This starts, and it's it's really fascinating to
go back. It starts, in 1996
with Netanyahu,
who wrote a book called Fighting,
Terrorism.
And the thesis of the book is, quite
straightforward and
and
and very dangerous.
He says, you know, there are there's Hamas,
there's Hezbollah. They oppose Israel.
It's not good for us to fight them
directly.
That that won't work.
What we need to do is topple the
governments
that that back them. So what we need
is regime change throughout The Middle East. And
he actually gave a long list of seven
countries,
that included,
Syria,
Libya,
Iraq,
Iran,
Somalia,
Sudan,
and Lebanon.
And systematically,
The United States has done Netanyahu's bidding for
almost thirty years now going to war
with every one of them except for the
big one, that Netanyahu
so much longs for, which is the war
directly
between The United States and Iran. About ten
days after 09:11, I went through the Pentagon,
and I saw secretary Rumsfeld and
and deputy secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just
to say hello to some of the people
on the joint staff who used used to
work for me. And one of the generals
called me and he said, sir, you gotta
come in you gotta come in and talk
to me a second. I said, well, you're
too busy. He said, no. No. He says,
you we've made the decision we're going to
war with Iraq.
This was on or about the September 20.
So, I said, well, did they find some
information collect connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda? He
said, no. No. He says there's nothing new
that way. They just made the decision to
go to war with Iraq. He said, I
guess it's like we don't know what to
do about terrorists, but
we've got a good military and we can
take down governments. And, he said, I guess
if the only tool you have is a
hammer, every problem has to look like a
nail.
So I came back to see him a
few weeks later,
and by that time, we were bombing in
Afghanistan. I said, are we still going to
war with Iraq? And he said, oh, it's
worse than that. He said he reached over
on his desk. He picked up a piece
of paper. He said, I just he said,
I just got this down from upstairs, meaning
the secretary of defense's office today. And he
said, this is a memo that describes how
we're gonna take out
seven countries
in five years,
starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran.
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.
Tell me your only question. Tell me your
only question. Analyst. Thank
you. Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Friday, 10/10/2025.
Thank you for joining me today.
I played that clip many times.
Are you I mean, the clip itself from
an interview,
the discussion from the book, the reality of
that very widely publicized despite not being very
much
immersed within the mainstream conversation.
The the clip of general Wesley Clark,
seven countries, five years. I mean, this is
this is not new information.
But just thinking about what we're gonna go
over today and what we've been discussing, I
mean, it's just really profound to look at
that, to think about that. And that's a
this is a verifiable fact. Whether or not
you think that is it explains everything we
could that we're dealing with,
the point is that I argue, and I
think it's very easy to see, that the
pretty much
every major problem we're dealing with can stem
back to that relationship.
And the provable reality that our governments
that, you know, the evolving nature of our
government, whatever that is, has been
coerced,
blackmailed, manipulated,
bought off,
you mean, in a in a kind of
rapidly escalating way right up to this very
point. These aren't debatable topics, guys. And what's
important to see is that through many, many
things that have been coerced,
wars,
the ongoing,
you know, destruction of this country in a
larger way, not to go into every fine
point of how this works out. War, obviously.
Whether that's blowback, whether that's the the sending
of Americans to do the bidding of a
foreign government,
understanding where we are today. And as well,
the other part of what we're gonna discuss
today, and there's many different things,
that now you know, what are they calling
Antifa? What are they calling Palestinian supporters? What
are they calling leftists in general, apparently?
Terrorists.
You're all terrorists now because you have a
different idea. Not because you committed a terrorist
act or broke the law even, but because
of that flag, which therefore, wink wink, means
you're going to do all those things, you
know, sort of like the left said when
they were doing the same thing in reverse
that you all you guys all decried as
absolutely unconstitutional.
And I'm only speaking to the partisan conversation,
which I don't even think represents the majority
today. I think most obvious you know, average
people can see that this violates the constitution
even if you think it makes sense, and
you pick the topic we're aiming at right
there. My point though is, okay, if they're
doing
that, what is driving that conversation? What is
the effort? Nobody's denying this. That's pushing against
Palestine
conversations to protest
Israel. I mean, they're high fiving about it
between The US and Israeli government, their policies,
the media. It's not even secret. So what
I'm trying to highlight right there is that
that conversation is about how they coerce the
US government to combat, go after its enemies,
conduct wars for it.
Well, guess what's happening now? You are the
one they're aiming at. Because what did they
say? We're going after the people that are
that and Netanyahu has set in front of
congress many times and made the case for
why we have to, in the case of
the book he was referencing there, topple these
governments.
Remove those people from the conversation. Well, the
problem is now that's you.
You are the biggest block. People like Charlie
Kirk who are beginning to inform their audiences
away from the Israeli propaganda
are the block. They are the ones in
the way of them, I mean,
I guess, succeeding in their agenda, I argue,
is just completely not collapsing inwardly in you
know, because of the last the
losing control of the narrative.
Like, either way you look at it, the
point is in their minds, that's an absolute.
It's necessary. And so what what I'm seeing
today with that just taking that mindset, the
point that was opening with right there, that
if they recognize that, if they're that's the
narrative they've created, and now they're saying that
people who have these ideas or act this
way or say the that they are the
the terrorists as Trump has laid out. All
in one there there's a mechanism that is
being focused on you. As Whitney talked about,
the wars, you know, your body is the
new battlefield, the domestic terrorism focus from Biden.
It's I don't know how anybody can miss
how clear all this is.
The rest of it's narrative. And this doesn't
mean that there's false everything within every narrative.
There's clearly issues around left wing extremism like
there is about right wing extremism, or rather
just an intelligent way to put it around
extremism,
wherever that may be. Instead of trying to
pigeonhole it into one type of an area
with this group, or if they wear that
shirt, that's that kind of thing. No. That's
just extremism. No matter what the color shirt
was, no matter what the group they're with,
that's the point. It's sort of like saying
it's political violence. No. No. It's just violence.
That's a label you're putting it on to
make it a certain way or hate speech.
No. It's just speech.
I at a core point, I think most
everybody can agree with those things. It's the
screening idiots at the top of the paradigm
that are right now high fiving about stopping
people from burning flags. Whatever you think about
that, despite that being an or a constitutional
reality that it's protected. The point is there
are people out there who are undermining things
that they act like they're fighting for because,
I guess, they feel involved.
It makes them feel like they're part of
some higher circle or that they're just too
dumb to realize that they're fighting against the
things they claim they're fighting for. Either way,
it behooves all of us to point these
things out and say, well, that's hypocrisy.
That's lacking a principle.
There's someone who's actually following through with what
they say even though I disagree with why
they're doing it. You know, just being honest
and objective.
So what we're gonna go through today in
general is the larger point around this and
the again, that mindset.
How all of this seems to be you
know, not just the ongoing
fake ceasefire that we'll talk about. The the
latter part today we'll be getting into, which
I think everybody saw coming, the lies around
this conversation and the fact that in case
you're missing it, as of right now, Israel
is still currently bombing Gaza and has been
every moment since they claimed this was a
ceasefire.
Just like literally every single time we pointed
this out. Maybe save for a few where
they were actually pretending to stop even though
they weren't and they were bonding in the
West Bank or secretly doing things in Gaza
they didn't want you to see, but they
were pretending to stop. They didn't even feign
stopping this time. And yet they all screamed,
we won. Ceasefire. Nobel Peace Prize. We'll talk
about that.
We'll talk about the illusion that I see
of the James Comey and Letitia James indictments,
which are just accusations like we were talking
about. I hope they go to jail. They
deserve to. I don't think that's what's going
to happen. And so if you can think
about that original point, my point would be
taking something as simple as this. Why would
you think that's happening? And why do you
think that connects to the conversation of Israel
corruption or rather just foreign government influence? I
think it's because this is about dividing this
country along partisan lines and feigning to go
after people of for corruption when the entire
thing is corrupt to get you completely mired
in a conversation that will never go anywhere.
Like the conversation of debating the the
as if your vote actually translate to the
outcome today, getting you debating about how that
was stolen. In no way am I arguing
those things don't happen or you shouldn't care
about it. The point is that if you
recognize how we've been played and how long
ago these things were taken, the rest of
it seems to be largely theater. But prove
it to yourself. Look into it. But the
fact that we get mired in these conversations
and so the point is today with the
point of the conversation of
the indictments and fake accountability,
this will drift on for the rest of
their administration. And I argue nothing is going
to happen, and we'll go over why it
seems the evidence is already suggesting that. We'll
talk about some foreign policy points I think
are also still relevant around that same larger
foreign policy point around Afghanistan
and bombings from Pakistan and why I think
that actually happened. Conversations around Venezuela and Colombia,
seeing as how the last ship they attacked,
the Colombia is claiming were Colombian citizens.
Interesting point since we were just talking about
the Colombia overlap, and The US is stressing
that we're still allies. We're still on the
same page. We'll find out how that goes.
We're gonna talk about Qatar and the Qatari
airbase being built in Idaho.
I mean, it's just keep keep screaming that
you're winning everybody out there pretending like this
is not the opposite of everything you thought
was gonna happen because that's insane. And even
people like Laura Loomer. I mean, a a
video of Donald Trump talking about how Qatar
Qatar, the government, are basically terrorists and now
doing this.
It's Israel, guys. That's what this is. Qatar
is I mean, like a lot of this,
UAE, these things are basically facilitation and,
sidestepping things for Israel. And the point is
even those like Loom are screaming about why
this can't happen are still supporting Donald Trump.
We'll talk about the Charlie Kirk overlaps to
all of this. We're gonna get into see
some Israel influence and largely latter end with
the fake cease fire and the many, many
points around that, which are, you know, hard
hard to get into. But the sad reality
is no matter what ultimately happens, I don't
care if today, this moment, Donald Trump and
Netanyahu
genuinely decided to go, yay. Ceasefire. We will
stop everything. We'll let them build their own
state. And everything you ever want that can
happen,
they're still not forgetting a year and a
half of genocide.
That's something we really need to think about.
Even even if they actually gave you everything
today, are we gonna forget that they've been
funding and arming and and, like,
in a cajovial sense, allowing a genocide to
continue while telling you you're lying about it,
that you're gaslighting, that you're a terrorist? There's
just no way around that. There is no
praising them for anything that happens around this
conversation. Well, let's just make it clear, Trump
and Biden at the very least, since both
of them have continued to fund and support
the genocide. There's no way around that. Maybe
if it was months and they were funding
it and then fun suddenly realized, no. We're
talking about ongoing long term in your face
genocide support to this very moment,
and they lied about the ceasefire.
So keep that in mind as we go
through it. I'm gonna start today with
shout out to a recent interview.
Really, it's just if Catherine Austin fits always
just as a way of putting things and
we we we titled this the, reverse Robin
Hood. Why has Trump become anti capitalist?
And it's interesting because,
you know, that's not the narrative. Right? Supposed
to be the capitalist versus communist, and the
reality is, as she'll tell you in her
opinion as the financial expert in the conversation,
that we have never had a more anti
capitalist president Donald Trump. That's her opinion. You
can decide for yourself. But look at the
policies. Look at TikTok. Look at Nvidia. Look
at Intel. Look at screaming down corporate media
outlets to do what they're told or get
on you know? Or or the FCC or
any number of smaller points that show you
the exact opposite.
And that you know? And that's the it
doesn't have to be it's anti capitalist in
your opinion, and I would agree with that.
But, you know, fascism, communism, it's very it's
very interesting how many of those things share.
And, arguably, you could go a lot of
different directions. My point would be that
neither of at the end of the day,
recognizing that these people are lying about what
they're really trying to accomplish is the point.
Not that we're going capitalist versus communist, which
a lot of people seem to think by
reading the title. If you think that, how
are you even watching I mean, if you've
watched this show at all, how would you
think this was going to you know, the
reality is we are not in the business
of pinning against, you know, narrative versus narrative
or left versus right or some kind of
duopoly division tactic. The point, whatever you think
about it, is that this is an entity
trying to frame itself as the counterbalance to
something else. If you're able to look through
it all and see weirdly that they both
do the same things, whatever you wanna call
it, that's the point.
They are the same thing. And they use
these coercive wedge issues to get you looking
anywhere other than what they're building around you.
It's a really great interview that I recommend
you check out.
Now I wanna also start with some points
on Epstein, and we'll just begin there, and
then we're gonna get into the the in
the indictments and and, you know, build from
there on how this all seems to connect.
But just again, I didn't want this to
be missed. It's amazing how little attention this
is getting. I get there's a lot going
on.
But it's I it's I'm I'm still kind
of baffled about how the Epstein conversation
I mean, I guess what I'm trying to
say is that there's a ton of people
that seem even at the higher levels of
the partisan game, who seem to be going
like, where's the list? I'm not buying it.
Where are the arrests? But yet then I
don't really see that much, like, there's not
a lot of real push right now. For
me, the idea that you can have the
the cash getting caught lying right in front
of everybody in multiple ways that Massey directly
called out, and this is reiterating that right
here,
about the 20 people that you could very
least tell us about, the all the victims
that are behind them going release the files
on me that you pretend you're not for
my protection.
It's just it's such a obvious theater show,
and yet we get very little conversation about
this. It was we from the people who've
been making a case about why this was
gonna change everything right up until they suddenly
told you it wasn't real. I mean, this
should have destroyed everything. Hey. Maybe it did.
Maybe we're at a point where everyone's already
aware of this, and this is them dwindling
it forward in hopes they can push you
into a panopticon where it won't matter anymore.
But let's watch this clip first to just
refresh the memory about how incredible it is
that this is still not being discussed by
the ones telling you they were going to
change the world by discussing
this. Applied according to the transcript.
There is no credible information that he trafficked
them to anyone else.
According to victims
who cooperated with the FBI in that investigation,
These documents in FBI possession,
your possession,
detail at least 20 men,
including mister Jess Staley, CEO of Barclays Bank,
who Jeffrey Epstein trafficked victims to. That list
also includes at least 19 other individuals, one
Hollywood producer
worth a few $100,000,000,
one royal prince, one high profile individual in
the music industry, one very prominent banker, one
high profile government official,
one high profile former politician, one owner of
a car company in Italy, one rock star,
one magician,
at least six billionaires, including a billionaire from
Canada.
Yeah. And a part in a pear tree.
Right? Everything everywhere. Right? I mean, the the
the takeaway is provable points, but then it's
it was p the the in society was
infiltrated. That's the real point about what Zionism
is doing. But recognize what he's trying at
least as I take this, by the way,
is there's ones he mentioned that you can
prove.
People often, you know, why wouldn't he announce
them? And that's a fair point if he
hasn't. But the question is or the point
is, it seems as if a lot of
that information is within the FBI's awareness, but
not known to people who have this information
he's reading. That there's a reason those things
were held back, and that's the point. Either
way, whether it's Massey and Cash, I mean,
question these things. The point is the government
is clearly not allowing that information.
Not and and Cash was even lying to
you telling you he wasn't allowed to when
really the the block was really only in
Florida. You know, it's just blatant misrepresentation
while they're out there screaming about accountability and
then even get fact checked on Twitter about
how they haven't done that. You know, it
it just I think I even have that
next, but really important to think about this
and how this is right in front of
you right now.
20 people.
We know that Trump had the the names
his name personally redacted from all this. We
know that they held back personal other information
about people that they were associates. This was
all very publicly released.
They're straight up covering this up in hopes
that people like
Alex Jones, Nick Sorter, Benny Johnson can come
out there and yell at you about something
else
and cheerlead about whatever they just said 30
ago in hopes that you don't focus on
this, on how obvious this is. I don't
think it's working, but I think it works
for the fake
perception of what everyone's talking about. See, they
they're two different things. They can my point
is that if you don't if there's people
out there that are kinda just wishy washy
and just going along with what's happening, they
get guided into that being what's going on
because they're not pushing back. I think the
majority of people out here are like, I'm
not buying it. I'm not having that. But
they don't get represented in what they project
to everybody else. And over time, those things
can win out. That it's it's a social
engineering long game, guys, and we can see
it happening every single day.
I I mean, you tell me what you
think. I think it's shockingly obvious because this
is insanely clear. Those three people I just
listed were the ones screaming about this the
most, and now they're looking over there.
Seems wild to me. Here's another clip, and
this is important because this is Johnson.
Right? Despite you know, just remember, at the
beginning, it was like, he'll never be the
guy. He's a rhino. And then he got
in and he was like, he's the guy.
He's our favorite. Showing you how completely whatever
whatever we're told to say is what we
think that day. The whole, you know, I
support the current thing of the right. It's
the same game. But here's Mike Johnson being
called out even by, excuse me, NewsNation
for why he hasn't sworn in this 100
the two hundred and eighteenth vote.
The point is they won in a recent
election
and are fail you know, withholding
to swear them in,
and Massey's at least accusing them of doing
that in order to withhold this vote. Now
his point is that this is a, what
do they call it, a,
pro form a session.
But the point clearly is that, well, you've
done it before, so why not now? Well,
you can decide for yourself. At the end
of the day, very may maybe it is
just a a waiting game. I'm still arguing
that the reason they don't do this is
because right now, they're doing everything they can
to whittle that down to two seventeen. They
need 218 votes, one of which seems to
be sworn in to make the two hundred
and eighteenth. But if someone like Nancy Mace,
for example, can be convinced to not vote
like I think she currently is, to release
the list, well, they won't be able to
do it. And what do you know? The
timing of the hold just lasts just long
enough until that one hundred and two hundred
and eighteenth vote no longer there anymore. What
a coincidence. Sorry. Go move on. And now
we're back. Like, that's what I predict will
happen. I hope not. But listen to listen
to this back and forth, and I find
this very revealing. It's just showing you that
even people on their side are going,
you know, I have to call this out.
Everybody in my audience is asking for it.
The Epstein
files. There she is. There,
speaking.
What That's the politician they're supposed to swear
in. Why won't you swear her in?
Yeah. I mean, again, they're becoming experts at
distraction and red herrings. This has absolutely nothing
to do about Oh, so he didn't answer
the question. I got it. Epstein. This is
a scheduling matter. As soon as the Democrats
open a vote to reopen the government, we
will get back to the regular order in
session of congress and See, he just skips
right past the Epstein point. Not about Epstein.
You're just you're all distractions and red herrings.
Well, okay. Let's just even say the point
is that we're trying to they're trying to
distract. Okay.
Then in but in the material sense, that's
the point. Right? So the Epstein thing's waiting.
You're waiting on her even if it's by
coincidence. And now
if and you know, when this goes away
and that is left one way or the
other, it will very much tell us the
reality of it, won't it? He's clearly trying
to avoid even addressing that. Again, I'm telling
you, my gut tells me that when this
comes to pass, he'll just try to muscle
this forward and act like it doesn't matter
because the votes will be changed. I hope
not. That'll be, I'm sure, among our first
orders of business is to administer the oath
to the newly elected representative.
This is just a matter of of the
schedule.
In a pro form a session, no one's
there in the chamber. It's literally sometimes three,
four people. Yep. And remember, that's because of
the way that they let this happen. I
mean, that was what this this was created
in the first place, not just because of
the continuing resolution. This was all discussed by
Massey. Right? So he's pointing to something, and
he had a part in kind of allowing
to be the way it is in the
first place as if it was organic. It
was not. McClure and whomever is serving as
the interim speaker, they they bang the gavel
in. They they say the pledge, and they
bang the gavel out. That's it. It's just
to keep Congress functioning. It's a tradition of
the institution. But we'll we'll do it right
and do it in the right way as
soon as everybody gets back here. I I
I understand,
and that makes perfect sense until we look
back and see that there have been Republicans
sworn in during pro form a session. So
Oh, you know what? I think I'm realizing
NewsNation's
yeah. Right? That's Cuomo and everybody, so I'm
guessing that's more Democrat. They're all it's all
mainstream alternative media propaganda for me. But either
way, that's that's more a case that was
unclear. I think I was kind of framing
it as NewsNation being more like one America
News, which I don't think is even close.
Let me know your thoughts in the chat.
I just it's hard once that all kind
of I I see them Cuomo and and
what's the what's the other group? It doesn't
matter. I just my point is I see
them all as very mainstream alternative media, but
I guess that would explain more so the
pushback to make that clear.
Why should it be different for a Democrat?
The great question. It's a it's a there
was a unique exception made when the two
Florida representatives are sworn in earlier this year
after winning a special election. And the only
reason we did that is because it was
previously noticed for that date, and they flew
all their families and friends in for the
ceremony. So okay. So the bottom line is
there's a law or whatever whatever, regulation, guideline,
whatever they're calling. And
people we like had a issue with it,
you know, family. Okay. So we'll just make
the exception. Okay. Well, it still doesn't that's
just all that's just all noise. You could
make an exception now if you wanted to
is the point.
Very clearly, he's just choosing not to. That's
obvious. But because they were here and the
the,
session got,
canceled, we just went ahead and did it
because their families were here. That's the main
purpose of it. But So if she flies
in her family, would you guys do it?
All of us, she'll get the full bells
and whistles.
It has to be scheduled. Right? We don't
schedule things for pro form a.
No. I'm tell but they're trying to make
an issue out of nothing. I've looked forward
to welcoming her. She's congratulated for having won
her father's seat. He served a long time.
She'll have a great career. But, you know,
again, these are distractions. We have to get
the government open so that we can get
all these regular processes working again. That's all
this is. Okay. Yeah. Sure. Why not, buddy?
Okay. Well, then we'll just wait and see
then, won't we? Right? So when, hopefully not,
but when inevitably
that whole thing adds up to, oops, too
bad, we lost a vote, can't happen now,
then it'll all be obvious. I mean, I
think it is now, to be quite frank.
I think it's very clear that this is
in design like, look, I'll make a I'll
point to what Massey said because I agree
with this and I've been saying this quite
a long time. This is always how this
tends to be used, always.
Right here. He goes, remember the swamp loves
the threat of a shutdown. How long have
I been saying this? I mean, it's not
even like uniquely my thing. It's very, very
obvious if you just recognize how it goes.
Like he says, by withholding funding for things
Americans want,
they can get funding for things nobody wants.
And usually, it goes both ways too or
I guess more they go basically, so there's
a way that the government can do this
to get you to accept things that you
didn't, you know, didn't want, but also get
left first right where they have personal agendas.
And let's just state Israel lobbyists or whatever,
gun lobbying, big pharma lobbying. The point is
they can demand that you insert some rider
that's added at the last second that nobody
even sees that allows Israel to
exercise military conduct you know, things in Mount
Alaska. I remember reporting on that way back
when that first happened. The point is that
those things happen and nobody sees it because
we're focusing on the larger conversation, which is
about farm funding. I think that's what I
was asking you about. Back in the day,
it was, you know, it was funding. We
have to allow the farm to be the
funding and and then everyone, you know, justified
it because it has to happen because it's
time sensitive, and then all these other things
were jammed in. And I argue like he's
saying, that's not by accident.
They intentionally make these things that we desperately
need or Americans largely claim they want, and
then they hold it hostage over a lot
of different things, even amongst each other. And
it says,
we should be passing separate funding bills, not
one giant funding bill. Yes. Like anybody with
a brain has been saying forever. This is
how they use the contending resolution or the
NDAA. All these massive things where they time
sensitive and then jam all sorts of things
in, like, you know, indefinitely holding
Americans in in prison or, you know,
Smith's Modernization Act, all the great things that
we get from stuff like that.
And he says rep reposting this relevant thread
from years ago, three years ago. And he
simply says, we first have to abandon the
absurd notion that we should pass just one
bill. It's omnibus bill.
It's a big manipulation.
To god you know, god forbid that you
have to actually, I don't know, work more
and give more time for the things that
historically were never a job but actually a
duty, and they always did other jobs. Now
they're millionaires, and then they demand you respect
them for doing something that should be a
duty in the first place.
Either way, I think that's important to think
about.
It is coercive. Now here is what he
was asked point blank, and this was from
either I think this is posted on the
seventh, so I think it was
recent. The point was that he's asked after
this and has been pressured. I think this
is him sort of at least stating he's
kinda giving in. I don't think it'll happen.
I think because right now, this has been
three days since. Either way, I think it's
interesting that all this answer shows you is
sort of like he's been dragging his feet
intentionally.
Was that a earlier this year, you swore
in two Republican members during a pro form
a session. So why not swear in Aleta
Bialba who was elected two weeks ago during
the pro form a session? Does it have
to do with her 02/2018
signature on the discharge petition, the Epstein discharge?
No. It has nothing to do with that
at all. You gotta love this, though. Right?
Regardless of whether you think that's the case
or not. The fact that this is on
c or I'm not sure who the guy
is speaking, maybe it's from another platform, but
it's on c SPAN. That's a that's a
corporate journalist
asking him point blank, is this shutdown
so you can manipulate the Epstein vote? I
mean, think about how crazy that is. These
are people at the highest level of the
fake news media,
and they're the ones asking things that independent
media set the table for.
You've never seen this before in the past,
guys. Like, this is what I've been saying.
Independent media is legitimately setting the the conversation.
That's why mainstream alternative media is so desperately
floundering trying to take control of this and,
I think, making themselves look more cartoonish than
ever, at least to people with a
brain. But I think listen to the way
he responds, though. But I just think that's
very important to think about in a general
sense.
No. It has nothing to do with that
at all. We will swear her in when
everybody gets back. It's a ceremonial duty.
Look. I we'll schedule it, I guess, as
soon as she wants. It has nothing to
do with it. I I Oh, that's a
very different response. He's getting fed up with
having to because, look, it's just only so
many times you can act like it's just
a normal thing, and everyone keeps going, well,
then do it right now. What about tomorrow?
What about tomorrow? And he I think he
just basically said, okay. Well, when if she
wants to. So now I guess it'll be
up to them to schedule. He'll probably find
a reason to deny it anyway. It's a
game.
We're in pro form a session because there
is nothing for the house to do. The
house is He's back to his explanations. I
just think that answer is very telling.
So we'll wait and see what happens. But
I think it's important to know where this
is going and at the end of the
day that this is a game of the,
you know, acting like they're in there fighting
for you.
Let it shut down. I think it's very
clear. You really hey. Look. Less no chemtrails.
Hey. Look. You know, if that's what's happening.
The point is that I think there's a
lot of despite, obviously, that there are people
that will suffer because of the,
I think, the
to their detriment, their dependence on the government,
I think there's many other ways that this
society could function and much better if we
got away from that. But, But, yes, I
can admit that this thing, the government just
no longer existing, let's say, would there be
people that would probably suffer? I would argue
that for if if we're gonna get into
the whole,
you know, better for everyone kind of mindset,
which I don't ever use to make my
case, My point is I think that is
generally better for this country, for our society,
for our politics, for our mental health, for
everything.
But that's my opinion. So I simply, regard
taking into consideration the the definite downside,
let it go. I think we should be
met very at least, I'd love to see
a world where we can give it a
go and see if we can exist without
some overarching authoritarian government pretending to be something
else.
Now let's talk about the
illusion
of accountability, which is everywhere right now and
has been for a very long time left
and right. I mean, I've said this before.
You can you point to one person
and not some, like, got caught by local
police or
caught up in something that was too big
to ignore, like, out you know, like, because
of something like that where it was some
kind of, you know, video or a leak
or the local police caught him. That's always
how this goes. At the high level, when
have you seen a politician go to prison
because of a congressional hearing or because they
caught them money laundering or or insider trading.
I can't even remember an example. Do you
know how much evidence we have about people
like Pelosi
or or any number of examples left and
right? Somebody like Dennis Hastert, for example, who
was a serial child molester, the judge called
him, that came out because of many other
things that had nothing to do with investigations
about him through the government.
