, it's obvious
who's stoking this, guys. Anywhere you look in
the past, whether it is South Africa, whether
it is Rwanda, you can see the obvious
Israeli hand. And I don't mean my opinion.
I mean, on the record showing that they're
arming the people, stoking the racial divisions,
and the fact that they manipulate and what
were people talking about these things? Shout people
down from talking about it. Manipulate the media.
Lush, you know, threatened countries are talking about
it. Then they things over the years have
been covered up. It's obvious what's going on.
And so my point is the way this
is all
like, growing into some sort of, like, race
war that they're building and acting like we're
being invaded,
it's obvious this is what Zionism has been
driving into the case. Now I'm gonna go
into that in new I mean, there's points
of it. But in a coming show, it's
important that we break down what we've been
going over in the past.
Now on the conversation of
the, you know, overlap to the two stories,
really. This is a point about the
at the claims of going after sex traffickers
and pedophiles
and overlapping this with the immigration point and
then into some, you know, kind of technocratic
shift. As Catherine points out, this is on
the September 6.
More than 1,900 arrests
doesn't mean that they're all guilty by the
way, which is important to think about, made
in DC since Fed will take over a
policing.
And it says, have you noticed that every
time we ask for mega rich to be
held accountable for child rape,
trafficking, and money laundering, the result is a
lot of poor and working people get arrested?
Now it's not just that. We've seen a
lot of examples of people being arrested. Like
like, they've had that report of, like, a,
a sex trafficking ring busted. I mean, I
keep saying this when I've seen I've seen
Kash Patel do that more than once.
Look for yourself.
I have yet to see actual evidence of
any of those things happening. I don't mean
ever. I mean, like, in this recent context,
they've said a lot. I think they're just
making things up.
I genuinely do. And we know they do
that. But the point is that right now,
even if they did go after some you
know, then if we wanna go after the
people involved, this should be the people running
the networks, not the individuals in the ground.
We made that point over the years many
times.
But overlapping this is it's not it's not
necessarily about
one thing or the other as always. It's
about the big picture.
And I think this is clearly leading into
some kind of national police state enforcement, whatever
the narrative is. I think that's important to
see. As Steve Cunningham writes, here's Glenn Beck.
The federal government should hold corrupt prosecutors who
ignore federal law accountable for negligence.
Are you releasing violent criminals onto our streets
over and over? You're part of a problem
and should be treated as such by our
legal system. Now before you
take the bait,
there's
yes. There are politician
acting in in their partisan political agenda or
just breaking the law. Yes. Everywhere.
I mean, again, if you don't recognize it's
actually both sides of the paradigm, then you're
the child in the room. But the reality
is that him saying
like, taking an issue that Trump's that Trump
is trying to claim like they did with
the judges. Radical judges, they're letting them go
for no reason. Here, they're taking criminals and
releasing them for no reason. Yeah. I'm sure
it happens in some context, but I find
it hard to believe it's just some blanket
policy.
It's usually some nuance to the conversation. But
if you think I'm defending any of these
criminals, you're wrong. The point, though, is that
if it's a crime, then do something about
that crime. To make it some nationwide thing,
that's what they keep doing, and too many
people are,
I guess, too blind to see that they're
being played.
Right? So somebody's breaking the law here. Is
the answer to do a sweeping unconstitutional
national change or to address the crime that
was committed in that one circumstance?
It's the same thing. The point is everywhere
you look. Oh, we've got a problem with
the the money. Oh, let's swing it all
out into some stablecoin, CBDC.
This is obviously, as he writes,
nationalizing the legal system is where that goes.
It's the narrative, the justification
to swing in with the federal government and
start enforcing state actions.
They're violating states' rights all over the country
right now. This is just one more example
of where that goes. Now I'm not saying
don't go after corrupt politicians. See, that's the
trap. Or that let's just say there's a
corrupt prosecutor
who's willfully letting criminals go. Well, then do
something about that. The idea that you need
to reform the entire thing, which I'm not
saying is also not something we should discuss,
but not for this logic, not taking this
problem and then rationalizing
something that is unconstitutional,
which by the way is the core point
regardless of anything else I said. If it's
unconstitutional,
it doesn't matter what the narrative is.
Sadly, there's far too many people today who
are,
I mean, like, almost cheering for the collapse
of the constitution
to win back the constitution, I guess.
So here's some pretty unnerving stories that you
need to see. And again, I really a
lot of this is falling by the wayside
because most people, left and right, it seems,
who cared about this, either because they were
saying it wasn't happening or because they were
trying to point it out, have been pulled
into some other conversations. I I mean, there's
a lot of important stuff going on. But
guys,
is as an American, there are few things
less important, more important
than this constitutional rapid decline in this country.
Watch this video and tell me this is
not terrifying. And this is happening all over
the country. We have masked men,
no identification,
no warrants,
grabbing people, Americans, legal residents, in many cases,
throwing them in unmarked cars and driving away,
and they get found two days later and
said they arrest me for not they didn't
charge me with anything. Okay. But there's no
crime. There was no charge.
It doesn't matter what the situation is or
what narrative of emergency you think you have.
The constitution shall not be infringed. And the
and Republicans used to know that.
And the idea that you can just drive
up, pull an American into a car or
anybody for that matter, not giving them justification
why, sweep them away, and release them with
no charge is exactly the problem.
So this is another example.
Two legal residents and American citizen,
none of which were charged with a crime.
And they sweep up on the car
because
they've removed the they've allowed them to do
basically stop papers, please. Now the court pulled
it back, which is wildly unconstitutional. So if
you ever wanna point out a politicized ruling,
it's right there in front of you. Judges
have one job is to uphold the constitution.
And so allowing them to do something that
is patently unconstitutional, well, there's the best example
of a political judge I've ever seen. They
all do it, as I've said, every time.
This is important to see. And this is
the decline
I I mean, I think it's being driven
in for obvious reasons, but this is the
decline of at least what we thought we
should have.
Today, one day after the Supreme Court lifted
the ban on so called roving immigration patrols,
this video of federal agents swarming a car
and detaining people at gunpoint was captured in
a Van Nuys parking lot this morning.
Get out of the car now.
With weapons drawn, federal agents walked toward the
driver's side of this red vehicle in a
Van Nuys parking lot. Luis tells us he
was in the area when he saw what
was happening and began to film. That's when
I saw this chaos, guns drawn, everything. The
girl was there screaming like, oh, like, why
are you guys pointing guns at us? Like,
we're not doing anything. That's when they got
closed. They They break the window. They drag
the guys out. And then the female, she
said she was pregnant, but they were just
all these guys gang up on her. A
man who identified himself as a friend of
some of the people in the car did
not want to go on camera, but said
the two men are lawful permanent residents and
that the woman is a US citizen.
I'm suing you. Just stop. Behind the wall.
On the passenger side, an agent points his
gun at a woman who said, if you
touch me, I'm suing you. She then steps
out of the car.
This comes one day after the Supreme Court
lifted a federal judge's temporary ban on the
Department of Homeland Security's so called roving patrols,
which have been denounced as unconstitutional
and carried out through racial profiling.
Like many others documenting the aggressive sweeps and
arrests,
Luis said he wanted to film as evidence.
They're always doing something they're not supposed to
do. So what we need when this is
we need we need people here recording because,
oh, we didn't do oh, no. No. You
know what? We got you on tape, bro.
Because I'll just they do a bunch of
stuff they're not supposed to by the book.
The man who says he knows some of
the people in the car says the woman
was released and that the two men are
in immigration custody. Right.
Why? Because they got them and they're brown.
They're legal residents, but that doesn't matter.
And this is it's not this is not
some this is the same story over and
over, and it's happening so often and so
constant that people just pretend like it can't
be true. It's the same thing they do
every damn time with these kind of things.
It's constant, guys. They are arresting innocent people
and letting them go. They scream their story,
and people go, oh, you're probably a liberal,
or you that they probably had a reason.
These are statists now. Like, these are the
people that are claiming they're fighting the deep
state, fighting for liberty and democracy, the constitution,
and then brushing off some of the most
wildly unconstitutional things I've seen since I've been
doing this.
And And you could look this story up
for yourself, guys. I've this is there's a
I actually think I had the oh, you
know what? I did put I was trying
to skim up the the tabs.
No. I'll leave it. I'll I'll try include
it after I'm done. You can look the
story up. Just it's very it's very it's
pretty prominent. There's been multiple reports on it.
The reality is there's a longer video that
I decided to play that very clearly that
there was no justification. There was no identification.
There was no warrant prevent presented. I don't
care if you think they're the worst criminals
in the world. That is still the legal
reality
for obvious reasons, and they're violating that. Now
and the story we're gonna get into next
actually, hold on. I'm gonna hold on. I've
got one more. Yeah. Oh,
no. It is. Okay. The story we're gonna
get into next is when we talked about
already,
when you've seen.
One of the most egregious in this conversation,
and and the point to be made here
on top of everything else is that they
got caught lying to rationalize
exactly what they keep pretend they're not doing.
Not identifying themselves, no warrants, no justification.
They lied and said they were hit by
the car. They lied and opened fire on
a car full of family.
None of which were breaking the law, by
the way, because
I'll get to it. Other than after the
fact, when they claimed they ran them over
the car, even though they've proven that didn't
happen.
This is a wildly corrupt situation right now.
More I mean, it's
my gut tells me it's pretty much always
been like this, and I've seen examples of
this, but this is on overdrive. And I
just think it's getting rampantly lawless like we've
never seen.
Here
I guess, I I think I can download
it. Yeah. I didn't even download it. This
is just to show you. And what all
you're gonna hear in this, it's important. This
is what got me thinking about the show
the this example again. This is somebody recording
the ICE officers who came to them after
the event and tried to get them to
give the content over. It says this is
allegedly the ICE agent because that's what they're
claiming on the video, but, yeah, take it
with a grain of salt,
that were the hunter bounty hunters that shot
three immigrant family members in a truck shot
at them that were all in, legal in
San Bernardino and are now harassing people in
their neighborhood for the footage of the shooting
to dispose of it since they're already in
trouble. That's that's how they're framing it. But
the point is they were there asking for
the footage. And in the video, they're simply
saying, no, man. No way. We already sent
it out. Everyone's got it. And you've seen
it. We include that for you. And this
is the story.
You've seen this is the one we played.
All all that happens in this I can't
do it. Is they come up to the
car.
I was trying to get it on there.
I didn't download the video again.
They come to the car,
and they basically, without identifying themselves,
ask them to get out, they don't get
out, they bash the window in, and the
guy drives away because he doesn't know what's
going on.
And I'll get into more of it. The
point is that that was very clear. Now,
the bigger story,
just pull this back real quick. And so
ultimately, you know, they they swarmed the car.
Yes. They've got something that says police, but
I so they added the point in the
story, which is interesting to me is that
well, for two two major points has been
many times now.
There's been examples of peep I think a
woman was raped. There was a robbery. I've
seen many examples of people dressing up like
ICE or police
and trying to rob houses, break into businesses
because of what's going on. Like, they're not
stupid. They're saying, look. Trump's not they're they're,
like, proudly saying we don't have to identify
ourselves, or at least they're doing so proudly
despite them lying about it. So shoot. Let's
go out and take advantage. And they're doing
that. I bet you there's more cases than
we we even know that are being suppressed.
So the reality is and and as the
law backs up, you're not required to just
submit if you think something's off.
That's the reality. And so at this point,
they're going, why am I being pulled over?
Who are you? What is this for? And
they go, get out of the car. You're
legally within your rights despite the fact that
most cops wouldn't care. And in many cases,
whether you're right or wrong, you probably still
won't win. That's the gross reality of where
we are in this country, but you are
still right, constitutionally and legally,
to not stop, to not pull over. And
now they drove away when they busted in
the window and provably did not hit any
of them. It's now been caught on a
second video.
Now the real story is, again, they surround
the car.
They threatened him. He said, I'm the kid
the the son said, I'm a citizen.
They bashed the window and he drove away.
Okay. Drove back to his house, immediately called
the police.
All this is on the record. We talked
about it in a previous show. Called the
police and said, I don't know what just
happened. I they'll no one identify themselves. I
drove away. I felt like I was in
danger. Oh, oh, and the point that that's
the craziest part. So as he drives away
with a family in the car,
they open fire on the car, three shots
with a family, a child, a woman. I
mean, that's these people are lunatics. These are
the bounty hunters they're pretending are somehow ICE
official, whatever they're using.
They drive home, call police, report it all.
So then they show up with ICE,
FBI, like, everybody, and surround the house, sit
there for, like, eight hours, I think, something
like a really long period of time, and
eventually coax him out of the house. They
get him out of the house. They have
him in custody. All of this was reported.
They let him go
because he's not illegal.
They have nothing to charge him with. They
claim he tried to, you know, go they
tried to hit him with the car, but
there's no evidence for that. They eventually decide,
I think, to because they're not stupid to
to say, well, we're not gonna arrest him.
They claimed it was because California's,
sanctuary policy. But if you have two brain
cells drop together, there's no way that makes
sense in the context of the situation. He
wasn't running into some place. He was not
hiding from the he was not there because
it was breaking the law with immigration. It
was it was the idea was he was
breaking the law because they claimed he tried
to hit the cop.
And that's why they said they were there
that night because you tried to hit the
cop with the car. You're gonna tell me
they'd let the guy go that tried to
hit a cop? In what world does anybody
think they would let that happen? They let
him go because he did not break the
law. Then this is where it gets most
disgusting. It we'll come back to this.
The new footage
on the August 26
challenges their claims.
They didn't hit them. And you already knew
this if you looked. We we did it
on the show. It was clear they didn't
hit the cop. The footage captured by surveillance
cameras from business across the street shows the
driver pulling away as armed individuals surrounded the
truck. The family attorneys argued the video proves,
because it does,
that he was not trying to run the
office over, unlike the Department of Homeland Security
claimed. They clearly opened fire on a family
and then was like, there's no way we
could rationalize this unless we claim he tried
to hit us. It just shows you what
dishonest these people are.
What if they killed the child? You know,
as well as I, they defend to their
death that they tried to hit them with
the car.
Because we don't know who these masked individuals
actually were,
who they work for. Because if you look
at the videos we provided, there's not a
single identifying mark. Now just because it says
police, that was my point before.
Doesn't mean you know it it should be
like, I'm FBI. I'm local police from this
I'm, you know, I'm ICE. It just said
it just said a generic police on their
vest, which people are pretending to be right
now. And, again, regardless of whether that's the
case, it's your legal right to demand identification
and justification.
Homeland Security off officials have said officers open
fire because he, the undocumented immigrant, which by
the way is actually not accurate, drove directly
at them, striking two agents with his
truck. That's what they just said. They lied.
