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 say that again. They are
liars.
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.
To stay. Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Tuesday, 10/07/2025.
Thank you for joining me today.
Obviously, a date that is now forever remembered
because of obvious events that took place on
that day from,
you know, the nuance we'll get into,
but also because of the incredible unprecedented
amount of propaganda,
lies, and,
I mean, words that I don't even think
describe the reality of what took place after
October 7. Some of the most nefarious things
I think I've ever had to cover.
We're We're gonna start today with an obvious
point because of the day to make sure
that we just sort of reiterate. Like and
I actually thought about not even making it
the starting point because the reality is
the information, which is what's important to me,
the truth of the topic is something that
I think has been nailed to the wall.
It's it's the one of the most obvious
things we'll even talk about and probably ever
talk about in my career of doing this.
It is so provably obvious that they've been
caught lying about damn near everything about it.
We'll talk about the Hannibal directive. We'll talk
about what took place in that day. You
know, briefly, to be honest, because you guys
are very well versed on this. Most people,
they're honest about this conversation are. But I
thought it's important to start with to make
sure that we you know, in case you're
new to this this platform or maybe you
haven't heard of this conversation and you wanna
know the truth in an objective nonpartisan way,
we'll break this down for you. And I
think it's really important to understand what an
important event this was for many, many other
reasons than what Israel says about it. Because
of what this change in the world, because
of the way Israel responded afterward, whatever you
think actually happened, what they did afterward
changed the world. And
in ways that I think are very, very,
very bad for them and in ways that
I think are beginning to be seen as
ways very, very good for humanity,
not because of their actions that are good,
obviously, because genocide is not something I'd ever
say. You know? Basically, the byproduct of what
they've done has caused the world to pay
attention.
That's nothing if not a positive thing. Even
Palestinians are the ones saying
because of what we've had to endure at
the one thing that's good out of it
is that people are starting to see what's
actually happening.
And, you know, it's unfortunate. Again,
words that just do don't do justice for
this conversation. It is horribly the reality that
it took that,
that it took a genocide that is still
being denied and supported by all the powerful
governments to truly shake people free from what
this from just what was going on in
the world
in ways that we won't even get into
today, but we've talked about quite a lot.
Well, we're gonna start with this topic today.
I think it's very important to get into.
We're gonna cover the the potential pardon, which
we've been saying from the very beginning was
the likely outcome
for Maxwell.
We're gonna talk about the overlap of that
conversation with what Bondi was saying, and I
think believe I could be wrong, but I
think she's still currently in front of congress,
but today she was.
And some of the incredible statements and lack
of statements from Bondi
and being called out even from very prominent
people in the you know, prominent, not in
the sense that she'd be respected, but prominent
because of lots of, I think, artificial followers,
even what they're saying about her right now,
which says quite a bit. But the overlap
of that with just many other things that
she said while she was there and how
that is an important conversation to see with
kind of where this is all going. We're
gonna talk about the overlap of this and
the claim of transparency
and, you know, from the FBI, from basically
everybody in this current administration,
and a pivot to sort of like, look.
The Dems were spying on us. Is is
anybody
yeah. So are you. So are you right
now. So is the government and everybody possible
left or right that you wanna spy on.
But this weird sort of carve out to
go like, look. They spied on us and
Jack Smith. Yeah. Who doesn't know that? And
but I'm and charge them for the crime.
Absolutely. I would even argue that's probably damn
near easier than anything in the conversation to
prove. I'll still argue that nobody will ever
be held accountable for it, And you know
why. I hope I'm wrong. The point, though,
is that if you're gonna make it about
one example and one side,
that's just the most childish thing in the
conversation. You could prove for a very long
time across many administrations
that even just this will say the NSA,
let alone the CIA, the FBI, and everybody
else has been doing exactly that, and it
still are right now, and even more so
are doing that right now to the left.
But it's okay because they're they're the real
terrorists. You know? They're it's the government on
either side of this. And if you've been
convinced that only one flake, one sliver of
it, or one part of it they're pointing
at is the only problem, then you're falling
into the trap.
Hopefully, I can make you at least percent
some things that'll make you
question the reality of that claim, at the
very least. Maybe I'm wrong. Always. Hopefully, people
are here because they want to be open
minded even if they disagree with what I
might think about the facts. But we are
presenting the facts to you, as well as
the conversation of apparently China killed Charlie Kirk.
Yeah. Who cares if there's basically zero evidence
other than just subjective overlap to make that
case despite all the evidence that clearly suggests
an involvement of Israel, not proof, mind you,
different things.
Interesting to see the bloomers of the world
start to build a case, and we knew
it. Or really. Anna Anna,
Anna Polina Lupa. I forget her name all
of a sudden. You know, these people are
largely irrelevant to me quite frankly at the
end of the day because I think we
know why. But either way,
to come out and just make the case
that it's China. I mean, what an interesting
and lazy thing to do right now of
all things. But we'll also talk about many
other topics around Israel, around,
what was the other one? I don't wanna
scroll the thing over real quick. But, you
know, a lot of things we're gonna get
into today that I think are very important.
The
in and the title, for example. And this
is really what I was kinda talking about
right there. We'll get into more of a
partisan two party illusion
conversation and Donald Trump pointing to the Insurrection
Act and, you know, being asked about it,
but let's I don't I largely tend to
think these things are somewhat organized. The point
is that this has been building.
They're making a case about the left wing
terrorism. And now just like we had the
left side and Biden and the insurrection, January
6, an outrageous and and and here we
are doing the same thing.
And I can easily prove to you that
January 6 was very much an organized effort
to trap the very side that pretends like
they're the ones fighting the deep state right
now being, you know, overlapping, by the way,
with your government that involves the people that
are currently there and
how outrageous that was. And now completely okay,
really, with the, you know, the typical screaming
at the top of the paradigm saying, yay.
The good thing. Go after them. Jack Posobiec
making a case for why everyone in the
country will support you if you initiate the
Insurrection Act to go to go to do
what?
Have they even laid out a case yet?
Have they even presented evidence of an organized
effort? I'm not denying that exists. In fact,
I think we all know that it does
in a nonpartisan
way. But the point is that you're claiming
a network of terrorism and pointing at the
left at large and then saying Insurrection Act
to go after them? I mean, it's just
this is it's so obviously everything else we've
been fighting, and it just goes teeter totter
back and forth. And I think that plenty
of honest people, which is the majority in
my opinion, are just tired. They wanna support
Trump, probably. They wanna support Biden, probably, but
there's but they see it. And I think
we all recognize this right now. I mean,
we see all of these things shifting. We
watch we're watching the paradigm struggle and be
vulnerable. We're watching the foreign policy illusion breakdown.
Everything's changing right now. It's a time for
change if we care to make it.
And I don't mean in the sense of
the government using that momentum to roll us
into the next problem. That's not change. That's
the status quo.
But let's start
with a couple of important things that I
want you guys to see.
And, oh, you know what? You know, I
forgot. I took let's get right into it
today. I I made the decision yesterday. I
always go through
my opening stuff, and I make decisions, and
I forget that I did. But I had
so few random things that I said, screw
it. We're gonna get right to it today.
Because I think sometimes it's important to kinda
go over some of the random little things
that I think are relevant, but most of
it really did fit in today with the
large picture. So let's get it October 7.
Now we're I'm gonna tell you right now,
we're gonna start with two videos. I I
have, like, maybe five or six things I
wanna point out, then we're gonna get to
two videos. One of which is about sixteen
minutes long from drop,
which one was it? It's
from Double Down News. There's been a they
did done a great job. Drop site news,
done great. There's a lot of really important
clips out there, but this one I really
did think was very well, you know, all
encompassing. I'm I'm largely not gonna stop it
unless there's something very important to say as
most of us we already discussed. But I
just think as opposed to me,
because I thought about it today, going through
and just going every little category. Right? The
allegations of rape, the allegations of beheaded babies,
and just go and I just it's just
exhausting because we've done it all. And it's
all been proven. You guys know this. 90%
of the conversation out there is just denying
Zionists claiming it's not true. So I thought
it was good to give you the a
video from drop site, this is, Double Down
News. We'll show you in a second. And
just kinda let them break down in a
quick way pretty much the full picture of
it. Then add some things that I think
are important. And one thing that I think
that we've never really gotten too deep that
I talked about. I decided not to go
deep to the video, if you remember this
a while back, because it was it's a
lot very visual for the podcast to sort
of loses its value, but we'll go through
it today. It has to do with a
a a a Jewish I think it's a
historian or a, like, an academic
making a breakdown review of what he saw
and points out these blue shirt ins
what do you call them at the time?
These people blue these peep armed people that
were there on October 7,
blue shirt, speaking in Hebrew,
white,
and anomalous for many, many reasons, and we're
gonna go through that as well. And I
think it just it just speaks to the
very clear reality of the Hannibal directive and
what actually took place. And I even obviously,
more than that with the blue shirt point
speaks to foreknowledge, speaks to possibly even false
flag in regard to conducting operations within Israel
by
intelligence, Mossad, IDF. I'll let you decide for
yourself as always because that's what we do
on this show. I'll give you my thoughts
as always, but we will present things that
you can grasp, facts, source material, information, and
then I'll lay out what I think.
You could disagree, but at the very least,
you have a foundation to decide for yourself.
Very different than damn near any show that
I even know of outside of the last
American Vagabond, save for a few people or
save you know, the people that we work
with. Let's put it that way.
No. Here here is
one of the many that I'll show you
today. There's plenty I could have included. This
one's entitled October 7 narrative further collapses.
And just as well as some of the
other this the other part of the show
that we put the title, the secret US
plan to forcibly displace all of Palestine.
Remember when that was called fake news and
hyperbole and and anti Semitic blood libel?
How dare you say and and and look,
we even had we had the picture. You
know, this was long planned out, well before
October 7.
Oh, look. He's working with Biden to get
it done. Oh, look. Now he's working with
Trump to get it done. Like, we can't
piece that together?
Well, these are just shows I'll include. You
can watch them when you have the time.
This is from 2024.
Heretz reveals, quote, IDF ordered Hannibal directive
on October 7. Right? That that I mean,
this is the hand this is, Heretz article,
by the way.
For those who don't know, the leading Israeli
news platform despite how what the scientists call
it today,
documents and testimonies obtained by Heretz. Oops. Here.
Oh, here's the article too.
Revealed that the Hannibal operational order. Now here's
the difference. Not that it was
what it looks like or that, yes, that
happened so luckily. No. This was them proving
that it was an ordered delivered
you know, a delivered order that was given
and handed down and carried out, and I
argue never stopped.
It says, Hannibal Directive Order, which directs the
use of force to prevent soldiers being taken
captive. And this is very simple. That's why
they bombed the cars and they're leaving, and
they lied about that. And that's the image
we use for this one because that's what
it looked like before they scooped them off
to the side and pretended like it was
a parking lot. They bombed them as they
were fleeing when they knew they had hostages.
That's that is like the most exact version
of what that is. We can't let them
get taken because you remember it comes from
the I think it was a was a
general. I forget. It was a high level
high ranking member of the military for Israel.
He was he was I believe the name
was even Hannibal. I think it's where it
comes from if I remember correctly, but it's
off the top of my head. The point
was that after it happened, he got killed
and it was embarrassing for them.
They they felt taken advantage of and they
made the decision then that next time when
that happens, we will kill everybody because we
argue it's in the best interest of Israel
because they will get taken advantage of. So
they made a policy to kill their own
people should they get taken taken.
You may even agree with that, understand. The
point is that they deny it because it's
illegal,
and they don't care about their own people.
And overall, they did it and have denied
it ever since. And that means they have,
you know, and that that overlaps with what
happened on October 7, not just driving away
and any and all the time since.
Things like this.
I mean, it's funny. I thought about this
the whole time. And even as I'm going
through it, I'm like, oh, yeah. There's so
many so many points we've covered in this
conversation. Even afterward, when there were two hostages,
or rather detainees,
who were holding a a sheet written in
food that says SOS.
And they were going and they're speaking in
Hebrew. They're white. They're going, look. We are
hostages, and they killed them.
Two of them got away. The they ran
behind the corner. This is all written in
the put to the BBC. It's been covered
by her rats. It's very real.
Then they coax them out. Come out. It's
safe. It's safe. And when the last two
walked out, the whole time speaking in Hebrew
going, look. We are hostages. They killed them
both right there.
I've said this every time. I literally don't
understand how anybody cannot understand what that shows
you. You don't think that and this is
what the article reads. I think it says
fifteen minutes they were around the corner. They
were saying they were trying to get them
to come out. I said the corner, but,
you know, they were hiding.
And they killed them anyway. They knew what
they were. These are IDF Israeli soldiers who
decided to kill Israeli people because they were
ordered to.
This is all coming. It came out is
the point a long time ago.
So back to this.
IDF orders Hannibal Directive on October 7 to
prepay prevent Hamas taking soldiers captive.
I just don't know how you deny something
like that, especially when it's being cited for
Haraz and citing Israeli military. But see, this
is the point to start with, the disconnect
between what we can prove and what your
government is saying, what the media is saying,
what the mainstream alternative media is saying.
There you just can't miss that. Now I
can't speak to intent, but that's not debatable.
They're lying to you or they're misled, and
they don't care. They won't look. That is
a problem. And it is the it is
the majority of the conversation today that sees
that, and they still do it anyway. And
they know you see them, and they do
it anyway. This was 2023. Harratz exposes atrocity
propaganda. And this was back when the point
is they're making, they proved,
like we've done the entire time, that they
lied about babies in an oven. They lied
about beheaded babies. Trump just reiterated that, like,
a few weeks ago. So did Biden. He
came out and said it in with big
I saw it with my own eyes, they
both say. They're both lying, and you can
quite literally prove that. You don't think Trump
knows that? So something's driving him to do
it even though people he knows people can
prove him wrong. How do you make sense
of that? Unless somebody's being pressured to act
against their own interests.
See if this grab this one quickly.
There we go.
Was it this one?
Yeah. I'll skip it for now. There really
is so much we could pull into this.
I mean, there were and really, I'll just
grab this one since right here. There's so
many of these that that have come out
too. Very clearly, I think this is one
of them, discussing
yeah. The the scope of the of this
this is one of them discussing how this
that basically the argument of this is
is hyperbolic.
And that was the one, I think, the
one person that was the one claiming some
abstract view, but they never they nothing could
be verified, and that was a person who,
in many cases, a chain testimony.
Here we go. I think this is the
one.
Of course, it is.
Wow.
I just haven't gone back this step in
a while, so apparently, it's been deleted. Let's
see if we can archive the archive.
Nope.
I just find that crazy
how often this stuff happens.
Sorry. I'm wasting time.
That's just so crazy. Here, let's grab this
one.
See what he says. I think this is
Mohammed Jihad's post about it.
Yeah. Here it is. This is so there
was two version, remember? There was a Hebrew
version and there was an,
English version, which pretty much always happens. Yeah.
There it is right there.
Now you'll find today, by the way, it's
kind of good that we did that real
quickly. You'll find today how how almost
intentionally difficult it is to find some of
this stuff today. I'll I'll I'll get to
a point about Candace Owens later in the
show in regard to Charlie Kirk. I mean,
what if you find a way around it,
you'll find that it's there's so many people
posting about the the text screenshot she put
up. But just a general search, it's like
it doesn't exist.
That's the algorithm, guys. It's very interesting.
Hamas massacre led to a spread of horror
stories, not all of which happened in reality.
And they go story by story, and they
and it goes to that group. Oh, this
this is behind the paywall.
I forget this is what the group called
off the top of my head, but they
lied, and they were the ones that were
trotted around. The guy was a a very
extreme Zionist, and they were caught lying.
Here, I'll just include all this for you.
Okay. Go back to the point.
The rape allegations
were proven to be false. Now this is
another one that has become full circle to
the point to where the may the woman
with the brown or the, I mean, the
gray pants that they with the with the
blood stain,
that was a worldwide phenomenon where they were
posting things. They had videos. They had bill
billboards, and, you know, they just showed those
pants with and people would dress in them.
That woman guy came home and admitted she
wasn't raped.
And there's been zero evidence of any kind,
and they've been proven to be lying. They
used an a a Kurdish woman that was
found dead, and Max I I believe Max
is the one that broke that story, and
I was able to find the archive version
that could prove that as well.
And they just lied about it. It went
forward. That that woman, who was, I think,
from a Ukraine situation, was even used in
the main one they presented to the IDF
or excuse me, to the UN.
All of this stuff is covering all of
these things, and they just kept lying about
it.
This one is entitled Israel caught using old
images, this is the one I was talking
about, as proof of October 7 rapes. It
was and you could archive it going back
well before this took place, and they just
used it anyway. And, again, the undeniable reality
of October 7 foreknowledge and the Hannibal Directive.
Now quickly the foreknowledge point, guys, there's because
there's just so much to go over and
you guys remember all this. I I refer
I, refer to, I I recommend Efraut Baganson,
for example, who was part of the intelligence,
part of the IDF,
former now, who well, she was one of
the most vocal people that you a cockroach
couldn't walk by without something changing, and you're
telling me nobody knew? Charlie Kirk called this
out before he was killed, suddenly going, guys,
you don't believe that. What about foreknowledge? Six
hours? I don't buy it. Never he was
he saying that before.
So the reality is that there was undeniable
foreknowledge. The women that were in those, towers
were reporting this. That's covered by her ex.
They were saying, we see them training. They
were threatened with jail time if they kept
bringing it up. Again, these points speak for
themselves.
All the different information about how they the
the allegation about how they had to go
to the West Bank and stuff, that was
actually a lie. And you pulled everybody out
of every place and allowed them you know,
it just it's clear that this was allowed
to happen to some degree, or some level
of the government did. Maybe it got out
of hand, but there's just no way you
make sense of all this.
This is a clip in regard to,
it's a it's a montage, actually, like a
compilation from Censored Man. It says, just a
reminder that we have multiple testimonies, and they're
all on here, from Israeli soldiers and civilians
that the IDF killed their own citizens on
October 7. What we saw was a mass
Hannibal. That was this guy saying it looked
like it, by the way, the colonel Naft
Erez. He said, look. What we see appears
to be a mass Hannibal. Right? People argued
that meant he just was saying that's what
it looks like happened. We can't prove it.
That's fair, but we have later proven that.
But you have many examples of these people
just simply saying, yes, we killed those people.
Yes, we used tanks to bomb those houses.
Yes, We used helicopters to attack those cars.
All in Hebrew for the podcast, but you
could read it for yourself. All of this
has been documented over the last year plus.
We have by the way, this Cradle article
looks like it's no longer accessible right now.
Let me double check. Maybe it's back up.
Look at that.
I find it very, very telling that a
platform like the Cradle is suddenly not accessible
on October 7.
I'm going to bet you anything that
is because of today.
I could totally be wrong. Just my opinion.
But
all of a sudden, invalid SSL certificate?
I guarantee you,
Cradle
is you know, it's a like, I deal
with this kind of stuff all the time.
We don't bring it up as much as
we used to, but SSL issues are back
end stuff or dot d o DUS attacks
constantly.
So my point is that and, I mean,
I have to literally hire people to make
sure they're keeping track of this stuff, which
takes money. The point is that the cradle
is down today. When I was just looking
at it, and it's something like that, you
know, maybe they just skip missed something. Maybe
somebody dropped the ball.
I find it hard to believe. But the
article,
Israel admits it killed its own at the
NOVA Music Festival.
Let's not forget,
this might not pop up right now.
It was involuntarily.
No. It's not. So they're they're one of
the ones we talked about is the after
the after the
festival, the peep the the people that were
there, a huge portion of them got involuntarily
committed due to mental issues. Involuntarily
was an important word.
And we later find out that there was
a lot of people pointing out. We were
being used as human shields. There's videos of
it. Of the idea of hiding behind them
in the car and shooting at whoever they
were shooting at or the fact they moved
the festival or who was involved with that
festival. I mean, all of these points connect
back to some level of foreknowledge in manufacturing
this event.
Here is Sam Hussain. He's simply pointing out
going back to Biden's administration.
This is a clip you can play from
Decensored News. You remember you remember is he
says your reminder on this day that the
Biden state department claimed they had didn't know
anything about the Hannibal directive,
even though you know they do.
It's a very public this is something that
they're very well aware of, guys, and we'll
get into these points as well. For example,
like, Trump going like, Josee Maxwell? Who? What?
That's not really what he said, but,
really, Dan? Like, Epstein, boo? You know, it's
just it's crazy the way he responds to
these things when you must know that it's
obvious that, like, they know this is something
they're, like, have moment to moment meetings about.
It's so important to get this the the
Epstein conversation is so damaging to them. So
we'll come to that in a second. My
point is just to when they pretend like
they don't know, that's desperation, guys.
Here is an Israeli woman and its testimony
of what happened. This is a squirrel's account
you should follow for this. He's been breaking
this step down since the very beginning.
He says they'll come this is what she
said. This is what we've played this on
the show. Channel twelve, Israeli news. They come
in, the or Islam with jihad or whoever
it was because it's you don't know at
this point. But you
know? Or anybody else, for that matter, dressed
like that because that's what Mossad does quite
often. The point is that I would argue
this is probably Hamas because of the way
that this went down and many other examples
of the same thing. And that's not to
say that this is somehow making them good
guys. The point is you cannot deny Israel
funding of Hamas, but you also can't deny
whether or not they were funded by Israel.
That it does not invalidate the act of
armed resistance. An illegally occupied territory, which is
what Palestine is, you can't deny that despite
all the narratives.
And that means they have the right to
legally to armed resistance
because they're legally occupied, whether or not they're
funded by Israel. And I think over the
last however many decades
that the funding and you know, it's it's
not as simple as it once was. The
point though is that you can see that
they've made a conscious choice like they there
was evidence now showing that they had mandates
out between their group. Don't don't hurt anybody.
Don't, you know, abuse anyone. That that doesn't
mean everybody followed those orders. But there's plenty
of evidence that shows that there were other
random people that broke through, and that might
have been the case. But overall,
this this is what it seemed Hamas was
directing people to do. It says they came
in, and I I told them I have
two children. They said, don't worry. We're Muslim.
We're not gonna hurt you. One this is
what the Israeli
said. He said, one of them sees bananas
and asked if they can have one. I
say, yes. They stayed about two hours then
left.