It it I mean, this goes back to
when he was in a teacher. There's I
mean, the whole thing is long term, and
I I argue it was covered up right
until the day it happened. And he was
a very der he's a Republican, third in
you know, he was the speaker of the
house, so he's
always doops can always debate these people. The
he's second in line, third in line of
the president since he's third, but he'd be
second. Anyway, the point is that very powerful.
And this person went to prison for being
a serial child molester, and even then, it
didn't seem to get as much attention. I
think what we continue to recognize is even
Donald Trump. Everyone loves to say they just
went, okay. You could argue that. I wouldn't
even disagree. The narrative of the the tape,
it looks like they went after him. It
looks like they threw anything they could. And
I think some of them,
individuals, very much hate Donald Trump and have
very much have political motivation. But what happened?
Money changed hands. That always happens. Any
accountability? Any legal? No? Nothing.
Not for Clinton. Not for Trump. Not for
Klaus Schwab. Not for Bill Gates. Not for
anybody Silicon Valley deep state globalists.
Nothing. So keeping that in mind,
this is from the eight central witness undermines
case against James Comey. Well, this is basically
what we already were telling you, but this
is just coming out more and more and
more. And I think if you recognize that
nothing yet has been added, which even then
I mean, I'm not a legal expert, but
the idea that they could just keep throwing
things out, like, there like, this is an
indictment that had to go through the minimal
process that it is. I mean, it's look.
There's a process. There does need to be
evidence, but it is you look it up
for yourself. The reality of what little they
truly need, especially when there's, you know, greasing
the wheels, You don't really need that much
to be able to throw in a diaper
like this.
And what we're talking about is lying.
That's it. And basically the same with Leticia
James. And it's difficult in the first place
to prove these things. And then secondly, when
we get into it, the evidence seems to
be pretty much nonexistent.
At the very least, that this seems to
have been set up so they could claim
political
manipulation.
When in the reality, it seems like it
was set up to fail, probably because
nobody ever could held accountable in this game.
But it says federal prosecutors
investigating James Comey for allegedly making false statements
to congress, which I have no doubt he
did. I think all of them lying for
the congress like a matter of like they're
breathing.
Determine that a central witness in the probe
would prove problematic and likely prevent them from
establishing their case to a jury.
It says according to the prosecutors who investigated
the circumstances surrounding Comey's twenty twenty testimony for
two months, using Richmond's
testimony to prove that Comey knowingly provided false
statements to congress would result in likely insurmountable
problems for the prosecution. Well, let's even say
they get him for that. Do you think
for one second that getting caught for lying
in front of congress is gonna be anything
other than a slap on the wrist for
this guy?
I just look at what we've dealt with
and you and and top of that third
point, I hope so. I hope it's more
than that. Third point,
I mean,
everything you everything that you're accusing him of,
and most of which I probably agree with,
and that's what you get charged or lying
in front of congress.
I mean, I got I just I think
you're being laughed at. I mean, this is
the I mean, you may have the secret
undermine, you know, they're gonna add more, it'll
discovery will bring more in. That's certainly possible,
but that's a hope. That's not based on
anything in front of you right now. Especially
that's based on your belief that they actually
want to hold the people accountable.
Investigators
detailed those conclusions in a lengthy memo last
month recommending that the office not move forward
in charging Comey Comey according to sources familiar
with the memo. More than one person left
and right, including people that Trump appointed and
got released for it, have tried to say,
look. There's not there's not enough here. It's
gonna make them look stupid, but it wasn't
about it's about a process so you guys
can alleviate the steam that's building. That's what
I think.
And almost I forget the Pelosi point where
they just came out for, what, the thirteenth
time and said Pelosi is a treasonous. You
know? I I agree. She's a criminal like
a lot of them are that you can
prove. But how many times are you gonna
report something on Twitter and not actually have
any accountability about it? How many times can
Miller and Kash Patel call Obama a treasonous
a traitor,
which has very real legal meaning, and then
not do anything about it?
This doesn't make any sense.
And you realize if you think Obama is
suddenly, why not? Why all of a sudden
now? Why not last time Trump was in
power? Why not January 20? It doesn't make
any sense if you really pay attention, guys.
But I hope I'm wrong because I do
believe these people are criminals. But to be
clear,
no more or less than the rest of
them, Trump included.
Prosecutors further expressed concerns. I mean, it varies,
but my point is I think they're all
at the same level of criminality. Prosecutors further
expressed concerns about the department's ability to take
the case to trial quickly quickly
due to problems identifying all the relevant materials
that would need to be handed over to
Comey's lawyers according to their sources. They also
raised alarms over the potential for Comey's defense
to cite the statute of limitations. How much
you wanna bet? I'm gonna read more about
this, but what this is what I think
is gonna be happen. I think this is
what's set up like this to fail. My
gut tells me this, which has been wrong
before.
But it says they've presented the idea that
the they're worried that statute of limitations will
be cited to be able to remove the
case. It says, which derives from the testimony
in 2017
and was only reinforced by Comey during his
2020 testimony in response to a question from
Republican senator Cruz. So the argument essentially is
that it really stems from a 2017
claim that was only pointed back to in
2020.
The argument being there is that if it
was 02/2017,
the statute of limitations has already played out.
It says prosecutors rushed to secure the indictment
days before the statute of limitations expired for
2020.
Right? So if his lawyers can successfully argue
that that was simply them pointing and their
real issue is what he said in 2017,
which is what it seems to be,
they're simply gonna say, well, okay. Well, then
all you're really
all that's on the table is what he
said in 2020,
and that's only pointing back to something. It's
not gonna be legally that that's what I
think this will be.
He goes on to say, although they believe
Comey's lawyers can argue that the statute of
limitations expired
years earlier
as the underlying relates to 2017 testimony,
quote, nothing is being done. What about and
this is this is important. This is what
Donald Trump posted. And by the way, it
appears
that it's turned out to be what we
all expected. We shouldn't have surprised anybody.
This one here.
White House has actually admitted that Trump's message
to Bondi was supposed to be a private
message,
which we considered when it came out. Right?
Because it was pretty ridiculous what it is.
It said nothing is being done. What about
Comey? And this is my point. You can't
then later go, I didn't have anything to
do with it. I just dodged it. I
didn't do that's what he said in the
White House. He He acted like he didn't
have anything to do with going after Comey.
He quite literally publicly said this and then
said
where was it? Right here?
No. It's not that one. The point is
in another point on that same conversation, he
basically said, well, do throw it out there.
We'll see let the courts decide. Well, that's
not how that's supposed to work. There's supposed
to be some basis for like, you should
believe you have a provable case before you
take this to town. But it says nothing
is being done. What about Comey, Adam Schiff,
and Leticia?
Trump wrote in a social media post last
month directly addressing Pam Bondi, and it says,
we can't delay any longer. It's killing our
reputation and credibility.
Ah, very different than having a case.
They impeached me twice, and they even died
to me five times. Right. Did he ever
go to jail? No. Because indictments are accusations.
Like, you guys would know, right, if you're
recognizing they lied about him, if that's what
you think. Over nothing, justice must be served
now. Okay. So if you're saying reputation and
credibility, then you're not really going after this
because you want to see something change. You
want them to think you are because it's
ruining your reputation to not do it back
to them because you're dealing with the lowest
common denominator.
We don't care about constitution rights and judicial,
you know, independence.
Do it because we want them to suffer
too.
That is the next order, Betty John's, the
same people we point out every time, and
it's not my opinion. Look at them. Look
at them cheerleading on constitutional actions that they
would have otherwise called out if Biden was
doing it. It's very, very easy to see.
K.
Leticia James,
criminally indicted. This was yesterday.
And it says, j James,
who is, oh, Leticia James, who led a
civil fraud investigation against Trump, who, by the
way, was found guilty in 2023, was indicted
on charges of bank fraud in Eastern District
Of Virginia. Now it's bank fraud, but, apparently,
as you read through it, it cite really
cites back to, like, lies. Like so either
way, though, this is what you think you're
going after her for?
I this this is peanuts when it comes
to what these people are actually guilty of.
But I guess that's okay for you. If
all you've and if if all you're I
mean, this is what I'm trying to say
from a nonpartisan perspective. If you're just an
objective
nonpartisan person who wants criminals to be held
accountable, this does not do it, especially since
it appears the same kind of setup as
Comey,
but I hope I'm wrong.
It says prosecutors accused James of alleged bank
fraud and making false statements to financial institutions
regarding a mortgage loan for her house. That's
what this is. That's it.
In a statement, James accused the president who
recently published publicly pressured
Bondi
and it says of a desperate weaponization of
the justice system is what she called it,
James,
which exactly what it is. Exactly like what
you guys did too because our our justice
system has been weaponized by the government for
a long time. And if we know who's
influencing and controlling the policy of our government,
it shouldn't be that confusing.
Trump appointed Halligan, his former personal attorney, to
oversee the case
after US another US prosecutor, Eric Siebert, who
Trump appointed,
resigned.
He was reportedly ousted after he told the
justice department that he had not found any
evidence to charge James. So this is the
same thing with Comey.
The person that Trump puts in place says,
we don't have a case.
Trump's person.
So they get rid of them and say,
who wants to do what I'm asking them
to do regardless of the evidence? I will
every power hungry person in the room. That's
Bondi, Hegseth, Cash, Patel. These are the people
that fall in that position
because they know where the honest people out
there that might have integrity are like, they
won't get a within a 10 foot pole
of this administration,
probably with any part of the government, because
we're starting to see what really is happening
today. And so these the junior team rushes
in, fills what they can, and are even
willing to take what might be thrown to
the bus to maybe get some power. That's
how I see this. So Donald Trump's person
said there's no case.
The federal government alleges James brought a three
bot, a three bedroom home in in Norfolk
using a mortgage loan that required her to
use the property as her secondary residence and
did not allow for sharing ownership of time
sharing home. Look. If it's a crime and
she broke the law, charge her for it.
I would not I don't care how minor
it is. If you think this is something
that happened, you can prove it, hold her
accountable. These people think they can get away
with stuff like this. The point is this
is nothing compared to what these people are
really doing. But But if you dive into
this further, it gets even more kind of
menial. It's so, basically, the claim is false
statements about whether she was actually utilizing the
other home as opposed to a lot of
the other people live there. It's a very
tiny thing. And it says the misrepresentation
allowed James to obtain favorable loan terms that
would not have been available for an investment
property.
So a a better loan term is what
we're really debating here and whether she lied
about where they were staying to get those
better loan terms.
I mean, just take a second to reflect
on this while we're dealing with Epstein client
lists and foreign policy genocide and everything else
that people have been doing from Biden and
before, and this is what they're focusing on.
They're laughing at you.
I mean, and at the same time, giving
shockingly,
you know, loans to Israel while they're committing
genocide at the expense of Americans all over
this country.
We talked about that in in the interview
with Catherine Austin Fitts. And I'll just grab
this, by the way.
What was it?
There we go. A great article from Gen
X girl, by the way. I hope I'm
hoping she'll write some more for KilaV.
How American tax dollars prop up Israel's zombie
economy. And we get into the the bonds,
which is just as it's it's incredible
to understand
that these Israel bonds
since October 8, over 35 states and local
governments have purchased Israel bonds. Of those 35
specific data is available of seventeen
and nine countries which have invested $2,400,000,000
in these bonds. Now what's crazy about it
is
US Americans,
they're right here. Laws in many states, including
Florida, Pennsylvania,
prohibit
divestment.
Now what they did is they actually created
what they call bonds.
What was it?
Alternative BDS called bonds donated to schools. So
Israel seeing the success of the BDS movement,
claiming that they're, you know, they're all terrorists,
go through the legal channel. When they do
and it's working, so they attack them for
it. The point is that they tried to
circumvent that. So they want people to divest
from the school's funding. Right? And most people
in these schools want that, including people at
the highest levels of the gov of the
school itself. And what do they do? Well,
they get high level billionaires connected to the
school to donate bonds they can't deny.
And then what the re legal reality is,
they're not allowed to divest for them in
the for a period of time, which is
sometimes a year. So, basically, they're tricking them
or manipulating them into not being able to
divest even if they want to. Then they
pass laws that say that people around the
situation, pension funds, are not legally allowed to
divest from it as they're losing tons of
money, millions of dollars from your pension fund
so Israel can keep bombing children.
It's a good summation, but there's a lot
more to it, guys. It's
amazing how crazy and obvious all this is.
So back to the point.
So the home and alone.
And it says the Trump last month called
on, US Attorney General, Pam Bondi, who leads
the the justice department in a social media
post to prosecute his political opponents, including James.
We can't delay any longer. It's killing our
reputation.
The civil the in the civil fraud case
brought by James back when he in in
the the last administration,
Trump was found liable with falsifying records to
secure better loan deals. Isn't that funny? Leading
to a $500,000,000
fine.
The penalty was thrown out by the appeals
court, so he didn't even get a fine,
let alone jail time in jail. It says,
which called the fines excessive, though it held
upheld that Trump was liable for fraud.
So you can call political
the evidence presented, and the court found that
he was guilty. But, nonetheless, still threw out
the fine, no jail time, not even a
slap on the wrist, guys. You're you defrauded
the American people for $500,000,000,000.
No big deal. Of course, you could argue
they lied about it. I wouldn't even I
wouldn't even shock me. What's crazy about it
is he could be held found guilty, no
consequences
for exactly what he's now trying to throw
at her, which will probably be thrown out
too. You you see how obvious this is?
None of them are gonna be held accountable
if you're paying attention.
I hope I'm wrong. The evidence speaks for
itself.
Now on just an additional point, we just
talked about this when she was in front
of congress. Pam Bondi accidentally, which I always
wonder, maybe it wasn't accidental. You know what
I mean? Like, these things are they must
know, they look. But here's what's interesting.
A lot of times you see it and
you go, oh, that seems like something they
wanted you to see. To me, I honestly
think this is just that the Bondi being
out of her league. And if you read
what she says, it's embarrassing for her. Bondi
accidentally reveals her burn book for fiery Epstein
hearing. What was she saying? Little quips and
things he was supposed to say about each
of them. Instead of answering the question, you
took money from them and you and Reid
Hoffman. Remember? And what did I tell you?
She accidentally got him confused and accused somebody
else of something that was meant to be
somebody else. And then she was like, Reid
Hoffman or I don't know. Maybe I could
be wrong. Like, what?
I just this is how bad and out
of these out of their depth these people
are. She literally wrote a list of little
things to say about these people, and even
then can't even get her narrative straight.
It's embarrassing. These people are out of their
depth.
Now on accountability,
I wanna I wanna refer reiterate this yet
again. That Alex Jones saying on the twenty
third or plenty of others that he had
his big, big, big actions coming that DOJ
told him were coming. Well, guess what? What
I'm act what I'm continuing to see from
this,
they did tell him that. What they did
is use him like they always do.
Drip this out to your audience as absolute
bombshell, end of the world changing everything, and
it turns out what you wanted was just
him to get you all hyped about something
that was gonna go nowhere as planned. That's
my feeling on it. I hope I'm wrong
still. I hope they still go to jail
just like I hope these other politicians do
because they're all criminals.
What?
I guess we'll wait and find out. They
that's just all the narrative about how this
is all coming down.
While here,
John Kennedy says the fact that then special
counsel Jack Smith and we just talked about
Pelosi in the same way. Cash Patel comes
out calling her a big trader. Nobody's I
don't even see a process beginning. Same thing
here.
He says, special counsel Jack Smith tracked the
private communications of eight sitting US senators. Yeah.
That's insane.
You gonna do something about it?
We need a hearing as soon as possible.
Okay. Got it. So you have evidence currently
in your possession that proves that he illegally
spied on US senators. Okay. What am I
missing?
Let's all gather together and discuss this in
front of people on the TV so we
can all grandstand and spend eight months doing
nothing.
How about instead, you just put the person
in jail with the evidence that you can
prove he committed a crime? I know it's
shocking. Right? We live in this PR theater
game we call politics, guys. These people are
all trying to distract you, or they don't
even know they're being played or they're getting
manipulated by a foreign government. I don't know.
I said, yeah, guys. Let's talk about this
a lot more, then do the media rounds
and claim a bunch of things and call
a bunch of people names, then do absolutely
nothing about it. The Uniparty doing its thing.
Again, guys, I'm not saying this just to
be repented. I genuinely hope that I'm wrong
about this. I hope that person goes to
jail because it's not a partisan thing. You
can see what they did was wrong, and
it should be wrong whether they do it
to the one side versus the other or
all of them. The bottom line is if
they actually go after this thing, it'll
truly, I think, would expose
what we're saying. It'll expose this is not
some one-sided
left wing terrorist attack on the government. That's
not what's happening.
But
let's wait and see.
Same thing here,
but five times August.
This is Disclose TV. He says, we have
82 vaccines that we give simultaneously,
and I'm a vaccine believer, by the way.
I believe in a lot of vaccines, Trump
says. But when you give 82 vaccines to
a shot of a little baby, that hasn't
even formed yet. That's a lot of vaccines.
And meanwhile,
next day, hey. Guess who's still giving a
two vaccines? The US government. Every which way
you look, did they even did they begin
did Trump just change his mind to begin
a process through which they're gonna suddenly change
that? No. Did they begin a slow process
where they're gonna try to use evidence? No.
They just said these things out loud and
went right back to allowing those things to
happen. As time as August points out, yay.
Go ahead. Just keep talking about and hinting
at vaccines being dangerous, but continue to leave
them all on the market while kids keep
getting injured in the meantime.
Tylenol, you gotta avoid immediately. All those 82
vaccines, hey. Well, you'll figure it out.
You can take what you want from this,
guys. I'm glad he's pointing at it. I
think that's a good thing. But when you
recognize that they know you all see it
and they then may for my opinion, know
they're not gonna do anything about it, the
best they can do is make you think
it's in the works.
Do something. You've been you you guys have
said things like the RFK Jr didn't need
to be told this. And where are we?
I was literally just laughing at Tim Pool
talking to Roseanne Barr. I just happened to
catch it. I was going live for,
Rumble. Of course, that's the main video they
have playing right in the home page.
And just talking about how RFK is doing
the best ever, and Stephen Miller seems to
be the one really running everything, and we're
so happy about that. I'm not even making
that up.
Stephen Miller,
a lunatic Zionist who is outrageously
I mean, everything he's proposing is undermining constitutional
rights, and you guys are cheering it on?
Maybe that bean is a little too tight.
I mean, they don't even care, guys. It's
about team my side, whatever that means today.
This is obvious, and they don't actually I
mean, this just continues
everything. Go from
the health side, vaccines,
fake meat, fake butter. Thanks, Bill Gates. He's
right there with them, guys. BlackRock and funding,
Israel and funding, Ukraine war and funding. I
mean, what are we talking about?
But, yay, hashtag winning, I guess.
Well,
pollo,
Anna Paluna
Paulina Luna,
the Nobel Prize commissions lost all credibility.
Oh, now, I guess. Not when they gave
Obama the peace prize for nothing. Right? Now
they did. Why? Because Trump didn't get it.
Has ended this is what she writes. Ended
eight wars. Can you can you list those
off, polluter?
Right? Can you can you give me a
list of the ones they've ended?
I guarantee it includes Ukraine and Israel even
though nobody's arguing those even came close to
ending. And what are the wars that we're
talking about?
They're just making things up. Eight wars in
nine months. That's what Trump said the other
day.
That's a joke. Nobody believes that other than
people lying about it.
And even then, I think they actually know
they're not I think they know it's not
true. Deserves the Nobel Peace Prize
for supporting a genocide, for bombing Somalia, for
continuing to allow everything for for ethnically cleansing
a location and building a
what do they call it? Gaza Resort? What
do they call it? I forget the name
they used. I just don't understand how anybody
could take that seriously. And this is my
point. They know they're simply nodding to the
others like a sorter, like a John, who
will just care go look at their platforms.
They all went, yay, this thing. I support
the thing. We're all angry about the thing
that's supposed to happen.
That's what's happening. Here
is Simon Godek, somebody with principles who actually
cares. He says, so let me get this
straight. You're all raging that Trump didn't win
the Nobel Peace Prize, which is just an
absurd thing to talk about. But you're not
raging that he let Fauci walk free or
that he kept the client list sealed,
And that's and that's what you're mad about.
You see, these people are dishonest, guys. They
don't care about what they claim to. They
claim to care about what you want and
then cheer what Trump does. And then pretend
they're the same thing.
It's right in your face,
everywhere you look.
Here's the prime minister of Israel because, you
know, when you've got friends like Israel, who
needs enemies? Right? He says, give Donald Trump
the Nobel Peace Prize. He deserves it. Now,
let's be clear. As of right this moment,
that's a little bit further down. They're still
bombing Gaza right now. As we're speaking, they're
bombing in Gaza.
And they're pretending that you I mean, look.
Let's even say you think the deal is
going to finish. To say it while you're
still killing innocent people
And not
just ignoring that, but asking for praise, guys.
I've said this from the beginning. That is
a special kind of evil.
And it's not unique. Biden did the same
thing, guys. It's your government being infiltrated by
the person who's pushing this.
Peace through strength, it says above him.
What I tell you, that's what this is.
Enjoy your peace through strength genocide because that's
what we're ultimately talking about. And that's what
he's per this is the mindset of people
around the world.
I just can't stress how much this is
going to destroy
everything that we think holds this world together.
You're allowing the monsters to not only continue
to conduct genocide and be praised for it,
but to rationalize, to set precedents for other
people who might want to take that. Like,
if you thought we were in a world
where the good outweighed the bad and the
evils that do exist aren't you know, that
wouldn't ultimately
find
purchase
with their evil mindset.
This is changing that.
Every single moment that this the world, other
bad actors are going, well, gee.
I see the model. I see exactly how
this is supposed to go. If I if
I deal with them and I allow them
to take what they want from me, I
can do whatever I want.
And we had a Nobel Peace Prize for
it.
Let's talk about more foreign policy. Right?
The nine ending wars
is insane to me. That you can even
pretend like anything, even close to that is
happening.
Well, we talked about the Afghanistan base. This
is more of a per
opinion, but it's interesting to consider.
First, the the peace president who wants to
steal back parts of Afghanistan because we want
it. No big deal there. The Taliban firmly
rejected Trump's claim for bag of air breaks,
that he incorrectly said they built. No. They
didn't. It was Soviet Union. But, you know,
who cares about facts? Right? He's wrong about
a lot of that stuff. And whether he
knows it or not is irrelevant
in in a sense of the truth. But
it's alarming that he either doesn't know that
or is willing to lie to you about
it for, I guess, being able to seize
land from a foreign country.
But this is recent from the seventh. Afghanistan
firmly maintains its position and is saying we're
not giving this back to them. The Afghan
foreign ministry firmly maintains with with Russia that
they will not give this base back to
United States.
Okay. Well, as of today, yesterday, really,
Afghanistan
was bombed by Pakistan.
Seems like an interesting development. Right? Afghanistan's
Taliban government, you know, the one that The
US was working with even though they use
them as a justification to begin the war
because that always makes sense. Right? In fact,
it's no different. That that is a model
for everything else we've seen, whether it's Al
Qaeda and ISIS, whether it's the Kurds or
rather more specific, the Syrian rebels. It's the
same thing every single time. It literally is
when you take a second to look. Or
Israel funding Hamas. You know, it it's it's
a round and round again. But it says
the allegation comes after two loud blasts were
heard in the city on Thursday.
Pakistan has also bombed a civilian market in
the broader province of Patika.
In Afghanistan's Southeast, the Taliban defense ministry said
in a statement on Friday, Pakistan has neither
confirmed nor denied. Now this has very clearly
fleshed out the point.
If Pakistan's bombing Afghanistan, why would that be
happening? There's plenty of different geopolitical reasons to
get into. I'll give you my opinion.
I think first and foremost, this is about
well,
well, let's put it this way first. I
think that this might be about
the issue with the base.
And I think on top of that, this
has been a building discussion around fighting terrorism
and ISIS k. We've talked a lot about
that. I quite frankly think it's obvious that
ISIS k
is a construct, as as we talked about
here. Does ISIS k even exist? Now I'm
not saying it didn't at one point or
might still have some remnants of people. I
think that it's become a CIA
intelligence facade cutout where it represents what they
point to when they are dealing with ISIS.
It is an extension of ISIS that exists
in Afghanistan that I can literally prove to
you has direct connections back to intelligence. I
did it in this show, and I did
it in this show. And this was at
this this one was about the
crook of city hall,
and this one was about the bombing at
the airport, I believe. And it was ISIS
k election threat surfaced at opportune moment.
It's it's again, I you if you wanna
go further on it, it's a deep conversation.
I think it's important to recognize that that
is supposed to be something they're dealing with
in Afghanistan. And I think the point is
you're going to hear if this fleshes out
that that's why. They were fighting the boogeyman
that Israel and The United States are going
to begin to use as the newer prop
let's just even say they lose traction with
everything else. Well, ISIS problem is always there
to fall back on. They'll just start claiming
ISIS attacks, and and I think that's part
of it. And this, again, this is completely
my opinion. But one I think I one
thing I didn't want you to miss that
I thought was very relevant, Trump's family backed
crypto firms
courts Pakistan.
Interesting timing. Right? So this is April 30.
Says the ar the agreement focuses on expanding
blockchain technology, stablecoin adoption, and DeFi integration across
Pakistan.
The press release cited by Dawn described the
deal as a major step toward positioning Pakistan
as a global leader in the digital finance
revolution.
You know, digital IDs, digital money, all the
things that we pretend we're fighting,
The rebels, the fight to deep state, and
enhancing Pakistan's position as one of the fastest
growing crypto markets in the world.
So let's let's ignore the fact that this
is literally a Trump company that is now
using his political position to make lots of
money through another government.
You know, nothing wrong
there. Right, guys? I mean, it's insane.
That's that's the whole point. That is your
fascist communist, anti capitalist overlap that's literally everywhere
you look. And it says the partnership comes
amid rising scrutiny of Donald Trump's financial ventures.
According to the New York Times, World Liberty
Financial,
remember the one that was basically a pump
and dump that just collapsed and still there,
but they just stole a bunch of money
to start.
High I don't mean that quite literally other
than the fact that people put money in
there thinking Trump was gonna give them millions
of dollars by supporting him, and it just
collapsed by 80% or whatever it ended up
being. You can look at it. And it
says, heightens a deepening overlap between Trump's political
role and his private business dealings. It's just
almost funny to me that they can't even
just be honest about this. You have to,
like, soft roll it. It is a literal
crime, guys. The idea that you can use
a personal company, like, look, to pretend like
your son runs it and he's not connected
to you is never been enough.
Historically,
it's just obvious to me how this is
being worked, and especially since Trump's overlap is
what made this happen. He's dealing with Pakistan.
So understand how clearly
criminal this is, but let's not pretend it's
any more so or less than the previous
administrations.
Other than the fact that my point would
be that it's, like, right in your face.
Typically, in the past, these things have been
done with ways that you can't really prove.
So that's about setting the new precedent.
Mister Trump's return to the White House has
opened lucrative new pathways for him to cash
in on miss his power, whether through his
social media company or new overseas and real
estate deals, you know, like Gaza.
But none of the Trump's family
Trump Trump none of the Trump family's other
business endeavors pose conflicts of interest that compare
to those
that have emerged since the birth of World
Liberty.
The firm, largely owned by the Trump family
corporate entity, has erased centuries old presidential norms,
eviscerating the boundary between private enterprise and the
government policy in a manner with a manner
without precedent
in modern American history.