Now even though the video proves it, which
you can watch for yourself, it's very clear
that's not what happened. It says Longoria's family
disputes the account. The new surveillance video shows
the agents approaching the left in the side
of the truck, and the driver takes off.
No one was standing in front of the
truck.
Period.
So
what you might expect in an honest system
is they go, okay. We have egg on
our face. We're embarrassed by how dumb we
looked,
but we'll let it go because you're not
a criminal. Instead,
Bush is very Trump in this mindset. They're
petty and small and vindictive, And they go,
okay. This guy made us look stupid, so
we're going to arrest him. Even though he's
got proof he didn't do it. And this
let him lounge through court and let him
go through the prison system, and, you know,
and maybe lose anyway.
This was on the twenty eighth.
It just simply says on on the sixteenth,
they tried to arrest him from the car.
He drove away. They shot at him. They
went to his house. They surrounded him, and
they got him in custody and then let
him go.
Then fast forward to a week later after
all this, twenty eighth, his family revealed that
he had been or taken into custody. According
to his attorney, Homeland Security,
because that makes sense. Right? Homeland Security investigates
arrested him.
Homeland Security Investigations arrested him at his home
on Thursday, Oct August twenty eighth. He was
arrested for a single charge, even though they
said he hit two people and they lied
about that, of assault on a federal officer.
Probably because they, like, bumped one of their
legs, and that's legitimately what they're gonna do,
with a deadly and dangerous weapon being the
car. He was arraigned later that afternoon.
His attorney said no arrest warrant was issued
at the time of the incident,
meaning they did not have an arrest warrant
for him. They profiled him, saw a brown
man, and did what they did anyway, including
opening fire on an innocent car full of
people.
The government claimed they they it it was
no arrest warrant have been issued on the
sixteenth incident,
and the government claimed ICE and CBP agents
decided to perform an immigration check. Guys, it
says it right there. They did all of
this because they saw Brown guy. They were
wrong, and they're still putting him in jail.
The criminal complaint alleged that the agents involved
in the store stop had been injured.
The court asked Corey Burleson to identify any
injuries allegedly sustained by the agents.
He then acknowledged, quote, I'm not aware of
any injuries.
Yeah. That's where the story ends, guys. Welcome
to America 2025. That man's in prison.
Or at least in per in jail right
now being arraigned to go to prison. You
think I'm kidding?
This makes me physically ill. Like, this is
so this is the kind of stuff that
we always pretend happened in the Banana Republic
of the world. This is real time. This
is the most powerful thing happening right now,
putting people in prison in The United States
because they don't because they're embarrassed.
Because they arrested him incorrectly, and they and
he did what was within the law.
Or, you know, sending 300 people to a
foreign concentration camp.
On top of that, Kyle Cheney says,
happening now, the Trump administration withdraws his claim
that parents of the Guatemalan children that it
tried to send back last month had requested
their return. Now you might have missed the
story.
They lied.
The DOJ says it has no basis for
the claim now in light of the contradictory
information provided by the Guatemalan government. Right. So
Miller and Bondi and Nome and all of
them came out and lied to your face
and said that these children requested to go
back to their families,
and they lied to you.
It was apparently to a very dangerous situation,
and now the Guatemalan government said they made
all that up. And so the DOJ is
forced to go, oh, well, I guess we
were mistaken. Too late, though. They're already over
there. Too bad.
I mean, that's how like, these people are
laughing at all of us. They know that
nothing's gonna happen.
Once again, he says the Trump administration outright
lied about their effort to deport hundreds of
children in the middle of the night. They
claim that children have been requested by their
parents.
Now they've walked back that claim entirely. But
too late, though. Who cares?
Guys, that's that's a big deal. Whether it's
about lying to send innocent people to El
Salvador or whether it's about lying to arrest
people in this country or lying to put
you in jail because you criticize Israel.
It is time to be honest about what's
happening.
Now this is interesting, by the way. Somebody
sent me this.
Mobilizing national guard to help immigration crackdown. Now
remember what I said about the beginning of
this, the whole thing about federalizing police to
because Washington DC is overrun with crime. Right?
Weird how and and to be clear, you
know as well as I, very different presentation
conversation than
ICE going after illegal immigrants. Even though, obviously,
one's a crime and they overlap. Right?
Very clearly, they were pushing this in in
the beginning as something totally different. We're gonna
federalize police, and we're gonna re we're gonna
bring back the country.
But what I said in the beginning was
that DC was a very different situation and
that they federalized police in that way in
regard to, you know, doing it the way
they did this in DC. In other states,
that's a big deal. And it wasn't DC
either way. It's a crime.
What I thought, which turns out to be
correct, I think, is that they ultimately
they it was about immigration or at least
using immigration to roll out the surveillance state,
whatever everything else they're doing,
and then act for Israel and all the
things they're doing, is that they then initiate
the DC move. Because it now we're talking
about ICE, policing, and it's a very fuzzy,
uncomfortable conversation to be like, we're deploying military
to get these guys. Right?
So they do the DC thing,
Rationalize the emergency of DC even though they
just made that up. And other than there's
clearly crime, but it's like in in the
context, they they lied about it, and then
they initiate the National Guard.
Then
under the guise of fighting crime,
DC, and we've already kinda got okay with
the National Guard deployment in regard to bad
crime all over the country, well, then they
just kinda stopped on that and they just
said, well, you know, jump to today.
19 states.
There are 19 states in The United States
right now,
scattered 1,700, probably a lot more than that,
National Guard. Why? Immigration.
Well, it's exact it's not a big bombshell.
You guys probably know that if you're paying
attention. In some cases, it's it's overlapped.
But really think about that. So
National Guard. Why?
Is it personnel? Why would it be military
if that's the case? All they did was
use these two stories to rat to make
you accept military deployment for civil enforcement.
That's posse comitatus. Posse comitatus, guys. That's what
it is. It's a crime.
And here we are. Now it's somehow okay.
Wait until it becomes 50. No big deal.
They're just going after some immigrants.
No. They already made it clear. Rapid deployment
forces. We now have a marsh, a a
military
enforcement for civilians.
Thanks, Trump. Rather, thanks US government. I should
say thanks
partisans for allowing this to happen on both
sides.
And of course, this is from the US
Department of War, which don't forget was what
it was already called.
Department the Department of Defense was the change.
That was the game. It was always the
Department of War. They changed the defense to
manipulate you. Now they're changing it back. And
it's like but even the mainstream, they can't
seem to recognize that that's you know, it's
just funny. It's all cultivated, guys. They want
you to think this is now the shift
because we're going back to a warrior mentality.
No. They're just they're war mongers, and they're
just trying to shift you into a war
focused might makes right mentality.
Statement by chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell on
the DOD personnel support to ICE.
Department of Defense announced today on July 25
in the duties,
a change in the duty status of military
personnel supporting US,
ICE.
Personnel will transition from title 10 to 32
as we told you before. This change affects
1,200 service members currently authorized for the mission
and includes additional 500 newly authorized personnel, bringing
the DOD support to 1,700.
1,700 military personnel marching around 19 states to
enforce immigration, so we're told.
But no big deal, though. Right? It's not
like they're rolling out a digital trans you
know, digital surveillance structure transition.
It's not like they're rolling out massive infrastructure
changes and, you know,
unrest all over the country based on numerous
things, but nothing to do with that.
Now this is a couple more points on
that overlapping from immigration into just like technocracy.
As Erin Melnick points out,
it's not hyperbole to say that thanks to
today's decision, this was on the eighth,
every Latino citizen and probably anybody, by the
way, just because they decided to make think
you, you know, use that you might look
one way to justify asking for your papers,
but that every Latino citizen in Los Angeles
should carry passports or birth certificates with them
at all times.
The Supreme Court has now essentially green lit
Trump's DHS demanding their papers at any point.
That was what we just showed you. That's
what that brought on.
They they let them racially profile. So the
point is papers, please. What's funny is you
can say that statement around plenty of Republicans
today, and they'll say, yeah. They should have
to prove that every time
without realizing that that's
Nazi stuff. Papers, please. That's Nazi stuff, guys.
And it's so funny how and, you know,
when it's the Democrats,
oh, it's so easy to call out all
the radical policies. No. They just they hate
the constitution. They wanna take my guns away,
and then all of this happens at this
point. And then, oh, it's all because bad
immigrants or Democrats are trying to trick us
first.
It's just willful ignorance and it's everywhere.
And let's not forget, worth playing this again.
It's been a minute. This is what's really
being built, guys. Again, this was under the
guise of immigration.
But now we see it, and, of course,
it's for plenty of other things too. We
talked about the geofencing. Guys, get ready. This
is what's being built around here. Great.
We will finally complete
the biometric
entry exit visa tracking system, which we need
desperately.
For years, Congress has required
biometric
entry exit visa tracking systems,
but it has never been completed. The politicians
are all talk, no action, never happens,
never happens.
Hillary Clinton,
all talk. Unfortunately,
when there is action, it's always the wrong
decision. Do you ever notice?
In my administration,
we will ensure that this system is in
place.
And I will tell you, it will be
on land.
It will be on sea. It will be
in air. We will have a proper tracking
system.
Hooray. Freedom.
As I said, it will be on oh,
well, that's I just said welcome to your
Freedom MAGA biometric tracking system.
As wet Whitney Webb pointed out on January
17, hope Trump supporters will soon catch on
to how the virtual border wall being built
by companies backed by Peter Thiel, twenty twenty
five January,
is meant to serve a as a Trojan
horse for digital ID by requiring, not just
foreigners
entering The US, but any American traveling abroad
to submit to a digital biometric exit entry
tracking system.
So when you come back, now you need
it. Now you have a digital ID. Too
bad you fell for it. I mean, it
just couldn't be more clear.
Now, by the way, I don't wanna get
too early on it, but there are some
rumblings about something new
coming between a few of us in the
background here, Whitney, Derek, myself. It might be
you know, it's it's in the talks. But
I'll float that out there to get you
guys excited about something new that may be
coming, but look out for that. We have
plenty of new things coming on the horizon.
Now this is an important article. This is
one of the things I put in the
in the title today.
I I wanna shout out Disclosed TV just
because that's where I first saw it. I
always think it's important. New US tech giant,
Microsoft
giants, Microsoft, Intel, Oracle, and others helped build
China's golden shield, also called the golden shield,
by the way. Golden everything today. Not guys,
there's more coordination to this than you realize.
And it's their golden shield surveillance system using
predictive policing. That sounds familiar. Exactly what they're
doing here. It's Gideon.
To analyze text, calls, and DNA to preemptively
detain people deemed suspicious.
DNA.
Think that's guys, that is what they're doing.
That's Gideon. That's Palantir. That's what's happening. My
argument is that was test, you know, incubated.
It was a test bed. Like, I don't
mean that was, like, coordinate like, necessarily coordinated
between China and the technocrats,
but it could be. I just mean that
however it went down that this was something
that it looks like was first built out
in China that's now building out in The
United States. And it could be that the
technocrats did just what they did here, worked
their way in, manipulated, funded, maneuvered, got it
done. Now it's happening here.
At least consider that as this begins to
happen.
Now this was this came out, yesterday.
Silicon Valley enabled brutal mass detention and surveillance
in China, internal documents show.
Says, the survey surveillance was nothing new
for the Yang family. So the story is
about this which starts at least with this
one family. In rural China, snared in an
intricate network based on US technology that spies
on them and predicts that what they'll do.
I mean, even just that, like, as always,
Corbitt's made this clear. If you really look,
there is far more coordination between The United
States and China than what people led on.
Lot of it's backdoor through Israel and other
connections.
But the idea you know, like, even like
this, they know that there's US companies that
are selling the you know, It's not like,
I mean, it's certain lights you could call
that treason.
And if they wanted to, they could,
or they would. We know our governments would
do. But see, these people are inner circle,
and this is what I think they wanted
to happen.
But it goes on to say, their train
tickets, hotel bookings, purchases, text messages, and phone
calls are forwarded to the government.
Now, think about this. Like, this is, like,
a year from now in The United States.
If not literally already happening. And I'm not
trying to be hyperbolic.
It's what's actually happening, guys.
All those things. Got them forwarded no matter
what.
Their house is ringed with more than a
dozen cameras. They've tried to go to Beijing
20 times in the past few years, but
masked men show up and grab them, often
before they depart.
And last year, Yang's wife and younger daughter
were detained and now face trial for disrupting
the work of the Chinese state, a crime
carrying a sentence of up to a decade
in prison. I mean, how does this not
ring, like, eerily true with what we're, like,
similar to what we're seeing right now? I
don't care whether you think it's like, imagine
all it is in this conversation is a
bunch of Palestine supporting lefty maniacs, you know,
whatever it is. The point is you can
rationalize
if you just dehumanize the other always. In
this case, all it is is a system.
Right? So what happens eventually when all these
lefty manias go away and get arrested? Do
you think they're gonna dismantle the system? No.
No. They're just gonna point at you now.
We see,
honest people can think about that. And the
the problem is that so many dishonest people
are out there driving everybody else into it,
not even realizing they're gonna get caught up
in it too or that they don't care
or they're too dumb to realize it's happening.
That is where we're dealing with. Or the
idea of disrupting the Chinese state, isn't that
exactly the kind of mentality the Trump administration
is putting out right now?
Quote, moo every move in my own home
is monitored,
Yang said, sitting behind the black curtains that
block him from the glare of his police
lights trained straight out straight at his house.
Their surveillance makes me feel unsafe all the
time everywhere.
Across China, tens of thousands of people tagged
as troublemakers,
like the Yangs, are trapped in a digital
cage,
barred from leaving their province and sometimes even
their homes by the world's largest digital surveillance
apparatus.
Well, you know, it's debatable today. I mean
that genuinely depending well, I don't think we
truly understand the level to which it's happening
in this country, but I would argue clearly
that China was the first it seems at
least like the first one there.
Most of this technology came from companies in
a country that has long claimed to support
freedoms worldwide,
The United States. And we all know that's
not true. Over the past century, quarter century
and by the way, I should say it
like this. I don't mean average Americans. When
I say that, I mean the government of
the United States. Over the past quarter century,
American tech companies,
to a large degree, designed and built China's
surveillance state, playing a far greater role in
enabling human rights abuses than previously known according
to an AP's investigation.
They sold billions of dollars of technology to
aid the Chinese police,
the government, and surveillance companies despite repeated warnings
from the US Congress and the media that
such tools were being used to quash dissent,
persecute religious sex, and target minorities. And, of
course, they don't care at all about that.