Now maybe that's the anomaly, but that's a
real story.
You can listen to it. It's in Hebrew.
Just you know, when you start to stand
back and look at all the testimony of
the people that came back,
all except one now, who is now suddenly
changing her story after she said originally that
she wasn't abused or raped or touched is
now suddenly giving a different story after a
year and a half.
Who knows? Maybe she's now telling the truth.
That's possible. But everything else backs up the
original story that she had and speaks more
to coercion than anything else.
Here's the clip from double o news.
So this is about a lot of different
points.
But let's make sure I mean, I think
this is a really important clip to play,
and I think we should you know, this
is something that should be shared, I argue.
It's a kind of a one stop shop
for basic understanding, and there's a lot more
to get into of pretty much what happened
that day and how much
was how much they were aware of things
and what they let happen.
There is investigative unit. We've conducted a forensic
meticulous examination
of the events of October 7. We uncovered
very real crimes committed by Hamas and others.
But I think what was perhaps most significant
were the crimes we discovered that did not
happen. And it's hugely concerning that these revelations
have been virtually entirely ignored by the Western
press.
What's extraordinary
is the Israelis were aware of the plans.
Hamas were actually training quite openly for this
operation, and they were actually placing the training
videos online
so anyone could view them. On the very
night of October 7 before dawn,
spotters along the fence are reporting back to
headquarters. And the head of Shimbet and the
head of military intelligence take this seriously enough
that in the middle of the night, they're
up and talking to each other. They conclude
it's just another training exercise. And what is
extraordinary
is that they don't even raise
the alert level to number one. You know,
the most basic alert level would have made
a huge difference, and they don't do that,
which means that when Hamas bursts through the
fence at 06:30 in the morning, they catch
many of the defenders in their beds. I
mean, you can see many of the soldiers
are killed in their beds. Hamas had anticipated
most of their fighters would be killed trying
to get through the fence. In fact, only
a small number were killed trying to get
through the fence. They were as much taken
by surprise as anyone
by the performance
of Israeli intelligence and the Israeli military. Crucially,
also,
they were taken by surprise by this very
large music festival that was taking place, which
they don't seem to have been aware of.
Having over on the military bases, the game
plan was to grab hostages and take them
back. And they do this on a large
scale, but they also clearly kill very large
numbers of of unarmed civilians as well. The
Israelis were then extraordinarily
slow to respond.
It is important to reiterate again for those
that didn't see that that that the the
the the festival was moved last minute to
basically be within the path of what they
expected.
You know, the thing that they claimed they
didn't know was coming, but now you can
see that they clearly expected that to be
the path. You know, it's there's so many
points that very much
it makes it clear that they were aware
that there was an an impending something. You
know? And that this speaks again to the
possibility, and you can't deny this. I get
the concern about
people arguing that by, you know, trying to
invalidate what again, that's why I make that
point very clear. Regardless of whether every single
one of them were funded by Israel, they
still the the group or anybody in Palestine
has the legal right to arm resistance.
My point is that I think it's worthy
of consideration that some of them might have
been acting for different agendas. That's not that
hard to wrap your mind around. I still
argue that first by first point, that it
still that it doesn't invalidate that act, but
also that I think most of people in
Hamas at this point have over, like, since
02/2006, for example, have changed dramatically.
Being aware of what's continued to happen. That
it may maybe if you argue it started
as a controlled entity, you know, certainly consider
it. Maybe that's still the case. I don't
think that's the case anymore, though. I think
that it's evolved because children have grown up
after watching their families get tortured and raped
and killed by bombs and have joined the
only group they think is gonna make a
difference. And over time, that has changed the
demographic or rather, I guess, the mindset of
people there. But you could still argue that
there could have been people that might have
been informed or funded or whatever else. Maybe
they took the money and didn't care. I
mean, you can't know for sure. But I
think what it speaks to is the idea
that there was some kind of overlap. And
as I've said this in the very beginning
that it's just like, a lot a a
possible scenario is that this wasn't allowed event,
but then somehow got out of hand because
they expected something different.
You see what I'm saying? Like, maybe they
expected something, you know, quick pop in, a
few things, and then they were gonna leave,
but, ultimately, then it didn't go the way
they planned because of maybe other groups that
came in or whatever. And then they were
forced to immediately respond to something they let
happen, and their only response was just to
kick out everything they could, maybe a cover
up.
This is all hypothetical. The point is that
what you know for sure is that they
did have foreknowledge and they didn't do anything.
Now they scramble Apache helicopters, but there's no
ground control. It's pretty clear that in the
chaos,
some hostages at least
were hit by Apache helicopter fire. We've identified
27
people who were clearly taken hostage, taken captive,
and were taken away from their homes, but
never made it to the fence, died somewhere
between their homes and the fence. There's a
fair chance that a number of them were
killed by Apache helicopters.
Within the kibbutzes, we've identified
18 people who were pretty much certainly killed
by the police and the army as they
arrived. 12 of them Meaning the IDF, guys.
Israeli troops and police.
You know, it's just it's
undeniable.
This is something they've admitted to and even
still gets pushed back online.
A specific incident
in Kiribati,
where
you have a large number of gunmen, around
40 gunmen, holed up in a house with
13
hostages. A tank is brought in and opens
fire on the house. There are two survivors
from this incident, which is why we know
about it. There may be other incidents we
don't know about because everyone was killed, but
there are two survivors from this who spoke
to Israeli media. There's a common sense thing.
You just have to look at the scale
of the destruction, and it's clear that 1,200
men armed with rocket propelled grenades and machine
guns did not do all of this. The
Hannibal directive, which was something that was developed
in the nineteen eighties by the Israelis,
and it was basically to avoid situations
where their enemies would capture one or two
or three Israeli soldiers and then effectively holding
them to ransom. There was one occasion where
the Israelis released over a thousand Palestinian prisoners
in return for a single Israeli soldier. So
an order was issued whereby they said, it's
better that we kill everyone than allow people
to be captured. Now this was supposedly rescinded
several years ago. But at midday on October
7, the army revived the Hannibal directive, put
it into effect. 70 vehicles were hit. At
least in some of the cases, everyone in
the vehicle was killed.
The Israeli military does not deny the report.
The peculiar Yeah. But see, what's crazy is
they very much do, though. Right? So that's
something that's been revealed
in certain circles, but this gets brought up
in front of the UN. It gets brought
up in front of Congress, like, you know,
in in a very public American viewed sense.
It's not every single time.
Try and get a member of congress to
admit that or anybody in The UK. They
don't. At least well, I can't speak every
time. Maybe there are people in The UK
doing that in in in their,
government sense, but I don't see that personally.
Speaking from an American perspective and I'm watching
closely, I haven't seen a single one of
them. Unless I miss Massey, for example, say
that or major, Margitelle Green, which maybe that
floated out one of her tweets that I
missed.
But the reality is it's insane how clear
it is, and yet it doesn't get acknowledged.
That speaks to the whole larger picture.
Of the days after October 7 is that
the Israeli media and subsequently the international media
choose to focus not on the very real
and extensive crimes that Hamas and others did
commit, but on crimes they did not commit.
To make a quick point about somebody in
the chat, the reason I chose this one
is because, you know, it's it's very the
point I think it's important to look at
it this way. Yeah. There's people out there
that could more accurately probably like, for example,
I agree.
I other than maybe a very few special
circumstances,
all of the people that were taken were
members of the IDF or former members of
the IDF, which ultimately means they could be
enlisted like we keep seeing today. Right? So
they're considered military targets.
That's not it's just the way it's the
reality of it. So when they say hostages,
I agree. I think that shouldn't be called
that because that's perfectly not the case. But
I think the video is doing it in
a way that's trying to reach people
who need to hear this. Right? So it's
like even when you take this very, very
average way, you know, like the
mainstream,
it's still an undeniable reality that they did
exactly what they're all lying about. So I
feel like that has the most, you know,
impact on people that might need to hear
it. You guys already know this stuff. Right?
But so I I guess it's important to
think about that. So I think that there's
a lot of different ways you could frame
this.
And this had two focuses. In the days
immediately after is to do with babies. The
most dramatic one is we see an allegation
that there were forty babies killed, many of
them beheaded. This is very simple to deal
with because we have a comprehensive list of
the dead. We know that two babies are
killed
on October 7. One is a 10 old
child who is hit by a bullet fired
through a safe room door. The other is
a child who dies after a emergency cesarean,
a Bedouin child in fact. Now any story
about babies that does not relate to those
two, and there are a lot of stories
about babies, is not true. We know it's
not true. This has enormous implications
for the other wave of atrocity stories that
began very quickly, which is to do with
sexual violence and particularly
the Israeli assertion that it was widespread and
systematic.
To be clear in the film, we are
not saying that there were no rapes on
October 7. I am. I don't I I'm
well, I'm saying well, let me finish the
sentence. I'm saying there's zero evidence to back
that up. Even at this point let's put
it this way. Even the evidence points of
what has now been shifted comes from somebody
who originally said they were not touched. So
you can call that a data point. It'd
be evidence. I argue it's now being falsified.
Either way, the reality of the picture is
a shockingly obvious case of constant lies around
things you could prove they lied about and
then unverifiable claims. I don't know how else
you would look at that. We simply don't
know. What we are saying is that I
I so one more thing. I do think
this was a little bit ago. This wasn't,
like, yesterday.
I think it's undeniable at this point. Let's
put it that way. I think from the
UN reports, from the investigations, from Harrettes, and
everybody else, every claim they made, including that
court case of the woman with the gray
pants, has been shown to be a lie.
It's been proven. That was her ankle bleeding
behind her, which is exactly what we already
said. So let's let's be very clear about
that. There is zero evidence.
Well, it has not been proven to be
as objective as possible. And with everything they've
claimed and then all the lies that they
put out that have been shown to be
lies, again, it really does put this to
bed. And I'm glad he said in the
beginning that there you know, Hamas did commit
crimes. You can't deny that either. And you
gotta be honest about this. Right? There were
some in cases where you can see that
there were people I mean, at the very
least, there were people that were killed who
were innocent.
Right? Because I you I don't think you
can verify that it was necessarily Hamas member
who did it because there was Islamic Jihad.
There was random Palestinians. But let's just say
it was for sake of conversation. You can't
deny that that happened.
So light or or here's a better case.
The Bebas children were taken.
Right? That was a real thing that were
taken by I mean, it turns out, in
fact, they weren't taken by Hamas. That was
later verified, but they were handed over to
Hamas from from Palestine Islam jihad. That was
reported by Israel. So yet again, you find
the example that Hamas did not deal with
the things they keep claiming, I think, for
a very clear political reason, but ultimately took
them because I think they they argue they
wanted to try to keep them safe. You
could disagree with that. They were ultimately killed
by Israel bombing them, which was testified to
by the father himself.
So, you know, you it's very important to
see all this bigger picture, and I'll bring
up that that clip as well. There simply
is not the evidence.
There's not the forensic evidence. There's not the
visual evidence. There's not the photographic evidence. And
there is not the witness evidence
to support the allegation of widespread
and systematic rape. The Israelis have this strange
system where they farm out the collection of
bodies after disasters and terrorist attacks and so
on to an organization called Zaka,
who are ultra orthodox religious. That was the
group I was talking about. They're behind the
vast majority of the very serious lies because
I think that was their job. A volunteer.
At least a leader who was shown to
be a very radical person. As they collect
the bodies, prepare them for religious
burial, and so on. A character that
many people would have seen in the days
afterwards is Yossi Landau, who was the southern
commander
of Zaka, who was on television a great
deal. He said
Piles of 10 children each
were tied to the back,
burned to death.
You then see a phone call which Netanyahu
makes to president Biden, where he repeats this
story. In fact, he embellishes it. They took
dozens of children,
bound them up,
burned
them,
and executed them. Terribly important. He knew that
was lie when he did that. That's important
to understand.
These people,
Hold on. It's weird.
I really jumped that fast. I was just
trying to get a shot of Netanyahu's face.
There it is. This guy. Yeah. I mean,
these people are yeah. I was trying to
I guess I can't get it perfectly timed.
You know, where he looks at the this
camera is all trying to do. He's these
these are dangerous people. Like, some of the
most dangerous people in the world. He is
very well aware of what he's doing. He
knows who he's doing it to, and he's
either completely okay with that or enjoys it.
I don't know how else you can make
sense of this. And he's literally telling you
that they murdered and burned and separated children's
bodies
after not only is that something that has
been done by Israel to Palestinians more than
once over the years, you didn't have that
evidence then.
So you must think about how dark this
is. He made this case to be able
to rationalize
what they later went on the the genocide.
That's what he's doing right there, and that's
why he publicly recorded the film. I remember
I said at the time, he wasn't even
probably on the phone with him.
And executed them. Terribly important this because it
was entirely untrue. We know the house he's
talking about. He's talking about the house in
Kibbutz Beri, which was the house that was
stormed by Israeli police and military, and where
it is almost certain that all of the
hostages were killed by the Israeli police and
military. There were two children there, two twins,
but no other children. So we know the
story is untrue. Mister Landau told a number
of other stories. There's one particularly notorious one
about the fetus
being cut out of a pregnant woman. The
baby that was connected to the cord
was stabbed,
and she was shot in the back. We
simply It's unnerving as hell to me, by
the way,
to know that he knows he's lying.
Right? To look at him sit there, putting
on his big display, crying when he's making
those things up.
That is harsh.
Speaks very much to the Zionist mentality.
Oh, this is untrue. The list of the
dead show there's no such victim. Mister Landau
said, you know, I have a picture of
this atrocity. If you wanna see the picture,
I have the picture of it.
This is the baby.
I'm sorry to be graphic here, but I
I can't see a baby here. You can't
see the baby because but this is the
picture of the of the mother. He's lying.
This is one of the most important this
was later shown to be this is their
proven
to be lying.
This didn't happen.
So whatever he's got a picture of is
horrifying.
Right? The fact that if that he's got
some disgusting dismembered picture that he was used
to lie to make the case about what
that he you know, this has been patched
together. In the beginning, this wasn't there. It
just you know, you really need to absorb
the kind of evil that we're dealing with
here. It was a piece of charred flesh.
It wasn't a baby. It certainly wasn't a
baby. So it was interesting. Psychologically,
I'm not quite sure why he offered to
show me a photo that he didn't have.
I'd point out as well that Zacker was
an organization that was in trouble. There had
been a major scandal. Its founder had been
accused of child sexual abuse.
There was a financial scandal. It had been
found to be cooking the books. It's raised
an awful lot of money since October 7.
These Now we're not gonna get much into
the sexual abuse overlap in a larger conversation
or the the ongoing
shocking level of increase of sexual abuse of
just about every woman in the IDF, it
seems. Like, it's it's insane what's happening.
But just remember that this is a very,
very important conversation. This is all I'm only
ever talking about the Zionist organization
and the government that is influenced by it.
There's plenty of people, Jewish or otherwise, that
are influenced and take are part of it,
you know, however they see it, but that's
the real core of the issue regardless of
the religious overlap to it that plays a
major factor. Don't deny that. But just as
a side example,
right, this this took place, you know, and
this is the kind of thing we keep
seeing from whether Biden or Trump administration.
These are the people that stand up and
do something, say something, and they get cast
aside by the US government.
We have to condemn the atrocities that happen
every day to Palestinians in the West Bank.
You mentioned sexual violence.
I was part of the human rights vetting
process for arms going to Israel,
and a charity called Defense of Children International
Palestine,
drew our attention at the state department to
the sexual assault, actually the rape of a
13 year old boy that occurred in an
Israeli prison in the Muscabia in Jerusalem.
We examined these allegations.
We believe they were credible. We put them
to Israel to, the government of Israel. And
you know what happened the next day?
The IDF went into the DCIP offices and
removed all their computers and declared them a
terrorist entity.
I think it is vital that atrocities not
happen to anyone. Not sexual atrocities, not sexual
violations, not any kind of gross violation of
human rights. We are looking at a situation
where there is so much
dehumidification
where peep
So the point is that they literally they
called it out,
and they went in and in and went
after the group that is showing them that
it destroyed everything.
I mean, that either means that they're involved
with that at the highest level of power
or they do not care whether it's happening
because it looks bad
from the international perspective.
I mean, I don't need to explain that.
Stories were clearly useful, and they were useful
to the Israeli government. In the film, we
see Benjamin Netanyahu
visiting
Zakha volunteers and thanking them for talking to
the world's media and stressing that this is
another front in the war.
Why does this matter? Why does it matter
whether this type of atrocity was committed, but
not that type? People were killed in this
way, not that way. It matters
because the murder of babies
under widespread rape has a particular
resonance. It's particularly triggering. The Israeli government and
its supporters, when they justify
the brutality of the subsequent
bombardment and invasion of the Gaza Strip, again
and again and again, what they always reference
is babies
and rape. Young girls who were raped
and then murdered.
Women brutally raped and murdered.
Little kids who are beheaded. Pictures of terrorists
beheading children.
These bastards put these babies in a oven
and put on their oven. We found the
kid a few hours later.
He's lying. Like, that's just what kills me
every time. That guy is lying.
So is he doing it because it's some
kind of, like, jingoistic, like, pro Israel? We
need to protect a lie to protect Israel's
inter I don't know. But it's just so
dark to me.
Yeah. I just it's so crazy. Or, you
know, what what what look what's happening in
this country right now. I believe even that
even maybe people like Trump and Bondi themselves
are you know, I I it's hard to
know. I think a lot of times they're
they're part of it. Like, maybe not Bondi,
but Trump, you know, aware of the way
he's playing everybody, but maybe not. The more
the point I'm making is that at the
end of the day, they may genuinely think
they're fighting some left wing
problem because and that's and the both and
it's really so the string pullers are the
ones that know that that's not true on
either side or, really, it's true about the
government either way you look. But they're so
worked up about the idea that they're fighting
the evil threat that they're willing to lie
because they know that the evil threat controls
the UN, so we have to lie to
be able to get the right thing to
happen or whatever you can do. I think
that's a huge problem today, that people are
willing to break everything and lie all the
ways they need to because they believe that
they're fighting for the right thing.
This it's just it's insane. So that's where
principles no longer exist. That, well, I can
lie because they would lie first.
Well, then you're a liar too. Right?
This is the thing this is what all
the partisans are trapped in right now. So
all I'm saying is this guy very well
may believe that him making up this disgusting
story is somehow the right thing. We're I
don't regardless of how he thinks, it doesn't
make him a good person. That's disgusting.
But think about that for a second, and
think about how much that is ruling the
day when it comes to our conversation in
this country. Either way, that's that's evil in
my opinion.
This is something you see in previous conflicts
as well. If you want to dehumanize an
enemy, if you want to desensitize
people to the suffering that is inflicted on
that enemy, then you portray them as barbarians,
basically, as savages, as people who are not
deserving of humane treatment. And that's why it's
relevant. That's why it's important to pick apart.
A lot of the world's leading media outlets
have done in-depth investigations where they have concluded
there was widespread
systematic instrumentalized
weaponized
rape. The New York Times makes a particular
feature of the story of a young woman.
She was killed early in the morning. I
remember how much that's been broken down. Like,
this was a while ago. Right? The New
York Times thing, it completely imploded and and,
also, I guess, blew up in their face.
Contradictory. But at the end of the day,
it was
insane how much even corporate media was forced
to acknowledge that they just basically went with
unverified claims that stem back to Israel. It
it's wild.
All I mean, and and the amount of
rape that you can prove, not even not
even
talking about said Tianan and and the and
the prison,
But rapes that have taken place against Palestinians
just since October 7, you could I mean,
I'm talking provable from UN level and anybody
else.
And yet, we still
they still, up until very recently, were constantly
screaming about things they couldn't prove against the
other side. I mean, that is the the
control over that conversation was so tight for
so long.
Now it's suddenly not the case anymore.
Think about how unnerving that must be for
them knowing how the display how vulnerable they
are for how their entire history has been
covered like this.
And I'm talking about Zionism. Nine miles north
of the music festival site as she and
her husband were fleeing. The New York Times,
in its big December
investigation into sexual violence,
leads with this. And about a third of
the article consists of her story. And it's
immediately undermined because the woman's sister then posts
on Instagram immediately afterwards.
This isn't true. We know she wasn't raped.
She was texting us until minutes before her
death. It's also the case that her husband
had a lengthy
phone conversation immediately after her death with his
brother and, again, made no mention of rape.
So it's very important that because it's the
central, most compelling piece of information
and one of the biggest investigations done by
one of the world's most prestigious
media outlets, The New York Times. And it
turns out not to be true. It's done
by three journalists. One of them turns out
to be somebody who worked in some capacity
for Israeli intelligence
previously, who has virtually no journalistic experience,
and then who had liked,
genocidal media posts. It's very interesting with Anna
Schwartz. She gives an interview in Hebrew to
an Israeli
channel. She actually
lays out how difficult they were finding it
to find evidence that they they were talking
to all the hospitals and all the psychiatric
clinics and so on. And that there was
simply no evidence at all. There were no
witnesses that come forward. No no victims had
come forward at all. I think she's telling
this as if to to show
what digging they had to do. Say, one
more point again. And I wanna be clear.
In no way am I saying this or
even, you know, implying that they deserve to
give the benefit of the doubt or, you
know, whatever else. They're just, like, trying to,
like, you know, remove accountability
just to kind of highlight, some whether this
is the case with these people or not,
that this is something that is happening. That
you could argue that someone like that may
genuinely believe that they're doing the right thing.
They might think that because they're fighting this
evil terrorist raping you know, like, look at
what they're doing to the people on the
left right conversation right now. Like, the dehumanization
is so crazy
that she may believe so thoroughly that it
happened that they're willing to patch together whatever
they can to make you see it because
they know it happened whether or not they
can prove it. See what I'm saying? And
it just I mean, it's not like I
even that's in no way it almost makes
it worse, quite frankly. So don't think of
it like a lack of accountability, but just
recognize that there's so many people out there
that are so warped by these political games
that they actually think that that completely patching
together a
entirely false story to sell you on a
narrative that they believe is true is still
the right thing. Because it still ends up
where you get the sense that the thing
happened because they know it did. Same thing
in the partisan conversation today. I'm telling you,
it's so immersed right now. But at this
point, it doesn't even make it doesn't make
a difference. The truth is all we care
about. And if you lied, you lied. Right?