It says in October 2024,
World Liberty Financial, the crypto platform, raised $300,000,000
in selling 20,000,000,000
WFI to FI tokens at point $0.15
each.
It now plans to launch a $1 stablecoin
pegged to the US dollar.
Like, we all didn't literally predict this being
your stable your central bank digital currency side.
This is the stablecoin version, privatized version that
is way worse than any CBDC you ever
thought was coming.
And I don't mean that because of this
one, but because that's what the stable private
coin version of that is. And it is
way worse. All the same problems,
way less accountability if if there ever was
in the first place. And we were telling
you, Catherine, IMA, everybody, Whitney, Derek, we've been
telling you this was coming. And this is
not new. We told you back when this
first started, and it is going to be
part of this game. But it says to
boost liquidity and support its US expansion, World
Liberty secured $25,000,000
investment from d f DWF Labs, a Dubai
based market deal. They're literally working with foreign
governments through this Trump company.
Earlier this month, the company's founders also met
with Binance's,
Zhao in Abu Dhabi. Zhao recently completed a
four month prison sentence after pleading guilty to
crypto fraud. But, hey. Let's work with Liberty
Financial because that's a good optics. Right? They
don't care is the point.
On Ondel Finance
sold a $130,130,000
coins to World Liberty and later donated $1,000,000
to Trump's organization
or his inauguration.
See how obvious that overlap is? The company
is backed by Peter Thiel. Of course, it
is. Because this is all much bigger than
it really than it seems.
But, guys, this is transparent.
Now look, like I said, you could make
arguments like Pelosi and funding and the investments
before the pandemic. This is just right in
your face.
And it's not it's not like they're saying,
well, they did it first, so we can
do it too. They're pretending that's not what's
happening while criticizing what they did.
Just people have blinders on about their chosen
ideologue That somehow it's okay when he does
it because he's fighting for freedom. It's just
it's childish.
Now I'll I'll include these for the talk
about ISIS care. I think it's important to
understand where that seems to be going, but
we'll keep an eye on this. I think
the important thing to think about is whether
what's now suddenly happening in Afghanistan
has to do with some other coercive movement
happening. Right? That ultimately,
Afghanistan
bucks the new plan for what they wanna
do in Afghanistan
and
possible coercion to get Pakistan to take action
against a group they were already take talking
about and Israel wanting the same, as well
as the rare earth minerals that take place
in Afghanistan that China is now pushing back
on. I've been saying this for years. So
is anybody who's paying attention.
The rare earth minerals, the the I mean,
yeah, I bet you I can even get
this to pop up.
There it is. Look at that.
We put this out
2017.
US to extract minerals from Afghanistan to defray
the cost of assistance.
In In other words, in other words, we're
going to rape your country because we stole
everything and destroyed it.
And now you owe us.
That's what they're saying. Defray the cost of
assistance, which destroyed the entire country, left the
terrorist group that you told you were fighting
in power, you know, but you get assistance.
And it's lithium, rare earth minerals, all from
the mountains.
Very public.
The point is that was one major issue.
And now that China, which we'll probably get
into another show, Trump is just posting about
it. He's all worked up about it, and
he's very much on the the weak position
in all this. They're not they're they're basically
doing what he's doing with tariffs, but on
rare earth minerals in a more of an
abstract way, but it's an easy way to
think about it. And he's all upset. How
dare he? They're gonna ruin everything, and they're
doing the same thing you're doing. The point
is clearly this is a huge issue. Suddenly,
now Afghans being pointed to. I think that
may be why. Or Venezuela, rare earth minerals,
lithium, and gold, and oil. You know? The
this is not an accident, guys. I think
there's an easy point to make here about
why this may be happening. You can consider
it
for
yourself.
So let's talk about Colombia and Venezuela, and
it's the same kind of overlap. I think
these are all happening for very clear reasons.
I mean, this one alone for just possibly
the point about being able to,
I mean, you can talk about the flotillas.
You can talk about a lot of stuff
Israel's done in international waters or international law.
This
seems to be changing that in a precedent
sense anyway.
Colombian president
Petro says the latest ship bombed by The
US off off Venezuela's coast was actually a
Colombian vessel, which wouldn't surprise me. These people
don't even seem to be verifying anything. There's
no evidence. And to this very moment,
excuse me, right before I started,
not a single piece of evidence.
Not one.
They have not presented anything. The US government
has not proven a single point about whether
they were committing
drug trafficking, let alone to the point that
you would call a
narcoterrorist. You understand this if they're selling drugs
in a boat, they don't become a narcoterrorist.
It's a whole category. It's about terrorism, not
just selling drugs. And this is them just
conflating it all because they need to be
able to take action like you're seeing. And
you can't do that with somebody selling a
bag of weed. Okay? This is something where
they're bombing people and without any due process
in international waters, there is no stretch of
the imagination
where that's legal, even if everything they said
was true.
They're trying to change that reality by just
pumping their chest and saying, challenge me. We're
saying it's okay. You challenge me. You see
what happens to your country tomorrow. You see
what suddenly starts happening within there when Israel
or or or sanctions or you know, this
is what they do. They coercively use their
power against everybody.
All of a sudden, you get tariffs, and
all of a sudden, it's the obvious reality.
And he says, Petro warns Trump now that
triggering a war scenario in The Caribbean.
This is no war against smuggling, he says.
It's a war for oil, and it must
be stopped by the world.
This is from Reuters.
He suggests that a vessel bomb was, by
The US was Colombian. It says, indications show
this is what he wrote on Twitter, that
the last the last boat bomb, bike, was
Colombian with Colombian citizens inside. He says the
aggression is against all of Latin America and
The Caribbean.
So
you could say he's lying, I guess, but
it's very, very basic straightforward statement.
Colombians
were on it. It's a Colombian ship. That's
an attack.
Simple. Right? Here's how they responded. Just showing
one their I guess their
again, it's not some the point to understand
is these people are out of their depth.
They don't know that, you know, the way
they respond is you is emotional, reactive, and
usually gives you more insight. And he says
The United States looks forward to president Petro
publicly retracting his baseless and reprehensible
statement so that we can return to a
productive dialogue on building a strong, prosperous future
for the people of The United States in
Colombia.
No. Couldn't you just say
incorrect?
It was not a Colombian boat? Sorry. We
you know, you'll you'll here's our evidence to
prove. The so what's reprehensible
about him saying you caught you bombed a
Colombian ship? This is just the way that
they're all acting. You're you you
claim righteous indignation and outrage and push back
lie lie deny, never say you're sorry. It's
what they're doing everywhere. It's not new. But
we've seen this hard slant by this kind
of Curtis Yarvin philosophy of the insider globalist
technocrats.
Overall,
you're simply
trying to act like it's insulting
when you haven't proven it in one way
or the other. And so he goes on
to say, the well, the official say Columbia
is an essential strategic partner
despite their differences. And the two share priorities,
regional security. See, there's an important overlap here.
I think he knows this, Petro, especially since
my point in the general sense about going
after Venezuela for narco trafficking, excuse me, trafficking.
Even though you can clearly prove that Colombia
is the largest exporter and and through another
ally of The United States, it's peanuts compared
to what you can prove from Colombia. They
don't care.
They're just lying to you. They're using this
for other purposes. But here's what he said.
Let the White House give us the information.
Oh, how crazy is that idea? How about
you prove what you're saying?
Give us the information about the people who
died
due to US missiles so we can see
if my information is unfounded.
Now does anybody think for one second they're
gonna do that?
Honestly, ask yourself. Are you right now going,
maybe? No. You know better. You know because
they're lying. That's my opinion. I can't prove
that. Very well could be that they do
have evidence and it'll come out tomorrow. That's
being objective.
The truth is, historically, just like we clearly
expected the Israeli government to not abide by
the ceasefire because they've done it every single
time before this.
So it's really not that eat hard to
see
it. He said, prove it. I'm saying you
killed the Colombian boat
Colombians on a Colombian boat. You're calling it
reprehensible and acting offended,
and that's it, I guess. So
saying you're offended is enough to ignore any
kind of
accountability
or legal process? I mean, where is this
supposed international community, guys? Well, clearly, they're showing
themselves to be quite inept when it comes
to the most obvious genocide we've ever seen.
So this seems to be quite a bit
smaller than that in a larger sense. So
I doubt anything will happen. I think what
we're recognizing, if you're paying attention, is that
they're just killing whoever they want for whatever
the reason is. We'll find out, I'm sure,
at some point. And it has nothing to
do with
I mean, it seems like whether it's even
Venezuela or drug trafficking. It seems like they're
trying to create a precedent for something much
larger, which I'm sure will piece together soon
enough. Either way, that's this terrorism, guys. Remember
when they were calling the Yemenis pirates? What
in the world do you call this?
Even if you can prove these are trafficking
drugs, there's international water. There's a legal reality
here that they don't are are they
the world police? I know they love to
see themselves that way. Trump swore famously before
you'd never allow that. Here we are. There
is just no and again, remember the argument
is that they're coming after Americans?
I mean, they already proved the first one
was turning around,
let alone how they could ever prove these
things were eventually going to The United States.
And then if that's the case, that somehow
that that is an immediate threat of killing
Americans with selling something you can't prove they
even have?
This is so flimsy. It's insane, and they're
doing it anyway.
But here's DC Drano, you know, with this
typically unintelligent mainstream alternative take. He says, I'm
confused. Yeah. We know, bud. We know. And
he says, Rand Paul doesn't think Trump can
drone strike narrow narcoterrorists coming to the American
well, he can't.
Funny. There's not like an if and or
but. You can't. It's illegal. There's no legal
reality there. These people who pretend they're at
the highest level of the media right now
are some of the dumbest people in the
room, or they don't care if they look
stupid to sell the agenda. He says, but
he did think Obama could drone strike terrorists
attacking the good countries.
Okay. Well, is this not what we always
talk about? So what's your point, Drano? That
because Rand Paul said it was okay then,
even though it's illegal then too, that it's
okay you do it now and it's illegal?
Or or that if Rand Paul thinks it's
okay, then it must be legal. Right? I
mean, this is the most childish take. It
is an uninformed,
subjective,
kind of manipulative take to be like,
see, they're hypocrites.
Okay. So then it's not illegal
because he's a hypocrite or it is?
I mean, I don't even know what he
thinks he's trying to make the point here,
but overall, you can read the article for
yourself seeing as how they never do that.
What's funny is he gives you a screenshot
of two different headlines
because that's circulating on Twitter. These people never
even looked at these things, I would argue.
And it says, Rand Paul Rand Paul defends
Obama's drone strike mistake. Drone mistake. Excuse me.
This one says Rand Paul stands by Obama
over drone attack. So it's the same article.
Here's one of them. Rand Paul defends Obama's
drone mistake. Now you can read it for
yourself. To argue that this is somehow
a hit like, the reality is clearly he
has been very aggressively against
the idea of these drone strikes, but weirdly
enough makes the case in this one that
because hostages were involved, 02/2015.
That therefore, this was a different circumstance and
that it was a mistake. But if you
read the article, in no way is Rand
Paul saying this is an okay circumstance for
us to for them to drone people without
evidence.
It's it's my point, I don't DCJ Draymond
probably doesn't even know that. He doesn't even
care. He's making a subjective Twitter files type
point to try to manipulate you into accepting
a a terrorist attack.
And Daniel McAdams says, why are you so
ignorant? Rand spent hours arguing against Obama droning
people, you idiot. You're referring to a completely
different instance. Now overall,
I don't even think he's confusing these with
today. What I think is the point is
he's trying to suggest that because he did
before,
now he's not. And I guess what? He's
a partisan?
Again, Lester Stevens said that's true. What does
that have to do with whether this is
an illegal act, you complete clown?
But that's all he's trying to do. It's
like Netanyahu coming out and going, well, you
didn't complain when Iraq was being killed. Well,
yeah. We all did. So your genocide's okay
because they did the one first? Yeah. You're
really intelligent.
It kills me, guys. These people, look at
the following these people have. I don't I
think it's artificial, quite frankly, but I just
don't believe Americans are that dumb. I really
don't. 2,300,000.
I think that's because of the Twitter files,
Elon Musk, weirdness around this, where these people
went from five followers to a million in
a matter of a couple of weeks. More,
you know, there's probably more in between there.
Overall,
this is Rand Paul pointing out on the
eighth, the constitution does not allow the president
to unilaterally blow up suspected drug smugglers.
That's a fact.
Are you disputing that, Drano, or are you
just putting out a hypocritical division to distract
people from that point? That's what their job
seems to be. But oh, okay. But let's
even take it a step further back and
say, okay. Well, he'll just say he does.
He's saying the constitution doesn't allow you to
unilaterally blow up drug smugglers. Okay. Let's go
back to the point about Obama and drone
striking.
Anybody honest should argue that the government should
not be legally allowed to murder somebody for
the drone without any process. That's always been
an honest person's stance in my opinion. But
overall,
are you now you're now you're comparing
an alleged
drug trafficker inside international waters without any evidence
to somebody that they're bombing on the other
side of the country
with, I guess, some level of process they
claim they can back up? Again, the point
is both of them are wrong, guys. But
to conflate the two just seems lazy.
What he's trying to do, I on I
argue, is trying to make Trump's actions against
these little skiffs in the water with no
evidence into some massive war on terror type
operation because I get the sense where this
is going. Whether Venezuela or Afghanistan or everything
else in Venezuela, they're this is building. I
think we sense that. And this is going
to be about something other, probably just distraction
if you want my honest opinion, but I
think rare earth minerals, occupation,
anything other than we're failing you in every
possible way.
Here's Max Blumenthal.
Chris you know, as always, Christine Amapour, these
people regardless of having some sometimes good takes
on certain topics. I asked Venezuelan's opposition leader,
she says, whether he would support Trump administration
overthrowing Maduro, and he told me, I would
support dismantling the drug cartels running my country.
So as Max points out rightly, this DC
based US government asset, which is what he
is, who has spent more time at Washington
Nationals games than in any meaningful political position
over the past five years is not Venezuelan's
opposition leader. These are I mean, now who
I'm let's just even say he's born and
grew up in Venezuela.
These are people who have been cultivated by
a foreign power.
It's not even a secret. Like Guaido, for
example, and we're just gonna go through this
yet again.
Clearly, there's an effort happening here, guys, but
there this is this is I mean, if
you thought they couldn't get it done before,
imagine this junior team trying to play it
out. Well, we talked about this back then.
This is posted on, this is posted on
the 01/10/2025.
We talked about this and this discussion
back on
right here. This was,
2024.
And the the title was bird flu emergency
declared,
Israel's Syria false flag, and the right
makes regime change great again.
Now this woman
was the person who wrote this letter
to Netanyahu
saying, to sum it up, please, please come
overthrow this government.
Not a joke. Come please regime change our
country
to Israel.
And she is the one that they're trying
to not only give a Nobel Peace Prize
to, but my point is that there's just
like the new guy, the they're just one
after another of fill in puppets being put
there by foreign powers.
Twenty twenty five Nobel Peace Prize winner, Maria
Karina Machado, I guess they she won it,
I guess, once wrote to Israeli prime minister
Ben Benjamin Netanyahu and asked him to help
overthrow Venezuela's Maduro.
2025, if you get a Nobel Peace Prize
Nobel Prize for trying to convince a foreign,
genocidal, apartheid state to attack your own country
and overthrow its leadership. That's the world we're
in.
This is Mencho Sint, low IQ corruption, giving
the Nobel Prize to Trump.
Top level corruption, giving the Nobel Prize to
a politician
to manufacture consent for Trump's regime change in
Venezuela.
See? So now you could argue that what
they're doing is setting the Sept to fall,
right, for the very intention of this justifying
what they like, this whether it's claiming that
Maduro stole the auction again or whatever it
is, this I agree with them. This feels
like this is coming together for the agenda
of the next effort against Venezuela.
And, really, if I had to pick one
thing, lithium, rare earth minerals. I think that's
a central point for the where the world
is going right now. And and Venezuela has
one of them, I think, one of the
largest unrealized lithium depots in the world.
That is going underground says Venezuela's president Maduro
says Israel's massacres in Gaza
are the most horrific genocide since Hitler.
Maria Corinna Machado,
Venezuela's struggle is Israel's struggle.
Right.
That is what the Venezuelan politician that supported
Israel in carrying out a holocaust
just won the Nobel Peace Prize.
That's the world we live in today.
Now we talked about this with Jimmy Dore
back in 2024,
another US led Venezuelan coup attempt.
And this was before. This was Musk, beginning
of Trump's administration,
Elon Musk, and manipulation of the right. The
point is that this has been going on
a long time. Remember this? We'll coup whoever
we want, deal with it. Asking about lithium.
That's what it was about.
Now we've talked about this many times. It's
important to understand how long this has been
coming.
Now this is what Peg Seth just put
out.
At the president's direction, the Department of War
is establishing a new counter narcotics joint task
force. Yeah. Because that's what we need, more
bureaucratic
groups. Do you need a joint task force
to enforce the law? No. You don't. No.
Do you need for a psyop you're committing?
No. You don't. But this is about more
and more and more. This is what it
looks like to
shrink the government. Keep telling yourself that. And
it says,
in the area of responsibility to crush the
cartels, you know, the cartels that you can
prove they're otherwise working with, or that the
DEA was just caught working with and funding
and allowing
I'll I'll actually see if I can grab
that real quick.
No. Dang it. I wonder I should I
should have grabbed that before.
That's not the one. The way you just
talked about the last show, it was
I forget the amount of money.
The point is that the the the major
article, I think it was Forbes.
Let me see if I can get it
real quick with that.
Nope.
Let's see.
There it is. Nice.
It's a this is a this is crazy
to me because of how obvious this all
is.
This was on August
19.
The DEA laundered $19,000,000
of cartel drug money into cash and crypto
and then did its best to gaslight so
they didn't actually get caught held accountable
for the cartels, guys.
Does anybody go to jail? No. Of course
not. That's not how this game is played.
And what he's saying is we're gonna do
it to crush the cartels that we're we're
working with in other context or the gangs
that we work with in other context or
all the games we're they're not doing that.
And he says stop the poison and keep
America safe. Not the vaccines, mind you, but
the drugs that they tell you you're not
allowed to have even though it's your choice
and your body, you can make your own
decisions.
I mean, it's the the idea that they
think we're gonna restrict something like recreational drugs
despite how obviously dangerous any of these things
can be,
which that's your choice with your adult body.
Right? But then tell you in other cases
that all these other shots are complete. Well,
no big deal. We're gonna you're able to
take all those, and it might as well
be cyanide.
See, you see the contradiction there? One's neither
really about freedom when it comes to the
other day. One's restricting it, and the other's
pretending it's freedom. And what they're doing is
allowing people to take something they know that
you your money to make that they designed
to kill people with. Overall,
the message is clear. He says, if you
traffic drugs towards our shores, we'll stop you
cold.
On this logic, do you realize this means
they can do anything anywhere in the world?
This is the war on drugs, war on
terror mashed together. They're saying that we can
bomb a ship anywhere in the world if
we simply argue it was about to bring
drugs to our shores.
I don't know how anybody with a brain
can make sense of that.
This is over the top.
But this is what we're seeing across every
conversation right now. They are building a situation
where they rationalize and justify whatever they want.
And the very people who claim you're fighting
for the rule of law and no one's
above the law are the ones destroying it
more than I've ever seen in my life.
And to be clear, this is not about
one left first left first right. It's been
an ongoing escalation that's now coming to a
head for whoever they have in power. Now,
with Cutter, it just becomes comically ridiculous to
me.
As Glenn rightly points out, I don't think
I grabbed that video either. Yeah. So as
Glenn rightly points out, this is just them
announcing
this this ridiculous thing. The gap between how
pro Israel well, first, it just says, I'm
also proud that today,
we're signing a letter of acceptance
to build
a Qatari Air Force facility
in Idaho.
Yeah. It's not a joke. Not the Babylon
Bee,
a foreign military
air force base in Idaho,
which might as well be Israel, by the
way, which I argue probably already exists. Or
that they're allowed to use these things as
they see fit, sort of like the legislation
that's already on the books on the 2024
that says that the IDF in in in
in a material sense is treated the same
as the US military in this country.
I don't know how that's not the clearest
thing in the world.
The gap between how the pro Israel MAGA
faction talks about Cutter
and the and Trump's treatment of Cutter could
not be wider.
This fact that faction constantly depicts Cutter as
an evil terror regime infiltrating US institutions.
Meanwhile, Trump loves Cutter, heaps praise on it,
and now lets them build a military base
in our country.
I mean, it's it's it's comical. It's sort
of like every other thing. And Epstein and
all these and people like Laura Loomer
seem to be freaking out about this, but
then simultaneously being like, we support Trump no
matter what, which is exactly what I expect.
But the pushback, it could be because
it does meant to appear like he's pushing
back while she'll never really challenge the people
she's why they're working for her, or that
Israel asked her to make that push because
it's something jumped in that doesn't make Israel
happy. I can't tell. Overall,
the idea that you could make the case
that, like, any of them for that matter.
I mean, first realizing that Qatar has been
used with through Israel to fund Hamas. It's
like, a lot of these things is an
extension of the same agenda. And over a
long period of time, they have, you know,
forced their way in, like with Egypt, like
with UAE, like with Qatar. They've created a
situation where the leadership is more amenable to
Israel than it is to their own people,
just like what we're dealing with in this
country and The UK for that matter. And
so now they're telling you we're gonna build
a foreign military base for that Muslim country,
which the fact that it's Muslim is irrelevant
to me. It's about the idea that we're
talking about a foreign power being able to
do so that is actively working with Israel.
Well, commit to genocide.
Does that matter to anybody?
As Dominic writes, cut The US Qatari air
facility deal in US soil in Idaho was
reportedly agreed to with the understanding,
as airports anyway, that The United States plans
to heavily utilize its airbase in Qatar for
a future attack on Iran.
Has anyone considered focusing on America for a
little while? This person writes. And he goes,
seriously though, we need to focus on our
own country, our own people.
Well, here's what Loomer put out.
Very interesting to me. This was today, I
think. Yep, she says, what the hell is
going on? Now realize they've been playing this
really late clumsy game of trying to make
it about Qatari influence in The United States,
which sure it exists. But to pretend like
you can even compare the two things to
Israel, it's just it's quite embarrassing. And people
laugh at them for it, but they do
it clearly because that's the agenda. It's supposed
to be like or even Luna comes out
and goes China and Charlie Kirk. I mean,
you're gonna get laughed at, guys. And that's
what Lewer pushed to.
You can't see the connected point, I think
you're trying not to.
What the hell is going on? She says.
Why are we try trying to train
more Muslims how to fly planes on US
soil? God, she's just such an idiot.
Like, I mean, so are you this reduces
down to you to Muslims in 09/11?
Like, she is just such an she is
back to square one. She pushes the Israel
narrative everywhere she goes.
That's not what happened on nine eleven. And
the point is overall
that you're talking about a base in this
country for the military from a foreign country.
That should matter in and of itself. The
idea that you make it about Muslims is
the way that this game is played by
people like her.
And she goes, Why are we encouraging more
Islamic infiltration? Of course, because literally everybody in
Qatar is Muslim and Islamic, right? No, not
true. She is just as always making it
about the one thing she, this is Israel's
agenda.
And also realize that the group she's pointing
to is a very clear ally of Israel
and The United States. And she goes,
infiltration of our country by the funders of
Hamas? Again,
it's possible she's too down to know that
she's wrong. That wouldn't surprise me. But we
must realize by now how clear this has
been on the record.
This was after this October 9 from Haraz.
From it from this is from Netanyahu in
2019.
Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of
a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas
and transferring money to Hamas.
Very simple.
You've played this many times. And so to
claim that they're funding well, that's Israel through
Qatar. It's on the record, and she actively
hides that. Sorta like when she tried to
capture, you know, hijack the conversation of the
Azov movement. And what was the one thing
she left out of the conversation?
Israel funding the Azov movement. What a coincidence.
That's what her job seems to be. And
she goes, this is very bad for our
national security. That is? Yes. I agree, but
not for the reasons you're trying to make
it into. Qatar is one of the largest
finders of Islamic terror. Okay. Well, Stephen say
that's true.
Trump literally is supporting them, allowing them to
make these deals and building this base. Are
you still gonna support Donald Trump? The answer
is yes, and I'll prove it to you
next. But she goes, now they're being rewarded
by getting Qatar Air Force Base in Idaho.
It's outrageous. We're allowing the Islamic enemy to
gain so much ground. To her, anybody Muslim
or Islamic
is a terrorist.
That's it.
And that's ridiculous. It's stupid. I wouldn't say
that about Zionists. I wouldn't say that about
Christians or Israel or anything.
Because I can prove to you that there's
even somebody who calls himself a Zionist who
does not think this should be happening.
It's just about being objective, and her point
is to try to make it as broad
and watered down and subjective as possible because
that's where these manipulators
live.
I will never support this.
Not true. Here she is right after this.
Oh, this one first, actually. So on the
tenth, she says, never thought I'd see republicans
give terror financing Muslims from Qatar, a military
base on US soil so they can murder
Americans.
I don't think I'll be voting in 2026.
I promise you she will. I cannot be
in good conscious make any excuses for the
harboring of jihadis. Now they're all jihadis apparently
too. See, I mean, this is what bad
journalism looks like. And she goes, oh, really?
Just bigotry. And she says, this is where
I draw the line. Okay.
I was I the let's watch the clip.
I think it's right to post this, but
the fact that Trump had just said this
so many years ago, and now he's supporting
him. That matters. Of Qatar,
unfortunately,
has historically been a funder of terrorism
at a very high level.
And in the wake of that conference,
nations came together
and spoke to me
about confronting Qatar
over its behavior. Just so it's clear again,
in case you missed the point, what they're
pointing to is what Israel's facilitated through them
by and large. Not that there's not things
you could point to that's unique to Qatar,
but what we're really getting at, because that
was kind of the narrative. Right? They the
idea was to sort of outsource that just
like they did with the Palestinian Authority or
any other kind of overlap. It's all Israel
extension, in my opinion, anyway.
So we had a decision to make.
Do we take the easy road or do
we finally take a hard but necessary action?
We have to stop the funding
of terrorism.
I decided,
along with
secretary of state
Rex Tillerson
Funny how rapidly these things change. Right? Then
then it was somebody else then it was
somebody else. Generals and military people.
The time had come to call
on Qatar
to end its funding.
Okay.
So now we're talking about a this government
having a base where they can fly freely
in and out of The United States and
use this airspace to do other things.
I mean, is that America first? Is that
even remotely what any American, I mean, anywhere
is asking for? No. But that's what Israel
wants.
And that's all that seems to matter to
this administration or any of the rest of
them. So
rightly pointing this out, but here's what she
says later in the day.
President Trump's amazing man. I proudly voted for
him for three years. Then goes, but but
if he allows Islam to gain ground in
our country, all of our hard work and
sacrifice will be wiped out by genocidal Muslims
who seek to impose Sharia law in America
and destroy the West. No. That's Israel. That's
the that's the radical Islam funding that they
create to drive it in to make the
case for what they're doing. There are people
that believe this stuff, but the game of
Sharia law in America, that's an obvious obvious.
There is not a single legal reality of
that happening anywhere in the country other than
narratives floated and people saying it on Twitter.
It's unconstitutional.
Doesn't I mean, legally, it would be very
easy to make the case that you just
I mean, it's just so embarrassing. Even even
in Dearborn, Michigan, by the way, they're all
just trying to gaslight you about this. Islam
equals death cult. No. It's just like any
other ideology, and there's bad and there's good.