I mean, think about the idea of selling
high level technology that they're currently in, like,
a space race level for to Chinese police
and government and intelligence and that not being
perceived as a as, like, a national security
thing. And And this was this was, like,
this was not that long ago, guys.
Does that make sense to anybody? Unless there's
coordination.
I mean, if this was happening to Iran.
I mean or how about how about somebody
like,
Mendez, I think. Was that his name? The
guy got a charge for, selling information to
to, to Egypt, I think. Or I I
forget what the real the the bigger story
was. The point is that I think a
lot of people in government I mean, I
honestly think that's how they make most of
their money is being that kind of sell
out position. And I think it matters who
you do it with. So it's okay when
you do it with the bad guys that
we're along with. You know? Either way,
most people in this country would not think
it makes sense to accept that our government
and people and companies they support and the
allowance by the government to sell high level
technology to an adversary doesn't make much sense
unless you kind of evolve your understanding of
the way the world works. It says, critically,
American surveillance technologies allowed a brutal mass attention
campaign
in the far West Region of of Xinjiang
targeting, tracking, and rate and grading virtually
the entire native Uighur population to forcibly assimilate
and subdue them. Okay. Remember how much they
all clutch their oh my god. And we
and, you know, and there was a lot
of,
I very much don't think it amounts to
the legal definition of genocide, but there was
very clearly,
very clearly human rights violations and crimes.
But you have to include in that situation
how that group was used by outside forces.
Doesn't change its human rights violations. The point
though
is that
American companies, American government
being a part of that and then standing
up in the public and going, so wrong.
We have to call it out. Well, same
thing's happening today.
US companies did this by bringing predictive policing
to China.
Yeah. Testing it there first. Technology that sucks
in and analyzes data
to prevent crime, protests, or terror attacks
before they happen. Well, gee, that sure sounds
familiar, doesn't it?
Such systems mine a vast array of information.
Text calls, payments, flights, video, DNA swabs, mail
deliveries, the Internet, even water, and power use
to unearth individuals deemed suspicious and predict their
behavior.
Guys, if you're not able to admit to
yourself that this is literally what your government's
drooling over, if not already has in place,
I just have to say that you're lying
to yourself. It's what they're doing.
It's what they're praising on the surface right
now. And I mean, think about all that.
You could point out that all the things
they listed
weren't necessarily met by any one agenda. But
if you look at what they've done over
the last four years, last eight years,
text calls, payments, flights, video, DNA swabs, mail
delivery, Internet, water power. Yeah. They've worked it
from from, like, three or four major agendas.
They've gotten all of that very clearly locked
down.
Could have been a coincidence, of course, or
not. But they also allow Chinese police to
threaten friends, family, and preemptively detain people for
crimes they have not yet committed,
which, of course, we know is abused by
illegal power structures to say, we know you're
gonna commit a crime even though you might
not have been because you're somebody they wanna
lock down before a certain event, whatever. It's
what the governments will do. For example, the
AP found a Chinese defense contractor,
Huade, worked with IBM
to design the main policing system known as
the Golden Shield. I mean, you can't miss
the overlaps.
The shield, the golden part. I mean, all
of this I mean, just let me read
this two paragraphs, and I'll go to one
point.
The golden shield for Beijing to censor the
Internet
and crack down on alleged terrorists,
the Falun Gong religious sect, and even village
villagers deemed troublesome according to thousands of pages
of classified government blueprints taken out of China
by a whistleblower, verified by AP, and revealed
here for the first time.
Now, whatever you think about, for example, the
following Gong and the different it's not it's
there it's the way that they are conducting
crimes and human rights violations regardless of whether
people may, you know, you may argue they
should be arrested or dealt with, whatever your
mindset is. All I'm saying is that there's
easy ways to say, well, that group's bad.
Therefore, it's the same point. The principle is
all that matters.
So
working with IBM to create the golden shield,
the sense of the Internet and crack down
an alleged terrorist. Sounds kinda familiar. Right? Well,
it's worth pointing out
or was it right here?
IBM has very serious connections to Israel. And
the reason I think that's important is because
all of those things are, you know, the
the shield conversation, the golden overlap, those are
things that Israel and United States have been
using in many projects very consistently lately. And
I think what's important to see is that
all of this, the way that they're conducting
this, the creation of the division, to me,
feels like what Israel's done everywhere it's ever
existed in this conversation.
That's no in no way, as always for
those new, is not to say every Jew
or every Israeli.
Never am I saying that. And it's about
the Israeli government, the Zionist infiltration. There's plenty
of Jews around the world that are aggressively
calling these things out. The connection between IBM
and the Israeli government and military is a
subject of significant controversy and scrutiny.
IBM Israel has been contacted contracted to design
and operate the ITIN system, a central computing
and data storage system for the Israeli population.
Sounds very similar, doesn't it? Immigration and border
authority. Oh, look at that. This system manages
the national population registry, which includes personal data
on Israeli citizens, Palestinians, West Bank, Gaza, as
well as Syrians that go out occupied occupied
Golan Heights. Oh, great. So you can you're
surveilling other populations too. So it seems like
they took it to a whole new level.
This system facilitates Israeli surveillance and control of
occupied populations, drawing parallels to the apartheid Arab
population. Or what it means is we're using
this to commit genocide.
So IBM is a part of this problem,
which those that already you already know that
I know that from the past. I'm just
for those new, it's important to understand. Microsoft,
same thing. IBM, very clearly immersed with the
Israeli apparatus. It says, furthermore, IBM's sub subsidiary
subsidiary,
Red Hat Israel, has provided critical technology infrastructure
to the Israeli military,
including the OpenShift
software used as the cloud platform
for the military central computing system, Mamram.
IBM has also been involved in joint projects
with the Israeli military's computer service and cyber
defense divisions, particularly in the fields of artificial
intelligence and machine learning. In 2020, IBM was
part of a $275,000,000
contract to build data centers for Israeli military
logistics,
and its employees have worked directly with military
units. So you see where this is going.
It's that's one of these it's one of
these overlapped. Right? They've it might as well
be one and the same. It's like these
Israeli front companies that work with Israeli intelligence.
You know, if you've got Israeli military units
working in these companies, then that's Israeli military
intelligence. And it says the company also has
participated in programs like cyber force, which facilitates
the integration of Israeli soldiers
into the high-tech industry. I mean, guys, it's
literally the mechanism through which they fold in
military intelligence into the real world situation. I
mean, we just played that clip. The world
is our stage. Right? I should I should
actually save that.
Because I don't think I have it saved
like that.
Shoot.
I'm gonna start and save that next time
because I think that's a good clip to
play at certain moments.
I don't wanna try to find it. I
I don't know if I have it saved
somewhere. But, you know, they're they they're, they're
sitting there with sixty minutes and they admit
Israeli IDF Mossad that the world is their
stage. They they create fake companies. They carry
these things out. It's very clear. So they
they they are literally creating companies that are
acting for the Israeli intelligence. They're not even
hiding it.
The company has also participated in those programs.
It says,
yeah, it says, and has collaborated with the
Israeli Ministry of Education,
of course, to promote computer science among high
school students. So it's like this pipeline
from people in their school. You know, it's
it's very clear.
These ties have led to ethical concerns and
actions by investors. In 2024,
Sir Brand, the a major Norwegian asset manager,
divested from IBM for this very reason, citing
the company's role in supplying biometric databases to
Israeli authorities
that contribute to the domesticate the discrimination and
segregation of Palestinians
or everywhere else, by the way, because it's
being used to commit genocide. It's being used
with Palantir to spy on Americans. It's all
this is all one I see all this
as one project where they build these things
out and it's being deployed. And it's not
as simple as that. That's like a broad
view of the general point. There's always multifaceted
agendas and moving parts.
But my opinion is that you can see
these connections.
So back to the larger point,
the the the the original case, we're talking
about the China Silicon Valley overlap. But if
we recognize that this is one of one
of them is this IBM overlap, you can
see how this all interconnects. So they tested
this out
in China,
built it out.
And it is, in some cases, functioning the
way they would like. And I think this
is now being outsourced, rolled out. Maybe this
was in earnest what it's supposed to be.
Across China, surveillance systems track blacklisted key persons.
That's happening today. Whose movements are restricted and
monitored.
In Xinjiang, administrators
logged people as high, medium, or low risk
according to a 100
score point scores with deductions for factors like
growing a beard, being 15 to 55 years
old, or just being Uyghur.
Now realize this point score, the medium, high,
low risk, these are things that are already
happening in this country, like, provably,
especially under Trump, by the way. While the
flood of American technology slowed considerably starting in
2019,
After outrage with sanctions over atrocities in Xinjiang,
it laid the founder foundation for China's surveillance
apparatus that Chinese companies have built since and
some cases replaced.
I found this really interesting.
Think of the time. So up until 2019,
the companies we're all talking about, the Oracles
and Larry Ellison's of the world were working
to build this stuff in China,
which seems like a kind of a sick
national security issue, but nobody seemed to care.
Who are who are now literally immersed in
the US government.
But at 02/2019,
it slowed considerably.
Now it kinda seems obvious to me that
right around 02/2019,
2020
is when this infrastructure was truly put in
in earnest. Like, look. Remember that on I
mean, that was the first video I got
a million views on that got my whole
YouTube account censored.
That under the cover
of COVID nineteen, Trump rolled out the five
g infrastructure.
In fact, I think I actually had that
saved.
Now I always thought that was so interesting
to me because at first, I was I
just thought it was because they which I
actually wasn't doing in in this show. Here
it is.
I actually wasn't, in the oops. I just
put it on the wrong tab. Here we
go. I actually wasn't in this episode trying
to claim, even though there's very clear overlaps
to be made, that, you know,
COVID nineteen was five g.
But it what's interesting is there was by
the way, just on a side note, there
were real like, there was two major studies
peer reviewed that showed that the symptoms that
you got from five g sickness were, like,
identical to whatever we called COVID nineteen. Take
that for what you will. I covered that.
It was crazy. And I do think there's
there's correlation to a lot of these things.
But this whether or not it's the case,
this show, even though I did touch on
some of the points,
was about Trump quietly signs five g law
under the cover of coronavirus.
And that got me booted off YouTube, like,
very quickly. And this went to a million
views very quickly.
So doesn't that seem relevant now? You know,
the idea that really they were building out
the five g great reset AI infrastructure to
the cover of COVID nineteen. And it's not
always one thing. I think there's that along
with many other things happening.
Feels very relevant to me in this particular
conversation. I'll also grab for you
this one,
which I think is just the
the clip that Brock had made. I did
that again.
And we were I'm I'm hopefully getting back
to that as well. Oh, on that note,
actually, I forgot I need to call Jason.
Jason and Brock, I wanna get them back
back to both making clips, which we will
get to.
If if, you know, if we keep on
the incline,
does a newly published study prove the five
g COVID nineteen connection? Here's just that's the
clip. I'll include both for you.
So back to the point.
If we're talking about 2019 being the when
it's, like, considerably slowed down, which if the
case is why? If they're building out all
this and why would they slow well, they
rapidly leaned into The United States. I mean,
you could argue they could do both, but
I I feel like that makes sense.
And it goes on to say, and, and
contracts to maintain existing IBM, Dell, HP, Cisco,
Oracle, Microsoft,
all of them were involved with this project.
Microsoft, IBM are obvious, I think. Oh, I
guess in the context of what I was
saying. But the the larger point It's just
people like Oracle Microsoft the ones that are
immersed with the current
administration.
The people selling this stuff to China.
When what started in China more than a
decade ago could be seen as a cautionary
tale for other countries.
At a time when the use of surveillance
surveillance technology worldwide is rising sharply, including The
United States. Emboldened by the Trump administration, US
tech companies are more powerful than ever.
Yep.
Other companies like Intel, Nvidia, Oracle, Thermo Fisher,
Motorola, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Western Digital, creator
of mapping software, ArcGIS
ISR,
and what was then Heward,
Hewlett Packard or HP,
also sold technology or services, knowing that the
Chinese police or surveillance companies. Think about how
crazy that is. You think they don't know
about that? These are major American companies, or
most of them anyway.
Wild to me.
So I think oh, here's that here's that
image, by the way. This is the people
being graded.
So this is what's already here coming in
some cases, and I just really wanna stress
the case that this is something that they
already did.
And now you overlap that with the idea
of, like, this transition of power, the kind
of transition of what we think matters constitutionally,
the transition into some kind of Freedom City
CEO run country. I mean, guys, the writing
is on the wall. I mean, it it
really did something we have to acknowledge is
happening. And overlap that with The US, as
we said earlier, The US's new Israeli made
AI precrime system that they just told you,
by the way, as we, I think, proved,
was already there. They had a shooting and
the guy's like, oh, we're talking to 12
agencies. We've got 200 peep 2,000 people in
place.
Yeah. That was already there. K? And they
they initiated it. So my point and it
seemed to happen with very little fanfare.
So if they initiated some new thing, I
think we'd talk about it a bit more.
But he said they did and then it
went away. So I think it's obvious that
Gideon, an AI created system literally built by
Israeli intelligence, not like a, I think so,
we're connected through a company, but on their
surface.
He said it in the interview.
Israeli built by Israeli intelligence with Israeli ideal
he even said the Steve and I talked
about it. He used a word that implied
built with Israeli like ideology.
Either way,
AI pre crime system, that's what he told
us. It's for stopping crime before it happens.
Yeah. Because that's super constitutional. Right?
You know it's there.
Now we also saw
Karp,
CEO of Palantir, co co,
saying that he's Palantir is not surveilling Americans
and that the company's reluctance to do that
was why they never got a contract with
the NSA.
I I mean, it's just it as I
just laughed, I'll just read what I said.
I said, yeah. You know, other than the
massive American surveillance system that they have running.
And other than that all encompassing spy network
focused on Americans,
they just don't feel right about spying on
Americans.
Yeah. That's how down they think we are
clearly. Actually, I'll instead I'll include in this
link here the Palantir oh, I think I'm
right here. Palantir real world order, Eric's article,
as well as the IMA panel. One of
them, the Palantir AI Panopticon.
But I'll grab this one too.
For those that may feel like it matters
that it's coming from a a mainstream platform,
it is not gonna come up.
Oh, well, I thought the New York art
New York Times article would pop up. I
guess not. Anyway, then never mind. I think
it was listed in here anyway.
The New York Times put that article about
you know, it's just the point is, that's
exactly what they're doing. Nobody anybody with a
brain is already telling you Palantir was involved
with surveilling Americans. That's not even up for
debate. Trump was praising that in regard to
going after immigration.
For them to say this is just Karp
literally playing on he's he's laughing at dumb
people buying that.
And that's by the way, that's Sacks sitting
right next to him, the AI czar. You
know? That's really objective.
Now let's talk about some foreign policy.