Or I mean, if you don't even know
you did, you still did. So that's what
the point I'm just trying to show the
demons the demonstrate the psychological
manipulation that is just everywhere in this conversation.
But it's actually very revealing. In the end,
it's quite clear. They fall back on the
same sources as everyone else, Israeli government officials,
IDF officers,
and first responders,
all sources which were discredited
by the baby stories.
So no babies were beheaded. No babies were
were thrown into ovens, and there is no
real evidence for widespread
and systematic rape. Now it's very clear
why the Israelis might want these stories to
to circulate. What's less clear is why very
reputable
Western
news and media outlets should swallow them so
uncritically,
particularly given the track record of the Israeli
government and the IDF, which has been shown
again and again and again in the past
to have been less than truthful in the
accounts it gives. Because our war is against
Hamas,
not against the people of Gaza. While this
mission is urgent, we will continue to fulfill
it with care and with a commitment to
the sanctity of life, both Israeli and Palestinian.
The response to our film, October 7, has
been interesting. The response is not
to criticize and to pick apart and say
we've got it wrong. They don't do that
at all. What they do is they simply
ignore you, which on one level I take
as a compliment because I think there are
all sorts of people out there who would
very much like to pick apart what we're
doing and to destroy it and discredit it.
And I think they take one look at
it and decide they can't really do it.
So what they do do, which in a
way is even more damaging, is just to
entirely
ignore us. This is significant because so often
what we are doing is critiquing
the way the mainstream media has covered the
story, which may well be, of course, precisely
why the media doesn't want to look at
what we've done. So in a way, the
treatment of this in many ways echoes the
treatment of our earlier series, The Labour Files,
which offered a critique
of the dominant media narrative about Corbyn and
the Corbyn years on the anti Semitism crisis.
Remember how that happened? Like, you know, I
I know many Americans I mean, myself, I'm
much more immersed in American politics, but, you
know, the remember, the Corbyn point about anti
semitism, which was just insane, or Roger Waters
for that matter. Like, just this effort very
clumsily to make that case. Why? Because they
were very prominent people who were very much
on, in their eyes, the wrong side of
that issue. And so they just manufactured
attacks against them. Same thing that's happening now,
just to much less effect. Right? Now it's
just about using government power to coerce you
to be on their right side, but or
on the side they think is right.
Or rather, I shouldn't even say it like
that, just decide that they want whether or
not they know it's wrong.
The allegation
of antisemitism
clearly I'm actually gonna leave it there. You
they get into some more points about this,
but I'll leave it there for time in
general.
But, you know, important to see how clear
this all is. Right? I mean and I
mean, there as I said before, there's videos
that you could find that are much, much
more, like, like, I think it was,
Propaganda and Co, I think, had a really
well done video that was just, like, not
mincing words right to the point, which I
think was very well done. There's there's plenty
of them.
So I'll include this, like I was saying
before, by the way. This is just kind
of the compilation I think is the best
one. As as TLav and others have been
demonstrating since 2023, IDF bombs killed the Beebas
family, and and that has been publicly available
information shared by the father himself and as
he still maintains. Despite all the lies that
they spun around this, he has come out
and more than once made it clear that
that, you know, basically based on the overlap
of other statements, his family, they said they
try to frame it as that that's not
the case. Now, he's come out and pointed
out that, you know, ultimately, it's only what
he was told by them, but he has
maintained that that's what he believed happened. And
the reality is in the video, he's crying
and he says, you know, IDF, what are
you doing? Netanyahu, what are you doing? My
family was just killed by the bombings that
you were doing. And every other
detainee hostage who came back said the same.
There's at least three examples of people that
are Israeli who came back and said that
IDF members were literally shielding them with their
own bodies. And if the things they were
most afraid of were the bombs and the
sound that it was causing, They were fed,
sometimes even taken out in the shot. I
mean, I just don't know how you can
all you know, again, I I think I
think this is why most in average people
even know this.
But this was,
the point was that this was the, if
if I remember correctly the full story, the
pal the house Palestinian
Islamic Jihad are the ones that grabbed them,
and Hamas ended up taking them. But then
my point the or the again, the point
that I was making was that still constitutes
a crime
because they they're
and children in general are not
military targets. Right? And so we have to
be honest about this, even if it ended
up happening through somebody else. But it also
we get to stand back and recognize that
none of the rest were taken.
Everybody else, even the women, they all try
to make out to be kidnapped hostages were
taken from tanks, were taken from military posts.
You can see them in their uniforms, and
they yet tried to make it be into
kidnapping. I was just seeing a post about
that. One of these guys was literally taken
out of a tank, and they're saying kidnapped?
It's just it's just so dishonest.
But it's all you can watch it for
yourself, understand the situation.
Lie they've been lying about everything.
As Niz points out, they said forty percent
of you had a baby, it was a
lie. They said babies in an oven. That
was a lie. They said babies were torn
from the woman's womb. That was a lie.
They said there was mass systematic rape. That
was a lie. They lied to justify a
genocide.
Now JD Vance, of course, and plenty of
others came out today. And look, you can
argue that they, you know, come out and
say I condemn what Hamas did. Okay. There
was crimes committed, but what about everything else
that happened
that day and every single day since. Right?
JD Vance says, on the second anniversary of
the terrible terrorist attack on October 7, we
remember all the innocent people brutally murdered by
Hamas. I guess he just forgot to include
the IDF because that was the majority of
the people that were killed. And it says,
and we continue to work towards president Trump's
plan to bring the remaining hostages home and
build a lasting peace for all.
And let's not pretend that he means anything
other than people that are Israeli and in
Gaza.
What about the 10,000 children rather three? I'll
get to it in a second. I think
it's 300 something they can prove. Children,
some as low as 12 and and younger,
are currently serving
undefined time in prisons and are going through
military courts because that's what happens with children
in this apartheid state. Of course, if they're
unless they're Israeli.
Right? He doesn't mean them. He doesn't mean
any of the anything. He doesn't even mean
the Americans who are currently held in Israeli
prisons. Right? It doesn't mean the child, Ibrahim,
I believe, is currently there. Third generation Florida
American. What about the people who are on
the flotilla? They don't care about any of
them. They don't even commented about them.
But he cares about the narrative because that's
what these people do.
Here,
secretary Rubio comes out and says, on this
second anniversary of Hamas' heinous October 7 attack,
they The United States remained steadfast in our
support for Israel in our common fight against
terrorism. Right? So genocide. That that that's what
they're supporting still to this very day. Are
you fighting terrorism, or are you fighting a
group that Israel funded that are continuing to
kill all the innocent people you could possibly
aim at and all the stories of rape
and torture and murder? But this is what
he says.
You must know that they know you see
that. That's what's so crazy to me, and
that has to speak to who these people
are and what's actually driving their mindset.
When it says, and our shared commitment to
bringing an end to the suffering of a
hostage in the families. Yeah. Again, he needs
Israelis. He's not talking about the Americans that
are currently in Israel. That's not what he
means. On top of that, our shared commitment,
you mean the 17 times up and and
again, which is happening right now to refusing
the deal that would do that? And, again,
they know you know that. It says POTUS
to Trump's 20 plan
Right. The plan that I already went through
the other day, which is a joke. It's
basically a continuation of the Abraham Accords or
his deal of the century or that Netanyahu
was already made clear he's not going to
allow, but, yay, the thing we know won't
happen.
These people are a joke.
Now and speaking of a joke, the the
mumbling fool that was put there by somebody
else is this this like, I'm sorry for
the podcast that you might think that could
mean any number of idiots in congress. But
I'm talking about John Fetterman.
On the anniversary of of ten seven, I
re I remain deeply proud to stand with
Israel. I just think that's so crazy to
think about right now. When the world and
every single genocide expert with any standing in
the world has been like, that's a genocide.
Every human rights group from Amnesty International,
Betsalem,
Human Rights Watch, and plenty of others with
with with standing have said this is an
apartheid state from 2021.
They've gone on to be caught lying about
almost every single thing they put out there,
and this clown stands up and goes, I
stand with that group.
Do you think that's what his constituents wants?
No. They don't. They they confront him all
the time, and he yells at them because
he's not there by them. He doesn't care
what his constituents think. Does that mean he
cares about votes? Clearly not. So maybe we
should reflect on what that means.
Finally, there's a clear path to peace.
Right. The war must end. You mean, despite
the many times you've been offered and you
declined it. Right? Over and over and over
and over. The free world should demand the
free world. What do you mean by that?
You mean all the apart the borderline apartheid
authoritarian dictatorships ruling by executive order? Or the
bouquet dictatorship that you pretend is the way
we should be modeling our objective? I mean,
the free world, what does that mean anymore?
To accept the plan.
You mean the plan that you guys keep
turning down? Like, these guys are a joke.
Let's not forget that he gets funded by
Israel. Guys, these are politicians pretending to represent
American interests that don't care about Americans. Speaking
of that, here's Randy Fine.
Before I even say what he says here,
let's not forget that Maumdani,
despite his seemingly correct stance on Israel,
I don't I was just told very much
still supports the use of COVID shots and
and the use of mandates. I mean, the
reality is I don't trust any of these
people and neither should you. I think politics
is broken. And I think the general idea
of government is why this is all a
problem. We should fight for a world without
it. I don't mean violence. I never do.
The point is that this person,
we should say what he says about I
I should and I have. Say, here's what
he said about Israel. Correct. I support that.
But I don't blindly trust what he says
next like I don't with anybody. The point
is I don't I find a lot of
this to be opportunism from a lot of
them. Maybe he believes it, and maybe he
believes that the right thing is to force
COVID shots on you too. The point is
that here he is saying what he says
about October 7, and I'll read that first,
then you can see people like Randy Fine,
the guy who says bombs away when he
sees picture of dead children on Twitter. That's
not a joke.
If they're in Gaza, not a joke,
is that he calls him a Muslim
terrorist.
A sitting member of congress is talking to
a person who seems to be one of
the next people leaving New York
and calling him a Muslim terrorist because he's
a Muslim and doesn't call doesn't
I'll let him read what he says. He
put this out. Two years ago today, Thomas
killed out a horrific war crime, killing more
than 1,100 Israelis. So he's already lying to
you, or he doesn't know he's he doesn't
or he doesn't realize that he's wrong.
So here he is upholding the false narrative.
He's upholding the nine eleven breaking story. He's
upholding the JFK report. Right? He's upholding
the government narrative of what happened even though
we can prove it's not true. And he
goes and kidnapping 250 more, except the vast
majority, I think, if not all of them,
side of the children were IDF members or
former. He says, I mourn those lives and
pray for the safe return of every hostage
still held by every family whose lives were
torn apart by the atrocities.
In the aftermath of that day, Prime Minister
Netanyahu and Israeli government launched a genocidal war,
which is correct. A death toll that now
exceeds sixty seven thousand. Like, see, this is
what's funny. This is not funny,
but that's the truth and way more than
that. That's what Fine doesn't like. How dare
you point out that my masters are committing
a genocide? And he says, with the Israeli
military bombing
homes,
hospitals, schools, 100% verifiable by literally everybody other
than Zionist shouting down the fact that it
happened. Every day in Gaza has become a
place where grief itself has run out of
language. I mourn these lives and pray for
the families that have been shattered. Our government
has been complicit through it all. 100% true.
This must end. Our occupation and apartheid must
end. Peace must be pursued through diplomacy, not
war crimes, and our government must act to
end these atrocities and hold those responsible to
account.
I guess, you know, war crimes and, you
know, the again, you could argue that unless
it's being forced to take a COVID shot,
which would consist of something problematic.
These last these last two years have demonstrated
the worst of humanity. Mayor, it must be
answered by modeling the very best or relentless
pursuit of our, you know, commitment to human
rights. Okay.
Walk me through how in any way that
could be framed as Muslim terrorist.
See, this is how
how completely out of touch and lost these
people are.
Or just forced to say things that make
them look like complete clowns because that's who's
paying them. Muslim terrorist.
Okay. So the idea is Muslim first is
the only reason a terrorist. Otherwise, you wouldn't
have said it like that. So the point
is terrorist, okay,
for saying that
the first of all, the enshrining the original
lie about what happened. Okay. Secondarily, pointing out
that they've killed people. So maybe you could
take issue with genocide. But are you now
claiming they aren't killing people?
Or even then, you could dispute about what
happened and say, I disagree. Does that make
you a terrorist now? Randy Fine is literally
being clumsy about this and showing that if
you disagree with their narrative, you're a terrorist.
Did he do these things? No. Did he
pay for anything? Is he poor? No. But
simply saying, I actually think Israel's killing people
makes him a terrorist.
You have must realize where the world is
going in this country. This you Israel
the many moving parts of this, Trump's current
administration, the US government, is creating a narrative
where you are a terrorist if you have
the wrong ideas. Isn't that exactly what we
were pointing out about the left in a
broader way? Yes.
This is what keeps happening.
And Randy Fine is just a completely clumsy
clown who is doing what he's told and
letting the cat out of the bag. Same
with Bondi, same with Dan and Cash. These
are the junior team. These are the worst
of the worst who have been allowed to
rise because nobody with any real I mean,
nobody
that might actually be able to do this
job in a functional way with actual intelligence
and morals and integrity wouldn't dare to be
close to this administration
or Biden's by that for that matter.
He says this is nauseating.
Mamdani is little more than a Muslim terrorist.
It's a disgrace he has ever granted citizenship.
Think about how crazy that is. It should
be stripped and he should be deported. For
what crime? You're literally creating an argument that
a person who's about to be in in
in political power should have his citizenship removed
because he has a different view of what's
happening. In fact, the reality of what's happening.
These people are not acting for American interest,
guys. That's just undeniable at this point. American
interest is about upholding the real or I
think what most Americans would argue is about
upholding the law. It's about fair and equal
situate you know, the constitution,
simply put. And they don't care about that.
Here's Laura Loomer.
May every single person who celebrates October 7
today have the worst karma ever.
Imagine being so depraved. Those people should be
forever ostracized by society.
All she means is if you dare say
that what we're saying today means you're celebrating
it. I'm not I'm celebrating any day where
people died seems pretty macabre.
But here's to make the point.
Here's where Laura does this all the time.
I simply went to Grok and said, hey.
Give me some examples of Laura Loomer celebrating
Palestinian suffering. And many, many, many examples come
up, and you could read through it for
yourself, of her cheering on the suffering of
Palestinians. But how dare you? And death, by
the way.
See, all I'm trying to highlight is that
they love to put this big stand on
where we are the moral one, the left
are the evil, and they do exactly what
they don't want you to see or don't
want you what they want you to hate
in the other side. But, see, these clowns
actually think in many cases, who knows if
she's one of them, that what they're doing
is right because they are the good side.
Think about how deluded you must be to
actually have the mindset that by doing the
exact thing that you're claiming is a problem
is okay because you're the one that is
allowed to or you're the one that's on
the right side. So there's no principle is
the point, guys. It's not about principled actions.
It's about the other side bad, whatever we
do good. These are the kindergartners in the
room, and they're everywhere right now. But just
think about how crazy that is.
On the other points around the ceasefire lie
and everything else happening around this, let's not
forget
that Trump has screamed about how Israel must
stop bombing them because the deal, and still
to this day is saying that he thinks
it's all gonna come through.
Israel has never stopped bombing for the moment
he said that.
Again, who is actually in charge?
Since Trump's announcement on stopping bombing on Saturday,
Israeli occupation forces have killed a 106 people
across the strip. This is up to today.
And it's probably more than that.
But, also, let's not forget that Netanyahu's already
made it very clear.
He doesn't he's not going to allow this
to take place. Everything Trump keeps claiming is
just about to happen. If Hamas accepts, Netanyahu's
over here going, that's not possible. So this
is what's happened every single time with Biden
and Blinken. They're just doing the same thing,
guys. He says imagine after nine eleven,
if we said, okay. Let's give bin Laden
an al Qaeda a state.
The the insulting re over the the way
that he's trying to conflate these things is
incredible. Other than the right overlap that Obama
Solomon, and Al Qaeda are also funded by
Israeli United States. So it doesn't really change
that much. But the truth is that you're
this is not like, oh, the Al Qaeda
somehow had
the the,
you know, whatever one you wanna take. Let's
just take Iraq or anything else. In this
case, I guess what he would be talking
about would be well, I mean, Afghanistan, Iraq,
whatever the lies are. Let's just pick one.
The point is, let's it's not like Al
Qaeda
or
going back however long owned and and actually
had a state in these places, and then
Iraq took it from them. And they're fighting
to get back their territory. These are groups
that you funded and armed and put out
there to be able to to blame the
Muslims for the problem in the world. And
you could prove this. Not to say that
there's not Muslims doing things or any religion
for that matter doing things that you could
call terrorism if you wanted to, but this
is a provable reality of what they've done
with ISIS and Al Qaeda or Hamas or
anything else. They have funded the most radical
elements of what they claim they're fighting.
Many times you can prove this. So if
if you're gonna claim Al Qaeda was truly
in you know, that this was their territory
that you stole, they were only gaining it
back, then it might make sense. But the
idea is that you put them there. So
for them to be
stopped, I guess, and then go, let's give
them a state is not it's it's doesn't
even line up. It's a completely different conversation,
and he knows that. What he's trying to
pretend
is that the group that they keep telling
us has to accept the deal
that they say
is a group that he'll never allow to
be involved or have a state. So why
in the world would Hamas accept something that
was the acceptance of their destruct destruction?
Now I again, if you're gonna make an
honest conversation about this, the reality would be
that they have to say that we that
why are we even negotiating with Hamas if
the contingent is whether they exist or not?
It just doesn't make any sense. The point
is it's clearly set up to fail. They
keep cycling through this, and it's it's insulting
to everyone's intelligence because we can all see
it.
He says that's what these European leaders after
suggesting after October 7. No. What they're saying
is give the Palestinians
the land you stole from them.
Cat's out of the bag, bud. We all
see what you are. And the reality here,
Israel war criminal Netanyahu again hints that he
will not withdraw from Gaza
or end the war saying that US president
Trump supports what he's doing, and I believe
that. I believe that just like the last
false you know, phase two was gonna start
if if they accept the thing we threw
in, the the monkey the monkey wrench into
the conversation.
The point was they threw it in to
destroy it because the plan was to break
on phase two right before all the hostage
were released. You realize they almost had this.
The la if they just initiated the second
part, they would have gotten all the hostage
back, and then he could have blown it
all up. Then he could have said screw
you, Hamas. But he didn't. He did it
before because the deal from Trump before he
came into power was that he would allow
them to do that.
Likely to argue that Biden's you know, that
the deal wouldn't you know, at the end
of the day, they have allowed this to
continue.
And he's saying Trump supports him in that,
while Trump is saying otherwise outside.
Now in general, let's not forget,
this is Lebanon, by the way. Their
their extremists are killing and raping in Syria.
Their their extremist IDF members in Mossad are
carrying out illegal attacks all across Lebanon. They
just bombed a building full of people in
Qatar. They're bombing all over. I mean, they're
they still bombing Iraq from time to time.
We've talked about that. They've been because no
coverage. I mean, there's many different examples. Or
even the point from Iraq, if you go
back a while, where it was proven that
Israel The United States was giving Israel intelligence
American passports to be able to secretly move
through Iraq.
It's it's it's all over the world. This
is a group that is fighting wars against
people all over the place and framing itself
as the victim. What you're seeing here is
Zionists who are waiting for the wife
of a person they're trying to bomb to
walk out to get in the car so
they can bomb both parents, leaving the children
orphans.
Western journalists don't are talking about any of
this. It happens all the time. This is
a deliberate terrorist attack on people outside of
a military conduct in a public place where
other civilians are hurt while waiting for the
wife to join him.
You think this is unique? This is Tuesday
for the IDF, guys. This is what happens
every day.
Gaza notifications points out two years in Israel's
genocide in Gaza. Civil defense warns the world
will be shocked by the scale of destruction
once the war ends. If you can see
the picture, guys, this is the whole of
Gaza,
And they just keep bombing all over. Anywhere
they're trying to keep some semblance of life,
they're bombing more.
Over 2,000,000 people are living in catastrophic conditions.
If that's the case, I find it hard
to believe that million many people are still
alive. 2,700
families have been completely erased from the civil
registry.
Smotrich, regard to the West Bank,
with all that's happening, mind you, comes out
on the corporate media in Israel. Smotrich established
a new enforcement department.
Tractors simply destroying the entire grove, ripping out
2,500
olive trees from their roots in the West
Bank. Guerrilla unit protecting the interest of the
Jewish people.
This is on channel fourteen's West Bank settlement
correspondent. He reveals the minister of finance and
de facto governor of the West Bank, Smotrich,
has established a paramilitary unit whose job is
the destruction of everything Palestine without bureaucracy.
Meaning,
like, as if they ever actually had some
kind of legal process. Now they're just doing
it because they know they have the allowance
from Donald Trump.
The thing he just publicly said, he would
never allow
even though it was already happening.
I don't know why people can't acknowledge how
obviously dishonest all of this is. I mean,
some of us are.
It says the end of the clip, the
so called rabbi,
deputy mayor of the area explains why it's
kosher to destroy olive trees.
The ethnic cleansing at its core.
This is interesting, by the way. Apparently,
a member of European parliament,
her name is Benny Shuder Shuderi,
was actually on the global sumoud flotilla.
She was taken violently and held hostage in
Israel.
I believe she was one of the more
prominent ones. They let go as quick as
they could. She gets released. Nobody cares. She
was illegally held in a prison in a
foreign country, and
nobody in the European Parliament cares. Yeah. Same
in The United States. Welcome to the reality.
The people in our governments are completely occupied.
I mean, think about how crazy this is.
This is imagine if Lindsey Graham was taken
by Iran and held in their prison for
a week. Can you imagine where we'd be
right now? Nobody cares.
They literally ignored it, and they were they
were people that were abused,
starved. There are still people. I'll show you
next.
I mean, think she's just simply going, are
we not gonna do anything about this? And
on top of that, just a simple action
in international waters, like, with is like, The
United States bombing innocent people in the middle
of the ocean. Probably there's an overlap there
trying to prep make a normal precedence here.