You guys are children. But
she says something different, doesn't she? If he
allows Islam to gain her good you know
why? Because she got so much pushback from
the team sport politics players that she
that she needs to feel like she's important.
She comes out and goes, Well, I love
him and Trump's great, but if he goes
bad with this, I'm not gonna support him.
See how different that is? So other than,
This is it. I can't vote for him
anymore. I'm not voting next time.
You're now going, Well, I'm gonna watch, and
if he if he goes wrong with this,
I'm not gonna support him. You will too.
And you will get the news reporting blindly
because Israel tells you to. That's what's happening.
My opinion, completely. But I just think it's
painful to watch these people try to act
like they're pushing back. I mean, this is
the equivalent I mean, what's a good overlap?
Like, just the fact that what she talks
about and having Trump do this is
pretty embarrassing for her, isn't it? Because one,
this should be a hard line to where
she's like, okay. I can't support him anymore.
Well, she does anyway because she's a complete
why don't you go eat some more dog
food online and make another $100? I mean,
this this person is if there was
any objectivity, people who are completely lacking principle
and integrity shouldn't have any position.
But that's not the world we live in.
Well, let's see. I'll play the other video
just in case we missed the point about
how Israel funds Hamas, and they used Cutter
to do it
and had at least up until October 7.
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.
It's still crazy to me how these things
can be so public and still we have
to debate these things or or the massage
the sixty minutes video where they're literally telling
you how they fake create fake companies to
manipulate supply chains and and manipulate business and
and create terrorist attacks, but we have to
be we you know, can't say that. You
might be racist. It's just it's mind blowing
where we are. With things like that. Right?
You don't bring in $1,400,000,000
in cash in a place where you literally
can't buy aid. That's why it's shipped in
and claim you gave them that for aid.
It's pretty ridiculous, guys. The world we live
in is
cartoonish today.
Gen x girl points out Israel agents claim
the Qatar lobby pays more to US elections
than Israel,
except they're lying, and she breaks it down
pretty easily. Where she re researched it with
Track APAC
and basically points out that,
Farah and non Farah lobby money for Israel
and Qatar, the lobby, the Israel lobby is
three times what Qatar is. And two thirds
of the Israel money is not Farah registered,
and that's the way they play that game.
And it says far registration registrants can't don't
cannot donate to elections. It's illegal.
And that's why we APAC,
all of it. All of these things should
be illegal. And and they really are, if
we understand the reality of it. Look at
that. So funny how these things work.
It looks like it looks like I'm not
following her, but I am.
It's just funny. It's it's so manipulative. I
guarantee you there's these things, like, the the
way that they channel these is so people
don't find the right people. And they it's
blocking information. Why do you think they stop
allow you know, why they down and they
suppress hashtags and why they suppress links used?
They're trying to avoid you from being able
to keep momentum going and collect back and,
you know, oh, that hashtag. Let's see who
else said that. It's just it's suppressed today.
Now talking about Charlie and this overlap, I
wanna give you a couple of updates of
Charlie Kirk. Then we're gonna get into Israel,
Antifa,
domestic terrorism,
and talk about the ceasefire conversation to end.
Now
I just thought that was interesting. This is
from the Mirror USA, Turning Point USA in
turmoil after leaked Charlie Kirk text. Now you
already know all this. The point is that
they you know, there was a lot I
mean, an insane amount of pushback
about every claim around Israel having nothing to
do with Charlie Kirk. And then every single
point
seems to continue to get more and more
proven, including the text messages that make the
core point that he felt threatened by his
donors, the Jewish donors that were trying to
give him money. And he felt threatened by
them. And that, you know, they people called
you such a how dare you say those
things? You're so racist.
Just like every other like, talking about rape
in October 7. How dare you? And we
proved they were lying. And this very day,
the point
is that Turning Point USA, as you saw,
later came out as this right here and
said, those are real.
And I guess caused a lot of uncomfortable
situations for people like like Misfit Patriot who
came out and was like, you prove that,
I'll give you all the shekels that Israel
gives me. Like, try to pick a joke
about it and made himself look like a
fool. Not very difficult for him. But overall,
I think what we're seeing
is that
I mean, to the point to where they
have to sort of admit these things, it
is very real and all let's cut to
the chase, the point about the larger conversation
of Charlie's evolving opinion
about all of that. His
all but a few points have been proven.
How does that not become a larger conversation?
Knowing how this went down, knowing what's happened
afterward, that the funding he refused is suddenly
now coming through, you got Ben Shapiro and
these
hardcore Zionists who he was pulling away from
now basically leading the show.
It seems insane, but it's just like you
have to acknowledge how clear all this is.
And so with this last point and the
the revelation around that, I just wanted people
to reflect on this
and what this should show you. If you
if that is the case, and I believe
it is, the evidence around it, what that
connects to, the world I mean, independent and
partisan,
it's very dark, but it's important.
And it speaks to the larger control over
this country that is
everywhere.
Now on that note, here's another example of
something that is being even further fleshed out.
This is, as Lauren Witsky is pointing out,
approximately thirty six hours after Charlie's Charlie posted
that he was leaving the pro Israel movement,
he had a meeting with rabbi Wolicki,
Josh Hammer, who we mentioned in those text
chains, and others so they could
refine
Charlie's talking points on Israel.
The rabbi said he was combative during the
meeting.
All this stuff has been denied up until
now. It's all starting to come out. And
that Charlie was stating starting to annoy people
in the Jewish community
when he questioned
October 7 and taking America first position on
issues. Right? Because America first is not Israel
first. How dare
you? That's not a secret, guys. And if
you care to understand how deep that goes
in the supposed America first movement, you you
if you haven't seen it by now, it'll
shock you. And I think that's the one
of the crux the in this point, it's
the crux of the issue. So overall,
I just want people to reflect on this
with what he's saying here.
People were were damn near ostracized for saying
what he's admitting to right here. And now
looking at the big picture, guys, I don't
know how you don't consider that this thumb
that something was done to him because of
this evolving point. I mean, the Tyler Robinson
point and how completely like, what's going on
with that? Are we just pretending is this
just Butler all over again? Just brush it
aside?
Oh, he was a lefty crazy guy. Well,
that's never been proven. He hasn't even admitted
he was guilty.
I I mean,
the very people who love to be were
rebels fighting the deep state are the people
that are damn near covering this up right
now
and acting like they're fighting for Charlie, by
the way. Here's what he said.
Preparing for his campus tour, he decided that
he wanted to have a meeting. Josh Hammer
was on the call. You know Josh. And
I was on the call and a couple
of Charlie's staff to talk through Israel issues.
He was he was really grappling with these
issues. I know that he's all That statement
alone.
The idea that he was grappling like, that's
not him hardcore
Israel cited
despite how he'd always been. You could watch
the videos, the many of them in the
last couple of weeks where he was starting
to go, what's going on? I'm not even
allowed to speak about Israel. How is that
possible?
So grappling is real.
So having meaningful conversations with people who are
anti Israel, and that's and that's fine, and
he's gonna do that. And that's all part
of who Charlie is. He's gonna expose himself
to every to everything.
I remember right after October 7, I was
a little concerned about some of the things
he was saying afterwards, and I wasn't so
emotional. But I realized Charlie was looking at
a lot of the Israel America stuff through
the America First lens. I was looking at
it through the, my family's in Israel. My
son's joining the
IDF. Okay. Think about this for a second.
So outwardly,
Charlie Kirk and all the rest of them
are just like it's it's printed on everything
they are. America first, America first. Right? MAGA.
Okay. Then why would he have any other
impression?
Ask yourself that. Why would this guy be
of the mind? Why would he be unaware
that he's coming through an America first lens?
Why would he be have to kinda make
sense of that?
It's a good point to ask yourself, guys,
because I think the reality is a lot
of this underlying issue is Israel first framed
as America first. And, really, to some of
them, it ends up being the same thing,
but not what you think when you're thinking
America first.
I was looking at it through that lens,
and I was very And just your Jewish
national identity. The fact that he was meeting
with you to Jewish national identity, that's Zionism,
and that's not a real thing, guys. We're
talking about being
Judaism as a religion and Zionism is national.
You're Israeli. The game they play of conflating
them is every day beginning to be broken
down and called out by Jewish people all
over the world. Orthodox Jews from everywhere in
the world standing up and telling you Zionism
does not represent us.
Refine his talking points. I assume there was
a lot of pushback. When when, you know,
that that reporter asked me what the mood
of the meeting was, and I said it
was combative. He was he was really grappling
with these issues. Combative. He was getting pulled
in different directions, and I understand that. There's
also within him a very faithful bible believing
evangelical Christian. If that wasn't there anchoring him
with a positive orientation towards Israel, he undoubtedly
would have been much further
along into the anti Israel camp with Think
about that.
The idea that somehow because he has Christian
beliefs that therefore he like, that's what kept
him anchored. Like, the the idea that they
just decide to use the name Israel after
Britain gives The UK gives them with the
Belfort declaration land that was not theirs.
In what world do you then go, oh,
that means that's the bible then?
Like, the I mean, you can even it's
not like there was some kind of magical
moment where something happened. They literally goes, here's
a piece of paper. We're giving you something
that's not yours. And then, by the way,
for history, we'll prove to you that they
actually decided three before that even happened, there
was other locations they were considering, other I
mean, this was not some biblical moment. Okay?
They decided to use the word Israel because
the game was to manipulate these religions.
You could look at Herzl's information. You can
understand the reality of his atheism, the reality
of his shockingly and openly anti Jew
position. It's just crazy to me. So what
they're trying to say is that be they
this is how they use Christianity to manipulate
people for a Zionist outcome. Whether he knows
that or not, that's the reality of it.
Whom he shared a lot of opinions and
a positive orientation towards Israel. He undoubtedly would
have been much further along into the anti
Israel camp with whom he shared a lot
of opinions, and that's where he he annoyed
people in the Jewish community with some of
the criticisms he had for Israel.
Yeah. How dare he criticize the state of
Israel, which has not it's you know, the
idea that criticizing the state action is somehow
against Jewish people is the dumb thing they're
always put pushing. That think about how ridiculous
that is.
Can can they overlap? Sure. Maybe you're racist
for that. The point is it doesn't matter.
If you're talking about
Netanyahu,
conducting policy that caused the bombing and killed
people, and you're going, I think that's a
crime. For someone to say you hate Jewish
people should make you just go where
it it's confounding.
Doesn't make any sense, but they they've successfully
used that Zionism
to
shut people down. And now, I mean, more
than I've ever seen in this country, at
a time that's never been more
seen or obvious. Right? So the time when
that ploy has never been more transparent,
they're pushing it more than I've ever seen.
How does that make sense?
Very
interesting.
Desperate, I would argue. So Murray points out,
you need to ask yourself,
why is Jack Posobiec repeatedly, relentlessly
pushing the corrupt FBI's laughable narrative while completely
ignoring the right to due process and presumption
of innocence for Tyler Robinson.
You realize at this very moment that's the
case. This has not gone through process. There's
not been a court. He hasn't been found
guilty.
So there is no world in which we
go, we know he's guilty or anything for
that matter,
And we know what they're
doing. He goes, this look organic to you?
Look at this.
And I I believe that you there's more
than four times. But these are four separate
times and four separate days saying, a leftist
I saw a leftist murder Charlie Kirk, and
I saw them celebrated.
Identical over and over and over. That's my
point about the way they conduct this propaganda.
One, you don't know he's a leftist. No
one's proven that. And you don't know he's
guilty outside of the claims that's been circulating.
Now it could be. The evidence points that
way. But are you of the mind, Jack
Posobiec, that the government never lies about these
things? Or Or is it only because your
team is in power? Or maybe because you
have a government connection to psychological operations? Who
knows?
Come on, guys.
I mean, you from an objective, honest point,
you have to laugh at this. But this
is the team. This is what they do.
He's also involved with this psych this PSIOP
Antifa meeting they just had. We'll talk about
that.
But don't forget, here's what Alex Jones said.
This was before they had even caught Tyler
Robinson.
I just I don't know how you can't
I don't know how people gain reputation or
continue to hold any positive reputation when things
like this can be pointed to.
Oh, you can grab that real quick. Thought
I'd add that. It's real very quick, but
it's just worth hearing. You know, the the
emotional screaming argument that we know
something that nobody till till this very moment,
we don't know for sure,
which is that the left did this. The
left are coming. The left are after us.
You just can't be if you're not honest
about this, then you're deliberately like, you're not
honest. Let's put it that way. If you
can't look at this clip and acknowledge what
he did here was
embarrassing, that should be called out. Even if
you think everything he's ever done and ever
will do is great, you have if you
can't acknowledge that this was ridiculous, then I
think you're being dishonest about it because this
deserves to be ridiculed.
Democrats
just killed Charlie Kirk today. They're desperate. They're
losing. They wanna intimidate you and me and
everybody else. The democrats just killed Charlie Kirk
today. They're desperate. They're losing. They wanna intimidate
you and me and everybody else.
Right. Because that's not incitement at all. And
I would never argue that his statements, regardless
of whether he was telling you to murder
people, are the respond that people doing those
things are his legal responsibility.
I don't think that. You could argue he's
responsible,
but legally responsible?
Never. In no world is somebody else's actions
your responsibility.
That's the game they're all playing. Just like
the left, they are the right side of
the same game, guys. They're creating a situation
where they can go after whoever they want,
bomb whatever ship they want, wherever they want
because you're an evil, wealthy terrorist,
or whatever narrative it is tomorrow or or
what was yesterday. Right? It's just so transparent.
He pretended to call these things out for
quite a long time, or maybe he did
and he changed his mind. I don't know.
It's wild to me.
This is at a time when they didn't
know.
They hadn't there was the guy in the
blue shirt, and they were, we know it,
boomer, lefty. We know even then, you didn't
know that guy was a lefty. This is
what they were told to say, or this
is what they knew would benefit them, and
they all rushed out to be the first
one to yell, breaking with 17 red lights
to go, we do it. Even though we
still don't.
How do you maintain a reputation after something
like that? Because we live in a gaslight
gaslit artificial reality.
Here's Tim Poole, who came out on the
seventh, by the way, and says,
this is Candace Owens who's been saying this,
I mean, since the moment this happened,
saying,
what the f this is going what the
f is going on? This is crazy. Candace
says Charlie expressed fear that he was going
to be killed just before he was murdered.
I said, where the f have you been?
Oh, that's right. Gaslighting.
Right? So I I just want you to
think about the fact that people will come
out,
you know okay. The the Tim Pools of
the world and people in this position,
in my opinion, are not honest about this,
have a very clear agenda, whether it's just
profiteering,
and will come out
about something like this, who which they've been
avoiding
when they when it becomes too big to
ignore and do something like that. And then
never talk about it again. But that way,
they got it. We brought it up back
then, and we cared about it. Are you
gonna pretend that you don't know he's that
he doesn't know about this conversation that's been
swirling around everything for the last of course,
he does. He's been ignoring it. He's been
lie he's been gaslighting people about it.
Just pointing these things out. Here is Tucker
Carlson
coming at the other direction.
Question them. Question them all. Regardless,
I I think a lot of these people
are in many ways building clout for the
next lie. But nonetheless, what he says here,
I agree with. I deserve I think it
deserves to be pointed at. He just turned
the gun around is what this person writes.
You can listen to it.
You hope that Charlie Kirk's death won't be
used
by
a group we now call bad actors
to create a society that was the opposite
of the one he worked to build.
You hope that. You hope that a year
from now,
the turmoil we're seeing in the aftermath of
his murder won't be leveraged to bring hate
speech laws to this country. And trust me,
if it is, if that does happen, there
is never a more justified moment for civil
disobedience than that ever, and there never will
be. Because if they can tell you what
to say,
they're telling you what to think, there is
nothing they can't do to you because they
don't consider you human. They don't believe you
have a soul.
A human being with a soul, a free
man, has a right to say what he
believes, not to hurt other people, but to
express his views.
Exactly.
I agree with everywhere he said.
The problem, though,
the problem, though, is that that's what's already
happening. Now I would take it a little
more seriously if he was suddenly going, that's
what this administration's already doing, and we have
to fight it.
But he doesn't.
Right? So, you know, I I mean, I'll
take what I can get. I'll still point
to it. I don't trust him. I don't
trust the the intent, but I'm glad he's
pointing at it because a lot of people
who would otherwise not even consider are going,
yeah. Good point. And then look at what
Bondi's doing and going, okay. Isn't that exactly
the yes. Yes. That's exactly what she's doing.
Speech and then there's hate speech.
And there is no place, especially now, especially
after what happened to Charlie in our society.
My position,
is that even hate speech should be completely
and totally allowed in our country. The most
disgusting speech should absolutely be protected.
And it's not a viewpoint that is held
by the left. The ACLU used to hold
this viewpoint. The American Civil Liberties Union, they
used they sued
so that legitimate Nazis could march through downtown
Skokie. You remember this? Yeah. And you guys,
I've told you many times that was the
ADL.
Like, you could easily prove Skokie, and specifically,
it was Mordecai Levy, I believe, was his
name, was an agent for Israel who got
caught marching as a Nazi. Nothing new. Same
stuff we're dealing with today. But just remember
this, guys. Remember that this is exactly what
they're already doing. From now,
the turmoil we're seeing in the aftermath of
his murder won't be leveraged to bring hate
speech laws to this country.
Now especially after what happened to Charlie in
our society.
My position,
is There's free speech and then there's hate
speech.
It's pretty simple.
So I'm glad he's pointing at it, though.
Overall, we can see this happening, and it's
being used in a lot of ways to
to drive in the agenda.
You know, it's it's funny because it's from
the right. These it's
honest ones anyway. It you could you you
made the same case for the government. Largely
the left, I guess, for the way you're
looking at it, but that you can see
the construct. You can see the way that
this works.
Never let a good crisis go to waste.
Now suddenly,
can't be because, I guess, you don't wanna
challenge the feeling that this may be all
leading to some conclusion that will win the
day. That's hope, guys. I wanna hope too,
but I don't let hope cloud the obvious
in front of me. Now just to point
that again, here's Laura Loomer out here making
cases about all this stuff and freeze this
is what she says. It's the same thing
Tucker was just pointing to.
She says, this is not freedom of speech.
This is glorification of violence, and it should
be illegal.
It's incitement.
Well, what the guy is saying, we showed
you last time, all he's saying with a
mic with a microphone in the middle of
the street, we got Charlie in the neck
and laughing about it. Yeah. That may that
may drive you crazy, and I think it's
disgusting for him to do that. A human
being. He's got a family.
But it's free speech. And the moment that
people like Loomer go, accept that because I'm
outraged, you're a snowflake just like the left.
You are exactly what you claim to condemn
when it is in your interest.
It's just it's just a principle, guys. I
think it's disgusting. But is he committing a
crime? No. He's making fun. And and to
be very honest, he's trolling you and he's
winning. The whole game that the left can't
meme and they can't troll. Well, you guys
are currently the vulnerable ones and showing every
day that the left is trolling the hell
out of you. And, you know, but in
many cases, now you've got a power structure
willing to go after them for making a
joke, and then you're proving the point in
reverse, like many honest people have been calling
out the entire time.
Well, let's not forget, though, hate speech is
exactly what Trump told you he would be
fighting for,
to allow that to be used against you.
Here are clips from Trump's
campaign trail 2024
with Israel flags behind him, which makes no
sense. Trump openly states that Israel used to
control the US Congress and said that it
will again win these presidents right there in
the last video. Or the many times where
he says that you can't say these things,
or we're gonna get rid of the Jew
haters from the country. Many of which just
wave a pal wave a Palestinian flag and
have no hatred toward Jewish people. But they
say that, and so they'll he's telling you
that you can't say these words. You can't
do this or say that about Israel,
or we'll go after you.
And he's proving it, as well as the
point about the flag or hate speech and
the Internet.
A thousand different examples of Trump being hypocrite.
It's not unique to just him. It's not
a partisan thing alone.
Truth is, they've been doing this for a
long time, and I wish people like Tucker
would truly call it out because it might
actually make a difference right now. Now in
regard to the media overlap before we get
into this weird panel they just had, DropSite
News reports that, CNN's Van Jones
is among 16
mainstream
journalists.
This is on top of the 50 and
50 states one Israel thing with the 250
members of Congress
or the $7,000
proposed almost a million dollar budget for funding
independent media. Now you've got 16 mainstream journalists.
Yeah. Look, the the trope of Zionists
controlling the media, what a lie. Right? Of
course, the game is they wanna make it
about the Jew the Jewish religion, and that's
where they conflate the thing so you can
make you right. The point is, it's not
debatable.
The
Zionist
power
structure governments, which is not just Israel, by
the way,
very clearly have influence over policy, over media.
It's not a secret.
And see, if they can make people think
that means you hate just hate a person
because of the religion, see how easy that
is to shut down an obvious, provable conversation
because people are terrified to be called that?
Yeah. It's worked for a long time. It's
not working anymore.
16 journalists, if you wanna call them that,
including two New York Times reporters serving as
mentors in a new journalism fellowship explicitly created
to help Israel win its information war. They
are literally co opting this stuff everywhere, from
Barry Weiss and her new fake platform to
Larry Ellison or the Ellison family in in
TikTok and or CBS News or I mean,
you name it. Every single one across the
board, you can consolidate into a corner of
a very few people in one hand that
all blindly support Israel.
And you're now watching those changes in CBS,
in other platforms, literally watching day by day.
Drop sites,
how do you say that?
Reports that Jackie Karsh, who launched the fellowship
after October 7, said it was her way
to fight to, her way to shift the
narrative for Israel's favor. It's not even hiding,
guys. This is very clear. Citing a call
to fight on the battlegrounds of academia, law,
business media, not true, false, but just what
Israel needs us to say.
To them, it means the same thing, I
argue. Anyway, the simple point is to recognize
that it's
everywhere. Independent, mainstream alternative,
mainstream media, government,
academia,
corporations,
Peter Thiel, Alex Karp. I mean, guys, it's
just everywhere you look.
Now, this is an interesting one. I this
wasn't this isn't it's a little bit out
out of disjointed, but I wanted them to
show this. I thought this was really interesting.
So the point to me is the infiltration
really in Israel and this very, very, very,
very obvious Zionist, Matt Miller.
This is fascinating to me for two reasons.
One, he says the the quiet part out
loud, and he always is. He's a he's
a very clear fascist. He's very much of
that mindset, and I think he's proudly if
it comes down to it.
And he says plenary authority, which is important
to understand the the name. We'll get through
in a second. But it's more to me
about the way CNN
not only allows this moment,
edits it out.
Two so two things on that point is
that, really, if CNN want if CNN
left media were out to get him every
single day, which in some levels, that's the
case, but overall, I think media, government are
in one direction.
So the point is that CNN, if we're
told the narrative they're hating against Trump, had
an opportunity to play a video where Matt
Miller kind of just spaced out for a
minute, but also play the term that people
would then go, oh my god. He's a
fascist.
And instead, they cut both those things out.
How do you make sense of that? Wouldn't
this be a low hanging fruit opportunity to
go after the guy they claimed to hate?
It should be.
Turns out they're willing to censor or rather
to cultivate these things for the benefit of
the Trump administration.
CNN.
Make sense of that. Insurrection.
Does the administration still plan to abide
by that ruling?
Well, the administration
filed an appeal this morning with the ninth
circuit. I would note the administration won an
identical case in the ninth circuit just a
few months ago with respect to the federalizing
of the California National Guard. Under title 10
of the US code, the president has plenary
authority.
Has
Steven?
So for the podcast,
he's blinking. Steven Miller's blinking. He's still there.
He stopped in his own mid sentence.
So I don't know really how you could
argue that he lost connection. So he's there.
He didn't lose. He's blinking. Somebody's in his
ear.
I agree. That's that's the only logical point
here. Somebody at that. Pause. Don't say that.
We'll start with just a little bit back
and you'll see. Title 10 of the US
code. The president has plenary authority.
Has
Steven?
Hey, Steven. Can you hear me?
White House deputy chief of staff for policy,
Steven Miller. My question was whether the administration
still plans to abide by that judge's order,
restricting any National Guard troops from being sent
to Oregon?
Well, the administration will abide
by the ruling insofar as it affects the
covered parties,
but there are also many other options the
president has to deploy federal resources and ass
source assets under the US military to Portland.
But I was making the point that under
federal law, section,
title 10 of the US code,
the president has the authority anytime he believes
federal resources are insufficient
to federalize the National Guard to carry out
a mission necessary for public safety. So it's
important to understand that in Portland, ICE officers
have been subjected
to over a 100 nights of terrorist assault,
doxing, murder threats, violent attack, and every other
means imaginable.
So the obvious point is that he did
not say that.
Right? So interesting nonetheless. It's nothing provable, but
I do think it's interesting to consider
why one that that wouldn't be used by
CNN
or criticize. It was cut out. Here's what
it says in the Seattle Times article, and
this is the title is, and the conspiracy
theory started flying. Well, the simple point is
that that that if you read it for
yourself, he did he paused.
There is no real point of why he
did that. They just went back and started
again, and he removed that term. Term. That's
what happened. And it says plenary authority is
a legal term that effectively means limitless power.
It's not hard to see what happened here,
guys. That's a that is saying the quiet
part out loud. It says the Trump administration
has invoked the term at least once before
in a legal argument as to why the
president should be allowed to rapidly deport Venezuelan
migrants under the Alien Enemies Act. A federal
appeals court ruled against the administration in that
case last month. I just find that fascinating.
One another point is the regard to Israel
and the influence.
Farah filings reveal how Israel quietly embeds itself
in The US media ecosystem through layers of
contractors, DDG Geopolitics.
One little known firm, Targeted Communications Global LLC,
plays a crucial role in the subcontractor
shaping American news coverage
and ad campaigns on behalf of the is
of Israel's foreign ministry and tourism ministry.
Says in March 2025, targeted communications registered under
Farah as working under direction and control of
the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
but receiving a paycheck via
SKDK,
which is was that SKDK Knickerbocker, a powerhouse
USPR firm. Their task? Coordinated outreach to Fox,
CNN, m NBC, ABC, Newsmax, and dozens of
journalists to amplify Israel's message. So I pointed
a US firm, and they just I would
argue anyway.
As opposed to this big direct extension of
Israel foreign ministry,
the surface is pointed to a PR element,
and so that's why it becomes a not
a a that having a foreign registered agent
influence media directly onto platforms
is obviously not what we pretend is happening.
I argue with CNN and ABC and that
they pretend isn't happening either. And since by
August 2025, they added a new contract with
Israel's Ministry of Tourism.
This time, subcontracted
through Havas Media Group USA. Remember all these
names, by the way? Their role, communications and
media relations for a multimillion dollar Israel ad
campaign targeting Americans.
It's like it's not even I mean, you
point these things out and of in and
of themselves prove the point we're making.
And yet people wanna call you racist for
having an issue with it. It's not because
they're even the overlap of Judaism, whether or
not that's even the point, Israeli. But it's
not even about Israel. It's about any foreign
entity having this ability.
And this is
why they're losing control of this narrative because
people like us and the way we're framing
this is clearly
breaking over the conversation.
This is but with no direct contract with
Israel.
Instead, this is what I was saying, money
and instructions flow through this company giving Israel
plausible distance so they can pretend it's totally
not a literal foreign agent.
This structure, Israel Havas SKDK, Targeted Communications US
Media, lets Israeli ministries flood American media and
digital platforms with coordinated messaging without appearing to
directly control it. It's a subcontracting shell game
designed for influence, not transparency.