And I think you're gonna see how clearly
these things kind of intertwine in a large
way. Now, this one I thought was important
just to cover because it does feel like
kind of a big
transition, and I think there's many implications to
this. But I if I it's up in
the air. Let's put it that way. Like,
a lot of these tend to always kind
of remain.
You have kind of markers you can see,
but there's just the competing narratives and you
can't be sure. And, usually, that's where partisans
just pick a side, and that's how it
goes.
Sometimes you just gotta leave it where you
don't know. You know? But this was one
post I saw, and it's being it's being
framed as the people of Nepal have rose
up against their government, and then I think
this has been taking place over the last
two days, and set it on fire. That's
the picture I use for the show today.
There are reports circulating The US is involved
and funding another color revolution.
It's important for the people of Nepal to
organize their own government and not let The
US install a puppet regime.
Now that's one perspective.
Another side of it, there are people arguing
this is just a genuine and it's actually
interestingly usually, I feel like it's easier to
see,
And I'll get to the two points that
I think, as you might expect, stand out
the most to me.
But
you could see this as a response even
with the latter points I'll make, the end
points of people, like, in response to outside
influence to, well, I guess, just largely outside
influence from The US, Israel,
and that these people maybe just got fed
up with that. In the beginning stages of
this or maybe the way it went, as
you'll see, it seems like there was a
Robert and I have talked about this a
lot, where you get these moments like in
Iran. It's happened many times, where you'll have,
like, a protest, and people have genuine grievance
with something their government did.
And it's real. It's an organic thing, and
in no way are they calling for outside
they don't want The US. They don't want
anybody involved. They just want their government to
listen to them. They don't want a revolution.
They just want their protest in the action
like we do in this country all the
time.
Then you get people that step into there
acting like they're part of that, and they're
all these fake Mossad CIA.
It's it's very clear. They do this as
a matter of practice, guys. They put them
in there. They cause the violence. What happens
is
the situation resolves.
Either the government caves, the people protesting don't
they just kinda pull back. And then for
some weird reason, the chaos goes crazy and
buildings get burned down. But everyone's like, well,
wait a minute. Hold on. They're not protesting
anymore. The government gave in. What's happening?
Usually, it's people taking advantage.
Now it could just be that things got
crazy and people you you know,
social contagion. That's possible.
Or it could be that there are people
that in the protest that are just genuinely
wanna tear things down, outrage with the, you
know, kind of wanna eat the rich, that
they got kinda mentality.
Those are all possible. But I think it's
very important to consider the fact that in
in many cases, power structures, especially those like
The US and Israel, see situations like this
or see them getting close and decide to
take advantage.
So the other argument, one of them is
that this is something that they manipulated. Right?
That the US government wants control of the
area or rather the Israel does or however
you're gonna look at it. They decided to
pull the trigger because they were losing control.
And they don't care how it really hurt
to get it done.
And here and a lot well, I I
should have had the other one next. Hold
on. The other
argument
did I close it on accident? Son of
a gun. Okay. Well, so, yeah, the other
argument, as I think I already said, was
simply just,
right, so one side, you could have them
fake it. The other side, I think I
think I did kinda say that people just
organically push back. You know, that that was
the the third kind of anomaly is that
so let's say people are protesting because they're
outraged about the government.
And but they don't want a revolution. They
don't want chaos, but they're protesting. And then
all of a sudden, you get a force
that steps in and starts
driving that chaos.
Right? And so then that chaos through their
protest in the midst of it be creates
all of this, and then they sort of
get framed for it. I mean, I think
that's kinda what I already talked about. And
so the ultimate point is it could be,
you know, engineered for regime change, or it
could be organic that was taken advantage of,
which I think are the two large, you
know, most likely situations. There's plenty more we
can consider, but we'll go through more as
we continue. The point here is here's just
an example from economic times. Girl takes shelter
behind
behind a a shop as police fire tear
gas. Like, just giving you examples, like, to
flush it out of, you know, people on
the street. Would would because we should always
question whether they think the these things could
be like wag the dog.
I know there are people that love to
act like that's never something you should consider.
That's the dumbest person in the room, truly.
They provably have faked entire events in history.
So we should be on guard, you know,
every time. But it does appear this is
genuinely happening.
Then we saw yesterday, the Nepal prime minister
resign
after 19 killed in the protest, which again
is where this started to kinda spin out
of control.
And the the groups calling themselves gen z,
I don't think that's necessarily connected with the
idea of what gen z in this country
is. It could be. The point is that
this is what they've called themselves. So I
think that in this country, it tends to
be maybe it is, but it could associated
with, like, a, you know, a culture
age revel you know, like, we're pushing back
against the structure kind of a thing. I
can't tell if that's the case. Now one
of the arguments was it was about social
media. They shut down social media in response
to some of these things, which I think
are and basically, the argument is that spun
them out of control, and that's kinda being
used by some of the partisan conversation to
claim this is what it looks like.
Right? To successfully do x y and z,
which is dangerous,
not wrong in a sense. The violence I
disagree with, but the idea of just the
people standing up and demanding change and action
and and forcing that through. And I do
not believe that means violence, but people disagree.
I honestly think that's what they need from
you to execute whatever they want to shut
it down.
But I think the important idea of the
the people standing up for what they believe
in is that can't be denied. And so
pushing back against corruption, which is what the
larger story says, and then the social media
being a thing that kind of spins it
out even further. It didn't make sense. But
I do think that this is being manipulated
in some ways too by the conversation.
Nepal's parliament set on fire after prime minister
resigns over anti corruption protest as they framed
it.
Here's,
a somewhat local platform for the ninth saying
Kathmandu
burns after bloody coup, but Nepal gen z
protesters carry victory march. As demonstrators against the
government, protesters were seen dancing and celebrating as
the private residence was,
was burning. That's the picture we used. So
right there, you see people out there celebrating
as burning down. You know, it's like it's
it's interesting the way this ended, which we'll
get to in a second.
You you know, you if imagine this happening
in this country.
Even if it was genuine.
We're in a, you know, we're in a
pretty violent spot in this country where, like,
it we'll we'll get to this where you
you can see that there's been an actual
shift, it seems.
Before we get there, on the I think
it was late the ninth or early the
tenth,
the
government of DePaul was
flown out of there as the crowd was
sort of, like, they claim ready to take
vengeance on them.
So it's interesting to see they're flying them
out of there.
DePaul's army takes back, this is today,
the streets after two days of protest.
So all that said, he did resign.
They flew the the main guy. I only
I think they flew him out and a
couple of others. And now they're
the Paul's army
has taken back the streets
after these protests, and now they're deciding, like,
what goes next. Now it says troops imposed
order after at least 30 people were killed
during anti government demonstrations.
It says leaders of the protest movement that
forced out Nepal's prime minister held talks with
military leaders on Wednesday and said they backed
a former
chief chief justice of Nepal's Supreme Court to
lead an interim government. So it matters to
me, this person, whether or not they have
other connections. I mean, there's floated ideas of
CIA connections. I couldn't find anything tangible.
So the the this person's in place is
is something we should watch. Overall,
it's interesting to watch the way this played
out. Right? So you've got people that you
could argue is an organic uprising because they
don't like the corruption or they felt like
they're being censored.
Successfully
got the leadership to remove and apparently got
the military on their side. Now if this
is organic,
that is usually, as I've said before, how
real change when when the enforcement arm decides
to change or enforce to not follow orders
is when these things truly change. And I
mean, in a real sense.
Even in this case, potentially other than the
30 people that got killed in the ongoing
protest without real bloodshed, like the military versus
the new, you know, the coup side.
So it's worth considering.
Just the idea, not like like whether we
should do something, but consider how that works
out in the real world, if that's the
way it went. There and I I imagine
we'll get more information as this goes forward
that'll flush this out. And the last two
points, I think, we'll we got a few
more to go on, but the last two,
I think, will make this flesh out a
little more. There was no immediate comment from
the Paul's military, which has deployed troops to
keep the order, the capital. They could also
just argue that they just in in some
unique unicorn in the world, the military is
like, well, we don't want any part of
this. We'll just keep to keep the order
and you guys can decide. That rarely doesn't
seem to happen ever.
After two days of unrest that left 30
people dead, the many government buildings in ruins.
The protesters have called for early elections to
fill the political void after the prime minister
and some of his cabinet ministers resigned on
Tuesday, leaving the remaining government in a caretaker
role.
So my concern, obviously, is that there's somebody
who's instigated this and has now taken advantage,
and that's why there was no real exchange
because it was a, like, a bloodless coup,
which was worth considering.
Rakeshaya Bohm, leader of the protest movement known
as Gen z, told the New York Times
after the meeting with military leaders, so that's
interesting, that they are all they're literally meeting
with so, I mean, that means they're essentially
in control,
that the demonstrations
had proposed
that the demonstrators had proposed
Shish,
Shishili Karki, the former chief justice as head
of the interim government. In the interview,
miss Karki told India's news eighteen that she
was ready for the responsibility.
The government on Tuesday reversed the ban, but
the unrest escalated.
The ban was, on Monday, the government forces
fired live rounds over bullets, water cannons at
a crowd of young people demonstrating.
Oh, and the ban social media was the
point. So that that was a major part
of this. I don't think that was necessarily
the one reason why it happened, but I
think that might have been the catalyst if
this was organic.
Government ban on 26 social media platforms.
So the government reversed the ban, but the
unrest escalated. So that's my point. I think
that's important to think about, to note.
If what they were really going after was
the ban, then why did it
continue? Especially since the government had already resigned,
right?
Or rather after that. My point is that,
so the government
reversed the ban.
They then they then leave yesterday,
and and it has continued the chaos. And
so the point is, what is driving that?
It may, Joe, I said earlier, could be
what we talked about. But I think what
my what I would say is most likely,
like, you know, average, is that that tends
to suggest that there's something else driving that.
The government on Tuesday reversed the ban,
prompt prompting, prime minister KP Sharma Ali and
some of the other cabinet members to resign.
Protesters said fire to the par parliament building,
Supreme Court, play stations, and the homes of
current and former officials, prompting the army to
step in and declare a nationwide curfew.
Some of the protesters said on Wednesday that
the Gen z movement had encouraged followers to
protest peacefully.
I've heard that, but it's really hard to
know for sure. Even if they did, this
is my point in general is that you
could say that, and then one person could
act violently.
And it can, if people want to, be
used to frame an entire group. It's what
they're doing right now with anybody with the
Palestinian flag or anything like that. They just
it's dishonest is the right word for it.
On Wednesday, they asked their followers to help
clean up the capital and said they wanted
to help rebuild the government. To me, that
to me, that does not sound like a
group, unless this is just the narrative now,
that wanted the chaos,
but wanted something to change.
So who drove the chaos? Now, you could
also consider that this was an effort to
do that, but it wasn't successful.
That there was like an effort to use
it, drive it further, and the and they
were able to quell it and ultimately got
to maintain control. Like, this could have been
an effort from outside. I do genuinely think
that both Israel and The United States are
stretched wildly thin. And that's why they lose
they've lost in many very obvious ways when
it comes to foreign policy lately.
So
this was from the ninth.
This person writes,
they went to Israel to, and this is
true, by the way. I'll prove it in
a second.
They the the the Nepal government, the leadership,
went to Israel. They they wrote to lick
Netanyahu's backside and has since completely lost his
mind.
Nepali youth were protesting against corruption,
not because they wanted to make TikTok videos
or something. That's that's what they say. I
think it's in some cases both. But what's
crazy to me is that and this person
simply says the protest was against the corruption.
Social media ban was just an addition.
Is that he went to visit Netanyahu.
And, like, a week later, this all spins
out. That could be coincidence. But if you
look around how often that seems to be
a a kind of common factor,
it's worth considering. Not gonna say that proves
it.
Ambassador
of Israel visits Koshi Province of Nepal,
August 28.
What do we just what else did we
just say was the August 28?
What was that? We were just talking about
something else. It'd be crazy if it overlapped.
So isn't that funny? So even even me,
even on the show, I'm like, what did
I just talk about? There's so many things
that we talk about. So trust me, I
don't blame anybody from having trouble absorbing all
the stuff we get into.
But it says, mother and sister of Nepali
hostage, Abipin Josie, arrive in Israel for the
first time.
Nepal also has a unique moral position to,
guess what, call for Palestinian leadership, including Hamas
and other influential groups in Gaza to release
an innocent young man in the name of
humanity.
So you could take this a lot of
ways. The point is there's involvement here and
that Israel was just visiting with them right
before this spins out. So consider that.
What was that on the twenty eighth?
That kills me.
Something.
There's a lot of stuff going on. Ambassador
of Israel visits Koshi province of Nepal.
Very, very interesting.
And this was
about a coup not being organic.
Protest initially triggered by a short lived social
media ban quickly expanded into broader anti government
demonstrations targeting corruption and government issues. The speed
and scale at the escalation
resulting in his resignation within days suggests a
level of coordination that may go beyond spontaneous
public outrage.
I I I agree. That's my that was
my thought before we even got into this
because it's it's rapid.
It it can be, but it's worth questioning.
Destruction of public and private property, including arson
and vandalism, as described in the reports, points
to a level of chaos that could be
exploited by organized groups. I agree. I agree.
Now, this was just another article, News eighteen,
that we're talking about, the local one, saying,
not a revolution.
Mobocracy
ousted oligarchy
in Nepal.
So, they're not proving anything, but they clearly
are questioning it. And it says, mass lynchings,
lootings, and lawlessness are not the work of
revolutionaries.
Even revolution
even revolution
requires a foundation of order and constitutionalism,
if only to provide a meaningful context for
what comes next. I agree with that. In
Nepal, the almost casual embrace of a morally
stripped extra constitutionalism
suggests that only decay is destined to follow,
and that is important to me. So as
somebody there who's talking about what they saw
happen, we we we at least what we've
heard from the people from the Gen Z
side of it very clearly seem to say
from before that they didn't want violence, seem
to suggest that they you know, it doesn't
line up.
And that we saw this kind of rapidly
spin into what we see in, like, a
Antifa situation or Black Lives Matter, which there's
manipulation
going on.
The chaos is what's needed to cause it
to be called out. That's what I think
makes sense, guys.
In Nepal, it says the the coup, from
its conception to its ex execution,
followed a trajectory that has played out in
Kabul,
Colombo,
DACA, and now Kathamont Kathmandu.
Coincidence?
Unlikely.
It says while it would be premature to
attribute all the instances of regime change to
a foreign hand or a non state actor,
there's little doubt that the eruptions are not
organic. That's their opinion. But, I mean, they're
right, though. You can keep the same thing
keeps happening. And so it's worth asking the
larger picture. Now I'm I'm probably gonna get
into this more as the, you know, as
the story develops and there's other moving parts.