It's all illegal from top to bottom, and
I and nobody cares
in powers in positions of power. American veteran,
Greg Stroker, who was taken, by the way.
Oh, actually, I only gotta grab this one.
Has been released from Israeli prison after being
illegally detained
aboard the flotilla.
This is last week. In a video update
he shared after landing in Slovakia, he says
that many of the detainees still imprisoned have
begun a hunger strike to protest the holding
of them. And because they're
withholding insulin from people who need it or
they might die,
they don't care.
I think this is really, really telling, obviously.
So what they're doing is simply letting go
of the people who might have a little
more reach. Right? The people who might be
a problem if they're they die unexpectedly
and torturing the rest.
Here's what, Greg had to say about it.
And the point to make before we watch
it,
there's Americans there, guys. There are still there's
Americans trapped still in Israel.
Not a word, not a single mention of
this from anybody in the America first, most
transparent administration in history.
Here,
I'm out of Israeli detention along with one
other
US citizen, Moe, a marine corps veteran. As
far as the rest of the US delegation,
we're not really tracking what's going on. In
terms of other delegates who have been released,
we're not really sure
either.
In the prison are kinda what you'd expect
from a terror gulag.
Basically, no showers,
food scarcity. A lot of people are on
hunger strike in protest to them withholding insulin
from some of our detainees.
And, yeah, we were told there are no
doctors
for animals.
We were told that, you know, they're gonna
try to get the rest of us out
in twenty four to forty eight hours, but
there is no transparency.
None of us has seen lawyers.
They're not following their own rules for self
deportation. You're supposed to be out of the
country in twenty four, seventy two hours. That
hasn't happened. I think the only reason I
was released is because some of the pressure
from my own local representatives,
in Texas. So we need to keep pushing
and fighting to get the other people released.
This is insane.
And also, I remind everybody that everything that
happened here is one tenth, maybe less, probably
less than what Palestinians go through in extrajudicial
detention in Israeli
terror prisons.
Only here, because I had the privilege
and luxury of getting shuffled on at the
last second to a Slovakian
charter flight
arranged by that government
to get me out of the country.
This entire process is insane. There's a lot
of bureaucratic incompetence. There seems to be a
lot of political infighting between, like, Bank of
Bear's coalition and what, other more liberal Zionist
elements,
want to see.
So the entire process is absolutely confused and
are not following their own laws.
And what I find most I think but
one of the parts that I don't think
is well, just to add my own thought
on this, that I think what's important to
consider is that
Netanyahu,
despite the deviation of what you know, I
think more liberal Zionist are are worried about
the way it will look, not that they
care. Whereas Ben Gavir is screaming, you're all
terrorists, and I'm gonna torture you. You know,
it's like that's the that's the divide.
But just recognize that I think what the
like, Netanyahu considers
is that they know that Trump and them
see them a bunch of radical leftists even
though that's not the case. The the the
political spectrum on these is
not only left, guys. It's all it's that
that this was so crazy, but they just
radical leftist, Stephen Miller. They're all leftists because
these are these are people fighting to destroy
this country.
So you know as well as I that
Trump and the rest of them are going
to ignore it because that's how they probably
view this.
These are American citizens, and they don't seem
to care. Now I just realized, by the
way,
let me bring this back, that I forgot
I I I guess I must have closed
that, screenshot I had very quickly to go
over some of these points that I post
that I wanna play through a video about
the blue shirt thing that I mentioned going
back to the handle directive. It's a little
disjointed now. Sorry about that. I just had
forgot I had that one.
But he goes through and says that, look,
there there are still Americans in prison right
now, and that those that have been released
as of October 6, and he list off
the names.
I just don't I don't under again, I'm
just so baffled. Like, I'm I I if
you would ask me before, I never would
have said that they'd be silent.
Like, they maybe they'd make up an argument
about why, you know, you know, but they
are not saying a word about Americans being
taken in this point. In the past, they
haven't as well. But now, with everything that's
happening,
with people like us screaming about it, let's
not forget that Mohammed Ibrahim is still in
an Israeli prison.
He is a he's a teenager. He's 60
years old. He's born in Florida, third generation.
And he is still currently in an Israeli
prison with none of these people saying a
word about it.
Not Randy Fine, not Ted Cruz, not Marco
Rubio, Pam Bondi, Cash Patel, Dan Bongino, Donald
Trump. None of them.
I just continue to be absolutely floored by
that.
Now this is just asking Grock, simply asking
what they this is saying, you know, what's
the current status?
Now he's been accused apparently of throwing a
rock.
Just not forget, Trump said the same thing
about the water wall. Right? Kill him.
I guess if you're American too. Okay. Israel
will take care of that evil rock throwing
American.
You know, who cares that they were West
Bay these, you know, IDF or settlers were
out there raping and burning houses down. How
dare you throw a rock? But get him.
Right? He remains pretrial,
which means that there is no trial, guys.
He remains in administrative detention without charges or
any trial.
You have to realize this is an American
citizen who's not even giving process in Israel
when they know that both I mean, I'll
read what this says right here. This violates
US citizen protections and international law, including the
Fort Geneva Convention ban on transferring minors from
occupied territories. You must realize, guys,
that this is something that Israel knows not
only legally is a problem, but that in
in most cases that this is something that
The US should have a problem with. But
they didn't even blink.
Doesn't that speak to the fact that they're
not really the one that the US government
is not a problem here?
He's lost 26 pounds. He's been there. He's
developed skates
due to unsanitary
conditions, including a lack of clean bedding, clothing,
soap, and showers
as American citizen.
Not some, you know, like, what I just
makes me gross that we have to make
a distinction here. But this is a kid
that was born in The United States. His
family before him was born in The United
States.
It says no family visits or phone contact
allowed for seven months.
Seven months. The US embassy welfare checks are
restricted.
That's not legal, guys. This is completely broken.
His lawyers requested medical care in August.
Nothing.
Next court hearing he has, scheduled for October
29.
He is one of 323
Palestinian children, aged 12 to 17,
currently detained in military prisons. Now, when they
say trial, what they mean is, and you
can see some horrifying videos of this, a
room full of grizzled, mostly masked IDF members
and a kid. And they scream and they
yell and ultimately, I think it's like 99.9%
of the cases go in the direction of
what they want. Roberts covered this. Children.
Over a 100 US organizations
have demanded his release.
Not your own government, though, mind you, urging
the Trump administration to intervene via a single
diplomatic call. Given annual US aid to Israel
exceeds
far more than $3,000,000,000.
His case gained attention after his cousin, by
the way,
20 years old, was allegedly beaten to death
by Israeli settlers in July.
No big deal, though. Right, guys? Small story.
And I asked if Trump's administration has said
a word in any way. Right? Now have
they said a word, let alone even mentioned
or condemned it? Nope. Neither president Trump or
any of his high level officials in administration,
any of them, have publicly mentioned this case
at all.
Critics, including many family members, argue this contradicts
Trump's America first stance, especially given leverage The
US has, which is everything.
I just it's like I want that alone
to be the one thing you take away
from the show. It's so absolutely wild to
me.
Now let's play this.
Going back to the Hannibal Directive.
Maybe just I mean, at least some of
it. I went a little longer than I
wanted to go over this case, but I
wanted to I wanted to see this is
an interesting going back to the beginning of
this. So like we said with Efr Feingenson
or plenty of others, this is an Israeli
Hebrew speaking Israeli.
I believe it was in Israel talking about
what he saw early in this conversation.
Now for the podcast, again, it's in Hebrew,
so I'm sorry for this part. It might
be might just wanna skip forward or find
the video part of it, but, ultimately, I'll
I'll I'll say some things, but I think
it's important that we go over this.
So what he says is birthdays in blue
shirts.
You'll see them, like, you know, some of
them closer to the face, but ultimately, these
are this is in
you know, I I think it's the overlap
of going breaking through and in occupied well,
in Israel, occupied Palestine.
And what he what he'll point out and
I'll read for you is that these people
are speaking Hebrew with a with an Ashkenazi
accent and with rings that demonstrate where they're
from. Very, very interesting.
And he says
Where was it?
I went too far.
Yeah. So so you can clearly hear someone
speaking Hebrew with a Jewish accent.
No question, he says.
Let's hear when he plays it.
It
a gold ring on his finger.
It's either a kind of a skull or
something. It's magnified, a skull with one of
the symbols of the organizations he belongs to.
This is a white Ashkenazi period.
And finally
wearing a corona face mask.
So it says he's wearing a corona face
mask.
You see, you're telling me a terrorist who
came to kill children is protecting himself against
corona?
He covers his face so that he will
not be recognized. It was his point.
He says that's only the,
this is from one of their local papers
publishing it.
He
said I have not seen this anywhere else.
Not in the written account nor on television.
At least asking the question.
Who is the man in the blue, light
blue shirt?
He sounds Jewish. He says who does he
answer to? Okay.
The word image of a man on the
light blue shirt number two.
First of all, his credit to Shannon Green.
Michael published an article in which you can
see another man wearing a light blue shirt.
Someone will blur his face. It says but
someone only blurred his face and not the
other terrorists.
So this is a case where you can
see the Bila's children.
And so this is something put out by
Israel, and they blurred that guy's face only.
I think that's pretty clear.
Because because I do not know who originally
blurbed the image, but again, the point is
released. This was something released by this government.
This angle, which you can see here completely,
does not appear in the four minute video,
which I have.
Why blur the face of the man in
the light blue shirt?
This image also appears in various other places
online.
Four minutes and eight seconds. You see a
lot of scenes put together.
Okay?
This is what this guy looks like without
the blur.
You zoom on the lower part of his
face.
And I overlay the part of his face
without blurring.
In your head, you can see his baldness.
So this is what the man with the
light blue shirt number two looks like.
Man with light blue shirt number three.
Okay.
Okay. So so there's a zoom on him
from behind.
I wonder what is this thing up here?
I do understand this. And here is from
the front, some kind of face covering, almost
looks like a, like a nylon knit kind
of thing.
So he's just reviewing. Man man, blue shirt
one, Jewish according to his voice saying Hebrew,
no. Let him go. So and also directing
the other what they claim are Hamas, you
know, in in what to do.
Man, blue shirt number two.
Definitely not a Muslim, he says.
No. I mean, I guess I would argue
that probably means not Arab, but, you know,
he says Muslim. I mean, the point I
would make is clearly anybody could be Muslim
or Jewish based on or, you know, deciding
to be, but he says it's he seems
most likely Jewish. That's his opinion.
He says, but he's wearing a blue shirt.
Pay attention. You're coming to slaughter people wearing
a buttoned up shirt.
Like, I agree. That doesn't seem to make
much sense.
It doesn't make sense, he says.
It appears he's one of the senior people.
According to his stance and also according to
how he's dressed.
And number three, does not seem Jewish, seems
like a Muslim. He said, again, I would
argue Arab. And that very well could that's
important to point out, by the way, as
well with Hebrew translation as well as, like,
Muslim or, I guess, depending on many different,
you know and, generally, Muslim Arab overlap conversation
depending on there's different dialects. You could clearly
point out that words, for example, from a
a Palestinian perspective. The the word Zionist and
Jew
basically conflate because of the years and years
of Zionist Israel doing that, claiming that's the
same thing. Right? And so when many cases
they can prove they mean Zionist, it the
the translation can be deceptively say framed as
Jewish. And same thing here. You could argue
that what he means there could but the
word may be conflated. That's just worth considering.
I think that happens a lot with some
of this translation.
So, you got two men he argues are
white and Jewish. One that looks,
two that look Jewish. One looks,
I guess, just an Arab or Muslim depending
on how what word you wanna take from
that. Say I think the point is the
same in where he's going. And it says,
Annie is the member of the command team.
Why in the command team?
If there was a place where he did
like this with his hand
and basically directed people with signals and they
followed his orders.
Remember, although the light blue shirts are not
operational uniform,
This is they were used to signal other
terrorists who was in command. That's his opinion.
To ensure that they don't hurt them accidentally.
Meaning, like, don't confuse me with other
IDF members that look white or Jewish or
whatever the overlapping point would be. Few more
things.
These are from other areas. It says you
hear in clear Hebrew. I think the simple
fact that you can hear this from people
who are working alongside the armed people that
were invading,
that's speaking in Hebrew and Jew. I mean,
and his point is, I look. You could
over argue that there's an overlap because of
where they are and how the and the
proximity,
but despite the obvious points to make on
why that wouldn't happen. The idea being that,
you know, that that overall, that it's a
a with a Jewish
accent, not an Arab accent or dialect.
Right? So, I mean, I I think that
alone is a very, very important point to
understand that there was some kind of involvement
on the ground with what was going on.
And he says you could hear them with
Jewish accents.
Let them have it. It's one of them.
You
can also hear slowly, slowly.
So these people directing the other alleged Hamas
members and giving keeping them you know, that's
I think that's very important.
Another scene.
He's He's just playing all the different Hebrew
Jewish accent Hebrews catching.
He says, wait. Hey. Hey. Hey. In Hebrew.
In other scene, you hear,
you have people here.
Not because of the quality of the sound
during our editing, it says. Now because of
that. You're putting in the comments two videos
stitched together.
A stitched together thirty second video where you'll
be able to see the advance of the
man in the light blue shirt,
three visible.
There you can hear very clearly.
It
says,
no.
Let
him
go.
Let them have it.
Context This is most important thing in this
context. It's the connection.
The words in Hebrew are in line with
what is happening in reality.
Right? So ultimately showing that they are the
ones directing, and then you can watch that
that is what's ultimately happening. They're following the
orders.
He says now on the Gaza side, it
appears there are other mercenaries helping them.
So that wasn't in Israel.
This one looks American, he says.
Credit to Michael Haddad.
He says, let's see this thing. Look at
a mark here with an arrow.
That's smaller, you know, but you could zoom
in. We we pause it, zoom in. He
says, and he's also putting on a black
face mask.
You know, I mean, the the point of
potential involvement from US intelligence is probably the
most obvious thing you could think of.
Now no mask.
I'm here with a mask.
Hey. Look at that.
That's very interesting to me. This is supposed
to be in Gaza?
Like, he's saying it isn't. The point is
that that wouldn't be what you would expect
to see. And what what looks to me
like a some kind of American intelligence operative
or military person
doesn't sure doesn't look like what they whatever.
You know, all Hamas members breaking through the
fence, does it?
Wearing a Nike hat with all black.
He looks like the type of Caucasian white
American, he says.
Also with the Nike cap you put on.
So it's not only Muslims who are involved
in these events.
So you could, you know, they could go
many ways with this. You could argue this
is the the evidence suggesting that Israel was
involved with sort of
manufacturing this event, and that's why. You know,
there's any number of ways. The point is
with all the evidence we have, and I'll
probably just leave it there since for time,
there's it's just
I it's just overwhelmingly obvious.
And this one, he says,
You could say it's a misunderstanding.
Basically, what he's saying is you can't keep
claiming it's all this kind of, like, chaotic,
unorganized, and then look and see the opposite.
Like, you know, it it's either one of
the other. I think that's the general point
he's making right here.
Anyway, I'll leave it there. It's I'll include
this. It's all you know, as always, everything
down there for you guys. I think it's
important just to see
how much of that
all the information we have is completely broken
down. You know? And now what you're watching
is these two powerful intelligence entities,
US and Israel, just doing their best to
just jam in the future world that they
want to build that will likely mean that
what you think no longer matters. Kinda seems
to make sense to me. I don't understand.
I believe very deeply that we can absolutely
stop that from happening. So it's not some
give up, you know, we're doomed. I don't
believe that. Now on the case of Maxwell,
which clearly connects to the larger conversation, let's
realize that the Epstein Blackmail network is, I
argue, one of the largest examples that we
can prove of how Israel gained the control
over these governments.
Supreme Court rejects Epstein associate Maxwell's appeal for
criminal conviction. Now I I wasn't sure what
I thought whether that would happen or not,
but they denied it. Right? And so now
quick you know, our argument is quick I
think it's right here briefly.
Well, first, I get in that article, you
could read in from Guardian, the base point
is that, that they were denied, but there's
plenty more they have to do. You know,
all these different ways they're gonna try to
get her out. But now it went people
asked Trump. Like, hey. You know, what will
you consider pardoning her? And he definitely says
he'll have to, you know, he'll consider that.
Not an absolute
no. So here it is. Trump says he'll
consider Maxwell's pardon.
And the way that he does this,
again, it's it's just kind of like you
could have just been like
I mean, I don't even understand why you
couldn't make this simple. Right?
It's very easy to sort of be like,
well, you know, I like, most likely not
or just say no whether or not you
end up doing it. Like, it just seems
like a very weird way to try to
walk this and ultimately does it in a
way like that's what I was saying before.
Like, who's who's Maxwell? Like, it's just so
ridiculous.
He's insulting all of you more than anybody,
the people who support him who thought this
was gonna change. And he's lying to your
face, acting like he has no idea. You
know as well as I that anybody paying
attention even barely to this that this is
one of the most important things to them
right now. The way that this is destroying
his own base, there's even been leaked information
showing that they're desperate having meetings about this
all the time. And this is the way
he responds.
Asked
about the pardon.
Today, mister president Say it. The Supreme Court
is back and said they rejected today. I
know that appeal by Glenn Maxwell to overturn
her conviction. That means her only chance of
getting out of of prison is a pardon
from you. Because that's something you're Who who
are we talking about? Dillian Maxwell.
You know, I haven't heard the name in
so long. Are you serious?
You mean, aside from yesterday when you talked
about it?
It's this is just bad bad acting.
Right? I I mean, if you actually think
that he's unaware of this right now, that's
pretty alarming to his mental state. I think
you can prove as a matter of fact
that he's playing stupid.
I can say this that I'd have to
take a look at it. I would have
to take a look. Did they reject that?
You mean, aside from aside from the fact
that you literally just started the question by,
they just rejected it, now what? And you're
going, what?
Did they do that?
Really?
Again, guys, I don't know what kind of
audience he thinks that's gonna work for. That's
just insane. Except for those ridiculous cartoons out
there like Danny Johns and Nick Zor. They're
like, yay. Trump did the thing, and he
said, we he just you know, bombshell. Trump
just shoved it in the face of the
media. You know? Is that what happened? Or
they just clumsily make it clear that you
know is by pretending he doesn't. It's just
funny the way that these partisan cheerleaders will
say whatever happened was the greatest thing of
ever history of Trump. You know, the UN
speech that was ridiculous. Oh, it was the
best speech ever. Shout in his face. Or
Pam Bondi, we'll talk about next, who very,
very just did very poorly. But what do
you get? All the and Eric and all
the rest of them going, oh my god.
They just dunked on them because she's like,
you're the one.
Wow.
It's just insane. It's bad. To appeal their
conviction. And what happened? Said that they were
not calling to hear or appeal.
I see. Well, the name is so long.
I can say this, that I'd have to
take a look at it. I would have
to take a look. Did they reject that?
She wanted to appeal her conviction. And what
happened? They said that they were not going
to hear her appeal. I see. Well, I'll
take a look at it. I'll speak to
I will speak to the DOJ. I wouldn't
consider it or not consider. I don't know
anything about it. So but I'll speak the
DOJ. I will speak to the d a
DOJ. The GD of Canada, the pharmacy, sir.
I don't know. I mean, I'd have to
speak to the DOJ. I'll look at it.
I'll
I I have a lot of people who've
asked me for pardons.
I call them Puff Daddy has asked me
for a pardon. They did a council.
Yeah. I mean, I'm gonna have to take
a look at it. I have to ask
DOJ. I didn't know they rejected it. I
didn't know she was even asking for it,
frankly.
Are you kidding me? You see, this is
what he does.
That was I mean, it was already a
step too far. That was already just, like,
insanely embarrassing. But you now you're gonna you're
gonna pretend that you don't even know that
she was asking for a pardon? You mean
aside from the fact that you've already addressed
that publicly, Donald Trump? Okay. Either he's completely
losing his mind or he's just
stuck.
He doesn't know what to do, and he
knows that if he just puts on a
show, all the million follower
puppets they've created are gonna jump out and
yell whatever they're supposed to. And maybe that'll
work. At least maybe we'll distract you with
another big thing we'll lie about tomorrow. You
know? Who knows? That is insane.
This is why most people who are anyway,
like, a
shred of honesty are going, damn it. Like,
I have to say, you know, and and
they're out there right now, and they're suddenly
and slowly starting to go, okay. I just
can't keep pretending I'm an idiot.
Good for you. Wish it was fat a
little faster, but I'm glad people are starting
to come come along with the right side
of history here. But it's obvious what's happening
here. It's really it's really bad. And we've
already talked about Maxwell granted was granted limited
immunity, which already should have been enough for
everybody. Moved to a soft,
you know, be it's the the what do
they call it?
A a a club fed prison?
That that very, very provably she would, and
she is potentially capable of getting work release,
which they all tried to down when that
it's didn't happen yet, but she already tried,
and they turned her down because of the
job. She still has the ability to get
work release right now. And all the mainstream
media people lied about that and pretended it
was a fake story. No. No. It's very
real.
The point is that this is already happening.
And she was already given the proper agreement
with whatever she gave them, and now she's
think this is gonna very, very clearly end
up where she is gonna get out one
way or another because of what they did,
and that was the plan. Whether he pardons
it or not, they'll find some way. That's
what I'm arguing. I think that's very clearly
on the cards here. Either way,
or let's put it this way. I think
the pardon is what's likely going to happen,
but I can't know for sure.
This is somebody posting this beneath this statement
of him going, do you much well? What?
Right? I don't even know. Island? What what's
an island?
Nice guy.
Got a lot of problems coming up, in
my opinion, with the famous island
with Jeffrey Epstein.
You raised the question of Jeffrey Epstein in
your remarks about in the q and a.
I think he's got a problem. I mean,
I'm not problem will be. I I don't
know, but that island was, really a cesspool.
There's no question about it. Just ask Oh,
so he doesn't know about it. He'll tell
you about it. The island was an absolute
cesspool. Free. Free. So he does know about
it, obviously. Right? So he tries to play
dumb. But, yeah, I'm not saying I could
prove that he's committed crimes there. I can't.
But the idea that you are pretending he's
not covering up for everyone that did right
now is insane.
So, obviously,
that's pretty embarrassing.