These filings matter. They show how small PR
firms function as operational nodes in a much
larger Israeli influence architecture. And that wouldn't be
allowed if the US government didn't see it
and ignore it.
Overall, this is just like the lobbying game.
They pretend like it's totally not just direct
it writing of the politicians,
and then that Israel can do that through
US companies like APAC.
Guys, this is a cartoon. Everyone can see
what's happening.
Your governments know that you see it. They
don't care.
It's right on the surface of the conversation.
Here, Gen X girl points out, and this
is going into the next point as well.
This is insanity, she says.
The United States president is considering using the
Insurrection Act based on stories by Israel paid
influencers,
literally one of the primary ones like Cam
Higbee.
We've talked about this guy throughout October 7
forward, and the guy is a complete blind
Zionist reporter. And he says he went to
Israel March, paid trips to Israel, Netanyahu influencer
meetings. He's a he's a diehard supporter of
this game. Far registration shows Israel paid $900,000
for US influencers from July to December.
Who is inviting these foreign agents to the
White House? Why is US domestic policy being
directed by Israel influencers?
You already know the answer to that, guys.
But Hag Higbee is just one of them.
Let's go through some of this. And it's
I mean, it's kind of embarrassing for a
lot of reasons.
But as Just a Thought points out,
this is Cam Habby again, the future of
journalism in the country is bright. Oh, how
embarrassing.
I mean, some of these people are absolute
children.
And she says, these are not journalists. These
are social media influencers who are paid by
special interest groups to push specific narratives. This
is not a real meeting about a real
issue. This is a PR stunt about manufactured
issue that is being used to label dissidents
as terrorists. 100%.
So let's talk about that. Here's what Pam
Bond in the White House put out on
the ninth.
Make no mistake. I'll play the video for
you.
Antifa is a radical terrorist organization that explicitly
calls for the overthrow of the US government,
law enforcement authorities, and our system of law.
Under the Trump administration, Antifa's days are over.
Okay? Well, first,
I guess they don't know the Constitution, especially
since it's literally enshrined the Constitution that Americans
can
have the legal right and even the bill
and really thinking believe what you want to
call for the destruction of this government. To
quite literally say, it says to alter or
abolish it, should it not align should it
not be acting for the interest of this
country to make to make it clear,
or the people rather.
So it literally says that. You understand?
So for someone to say, I want to
alter or abolish this government is literally the
constitution.
And they're saying so what they're trying to
say is the overthrow of the US government.
So what I what I'm saying, I want
to I wanna live in a world without
government. They frame that as overthrow the government.
And in essence, you could argue that that
would be something that would have to happen
for there to be no government or to
be removed.
But I'm not making the case about how
and why. No. I'm saying, I want a
world without government to exist. Or let's just
say as an American, you go, I wanna
abolish the government entirely and put something different
in its place. These are things that are
rooted in the origin of the constitution,
and they want you to be called a
terrorist. That's not new.
Believing too much in the constitution has been
something the US government has used to label
people as dissidents for two decades.
It's very easy to prove.
These people are the ones challenging the constitution.
These people are the ones challenging historical US.
I mean, everything we believe represents this country.
So is Biden. So is Bush. So is
Obama. It's not secret. The point is that
right now, this is becoming more real than
it ever has been
And aimed at you, I think was always
the plan.
But so, overthrow of the government, law enforcement
authorities, or our system of law.
So if you try to change any of
these things, you're now a terrorist. I guarantee
that's where this is framing. Because as this
gets more and more unconstitutional and you start
going, well, the government is authoritarian.
The government is literally
unconstitutional.
You're now a terrorist. You wanna overthrow the
government. Well, if the government becomes unconstitutional,
if the US government's proven to be working
for a foreign agent,
what does that change?
Suddenly, when we go, well, aren't they the
criminal? You're a terrorist.
Well, that's that tends to be the claim
of more many authoritarian governments against people calling
out their crimes.
Never am I calling for violence. In fact,
I argue there's plenty of mechanisms through which
this country, the people of this country, at
least the current moment, can find momentum to
actually push these people out of power because
there's plenty of other people, of course, sadly
enough, when we have to live in a
world where government exists,
that would be willing to step into these
positions if it was not a clown show?
Hopefully, we can maybe do like a, you
know, like,
John McCaffey, who I interviewed back before he
passed away.
His major stance was,
elect me so I can dismantle the government.
I love that.
But anyway,
so she says, this isn't activism. It's anarchy.
Well, again, how about we first understand what
these definitions mean?
There's the definition of anarchism. Anarchism stands for
the liberation of the human mind from the
dominion of religion, and the liberation of the
human mind from the coercion of property.
Liberation from the shackles of restraint and government.
It stands for a social order
based on the free grouping of individuals.
That's what anarchy is. Not chaos.
The only ideology that has no place for
leaders and rulers. Gee. I should say leaders.
Rulers.
Because leaders are naturally arising in a free
standing of of individuals in a social order.
The point is that they want you to
think that because there's no world for them
in a world where we don't need government
to live our lives. But Antifa is a
radical terrorist organization. There's lots of points to
get into about how they're using this and
they can deem anybody Antifa because there's no
real definable points to all this right now.
And anybody wearing a mask and protesting ICE
is now Antifa. They've made that clear.
And activism, protesting, that's your legal right.
And so all they're trying to say is
now if you come out and protest, what
we're saying is important,
you are now anarchy.
Activism
is anarchy.
Freedom is, you know, war is peace.
Ignorance is strength.
It's what this is. Here's what she says.
Tifa beats journalist.
Antifa attacks our police stations.
Okay. So just right out of the gate,
you look at these cases, they're talking about
people protesting. Now I'm not gonna say I
know they're Antifa or not. I don't. Neither
do they because there's never even an effort
to make the case. They arrest somebody at
a protest and they call it Antifa.
Look into it. It's very clear.
So that becomes a very alarming
slippery slope, doesn't it, where they can then
go, you're Antifa. Like, some kind of reverse
o Oprah show. You're Antifa, and you're Antifa,
and you're Antifa, and you're going to jail,
and you're going to jail. That's where we
are.
And if you think for one second this
won't be applied by the next administration, left
or right, you're the child in the room.
And I think we all know that's not
the case. We all know or rather that
is we all know that this will be
continually used as far forward as it will
never go away like it never has. Power
never gets turned back over. They attack our
courthouses.
They docks our law enforcement officers.
No more. Yeah. What they mean by that
is report what they're doing and demand accountability.
Now anybody who actually does go, here's their
home address, put them in jail. Charge them,
prove it, put them in jail.
What they're saying is
they demanded by badge number. They posted where
these people were arresting somebody
that you could publicly see or people who
are doing the tracking app. So there are
people who are in these positions who are
not giving warrant and identifying their names. They're
not giving their badge numbers. There's zero accountability.
And so how dare people try to hold
them accountable by saying, here's where they are.
Here's what's happening. Now, yes, could somebody use
that to go attack them? Sure. And guess
what? That would be a crime. And if
they do so, put them in jail for
it. See how simple this all becomes? The
game of hyperbolic maybe if they do this
and then,
both sides use that against you every single
day.
They are a terrorist group, and we are
coming after them. We are here at the
White House today to unmask Antifa to follow
the money all the way to the top
if you want to get to the bottom
of who is fomenting
this chaos in How much you wanna bet
anything? How much you wanna bet
that this never goes anywhere other than individuals
being deemed Antifa and getting arrested for protest?
How much you wanna bet this never ever
ever goes to any RICO case or ever
goes to anything? And if it does, then
it never actually materializes in some kind of
massive arrest. How much you wanna bet?
Now look, I can easily overlap with the
Patriot Front two, the reality of how clearly
you can show influence, funding, and manipulation of
a lot of these groups.
That your government left and right has done
its entire existence. Yeah. That should matter. And
you wanna start with an TFO alone? Good.
I support it. But make a legal case.
Prove that you are present your evidence. Go
after Soros, whoever you wanna claim. Show me
the legal reality of that traffic or the
network, and go after the top.
Do you think that'll happen? Does anybody anywhere
actually think that's what's gonna happen, or are
you just enjoying watching Democrats get arrested?
Violence in our country, you must follow the
money. I was a mainstream reporter in Seattle
for ten years
before I quit mainstream media in part due
to its refusal to acknowledge the dangers of
Ah, yes. Another mainstream media journalist who's now
suddenly independent,
but not really. Antifa and radical left wing
violence.
Part of the problem that we have is
that a lot of people refuse to believe
that Antifa is real. It is just a
made up thing, but I have seen them.
They are real. They are dangerous, and they
are violent. Okay. So when they commit a
crime, charge them for a crime, present your
evidence, put them in jail.
Why is anybody in this room, other than
manipulators, actually of the mind that we should
create a sprawling kind of construct that the
government can use to say, well, you didn't
actually do that thing, but you were there
too. So you're charged. Isn't that like January
6? Yeah. Yeah. Same kind of thing. But
the overarching point
is that if you think they broke the
law, then you can easily present your case
and charge them with a crime.
All you're doing is trying to create a
larger game that can be used against anybody
they want,
which is what they always do. They are
an organized systemic international
criminal enterprise.
And what the FBI is going to do
is trace the money, follow the funds, and
find every single person that was involved in
funding the riots and the violent acts of
criminality that they're perpetrating on our street. I
yeah. Yeah. So he wasn't reading that at
all. Guys, do you think that'll happen?
I would bet and I don't know for
sure. I could definitely be wrong. I would
be you want I would love to bet
somebody on this.
Genuinely, that nobody will ever get some network
of international funding.
Really?
I would love to see that come down.
Watched Antifa brutally beat, harass, and threaten Americans
in the street, but all of that What
they mean is people did. So good. Charge
them with a crime. What does that mean?
That literally anybody anywhere that is part of
this protest is now a terrorist organization?
Why does this make sense to anybody? What
is this game where you can broaden it
out? They're these people did hear at this
one event. Therefore, everybody wearing a black mask
is a terrorist.
How tired this becomes. It's always the same
game. Ends with the Trump administration.
I was brutally attacked and almost killed by
Antifa in the streets of Seattle. All of
my colleagues have been attacked. I can't think
of a single one who hasn't. Violence against
journalists and police officers in our streets can't
stand. You're right. So arrest them now. Put
them in jail. Charlie Brown and put them
in jail. Everything else is nonsense. Everything else
is bluster and building for an agenda.
Israel Fund a journalist.
This this this this is the special element
of this. This guy with this really cool
jacket is just part of the clown show
up more than anything else in this conversation.
Just days ago, I was in the Portland
Jailhouse, and now I'm in the White House.
Oh my god. He's even carrying the flag
right there. He's just he's just carrying this
dragging this thing around the entire time. Administration
is built
different, and Antifa's days are numbered.
God. I'm telling you, these people are just,
like, the weakest thing in the room.
What these people are, even the way they
talk, the lack the lack of intelligence in
everything they're doing, these people are being propped
up by a broken thing.
It's just wild to me. I don't believe
we're in a world where people like this
are, you know, just they're objectively stupid. What
they do with the way they talk, what
they present, the lacking of evidence, the subjective
cheerleading about everything they point to.
This is it's just sad to me, and
I think this shows people
that they are like, can't they not find
people who are better presenting to push these
things? Probably not. I think this is an
ongoing collapsing of the narrative, of the influence,
of the government, of the
empire. Wanna thank president Donald Trump for designating
Antifa a terrorist organization, and I'm looking forward
to the FBI and the DOJ hunting down
these people like the terrorists that they are.
What is this? Real world
Antifa version?
I mean, guys, this is I mean, this
is the PR presidency we're talking about.
John, I'm looking forward to Antifa going down.
Thanks, John.
Renumbered. And I wanna thank president Donald Trump
for designating Antifa a terrorist organization. And I'm
looking forward to the FBI and the DOJ
hunting down these people like the terrorists that
they are. All I gotta say, it's a
bad day to be Antifa. And Antifa's day
I mean, seriously?
This is
wildly overproduced.
Like, it's some kind of reality TV show
because that's how these people view the world.
Trump was literally around a TV star, guys.
These people think that's everything this is.
A's of using violence and intimidation against their
political opposition
are over. Yeah. Because that's only on the
left.
And I've continued to report on them over
the years despite the threats of violence and
actual violence that's happened
because I owe a thank you to this
country, The United States, for settling my parents
who were victims of communism
in Vietnam.
One month ago, Charlie Kirk was murdered by
a violent leftist.
There you are. Right back to it. Posobiek
knows his marching orders. We all saw it,
and we all saw thousands of leftists celebrate
it. Antifa symbols were found on the bullet
casings of the gun used. Symbols? No. What
he meant is the word fascist or chau
fascist chat, which was from a game. You
could literally prove it was from the hell
divers game that he was playing. Look it
up for yourself. It's easy to verify. But
see, this liar doesn't care about the facts.
He cares about going, Antifa symbols were found,
bullets, that we know it's Antifa. No. They
weren't. These were words that were from something
else. So now anyone that says the word
fascist is now Antifa, which by the way,
they've already started doing.
This is this guy is one of the
worst. My point is I think very clearly
of all of them, my opinion, is this
guy is still tapped into some kind of
operative element. To shoot and kill. Completely my
opinion. Bill,
my friend. We won't take it anymore. President
Trump is not going to stand for it.
And I'm so grateful that we have a
leader in the White House that understands
how we need to fight these sophisticated networks
and how we need to take these terrorists
out. We're not gonna take it anymore.
Why is any of this necessary?
See, this is the kind of thing that
is laughable to the rest of the world.
This this is all PR bluster. Do the
thing. Sit around, have a conversation.
Give us the breakdown. You don't need some
flashy 30. This is about trying to propagandize
you with the scary music and the whole
thing. And these are a bunch of people
repeating subjective claims, most of which is rooted
in personal opinion. I've been attacked by Antifa,
doxed by Antifa, harassed by Antifa, but we're
not standing down. We're now coming for you.
Guys, I'm embarrassed. I'm embarrassed as an American
for something like this.
Am I am I crazy?
So that's what she posted.
Like, she
I'm at a a little point here. Let's
see. I think it was the same thing.
Oh, yeah. No. I'm glad. So this is
important, actually. So I think
what she's saying there is activism.
Right? It's it's anarchy. It's not activism.
Or just in general, organized
political effort that this is what they're framing
this as. And I think it's really important
to see, especially since we already made it
clear this is subjective,
that you're Antifa if they decide so. Just
like you were a Nazi red hat wearing
whatever if they decided so, like they were
doing the same way before.
Coordinated political action.
Right? Because that's what Trump is saying. They
all have the same signs. Okay. Could it
mean something? Sure could. It also could just
mean that they
use the same signs or that somebody funded
them because people have political you know, this
is what this is what you have to
think about. Somebody who believes in what they're
protesting, who may be a rich person, who
wants to dump a bunch of money in
their organization is not the same thing as
an organized terrorist funding network.
It certainly could be. And the idea that
you have a billionaire like Soros funding to
make these things happen as much as that
still may be organized, it's not a crime.
And it happens on both sides. As long
as we're adult enough to go, I think
billionaires are funding. Elon Musk does it all
the time. So do people. I mean, the
Soros Musk,
that kind of balance is really a larger
way to look at it. Overall,
if a crime is committed, then do something
about it. What they're pointing to is
high level political organization,
which I have a general issue with the
way that we elect the way that this
political system is hijacked by all that. But
to make it illegal, then all you're really
saying is that people can't do what they
want with their own money. Like, this is
where principles matter. I don't I completely agree
these people are abusing these situations. The government
allows that. The government facilitates that. But the
point is the same is that people can
fund their money how they want. The point
is the little super pack and, like, this
is something that should be visible. If they're
going to be doing these things, this is
something something something this should be things that
people could look at, prove to themselves. And
generally, it can be. But anyway, just we're
getting off track. The point
is that before even Soros comes into play,
they're not proving that just yet, is that
people have the same signs. They're protesting ICE.
Okay.
Let's just say they decided to go out
and get nice signs. Does that make them
terrorists? No.
Let's just say they coordinate with every other
group around the country. Let's say there's a
group around the world that supports people fighting
against authoritarianism, and they say, here's a grant.
Like, you understand how many different ways this
could amount to what they're framing as an
absolute?
So now coordinated political violence, which is, by
the way, what we all argue is the
way this should go. Right? Not necessarily with
billionaire funding. But if we're out here and
we believe we wanna fight against something that's
happening,
that we believe the government listen, we're fighting
against the Vietnam War or the Gaza genocide.
And the only way to really get momentum
is to
scatter a bunch of people around and yell
different messages? No. It's to coordinate. It's to
discuss. It's to have political action where you
frame protest. Now, I'm not really
I don't you know, I've always this is
what I do.
But I get the the merit of doing
that. So the point is now anybody doing
that and actually trying to coordinate to have
some kind of message that can maybe break
through is now terrorism.
If you're saying and doing things that Trump
and or just the power at the time,
disagrees with.
Now whether or not you think they're taking
honest action now, you know as well as
I that that is where this will go.
And if not, already is, which is what
I think. That anybody standing up and going,
I don't agree with this, is now gonna
be deemed a terrorist. Biden did the same
thing as we posted with that Whitney's article.
Who is a terrorist in Biden's America might
as well be the exact same article for
Trump because they're both doing the exact same
thing.
So here,
Pam Bondi laying out well, as as this
person frames it, acting like they're going to
put them to death like they did cartel
members. That's more of the opinion of the
way they frame it. Just listen to what
she says in of itself, and I think
it's enough to point out this is
as as saying they they they're claiming she
suggests it'll execute people they catch. Just like
we did with the cartels, we're going to
take the same approach with Antifa. Now this,
I think, is more of a nod to
what people that support them want to think,
which is the RICO, and it's gonna be
some larger international, you know
I doubt it. Overall, your this broadens out
how they can aim it,
and they're gonna use this wherever they want.
That's what I think is happening.
We're not gonna stop at just arresting the
violent criminals we can see in the streets.
Fighting crime is more than just getting the
bad guy off the streets.
It's breaking down the organization
brick by brick.
Okay. So let's say you catch somebody or
a lot of somebodies who aren't part of
some organized effort,
or maybe there's no have any intention of
going after the organized effort. What's the benefit
of creating this kind of situation?
Most like I said,
You you can literally start creating circumstances where
you frame this as something larger.
And sure as hell it's going to distract
from everything that's currently happening. Like, the crazy
thing is you have a lot of that
happening. Coordinated political mis
infiltration,
manipulation, whether media vote, that's all happening through
Israel in the most shockingly obvious way I've
ever seen in my life.
So they make this about something else entirely.
Even though I argue it's probably part of
the same manipulation, which is largely why I
don't think they're ever gonna come to a
head with this because I think we know
where it comes back to.
Just like we did with cartels,
we're going to take the same approach, president
Trump, with Antifa,
destroy
the entire organization
from top to bottom.
Now, again, she has you know, she's reading
her little thing, and I just it's hard
to watch these people who are always trying
to put on the show. Just say what
you think. I think a lot of people
cannot construct their thoughts without having it written
down in front of them like she was
showing before.
We're going to take nation
from top to bottom.
We're going to take them apart.
Thanks to your bold leadership and the designation
of Antifa as a terrorist organization,
which is exactly what they are,
Americans will no longer tolerate their unhinged
violence.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
There's another one, by the way, which is
the one I was thinking of, but you'll
see what I mean. Just same kind of
thing though. Just, you know, reading
from a thing that you prepared, which is,
you know, whatever. That's what a lot of
them do. But overall, the point is creating
the idea
that this is a organized cart you know,
again, despite working with the cartels, right, which
is the same deal here, I argue, because
I really do genuinely argue that there's more
connective
use of these groups. Psy like psyop type
internal manipulations like Patriot Front, Antifa, or plenty
of others that I think are pretty easy
to prove.
So here is a couple of other journalists
who are all there just kind of going
around the circles and telling their stories about
Antifa, which is the same points, but I'll
play some of these videos for you. What
they're talking about is their personal experiences. Now
sure, maybe that everything is true about it.
I'm not I'm not even doubting it.
What how do these individual personal stories about
something that happened to you by somebody in
a mask? Did you are are we saying
that every one of these people have proven
a network connection?
No. In fact, none of them have. I
would I would even argue maybe somebody like
Andy Andy Noe
has probably done some debt, like but here
and now, I'm not seeing a presentation about
how we can prove that the things that
happened to you
are tied to an organized funded network action
of terrorism.
Because you see, they're not even trying to
do that. They're just giving you a bunch
of just like they do with immigration.
Rapist over there. This guy, you know, kidnapped
children. Well, what does that have to do
with this other brown guy? Well, the argument
is because he's brown and here, therefore, he's
like that. It's the same thing they do
in every other conversation. They're playing on your
willingness to lean into whatever they're building for
you. And it sure sounds convincing.
Yeah. My name is, Nick Shirley. I'm 23
years old. I'm a 100% independent YouTube journalist.
And over the past year or so, I've
been able to go to 15 countries.
I've hung out with people in the gangs
of Brazil and the favelas
and the prisons of Secot, but yet the
most dangerous places I have been have been
here in The United States, unfortunately.
I mean, guys, does anybody believe that? Or
you you just literally said you went to
Secot, which is probably one of the most
horrific places in El Salvador I could possibly
imagine. It is a literal concentration camp where
people I mean, or any other places he's
mentioned. This is and this is the most
that is ridiculous to me. Just like Trump
pretending that Washington DC is the most dangerous
place in the world, that's objectively embarrassing.
It's a danger. There's lots of crime. So
when I get pee when I hear statements
like that, people are being coached, or this
guy knows what he's supposed to be giving,
which I think is more likely the reality
that people wouldn't be in these positions if
they didn't already hold certain views that go
along with the agenda. That's manufacturing consent. We're
watching the new age of that happen in
front of us right now.
And I've had the opportunity to show people
about the protest Antifa here in The United
States, and there's nothing organic about what they
are doing here in The United States. I've
watched people be bust in from states.
I've watched the same lady at a protest
in Atlanta
be bust to protest in DC and Okay.
So let's just take it one by one.
Okay. So people busting around for protests. So,
sure, that could mean coordination. In what way
does that then translate to terrorism?
Because you're coordinating political action? This is my
point, guys. They're stopping where they basically go,
look look, they're working together. So in what
world does that mean terrorism?
But overall, let's just even move aside to
Soros possibility, which is obviously real or anybody
else.
Are we pretending that it's not possible that
people could want to
involve themselves? Okay. If we're of the mind,
which I agree that this is a massive
constitutional issue, which is unprecedented,
don't you think people might also go, well,
this is important?
So maybe I'll wanna go and join that
protest too because it's happening all over the
country? That's outside the realm of possibility?
No. I'm not saying I know that either
because I'm not being subjectively
one-sided like most of them are. I don't
know. It could be.
But the truth is obvious that people busing
from different locations could be that they care.
Could be that there's a political motivation. It
could be that somebody paid them to be
there. None of which actually is illegal, by
the way. But I have criticisms with how
your government does that and gaslights you with
every conversation.
My point is none of this is being
proven here.
Than New York City.
There's nothing that
is
honest about what they are doing, and they
have signs. I've seen the same signs here
in DC and in London as well. Yeah.
Because they work together and have similar messaging
or they're being paid. Could be either, couldn't
it? See how simple this is? These people
are just using their personal opinions to progress
the agenda that Trump wants. That's why this
guy repeated it. He's obviously nervous,
And he repeated the ones he spoke, the
signs and the I know you it's very
clear that's what Trump points you every time,
and none of which is actually approvable. Bring
that to court then. They'll go, okay. How
does that prove anything? Could mean something. It's
not provable. Thrown it out.
There's nothing they've actually get presented that actually
makes this case other than it could be.
It's a big
organization
incorporation that they're they're running.
And people may wonder, like, what's the threat
to us as Americans if we go? Well,
you'll be labeled as a fascist, you'll be
labeled as a Nazi, and they'll wish death
upon you because they wish Think about what
he just did.
So now literally every single protest anywhere that
they claim as Antifa, that's exactly what they
all do no matter what? No. I can
prove you that's not true. They'll wanna kill
you. They'll go after you call you a
Nazi. Well, don't you guys do exactly that?
Yes, you do. Fascist, terrorists, every day, every
day. Everyone in this room has been doing
it all week. You're a terrorist, Nazi, lefty.
They do the same thing.
But it's okay because they're the they're the
right ones. And and the other side is
that. Right?
That's upon me. And just last week in
Portland, Oregon, I watched a lady get trapped
in her car surrounded by Ankefa,
and her sister messaged me after seeing the
video. She said the only reason I think
my sister was safe is because you were
there recording.
I also Good. Good. Did they break the
law? If they did, send your evidence. You
got a video, put them in jail.
Funny how that never seems to happen. Right?
If they broke the law, do something. If
this is about somehow using things like this
to make a larger case the government can
use to go after anyone they want, then
just say that out loud.
So,
was chased out by a member of Antifa
who said he would smoke me,
and next thing he knew, a DHS sniper
had lasers on his chest. If he was
not there, who knows what would have happened?
God. These people, it just makes it's just
sad.
So where in the where in there did
somebody break the law? These subjective points. So,
yeah, he said he'd smoke you. Maybe he
was just blustering because he's he's a coward,
like a lot of them are.
But all this is being used in this
big important psyop meeting to make a big
case about why they'll use it to go
after you next, bud. You sitting right there
the moment that somebody else changes their mind.
The moment that the next left organization comes
in.
Why can't these people think about that?
That day. These people are very dangerous and
people wonder
how they're able to do it. It's the
re the reason is because these these cities
are not enforcing the law. And what He's
just rattling through the narrative.
Yeah. Probably in many cases. I can point
out where there's a 100 different things that
Republican governor are doing the same way. Maybe
not in the same conversation.
We're all we live in a corrupt government,
But this is just like a one, two,
three walking through and he's very clearly nervous.
He knows who's waiting and expecting him to
say and he's delivering the narrative.
How in the world does this kid say
he knows that's why that's happening?
What if it was just the police? What
if it was the local sheriff who made
that choice?
I'm just trying to make a point. You
obviously get where I'm going with this. This
is subjective,
and it's dangerous the way it's being set
up to lead to wherever the government at
the table wants to use it. Aren't these
the ones supposedly fighting the power? Is that
what they tell themselves? You're building government power
to be used against Americans like I've never
seen.
Why should these people be worried if the
law is not being enforced?
And
we are not far right nor are we
far wrong. We're just right. And the truth
about what's happening Yeah. Well done. We are
just right and you're wrong.
Very subject very objective standpoint from a journalist.
I mean, guys, I there is right and
wrong. Okay? There are people who are correct
and those who are incorrect. My point is
that you're framing it as like that the
right is right. Like, that's the way he
did it. We're not alt right or whatever,
but we're just right and you're wrong. It's
it was just a well, it probably thought
it was really pithy when he wrote it
down. That's what it comes down to. At
the end of the day, that all of
this, nothing has any real but please watch
the video, which is linked to the other
tweet of the entire thing if you wanna
sit through two hours of nonsense.
And no way am I saying there's not
a real issue with this. What I'm saying
is what they're doing with it is not
actually stopping whatever you think you're trying to
fight here.
And here in America with these groups is
very dangerous, and I thank you, mister president,
and your administration as well for acknowledging that.
Thank you very much.
It's too bad you have to go through
it. I know. It's a little crazy right,
mister president. When you're gonna get to the
bottom of it, so it's rare. Yeah. Rare.
I know. Right? I know. Right, Trump? Right?