But there's a lot around all this. In
in this entire area, there's even more, I
think. I figured if I included it, that
I was gonna go into. It doesn't look
like it. The I wanted to go into
some more that's going on around
India,
Pakistan. You know, there's there's very weird there's
a lot going on around this that does
very much tie back to what I think
are a lot of different power moves being
made for transitions of power. Like, you have
to realize there's a massive shift in the
world
around AI, you know, infrastructure,
technology. It's all happening very quickly, and it's
causing a lot of upheaval, and it's causing
a lot of money to change hands. And
so and that's just one part of it.
The control for people that are already very
wealthy is usually the bigger picture or, you
know, letting themselves live forever in the cloud
or whatever they're trying to do. But the
reality is very clearly that this is something
that's, you know, a global agenda, and we're
watching this transition take place. And there's a
lot of stuff that's happening, and I think
moves like this, you know, usually have more
implications than we realize. You know, until you
find out there's some secret lithium deposit or
whatever it is. Some rare earth minerals or
something that's, you know or just that they
were blocking some building of something they needed
or or nothing.
But realize that moves like this tend to
be connected to something.
You're talking about Venezuela.
Now, again, hopefully, you're seeing, you know, each
one of these different things seems to connect
back to a larger thing right now. This
is just over the top for a lot
of reasons that I've talked about more than
once already. But on top of that,
what I think it's it's not just the,
like, Venezuela,
but really the the normalization
of this kind of action against anybody, including
Americans, by the way.
Both suspected now for those in case you
haven't seen this, which I'm sure I think
most people have, the US government, Donald Trump's
administration,
targeted and and bombed multiple times and sank
a little speedboat.
They claim it was trafficking drugs despite the
evidence seem to suggest otherwise according to platforms
like this, Or and 11 people again disputed
sort of by the black and white video
they put out even though they can clearly
give you better evidence than that, but they
choose not to just like they did with
Iran, the Olympic minds. Right? They they they
do it so you can't find identifiable things
on the video. You know, a shirt tag
or a name tag or, you know, whatever
it is. Look at the thing that's on
his shoe. You could tell him where it
came from. They don't want that. So it's
black and white.
Now, right away, it became clear that they
had no evidence to back it up, that
they were claiming they were trendy aragua. And
most people were saying, okay. Well, so even
if you're accurate,
in what world are you able to execute
people in the middle of the international in
international in the middle of the of maritime
law on the ocean
for a crime that you never even proved?
Right? Right? I mean, that's even if even
if they were drug traffickers, that's never been
the case. Execution. On top of that, what
if they're in an area well, they're in
international water, so you have no jurisdiction. But
what if they were in an area or
going from one to the other that allows
drug trafficking?
You know, the idea that you can just
get to dictate that, and then it turns
out even more that it seems this wasn't
about any of that. And this is even
more important.
So all of it aside, the boat they
suspected of drug drug smuggling drugs because they
haven't proven that,
was now said to have been turning around
before they attacked
it. So the whole thing was as flimsy
as it is and laughable that this represented
a threat to The United States.
So if they were turning around, which the
evidence suggests they were, then that was no
longer a threat.
And so it's just it's it's showing you
that this is not about what they're claiming.
Just like they're getting caught lying about shooting
at a family, like they're getting caught lying
about what they did to people in El
Salvador. These are monsters.
And I just mean the US government. The
same difference on whichever side you look, and
they are willing to lie through their teeth
to maintain their power, especially as that power
seems to be diminishing.
The Trump administration has argued that the summary
killing of 11 people is accused of running
drugs was legal
under the laws of war.
Oh, okay. I didn't know we were at
war with speedboats in international waters. I didn't
know we were at war with Venezuela. I
didn't know we were at war with Tran
de Aragua. Like, they've declared certain things, but
none of that can actually be stated.
There's no declaration of war. Congress hasn't declared
war even though it it just that is
insane to me. So if you're gonna claim
you're in the laws of war, then you're
admitting you're at war with something, and congress
never allowed that. So it's just every which
way you go, they're showing you that nothing
matters to them. Constitution is a thing of
the past. That's what they're trying to train
their followers to think without knowing that.
A Venezuelan boat that the US military destroyed
in The Caribbean last week had altered its
course and appeared to have turned around,
according to the GPS evidence, before the attack
started because the people on board had apparently
spotted a military aircraft
stalking it. According to American officials familiar with
the matter, the military repeatedly hit the vessel
before it sank. I just thought that was
interesting because if you bomb it, right?
And then
at that point, you stopped it. It got
hit. Right? It's floundering.
Wouldn't your obvious point be to try to,
like, get them, arrest them, see something? But
no. They bomb the bomb the bomb the
bomb right to the bottom of the ocean.
Because that you like, that is almost to
me, that's a suggestion that they were trying
not to have evidence.
Trump's use of military for matters typically handled
by law enforcement,
otherwise known as civilian enforcement. That's what that's
on this point. It's on every point we
talked about today. The transition
to a military power structure or, you know,
a technocratic military power structure, which, by the
way, I'm sure you know, if you watch
the show, know where I'm going, That's already
happened. I'll include this for you.
This was back in June. Detachment two zero
one, technocracy in uniform.
This is literally
the,
chief technical officer of OpenAI,
of Meta, and a Palantir who have been
sworn into the military as lieutenant colonels.
And as Brad Miller, formerly from the hundred
first airborne, he resigned in a protest because
they forced the shot on him. He told
us on our show on many more than
once.
There's no difference. There's no there's not like
some second category. They're lieutenant colonels, and they
have command over anybody underneath them. They never
went through training. They didn't go through they
didn't put the years in like everybody else
did. They just got they are part of
the military. They're more powerful than most people
in this country in a military law sense
now, guys. And on top of that,
there's a there's a civilian side of this.
There's doctors and people that wear lab coats
that are considered part of the military. So
why wouldn't they given that? Because this is
a transition of power.
I think that is strikingly obvious today.
So back to the point. Trump's use of
military for matters of, you know, civilian enforcement.
Legal specialists have disputed that it was lawful
for the military on president Trump's order to
target and kill drug smugglers
suspects
as if they were combatants of war. So
this is what I hate about this. Like,
I understand being objective, and I think even
if, like, if you have to choose, it's
better to be irritatingly objective. I do think
that.
But this is not about,
disputed.
Like, you have to understand, guys. This is
like saying that
you take an illegal
immigrant
and deport them without any process. That is
illegal. There's no air in the room. There's
nothing you can claim. There's nothing you can
say at the crime. Or either it's unconstitutional
to make it as specific as possible. And
FAA, well, no. There's a law that says,
nope. Doesn't matter. Mayberry versus Madison. If it's
repugnant to the constitution, it's null and void.
The reality is there is no more talking
that. And so the same thing here.
Legal specialists disputed. But I didn't just know
that they're they're saying Trump broke the law
because the reality is nothing was verified. These
people were not at war with them. They're
not terrorists. Even if they say those things,
they were not arrested. They were not proven.
There was no evidence presented, not even to
us. So right there, that is a problem.
On top of that, there's never been a
point at which you could execute people in
the middle of the ocean under the guise
that they're breaking the law, especially not drug
trafficking. So the reality that they're saying they
dispute it is just frustrating. And then it
says, legal specialists have disputed that and Trump's
orders to get in, you know, as if
it's debatable. It's just not. I think that's
very clear. I think it's worth saying that
like with those other conversations.
Due process is the legal right for everybody
everywhere
within this country, but, technically, the mindset is
the whole world, but we can only enforce
that in this country. That's the idea of
the founding documents. That's the reality.
It's just so sad how many people and
I mean, people who are, like, rabidly, aggressively
think they're right are very wrong about that.
To the detriment of our country while they
scream America, you know, it's it's just insane.
It says, yeah, targeting and killing smugglers, suspects
as if they were combatants of war. He
said
he said they were transporting drugs heading to
The United States, but that's already been disputed.
Max Blumenthal put out a whole thing showing
that the reality was not even coming close
to United States. But again, you could argue
that could have gone in the direction. The
point is if that's the case, then nobody
could say for sure. But the reality, what
was the only data you can see that
that Trump or or Mass could look at
shows that wasn't the case. So they're either
claiming what they want you to think or
they're lying to you. And it says, not
put forward evidence to support those assertions. They
did not put anything forward.
Well, just like with Garcia, they kept lying,
they kept lying, they kept lying, and now
they're proven to have lied. But their supporters
still pretend they have the truth. So, they
just keep saying the thing. Deny, deny, deny.
Trende Arugua? Really? I mean, the idea that
we're still like, that's just this excuse. It
pops up because they have nothing better to
put in the pot in the spot. You
can't call it terrorists anymore because I mean,
that's what they're doing, essentially. They're trying to
create this new category that they can just
call terrorism and go after wherever they want.
Right? The war on terror, that's how that
was used. Oh, we've got terrorists in your
country. We're gonna invade. Oh, we'll take your
oil over here. This is the new argument
in one part of the larger conversation. It's
also because they had to claim Trende Arago
were terrorist invaders to justify the actions they
committed under the guise. It was Insurrection Act
or what was it? The Alien Enemies Act.
It's over the top. All of it's gonna
be used against you. That's what's happening.
Using lethal military force was permissible under the
laws of armed conflict to defend the country
from drugs because a hundred thousand Americans die
from overdoses. That was their argument.
Oh, because those hundred thousand people are being
kidnapped and forced drugs down the throat? Let's
think about the broken logic there. The idea
that you are a military force on people
that you never prove were what you said
because
people in America are dying from drugs. You
know, again, experts have pointed this out many
times, in this conversation. I I just shared
it the other day. Most drug trafficking within
The United States is conducted by Americans.
So what are we talking about? You're killing
people in this ocean because Americans buy drugs
from Americans? It's just insane. But it's not
about that if you understand the reality. That's
why they're blaming Venezuela when that's not even
close to what's happening. Colombia produces far more,
which I've said for years.
And says, I mean,
secretary Rubio said people suspected of smuggling drugs
toward The United States.
Suspected.
Pose an imminent threat.
These guys are lunatics, man. I mean, at
least have a better argument.
Mister Trump, in a letter to congress, justified
the attack as a matter of self defense.
Yeah. You know, in the whole Israeli side
of the thing, you know, that we're gonna
murder you and just claim that you were
gonna do something and whether we prove it
or not. Yeah. We're there's some precrime right
there for you. Kill them. They were gonna
do something.
It's just wild.
Suspected is not an imminent threat. I just
I mean, the idea around this is so
over the top.
I mean, you understand that they've got this
to work in the context of, like, you
know, an evil Muslim trying to bomb something.
Right? Most Americans would still go, oh, well,
they thought they were gonna kill people. Even
then, guys, there are laws and re and
and rights for a reason. All they're doing
is creating a situation where you ignore that
because they've created it just right to make
you, you know, feel like it makes sense.
It's like it's like fire in a theater.
It's how these things work. They create a
narrative
that very clearly undermines the core point, but
it's logical. So you go, well, you know,
and then they step further, and they step
further, and they step further. Woke left, woke
right, woke left, woke right. It keeps going.
It's Happening right in front of you. And
now we're talking about people who we suspected
of crimes can be killed in the middle
of the ocean because I mean, so what
happens next time you're anybody. Anybody they don't
like. Anybody in the world that they suspect
or Israel thinks is a problem, they just
murder on the ocean and go, oh, well,
drugs and stuff.
Nobody cares. Nobody's proving anything. It's the same
point maybe with immigration. If they can shuttle
people off with no due process, they can
do it to you too and claim they
thought you were an immigrant. It's already happened,
in fact.
Many legal specialists included including retired military lawyers
have rejected the idea that Trump has legitimate
authority to treat suspected drug smuggling as legally
equivalent to an imminent armed attack on The
United States. I mean,
think about, like, hypothetically, and I'm not even
remotely saying that there's evidence of this.
Hypothetically,
somebody has important evidence that they're trying to
rush away somewhere about Israel's genocide or about
Trump breaking the law or Biden killing, you
know, whatever. And they're speeding that evidence for
some reason because, you know, whatever. Just think
of whatever the narrative is you wanna make
sense of. Something important is happening and they're
trying to race it over there to get
it right in their hands for the ICJ
presentation.
And then they murder them in the ocean
and just say that they were terrorists smuggling
drugs and nobody knew what was happening.
That's how that can work. Or any other
thing you can imagine with
gangster government like this willing to abuse whatever
they want to get whatever they want all
the time.
Now here's Hegseth saying that, you know, claims
officials from other countries have secretly thanked him
privately
for blowing up a boat and killing 11
people. That he genuinely saying this. He is
just parroting what Trump does and doing it
poorly. Right? That's Trump always does. They said,
please, Trump, make a deal with me. All
of them, everyone in the world was calling
you before the election going, please, Trump. And
then that got proven to be false.
That and those things didn't even happen. And
half of them were like, what's he talking
about? He does this all the time. It's
because he's trying it's about propagandizing you. Hegseth
is just trying to set the narrative is
that, well, everyone in the world was happy
that we illegally bombed a small boat full
of people.
And why would they privately thank you if
you claiming they killed drugs or killed a
a terrorist?
I mean, it makes no sense other than
him trying to lie to you into thinking
that everyone secretly supports it, so you should
too. Don't be stupid.
Well, as Lisa Riley points out, don't argue
with their with this either. We cannot have
any country
just bombing boats or vans. Can you imagine
how wrong this could go? We cannot take
their word for anything. We must have due
process and evidence.
You, liberal.
You know, it's like, what? It's insane
where people have gotten to today. That is
obviously the way we should look at this
if we care about what we claim we
care about. Here is Rand Paul. I don't
think I grabbed this one. I was gonna
yeah. I was gonna code this through quickly.
Under the constitution, congress, not the president,
has to declare the use of military intervention.
It's really cut that cut and dry, as
Rand says. There's three minutes of the clip.
The point is very obvious. As Rand Paul
correctly continues to state, but yet still seems
to kind of
let that go as, you know, he's one
part of a larger body, but congress still
fails to do their job when it comes
to any of those things or impeaching presidents
of any side who continue to violate them
over and over and over.
Obama, Trump, Biden, he doesn't matter. They're all
acting illegally when they commit war without congressional
authority and many other examples.
But here he is again, pointed out, no
one cares.
You know, but but narrative though, but narrative.
Okay. Got it.
Foley Vargas simply says what I've said many,
many, many, many times, which I'm glad he
did. It needs to get more reach. It's
important.
Venezuela
is not a cocaine producer,
nor does it register as a significant transit
country. Now whether you can argue no cocaine,
I'm sure that's debatable.