Right? The you know, or it it reminds
me of what we just saw from the
joke of, when James Lee posted it of
Tim Dillon. Right? What is
ice cream? You know, it's like that's it's
making fun of Barry Weiss going like, what
is Mossad?
They say I'm part of you. What what
what is it? You know, it's like it's
just it's pretty what's happening right now is
hard to watch.
Like, if it wasn't so real, like, if
it was a I mean, it would probably
be almost in bear unbearably funny if it
was a show because you'd laugh at how
dumb, but this is real life. These are
people who are actually out there doing that.
It's pretty wild, guys. I mean, it's it's
entertaining in a way. That's why it's kind
of scary how it's used, a kind of
reality TV today.
What the patriotic blonde says, I barely know
her, but I may give her a pardon.
And I'm joking. Right? All these many, many,
many, many times where they're together.
You have Epstein on record saying he was
his closest friend for ten years. You've got
on on the Daily Beast podcast.
You got all these different overlaps you just
can't deny. Right? And they just lied to
you guys.
The oh, and this was,
so why does it keep happening right there?
Oh, come on.
There it is. Just a shout out to
the person who posted this AI image, by
the way. I've I'm not sure if they
made it or not, but the post the
image was on the it's if you haven't
seen it, it's on the the main cover
today. It is kind of a mock of
of the Trump pump, you know, fight fight
fight meme where it shows Maxwell holding the
pardon with Bondi and Trump trying to usher
her away.
Well done. Well done.
Now Massey points out, contrary to what the
speaker Johnson is saying here, he's doing everything
he can,
including delaying the swearing in of the most
recently elected member of congress
and spreading misinformation about the legislation to block
a vote in congress on legislation to release
the Epstein files.
Very simple. And, of course, I I was
actually aware. I thought that that person had
already been sworn in, and ultimately, that was
the vote. But apparently, it is. They're way
that they're potentially
delaying that. And I argue, like I said,
still,
going after one of the Republican votes.
All they need is one less, right? So
if they can get one of the Republicans,
Mace, I don't know if they've already if
she's already changed,
to change.
As this says,
I'm I'm for maximum disclosure. I won every
page of this out, really.
Donald Trump is not implicated in this. I
think he yeah. The doth protest too much.
He wants to protect the innocent victims. Alright.
Well, that's not off the table, guys. The
victims are the ones calling for you guys
to release the information. You guys are caught.
He's very passionate about that. No. He's not.
He's for maximum disclosure. No. He's not. And
the DOJ has shown that. No. They haven't.
Just keep lying. I mean, nobody's buying this.
Not even Republicans are buying this right now.
But overall, I think it's also about, like,
the larger lies around just the legislation in
general. Like, the actual closure, like, funding of
immigrants and so on. You know? It's just
the the point to make about that quickly,
I am in no way arguing that there's
not ridiculous Democrats out there who make the
argument that we should ignore the law where
it comes to certain things they care about.
The point is that most people left and
right are look. If you're breaking the law,
if you're a legal immigrant, you get deported.
That's not the point about whether that should
happen. That's why they're trying to to kind
of couch the conversation. It's about whether you
go through the legal processes
to do it the right way. Charge with
a crime, present the evidence, due process. That's
the only way it can legally happen.
They just lie about that and go, they
don't want deportation. Not true in most cases.
So are on top of that, the idea
of, like, the giving them health care. Yeah.
There's my same point. There are many people
that actually stupidly make the argument even if
it's illegal.
Most people recognize that this is not the
real picture. They're not arguing for doing that.
They're arguing for things that do not even
arguably do that, but simply making the broad
case that's what they want and acting like
you're lying if you don't think that. All
they're doing is convincing people of lies to
keep this going, I think. That's what he's
generally saying. Whether he means that point about
the legislation or not, the point is the
same.
They're dragging this out, guys. I think until
they can change those numbers. Watch. If you
end up with 217
people and they don't have one vote enough
to make it happen, that's what they were
trying to accomplish. That's my opinion.
So three posts. I think it's three or
maybe two. Yeah. So three posts of Pam
Bondi. Where it relates to the Epstein files,
there could be more. I think there are
actually, but these are the ones I wanna
show you. Then we're gonna get into some
of the other things she had to say.
I'll tell you, this is hard to watch.
She she she, I think the scent the
the feeling I get from this is that
she seems to believe maybe she just desperately
clings to the hope that Donald Trump will
back her no matter what. That all if
she all she does is project venom and
you lefties are bad and you're, you know,
what? You're doing the wrong thing and just,
like, this childish pushback.
Even if it's true, that's not the point.
Right now is about you're being asked a
question. In most cases, historically,
they they grandstand. They don't answer. But they
never just go no.
Like, you're an idiot and you're the lefty
dummy and I'm, you know, really childish. She
doesn't say that. Obviously, I'm making fun of
her. But
in in in most cases, there's some at
least an answer that we all can sense
is clearly trying not to answer. But at
least there's some kind of argument.
Not just you're the criminal.
You're dumb. You know? It's like there's this
bet. You'll see what I mean. It's it's
embarrassing.
And she is out of her league, like
most of them are. And even people like
Kat Turner, like, get her out of here,
while otherwise trying to make how she won
somehow. It's it's embarrassing. Look at their feeds.
They're like, Bonnie just dunked on the Democrat.
But then over here going, Bonnie needs to
go. She's bad at this.
That's they're doing both things at the same
time. But the point here is that she
is clumsy and falling in front of them
about a lot of this stuff. Here's the
Epstein points. Pam Bonney now says that she
never had the Epstein list. Now we know
this one already. Her argument, even though she
does a very poor job of making it
here, even though there's a better way she
could have framed this, because her here's her
argument.
I wasn't saying the list was on my
desk. I was saying all of the stuff
was on my desk, and I have to
get there to review it, and the list
might be there. You see how easy that
is to say in a very, very that's
I'd be like, oh, okay. Well, I don't
agree with you. I I don't believe you,
but, well, bear well, good point. Right? Maybe
that's what she meant because you don't know
for sure.
Right? But no. That's not what she does.
And the truth is that whether or not
it was a a list one, two, three,
four, five, the reality, and they know this,
is we're not asking for some one man
we're asking for you guys to compile a
list of people who were responsible,
which you know you have,
and this is how they're trying to sidestep
it. It's cover up all across the board.
You made a public claim that the Epstein
client list was, quote, sitting on my desk
right now for review,
end of quote. You then produce already public
information and no client list at a major
media event hosted at the White House. Attorney
general Bondi, why did you publicly claim to
have the Epstein client client list waiting for
your review and then produce nothing relevant to
that claim?
Also watch her just very you know, her
disdain,
the way that she reacts.
You know, it's just it's just lack of
decorum. And that's not to say that you
have to respect everybody, but it's about respecting
the audience. And, you know, the idea is
that she comes across with just absolute,
you know, I don't even have to be
a part of this. I'm doing this as
you know? I I disdain is the right
word for it.
But there's more to it. Like, the way
that she's presenting herself
is,
I guess, not just disdainful of the other
side, but of even having to go through
this process of explaining myself to the peons.
Senator
sir Durbin,
if you listen to my entire clip on
that, I said I had not reviewed it
yet, that it was sitting on my desk
along with the JFK files, the Martin Luther
King files. Even the way she just said
that, it seems to continue to suggest that
the list was on her desk. You see
my point? Like, she is wildly out of
her league. I mean, anybody who could've I
don't even know if she understands what they're
getting at at this point. Like, her answer
just basically said, I just didn't look at
it. It was there, but I didn't look
yet. So what's your argument that the list
was there later and it just didn't show
what you thought?
Your argument doesn't exist. You understand? Like, you
just set yourself up for failure right there.
And I said I had not yet reviewed
it.
And if you see our memo on Epstein,
you will see excuse me. Our memo on
Epstein clearly points out that there was no
client list, our July 6 memo.
Going back to the Epstein files,
according to another whistleblower who made a protected
disclosure to my office,
You pushed the FBI to review approximately a
100,000
Epstein related records
on an arbitrarily short deadline in March, and
the FBI was directed to flag any documents
that mentioned president Trump.
Nothing came of that review until July when
DOJ and FBI released an unsigned memo stating,
quote, there's no incriminating client list. Why was
the July 7 memo unsigned?
The July 7 memo came from the FBI
and the Department of Justice. Director Patel answered
those questions very clear. And, you know, senator
Durbin, I I find it very interesting
that you refused repeated Republican requests to release
the Epstein flight logs.
Sorry. I was muted. So right there. I
think it's important to highlight the fact that,
you know, look, I think they're all criminals.
I think most of these people in in
some way or another are compromised by a
lot of this. But what is the and
I'm not even denying that that point may
be valid. Let's just even say it is.
Fine. So you did that. You have a
you're you know, the point is deflect to
his criminal activity.
I guess, therefore, that means that mine doesn't
matter.
You see what I'm saying? Like, it's not
a well crafted effort right there. Yes. You're
a criminal. Yes. I you're the one that
did something wrong. You're just simply going, you
did something.
It as if that somehow changes the question.
Like, in a a well crafted way would
be to make a retort that was involved
with this. Like, somehow, he or somebody else
did the same thing or is you know,
it's just
so, yes, he covered it up. So what's
your point? That you didn't? Then say that.
In 2023
and 2024,
you fought that.
Did you take money from Reid Hoffman campaign
donations No. Who was a huge Epstein friend?
Why did you fight for years?
Why did you fight to not with disclose
God. She was so bad at this. Log,
senator Durbin.
I can tell you I did not refuse.
One of the senators here wished to produce
those logs, and I asked her to put
it in writing, and she never did. Yeah.
I think senator Blackburn would quarrel with you
on that. All I would quarrel with you
is to read somebody that you mentioned I
never heard of. Reid Hoffman. So who gave
the order to flag records related to president
Trump?
You you know what's crazy to me?
Look at her face. And this is because
she thinks by mentioning Reid Hoffman, she's gonna
get some callback to all the people that
there's valid points we made around all that
conversation. She thinks she somehow just got the
one up on that because she threw out
a buzz conversation to make the thing.
How is that at any bearing on whether
or not you did what you were supposed
to do?
I just don't think she's smart enough to
recognize how out of her depth she is.
President Trump.
Read with you on that. Heard of. Reid
Hoffman. So who gave the order to flag
records related to president
Trump?
To flag records for president Trump. To flag.
By the way, something that we all know
for a fact happened because it was reported
widely, and they'd even basically admitted to it.
That they flat that they you know? And
this this to be clear, that doesn't then
therefore mean that that was a proof of
crime.
Trump knew him. We know that. His name
would likely fall, and that was the point
that they were so afraid. Like, let's just
even say for sake of conversation, he didn't
commit any crimes. That the effort was to
keep his name out of it because he
didn't wanna be overlapped with it by manipulative
Democrats. Fair. But the point is he still
is lying about doing so, and she can't
even admit that even though it's already been
reported.
She thinks Trump will get mad at her
if she does, and he probably will. Flag
records for president Trump. To flag any records
which included his name. Look at her.
I'm not going to discuss
anything about that with you, Senator. Wow. Have
to Okay. So you're just gonna Conducting. What
she just did, by the way, admits that
it did happen, and she just is refusing
to discuss it. See my point?
The lack of answer is supposed to leave
it, ambiguous.
And look at her smile
out of your depth.
So
the
next
one oh, the the, again, the our memo
on the Epstein clearly points out oh, and
there was one thing I was gonna hide
highlight real quick. Already public information and no
client list in a major
Senator Durbin.
Senate and if you see our memo to
deflag any documents that mention president Trump. Yeah.
Either one of the points I'm gonna make,
but I'll leave it there. There's plenty of
stuff to get into. So this was the
one we just,
discussed. Here's the next one, And this is
the same overlap. And it says, Bondi, point
blank.
Dick Durbin asked Bondi, point blank, if she
consulted the White House before
about not releasing the Epstein files, and she
refused to answer.
Many, many cases. And, again, don't ever take
these as somehow like the other side good
or not that childish. It's just you highlighting
you know, let's just say they're all criminals.
The point is that she's refusing to answer
these questions like she thinks that gives her
some kind of one up and in ways
that make her look guilty.
Is to read somebody that you mentioned I
never heard of. Reid Hoffman. So who gave
the order to flag records related to president
Trump?
Continuation.
To flag records for president Trump? To flag
any records which included his name. I'm
not going to discuss
anything about that with you, senator. Eventually, you're
going to have to answer for your conduct
in this. You won't do it today, but
eventually, you will. I yield, mister chairman.
Oh, what? You know, I'm sorry. So it's
just basically the last extra part of that
that you didn't hear the first one. The,
you know, the idea that you're going to
have to answer for this in some way
or another because legally speaking, that is the
case.
Now this one
is in regard to the,
oh, the the this is interesting, by the
way. Allegations
within source material and testimony,
that doesn't mean real, by the way. It
could. That's the point of the question is
whether or not there's evidence around what they're
reporting as photos of Trump with half naked
young girls.
And this is the way she responds.
Something else. There's been public reporting that Jeffrey
Epstein showed people photos of president Trump with
half naked young women.
Do you know if the FBI found
those
photographs
in their search
of Jeffrey Epstein's safe or premises or otherwise?
Have you seen any such thing? I mean,
guys,
just look. Look. The same point is always.
Just because something like, just because somebody has
a political motivation,
right, like to say, for example, that these
people probably have huge motivation to expose or
even lie about something Trump did, of course,
they do. That does not then make the
thing false. It can.
Right? But the point is that's a very
valid question. There's evidence that shows that somebody
could lie. So all he's doing is going
confirm or not. Do you have evidence that
that exists or not? She could've just said
no. You understand. But I think that she
doesn't say no is the worry that an
eventual come out, and it does exist.
So here's how she answers. Of course, she's
gotta start with disdain. How dare you
besmirch the good name of Donald Trump? Well,
he didn't. He just asked whether or not.
And you have an opportunity to dispel that
terrible lie, don't you?
She's just so bad at this. Or premises
or otherwise. Have you seen any such their
search
of Jeffrey Epstein's safe or premises or otherwise?
Have you seen any such thing?
You know, senator White house, you sit here
and make salacious remarks once again trying to
slander
president Trump
left and right
when you're the one who was taking money
from one of Epstein's closest confidence, I believe.
Probably. But what's funny about this one is
she goes on to be like, I don't
know. Maybe. I'm not sure.
That's bad.
But the point is the same, whether or
not that has no bearing on the question
that's being asked. Just because he's guilty doesn't
make the other side not guilty as well,
but this is the game in people's minds
in partisanship.
One side bad, one side good. Right? No
matter what. Binary thinking.
I could be wrong. Correct me. Reid Hoffman.
Think about saying that. Keep about saying that.
You realize that's that from a lawyer.
To make that allegation publicly, if you don't
know for sure, you could be sued for
that. She's very desperate, I think, to do
whatever Trump wants. President Trump
left and right
when you're the one who was taking money
from one of Epstein's closest confidants, I believe.
I could be wrong. Correct me. Reid Hoffman,
who was
with Jeffrey Epstein on multiple
occasions.
And the senator sitting right next to you
tried to block the flight logs from being
released. You know what I mean? Me
on president Trump and some photograph with Epstein?
Come on. Like that doesn't matter? Now the
way she just said that seems to suggest
that might be real.
You see how bad this is?
Because she with with her effort to go,
you're the bad one. She keeps almost saying,
but that's real, but that's less important.
Now what's crazy is what I think she
actually did right there because she's so clumsy
is that she just conflated the two people
sitting next to each other. See, she called
out the other guy for funding for Reid
Hoffman. He denied it. This time, she's saying
she's talking to him. And I think in
mid conversation, she's going, oops. That's not the
right guy. And she goes, well, maybe though.
I don't know. I don't know. Could be
correct me if I'm wrong.
Wow.
The question is,
did the FBI find those photographs
that have been discussed publicly
by a witness
who claimed Jeffrey Epstein showed them
to him.
You don't know anything about that?
Wow.
And she was and she's like, thank you.
Took it.
You see how crazy that is? She just
say no.
Deny it.
But she just goes, if if if he
doesn't push me, I'll just take that. I'll
take that shocking large l. You just lost
that exchange. But, I mean,
that's what vulnerability looks like. You must be
able to see that by now.
So as Betty points out, this is her
her non answer. Notice the non answer. This
is explosive. She this should should be explosive.
The US attorney general, who said she had
the Epstein files on her desk cannot say
whether or not the FBI has pictures of
Trump with half naked women, which one witness
who knows Epstein said he she's seen, as
well as the fact that she didn't even
deny it. In fact, she seemed to suggest
that they're real,
but less important than what she was saying.
Okay.
So just understand before we move past Epstein,
guys, that there's this is not going away.
And this, I promise you, is something they're
gaming in every moment right now while acting
like they don't know, which is really, really
conspicuous.
So let's talk about some of the other
things that she said in this conversation, which
speak to much of the other conversation we're
going to have. First was just a point
about Tom Homan.
Just I mean, think about the lack of
the the no one above the law, they've
all,
like, said even though they don't believe, or
what they mean is no Democrat above the
law,
or the corruption that they pretend they're going
after, and or all the Democrats, they say
we're robbing, and Social Security, and nanny oh,
oh, yeah. But no one's been arrested, though.
But Tom Homan, though, which again is the
same point either way. I think nobody's ever
held accountable.
This is something you could prove happened, guys.
The evidence is very clear. All they're really
trying to claim is that there was political
motivation.
Okay. Maybe there was. Then charge them for,
I guess what, using political motivation to trap
someone in a crime they just committed? But
overall, he took the money. And I they
don't and they almost are and she doesn't
even try to deny that. And the evidence
is there. There the reports rather are that
there's video and audio recording of this break
breakdown and that they chose before the election
to not do anything because they wanted to
flush the basically, he needs to
carry out the action that he said he
would for the money, then they can get
him and say there, you know, that was
the completion of the whole thing. So you're
telling me that you're claiming it's political motivation
for them to not expose that before the
election,
but instead allow the other side to gain
control of it? That's political motivation?
That's insane to me. And the part the
reality is you took control and then dropped
the case even though there was evidence.
I think that speaks for itself, but here's
how she responded.
You know, you've mentioned
that
you can't discuss pending litigation, and I think
the committee by and large accepted that answer.
But I did notice that you spoke at
great length
about pending litigation, specifically with respect
to the questions, senator Cruz asked you about
the sentencing of the Kavanaugh defendant.
They all do this, by the way. I
make this point all the time, very frequently.
Like, even even Cash Patel. Right? Here's a
picture of the bullets we just found in
in thirty seconds ago. Ongoing investigation.
Oh, okay. So you clearly can comment on
an ongoing investigation. Would you want to sway
it into your direction that later was, you
know,
that you claim he was a lefty, nobody's
still proven even though they all claim as
absolute fact. Same case here.
She's gonna, you know, try to clums, you
know, work her way out of it. The
truth is you've talked about plenty of ongoing
investigations.
You use that excuse when you don't want
to.
That's pending. Right?
He was sentenced to eight years. I understand.
The Kavanaugh overlap. That, but it that's on
appeal. Right? Yes. We will be appealing. Right.
So that makes it pending litigation. So you
made an exception with respect to No. The
Cruz question. Hold on. No. Those were any
of the questions that you said were pending
in litigation from any of my colleagues. Those
were Now, again, regardless of whether his motivation
is to don't whatever, it it it probably
is, dishonest. It's still a very, very valid
fact.
Yes. That is the case. If it is
ongoing, if you are pending, that means it's
an ongoing that's the truth. Legally speaking, absolutely
the case. Here's her argument for why it's
not. Facts that came out at the sentencing
hearing.
You're welcome to see the transcript of the
sentence No. I I understand. But all that
reality that she's speaking about an ongoing pending
I mean, it's it's very clear. You get
it. Details of what they threatened to do
to
justice Kavanaugh and other justice I I condemn
what that person did. The sentence seen?
But the point here is that
that's pending litigation. You indicated you're gonna be
appealing. It's your right to do that.
And
you would not you you use that
justification to not answer many other questions.
Justification? You're an attorney, senator.
Okay. You realize that?
I I think she literally
just took issue with the word justification.
Do you realize,
lawyer Pam Bonny, that that doesn't mean false?
It is a justification. You're using that to
justify why you did not do it. In
other cases, you did.
It's just I I actually think these people
are too stupid to even be in these
positions.
I do wanna go back to Homan. You
know, there's a tape, right, with, mister Homan?
Reporting, anyway. Yes. I mean, first of all,
is there a tape in that has audio
and video of the transfer of the 50,000?
You would have to talk to director Patel
about that. Wow. No. I'm I I'm talking
to you. I don't know the answer, senator.
You do know. Wow. Don't call me. Okay.
This is crazy. So this is, again, same
point.
You don't know the answer? Well, either that's
a shocking lack of due diligence. You're you're
embarrassing yourself. That's that's absolutely your responsibility, especially
since she's commented on it. But just claiming
you don't know? Why wouldn't she do that
in every other circumstance?
Not true. I don't know.
I don't I can get it. I don't
know why this would be the one time
she and then she screeched, how don't call
me a liar. It's like, well, we can
quite literally prove that you do know. Like,
because of the ongoing because you've talked about
it, because you've denied those claims in other
in other what, conversations? I don't think it
was a podcast. I think it was on,
either an interview or in front of, like,
a briefing, but she has. But watch the
way she responds to this. It's very telling.
Video of the transfer of the 50,000?
You would have to talk to director Patel
about that. No. I'm I I'm talking to
you. I don't know the answer, senator. You
do know the answer to the call me
a liar. I didn't call you a liar.
You just said I know the answer. I
said I don't know the answer. You have
to talk to Okay. Director Patel.
What I said is that investigation
was closed.
If you don't know, why don't you know
whether there was a tape and video? Because
it's her job to.
Senator,
I believe that was resolved prior to my
confirmation as attorney general. Do you think that
That's not resolved. Use of public interest for
the people to know
what happened to the $50 that the And,
oh, I'd point out that if it was
resolved
okay. So let's just say before she's in
the position, then it gets brought back up,
and you guys are the ones turning saying
no.
So you're telling me you're denying that something
happened without knowing the case is facts?