It's just weird. You know what's also very
obvious to me? And this is not even
my opinion, guys. Every single one of them
are just so desperate to ingratiate themselves with
Trump. We're like, you're the guy, Drebin. You're
the best. And then we're we're you know,
I'm in your circle now. Right? Because we're
all on the same team. Like, that's what
Nick is all about in this. And it's
really sad to watch. Like, there's just this
I mean, if you're trying to pretend to
be a journalist, then what you're doing and
the way you're conducting yourself in this conversation,
all of you
is sad.
You're you're you're pandering
to the most powerful person in this country.
That's not what a journalist is supposed to
do. And overall, they don't even seem to
care. Or rather, I think that's the way
they've convinced themselves is what journalists do these
days.
I guess why not? That's what every other
journalist seems to do in the mainstream media,
what they pretend to be fighting.
Here is another one. This is Paulina Luna.
I'm just gonna read this. The White House
just announced they discovered that over a $100,000,000
in taxpayer funds and laundered Democrat donations
went to Antifa.
Oh my gosh. To linked organizations and protest
networks.
Okay? George Soros, Arabel Advisors, Tide Networks. Oh
my god. Bombshell. Let's just even say for
sake of conversation, everything in this is real.
Despite how often they lie and say things
that don't matter. Okay.
When will they be arrested, Luna?
I mean, you just really you just said
a $100,000,000
in taxpayer funds that were laundered by Democrat
donations?
So are you telling me you figured all
that out without discovering a single person who's
culpable accountable?
That seems kind of unlikely, but okay, then
let then go after them. Who is gonna
get arrested for this massive crime? Or how
much you wanna bet, it gets floated in
the middle of a room of people that
don't challenge anything and nobody ever comes back
to it?
I mean, if we're really pretending they just
discovered, whatever that means, a $100,000,000
of this network funding,
wouldn't there be something going on? Now look,
I'm obviously laying it on heavy, guys. I
hope these people get charged with if there's
crimes to be charged. May it may well
end up tomorrow that I'm proven wrong, and
some massive RICO case comes. If it's about
something you can prove as a network organized
effort, then and and breaking the law in
doing so, not just being organized in political
action,
I'll say I was wrong, and I'm happy
to see it happen.
I'm still waiting for Obama, Jones. I'm still
waiting for any number of them.
Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, all the deep state
Silicon Valley oligarchs, except now they're on our
side or any of them. I'm waiting on
the mRNA shots to be stopped. I'm waiting
on the, the war in Ukraine to end,
the war in Israel to end. I'm waiting
on the Fed to be closed. I'm waiting
on the IRS to be stopped. I'm waiting
on you know, can we keep going? Or
I mean, when can we insert some of
these wins that we're hearing of about every
single day?
Okay.
Do you do you think Soros is funding
things like this? I think that's a provable
fact. I think you can easily prove that
these billionaires
fund all sorts of things. And maybe you
could argue that they're doing it because they
believe in what they're fighting for. I don't
think so. I think it's about their, you
know, stock prices and political mode. You know,
who won't want in power. I very much
believe that. And then maybe even through people
that are abusing them, like Israel or other
overlaps, by the way. But overall,
if nothing happens,
then this is all just bluster to get
you to think there's something there while they
go after that random Democrat with pink hair
and go, we got him.
Democrat
network.
I you know, and I really wanna stress
again, the network of organized politics is not
the same as terrorism. So So if they
end up making some sprawling network of even
a billionaire giving money to protesters who go
out and buy signs and protest throughout the
country, there's no crime in that.
That that is a manipulation of the way
that the system works, but there's not a
crime being committed. They're not even close to
the word terrorism
as they actively work with the largest terrorists
in the world. You know, surprise surprise.
Now here's Cash Patel.
Of course, this major big time journalist writes,
holy chisels and says, did the did you
hear what Cash Patel said?
Oh my god. They just said a thing.
Shocking bombshell. This I always laugh at this.
They say something out loud, and it's like,
breaking news. They just said something.
And a lot of times, it never happens.
It doesn't even end up being real.
That's just what the TeamSort politics is all
about. It's cheerleading.
Says secretary
Besent, a very, very clear Zionist,
is mapping out the entire financial structure of
the Antifa organization.
You know what that means? Rico,
this is literally what the Q drops talk
about, he says.
Happening a long time ago.
Well, with what we've seen so far about
Q things coming to pass,
doesn't doesn't speak well for where this is
going. Seeing how basically nothing they predicted ever
really comes to pass. But
do you think that'll happen?
Here's what he said.
Seed money,
donor, organization,
and funding mechanism that we have. And I
wanna echo the secretary's comments on
Scott Bessen, who's allowing us to map out
these networks through their financial criminal activities,
which has been going on for decade. Now
note the difference between what he said
and what this guy wrote.
He says, the scent is mapping out the
entire organization.
No. No. No. That's not what he said.
He said, the senate is allowing well, listen
again. And this is different.
Through their financial criminal like Scott
Bessen, who's allowing us to map out these
networks. So allowing them to map out these
networks.
So what that sounds like is being given
a database.
Do you see that the difference between some,
like, you know, percent out there mapping it
all out as we speak is the way
they're framing that. I don't think that's what's
happening. Through their financial criminal activities,
which has been going on for decades. And
I would like to remind the American Oh,
okay. So through multiple administrations. Why hasn't it
changed until now?
Public. They built this disease temple of corruption
over decades. And in this disease temple of
the American public,
they built this disease temple of corruption over
This diseased temple of corruption.
Come on. If you watch this guy speak,
you know as well as I that he's
not very composed. That is not something he
just came up with. That is something that
he my opinion. Maybe it means nothing, but
I just, like, think that's fascinating. Like, that's
he's like, he can't even say that very
well. He planned to say that for some
reason. That's my opinion. I just find that
odd. Not many not many know why that
is valid or rather, relevant.
But it's something that just jumped in my
head. I think that's weird. Why would you
make that case? This disease temple of corruption
over decades, and in eight short months, mister
president, you have crippled their foundation because How?
In what way?
I mean, realistically,
you've said a lot of things. You've passed
legislate or rather executive order. Excuse me. And
you've declared them a terrorist organization, and you've
arrested a few people at protests.
Are we really pretending like eight okay, so
over eight months, you mean what? In the
last couple of weeks you've been talking about
it? Or are you pretending for eight months
you've been focusing on Tifa?
I just this is just so these people
are so ridiculous.
It's all blood like, look. All I'm saying
is that you don't have to if you
wanna come out here and say, thank you
for focusing on this, and we're gonna get
it done. No. They have to be pandering
at Trump. Trump, you're the greatest thing ever.
You've been you've annihilated ISIS, and you've destroyed
Putin, and Israel's gone, and you know, it's
like, no. None of that. Eight wars and
nine did nope.
Why don't you just say why don't you
just embellish the things that are real as
opposed to just lying about everything?
Months, mister president, you have crippled their foundation
because of your leadership here, because of the
interagency, because of people like deputy attorney general.
No. Nothing of substance then because you're here
and things.
Okay. I'd like to hear a material substance.
So by
arresting a leader, by
breaking down one of the organizational fund funding,
you know, financial mechanisms. No. No. No. None
of that. They're all exactly the way they
were, but now they're breaking the foundation because
Trump said Antifa bad. Blanche and because of
attorney general Pam Bondi's fearless leadership to go
after criminals wherever they are.
Again, a completely meaningless thing.
And if they're destroyed because of Bondi's willingness
to go after things wherever she can find
them, wow. I'm blown away by that in-depth
point. They will not be able to hide.
They were able to hide and conspire with
prior administrations, and we are exposing their Oh,
so Trump's then too. Right? Yeah. Because that
was the Trump he was there before? Yeah.
I guess you forgot that. Corruption from within,
and we will go to every single city
in this country under Operation Summer Heat and
the other operations we are doing at the
FBI
to bring these criminals to justice. We will
Right. So they're gonna hunt down this country
to go after anybody that they want to
under the guys they're fighting Antifa.
We'll arrest every single one of them from
whatever perch you sit in, private or public,
no matter how your goal or your ambition
is.
I mean, am I the only one that
picks up? Like, just this is he's grandstanding.
He's trying to make himself sound so important
off the perch or whatever, international or not.
So you're gonna get somebody who committed a
crime. I'd like to see that. Let's just
leave it there and just get somebody, one
person. Your entire team is saying, good. Just
arrest somebody.
Fine. Good. Say that again. Just arrest somebody
finally, please. It will be crushed by the
constitution because the American people deserve law and
order, and that's what we're gonna give you.
Yeah. Yeah. Except that you don't care about
the constitution, seeing as how what you're doing
right now is a violate. Everything you're doing
across this conversation is a violation of the
constitution. So they don't care about that, but
they love to yell it out loud.
So here is Jack Posobiec.
And this one again is this guy strikes
me as very,
yeah, you know, organized, if you will.
In a funny way, by the way, you
could make the case that the very thing
they're pointing to in regard to the organization
of Antifa is literally the people sitting in
this room. The organized manipulation of the funding
through foreign governments or the power of funding
these people. I mean, there's an organized element
in all of it. But is it a
crime? Well, that'd be the case, wouldn't it?
Present it. If you have the evidence, make
the case. Here's what he had to say,
but it's all about another subjective, you know,
we're all in risk and danger, which maybe.
But until we present even a shred of
evidence, I guess we'll have to assume or
take your word for it, Posobiec.
Eyes on campus, we are getting more and
more
people coming out in the face of this
threat knowing what happened to Charlie.
But, mister president
Oh, we know. Do we? We know even
though nothing has actually been verified, it's still
up in the air. There's no court case.
It hasn't been. Nothing has happened. We know
it's a lefty, and we know
this is sitting in a room full of
people who are all nodding their heads.
The president. Like, is that just insane?
Because that's where we are today.
We need to do something about this because
I fear that the next one who
could be killed could be sitting at this
table right now. Yeah. Yeah. Or the table
next over there or the room across the
way or another building or another country. Could
be anybody. Right? Anybody could die tomorrow. Sure.
But the idea that we're making into some
we are all an extra threat more than
anybody, I highly doubt that. In fact, I
actually argue the exact opposite. I argue that
people in that room are safer than anybody
else in this field.
Maybe safe for, like, an irrational person who
hates them because they're obviously manipulating. But that'd
be individual actions of individual people. And if
they commit the crime, they could be charged
for it. Overall,
the people out there that are actually exposing
the things they're working for are, I think,
the ones who are actually at risk. That's
my opinion.
And we're not gonna stop, but they need
to stop, and they will not stop until
they are stopped. Wow. Very intelligent.
A meaningless statement that's basically do whatever you
want because we're on your side.
It rebels fighting the deep state. Okay, this
is where
Oh, a couple more points and it gets
this is embarrassing.
Well, first of all, the the one of
the first point, but one of the most
relevant in my opinion,
is that what they're doing,
you know, I I don't know. I maybe
I don't wanna say secondarily. It's hard to
know which one of these is more important
in the moment, but one of them is
clearly using this to go after anybody who
is
calling out the government,
right, saying that they're breaking the law, sorta
like Israel does with everything else they do.
It seems weird. The parallels between these governments
are alarming as hell right now. But saying
you're Antifa because you said fascism or because
you said we're fascist, whatever it is. Obviously,
a very unconstitutional reality. But may may you
know, you decide which one's more important. At
the same time, we have the idea that
they're using all this to con to further
entrench us in the technocratic panopticon that is
building.
Very soon, ICE will know exactly where you
are all the time.
Trump is going to attract Americans every single
move. This is in addition to Palantir tracking
us using our fight private financial, health, and
travel data, social media donations, and more. If
you think they're only tracking illegals or Antifa,
you haven't been paying attention.
But it's the same thing. Right? So Antifa
now is just an extension of this. It's
just a tracking
they're creating the Panopticon.
I don't know why we can't see this.
Actually, in fact, I think everyone does, and
I don't know why we can't call out
the screening idiots at the top of this
paradigm who act like they're winning and fighting
for you while they're enriching themselves from the
empire they claim they're fighting.
ICE bought vehicles
equipped with fake cell phone towers to spy
on all of you because you understand the
only way that works is that that anybody
around it, anybody.
They're not just picking on this is a
government spying on everybody in this country under
the guise of going after one group.
This is from 10/07/2025.
So now they have all sorts of Israeli
tech, by the way, which you just can't
hide. The amount of Israeli tech they're using,
let me see if I still have that
actually.
Maybe not. Yeah. There it is. Good. So
it's very important, maybe just beginning of this,
to understand how much of this is sort
of a a funnel. It's been doing it's
been going on a long time. But right
now, more than ever,
Israel is training things on murdering Palestinians, and
ICE is quite literally bringing them home. Don't
forget the way we started.
Israel currently sees Americans as the biggest threat
to its narrative control. That's not even a
secret. Netanyahu is saying that. And so your
government is helping them spy on you. Your
government is helping a foreign government track you
and everything else. Killing thing I've seen responding
to these immigration raids. I'm an immigrant rights
attorney, and usually, I'm a pretty optimistic guy.
I don't get scared easily. I love watching
horror movies. Over the past six months, I've
seen some really disturbing stuff. At one location,
people hid when I showed up, and I
still found them using a thermal drone that
detects body heat. Where was this technology first
tested? By Israel in occupying
Palestine. When people get taken by ICE, they
often refuse to say their names. So ICE
identifies them using a facial recognition technology.
Where was this tech first used? By Israel
in occupied Palestine. When people refuse to let
ICE search their phones,
ICE will plug their phones into this box
and it unlocks their phone. Where was this
tech first used? By Israel in occupied Palestine.
The amount of dystopian tech that the US
government has taken from Israel to use in
its own country is terrifying. And this is
why free
It's very clear, guys. And this has been
going on. I mean, it's just every single
moment that we continue,
it gets more and more and more consolidated
and more obvious. I mean, 90 like, a
very large portion of what we were talking
about in the beginning of the Trump administration,
the 2025,
was about a lot of the different things
that we, you know, weren't sure about. Ethics,
pledges,
Israel infiltration,
Doge, and the overlap, the the data, AI.
I mean, a very large portion of that
has turned out to be exactly what we
were worried
about. And and that we were saying is
most likely, and here we are. You know?
And you see, we're doing backflips and saying
right about every single thing all the time.
Look at our track record. It speaks for
ourselves. And those that scream that tend to
be the ones that aren't. But overall,
it's very clear that this was not something
that was hard to see. And I wasn't
the only one. There's tons of people in
the Independent Media Alliance and independent media in
the actual media who are clearly seeing this
on the wall. Have been for a long
time.
Now, this two points to make here, three
technically, with two points about this that I
think are very relevant.
As they're saying that you're Antifa if they
decide,
right, or just, you know, like like exactly
right in this case,
this person says this guy
is a professional
communist Antifa agitator
who he says professionally gets pepper sprayed
in the face while wearing clerical shirts for
photo ops.
This guy,
150,000
followers,
is literally saying that this guy, who is
a real pastor, by the way, we I'll
very clearly break this down,
is a professional Antifa agitator. Why? Because he's
there protesting.
You can look into this for yourself.
This is a person who supports this ideology,
maybe even to a dangerous degree, but he's
not breaking the law by being there
and protesting,
even if it's constantly at every protest he
can find. The point is he is a
pastor,
And this is literally what they just did
to him while he was legally protesting
out for advice.
That's so frustrating.
I do wanna play it for you. Let
me grab real quick.
So this
is just a quick video of him being
shot in the head with a pepper spray
ball. Okay. But it's pepper spray. Right? This
is no joke, guys.
Honestly, pepper like, people don't know this, but
pepper spray, maize, enough of that stuff can
actually kill you. It takes a lot, but
it can. It clog up your air passage
and so on. And especially, some people can
get hit with these things, and they can
be allergic, can have a reaction to it.
And it can be very serious. My point
is it shouldn't be taken lightly to just
casually hit a pastor who is protesting
what you're doing.
They hit him right in the head.
So these guys are on the public sidewalk
protesting.
I just, you know, in what world do
they think they can get away with that?
Oh, in in Trump's world, apparently.
And, yeah, I'm making the point for today.
The reality is it's just the US government.
So this person comes out and call first
of all, Aaron Melnick, though, is a lawyer
and says this video of this incident is
just as bad as it sounds. The priest
is standing there, not doing anything remotely illegal,
and without warning, a masked DHS agent on
the roof shoots him in the top of
the head with a pepper ball.
Okay.
So now this guy says, well, no. He's
a professional
agitator.
Okay.
Well, first and foremost,
was he doing that there?
Clearly not. He was either praying or just,
you know, petitioning them with his hands out.
So let's just say he's a professional agitator,
whatever you think that means, and it can
vary.
He was still an American citizen who was
still standing there in a public sidewalk, not
breaking the law, and they shot him in
the head. So does that mean that you
don't care about his rights because you think
he's doing something you disagree with? You see
how dangerous this gets? These are dangerous people
who, by the way, are allowed to think
what they want, who are being my point
is dangerously manipulated by a power structure to
think that to convince them that they're fighting
against an evil power, which all you're doing
is fighting against yourself. You are literally fighting
against your own rights by doing things like
this.
Pepper spraying him as well.
So Evan loves more simply says he's quite
literally a pastor in the First Presbyterian Church
of Chicago. The fact that he participates in
protests for human rights should tell you something
about your beliefs.
I think it's very important to make sure
we understand all this, guys. To understand that
what we're watching are people who are being
labeled as a terrorist because they are at
a protesting, which is their legal right, in
any context is simply because in this case,
something that they don't agree with.
I mean, how do these people not stand
back and go, I am exactly the left
thing that I thought that I was making
fun of ten seconds ago. This guy literally
is the editor of the Babylon Bee. Like,
you have become your own joke, man. You
have become the very hyperbolic cartoon that you
make about everything else.
I just I think it's wild how clear
all of this is. And, again, let's be
very, very clear. Even if this guy was
literally
Soros paid agitator, whatever you think that means,
he was not breaking the law by standing
there protesting, and they shot him in the
head anyway with a pepper ball.
But if that's okay to you, then you
need to reflect on you being the problem
in this conversation.
Or we just talked about this one. Right?
These are two
very provable
Republican
MAGA supporters.
The ones guys,
Joey Gibson of the Patriot Prayer Group and
his girlfriend. And they literally take their mask
off and admit this in the video.
So all of them is we talked about
this recently. They get caught by the police,
dressed up like Antifa,
and all they said was they were there
trying to document the Antifa,
or they were there pretending to be Antifa
and causing violence.
Either one is possible. Right?
All I'm trying to show you is how
easy this is. Well, how about in the
case that they're there at the protest dressed
like that? Aren't they not don't they already
meet the definition of Antifa? Or is it
just because you believe they have different intent?
That's this is being flavored very clearly by
their own personal beliefs. Trump and everybody else.
This is obviously a part of this. And
my anybody non part just aware, smart enough
to see that partisan games are not everything,
are easily able to go, yes, and we
know this happens. We know that the FBI,
Patriot Front, Antifa, infiltrate groups, oath keepers, and
they manipulate these things. And so we can't
think of that, the right who just got
done telling us how much the FBI lies
about these things, and now they're taking it
at face value, but anybody that is Antifa.
I know you guys aren't this stupid. Call
out the screaming idiots at the top who
are trying to convince everybody you shouldn't look
harder at this.
And Ron DeSantis
puts this out today.
This is says, breaking pro Palestinian Islamists take
over the street of Montreal and Canada.
Or they're protesting. Right? You can make it
all about terrorism when you want it to
be. I've seen I mean, what about the
trucker convoy? Is that the same? How is
it different?
Because they believe in something different? Yes. Exactly.
The point is I always said the trucker
convoy dynamic should have been circling the car
the, you know, congress and their political buildings.
But, you know, they did their own thing
and they blocked traffic. I think that affected
more than average people more than anything, but
it still had a good point. It still
got the message out. But how is that
any different than Pete leftist sitting down in
front of the in front of traffic?
It's only different because we are right and
they're wrong. It's partisan childish nature, guys.
I disagree with anybody stopping everybody else's free
movement. The point is that many of them
believe they're doing it for a good reason.
Overall, what you have is people marching down
the street with their flags. And to anybody
who is a blind Israel supporter, that means
they're terrorists.
Think about how crazy that is. Just like
with Antifa, you are on the left and
you're protesting, you're Antifa, put them in prison
forever.
Ron DeSantis comes out and says, free Palestine
is just a proxy for political Islamism.
Political Islamism?
Is it can can we say political political
Judaism? No. That that's Zionism, and it's not
even Judaism. The point is they're trying to
create something. They're trying to say that if
you believe Palestine should be free, therefore, you're
a terrorist.
But wait a minute. I'm a Christian and
I'm not a terrorist. Free Palestine.
Oh, I guess he's lying. That goes clearly
I'm not and clearly that so clearly there
is a world in which somebody can go
free Palestine and maybe, maybe
just mean free Palestine.
They want to defeat the West via mass
migration. You mean Israel publicly telling us that
we have to migrate that people need to
migrate into the West to be able to
destroy the West? Publicly? Rabbis, government, the whole
thing? No. Not that. Right? Not the provable
one. The one where we claim it's being
done over here. And even though that I
can prove to you is being driven by
Israel and their but, no, it's all fake
news. The point at the end of the
day is subjective on everything.
Free Palestine means free Palestine. If they break
the law, then charge them with a crime.
Him to for him telling you that saying
free pal or anything, therefore, means you're a
terrorist
is the bigger picture. And here, Ron and
Sanders and Trump are on the same team.
Yes. They are. They're all doing the same
thing for the same outcome when it really
comes down to it in my opinion.
This is not free speech. This is political
manipulation. They're creating a world in which you're
not allowed to have certain ideas. And if
you do, they'll call you whatever they want.
How do we not see this?
Now this is embarrassing.
Trump this is so let's let's start with
the clip, I think, most importantly, about
the flag burning.
And hopefully, we know by now that that
is something that's not only protected, you know,
in your inherent rights, god given rights, but
has been roundly upheld by the supreme court
and people that they love they pretended for
about a second that were wanted to be
on the team, Massey, Ron Paul, all of
them because they're not ridiculous.
Excuse me. Do you mean do you mean
to say that? Ridiculous.
I'm actually it was funny as it wasn't
like I tried not to. It's just something
I never actually say. I'm not even sure
why that slipped down. But the point is
that they're all very clearly aware that that's
a a constitutional
reality.
And so all these people pushing this idea
are just trying to do it because of
their political side. I'd like to believe we're
not supported by the majority of Americans who
aren't this easily fooled. But let's play this
first, and then we'll go through what we
what this weird little, you know, this desperate
need for attention is for Nick's order.
I'd like to suggest that we put in
a bill
if you burn the American flag one year
in jail.
So this is an executive order on flag
burning that charges your attorney general. Would you
listen to this? This is not an important
one. If you burn a flag, you get
one year in jail.
No early,
exits. No nothing.
Now don't forget, guys. I love how this
game, they they how the narrative evolves when
they want you, and it's just how they
this is how dumb they think we
are. Trump acts like that's not even if
you read the executive order, it really makes
it about burning in certain locations. But we
know as a matter of fact, because he
just stupidly said it and he has reiterated
it many times, that it was 100%
about the flag.
But wait the way he wrote it was
a way to avoid the legal, you know,
repercussions
from literally enforcing something unconstitutional.
Because that's what they're claiming. No. No. He
burnt at the place he wasn't supposed to,
but we also care about no. They're they
they already went after a veteran for doing
that.
And I wanna be clear about it. This
is what he publicly says. Just like these
he told Bondi to go after them, and
then when asked a couple days later, he
goes, well, I don't know. I didn't say
that. You just said it on air. We
all heard you. But he knows his screaming
followers, like the ones you keep pointing to,
will yell whatever he's supposed to think, and
many too many will follow suit.
Just understand
that they're trying to play this game where
that's not the case. It's 100% what they're
doing. And
And if you don't realize that's a shocking
unconstitutional issue,
I
I respectfully argue you either don't understand the
constitution or you're ignoring that because you think
Trump is somehow different. You burn a flag,
you get one year in jail. Do you
watch this shit? Did you watch the flag
burning thing? Wasn't that great? There's some cussing
in here, so heads up. Boy, if everyone
showed their true colors then, didn't they? The
court ruled today that burning the American flag
as a form of political protest is a
right protected
by the first amendment to the constitution. People
acted as though the supreme court approved of
flag burning. You know what I mean? Does
that mean we have to burn our flags?
What did it they said that we had
them No. No. No.
It's not what they said.
They said that perhaps if somebody wants to
burn a flag, he perhaps doesn't need to
go to jail, for a year.
Pretty harsh on their part,
They
said that they said we should burn it.
They didn't say that. They didn't say that.
They didn't say that.
Does that mean I have to go out?
No. No. No. No. No.
Listen.
Read.
Think.
Well, I don't get it. I don't wanna
burn my flag.
People snapped over this. Did you watch that?
People were just, hey, buddy. Let me tell
you something.
My daddy died for that flag.
Just really? Wow. I bought mine.
Yeah, they sell them, and you know, at
Kmart and shit. Yeah.
Yeah, he died in the Korean War for
that flag. Oh, what a coincidence, mine was
made in Korea.
No one, and I repeat,
no one has ever died for a flag.
A flag is a piece of cloth.
They might have died for freedom,
which,
by the way, is the freedom also to
burn
the fucking flag. Say,
burning the flag doesn't make freedom goes away.
It's kind of like
freedom.
Today, the US Supreme Court said that the
state may not criminally punish a person for
burning a flag as a means of political
protest. In an unusual coalition, liberals William Brennan,
Thurgood Marshall, and Harry Blackmun
joined with conservatives Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy.
I don't I don't approve of flag, Bernie.
I don't wanna burn a flag, but if
somebody wants to burn a flag,
what business is it of mine?
Is it my business if someone wants to
burn a flag? Is it? See, that's real
freedom. That's actual liberty.
And the awareness that whatever you think about
it, what they're doing with their things in
their home and wherever is their decision. What
they wanna put in their body is their
decision. If it ends up being having to
do with with children, well, there's an entire
line in regard to protecting the innocent. The
point is that it's personal choice with your
personal body. It's important to understand this. The
reality today is that you've got far too
many people out here acting like they believe
deeply in this and cheering
the exact opposite of what they should fight
for. Like, assuming they actually hold that opinion.
So either again, they're too stupid to realize
that what they're doing is directly the contrary
opposite of what they claim they want or
they're dishonest.
It's not very difficult today. This is the
point they're making about free speech. Any of
this any of these constitutional realities, guys, that
it is an absolute
principle. Everything else is political manipulation.
No. No. It's not. Is it my business
what other people read or watch on TV?
No. It's not.
Justice William Brennan for the majority. The government
may not prohibit the expression of an idea
simply because society finds it offensive or disagreeable
that would dilute the freedom that this cherished
emblem represents.
And he said, if there is a bedrock
principle underlying the first amendment, it is that
the government may not prohibit the expression of
an idea simply because society finds the idea
itself offensive or disagreeable.
You can't make the flag into a sort
of a religious object that's so sanctified that
it can't be used in public protest.
That's funny, actually. As Kevin pointed out in
the chat,
after major events and, you know, and and
even in some cases, flags that are put
up on, like, flagpoles and such, Not just,
like, paper on the but, like, flags get
thrown away. American flag after major events at
the White House, for example. Right? So it's
just so so so so objectively stupid all
this is. And he says, well, should we
throw away all or should we send all
the workers who took part in the waste
management in jail?
No. No. But that's not the same thing.