But it is not a significant transition point
for it's it's just simply not and is
very low on the scale of what we
claim is the trafficking of anything, in the
cars to drugs. Meanwhile,
70%
of Colombia,
their cocaine that reaches The US departs from
Ecuadorian ports. You know, The US' closest ally
in the region.
These figures come from the World Customs Organization.
Now that is simply making a point that
70% of what they produce goes through a
US ally to be sold, but they produce
the vast majority of cocaine in the world.
You hear about that? Are they going after
Colombia for a narc? No. Because they're allies.
So
either they don't care about drugs,
and they're going after Venezuela because of Venezuela
and they want what they have.
Or I mean, I guess I set that
up wrong. The point is that clearly, if
they cared about drugs, they would go after
Colombia. They don't. So they're using it even
if true to go after Venezuela because of
a thousand reasons. They've been doing this for
decades. They want them for their oil, their
gold, their lithium, especially today. And also just
because Maduro and that country represents a thorn
in their side that has continually proved them
to be inept. And
especially in the last so many years
to be
embarrassing,
like, bad, you know, with Guaido.
But here is the reality as I was
just making clear.
And they don't even hide this, guys. This
is the why in many they they they
are now publicly stating that the resources they
control in other countries,
it's a national security interest. Oh, we know
what that means. They can rob, rape, and
steal whatever they want because national security. Right?
Well, that's what they want you to think.
Talk to, my number two,
adversary in the region, Russia. I mean, I've
got,
of course, the countries,
Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua with, Russia relationships. But
why this region matters? With all of its
rich
resources and rare earth elements,
you've got the Lithium Triangle which is needed
for technology today. 60%
of the world's lithium
is in the Lithium Triangle, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile.
You just have the largest oil reserves, light
sweet crude discovered off of Guyana over a
year ago.
You have, Venezuela's
resources as well with, with oil.
Oh oh, and lithium. I guess you just
casually forgot one of the largest lithium deposits
in the world or that was deliberately left
out. You could decide.
Copper, gold.
We have the Amazon,
lungs of the world. We have the 31%
of the world's fresh water in this region
too.
I mean, it's just off the charts. We
have a lot to do. This region matters.
It has a lot to do with national
security,
and we need to step up our game.
Oh, good.
Transparently laying out that that we need to
militarily get involved because they have things we
want.
As I said, these are the pirates of
today. Not even hiding it, guys. They're being
very transparent. It's almost like they they bought
into their own BS. Right? They somehow believe
that we're the righteous thing fighting for good
things, and so we need that to do
good. And so even if we murder everybody
to do it, it's all for good. It
actually it's funny. It reminds me of that,
Peacemaker show where he jokingly says, you know,
I I I I care about peace with
paraphrasing. It's like, I care about peace more
than in the world no matter how many
men, women, and children have to kill to
get it. You know, it's making fun of
how stupid the, you know, blind American policy
kind of thing is where we'll just murder
everybody in the country. Freedom. You know, it's
really stupid. I mean, it's embarrassing. And I
think it's important that we know that most
Americans, I think, call that out today, as
far as I can tell. But this is
clear,
very much clear. They're telling you that we
have an agenda to go after their resources
because what? AI agenda. That's literally as as
at least in one part, as simple as
it gets.
And that means they're willing to murder people.
They're willing to destroy countries, regime change, destabilize.
I do find it very telling that she
just left off the lithium in Venezuela. I
think that's important. Because you have to understand,
right now, she knows there's an active operation.
That's clear. And here's Maduro
saying he says the military buildup in The
Caribbean is aimed at Venezuela's oil, gas, and
gold reserves, which are among the biggest in
the world. He says The US is creating
Hollywood stories about narco trafficking to portray him
as the villain and justify intervention.
I agree.
Doesn't mean he's a good guy. You can
decide for yourself. I don't think he's even
remotely what they claim he is. You can
prove that. But it's very clear that this
is about orchestrating this. They don't care about
bad guys. If they did, they wouldn't work
with Netanyahu. They wouldn't work with Mohammed bin
Salman. They wouldn't work with all the groups
they work with if they actually care. I
mean, yeah, listen. We can objectively point out
that the worst people in the world,
like, in the context of, like, terrorism,
murder, all whatever. Autocrat, you know, despotism.
It's all it's their allies. Their chief core
allies in the world.
But no big deal, though, because freedom.
Next one.
They can't claim I have WMDs,
Maduro says. Nobody would buy it. So they
invent Hollywood stories where I'm the villain, and
they're they're the heroes sending tall blonde guys
to get the Latino villain.
But some know the truth. The real villain
is the one who writes the script. I
just have those the point about, you know,
they they, you know, they used to WMDs,
you know, bought weapons of mass destruction. They
did they did it with Iraq. They tried
to do it in a lot of places.
Iran's still going even though they're it's blowing
up in their face. No pun intended.
So here, he's simply going, they can't get
away with that because it won't work. Nobody
would believe it. So they just go to
something else. Narcoterrorism,
you know, and it's really embarrassing to pretend
that they care about that when they've been
caught trafficking drugs more times than anybody.
Look it up. It's very easy to prove,
guys. They made a movie
about it with Tom Cruise trafficking drugs for
the CIA. But, you know, but let's all
go after them.
We really are in a situation where it's
hard to laugh at ourselves. Well, laugh at
the government pretending to represent us today.
Now, two last things we're gonna talk about
are the Freedom Flotilla and Qatar. And what
this really shows you when you piece all
of this together. Right? I mean, I think
it's interesting and obvious to see the policy
and the way it's being conducted and the
obvious
similar notes you see in everywhere you're looking
right now. So this is obvious, though. This
is Israel bombing
peep I mean, think about the Venezuela boat.
Think about the normalization of bombing ships in
the middle of international waters. Think about the
idea of killing people with no proof, no
evidence, no and here we are watching them
bomb and getting away with it first anyway,
maybe still. A civilian boat full of civilians
traveling to a place where they're supposed to
be allowed to give food.
Tehran, Tag, how do you say that? It's
Irish, I think, and I can't pronounce it.
Tag, how do you say that? T tell
me in the chat. Give me the phonic.
T a d h g.
But he goes, this is my boat. I
don't fear the illegal, immoral, despicable entity. Israel
is what he's talking about. I only fear
is that it it'll be killed that I'll
be killed, and that the media and other
craven western media will ignore irrefutable video evidence
like this about the perpetrators and continue to
side with the serial killing narrative
killers narrative. The point is that they bomb
the ship.
You see right here.
Then they
for, like, from the ninth to the tenth.
Zionist everywhere and all these manipulating Republicans trying
to side with the Zionist were telling you
it was a flare, and they fake I
guess there was one side was that was
a flare. It wasn't even real. Oh, but
they also faked it, though. So both those
narratives swinging around, which both of them don't
work together, but it's okay. Like, always, they
throw both multiple false narratives and see which
one they'll take.
That's where it stopped yesterday. So they they
lie. They faked it. They were just trying
to get okay.
Here's what he said between that.
Actually, I think this might have been, yeah,
okay. This is good. This is yesterday. And
then there's another event that happened earlier today
through the day. But here he is, the
same guy, talking about the first drone strike
on the Freedom Flotilla.
And remember, guys, these are innocent people,
civilians in most cases. I think there's been
a past where there might have been like
a veteran, but most most cases are simple
civilians.
And going there to prove they're lying about
being able to give food to Gazans.
And every single time, even if you even
if they wanna tell them public you're not
allowed to, which is what they're basically doing
now, even though it's supposed to be a
crime, they're not allowed to bomb these ships.
And they do it every single time. Like
I told you before, Joe Meaders was a
veteran of the USS Liberty so many years
ago. He was on one of them. He
got arrested. Your US government never even mentioned
it, probably for obvious reasons. But here's what
I had to say about this recent event.
From beautiful Tunis, guys. Tunisia is absolutely stunning,
by the way. Absolutely
absolutely beautiful city.
So, thank you for all your lovely messages.
I have lots of messages from people concerned
because I think most of you will have
seen now there was a drone attack
on one of the global smooth flotilla boats
last night. It's the family boat that will
be the boat that will be carrying Greta
Thunberg,
Thiago, our spiritual leader, Yasmin, our spiritual leader.
And
so it's a significant boat. It's one of
the main boats, and it was attacked. There
was a drone strike.
Of course, you know, we're two years into
the genocide now. We can't say for sure
who's committing all these crimes. As you know,
we have to say alleged.
You know, we we know who has been
threatening us, you know, for the last, not
just on this mission, but in previous missions.
We we know who has skin in this
game, who would like nothing more than to
derail our project to bring humanitarian aid to
Gaza. But, of course, we can't say for
sure
who it was.
You can look at the images yourself there
of the drone strike. I think Tunisian authorities
or somebody,
somebody in the mainstream media and Zionist media
has been declaring that it's likely,
a fire brought brought about by a cigarette,
I think. That that story is going around
Western media at the moment.
Who knew that cigarettes can can fly through
the sky and explode,
explode on boats and potentially kill people.
We all knew the smoking kills, but perhaps
not to this extent. You know what, though?
It really makes me feel I know that
I'm just talking to some of the Irish
delegation here. My big fear is not so
much that I would be killed on this
mission, but that
I'll be killed. And the Israeli propaganda point
or western media will say, well, look,
you know, he was smoking a cigarette and
it exploded
and blew him up. And that will be
the the narrative because we're living in a
kind of an alternative bizarro world where we
can have irrefutable evidence in front of our
eyes as we've seen with the mass murder
of Palestinians for the last two years. And
yet,
Israeli propaganda,
and the Western media will kinda say, well,
we're not sure. There's a bit of doubt
on it, so, you know, let's just let
Israel investigate itself. And I'm sure they'll say
that they've done nothing untoward and we can
all go on with our business. That would
be my worry that perhaps even the Irish
media and the Irish government would say, well,
we're not quite sure what happened to some
of the Irish delegation that were were killed
in that flotilla. I think the big lesson
is let's not go on flotillas
and, let's just continue looking the other way
as Israel continues to mass murder civilians and
starve,
the population to death. That's our big worry.
But, anyway, look. The attack is the attack.
It's alleged for now. You I'll let you
make up your own mind as to whether
it was a drone attack, and I'll let
you make up your own mind as to
who did it. I'm safe.
I'm a big boat sky, as you know.
I love my boat, and I do actually
mean that. I love my captain. I love
my crew. We have a beautiful camaraderie,
amongst ourselves. I didn't wanna leave the boat.
I was asked to do a media thing
yesterday.
And if for any digit of time, I'm
gonna leave it there. There's more to the
clip, but that was the the main the
main, you know, kind of thrust of what
I want you to see.
So before we get to the next day,
so still on the ninth, Caitlin Johnstone just
rightly doing her job comes out and says,
so literally the exact things that that Sumon
Flotilla activists say they've seen dropping incendiary fire
bombs onto their boats is just so happens
to be documented right here by TRT World
of Israeli drones dropping exactly what they saw
after okay.
But, Mayo, but it was it was a
flare or they faked it or whatever. That's
what was going around. Same thing here. Dave
DeCamp says, well, this looks awfully a lot
like what they dropped in those flotillas, and
it shows Israeli quadcopter dropping flammables on Palestinians
and Gaza. You know? It's like it's just
funny. It it was people pointing out that
it looks awfully similar. But he as he
said, up until that point, you know, unsure.
Then, of course, today, early in the morning
you think about this. After they did it
already and after it got called out, and
I think they successfully thought they got away
with it, Zionists pushed the lie yesterday that
the flotilla team staged the attack, then they
strike again.
And that there's a better video of
it.
So, Israel exposed says the flotilla has been
struck by a second time by Israel. This
time, the Alma ship caught fire. They managed
to recover pieces of the device used, so
I'm sure this will end up being investigated.
I'm sure somebody might have some insight right
there from that. I haven't checked the chats
on this yet.
Thank you. We are all Palestine. Oops.
Did you delete that?
That was weird. Did you see that? Watch
this.
You
see that, guys?
Am I correct? I mean, this this is
what Twitter does.
At first, I thought, oh, he deleted it,
but no. It's right there.
Whoops.
Still there. Same post right there.
Yeah. Guys, what the hell? Look at this.
So if you so this is how this
works. So if somebody shares this,
boom. I this happens to me all the
time where somebody like so we are all
Palestine here will tag me on a bottom
one, and I and I but you go
to look at it, it says unavailable. And
you can't find a way around that unless
you get the original tweet. But it's this
is there.
How how crazy is that?
I'm gonna save that and look into that
more later. The point is clearly, this is
something that has been saved,
and I think they're gonna hopefully be held
accountable if there's any honesty in any of
this.
Lastly oops. Dang it. Hold on. I'm gonna
save that.
There we go. Lastly, Mentosent just gives you
a side by side comparison saying, good morning
to everyone except those who said this was
a misfired flare. Exposing Israeli lies and manipulation
is a never ending job. And he he's
they've they've done a good job on this.
Like, it's obvious to see what this is.
You can get the very clear video that
shows you it wasn't a flay. It was
something that was coming from the drone in
the sky. You know, just going through it
quickly. The point is clearly,
this is not new.
Like, the idea that you even question that
they would bomb a flotilla in the first
place is is wild seeing as how they've
done it many, many, many times. They've killed
people on these ships before and seemingly nothing
happens about it. I just think that's crazy.
So lastly so showing that they're willing to
bomb inter ships in international waters with no
justification,
interesting overlap. Lastly, same kind of thing.
Israel attempts to kill Hamas leadership in airstrike
on Qatar
as they're in the middle of a ceasefire
negotiation.
So, I mean, this is just this
accentuates exactly what we've been saying about this
process the entire time. So let's not forget,
by the way, taking a step back to
2020,
And this was the the interview I think
I did with James Corbett about it, but
it was,
on the assassination of Soleimani, what you need
to know. I mean, this was the same
point, guys. Donald Trump,
with Israel,
lulled him into a peace negotiation,
into an international airport, which was the Iraqi
airport, and then they murdered him in the
airport.
Now look not to get into it all
now, but Soleimani, hopefully, over time, people that
are blind to this can understand was not
the person they made him out to be.
Just like Maduro is not. Just like any
of these people are not. Assad, anybody. Not
to say he was an angel, but he
was very clearly and honestly, with what I
can see improve, he does seem to be
somebody that was not even close to what
they were framing. And honestly, was somebody who
was largely the force fighting ISIS, you know,
the Israeli US proxy element that they pretend
they're fighting.
They murdered this man.
Now whether what let's just say say everything
they said about him was true. It still
makes what they did illegal. So it's just
look at where we are today. They can
just execute
people in the middle of the ocean, and
it's so so much less of a problem
because they've been desensitizing you to it.