Again, maybe, and that would be shockingly stupid,
but I don't believe that's what's happening. The
FBI turned over to Homan. Did you hear
what I just said? That was resolved
prior to my confirmation as attorney general. That's
why I said I would not go. It
is it's not resolved. She's like a soldier
child. You a thousand dollars. Homan has it
or somebody has it. Do you have no
interest in knowing where it is?
You're not gonna sit here and slander Tom
Homan.
Oh, great. So now now you find yourself
up against a wall. You're in a corner.
You don't know what else to say. You're
the you're doing bad. You're a bad democrat.
Or, you know, that's the equivalent of what
she's doing. I'm not gonna let you slander
the Homan is the one who got caught
in all of this. You've just you've claimed
already that you don't think it's the case,
then prove that. Break out. If you think
this isn't true, but yet you're telling us
you don't know the facts, how can you
possibly think it's not true?
You're it's team sport politics. She's choosing to
side with them because that's her job in
her mind.
The FBI
and deputy director Blanche said there was nothing
I'm not slamming Tom Homan. He got to
$50. Doing how do you know that? Tom
Homan is doing a great job as our
borders are, keeping your border state safe.
You're a border state.
Thank you, senator Welch. We're gonna Madam president
and I have twenty minutes. Not right now
at the end of the week. Wow.
Something else, guys.
And again, from a general sense as an
American, I'm embarrassed by this. People laugh at
us in the world right now. And it's
not that I'm saying we should care what
the world thinks about it, but it matters
to see that people outside of our political
broken lens
can see it because they're not they're not
I mean, we all they're all in their
political games going on the world, but the
point is that they're outside of it to
some degree and are able to see the
bigger picture. And we look
we we look like a clown car go
on fire about to roll over a cliff.
And that's not what Americans want. That's not
what even conservatives want. That this is my
point. Most are left, right, aware of the
lie, don't want anything that's happening, and are
arguing it's the other side's fault, and we
have to take action, take and all of
it is just the government driving us in
this direction.
Here she is talking about or this was
which one was this?
I was just playing. I forget which one.
The the I think the next one yeah.
The next one is again, this this is
somebody that I'm willing to make fun of
more than almost anybody. This guy, Adam Schiff,
is such a clown. It doesn't make what
he's saying false, and I'll play it for
you in a second.
This one is an a similar one, and
the next one is just going off, like,
all the questions that she's ignored. Here's one
more before that.
What conversation did you have with mister Ballard?
Oh, okay. That's right. This one's interesting. Because,
basically, here's Blumenthal, who I also don't same
as any of the rest of them, by
the way. I should need to keep saying
that.
A very, very basic question. Right? Just what
was your here. Listen.
What conversation did you have with mister Ballard?
What conversation did you have with this person?
And this is her response.
Senator Blumenthal, I I
cannot believe
that you would accuse me of impropriety
when you
lied
about your military service. I am not lying.
Now look. There was probably statements before that,
you know, building up to the question. The
point of you whatever. The point is that
you're asking a very straightforward question, and your
answer is to go, you're the one doing
things that are completely irrelevant to this conversation.
You're a criminal. Okay. He probably
is. Does that what is it the case
that you're a criminal, therefore, the question you
asked me is somehow not valid?
I don't even know how you make these
connections, but the game is deflect, deflect, deflect.
Lie, deflect, deflect.
Just completely just shut down and push and
deflect and lie and ignore the question.
Doesn't work, though. What conversations did you have
with mister Ballard?
Senator Blumenthal,
I I
cannot believe
Outraged. You would accuse me of impropriety
when you lied
about your military service. I am not advocating
you. I'm not appealing yet. You're not acknowledging
you. You're not violating you. You're asking you
about your military service. You. I'm a career
prosecutor. Don't you ever
challenge my
How dare you? I guess she's the new
grad of Thunberg. Integrity. Had I have abided
by every ethics standard. Do not question
my ability
to be fair and impartial as attorney general.
That's not an answer. Right? You're you're clutching
your pearls at the accusation does not give
you any credibility.
Answer the question. Anything answer that question. Former,
former, valid partners. Thank you.
Wow.
Right? Just righteous indignation.
Okay? Doesn't it doesn't make it doesn't do
the thing you think it does. Right? Maybe
you're outraged,
but answer the question. Right? Make the case
for why that's if it's such an egregious
lie, then show us why.
It's just be you know, people are not
they're not as stupid as they like to
think we are.
I've made that case for quite a long
time. Here's Adam Schiff
breaking this down, and it look. You could
watch for yourself. This is not just because
Schiff said it does not make it false.
She
willing like, more than I played it, I
think, the most egregious, but many more cases
that she just refuses to answer these questions,
which is not new. But the way she
does it, like I've shown you a few
times, is very, very damaging to what she
thinks she's doing. Before, you you it's ways
that are more about grandstanding or there's some
kind of an argument for why, but this
is just her trying to parent what she
thinks they've done. And I think she's been
given direction that it's
to protect Trump.
That's it. And so here's what he has
to say about this. And, again, what he's
saying is true.
So these are just some of the questions
you refuse to answer, but or have answered
with personal attacks on members of this committee.
You were asked whether you consulted with career
ethics lawyers as you promised you would do
during your nomination hearing when you approved the
president receiving a $400,000,000
gift from the Qataris.
You Oh, the ethics, did we forget about
that? Remember how many times I brought that
up and the whole ethics pledges and that
just never happened, an unprecedented shift and allow
yeah. I guess we'll just ignore the fact
that that allowed them to basically work with
foreign governments within our government, which we now
see. But, you know, too bad we didn't
call attention to that back when I was
screaming about it when everyone was calling us
black pills and purity test. All those people
are currently supporting this. Refuse to answer that
question.
You were asked what who or what role
you may have played
or who played the role in asking the
Trump's name be flagged in any of the
Epstein documents gathered by the FBI. You refused
to answer that question.
You were asked
whether Homan kept the $50,000
bribe money. You refused to answer that question.
You were asked whether Homan paid taxes on
the $50,000
bribe money. You refused to answer that question.
You were asked, did career
prosecutors
find insufficient evidence
to charge James Comey? You refused to answer
that quest.
Isn't that interesting?
That's what's happening, guys. Why would she not
she's refusing to answer. Why? Because they don't
have a case. It's clearly been it's they're
they're just like with Garcia right now, they're
scrambling to patch together whatever they can, at
the very least, to sell MAGA people on
how clear it
is. Now and even though when it breaks
down, you'll probably find holes throughout it, and
they'll get turned down, but all they'll say
is Democrats did it. Even though that's very
possible too, the reality is they don't. And
they're trying to manufacture it in hopes that
you will forever think that they had it
but failed because of the corruption. The reality
is they're not ever actually going after Comey.
That's what I believe, or any of them
for that matter. We'll get to that in
a second. But I just think want you
to think about that. She refused to answer
the question because the evidence is already pointed
remember, that's why the person that Trump appointed
said no,
and they've got rid of him. Or the
other guy who wouldn't make a perk block,
they got you know, they're just getting rid
of people who won't do what they're told
even though they have integrity and principles, at
least in some cases, it seems.
You were asked
how are military strikes on these boats
in The Caribbean legal, and you refused to
even ask answer that question. Wow. You were
asked law degree. Excuse me. Excuse me.
You are Gosh. She's so gross right there.
Just what she's doing. You can tell her
face. She's just like,
yeah. The law what does that so you
lying about thing or not rather you not
even answering questions requires a law degree?
So your lack of an answer was some
of a some kind of a legal justification,
you you must see by now. This is
not my opinion. She has lost the plot.
Her answers are almost, in many ways, proving
that she's lying.
The answer your argument right there is that
somehow having a law degree justifies why not
answering a question makes sense.
I mean, unless you're talking about, like, the
like, pleading the fifth or somehow not incriminating
yourself, which all again, pretty much makes the
case.
Asked,
did you discuss indicting James Comey with the
president? You refused to answer that question. You
were asked, did you approve the firing of
antitrust lawyers who disagreed with the Hewlett Packard
merger? You refused to answer that question.
You were asked
whether you support a restoration fund for violent
insurrections
insurrections to attack the capital on January 6.
You refused to answer that question. You were
asked whether you were firing career professionals,
career prosecutors just because they worked on January
6 question, the January 6 investigations. You refused
to answer that question.
You were asked by my California colleague whether
you believe government officials, like immigration officials,
have to abide by court orders Wow. You
wouldn't even answer that question.
I mean, how can you see, why wouldn't
you just go obviously?
Because you know that you're giving orders and
directions to ignore them right now. And so
you don't wanna trap yourself for some legal
proceed. That's what I think because you can
prove that's what's happening. They're telling them not
to worry about identification, warrants. It's all very
easy to prove.
And she's just
basically, I think what she's doing, maybe by
orders,
is creating the very case for her to
be the scapegoat, but nobody else.
This is supposed to be an oversight hearing.
Oversight?
These excuse me.
You can attack me after my own over.
Attacked all of us, including
Oversight?
Could you give me the definition, please?
Just crazy.
Really. Just over the top.
But let's let's make a point clearly that
that's the I think part of the reason,
by the way, that they're doing that is
because it's not new. I mean, I think
it was Colmi, by the way, who was
like,
oh, I I can't I don't recall. Alright?
That's but, see, this is my point. At
least he had a strategy to be like,
you know, like, you could probably call see,
that was very you know, he's a criminal,
guys, and he deserves to be in prison.
That's my opinion. But the way he did
that to say I don't recall, if I
do recall that correctly, I think that's what
he was the one that did that. Because
you see the legal argument is later you
can say that, oh, I just couldn't remember
at the time. Because it's not a denial,
it's not acceptance. You see, that's at least
some kind of political tact. She is just
sealing this I mean, I think, again, the
last thought, it maybe that's the way it's
supposed to go, that she's taken one for
the Trump team. I don't know. But I'll
include this show, by the way, because this
is a I think every day this becomes
more relevant. The Trump administration's missing ethics pledges.
And we've gone over this so many times.
The reality was clear that even the person,
I forget the guy's name, who was, like,
heading that transition,
he said, look. This could mean that they
very well could be working at the behest
of a foreign government, and we wouldn't know.
I don't think he was trying to he
just plucked that out of anywhere, or maybe
he knew something. You know? Either way, it's
not that he made the case that we
could prove that, but that it could be
one of the many things that we don't
see because they failed to do what every
president before has done.
I think we know why this is happening.
They they don't the conflicts of interest don't
matter. They're breaking the law everywhere. I think
that there's very obvious Zionist infiltration at the
highest levels of power, whether it's walls using
a telemessage
transition,
archive app that sends back the White House's
inner circle conversation right back to Israel?
Again, I always do this, then I'm like,
oh, I'll grab it just because somebody out
there is going, that's not true. But then
again, not what maybe my show, it doesn't
prove it to them when you look at
it, but look, all the source material,
The show state department revealed to be using
an Israeli intelligence link chat app involved in
Trump admin hack.
All very clear what's going on. So many
points that you can see.
So going forward,
of course, here's Laura Loomer. I have to
say, Pam Bondi is doing a very good
job during this Senate Judiciary hearing. Maybe because
Laura's about as dumb as Pam Bondi is,
but she says she brought the receipts.
Does she? The Democrats can't handle having their
dirty laundry exposed. Oh, you mean by just
going, but you lied about your thing.
You took money from Reid Hoffman. Yeah. Let's
just even say they're all true. Good. Call
them out. Now maybe don't do it in
a clumsy way to prove that you're lying.
See, these are just people here's five times
August. I didn't see that. Let me know
when someone goes to jail. See? He sees
it, guys.
See, the problem is that so many of
these these partisans
are just there for the team. Then five
times August has shown himself to be somebody
who has a principle. He cares. He wants
this to happen. And now that they keep
doing it, or, you know, everything but he's
going, I see that you're lying to me.
Nobody's gone to jail.
So Laura Loomer is just the, you know,
blind
follower in that case, but here's TMK saying,
Pam Bondi has been handed overwhelming evidence.
The Russia hoax exposed by Tulsi Gabbard. Now
I don't or I mean, I argue that
was just a reiteration of things we all
actually knew, but what I say when that
happened, remember? Nothing's going to happen. I don't
I I I hoped it did. Here we
are. Jack Smith's illegal spying, we'll talk about
in a second. That's, again, not new. It's
been going on as anywhere, everywhere as far
as you wanna look back, and it's not
left and right. But good. They did break
the law. Get them. Nothing's gonna happen, I
argue. Mortgage fraud committed by Leteta Jane is
it Leteta James? I argue nothing will happen.
Nothing has happened so far, and they've all
used her name. Mortgage fraud by Adam Schiff,
nothing's going to happen, I argue. Mayor Brandon
Johnson and governor Pritzker
openly defying federal law and calling for violence
against ICE agents, which with whatever your stance
on the statement. The point is no one's
going to jail.
He says, after all that, the only thing
Pam Bondi,
she's the only one, right,
managed to do is indict James Comey for
lying in con congress. No perp block, no
arrest, no mugshot because that's all they really
wanted. Right?
Make them look like the bad guy. Even
though they are the bad guy, they're all
part of the problem. But, again,
look, this is freaking all I've got. Get
off the Fox News and arrest somebody.
BC, all they're doing here is going Bondy.
Not that we know Trump put her there
or that we know that she's basically a
blind repeater of what Trump tells her to
do, which we can prove every day,
but Bondi because they're completely unwilling to reflect
on the fact that Trump is involved just
like everyone else in this situation.
That's a childish action, guys. That's the same
thing Jones and the rest are doing.
Hector, though, says it's time to just say
Pam Bondi is the weak link.
Yeah. That's always been the case, though, as
even Jones, like, because she's got six months,
and she's out of there. Well, I think
the plan was always that one of them
was gonna be the scapegoat because they are
spectacularly
failing in their narrative management.
This guy says, what's Dan Bongino and Cash
up to? And Kat Heard says, they absolutely
took a fantastic job.
That's insane. Well, they're probably the next one
that he'll go, get him out of there.
They're failing because anybody but Trump seems to
be the game. But they're not doing a
fantastic job. They're all doing the same thing.
They're all pandering to Israel and lying about
everything else. And they're very clearly not doing
anything of substance in any case, guys. I
don't care what they keep posting on Twitter.
That seems to be all they care about.
Here's what Trump said
about bonding and about Comey. That's why it
was asked. And I think they very clearly
organized this to be like, you know, do
we really think I mean, let's put it
this way. A question was that you do
really think Trump's not involved in what Comey
did and what happened?
The point is you already know that's not
true. He has been he's on record saying
go after them. We'll find just, basically go
after them.
See what see what happens. Remember? Just like
the FCC point. Don't you you coerce them.
And this is even much different because this
is them and then a private entity acting.
This is Trump saying, go after them. Get
Comey. Make your case whether or not we
have anything. We'll let the courts decide. Remember?
He said that publicly.
And now when asked whether or not he's
the one that made this happen, he goes,
oh, I don't know. Who's called me? Basically.
And, dishonest guy.
So, all I have to do is I
I mean, I have nothing to do with
the case. I just say
But you called the damn body to prosecute
them and opposed No. No. I don't call
anybody. You know what? I'm allowed to do
that if I wanted to do that, but
Comey's the crooked guy. He has been for
Right. So he they he just said no
when she said, but you or you said
go after them. Why? Because of the public
statement that he literally said. And, you know,
no. I don't know, Comey. I didn't do
that.
There he is trying to legally insulate himself,
and Pam Bond is the one that is
clearly being set to take the fall should
they need that.
And let's not forget, yet again, the big,
big, big actions that are absolutely coming that
Jones told you about on August 23.
I mean, he I mean, again, even us
went down here. This is back in 2024
where he said before Trump got into power
that Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates and Fauci
and Hillary were going down. Should we keep
Trump alive long enough?
Okay. And what happened? None of that happened.
In fact, most of them are right in
his inner circle today. That means we're winning,
though, guys. You see how fun that is?
Well,
this is this is Comey. This is James,
Latina James. This is all of them. I
want these people to be held accountable, Obama
included,
Comey included.
Do you think that's gonna happen?
His DOJ sources swore it was gonna happen.
We'll find out. But please make sure you
reflect on things like this when it inevitably
does not happen.
Here
is the one about
Pelosi. This is, like, the third time they've
done this.
This this is Kash Patel
saying, Nancy Pelosi was involved in January 6.
The same case in before. Yeah. You can
quite literally prove these overlaps. My question is,
I said, I agree. Now watch as absolutely
nothing of substance happens. I hope it does.
Same with them.
The truth though, do we not already know
this? Have we not seen this? Trump had
this opportunity last time. Nothing happened. They continue
to do absolutely nothing against the people they
claim are gonna go to jail. The Clintons
he famously used first, they're all good people.
We'll let him go. And he stands by
that to this very day, along with the
shots that he apparently think saved the world.
Well, let's talk about the Epstein overlap again
in regard to the most transparent administration in
history.
Or not just the Epstein point, but the
accountability point that overlaps with the lack of
accountability and transparency with the Epstein case. Chris
Rozzini says, long story short, Trump went from
campaigning to release the Epstein files, because he
really did, despite the claiming that he did
he didn't do that,
To the binders which say on them, literally,
on the binders at the bottom, it says
the most transparent
administration in history.
You know, the phase one that was all
redacted that didn't go anywhere.
Just it this is DC Drado lives with
TikTok.
It's just embarrassing and they just don't pretend
like that's not the most embarrassing thing. Now
they're the ones convincing you to ignore the
whole story. But then it went from that
to it's a hoax
to now considering pardoning her.
Yeah. That's pretty insane. That's why honest people
are seeing this. But here's what Cash said
yesterday. The transparency I promised is being delivered.
You gotta love how dumb that is. Okay.
He said it, so it must be true.
Really? You just yell out the thing? Keep
screaming things on Twitter. I think that'll work
out for you, Cash. Jen says, laughy face,
laughy face, and shows Trump on pardon from
Maxwell. I'd take a look at it.
And then I'd look at it. And then
I said, Epstein committed suicide, and there's no
client list. And they're all laughing around the
water cooler.
Well, this is what I said.
That's just the dumbest thing in the world
today. And this person says list. And says,
what would be what would the FBI do
if it seized control of the largest blackmail
archive in history? Answer,
exactly what they're currently doing.
Good point.
Well, here's the CIA director, John Ratcliffe,
saying, today, I declassified the CIA intelligence regarding
Ukraine after determining it is in the public
interest, and feel free to read the almost
entirely redacted point.
Right? Here's information that we basically here are
some names and the, of, and is. It's
transparent though because we gave you a document
for mindless parsons to go, look at they
gave us everything. Like they did about Epstein,
like they did about JFK. What do they
say every time? What do they say about
the Epstein phase one files? This changes everything
because that's their job. Nick Johnson, Nick Sorter,
Benny Johnson, all these people, there's plenty of
them that I don't mention. There's the ones
that just seem most prolific who come out
and go, whatever they said is the best
thing ever. With a red siren, breaking news,
even though it's two days old. You know,
typical stuff. But yet again,
transparency,
which looks like redaction to me.
Here is Kash Patel. This is today. Transparency
again. Right? So this just keeps screaming the
thing online. That's propaganda. Transparency is most important
and accountability is critical. Well, we all agree
with you. Where are you on that? He
says, we promised both and this is what
promises kept looks like.
What? Writing that on Twitter?
He says this FBI is delivering,
period.
I guess lies and cover ups, yes, as
a result of our latest disclosure about the
baseless monitoring of members of congress. Oh, okay.
So by pointing out a set a fraction
of a larger story and going, Democrats spied
at this one time against us at this
one time.
Breaking news. Did anybody not know that? On
top of that, is anybody gonna go to
jail for that? I promise you that won't
happen. The reality is this is not only
one side. It happens on all sides, and
it's absolutely being done against Democrats by them
right now.
That's how stupid this is. And he goes,
as a result of this transparency, we're showing
you this case. And we have taken act
the following actions. We've terminated employees.
We've abolished the weaponized CR 15 squad, and
we initiated an ongoing investigation.
Okay.
Depending ongoing until we drift into the background,
we don't talk right that's what's happening.
Ongoing investigation that he not supposed to talk
about petting, you know.
Hey, I hope I'm wrong, guys, as always,
because I want all of them to be
held accountable, not one side or the other,
the government, for their crimes, including the people
he's pointing to. Do you think something will
happen?
Is does history show you that something will
happen on either side? Ask the Clintons. Ask
Pelosi. Ask any of them. Ask Trump.
You can let you can paint your pace
about how he squeaked by. No. All I
see is narrative
process, no outcome. Nothing. They they walk away.
And he says, and still, August says five
times August, and still nobody of relevance has
been arrested. Larkin Rose says, so where are
the Epstein files? This is not unique. Well,
I guess bar Robert Barnes says, good.
Okay. Well, yeah. I think most of us
can recognize this is not what it appears
to be.
Dan Bongino goes, we promised you transparency and
accountability.
We will continue
to deliver those promises. You deserve better.
Well, maybe you meant that differently, but I
think at the end, yeah, we definitely do
deserve better than right now. But
you can make it better by actually giving
us something and not just stating online that
you're doing that when you're not. Again, five
times August accountability means you cut the head
off the snake. You haven't.
You are transparently working on behalf of pedophiles
and delivering nothing but lip service to Americans.
There's a lot of people underneath this and
all of them calling them out.
Now here's Gunther Eagleman,
a die hard MAGA blind Trump supporter, which
you can easily verify for yourself.
He's got 1,500,000
followers.
He came out and said, it's been ten
months. Not one deep state arrest yet.
I'm trying to be patient.
Look at that. Now on my gut opinion,
it's him just going, be patient, stop talking
about it, while framing it as, I'm with
you. I'm upset about this. But then 95
other posts about how Trump's the best and
Ponti's winning and we're all the best and
nothing can stop us. Democrats are the only
problem. Right. So then you don't mean that
then. You wanna feign that you wanna see,
but you're not gonna ever actually do anything
about it because no matter what, you're gonna
support Trump. That's why I argue it's gonna
happen. My point though overall
well, I what I was gonna say on
top of that, my point was the same
as that, you know,
will you care and do you actually? Are
you just trying to give people direction on
why not take action? But what what does
a deep state arrest look like? If Comey
went to jail, would he call it a
deep state arrest? Probably. Do you know if
he's part of the deep state or just
the government? No.