You know? So, well, yes. In principle, it
would be the exact same point. It's like,
this is a choice
about politicization.
Right? And there's a very clear line.
Liberty
or, you know I mean, ideas. Like, you
know what the real thing is? Is rather
anarchy than tyranny. And people may not realize
what anarchy really means, but even if you
meet think it means chaos, I'd rather have
that than tyranny.
Two Reagan appointees, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy,
both conservatives, provided crucial votes for the five
judge majority. And I would like to suggest
that we put in a bill
if you burn the American flag one year
in jail.
We do not need more legislation like this.
The real attack are on our liberties. The
real attack in this institution is the attack
on the constitution,
and this does nothing to address it.
All we need to do is pass a
flag amendment, and it's gonna solve the problem
of the attack on the con on the
constitution, which is continuous
and endless.
Isn't that an incredible point to think about?
Right? The idea that the argument is that
there's a tax on the constitution, you know,
largely from, you you know, foreign communist and,
you know, whatever or whatever the point would
be. Whatever they're framing at in this moment,
there's always something new.
But the attacks in the constitution are real,
so therefore, we have to protect the flag
from being burned, which in and of itself
is unconstitutional.
I mean, it just never gets it's always
like this. As Ron Paul pointed out a
lot, it still does to this very day,
that they all they ought like War Powers
Act or anything else or miss Smith Modernization
Act. We have a problem with something. Instead
of going instead of solving the problem, they
legalize the bad thing. And then go, well,
didn't that solve the problem?
No. You just made it okay to do
the problem. Okay. Well, then we're good. Happens
all the time. In this case, the argument
is protecting the constitutional rights by doing something
that removes your right. It's just it's just
a perfect analogy for government.
I would like to point out that, the
word desecrate is a very important word, and
we've talked about it all day, but we
haven't yet defined it. It means to deconsecrate.
What I'd like to know is when we
have consecrated the flag, we're holding the flag
in the highest of esteem. Right. And yet
liberty is really what should be on the
pinnacle.
Liberty and the constitution. But to deconsecrate something
means that the flag was consecrated. I'd like
to just read what that means. It says
to make, declare, or set apart as sacred
or such as a church to set apart
for the worship of a deity? Who and
when did we raise this flag to this
level? Have we deified the state to this
extent?
When we undermine the constitution and the bill
of right, we undermine liberty, and then we
diminish the value of the flag.
Decenters News. Great video.
So think about it. Think about it. Listen
to Ron Paul talk. Right? Listen to the
the the principle. Listen to the passion in
his words, the belief in what he's fighting
for. I mean, that's that's what I take
from anyway. That's my opinion.
But then listen to that. Right?
And now let's get into some of these
these people in this room and look at
the chasm between
who that person was right there with principle
and meaning and and and, you know,
drive to actually save this country
versus the clowns in this room who will
pander to the person who's powerful.
We're talking about the flag right here.
So
president Trump tells Nick Sorter to give Pam
Bondi the information on the person that burned
that flag that he had. Oh, you know
what? I just realized I forgot. I'm, it's
not that important.
There is a video of him.
Might even just be down here.
Oh, they didn't see this, but there there's
one basically, there's one where he runs up.
Right here. Perfect. There it is. Okay. So
somebody's burning a flag, which by the way
is their constitutional right. As I as I
said the other day, if Nick Sorter and
his team were burning a Palestinian flag and
Antifa ran up and tried to stop him,
I'm pretty sure they would frame that as
terrorism or somehow violating his rights. I guarantee
that's my opinion anyway. So reverse.
And it so he runs up and grabs
this flag, which in a weird way seems
very controlled.
There's nobody nobody tries to stop him. I
just get a sense that a lot of
this might be a little more coordinated than
we realize. Like, that's the kind of gaslighting
we're dealing with. But he just so you
can see, he grabs the flag. He runs
and he puts it out.
Oh, you're so brave, Nick. You're so just
so brave. And he walks away. No one
tries to stop him. Are you kidding me?
There's a whole world of people there and
you take my you steal my flag and
run away with it. No one he doesn't
run. He just walks away. No one does
anything. No one even barely says anything. I
call BS, by the way. But either way,
the point is
he sets this up to be this big
thing he's doing. And so he literally brings
this burnt flag into the room and is
like, look. I've got it for you, Trump.
It's right here.
I just am embarrassed for this guy. It's
just he's so far
anyway, my personal opinion is irrelevant.
Clearly, this
is
setting this idea up one. Well, first of
just the idea that I think I've got
the video
Where Trump is saying, give me it. We'll
investigate. Investigate what?
Investigate that the person did something which is
completely protected within which you are you know,
his constitutional rights
I guess that's the right way to say
it. My point is to make sure we
understand that it's not something they can take
away or that they even have to agree
with. It is inherent, god given. They choose
to respect it or not. In this case,
he's literally telling you that we won't respect
your rights because we made this a sacred
thing. Here's what the here's the clip. Into
that flag.
So remember, you put out a truth right
after
I, I saw it. I saw it.
Took this flag from that, from that man
that was burning it in the street. I
said, do you know who he is? I
didn't realize how much that is just like,
please
please praise me. Please
praise me for the thing. Isn't that what
you wanted, Trump? I did it for you,
which just feels gross to me. Here's what
he says.
Oh, yeah. I know exactly who it is.
This is Why don't you give it to
From that man that was burning it in
the street. As, do you know who he
is? Oh, yeah. I know exactly who it
is. So why don't you give it to,
Pam? Give it to the attorney general, and
let's, start
Unconstitutional
actions. Yeah.
Just just pathetic.
The attorney general, and let's, start prosecutions.
Yeah. I actually have a second flag that
he tried to burn as well. So I
have two of them from the same guy.
What happened
How embarrassing. When that flag started burning, everyone
went crazy.
Oh oh, did they? Well, let's go back
and look.
Did they go crazy? I don't remember that.
Let's see.
Okay. Well, let's watch. Let's see if it
goes crazy.
Looks pretty calm to me. Everyone's standing. There's
not there's not no music. No one's even
talking. And Nick is just calmly standing there
watching it. Okay. Nothing crazy yet.
Intensive
credit.
You got intensification on here. Oh. Oh. Oh.
Just putting it on the ground and he's
making it. So someone says he put the
flag on the ground. Making fun of him.
Right? Okay. Well, I don't see people going
crazy.
Do you?
Yeah. He walked away. Oh, that's weird. Almost
like they're making that up. Why not though?
Why not just lie a little bit more?
They lie about everything else. That's when it
started. Everyone went crazy.
Plus, also, so what happened? And don't you
love the you hear bond to your no?
That's right. What Trump said is correct. He
that's right.
These people it's just like a bunch of
yes people. It's so embarrassing. When that flag
started burning, everyone went crazy. That's right. And
that's when it started, when they started burning
the flag. So thank you. If you could
give the information That that's when what started?
His story about a flag?
It would be great. Absolutely. And at least
that horrible night made you famous.
You
guys saw it. I got a I got
a text from the president of The United
States, so I appreciate that. And president Trump
Trump Yuck.
I mean, just I mean, look. It'll be
re I mean, this is whether I have
a very, very, very low opinion of this
very small, childish, manipulative person,
an objective perspective, I mean, this is weird.
Like, this if you are
anything but a pandering sycophant, this is a
very, very weird and and it's not just
him. Watch the whole thing. It's just a
circle, you know, what? About going around going,
we did this for you, Trump, and you're
the best all the time. It's just very,
very, very uncomfortable.
Here
is where Trump previously said that
he already thought this. We already played this
one.
This is a great clip from
Decentral
News. Well, here is just Trump before that.
Already we're stressing. By the way, you know
that he was told by his people that
this was constitutional. That's why he said this
in this clip. This is before he was
put in position. Put the American flag down.
They were writing Hamas on the bell outside
of Union Station. As I've said many times,
they don't have any evidence of that. It
was something somebody caught afterward and said Hamas.
For all we know, it was a Zionist
written there, but he's conflating the person who
burned that flag with the person who wrote
that because it was at the same event.
Therefore, they're all Antifa, and you see how
subjected this always gets. Certainly could be. I
would never deny that. But the idea that
we know, as a matter of fact, is
the same partisan game both sides play all
the time. What does a Donald Trump do
if he takes office to these people on
the street?
Rarely have we seen anything like this, and
I think you should get a one year
jail sentence if you do anything to desecrate
the American flag. Now people will say, oh,
it's unconstitutional.
Those are stupid people. Right. You're stupid if
you understand that it's unconstitutional.
You must understand that. Right? He said that
because he knows he's been told that. He
just goes, I don't care.
That's not correct. I know better than everybody
else about the constitution or rather just what
it should be. So those are dumb. Those
are stupid people
for arguing the truth.
And you're only smart if you believe what
I'm saying even though it's false.
And Nick Sorter jumped up and said, I
believe you.
Everything you just said is correct, Donald Trump.
You know I know we're on the same
team.
It's just sad. There's so many examples of
this. All I mean, this is him at
the Internet, same point.
So here's Nick Sorter driving around afterward
for whatever reason, saying, after we saved the
flag from Antifa, we drove around with the
flag blasting, God bless America.
We win.
We win. This guy's so childish. I'm sorry.
I mean, it's not even this is any
important. It's just I'm I'm
if these people
with
1,200,000
followers, things like that, it's insane to me
that this kind of person
who should be you know, this is the
kind of if this wasn't a group of
people in any of the like, not in,
like, a controlled like, a I'm trying to
think of an example. Like, where you just
have a group of people and this guy
started doing these kind of things. He would
be collectively laughed at. But he's in a
room full of other Syca fans who pat
him on the head for saying the things
they all agree with. Just like Barry Weiss
went on Joe Rogan and called him Assad
toady and she didn't know the definition because
she's so used to being in a room
full of other pandering people, they go, Oh,
Barry, you said the thing we all agree
with. You're correct. Don't even worry about defining
what it means.
She is so they're so trapped in those
echo chambers. They don't even realize that they're
I think that's what we're staring at. But
this person rightly said, no one is giving
you the attention you seek, not even ice.
This reflects a significant issue in our society
today, influencers
desperately chasing visibility for clicks to maintain their
lifestyle. It's money over morality, and it's frankly
disgraceful. Now that very well alone could be
the reason people get trapped in stuff like
this. They they they get trapped in a
cycle of trying to be constantly and they
will lean into anything.
Whether or not they have important,
principles
or integrity.
Posted this. Hey, Antifa. Your reign of terror
is almost over. President Trump will make sure
of it.
This was it was really about this.
I made it. I'm in the war room.
Like, so they were the defining the power,
but we're now pandering to it. Woo hoo.
But she says, the patriotic blonde, unless they're
on the Epstein list. Right. Mic drop.
Same people that were screaming about how we
have to we can't stop until we get
it, and we can't stop until it's released.
And then Trump goes ignore it. And they
go, what are you even talking about anymore?
Who's Epstein?
It's just it was pretty sad. And in
making that point, this person says, shut up.
No one cares. Choose Liberty says that.
And for instance, Patriot Blunt says, apparently, you
do. You replied. You must be quite triggered.
And he's Choose Liberty says, you're grifting off
something that will never happen. Got it?
And then rightly so, Cohen tell bro
makes fun of him. Do not criticize Israel,
Trump, Kirk, Jeffrey Epstein. I fell for it
again.
You're grifting off something that will never happen?
You mean the release of the Epstein information
that you all I mean,
wow.
Well, here's Nick making his point even further,
pointing out. Here's a protest. So you have
to understand. This is the tenth. Right? So
they have their whole little thing about Antifa,
terrorist organization,
and this is already the the embodiment of
this. So now because they're there
now is this Antifa?
I don't know. Is this a group of
people? Did they are they are they they
give you evidence of some kind of network
funding they can prove went to this? And
even if they did, is that can you
prove that's terrorist activity or just somebody wants
to fund them?
None of that's happening.
They're using this big round table to make
to act like there's some kind of process.
So here it says, Illinois state troopers
dragging and arresting
anti rice anti ice rioters.
Right, just like they do to each other.
Right? They're all protesting. Okay. And you could
look for yourself. The the group the major
group behind them
I'll play it real quick. The police are
rushing in there. They're trying to arrest people.
The vast majority of people standing behind them
are just standing there waiting.
So as always, Derek has covered this forever.
They kettle, they rush in, they confront, they
caught and they cause conflict, and they blame
you for violence, and they arrest everybody they
can. They do it like a matter of
policy.
So he is cheering on the guy claiming
he supports the constitution, the fact that they're
just going and arresting protesters because they're ICE,
or rather they're Antifa because they're protesting ICE.
It's what I told you. It's what's happening.
President Trump is forcing the state of Illinois
to finally address lawlessness.
Protesting.
You think this is you think this is
not easy to see? I showed you this
so many times already
that Donald Trump already let this out of
the bag. When in LA before his military
parade,
there were planned protests, and he said, if
you protest, you'll be met with force.
Not if you break the law, not if
we pretend you're Antifa.
If you protest, you'll be met with force.
That is unconstitutional
textbook. Big on Saturday. We're gonna have a
lot of and if there's any protest that
wants to come out, they will be met
with very big force, by the way. And
for those people that wanna protest, they're gonna
be met with very big
Is that difficult to understand?
Only complete hypocrites will agree with that. That's
that is unconstitutional. I don't care whether you
agree with why they're protesting.
Same thing is happening here. What he's showing
you
is a video of them
basically trying to drag out people while they're
I mean, look, there's film crew standing three
feet behind them. Let's not pretend like this
is some massive violent activity. They're protesting
and being arrested for protesting.
And it's a circular logic. Well, they're Antifa
terrorists, and they're anti ice rioters because they're
Antifa, so we have to arrest them because
they're rioting. Well, were they, or were they
just present? And you said that because they're
Antifa even though we can't prove they're Antifa
because they're probably just lefties protesting.
It matters to me these things are proven,
and it should to you too.
Keep pushing 47.
These people are absolute hypocrites.
Oh, and just in case you were uncertain,
he says president Trump is scheduling to make
an announcement on Friday.
Oh, yeah. That's it. That's it, by the
way. Breaking news. I'm now a stenographer for
what Trump wants me to say. Typical.
But David Icke rightly points out, as Nick
Sorter's breaking out his flag display,
morons using morons to advance a moronic, fascistic
agenda.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Now last couple of points.
I found this interesting, and this speaks to
the the Antifa point in the same
way. Lovable liberal says this interesting,
perspective about this guy,
about Jesse Waters. And saying, according to the
Internet sleuth, Jesse Waters has, on several occasions,
interviewed a masked actor who has passed off
as a gang member or an Antifa insider.
The Internet has tracked down the name of
the actor.
Now regardless of what your thoughts on this,
this is I've I've got this is interesting
to me for many reasons to look in
further.
But
we know they do this. We've caught CNN
in the past doing exactly that
way back with Saudi Arabia and plenty of
times after that. But look at this guy.
Look at this guy we're pretending is in
Gaza
with blue eyes and y I mean,
it's just insane that we ever let these
people get away with this kind of stuff.
But so, apparently, that's a guy that said
Tifa founder. This guy is an ex.
Which one was this?
Anyway, just, like, different this was Gaza. This
popping different situations. Right? And this is accrediting
to decoding Fox News. It simply says, last
week, Waters spoke to a man named Eric
who claimed he was a former former member
of Antifa. Two years ago, he interviewed Ramon
Mundo, who is a Mexican mafia member. Some
folks thought he looked exactly the same. Why?
Because it appears that it seems to be
the same person.
And by the way, I'm pretty sure that
it's weird to have a,
even, I mean, even Antifa where, I mean,
this is Mexican cartel member, a Gaza terrorist.
Weird that they're all this white guy with
blue eyes. It just just feels like they
could think that one through a little further.
Or
just to end this segment and finish with
is or with Gaza and Israel.
So we have this whole thing going on.
Right? Where they're sitting around this table with
this whole weird display.
And I think this this was about,
many other different topics not to get into
it all.
Rubio comes up, whispers something in his ear.
Right? So Johnny Maga says Trump is forced
to end the roundtable discussion after receiving news
that Marco Rubio that a peace deal in
Gaza is at our fingertips.
Even though literally were bought they were bombing
up until then, and they bombed every moment
after this. So that's a lie, basically. And
they need him to close the deal. Are
we really pretending that? I mean, let's let's
be let's let's be clear about how stupid
this is.
They had already had a general agreement to
this point. And the point we were being
told was that we're waiting for Hamas. Right?
Okay. So then what would he have to
get up and do if the point was
waiting for something else to overall, we know
as a matter of fact today that they
didn't even stop bombing, guys. So this is
the I think personally, him trying to make
himself look important.
But this is Rubio coming up to him.
Conspiracy.
Okay.
And so to me,
I just I I I think it's just,
you know, probably nonsense. Probably something else entirely.
Criminal conspiracy.
Okay.
I'm just giving
Yeah. I was just giving a note by
the secretary of state saying that we're very
close to a deal in The Middle East,
and they're gonna need me,
pretty quickly. So, I will take a couple
of more questions. Criminal conspira Just my opinion.
You know, that's why I put the title
the image on that in the beginning.
But the point is, I have to rush
off to deal with the ceasefire that didn't
ultimately happen. So, you don't really need to
piece this together too much. So, let's point
this out. Okay? So, on the ninth,
Israel had bombs and this many, many, many
other places and ongoing starvation, rape, and torture,
and everything else that doesn't seem to stop,
not even for one day. But on the
ninth, one specific location, they bombed the Al
Tufa neighborhood and and Al, Al Nafak Street
in Eastern Gaza City, while Israeli forces opened
fire on civilians along the Al Rashid Street.
Another day in the ongoing genocide. Now this,
by the way, was already after Trump had
said they should stop bombing or said he
told them to stop. They didn't stop. We
already proved that to you, but wanted to
reiterate that. This is not just as of
today. This is the ongoing reality that they
never stopped. They never have. Not in Lebanon,
Syria, anywhere else.
An Israeli tank advance by the way, just
really quickly, even the other ones where there
was some semblance of a pause, they were
bombing and torturing and burning houses down in
West Bay.
They had a deal with the Palestinians, not
just in Gaza. That was the point, and
they didn't care. They just started killing as
many Palestinians in the West Bank as they
could, which is right now also what's happening.
But it says an Israeli tank advanced in
the Rashid Street in Gaza City's southwestern
entrance, blocking displaced Palestinians from returning north as
news of the ceasefire spread. So they were
already trying to stop them from being able
to do what they wanted. This is torture.
Elizabeth says the reality of the ceasefire, Gaza's
being bombed. Civilians are targeted. Tanks block displaced
families from trying to return home. In minutes,
hope turned into violence.
Now even a pause means nothing. They were
already going, yay. Praise us. We Nobel Peace
Prize. That's what they were doing. Netanyahu comes
out and says, everyone in Israel is happy.
We did it. We said it. You know,
like,
forcing, like, aggressively trying to get everyone to
just, like,
jump far into it. We did it. It's
over. Everybody look forward. Like, they thought that
would actually happen.
But
as of today,
here's the this is what,
Reuters is reporting.
Gossmas trek to ruin homes as Israeli forces
pull back
under ceasefire.
It kills me.
Just, you know,
they see everything like we do, guys. This
is all over social media. Even Sky News
was publicly streaming
this exact
location.
I well, I shouldn't say that this exact,
you know, general location. You'll see what I
mean. It could be further down the beach.
My point is that this very train, this
line of people want this first they're all
displaced and ethnically cleansed, by the way. Overall,
they bombed them the entire time, and they
are still to this very moment. And Reuters
just they pulled back on their ceasefire. It
kills me that people who think they can
trust these platforms still pretend like that's the
truth.
It's not. Now before we even get to
the bombing, I wanted to make this point
like I did in the beginning. I don't
let's just even say that the first thing
they did was absolutely they gave everything they
could. The the whole thing ended. They give
Palestine a state. Literally every do everything we
ask for.
Are we good in pretending like they're still
not guilty of genocide?
Like, are we really gonna take an honest
moment and reflect on the fact that no
matter what ultimately happens next,
they need to go to jail?
Biden, Trump, Netanyahu,
the Zionist
government, Rubio, Blinken, any of these people that
have been actively involved with this, Matt Miller,
any of them, these people have gaslit and
and allowed and funded and were apart. They
were material,
belligerent actor.
They were a belligerent, a coal belligerent, if
not an absolute
I guess that is the right. They're coal
belligerent, like, they are part of it.
So just because they ultimately cave and do
what people ask does not mean they're not
guilty of that. Now there's like I said
before, there's a moment where you could have
argued, like, a a few months go by,
and Trump does it. Okay. You could argue
that maybe he had to decouple and and
do whatever.
That's not close to what's happening. But my
point is you could have argued that should
he have done it early enough, you could
have said, okay. He's not guilty. Biden's the
one that did it. He has actively continued
to support it, lied about ceasefires, funded everything
even more so than Biden, and continued to
be a part of everything, the worst parts
of this. Trump is guilty of genocide, just
like Biden is guilty of genocide. That's an
easily provable fact. So now
even if they give you everything,
we could the fact that they want you
to jump out of your chair and go,
yay, Netanyahu and Trump is insane,
but it shows you how desperate they are.
So that's not what happened, by the way.
But even if it did, this person says,
It's an incomplete joy because we've lost a
lot. Instead of time when he thought there
was a deal in place, he says, I
don't have a spoon or a fork in
my house, just rocks, stones.
Other lost families,
some lost everything they own. Others lost legs
and limbs, some lost everything. Some went missing
as well. So you see the point like
even if you give us this peace fire,
you just make up for everything you've done
to them.
Just really reflect on that for a second
because that's something sure as hell they're gonna
try. I think last last ditch effort. Now
this is funny. This clandestine account has me
blocked for some reason, probably because they're very
hardcore one-sided narrative. But he says, hey, Dave
Smith, Nick Fuentes, Ian Carroll.
Trump just ended the war in Gaza.
See how ridiculous these people are? Why? Because
Trump said that out loud, you clown. And
it says, but none of you have acknowledged
it.
Seems like something you might have been interested
in given that you've been crying about Israel
all day for years.
So why so quiet? You realize this came
from Israel. The Israeli government made this point
and it filtered across the Israel media in
this country. And I do mean Israeli funded
media. That's what we're talking about.
But Steve rightly says, well, because a ceasefire
isn't an end to a war, the ceasefires
are never honored by Israel, and there are
still 10,000 Palestinians being held in torture prisons
and rape dungeons.
Decentured news says clandestine similarly similarly
promoted Musk as a free speech hero who
had proven his critics and critics wrong in
2023, then blocked and hid comments from people
who challenged him. Oh, well, I guess that's
why we're blocked too.
Makes sense to me.
And he says, some of the many examples.
Yeah, look, we're right there.
Yes, you do. Oh, that's right. I remember
this now. Yeah, Mel.
Right? Misty.
Same to you. Me too. Apparently, everyone's ever
got bro flakes. What a bunch of children.
Right? What's to the point?
Why would you come out and go, he
just ended the war. Like, literally,
still happening. Whether they're bombing or not, it's
a ceasefire, SD points out. It didn't end
the war. Are these people that uneducated when
it comes to a very thing they pretend
they're doing every day? It seems that way.
Or more likely that they're absolutely blindly a
part of a certain narrative.
But as I said, and this is thirty
seconds after this clown's like, why didn't you
say anything? Well, guess what?
Israel bombed them and had been the entire
time. And people like James Lee have the
courage to call it out. He says, well,
that didn't take very long. And people came
out going AI because that's what Trump kind
of set up to do. But the truth
is you could prove this. Sky News was
playing it publicly.
I think I here's the here's the clip
that was shared by,
the chairman of the Arab Emirates group, Rami
Abdul.
But this is just one of many examples
of this, guys. And they're everywhere you look.
The point is, despite the ceasefire, footage shows
Israeli tanks targeting Palestinians,
and this was
six in the morning, October 9. Right in
the Al Rashid Street that we were just
telling you about. Right? That's where they were
going. That's where they were forced. They blocked
them with the tanks to begin with, and
now they're opening fire.
This is coordinated like it was with the
flower massacre, like it has been every other
time. And what's the consistent factor? The ethnic
cleansing of all Palestine.
Oh, wait. Hold on.
I said and simply the same point really,
but just, you know, this and this is
why
one of the many reasons
that very few people cheered when these sociopaths
once again
announced a false cease fire
and wanted mountains of praise for pretending to
seek an end to this. They lie.
Right? It's pretty simple.
My father told me when I was a
child,
people in authority lie.
Correct.
So
all these people out there get, like, laughing
about why didn't they say anything? How embarrassing
for them. And what's even crazier is they
must either they're so convinced that everything they're
told to lean into must be what they
say it is, that Trump did it so
he must be doing it, and then ten
seconds later, it proves out to not be
the case. How many times can they fall
for that? And if they always do, then
you must ask whether or not they're being
paid to continue to look like the fool.
Here's what Eric Daugherty, speaking of fools and
blind supporters and sycophants, he says tens of
thousands of Palestinians are flooding towards Northern Gaza.
Okay. Get how insane this is. He's pointing
on the next day to the very location
that Israel was bombing and still is right
now.
So you see, this is Fox News lying
to you with fake information. It's what they
do every single day just like CNN. They're
trying to and look. You if you watch
right now, largely Fox,
the ceasefire, it's wonderful when everyone's free and
happy and Gaza is changing forever. That's what
they're doing right now While Israel is quite
literally still bombing innocent people as we speak.
And people like Eric come out and get
1,000,000 views for saying, oh my god. Look
at it. It's so great. They're all returning.
Tens of thousands are flooding toward Northern Gaza.
President Trump's ceasefire took effect, and peace broke
out in the region. That's what he wrote.
Many of them are seeking to return to
their homes or check to see if they
withdraw. Oh, and guess what? Israel killed them
every time they did that and are doing
so right now.
It's unbelievable. Historic Trump is saving thousands of
blood. These people are so uninformed. It pains
me,
or they don't care. Well, here's another one.
This Paul guy says, woman asked a good
question now that president Trump has made peace
in Gaza.
That's on the ninth, by the way. Where
are all these pro Palestinian people? Shouldn't they
be celebrating this or whatever? The thing that
isn't the the narrative about something that hasn't
even happened yet? And I said, this is
one of the largest problems with those lost
in the falseness of the mainstream
partisan divide.
They seem to blindly take and run with
whatever their chosen politicians and podcasters report without
zero due diligence.
Or I should have said with zero due
diligence, that's frustrating. Or follow-up, at the moment,
Israel's bombing Gaza.
So another one, this guy, Leo Kearse. Ever
heard of him? Have 95,000 followers, comedian? Says,
is it just me?
Or do the people who have been screaming
for peace in Gaza for the last two
years seem very disappointed there's a peace deal?
These are not all hot takes. This is
the same sentiment being put out by a
lot of people.
And I said, you mean aside from the
ongoing Israel bombing of civilians that never even
slowed down? Yeah, baffling. And you won't be
surprised that no response.
Except for person you know, this guy agreeing.
Cease fire, my a s s.
But here's where it starts on October 9
that Tali Bennett comes out and says, this
is from Israel. I would have expected the
streets of Europe capitals and campuses around the
world to be bursting with joy for the
end of what they claimed is genocide.
Can you believe that?
Even Israeli experts are calling this genocide. These
people are so desperate. It's crazy. He says,
might it be that their goal was never
to secure Palestinian lives, but to destroy Israel?
Wow.
They're and you this guy knows they're bombing
people while he says that.