Just remember this. Vox the show for yourself.
This was crazy what they did, and they
did it because there was a peace negotiation.
Saudi Arabia is the one that lulled them
to this deal, and they thought good, so
this will bring an end to this. And
they murdered him for it, which pretty much
shows you who the in this context, who
the bad guy is. Some they were there
to try to meet for peace. They murdered
him.
So department of state and this is important
to remember before we get into the bigger
point is to, you know, Qatar.
Hamas. You guys know this. I meant this
point many times, but the point is that
Hamas
was,
regardless of what you may think, it it
changes in the conversation. It is the truth
funded through Israel and through Qatar.
Israel through Qatar is the point. Now people
push back saying that undermines the idea that
the arm is first of all, it's true.
So you have to acknowledge it. But it
does not undermine the act of armed resistance.
It's a legal
act of armed resistance for an occupied territory
to act militarily against their occupier.
That's what happened. Regardless of whether they were
funded by Israel, it didn't change the reality.
Now I also think that it's not as
clear. I think going back a long way,
you can prove that they've been funding them.
In In some ways, just some ways right
up until October 7, but it changed radically
over the last so many decades. Right? The
point is that you could argue that they
had some influence, some sway, but ultimately, that
Hamas had changed because more and more children,
that families have been killed and grew up
and became members, and that was the only
outlet they had, have changed it into a
force that largely seems to have changed in
fighting largely back against Israel, if maybe not
all the time. The point is we should
question that.
The indisputable fact is you could prove they
did put money in their hands. That has
to matter,
But does not change the fact that they
legally acted within the rights to push back
against Israel. Now, the reality and for all
the ones that are clutching their pearls at
that, well, I'm sure you maybe you don't
care or you don't know yet that Israel
killed more people than anybody that day, and
the reality of Hannibal directive and killed their
own people more than anybody, and the reality
of the foreknowledge and the allowance of moving
the the idea that just came out on
top of it, the moving of the festival,
the person involved. Every piece of this data
point or this story rather, data points within
this story show you that they had foreknowledge,
that they allowed it, that they were part
of it, that they involved it, they killed
everybody. I mean, every story lied about rape,
lied about babies, lied about every part of
it, and yet we're still debating this. The
point
is that they funded them. And so with
this narrative that they're, you know, everything they
wanna say about them, the first point should
be like, okay, then explain why you funded
them. Right? So understand that
that they used Cutter to facilitate that transfer
right up until 2020. There's articles from 2020.
This clip you've seen is the former prime
minister in Shin Bet and former head of
Shin Bet telling you that they gave them
half a million dollars
at a place where there's nowhere you can
buy aid. So the game they play where
it was for aid is so stupid, it
makes my teeth hurt. So you have to
ship in aid because they're starving. Pretty sure
you can't go take that money and buy
a bunch of aid. And you can buy
some. The point though is that the aid
you're talking about is not per they bought
weapons.
That's what they wanted from them because they
were using this to keep them divided. And
in fact, for that very point, I'll play
that small clip, just the beginning of it.
Yeah. That's what you have to understand. It
was the the interest
was making sure
that they kept Palestinians
divided.
So are you saying Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately boosted
Hamas
to try to prevent a Palestinian state? Yeah.
Sure. He deliberately and systematically
even even told this on record, whoever
wants to avoid
the threat
of a two state solution
has to support my policy of paying protection
money to the Hamas. So what we did,
with the permission
of our prime minister is
to
let
Qatar
to transfer
a huge amount of money in cash,
probably more than
$1,400,000,000.
By doing it, we increase the power of
Hamas.
We
did everything in order to make sure that
Hamas will go on controlling Gaza,
and Palestinian authority
will control the West Bank so they will
fight each other.
1.5.
Yeah. Like, you know, billion, way more than
I said, by the way. So I misremembered
that.
But okay. So funding them to keep the
divide. Now I I disagree with the chat
saying that they're simply a proxy of Israel.
I don't agree with that. Maybe at one
point, I think you could see today that's
changed, but it's something it's it's disputable for
a 100 different reasons. I think the important
point is to understand that at some point,
if not to you know, it's it's including
to possibly to this very day they funded
this group. That has to matter.
Doesn't change the reality of the armed, occupation
and the active armed resistance. So, again, it
doesn't matter or it doesn't change the you
know, that I think that's where we have
to, you know, be
it's the best place to leave it for
less we get more information. Right? And so
at this point, we know that they funded
them. They're admitting that. We funded them through
Qatar. And then lastly, it was just the
tweet from Haaretz, the leading Israeli newspaper that
said on October 9, two days after October
7, any quoting Netanyahu, anyone who wants to
thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has
to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to
Hamas. This is part of our strategy.
That's Tourette's.
So just understand that this the the what
I'm getting to and showing you this is
the reality
that Cutter in this conversation
is, at least in part, a willing participant
in this Israeli apparatus.
I think that's obvious today by, you know,
Qatar, UAE, many of these groups that say
a lot and don't do anything to help
Palestinians.
But this is important on top of this.
So knowing that there is funding overlaps there,
this is a a flashback, Hotspot shared, of
the Qatari prime minister confirming that The US
is in fact the one requesting
that Hamas put an office in Qatar.
That seems relevant.
Of a Hamas office here.
And Hamas has been designated, I think, repeatedly
by the US government and certainly by the
Congress as a terror organization. And people say,
well, how could you have a Hamas office
here? What is that? We have to go
back to,
the root of this office. Like, why why
it's here in the first place? And Hamas
office, when it was opened here in the
first place, it was opened with full transparency
and full consultation
and actually
even request
from The US. The US asked you to
put a Hamas officer? They have asked us
to open the channels with them and to
have an established communication channel with the same
case what was applied to Taliban.
Right. So the bottom line,
we wanna be able to negotiate with them.
Yeah. Maybe. But seeing as how they continue
to actively sabotage those, that answers your question.
Right? So what he's saying is the US
government, regardless of the outcome, like, or rather
the intent,
asked for that.
Right? So you could argue it's for good
reason, but you should at least be smart
enough to ask maybe that's not the real
answer. Right? And that okay. So it's it's
about what we can prove, which is that
they asked for that to be there. We
know we can prove that Israel funded them.
We know we can prove you see, when
you start to look at this bigger picture,
you start to recognize, you know, in regard
to Hamas that there's more going on in
this situation, but also that Qatar is playing
this facilitator role. And if they know that
and they recognize the sort of situation of
the Hamas leadership being allowed to sit there
while they act like they're hunting down Hamas
leadership. It doesn't make much sense until you
start to think that there's more coordination.
And so we're gonna guess. We get to
the bombing of Qatar. I'll go through my
points of what that may mean, but this
is important kind of back understanding
to, you know, the narrative to understand there's
much more going on than it looks like.
Oh, and I'll include that article for you
so you can read the massage chief visited
Doaa, urged Cutter to continue Hamas financial aid.
So here's what Ryan Grim points out. And
this in regard to the ceasefire negotiation is
really important to understand.
Here's what just happened, he wrote. Trump sent
a peace deal to Hamas. Hamas met met
to discuss it in Doaa, you know, like
Soleimani, right, where The US is mediating talks
and has a base and Israel bombed them,
presumably with US support. Now, guys, you have
to understand this.
The US could have been there.
Right? This is a US Israel supported supposed
ceasefire negotiation location where they are often there
in midst of this conversation. The fact that
they weren't
I mean, you really think that Israel would
have risked bombing them by accident? They they
either made sure they weren't. I mean, look.
My my opinion is they, without question,
worked with The US on this. That's my
opinion. I think it's clear what the indication
is that's the most likely reality.
And he says the but the first just
don't miss it. The idea that they literally
set up this peace conversation, invited them there,
and then bomb them. And then stand up
and say, Hamas doesn't want peace.
Strike and Doaa was aimed at Hamas negotiators
who were gathering to discuss Trump's ceasefire offer.
According to a Hamas official speaking on Al
Jazeera, much as Trump carried out fake nuclear
talks with Iran in order to kill Iranian
negotiators.
Exactly.
This is what they do. These are not
honest operators, guys.
They they that might explain why Trump's offer
was too short was so short and scant
on details. The whole point was to gather
people together, discuss the peace offer to kill
them.
Israel was taking credit for the attack, citing
October 7,
though most or all in Douo didn't even
know about October 7 until it happened.
The IDF and ISA announcement, quote, the IDF
and and ISA conducted a precise strike targeting
the senior leadership of Hamas terrorist organization
and the political. Right? Not not military, which
is a whole different conversation, even legally speaking,
with the international order. For years, these members
of Hamas leadership have led to terrorist organizations
operations, yeah, that you funded though. You forget
about that? Are directly responsible for the brutal
October seventh massacre that you know about, that
you allowed, that you killed people a lot.
You know, these that's why those things matter
and have been orchestrating and managing the war
against the state of Israel.
Right? So they're saying that Cutter
was allowing that. Okay. So then why did
it take you a year and a half
to carry this out? Like, you know, this
has been clear from the beginning. This is
not the reality of what happened.
And I'll include this, by the way.
A good show I did on this keep
doing that. On this larger point.
Undeniable reality of October 7 foreknowledge and the
Hannibal directive.
We did this a while ago.
What was this? This was the 2023.
Oh, it's 2024. I thought that was
oh, it has to be. I'm sorry. I
was thinking about it all the time. Either
way, the point was we did this back
in June, is what I was thinking. So
it was, you know, I think anybody paying
attention was already well aware of this. I
mean, that even this picture we're using shows
you how the cars look before they scooted
them all in neat rows and somehow claimed
they bombed them all like that. They're just
so lazy.
It's important to understand how clear it is
that they now we now know. They've admitted.
Well, Pat, I don't have it in the
show because it happened well past this where
they've now publicly admitted that, yes, we not
only did it, but we ordered the Hannibal
directive. Right? And carried it out. And it
seems as if it's still ongoing.
Yeah. So it says, prior to the strike,
measures were taken in order to mitigate
harm to civilians, you know, other than the
civilian people that you killed, which were the
leadership. It says, including the use of precise
munitions and additional intelligence. The IDF and ISA
will continue to operate with determination in order
to defeat the Hamas terrorist organization responsible for
October 7. Okay.
You know, again, ignoring that you funded them
in the whole process. Right? But John King
says Israel literally just bombed Doaa and Qatar
to kill the entire team negotiating ceasefire. It's
literally one of the safest and most peaceful
cities in the planet. Israel is the most
dangerous and least accountable nation on Earth. And
there's a video if you'd like to see
it of the
the chaos and the bombing.
Drop site news.
This person says, new details on the operation
to eliminate Hamas leadership.
This is an operation that has been planned
in Israel for several months. That's the real
point to me.
Okay.
So that means very clearly,
they've been planning to lure them in. So
that means they've never wanted peace, guys. This
whole claim, which we all know, anybody watching
this who already knows, but it's just very
clear. They're now admitting this. And this this
is
a, you know, military entity correspondent
from from Israel
saying Israel's army radio correspondent reports that new
details on the Israeli operation to assassinate the
Hamas leadership. He writes, this has been an
operation that's been planned for months.
During the past month, that is, since Hamas
showed significantly
more
rigidity regarding the deal, it was decided in
Israel to accelerate the combat procedure. They're not
even trying to hide this stuff anymore. Every
week, discussions were held with the IDF to
ensure the readiness of all intelligence and operational
entities while keeping them on the string, making
sure they thought there was a peace deal
coming.
The air operation, about 15 fighter jets, more
than 10 airy munitions, one target attacked, arrow
I mean,
it's just so crazy to me how open
this
is. Insider paper reports that this is Trump's
true social. President Trump says cut or strike
decision was Netanyahu's not made by me. What
a cowardly thing to do. You don't have
to say that, by the way. You know,
you the idea that it's just funny that's
therefore, that that to me shows an agreement
between them to make sure that it was
on Israel because it was this would look
bad for you know, it's these people are
in tandem.
Here's even more of the evidence of that.
Drapsite news. This is Cutter's minister of foreign
affairs. He says this attack happened at 03:46.
The first call we got
was from an American
official
at 03:56,
ten minutes after the attack,
barely registering on the social
what do you think that means?
They it this clearly, Cutter seems to be
insane insinuating that same point. I mean, really,
prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted for war crimes
by the ICC,
spoke at the US embassy after leading a
failed assassination attempt on Hamas leaders in Cutter.
This was the ninth. He insisted Israel acted
wholly independently and and said the war can
end immediately if they accept the ceasefire proposal.
Not joking.
You know, the ceasefire proposal, he just bombed.
Like, he's laughing at you. Do you realize
that he they are he's
I guarantee you to people that he supports
that they're pointing at this going, look at
how easy it is to manipulate Americans, or
rather at least American
officials.
They literally bombed the ceasefire room, and then
he goes, they could have ended this if
they just six steps after the ceasefire.
And realized that he's again, we acted independently.
When is the last time you even heard
them say that?
There's coordination happening here.
Cutter denies they were prewarned by the Israeli
strike, about the Israeli strike. So So just
con continue to show you that they're making
up narratives, trying to lie about this, and
they were trying to trap them into a
position where they could be murdered because they
were at least considering a deal, which as
even the radio, a IDF element argued, they
were getting more closer to it, so they
they blew it up.
According to various sources, an Israeli assassination in
Doha failed because the Hamas leadership left the
main negotiating room to perform the afternoon prayers.
But they left their phones in the negotiating
room, which
provided Mossad and the Shin Bet with the
faulty intelligence that the leaders were still in
the room.
Very important.
In fact,
I'll include this art this show, which you
should watch, especially because of this point.
Israel's global cybersecurity oh, throw on one. That's
good too, actually.
This is just about the global infrastruct infiltration
of just cybersecurity in the world. It's everywhere.
Gideon, for example.
But this one, Israel's infiltration of US tech
in light of the Lebanon pager attack.
Same point, guys.
The truth,
this is happening everywhere. Like, the pager thing,
the phones. I mean,
we genuinely should be worried today about whether
or not there's
devices circulating our country right now.
You know, for the for the worry that
maybe The US will turn on them. I
mean, it's like that's the kind of people
we're dealing with, guys, and the point that
they make here.
Propaganda and co. How many people need to
die before they learn to stop using modern
modern smartphones? Seriously, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iranian officials
have been decimated
because of their use of smartphones.
They they casually use WhatsApp as if Zuckerberg
doesn't give Israeli direct access. They're in they're
they if you're in the fight against Israel,
you cannot be using a smartphone and need
to learn to communicate another way, which, again,
by the way, is which is exactly why
I use the not like not because I
mean, who knows these days? I'm not necessarily
concerned they're gonna be bombed by Israel, but
the point is using one of these pouches.