I argue there's a much more abstract point
of what unelected power structures looks like, and
Comey was well,
yeah. You could argue unelected in a very
real sense. My point overall
is that anybody they don't like going to
jail, they would label a deep state arrest,
and yet there still haven't even been one
of
them. Five times always says they they want
you patient and complacent and sitting idle. That's
the whole point. Gunther knows this, in my
opinion.
He also says here,
still waiting on the July 18.
This post is from
yesterday.
It says, Tulsi Gabbard turned over documents that
prove this is dishes conspiracy. That's okay. Yeah.
I agree. Even though it was already clear.
And they all called Obama a tree, and
Miller called him a treasonous traitor.
Very real legal words that have very real
consequences if you're especially if you're lying about
it, which I don't think they are. The
point is never that these people aren't what
they say. I mean, that often is, but
the point now is about the fact that
they say those things, which have like, Obama
could sue the hell out of them right
now if he wanted to, libel.
Or the idea that you accuse someone of
treason and there's not even a moment of
action.
I don't know how anybody on this pretends
this isn't the most obvious thing in the
world. But even the gun three going, there's
been no arrests.
Holding people accountable.
Get it done, Bondi.
Only Bondi.
I get it from an AG position. My
point though is that you must be able
to see that that's not she's following orders.
Here's Nancy Mace.
When are people going to jail for this?
Aren't you the government, Nancy? Aren't you shouldn't
we be asking you that? Don't you love
how it's it's not how Trump tries to
paint himself as sort of like this independent
thing that just I don't know. I'm just
trying to stand by and help everybody. You're
the one doing it all.
Grassley comes out and goes, this document shows
the Biden FBI spied. Look. We know that,
guys. No. I'm not disputing that in any
sense,
but that they were spied on these people.
I think that's happening back and forth. The
Biden weaponization of the FBI. Are we actually
not going to see that right now happening
in front of us?
Oh, I guess the blind from, you know,
self reflection from partisans, but I think most
honest people can. But so in this case,
it's not to say that we shouldn't care
about it. But go after them. Yes. Put
them in jail, which I already argue is
not going to happen. So that's the first
point. But secondarily,
then let's make sure we flush this out
and understand that that's happening now or back
as far as you wanna look, left and
right, and on a whole of government scale.
But first and foremost,
show me when they get arrested. Show me
when Jack Smith or anybody else goes to
jail,
not gets indicted
with no action after that, but goes to
jail.
Ron Johnson, same thing. I was just briefed
by Bongino and the FBI.
Justice department obtained call logs from eight US
senators, including himself. We were surveilled simply for
being Republicans. Now that's his opinion of it.
I argue it's probably true. The point, nonetheless,
is that, yes, probably.
Charge them, put them in jail if you
have a case.
It says what the Biden administration has done
is so outrageous, the abuse of power. Yeah.
No one says agree with that other than
people that wanna ignore that, you know, the
the team sport politics on the left are
doing the same thing the right does, ignoring
it because it hurts their team.
Even Cat Turd comes out and goes, they
were illegally listening to my phone calls.
Really?
So are you pretending like that's not happening
now or wasn't happening before Trump's last administration?
Do you realize we can literally prove that
the NSA they they've been spying on us
the entire time. Kat Tur, do you not
realize that Palantir and Israel are right this
moment doing that to you?
But but the ones, the Democrats in that
one thirty second period that we want you
to focus on, that one,
Just lazy.
Here is Josh Hawley saying Biden's FBI spied
on my phone calls and tracked my location.
Same thing. This they're all coming out and
going, oh. And he goes, they also targeted
parents, pro lifers, and Charlie Kirk's Turning Point
USA.
Oops. A little bit untimely to say, because
right now, there's a very important conversation we're
gonna get into next where it turns out
that the current runners that seem to be
Zionist tied in
were very much using that kind of thing
to spy on people in this country.
But But maybe that's why he said that
to distract from something else. Either way, I
think they should go to jail. Let me
know when it happens.
Now I wanted to make one point.
Now, I mean, I think I basically already
did. I said a note for myself is
that ultimately,
I think it's really important to recognize that
what all that how far back you wanna
look if they've had that capability, they've been
doing it to anybody they could.
But, really, that right now, as they're pointing
out the weaponization,
already, we can prove in a lot of
other cases they're doing that to the left.
They're left, lunatic terrorists. Right? But, also, that
they're doing this case is being used to
rationalize
and justify
more of that. And not even hiding that.
Right? They are the terrorists, so we have
to go after them. See, it's okay when
they do it because they're actually the problem,
just like a left would say in the
same situation.
It's just be we're bitten people getting played
against themselves by a government that wants you
to fight yourselves.
Here is the point I was making about
Turning Point USA.
Brian Ferentz came out and says breaking with
Turning Point USA and Dream City Church. We
just talked about this. Both the church and
the,
it's mentioned here somewhere. What is it called?
So it's some
blank on the name. It's in here somewhere.
It's that it's that church group we mentioned
that was influenced by Israel and the whole
overlap of the Zionist conversation.
It says that turning point USA and dream
church Dream City Church, you can be tracked
by Israel at funerals, church, political events, everywhere.
It says, remember and this is the FARA
document. This is I'm glad they included this
because these are the things that I seem
to be, you know, I think deliberately and
really hard to find today.
This is a FARA registration document. Oh, that
it's right there. That's what I was talking
about. Show faith by work. Remember, we just
talked about this.
And the Israel foreign ministry.
Right? That's why they have to this is
because the Israel government is obviously a foreign
agent, and they registered as such. They but
the APAC and the rest, they pretend aren't.
They are.
Also overlaps with how JFK got killed. They
argue with a very relevant point in that.
And then after he died, that no longer
happened as he was trying to get APAC
to be called something different at the time
to register as a foreign agent. Now it
did after he died, it didn't happen.
Show faith by works.
Far registration. I'll include this. The point
is remember when Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew
Covet,
this guy
here, said that their tech partners tracked over
277,000
devices, we reported this as well, at Charlie
Kirk's funeral.
Well, the Dream City Church in Phoenix that
hosts all of these events, Turning Point Rallies
and Amfest and Kirk was on the board
of
of is front and center in FARA filings
of Israel geofencing and propaganda campaign. So as
we reported, this is a massive geofencing thing
where they can control they can steal data,
they can basically put in data, but it's
also just tracking and information. And they did
this to everybody at the funeral. The Israeli
foreign government.
I mean, does this not make the case
for what? I mean, it's just it's obvious
that there's something very, very off about all
of this. As Mel points out, Israel's plan
to win back the Christians.
According to the FARA filings, Israel has hired
a California firm to conduct the largest Christian
church geofencing campaign in US history in order
to specifically target evangelical churchgoers with pro Israel
anti Palestine messaging.
Imagine if that was China publicly doing that
to Americans about Chinese information.
See, it's the same problem. The fact that
we pretend it doesn't matter when Israel does
it is the largest problem we have.
Now she also, Mel points out, isn't that
convenient?
Israel's contract with Show Faith by Works was
formalized
three days before
Charlie's memorial.
Just in the nick of time for Colvet
Colvet and his partners to geolocate
277,000
morning fans and sell their information to the
state of Israel for propaganda purposes because that
was the date and the foreign principle.
This is the same, the post we just
showed you.
Lastly,
first, this person swim in response.
Candace Owens will play this clip for you
in a second, The longer one. As it
says, Candace Owens dropped the receipts today, and
already the s h I t birds are
trying to spin it. Have any of the
people who are squirming like worms on the
hook right now bothered to stop for one
freaking second and ask themselves, why exactly was
BB Netanyahu the first world leader to comment
in Charlie's passing?
Right.
This person says, why drip feed? Why? She's
playing with fire now. She has to expose
all immediately for her own safety. Well, maybe.
And says, no, she's actually doesn't owe you
guys. You have been calling her a liar
and grifter for weeks now, anything. She knows
exactly what she's doing and god bless her
for it. Well, you can decide if you
agree with that. And it says, she definitely
knows what she's doing and that's for sure
profiting from the man's death, this person says.
Well, Mel says, Turning Point USA quite literally
sold the data of every single person who
attended Charlie Memorial to a foreign country. But
please tell me more about how you think
podcasters are getting rich offering up alternative theories
to the obviously bogus story cooked up by
the government. Here's Andrew Colbitt saying, I just
broke the news that our tech partners tracked
over 277,000
devices.
Yeah. I guess he failed to mention Israel
was the one he was working with though.
Right? Because he did.
Not for by design, I think. Well, the
overlap of this is very interesting. Make sure
I didn't just miss something. Okay. Yeah. It's
right there.
This is just insane to me how it
yeah. How lazy it is
to come out well, this is Laura Loomer,
but it starts with Paulina Luna
saying,
Laura Loomer goes, I just spoke and by
the way, the fact that this crazy monster
has access and just cut touches base with
all these Zionist politicians speaks for itself. I
just spoke with congresswoman
Paulina,
and she tells me that she has received
evidence that China funded one of the groups
under FBI investigation for ties to Tyler Roberts'
Discord activity.
Okay. First of all, that's a shockingly flimsy
connection to something that you don't even like,
let's walk it through real quick. That China
funded
one of the groups under investigation
for ties
to his Discord activity. So all that means
is somebody on the Discord, they claim, has
connection to a group, not necessarily tied to
them, but just simply connected to a group
that they're in that they're watching,
and that China in some way funded them,
which could very well mean a China adjacent
anything.
Because guess what? They're not really proving anything
to you. And it says, where he may
have discussed his plans of assassinating Kirk.
That's your story?
And this person says, now I'm now 100%
sure it was Israel.
Exactly. James Lee says, Zio's are now spinning
a new narrative that China killed Charlie Kirk.
I mean, anything's possible, but what's the possible
like, the argument clearly, we have so much
motive and evidence around the point of Charlie
Kirk in Israel. Doesn't prove it. I argue
there's not proof, but the evidence is wild,
and this is what they come out with.
Guess what Alex Jones put out?
I wanna make sure I got that actually.
Okay. Good. I did miss that. Let me
pull I'm gonna play this one.
So Paulina Luna
is making her case for why Chyna did
it.
And of course, Jones jumps in with this
and it's perfect. An easy way for me
to distract from the person that I'm always
telling you I'm not actually pulling punches for.
And that's Israel.
Here's Paulioluna
first,
trying to convince you that this was China.
Consider it though. Open minded, consider it. Look
into it. Ask questions.
But it's very conspicuous timing. There's been a
lot of, questions as to whether there was
foreign government involvement
In which one? In the assassination of Charlie
Kirk. Right? So, like, we're gonna address these
theories right now. Well, there's been questions of
Israel involvement, not foreign government like a broad
case, but Israeli involvement. I don't see anybody
really questioning other governments. I don't think there's
evidence for that.
Back during the ICE rights, do you remember
all of that at the beginning of the
year? Mhmm. A lot of people were like,
where are all of a sudden these big
violent rights coming from? Who's funding these organizations?
We found out that there was a foreign
funding tied to an individual by the name
of Neville Singhham who's in Do you realize
they never verify these things?
Like, a larger group point? Like, I'm not
denying that's probably all over the place, but
they never seem to bring the evidence. They
just allude to it. That group was tied
to this. That's Antifa, therefore, terrorist, therefore, we
know it.
But it works for people who want or
agree with her.
Violent rights coming from who's funding these organizations.
We found out that there was a foreign
funding tied to an individual by the name
of Neville Singh Ham, who's a multibillionaire,
And he made his billions by working with
the communist Chinese government. Right. Okay. So a
guy who has connection to China. You see,
we're talking like a sex like a five
or six point removal.
A group
who has ties to him, who he has
ties to China, who has ties to the
discord, who might or might not have been
connected to Charles LeVert. I mean, my god,
guys. Talk about a stretch. You think they
you think they could have at least, like,
manufactured a better case than this? And he
would take, foreign agent, which is a FARA
violation. So he's taking these millions, funneling it
into organizations like the party of socialism and
liberation,
who then in turn create these very radicalized
movements, but they're not even American in theory
or funded by American people. They're actually formed,
funded by foreign governments. Yeah. Sort of like
everything Israel does in this country, but she's
okay with that because she's a
hashtag team Zionist.
The irony in all this is that Neville
Singh ham, not just to Mondani's election, so,
like, Jews from Mondani,
but he actually also has ties to funding
the party of socialism,
the Salt Lake City queer group, which is
now being investigation
investigated with, former knowledge on whether or not
they knew Charlie would be assassinated.
Alright. So okay. Clearly, you could argue that
may be the case. Look into it. How
much you wanna bet nothing ever comes of
it? The point is that that could be
or it could just be a guy who
has political opinions and funds people he agrees
with. I don't know. You're the one who's
supposed to make the case, not come out
of a podcast and float an an unflheshed
like, a non fleshed out argument just to
deviate from the group that's funding you.
Who had ties to the shooter. So I
do think that there's a foreign funding tie,
but the question is which government, and I
think it's tied to the Chinese.
Interesting.
I mean, like Called the queer what? Salt
Lake City queers. Salt Lake City queers. They're
being investigated by the FBI. But if you
look at the organization where the funding come
Oh, so transgender. That's the that's the stretch.
Right? So now now it all patches together
despite evidence, I guess. It's from I mean,
not just them. They had ties to groups
in Cuba for and they are actually calling
themselves terrorists.
But not just that, they also have ties
to the United Nations. So Which probably means
they're manufactured by Israel in The United States.
I find it hard to believe the group
would call themselves terrorists unless the game was
to make themselves terrorists to be used as
a terrorist entity by the government that fund
things like that. But that's just my take.
There's this aspect of an a very pro
globalist and then a pro Marxist
movement to really sow discord and divide in
this country. And that's why I recently posted
on my social media. I was like, check
out the bot farms that actually exist. And
we see all this Yeah. Right. She's not
talking about Israel, by the way. Shit talking
on Twitter. Which we know they exist all
over the world, but just the the punch
pulling, the deep to try to re derail
it's guys, there's not a debate here. The
most obvious, most prolific, most widely acknowledged bot
element is Israel. They proudly tell you that.
This is just her trying to deviate from
the obvious that's in front of you. Make
sure you're not arguing with the bot because
that's Yeah.
Not like a fake thing. It happens. And
so we have to realize that social media
is being used to kind of
stoke this divide. But in the instance of
the shooter,
Charlie Kirk was
almost like a son to president Trump. Don
Junior will tell you is like his little
brother. Right. Very close to JD Vance, very
close to Cash Patel. So if you think
for a second that there will be any
amount of resource spared in his investigation, you're
wrong. Right. Trust them. They know. Trust the
plan. You know? Not like they might also
have an ulterior motive. Right? Who knows? Like,
even if you agree with her, like, the
idea that they just presented as usual as,
you know, we're the power and because you're
on our side, you shouldn't question the power.
Always question the power. Even if they're on
your side and you may think that.
Maybe they have a different motive. To come
at this like we know they're going through
the right thing is a child stance for
anybody on any side because that's not always
the case.
Because I know these people, and I've seen
the way that this administration has worked towards
at least issuing some of the darkest secrets.
We know them. We know they're on our
side. Oh, you mean secrets like Epstein and
JFK and what? What else? Tell us. For
example, what happened with CIA and the connection
to JFK's assassination.
I've met with the Oh, you mean the
things we all know? And they didn't release
any new information that actually deviated from the
reality of the watch your interview with Corey
Hughes.
These are these people don't even know what
they're talking about if they actually think about
it. Director. But to, I think,
really
take into account that you have the family
that is seeing all this stuff out there
right now.
I hope that they get every single person
involved. I definitely think that it's likely that
more than one person knew about what was
happening because Okay. Let's say it was the
Israeli government. Would you want that then? How
much you wanna bet that that would dramatically
change what she wants?
And, you know, you ask yourself why the
people that they put in front of you
are all these people that don't seem to
even like, they it's like I said. These
are people that are the way that they
conduct themselves, the way they speak, the way
that they act, their knowledge base. They are
out of their depth.
But I think that's why these are the
people that are blind supporters both of Zionism
and seemingly of Trump.
And you you could see the same thing
when the next left person is in power.
Those seem to be the both consistent things,
and they seem to be getting increasingly stew
more stupid, less informed, more hyperbolic,
more willing to destroy the constitution. You can
make a case for why that clearly points
in one direction. The Salt Lake City queer
group immediately deleted their page. They're under investigation.
There's a foreign funding tie there.
For Of course, the point they're making, by
the way, is that those people said bad
things about Charlie. Therefore, we're investigating him because,
you know, free speech doesn't matter. We don't
like what you said. And then they have
a connection to China, therefore, Charla killed Carly
Kirk. Very simple. For Tyler Robinson to say
that Charley was, you know, hateful and that
he just wanted to eliminate his hatefulness,
where does that come from? Right? Like, if
you actually listen to the things that Charlie
was saying and you don't clip it, you
can realize it was a very logical conversation
that he was trying to have. And there's
also some racism too. Let's not be child
children about this. I can easily point out
this DEI stance was a logical merit based
point. But then if you watch him and
you listen to him, there's points that ultimately
end up to be, sort of joking about
the fact that it's a black person. Not
that any other person who's just not at
merit, but that the black person so you
look, you can't deny that. But I've made
the same point about the way people misrepresent
that point. But you can't deny that if
you're not a completely blind person that there
were evidence that are undeniably about racism. But
the argument very well may be that certain
people in those colors, right, in the the
race
categories
might not be the best for the job
because of certain factors that I've heard him
discuss. Now whether you agree with certain points
or not, that is the definition of racism.
I'm not saying even remotely that the actually,
I think a lot of what people say
about him were actually hyperbolic and false. Nonetheless,
these are people trying to paint a very
clear picture. Don't forget, by the way, that
little picture about on the right,
in case you didn't hear this already,
more ridiculous things flooding the conversation about the
Simpsons predicted it. People made AI pictures of
the Simpsons and dumped it all over the
Internet, and people like this fall for it.
Just make sure that's clear in case you
heard that, you know, look, the Simpsons predicted
it again. No. I didn't.
So Alex Jones with that clip comes out
and simply goes, congressman Luna says that child
that, Charlie Kirk's assassination is tied to foreign
government funding.
Here's why she thinks the Chinese are behind
it.
Yeah. Perfect.
Is that so is it you know, it
so let let me let me break this
down as quickly as possible.
Did is anything she presented there of substance?
Anything. Is there evidence? No. It's just her
repeating what she wants you to think without
ever verifying anything she said. And even what
she said is based on flimsy half connections
at best.
So this journalist, Alex Jones,
points it and post it and goes, hey.
Look what she has. Okay. What's the value
of that? Is the value that you have
anything to gain from that other than a
a person in the government feeding you a
narrative without evidence? Aren't you the one supposed
to be fighting things like that? Or are
you just now the team acting like you're
somehow still fighting the deep state and the
power while you literally are supporting government narratives
everywhere I look?
That's pretty clear.
Jack Posobiec says, I saw leftist murder Charlie
Kirk and saw them celebrate it.
Who? They? Every single leftist in the world?
And let's not forget that the Charlie Kirk,
if you believe Tyler Robinson's responsible,
how in the world are we still this
it was a fact now? There is no
provable evidence to make a case that he's
a left or right. You could argue that
there's possible evidence that, like or I say,
proof, first of all. You could argue there's
evidence points.
Look. He wore a mask. That's one of
them. Yeah. I've seen plenty of Republicans wear
a mask, so maybe.
Or he's living with a transgender person, maybe
in a relationship that I've never seen proven.
But even so, does that mean? No. Again,
you can make a joke about Alex Jones
in that conversation. Or Blair White overlaps. Okay.
Is it only bad when they do? Okay.
The point is, could it be yes? How
do we know for a fact we don't?
Okay. His family was entirely MAGA. Does that
prove he's right? No. But it could.
This is what being an adult and having
actual objectivity looks like, guys. Every one of
these people are screaming narratives at you. We
don't know for a fact that he's a
leftist murderer. And even if he was, that
mean every lefty is now part it's just
it's lazy.
These people are not on your side.
Now here is National File saying, Charlie Kirk's
pastor speaks out about Kirk's texts marking his
exit from the pro Israel cause. National File
publisher, this person's name is Noel
Noel Fritsch,
Says who still cannot who still cannot post
on his platform for some reason. Just spoke
with pastor Rob McCoy, who sounded like he
was still in bed sleeping after a long
night fretting or drinking, it says. It's his
opinion. Now they say whether he shared Rick
Candace Owens bombshell text message with anyone implying
that someone may have taken
action with that information.
He asked him that. And this is Kirk's
now viral text made it clear that he
had no choice but to leave the pro
Israel cause.
This is people people are spinning out about
this.
Pastor McCoy refused to divulge whether he or
anyone on the thread shared the information with
anyone.
It says he also said, quote,
you'll find out later today, you're a little
slow to the game, indicating that someone on
the thread would be making a statement. And
this is when Candace, you know, posted this
stuff. When you asked who in the thread
would be making a statement, he replied, unlike
some people, I can keep a secret. When
asked what that means, he refused to speak
further. McCoy also refused to con confirm which
other individuals apart from Josh. Looks like,
yeah, Josh Hammer was in the now infamous
text thread. National file will continue to follow
the story. Now this is just a picture
of it. I'm gonna play the the I'll
I'll stop when we get there. This is
the
video,
a longer one. There's about, you know, a
minute clip that's going around. I wanted to
give you the you know, more of what
she has to say. Candace Owens releases a
leaked screenshot of Charlie Kirk saying he was
leaving the pros or cons. Now, obviously,
it's a screenshot.
Not only could that be a fake image
of something that doesn't exist,
right, or just a fake image, right, pretending
it's there, it's not.
Or it could be a a text message
with somebody or, you know, that maybe she
thought was Charlie and it's not. I mean,
you have to be objective like this, right?
But with what we're looking at, it's likely
that she would have a text chain with
Charlie Kirk, and it's also been backed up
by a lot of other people now. So
consider that as we go through it. She
claims it came from nine a nine person
group chat. She then goes on to elude
the Jewish donors have taken over, which we
can prove that. Right? The Zionist Jewish donors,
100% easy to prove, have taken over the
funding and the organization
of this platform
and covered up his murder she's she's claiming.