He said and Simon here says, do you
see how they spit it? They failed to
ethically cleanse Palestine. I don't think they did,
in fact. I think it's still happening. And
now they spin the false to the next
narrative. I agree. It's what they do.
Zachary Foster in response to Nepali Bennett says,
an end to the industrial scale slaughter of
Palestinians is welcome.
But if history is any guide, Israel will
violate the deal like they are right now,
like it has every other deal.
Israel's words and agreements and promises
are toxic nuclear waste.
You know that.
So a lot of people know that. Let
me let me preface these remarks with I
never never ever believe
Israeli figures.
I've been in the government too long to
know that the Israelis are patent liars.
In their intelligence community, in their propaganda community,
certainly,
and in their leadership, they are inveterate
liars.
Let me
So
he puts up an article, which you've probably
seen, we've talked about in the past.
Israel and Hamas signed at least six deals
in '20 02/2008,
2012, 2014, 2019, and 2021, and 2025. Deal
number seven was apparently agreed upon yesterday.
And there's more than that if you understand
like the the whole blinking.
I mean, even with Trump, same thing, like
these kind of false setup and fall like,
they they
they are lying to you about all of
them. We've proven it every single point.
The history of ceasefire talks between Israel and
Hamas, 2008 to present. Spoiler alert, they have
sabotaged every single one. And it's easy even
Oslo Accords. Guys, you could look this up
in UN documentation. They lied. They completely sabotaged
it. Sort of like, let's use Hamas and
Palestinian Islam or rather Palestinian authority and make
them fight each other.
That's what they're doing. They're literally creating the
balance. They fund one side or The US
and Israel at large have funded the most
radical elements of Islam as far back as
you wanna look. If you can't take make
if you by the way, it's approvable easily
looked up back. If you can't accept that
and acknowledge what that means while otherwise saying
they're fighting terrorism, I mean, it's it's a
willful choice to be uninformed.
Here is Grok, for those that wanna pretend.
It's honestly about the other day, it's funny.
So Grok was started by Elon Musk after
he took over Twitter, right? Okay, even though
we know it's a DARPA program.
So he takes over Twitter,
all the holdovers and woke and stuff, and,
okay, we're changing everything, and so he rolls
out grok. Okay,
somehow still we get the woke grok, and
the grok is still, okay, in what way?
How is that possible?
So if you were gonna pretend it was
like a hangover Democrat or whatever,
maybe the fourth time they change over Grok,
probably gone by that point. Right? So the
last time, oh, look, Grok is saying Israel's
committing genocide. Come on. You gotta fix your
woke Grok, Elon. I'm thinking about the logic.
I'm going, why would it be woke? Are
you are you implying that Elon is woke?
Or people he worked with after this fourth
iteration are still woke? Or that somehow like,
my point is it doesn't obviously make sense.
What they're saying is we don't like what
it says, therefore woke. So change it. We
wanna hear what we want to hear. It's
not about woke or anything else. It's about
narrative control. It's everywhere you look. And so
my point is, here's Grok despite their 17
upgrades, constantly being trained to look at still
telling you what's going on. Now that's not
like you should trust it. Grok is gets
caught lying all the time. The point in
this is to recognize that their platform that
they actively tweak to lie to you is
still showing you that, yes, Israel appears to
be conducting air strikes
and many other military operations
at this moment,
even as The US broker ceasefire agreement was
announced earlier today.
Literally bombing on the record in front of
everybody, and they're all lying about it.
And then Trump even says this.
This was yesterday, by the way. So they
were bombing yesterday. I can prove it. They're
bombing today. I can prove it. Here's what
Trump said.
And what guarantees Hamas disarms and that Israel
doesn't resume bombing once the hostages are reversed?
We're doing is getting our hostages back. Okay?
And that's what people wanted more than anything
else. Not Israel, though. And you could prove
that because they've said that 17 times. That
Sahah hostages were secondary
every time. But see, Trump is just repeating
the narrative. That's what he does. Maybe he
doesn't even know. They wanted these hostages back
that have lived in hell. Nope. Most of
them are treated far, far better than even
people in Gaza. Most I mean, all of
them, in fact. All of them are treated
better than any single person held in Israel
prison. Almost every single one of them have
come back and said they were kind. They
took us shopping. They shielded our body. Look
it up.
But here he is just lying to you,
you know, just casual lies.
Like nobody has ever even dreamt possible. Nope.
Completely false. Exactly exact opposite, in fact.
And, after that, we'll see. But they've agreed
to things, and,
I think, it's gonna move along pretty well.
Right. The bottom line is
we don't know.
Meaning that Israel's probably going to violate the
deal because that's always what happens.
Trump could not guarantee that Israel won't start
bombing again. That's the way that reads.
So
all these people going, why are you cheering
about this? Okay? I just don't get why
all these Palestinian supporters aren't cheering. He literally
just said Israel and we already know this
because of their past agreements. Israel will do
what they want.
In fact, let's get to that because Netanyahu's
already said that.
David Ick simply points out, it is a
head shaker to see the mainstream and much
of the alternative media accepting the Trump Netanyahu
Gaza peace deal
on face value.
Israel has an agenda for greater Israel and
the destruction and relocation of Palestinians. That's secret.
The peace deal is just another another step
on the road to that as we see
as we will see. Once the hostages are
out, the last Hamas negotiation weapon is gone.
No way that Netanyahu has inflicted this this
staggering death and destruction on Gaza just to
get peace. He wouldn't spell the word. I
mean, guys, how do you not see how
logical that is? I've I've been saying it
from the very beginning. The moment that he
goes, yes. Fine exchange and the hostage are
done.
Well, the argument is that you have no
leverage right now, then, ultimately, then you're
just ethnically cleansing, which is what they're already
doing. They're creating the circumstance where they keep
this hostage exchange open so they can keep
having the justification to do what they're doing.
Even though everything they do every day puts
them at risk, which everyone in Israel is
saying. Really, everyone everywhere is saying other than
blind politicians and blind Zionist supporters.
Now war of peace points out to our
beloved Palestinians in Gaza. Now this was on
the ninth.
Please stay safe and do not cross into
areas where there is military presence and do
not attempt to go to your homes in
the north. The Israeli media, army radio, and
channels across the Israeli media landscape had announced
that at midday local time, the ceasefire took
effect just like the Egyptian media did.
Then
there was a clarification
disseminated by the office of the Israeli prime
minister that only went to the people that
need to see it. Right? The media goes
ceasefire.
Cheer Israel and The US. And then they
go accept
for you guys, for the dough,
saying that this ceasefire would only take effect
once the government convenes the approve and approves
the
deal. See, you want you I mean, is
it even hard to recognize why that part
wasn't said out loud? Because they're saying we're
not doing it yet. But we wanna take
all the praise from claiming that and let
Trump blum you know, bumble into it saying
it's all happening and take the fall. He'll
be the one that looks stupid when it
doesn't happen.
And it says so, no ceasefire according to
the Israeli prime minister's office.
Yet,
as they said, it is almost inevitable that
they will vote to accept the ceasefire. They're
arguing, I disagree, since they've already scheduled a
cabinet meeting and one hour after to discuss
the recent footage. So first, it started with,
woah, hold on. We have to agree ourselves.
Wait a minute. Isn't that what you already
said? Didn't Trump already say they've all agreed
and Hamas has to accept? Now, they accept.
They go, wait. We have to go for
it's it's just it's an insult it's insulting
your intelligence. It's a game.
Owen Jones points out this was the first
one, same kind of thing.
It says, what we should know is that
this deal could have been done a long
time ago. Yes, we all know this. This
is the Israeli hostage negotiator. It says, what
we should know is that this deal could
have been done a long time ago. Hamas
agreed to all of the same terms
in September
2024.
You see,
honesty
from the Israeli, by the way. But you'll
still get called racist for pointing it out
and still get called an anti Semite for
acknowledging that they have been actively hurting their
own people the entire time. It says, but
at this point, the response of the Israeli
negotiators was that, quote, the prime minister did
not agree to end the war.
That's where we are right now. So they're
going, Cease fire. How dare you not praise
at all while Netanyahu is behind going, well,
we haven't we haven't even we haven't started.
We can't do it because Netanyahu said we're
not allowed to end the war. That's what
they keep saying. Yep. Because it's like every
other time. It's exhausting to act like we're
even surprised about this.
Mohammed Shehada,
this is today, says, I've received new information
that shattered any bit of optimism I had
about the Gaza Trump deal. It's neither a
plan nor a framework. It's a political performance
that aims to legitimize further violence. It's not
meant to last beyond the hostage release. If
even that, by the way, I argue it
won't even happen to that. These aren't my
words. It's an assessment of the very mediators
brokering the deal.
Glenn Greenwald says when Trump and Witkoff engineered
their first multistage ceasefire agreement in January,
Netanyahu told Israelis in Hebrew, as we showed
you then,
he had no intention of complying
with subsequent steps once it got hostages back.
See? And they'll point to that and say,
look at how easy it is to play
the US government.
Yeah, when you when you leave out how
you're blackmailing them all or whatever else is
happening, either way, that's what happens. And Glenn
can point to it and go look what
he just said. And it doesn't go even
break through Fox and CNN. And all the
politicians secretly know anyway, don't care.
Some hyper hyperbole there. I'm just trying to
make a point.
But it says, of course, no one hopes
this one of course, one hopes this one
endures, but skepticism is very rational.
That's where we are right now, by the
way.
So
Trump gives a vague answer about Palestinian statehood
and says they may do something that would
be a little bit different. Oh, great.
You mean that the deal you agreed on
that they which they supposedly accepted
might change after the deal was made? Shocking,
I know. Who could have thought that might
possibly happen? They'll do whatever they want and
they'll act like it's their fault. They did
it in Yemen, they do it in Syria,
they do it everywhere they go, guys, left
and right. That's what your government does. They're
dishonest actors.
Make sure I've got this one second.
Shoot. Hold on.
Don't know how I know I've got it.
I can't see the video. Give me one
second.
Nope. Not that one.
How strange is that? So not that you
need to hear this, but while I'm looking
for it, my computer still holds some of
these older videos
and changes the image on it. So I
can't see. It looks like a video from,
like, some
COVID thing. It's
weird. I'm being manipulated.
Here we go. I think this might be
this one.
There we go. Sure.
The nineteenth point of the 20 plan said
that in the future, there could be conditions
in which the Palestinians might
potentially get a state. Under what conditions do
you think the Palestinians Well, we're looking at
it at the time. We're gonna see how
it all goes. And, you know, there's a
point at which we may do something that
would be a little bit different. It may
be very positive for everybody,
but we'll be looking at that at the
time.
Mister president. And I I think we'll get
to that I think we'll get to that
period too. Yeah. Please. Mister president. Yeah. Please.
Alright. I mean, that's not that's pretty clear.
Right? So despite the agreement on the points
that we're gonna do, it may might change
when we get there.
So yeah. Because guess what? Once this all
happens, Palestinians have zero leverage whatsoever. And so
they'll get to and I guarantee you they
know that. They'll they'll do whatever they want.
They have dollar signs in their eyes and,
you know, quite darker things from Israel. The
point is clearly, once this happens, the Palestinians
are gonna get put wherever they're
Israel will take advantage of everyone they control.
I think that's pretty clear.
Now for time in general, I'm gonna skip
past this, but I just wanna I'm gonna
I'll make a point about this in another
show in general, but just
I mean, I might, depending on the timing
if it if it happens the next show.
But UN commissioner says Trump's plan
breaches international law. And the simple point is,
let's realize guys, and she makes the point
I'm making, that just because this happens does
not change the ruling of genocide.
They've been deemed genociding
actor or genociders or whatever. They've been they've
been deemed guilty of genocide.
You don't that doesn't just get taken away
when you make a deal. That's what they're
trying to act like. Give me peace. We're
getting the Nobel Prize. We changed everything. You're
the ones committing genocide. And she also goes
on to make the point that, look, we
already ruled on this. The idea is that
these people are committing genocide, and therefore, there's
a very clear path we laid out for
this to end.
Just because they collectively decide to do it
differently, that doesn't it's breaches international law, but
they don't care. These people are not of
the mind that they have to follow international
law. That should be clear by now.
Now Donald Trump is now saying
200 troops to Israel,
US troops to support monitoring the ceasefire deal
that's not happening, and I don't think they
have any intention of it. This is more
US troops being put in the line of
fire. Now, of course, what's interesting is they
very clearly made the case that they were
going to be they'd already begun arriving, said
the US official.
Military troops being sent to Israel, said the
US official.
Then, of course,
Kelly Ann Leavitt comes out and goes, that's
not true,
saying
they're already stationed at CENTCOM and will be
tasked with monitoring the peace agreement.
So are you trying to say that CENTCOM
is in Israel? I don't think I'm just
saying, but maybe.
She's really just simply saying that they're already
there
and stationed or positioned and they're okay. The
bottom line is whatever's going on, there are
US troops that I can prove to you
are in Israel and have been for a
while. That's not new. So whether she means
200 more
or it's 200 that are in CENTCOM somehow
managing a peace deal on the other side
of the world, like Florida CENTCOM, I don't
know. I think they're just trying to cover
constantly because this doesn't look good because Americans
are not happy with the idea that more
US troops are going to die for Israel.
Janice girl points out, but guess what though?
The community note on the post,
which is meant to debunk this where it
says, context needed, personnel who are already stationed
in CENTCOM will be monitoring
we'll
be monitoring
the peace agreement in Israel working with the
other international forces. Okay.
And she says, well,
they put this out to debunk the Fox
News headline, which sheds light to bigger problem.
The US Central Command CENTCOM is responsible for
defending US interest in 20 nations.
Why are we paying to defend 20 other
nations? 2025,
Dow budget is $1,000,000,000,000.
It's a good point.
Done this, it says,
he'll initially have 200 people on the ground.
That's literally what he's saying, The US politician.
So I think they're trying to hide that
this is actually going on. It's not new
though. There's already people there. I've made this
case before. His role will be to oversee,
observe, make sure there's no obvious incursions.
You mean to cite from Israel currently bombing
and violating the deal. Right? Nobody can take
this at face value.
Glenn says major every major poll in The
US this year is worse than the prior
one for Israel. That more Americans now sympathize
with Palestinians than Israel is stunning.
As Curtis Mills notes, younger Republicans are 41
points less likely than older Republicans decide with
Israelis.
This is exactly a Charlie Kirk thing. This
is exactly an ADL Greenblatt generational
problem. That's what they're trying to hide from
you.
And that's all the more reason why somebody
like Kirk would have been taken out.
Here's
Taylor Greene, and I agree with what she's
saying. She goes, they're not Hamas, they're literally
women and children. And you can't unsee the
amount of pictures and videos of children that
have been blown to pieces
and and that they're finding them dead in
the rubble. That isn't, those aren't actors, that's
fake, That's isn't fake war propaganda. It's very
real.
Good for her. I still I still think
it's largely opportunism. I could be wrong. Either
way, I support it.
These were children on 11/07/2023,
sending a letter out to the world. Kids
and gods are hosting a press conference in
English, begging the world for life.
We come to shout and invite you to
protect us. We want to live. We want
peace. We want
other children to live.
Well, this was twenty three months ago. Israel
forces have killed more than 16,365
kids since
since that time.
I just don't I mean, this is the
this will change the way I view the
world for the rest of my life.
Young lives cut short on an unimaginable scale.
This is The Guardian.
Corporate media, 10/08/2025.
The 18,457
children on the Gaza's list of war dead,
and I guarantee you it's more than that.
And by the way,
names,
faces,
families,
there's not hiding. There's no hiding from this,
guys. If there's any accountability in this world,
if there's anybody with any morals and integrity,
people will be held accountable for this.
And let's not forget while that's happening,
there's a 16 year old kid, third generation
American,
born in Florida, who is currently being held
in Israeli prison
indefinitely with no charge.
American
kid.
And I said, while this new while while
numerous Americans are being held in these prisons,
some of them from the flotilla, by the
way, right now,
including a third generation American kid who was
kidnapped while visiting parents in the Westburg, family
in the West Bank, and not a single
America First politician or any other has said
a word about it.
Just don't know how you make sense of
that without understanding what Israel is doing to
this country.
The US has spent over thirty one billion
dollars with a b
sustaining Israel's two year war on Gaza and
the wider region.
$31,000,000,000
that Trump only went further.
A new report from Brown University finds that
Americans have spent 33,000,000,000.
That's 44 $45,000,000
every single day. Right now, Trump is sending
spending $45,000,000
a day to commit genocide.
Biden did the same.
That is $4.85
a day for every single citizen of Israel.
The American taxpayers have sent every citizen in
Israel a 144
check every month for twenty four months straight.
Not America first, guys.
Now in general, on the West Bank, guess
what? You now have Israeli media
saying it's now time to shift their focus
to what they call Judea And Samaria. That's
the West Bank.
That's happening on live Israeli media. They're saying
it's time to focus on that, which was
always the point, guys,
or one of them anyway.
The reality that Donald Trump took money from
Miriam Adelson so
so he could get a $100,000,000 from Miriam
Adelson. And her condition was West Bank annexation.
There's no hiding this.
There's only ignoring it.
Now you have settlers, illegal settlers who rape
and torture and burn houses down. That's been
publicly covered by everybody.
Raising the American flag
on a pole in an illegal Israeli settlement.
Is this the quiet part out loud?
Andre x. I'm gonna play two videos for
you to end today. K?
This is an American citizen
in the white.
It's an American
citizen who's an activist along with Audrey. She
was there documenting and calling out the West
Bank settlers.
Watch this video and understand what happens here.
Watch the reality of what these settlers are
allowed to do to legal owners of the
first of all, Palestinians who own the land
they're on now were displaced there back when
they first got displaced because of the Nakba.
And then you get illegal settlers like this
that rush in and destroy their homes and
force them off the territory. Right? If I
don't take it, somebody else will. Yeah. That's
that's a real quote because that's how they
believe. And they are stealing and robbery and
the
and being praised for it and the idea
of supporting them with a gun.
And yet we're supporting this. This is democracy.
This is the reality of what's driving what's
happening in this country.
And I want you to understand this and
see how real this is. And what happens
to the American citizen
as he gets dragged away?
Did did did Trump speak up? No. No.
He's probably in a prison right now.
And then we'll play one more video
about the funding of politicians in this country
and how obvious it truly is.
Start with this one.
Take a step back.
This is not your land. This is not
your cable. You're doing damage to private property.
So the settlers started digging up a cable
that leads to the Palestinian houses over there
in the village of Rasrauja, and they're still
here. There they are. And then we got
a visit from Zohar Sabah, the engineer of
the ethnic cleansing of the village of Marajat.
So this is Zohar, a sanctioned settler
who is directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing
of Marajat and for countless terror attacks against
Palestinians in the South Jordan Valley.
The army arrived and now the settlers are
continuing to dig up Palestinian pipes
in the presence of soldiers.
Hey. Don't touch me.
You just attacked me. Move away. Don't touch
me. Don't fucking touch me. Move your hands
away from me.
Hey.
Move move away from me.
Move away. You're gonna do anything? He just
attacked me. You're gonna do anything about it?
You're gonna do anything about it? You just
watch him at
all she's saying is speak Hebrew to me.
They don't care.
Even if you're speaking Hebrew, they wouldn't care.
These are Palestinians, and they will publicly tell
you as he's showing you on a 100
different videos that they don't deserve to be
there. They're not human. They don't exist. We
can do what we want. Trump Netanyahu support
us. I mean, all of this is on
video. Who cares though, right? Back me. When
I talk about Israeli child soldiers, I mean
that in a very literal way. Right now,
this kid who's, like, 14 is enforcing the
orders
of the soldier.
He's destroying your security camera.
They're destroying it or taking it in.
How was it?
Right. That's the reality, guys. That's what they
live under. You're living in your home in
a place that you've tried to make a
life out of since they displaced you and
just and stole everything from you,
and then they come do this.
And the IDF comes and watches and laughs
and helps them do it, destroys your water,
steals your home. Remember, we showed you one
last time where the woman tried to jump
in to stop his her her son from
getting beat, and he she got her head
bashed in with a pole right in front
of her family. And the IDF pointed guns
at them, and they all left.
Happens every single day in this country.
So lastly,
the people that support that, the people that
have allowed that facilitated and grown that in
their country
are the ones doing this in this country.
The country's government and many others are undeniably
bought and paid for. And it's not just
Israel, not just Zionism, but it's a huge
part of this. And I said that old
NASCAR advertising joke just really doesn't do it
justice.
That you get called racist
of all things when calling this out speaks
volumes.
Congress should wear jackets like NASCAR drivers so
we can know who bought them.
Truly.
How are they? And then gen x girls
post, which is what I'm taking this video
from.
Oh, it just gives you the video for
some reason. How are they? But we'll play
this to wrap up guys, and I'll I'll
leave you for it.
It's a clip talking about
APAC. Now, recently, APAC came out and made
this big denial about how I think it
was,
Matt
Gates who said that they they would walk
around APAC things. They'd scan their barcodes and,
like, dance for their money kind of thing,
which we know actually happens. And then she
goes, well, APAC denies the barcode scan scam
with the fundraisers, but what about this scam?
This one was caught on camera.
The truth
is that quite obviously we know that this
house works. We have I mean, here just
this real quickly.
This this is not a secret. Then then
I don't even know they've denied this. Republicans
who come to me and say, that's wrong
what APAC is doing to you. Let me
talk to my APAC person.
By the way, everybody but me has an
APAC person. What's that mean, an APAC person?
It's like your babysitter your APAC babysitter
who You get it. We've talked about this
many times.
How in the world does that not show
you everything you need to see? So this
clip is simply showing you an extension of
that. Right? That the
barcode scan kind of that there's nothing new.
What this simply shows you is the on
the record reality of what these people expect.
Doesn't mean it's always what gets delivered. Right?
And that's why things can shift to whatever
else. But understand, this is one visible, almost
surface level part of how they control this
government.
Doesn't even get into blackmail and Epstein overlaps
and any, you know, and, like,
dark horses, you know, mandarin candidate types or
whatever. People that are slowly built into the
system over the process of twenty year or
Palantir surveillance and AI infiltration.
I mean, everything combined.
I think we all know. I don't even
think I need to convince anybody anymore. The
question is really what are we gonna do
about it? Violence, I don't think is ever
the answer in this conversation. But I think
the reality is, first and foremost, that we
simply acknowledge to each other that we see
what's happening. And we start to drive this
conversation at the highest, most, you know, the
the most surface level part of the conversation,
which is why you then end up having
somebody in the the corporate media going, Are
you doing this for the Epstein list?
That's how that works. Force it into their
conversation so that where it has to be,
at the very least, they have to create
a narrative or a something to pivot from
it. Get them on their toes, keep pushing
back because the reality is they're already there.
You're having an effect, and they see that,
and they're terrified of you. And that's why
everything that's being pushed right now, I think,
is to create that world where they don't
have to rely on your in you know,
your your pretend vote or what you think
or what you know.
It'll be them coercing you.
You'll but, you know, the social credit, digital
ID, panopticon reality where
you have to comply or other things happen.
And I was just not about trying to
scare everybody. The point is we all see
that building. They're promoting it. The point is
that I know we can stop this if
we actually truly
stop the partisan game and just stand up
for your principles and call this out and
talk with people. I know it. Catherine and
I had the same conclusion at the end
of the show. It can feel over overwhelming,
insurmountable. The truth is, though, we wouldn't be
doing this if we didn't deeply believe that
we can make a difference.
Stand up.
Find the courage. Now is the time. I
love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
Our undercover reporter wanted to learn more about
how funding is secured for congressman.
Speaking of the devil.
David Oakes, a prominent pro Israel advocate, invited
Tony to a fundraising event.
Oakes later called him to discuss the details.
Is it just a social event?
Down the wall.
I'm making a huge list
of the people
that this group supports.
This is the biggest ad hoc political room
that's the one that's the wealthiest in DC.
All of.
Laura Kirk,
senator from Illinois.
Ken Delish
The fundraiser was being held in a wealthy
suburb of Washington.
The save headroom. It makes a difference. It
really really does. It's the best bang for
your boss.
And networking is phenomenal.
Congressman and senators don't do anything unless you
pressure them. They kick the can down the
road unless you pressure them. And it's the
only way you guys would want it. Right
now, our current contribution limit from any person
to a candidate is $2,700.
Now that's a lot of money, you know,
and and that can certainly buy some gratitude
with the lawmaker.
But if you really want to add punch
to, that type of buying of favors, what
you do is you get 50 or a
100 people together
at an event like this, all chipping in
$2,700
and then you bundle it all together and
hand over the total amount to the lawmaker.
At that point, we're talking anywhere up to
a quarter million dollars. So suddenly, you've got
a group of people with the same demand
they want from the lawmaker handing over a
quarter million dollars.
That buys a lawmaker.
The fundraiser was for Anthony Brown who ran
for congress in November
2016.
Uh-huh.
So we want to hear from you a
face to face in a small environment, give
these thirty, forty people and say this is
what's important to us. We want them to
make sure that we give money to your
enforce the arousal.
That way, when they need something from him
or her, like Viracho,
they can quickly mobilize
He's actually saying we're buying this these office
holders. And that's the point. We're chipping in
all this money so we can hand over
a 100,000 or 200,000
to the office holders so we can buy
them. Them. Because I was supposed to advertise.
It's only advertising long. I would be trying
to add an invite. I've never seen an
actual invite before.
Oakes described a similar event he attended in
New York, which included donors from Wall Street.
In New York, we're just helping. We don't
ask a goddamn thing about the Southeast Airlines
because it's a tiny issue. That's why. It's
a small and significant issue.
The big issue is Iran. We want everything
focused on Iran.
What happens is Jeff meets the congressman in
the backroom, tells them exactly what his goals
are. And by the way, Jeff, tell them
to work $250,000,000.
Basically, they hand me an envelope with 20
credit cards
and say, you could swipe each of these
credit
cards for a thousand dollars each.
There is
a disclosure law that is designed to highlight
whether there may be potential money laundering going
on in events like this. And that is
if the funds are earmarked,
and that means the organization has to disclose
who showed up at that event and how
much each individual chipped in and what they
handed over to the lawmaker.
What's the name of the group that puts
this on? Doesn't have a name. There's no
name. It's a political group.
For all the legal reasons, people pull their
money. What this specific group is doing to
try to avoid that disclosure requirement, it isn't
taking money and then putting it in its
own account and then handing it over to
the office holder.
It's just collecting credit card information and then
turning that over directly to the candidate. Therefore,
it's not violating the earmarking law, and they're
not reporting this. All we would see on
the campaign finance reports are the individuals who
contributed, but there'd be no record on those
campaign finance reports that they worked together as
a bundling group that they were all at
this event.
All we know is person a gave 2,700,
person b gave 2,700,
and we'd have no idea they're working in
in tandem with each other.
The one in New York is paying rent
over two cycles. It's a minimum commitment. Some
people do a lot more than that. Whatever
your commitment is to, like, to give 5,000,
be careful and ensure that we don't that
I don't go over the 22,000.
Is that okay?
If one is at a meeting where person
a wants to give 5,000,
another person has only $100
to give, and that person gave 2 and
a half thousand to the other person at
that meeting as a gift,
and they both therefore gave a total of
5,000, 5,100,
would that be illegal?
That would be illegal. That would be laundering
of campaign contributions.
The limit applies to the individual,
and so each individual is subject to that
$2,700
limit. And if any individual goes over that
limit, they are violating the contribution limit. They
cannot legally do that by laundering money through
other individuals.
If you give 5,000, you definitely ensure that
we don't, go between the funds. Shut up,