I am new I the Catherine sent the
Solari one they're using now, but I've been
using one of those other ones I've been
showing you for years now. And it's just
a blackout pouch. You put it in, turn
it off. And I know people give,
you know, withdrawals when they don't have their
phone, but you gotta learn to not be
a slave to that phone. It's okay to
not respond to things instantaneously these days. Put
it away. On top of that, then it
blocks it out and you're you know, everything
goes down. You can't be tracked when that's
in there, at least as I understand it.
But the point is they use that and
and and
targeted them, and they thought they were in
the room, and that's why they bombed them.
Well, it just really does adds far more
information to the I mean, this this to
me shows a US Israeli agenda.
Cutter reserves the right to retaliate for the
Israeli attack against Doha, he says. Now to
me, I get the sense, again, there's far
more coordination between the two. Now it could
be that we're talking about a situation where
Cutter was pulling away and this was their
warning. That's happened before. Or it could be
that this was something that they were doing
that Cutter was involved with. Maybe there's a
split off within Cutter. I mean, who the
point is we don't know.
But this is interesting. And if they respond,
I think that'll say something. He says, we've
reached a decisive moment. There should be retaliation
from the whole region.
We'll see. And if it does nothing, I
think that says a lot. But I think
that we've seen for a long time that
there's more here than we think. Now this
is where I think we'll end with that
I think is really concerning.
And whether you think it's about you or,
you know, whatever you think the full breadth
of this possible risk is,
there's no way around
this is a I mean, they're screaming to
the world, we can bomb anyone, anywhere, no
matter what.
Israel,
Netanyahu, this rabbi, they're completely
saying that.
I don't know why we don't recognize what
that shows us. If they're telling you the
world is our stage. Right? I mean, if
I should I don't know. I'll grab for
next show. The world is our stage, as
they told sixty Minutes. They're looking we make
fake companies and we act these things out.
Okay. Infiltrating Lebanon and spinning out, you know,
pages over ten years that blow up all
this time later, you know, that they then
tell you publicly in the Knesset more than
once that we're not bound by international law.
We can legislate anywhere in the world. They've
said this publicly.
To consider what they're saying, they mean that
they can kill you tomorrow in The United
States should they decide independently that you're somehow
culpable for 09/11, or '10, October 7, or
whatever other justification they decide.
There's no legal reality there, guys. Listen to
what this rabbi has to say. He'll tell
you point blank. It's a little low, so
turn up the volume.
You're a terrorist, and you're part of October
7. We're coming after you. And we don't
care if you're in Qatar. We don't care
if you're in Lebanon, and it could be
even if you're in England. We'll get you.
And Wow. Okay.
You hear that? UK? So if you're in
England and they decide you're part of that,
they'll come bomb your hotel.
I mean, right now in Gaza, by the
way, they're bombing massive civil like, large towers
that are full of refugees and claiming we
brought down 50 terrorist buildings.
It's just they're it's rampant,
and they're gonna do it to you too
is the reality. I'm I put this out
earlier. I said, oh, that remember the whole
thing about, you know maybe I did include
it. We'll see. I'm supposed to say it.
I'll say it. No. I guess I didn't.
That whole thing about, you know, if you
don't get Hamas, it'll come to your country
next. Oh, it looks like that was Israel,
like a lot of us told you. So
here we are. We don't care if it's
England. We'll come and bomb your town center
too because we think you're part of this.
How do you miss what that says?
And on top of it, what you're doing
is promoting something that was unquestionably
illegal on Fox News. Like, it's no big
deal. And having a rabbi? Why would a
rabbi be brought out to talk about the
actions of the Israeli government? Oh, that's right.
Because they're all propagandizing you into this horribly
Zionist man. I mean, even if you believe
that Zionism is the re is the homeland
of the Jews, which I think most Jews
in the world are starting to call out,
It still doesn't change the reality that has
no place for a religious entity to come
and talk about the actions of the government
in bombing a foreign country. Are you claiming
that's being religiously driven?
I just it's insane where we are and
how clear all this is right on the
face.
Here's the next one. And this
this one is Netanyahu
speaking about kind of similar things. Tomorrow is
September 11.
We remember
September.
Tomorrow is September 11.
We remember
September 11.
On that day,
Islamist terrorists committed the worst savagery on American
soil since the founding of The United States.
We also have a September 11. We remember
October 7.
On that day, Islamist terrorists committed the worst
savagery against the Jewish people since the Holocaust.
What did America do in the wake of
September 11?
It promised to hunt down the terrorists who
committed this heinous crime wherever they may be.
And it also passed a resolution in the
Security Council of the UN two weeks later
that said
governments cannot give harbor to terrorists.
Well, yesterday,
we acted.
Right. So you did it first. Right? Your
government said you can't do that. You can't
give them Harbor. Yeah. Right? And where did
that come from? Israel.
We should know that by now. Bush and
the rest, that was we are fighting Israel's
wars
everywhere you look. So what he's telling you,
that's a perfect pause moment right there. Let
that sink in. That's the person running your
country.
He's literally telling you that we're going to
murder people. We don't care where they are.
We don't care what the legal justification is
because you guys already set the precedent. Oh,
and you did you did that for us
at our behest. So thank you.
Along those lines,
we went after the terrorist masterminds who committed
the October seventh massacre,
and we did so
in Qatar, which gives safe haven.
It harbors terrorists. It finances Hamas. It gives
its terrorist chieftains. I mean, think about this.
A group that you actively work with, a
group that you've been negotiating with the entire
time, a group that you know you petition
to fund Hamas, and they know that, and
you stand up and say this.
You say what you that's why I've been
saying this from beginning of October 7 forward.
Look at Qatar. Why are they allowing them
to sit there and just cushion you? Like,
why does that make sense to anybody? They're
they're negotiating team, and they're allowing the leadership
to sit in Qatar while they act like
they're hunting down Hamas. Like, it doesn't make
any sense unless you realize the bigger picture.
This is not about going after Hamas, guys.
It never has been.
Sumptuous villas, it gives them everything.
I mean, in the real sense, it's about
Palestinians
by and large.
So we did exactly what America did when
it went after the terrorist, the Al Qaeda
terrorist in Afghanistan Which was a crime. And
after they went and killed
Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Yeah. And pretty
much every example of what they've conducted was
extrajudicial assassinations,
not legal.
It it that and so it's funny that
that Israel loves this argument. Nobody cared when
you do that in Iraq. Well, yeah, we
all did, though, and there was massive protest
about it. But your argument is it's okay,
I genocide because you kinda did it first?
I mean, the idea of what he's saying
here is, okay. Just take the first example.
Oh, too far. Damn it. Al Qaeda. Afghanistan.
That was an illegal war. So too was
all Iraq, Syria.
And based on what? A group that you
can now prove is literally a proxy element
of The US and Israel. It it it
real Israel and US governments.
And the the look at Hayat al Sham
in Syria right now. That is the group
we're talking about, and they are working with
them. They're having meetings with them. Guys, it's
obvious to see what they're use they're using
those actions that they manufacture to rationalize more
of the actions they claim are in that
vein, even if those are all illegal in
the first place, regardless of what they're lying
about.
They're creating a situation where nothing means anything.
Everything means nothing. They can tell you what
you're supposed to think, and you're not allowed
to question.
That's what your rebels fighting the deep state
are bringing in. Terrorists in Afghanistan
and after they went and killed
Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.
Now
the various countries of the world condemn Israel.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
What did they Isn't that funny? That's one
of the first times I've seen them acknowledge
that most of the world is against them.
Now they love to make it about to
be out, oh, the people's a racist, but
they at the at the same time, they
try to make it out to be the
idea that they have support of the world
when they want it to. That's out the
window. So when I keep telling you that
everyone in the world sees this, it's obvious,
guys. Stop pretending that's not the truth. It's
clear. The whole world, including the governments, they're
just all bought off, influenced, blackmailed. I don't
know. But they see it too. It's not
about Jews. It's about Zionism and murdering children.
They do after
America took out Osama bin Laden.
Did they say, oh, what a terrible thing
was done to Afghanistan or to Pakistan? No.
They applauded.
They should applaud Israel for standing in up
to these same principles and carrying them out.
Oh, yeah. Right. So the principles of funding
a group into care into terrorism and then
bombing them
rather bombing their political representation after you offer
them into a negotiating table in a building
full of civilians.
Totally the same thing. Right?
And I say to Qatar and all nations
who harbor terrorists,
you either expel them or you bring them
to justice
because if you don't,
we will. Right.
Right. So he is going to bomb your
country if you don't do what he wants.
Am I missing anything?
Explain it for me. Or invade and pull
some I mean, how do you there's no
way around it. And you think if China
said that to The US, they just brush
it off and be like, yeah. It's okay.
If anybody did, but Israel does it, no
one says a word.
Why? Well, because that's what's really going on.
Seems pretty clear to me. And of course,
every time. I hope you guys laughed at
me. It was literally the one that I
had on the screen already. So all that
talk about a mosque coming to your country.
Right? Turns out Israel was the one.
And of course, here is the Israeli ambassador
to The United States.
If we didn't get them this time, we'll
get them next time.
Get over it.
That's that's the message. Right? We'll we'll we'll
get them next. We'll get them somewhere. If
you're anywhere in the world, we'll come after
you like Netanyahu just told you. You know,
freedom and whatever. What what your current thing
is today? We're gonna do what we want.
They're they're just straight up telling you. We've
got the examples in the past where they
said, we'll go after anybody we want anywhere.
Czank Uygur caught him and said, what do
you mean you're gonna remove presidents? He goes,
well, we'll vote him out.
Clerk, you you mean you don't you're not
you're not American. What do you mean vote
him out? He got caught admitting that they'll
remove politicians from power.
I did an entire show about the election
meddling and manipulation.
You know, the an Israeli entity was literally
caught proudly
selling services to manipulate foreign elections.
And two of them, they claim, were done
in The United States. Oh, brushed it off.
It looked like a Guardian investigation.
It could not be more clear.
And, of course,
here are the monsters that pretend to represent
you. Right? So remember, they bombed a building
full of people,
invited the political leadership of a group they
claimed they wanna negotiate with under a guise
of peace into the building
and then tried to kill them. Now they
killed some. They killed plenty of other people
too. The report of whether who got killed
in regard to Hamas, it's really hard to
tell. There's all it's always they got everybody.
No. They got none of them. You know,
it seems like it was somewhere in the
middle.
But it was a crime in every context,
and there were innocent people there. And this
is what this moron, Fetterman, puts out.
Winnie the Pooh?
An Israeli official confirms the AP that the
Israel they Mil Israel targeted the leadership of
Qatar. I mean, this guy is so stupid
in this conversation. I actually I genuinely don't
think he understands what's going on, but he's
been paid enough to go, whatever Israel did.
Yay. I support him. Where's my sweatshirt?
These these are these are the idiots that
are running this country, guys. And this is
what he posts. Like, I don't care if
you agree with the print of the outcome.
It's a major crime that took place, and
this is what you get from people acting
like they support freedom and democracy. It's painful
that we can pretend that we're not in
this very bad position sometimes.
Kills me.
But we'll leave it there for the day.
Thank you for tuning in.
And I'll I'll I'll add with, you know,
as usual to keep keep it keep talking
to the chat, guys. I think it's important
to have the conversation, but it's not debatable.
Zionism is not Judaism. It is not. I
don't care what your argument is. I don't
care what you think. It's just simply not.
It's it's like saying, you know, it is
a separate entity entirely. Though Zionism can claim
that they are the rep that they represent
Jews, but there's a whole lot of Jews
in the world that don't want anything to
do with it, who claim very clearly that's
not me. I don't identify with that. That's
not the symbol that represents Judaism. That's a
Zionism.
So you can't argue that. Now you can
argue that some Jews think that, but it's
a fundamentally proven fact that Zionism is a
political organization that is using Judaism.
That's it's a simple fact. So it's just
funny that we have this conversation all the
time. It's important to understand that. For those
of the podcast, I'm mentioning because it was
in the chat because it's it is the
crux of the lie. Now, yes, is there
Jewish supremacy
very much,
you know, intertwined with Zionism? 100%.
The Israeli,
B'Tselem
human rights group. They literally call it. It's
it's Jewish supremacy from the river to the
sea. That's their they called it apartheid.
But that's not the same as saying that
every Jewish person is the part of this
problem. It's very clear that that's a rapidly
shifting conversation, and I talk about it all
the time. But the point is there's also
other there are Zionist atheists that are very
prominent in the Zionist Israel conversation, which is
it speaks for itself if you're not blind,
or the idea that you got Christian Zionists
and they both, like, have this counter idea.
It's like they both need the other to
collapse. It's like it's just weird. The point
is, Zionism is the key problem in all
of that.
And it's important to call it out. And
it is I mean, can you not look
at the, like, flamingly proud Zionist organization and
Trump's it's the whole team, guys.
Religious Zionists in a position
of power in The US
with an ideology that demands that the West
collapse.
America first.
We'll end on that positive note. But thank
you for being here tonight, guys. I think
it's important that we have these conversations and,
you know, remember, don't lose sight of the
positive nature of what we're doing regardless of
how how bad it can feel. You know,
we
are fighting for the truth. Right? The light.
That's the point in the sense of, like,
shining the light on the truth, not in
some biblical sense. It's it's important to see
that. You know, that we are that spotlight.
We're trying to identify things, and it can
be uncomfortable. It can be it can be,
you know,
scary. It really can. It can be it
can be, you know,
unsettling to feel like things are changing and
it really you know, it it's because in
some ways, it is getting bad. But nonetheless,
don't lose sight of the of what we're
really doing. And that the only reason in
in earnest that it feels this way, like,
the honest reason that it's getting this bad,
I think, is because we're changing things for
a positive in a positive way.
And it I mean, it's at the core
point, starting with people simply being aware there's
a problem. That's a hugely positive shift.
But gotta keep pushing. You gotta keep fighting.
It's it's the whole point. So just try
to hang on to that positivity that you're
helping people. You're opening people's minds and and
that you're aware of the bigger truth, right?
The reality. And you know, I don't mean
that in the sense of all encompassing. Question
what you're thinking. Don't blindly assume you know
everything going on. But my point is though,
just find the positive nature in the in
the things that we do have and what
we you know, we've had plenty of wins
in this conversation.
Like, you know, in this, I guess, in
this law the work that we've done. Plenty
of examples. Even just the individual people that
chose not to take that dangerous thing because
we inform them properly about it. And you
inform them properly about it. Right? That's a
powerful, guys. So hold on to that. You
deserve that. Thank you for being here. I
love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.