Now look, I you I like anybody, question
what she's saying, don't take it at face
value. But if anybody would have insight, it'd
be somebody like this that were close to
him. So consider that. Here's what she had
to say about this.
Actual group chat, which happened two days before
Charlie Kirk was assassinated. There were nine people
in total on this chat, including Charlie,
and Rob McCoy. I'm going to protect the
names of the other seven for now. To
be clear, I might actually release a name
every day this week, but I wanna show
you this because suffice it to say,
Rob McCoy was on this text thread, and
I think it helps contextualize
him as a person in my view that
he would attack me for telling the truth
about the pressure that he was facing. Take
a look.
Well, I will say this is I mean,
we're not whatever your thoughts about her, and
we should very much I mean, even just
the Tate overlap makes me skeptical in general
of any but nonetheless,
consider everything. Maybe that's a necessary answer for
that. And who knows? The point is that
I do think what she's putting forward, I
I my gut tells me this is real.
And overall,
whatever the intentions I mean, look, even people
criticize the doing it slowly. You know, I
who who can speak to what her motivation
is behind it all? But the point is,
she has been coming out and saying this
and getting attacked
incredibly
by people who otherwise supported her before this.
It's to me, screams that it's the same
conversation that she that what happened to Charlie
Kirk. And she's almost proving that by how
people respond to things that she's then proving.
Hard to deny that.
So Charlie writes in this group chat, just
lost another huge Jewish donor.
They deny that. 2,000,000 a year because we
won't cancel Tucker. I'm thinking of inviting Candace.
Somebody writes,
Charlie writes, Jewish donors play into all of
the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be
bullied like this,
leaving me no choice but to leave the
pro Israel cause.
And somebody writes a donor writes, please do
not invite Candace. That might feel good short
term, but it's not good long term, in
my opinion. Like all groups, you're going to
get a wide variety of opinions. That nasty
free will thing that God bestow on us
makes life frustrating at times after the dust
settles a bit, maybe.
So, again, this is forty eight hours before
Charlie was assassinated. He was very clear and
he was very explicit, and he did not
back down. Not in that Hamptons meeting, which
they're all lying about
nor in this text thread.
I'm not going to reveal the names of
the other seven.
Actually, you know what? I disagree with myself
four seconds ago. Let's just throw in Josh
Hammer for funsies on this chat. Okay?
So what are we to make of that?
Okay. Now that I'm showing you this and
showing to you that the conversations were real,
I want you to reflect, and it took
me a lot of patience to allow the
lies that were being woven and the misrepresentations
of people that were pretending
that I was just, what, high on lying
about Charlie and the pressure he was under,
the attacks that not just me, Tucker Carlson,
Megan Kelly faced for trying to stand up
and tell the truth about what Charlie was
actually going through.
Why are you hearing it though? Really quickly,
guys, for those that just are desperate to
jump ahead. Newer people to the show don't
know how we tend to do things on
this platform. I already have the information that's
been confirmed after this. We're just walking people
through the elevation the the escalation of the
conversation because I'm not just gonna scream headlines
and dump things in front of you. I
wanna make sure we watch the way this
goes. I already have the information lined up
next from the Turning Point USA and the
confirmation that they're real. Okay? Let's let's keep
it focused on what's happening and so I'm
distracted from the chat. Okay? I get the
point, though. Like, just put follow along before
we jump to conclusions about what we're gonna
get to. This is about what happened first.
And if I didn't show this first and
I jumped right to what he said, you'd
missed the point. Right? It's important to to
be patient with the information. Now I think
but if you have something to add in
the chat about what you know, fill us
in. We're always open to new information.
Me and Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly.
Isn't that weird? You got people that are
hosting a show. Have they, in, like, one
honorable thing come out and said, like, you
know what? F a couple of these donors
who made his life a living hell
in the last couple of weeks. Why haven't
they done that?
There's also a rabbi in that chat. Like,
why hasn't anybody
made that move to at least say, to
vindicate what I have been saying about what
he was going through, that registers to me
as very
suspicious. I'm gonna frankly say that it's suspicious
to me.
It makes me think that
in the way in the same way that
Charlie was being pressured by money,
that you might be now run by that
same money, that those same donors might be
running you
to correct the ship
and to focus yourselves on eulogizing
Charlie
as something and someone
that
never once flinched,
never once
for a single second doubted
the Israeli cause.
Now they want us to suddenly believe the
best way to honor Charlie is to shut
up. The exact opposite
of what he quite literally
laid down his life doing. Answering
questions,
turning points. Answering
the questions is what Now, let let's be
clear and just I'll show this quickly while
I'm talking for those that might be confused
what I just said. The the point is
that you know this, that the the the
funding remember, we were very clear about this
when we were waiting. Right? One of the
points we made is that we're waiting for
the next couple of, you know, next few
days. Like, is there gonna be new funding?
Right? Who's gonna take over the show?
Which we largely answer those questions now. We
got immediate funding that came from Zionist donors.
That's exactly what he was turning down, and
now they accepted it through Erica. Right? We
also have the point of,
what was it? The,
oh, Ben Shapiro and then, you know, filling
the the the seat and arguing they're gonna
continue the campus thing. You know, it's just
all of this does the funding is the
real point of this. But just too quickly,
this is we're gonna get to this next.
This is the the statement confirming that are
real. Right? For those maybe, like I was
saying, for those maybe new, I tend to
do that where I'm showing this and we're
talking about it as if this is all
we have in front of us to not,
you know, confuse the issue. That's all I'm
saying. And so, we talk about what was
done there and then we're gonna get into
the next day where he comes out and
goes, Yes, that's real. So, just to confirm
that, these are already confirmed as real. Right?
That's very clear. And we'll talk about the,
just a general summing it up right there.
But continuing this, I just wanna make that
clear that the funding
very clearly happened right afterwards. There's no denying
that. That's not some disputed point despite that
being all kinds of, you know, what you're
getting right now, people on in, you know,
Zionist, I argue, online who are just shouting
down anything that doesn't sound like it's helpful
for Israel. And blind followers doing the same
thing. Doing
in the second that he died. Okay?
And we all feel we all are feeling
spiritually the same way, so I'm just gonna
say it.
They're not grieving rights.
It's not up to us to decide how
people grieve, but I will say unequivocally
that you shouldn't grieve by lying or by
gaslighting. Is that fair? Can we all agree?
You should not grieve
by lying and gaslighting the public.
They want us to believe that the only
way that we can support and honor Charlie's
legacy is by donating our money.
But it would not be supportive for us
to try to figure out who killed him
and why the feds are lying. We should
instead just trust the feds and
excuse their little
half truths that they're telling along the way.
Now on that point,
they keep trying to make it seem like
it's completely normal that four minutes after Charlie
was shot, someone on their team nervously raced
to grab the SD cards,
specifically from the camera that is behind Charlie's
head. That we've never seen, by the way.
No one has seen that angle so far
that I can tell. And,
that was because
during that time, they think it's, like, trying
to make it normal that his instinct was
to stand on Charlie's chair to actually violate
a crime scene. That's exactly what I said.
Right? So that that was very clearly his
chair. That's insane to me. That you pick
up the chair that he was killed in
and use that to stand on. You know,
that's wild. His argument, at least so I
can tell, from other like, I can't verify
that it came from his mouth, but the
reporting has been that he was told by
the police to take that down and hand
it over. I just there's no way that
ever makes sense, that they would go go
grab it and stand on his chair.
Has anybody ever verified that there was any
kind of controlled investigation in the area? I
I find it hard to believe there wasn't
something. I haven't even seen any picture, any
evidence of that, let alone any actual provable
evidence that was like, the, you know, autopsy,
for example. They've said a lot of stuff.
Now look, I'm arguing I made this case
to somebody the other day. Think about it
if it wasn't somebody famous. If your neighbor
was shot, would you demand the autopsy report?
You would have no right to that. Same
thing here. There's no there's no legal reality
why they would we have a right to
see those things. But, nonetheless, if they wanna
assuage our concerns, then that would be something
they could do. But I think outside of
this outside of that kind of thing, you
there's so many other elements of what happened
right afterward and still to this day, just
like Butler, just like any number of examples
that just don't make sense if you're being
honest with yourself.
But also to mysteriously just grab the SD
card out of the camera. Right?
Not only are they pretending that that was
completely normal, but they're also presenting it as
though it was a heroic act. It was
like a forthright
clarified act to do in that moment.
And then anyone who uses their own eyes
and sees it as maybe a little bit
suspicious are just in the business of spinning
conspiracies.
Also, let's not forget that the
people who were just to the side,
who were already filming, and then the moment
he was shot, they kind of spin around
and get and are aiming right where he's
later moved by. It just that does all
could you know, you could explain these as
coincidence, certainly.
But there's something about this guy that you
know as well as I that there is
just no way
that all of it together, there's there's something
missing. Now as I said every time when
this happens, that doesn't don't use the absence
of something to prove something to yourself. It
could very well mean what we think is
happening here. But the fact that we don't
have it could mean there's something else that
makes it all fit together. And a lot
of times when it's like that, and it's
not meant to be like, you know, don't
we we need to wait for the evidence
to prove it. But the point is it
could end up being something where it fits
in and you go, oh, okay. That now
it makes sense. Even though there you couldn't
even fathom you couldn't even fathom what that
could have been at the time. I've seen
cases like that. You know? So just the
point is we need to wait for what
we can prove. And my point is right
now, what we can prove is that we're
being misled. There's something about this that doesn't
line up, but what we're being misled about,
we have this is something we have to
continue to investigate. But the evidence of Israel's
connection, all the things she's proving, I mean,
they're lying about far, far more than just
what happened that day, guys. There's something obviously
wrong about this. Now, to the next point,
I think this is important for two reasons.
One, that he has confirmed that they are
real. But secondarily, the way that all these
fake patriots
acted.
This guy
now they don't look they've even added the
update now and here. It's perfect. The Patriot
will probably delete this soon. Says, I will
give Candace every single shackle Israel has paid
me, pretending, like, you know, making the case
that, like, somehow she's lying about him getting
funded by Israel because he every moment he
can defends Israel even though he makes him
look like a clown. He says, I'll give
him everything if
she can prove those messages are real.
Oops. Right? I mean, that's crazy. And
here it is. And Mel says, payout, fat
boy.
Show
to address some of the things that have
been going around on public, namely about a
text a group text chain that has been
made known,
and released, by Ken Soens.
And I just wanna address it head on
because,
you know, that was a text grab a
screen grab that I had shared,
with people. So it it is authentic. And
I wanna go into it because I actually
am really excited that the the truth is
out there. I first
So
why the massive denial, the pushback? And I'm
not talking from high level people. And I
don't mean that misfit patriot clown. You know,
he was the one on there laughing about
you know, I there's so many examples. These
guys just it's anybody who's not a complete
clown or complete like, I should just, like,
intelligence level. You it's whether you agree with
them on their side or not. It's the
way that they go about themselves. It's all
straw men and red hair. It's it's every
every skate,
logical fouls you could possibly it's just about
trying to deviate from the reality everywhere you
look. And in many cases, don't even realize
it. They're just so ramped up on the
belief that they're part of the winning side.
They don't even realize it themselves.
But the point is that there's so many
people out there who were doing that.
That's not true. You're a liar. You're an
anti semite. And then he comes out and
does that. Now who knows why? The truth
is that they do this every single time
because that's what their job seems to be,
deflect and lie. Deflect and lie.
And this is just the overall this is
see, m MJ True Ultra, huge
MAGA team Trump supporter.
Something disturbing has come to light regarding Charlie
Kirk's memorial service, it says. Now this is
about the show Faith by Works
literally tracking them, getting the allowance to do
it before this happened, and tracking all of
them. Very, very weird. It says the same
company, Show Faith by Works, is behind what
is described as the largest Christian geofencing campaign
in history. We talked about all of this.
Israel, $4,000,000
contract with the company.
After the memorial, Turning Point USA
Colbert confirmed on Jesse Waters they attract 277,000
people. So two days prior to Charlie being
assassinated, he lost a major donor because he
wanted, quote, anti Semites, they claimed, Tucker and
Candace, to speak at the events. Then after
he died, Turning Point USA allegedly partnered with
a company infused by Israeli government money that
tracked everyone.
He goes, The math isn't mathing.
I mean, guys, these are massive,
massive MAGA Trump supporters who are going, Ugh,
just just us. I mean, the point is
even these people who would pull every punch
in the world are going, damn it. There
is still a line for me. That is
ridiculous.
You need to see what's happening.
They're talking about the overlap of media because
it's a very clear point there about because,
you know, Charlie Kirk. That is a what
what's happening after this is this massive push,
I mean, in your face to take control
of every element that might be talking about
things that show you what Israel's doing. From
TikTok to Instagram,
Twitter, Facebook, everything. Everything. And Twitter's been there
for a while now. Just and this whole
even, like, the game of the FBI, like,
pushing back against the ADL.
I mean, look. The idea that the first
of all, whether or not they, on the
record, use training materials from the ADL has
no real bearing on whether or not the
US government is
manipulated by the foreign government. If Trump tells
Cash to do something, he'll do whatever he's
told, and you damn well know it like
anybody else does. Glenn Greenwald comes out and
says the Jane Harman case is a part
is part of a crucial event.
It says in 02/2009,
two AIPAC officials
got caught passing classified Pentagon documents to Israel.
You'd be floored if you don't know it
how often you can prove that.
That that's one of many examples of Israel
getting caught spying on the White House, of
Israel using sending per internal documents. I mean,
here here's actually one that I had on
on the starting one today.
A clip for the, what was it on?
Hold on. Let me grab this real quick.
The, you know, the opening video for rumble
and so on, just showing you that this
is this is, the,
the one I opened with actually from with,
going underground telling you that Israel has in
full infiltrated the Pentagon.
It's unquestionable that the Epstein business was
heavily influenced, let me put it that way,
by Mossad.
And so that's somehow emblematic on these huge
geopolitical issues.
Yes. I I watched Mossad
take over the Pentagon
in 02/2002.
The Pentagon was infiltrated
by Mossad.
They did not need any identification
to get through the roofer entrance to the
building. But And we've we've already heard similar
statements from current like, they have to understand
that go from from Trump to Biden to
Trump and well before that. It's only been
getting worse. You can see it right now
with the most pro Israel president in history.
He'll call himself that. Right? So if this
is happening then, it's happening now, and you
can prove this. The I mean, the the
same point is that the cabinet itself is
infiltrated.
They went upstairs to Douglas Fife, the undersecretary
of defenses
for policy,
the third most powerful man in the defense
department.
Occasionally, they went to the second most powerful
man, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense,
and they had run to the Pentagon. Donald
Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense said to my
boss one time, hell, I don't run my
building.
Mossad does.
Now whether facetiously or not, guys, the point
is that there's some level of truth to
this, and it's everyone's beginning to call this
out. People like Glenn, otherwise, in historical cases,
would have called everybody racist for saying it.
Like, it's become under undeniably
reportable now.
This is a Pentagon official pled guilty, by
the way, in 2009
to APAC officials passing classified
Pentagon documents to Israel. When FBI spied on
representative Harmon, she was promising APAC to coerce
DOJ to drop the case. Now here's a
fun overlap even though I don't think this
is the case, just for making a point.
What if the FBI was spying on Republicans
because they were working with the with Israel
illegally spending documents? See my point? I don't
I think that they're all compromised, but you
can see how easily that that you can
make a case one way when there could
be a very real something else going on.
Right?
US government to drop espionage charges against APAC
officials. That's insane. Both Dianne Feinstein and former
representative Jane, Harmon, both California Democrats, did the
last
same thing as Lindsey is doing
here. They were the biggest cheerleaders for NSA
FBI domestic spying then became enraged
when they were spied upon.
See? He's talking about the same thing.
CIA spied on the senate. They may have
violated the constitution.
Harm and outrage over alleged wiretapping.
They all do the same thing, guys.
Here's Lindsey Graham when he was grandstanding with
Bondi going, how why do they have my
phone calls? He's just such a he's just
so transparent. It's like all of them. Because,
I mean, I think they're sensing that the
walls are closing in, and I think they're
getting increasingly irrational.
Well, in regard to the news conversation, are
you really pretending like we don't see this
happening in this administration, like it's happened everywhere
else? Donald Trump flips out on Fox News
with get on board or get off?
Okay. So we we we can't are we
really pretending like this isn't happening? How in
the world can you he's making public statements
about tell a a news organization, if you
wanna call it that, left or right, CNN
or Fox News, they're all the same thing,
and saying, you better get on board with
what I wanna see or get off the
train.
I mean, that's a that's a coercive statement
if I've ever heard one. Get in line
with what I want.
Now watch him start talking about funding mechanisms
or whatever else or, you know, something that
will coerce them to do what they want.
Trump has turned his fury on Fox News
after they interviewed a Democrat senator. How dare
they? The president whose administration has in recent
weeks ramped up its attacks on people and
networks who cover him critically. Don't forget he
just said that when he becomes 97%
bad coverage, that's not free speech anymore. Yeah.
It literally is, by the way. I can
lie about you all day long, and that's
still free speech. You could personally sue me
for slander, like I talk about. But when
the government stands up, maybe the president, for
example, and says, when you say it that
much, that's not free speech, then you just
violated the constitution. Or rather, you're infringing on
that person's constitutional rights.
They don't care about this or worse, they
don't even know.
Now it says they people attacks on people,
ranting on his true social about Peter do
Ducey with, about the government shutdown. He says,
well, why is Fox News on and Peter
Ducey putting on Democrat senator
to talk about what they think?
That's what he's asking. How dare he talk
to them about this?
I mean, guys, it's not even secret. Okay?
I don't even should I I haven't been
this is what's so crazy is half the
time I do I even need to go
further?
Is anybody pretending like this is not absolutely
transparent is on a team?
Why is Fox News and letting them talk?
Fake spin is so bad. Okay. Then call
them liars. To argue that you're only supposed
to speak to people that you wanna hear
from is exactly the point.
Here's Pam Bondi.
And this is really telling, by the way.
She's trying to make it sound like it's
the way it's supposed to be. What they're
saying is that they investigate journalists
for saying things they don't agree with under
the claim that it's because of foreign influence.
Okay. Well, maybe. I mean, look, no one
can deny the possibility, for example, of, I
don't know, an Israeli, you know, having, you
know, an intelligent
asset,
deciding to become, you know, an American and
having a family and whatever, and then getting
a job and becoming a news person and
claiming I'm an American citizen. I'll just be
a journalist. Yeah. That that very well could
happen. It could be Chinese person. It could
be a Russian person. Okay. Fair enough. They're
American citizen. They have a right to do
that.
The argument is, is there a crime taking
place?
Well, the crime, they say, is because they're
using the position to influence American opinion. Okay.
Maybe. I mean, that's certainly possible. If you
can prove that's happening, then present your evidence
and arrest them for that because that will
be a crime. Funny how that never happens,
though. So what they do is they make
the broad claim of that happening, and what
they do is then go after journalists who
say things they don't like.
Acting like that explains everything. Because what they're
doing now is bringing back the idea that
you can now investigate journalists because they're a
national security risk.
You see, the reason I made the case
like that is because they very well may
be, in genuine sense, some kind of infiltrated
thing. But this is my point about the
reality of the constitutional rights that may in
fact be some kind of a detriment to
a group that wants to go after people
whoever they want, and maybe they even have
the best of intentions. But the point is
that that principle cannot be violated. And if
they break the law,
then do something about it. Make your case
and arrest them.
The point is that if a Chinese asset
was being caught infiltrating the media and you
could prove that they're a Chinese intelligence asset,
then they would already have them in jail.
All they're using is that framing to go
after anybody who says things they don't like.
In April,
restored the justice department's
long standing norm on this issue.
It was AG Garland
who had deviated
on the media investigations
policy,
allowing
self identified journalist
Oh, how dare they? This self serving status.
So this person doesn't understand the constitution then
or the reality of of many, many supreme
court rulings, which say that you're a journalist
if you say you are, if you want
to be. The game they play of access
journalism and credentials in school, that's not required,
guys. You could be a journalist if you
want to be.
Even legally speaking, they're not allowed to box
you out of certain areas based on those
credentials. They do anyway. That's a crime. It's
unconstitutional. It's it's illegal. They don't care. But
all she's trying to do is now create
a class. You're part of the media class
if we decide you are. That's what dictatorial
authoritarian governments do because they can then control
the way that you get reporting.
So what they're doing and I'm not saying
this is the left or Garland or Biden
doing the right thing. Who knows why they
made that decision? The point is that the
reality is very obvious that creating an idea
where you can investigate journalists based on your
threat, not because like, charge them with a
crime. You don't need this new thing to
do that. Prove they committed a crime. Charge
them with a crime.
This is all it's it's like political violence.
You're creating a a lens through which you
could look to say we think that's the
case, and then you go after them based
on that flimsy idea. National security, we can't
prove it. We can't talk about it. And
they go after journalists,
whoever they want, like they're already doing, by
the way.
Self identified journalist
using this self serving status as a shield
against being held accountable. Oh, accountable for what?
Words.
That's what she's talking about. Because if they
were char if they were account if they
were committing a crime, you would be the
accountable would mean going to jail for the
crime. What they mean is saying words that
we decide is Russia propaganda. Is China propaganda?
Definitely not Israel because they don't care about
that. But they say that that's what it
is, therefore, they can go after you.
You see what I'm saying? It's not hard
to see, guys. They wouldn't need any of
that if they thought you were actually breaking
the law. They need it because you're not
breaking the law. And they argue that we
have to do that. Just like we see
it building, we don't know how to stop
it. Every day, they're making rationalizations that are
unconstitutional to be able to get around the
rights to protect you from them. Because the
constitution was not about you, it was about
controlling the government.
And they flipped that on to you today.
And too many mindless partisans actually don't even
know that or don't care anymore.
For endangering
our nation's security. One more time. Allowing
self identified
journalist
using this self serving status as a shield
against being held
accountable for endangering
our nation's security.
Yeah. With words. With she saw she shows
she means words are violence just like the
left. We have taken that policy
back to the norm, and I can't comment
on whether we have or have not or
do or do not have
Right. So, yeah, so I agree. The norm
is that your government doesn't care about your
rights. Thanks for making that clear, Bondi. You're
going back to going after journalists if they
say the things you don't agree Look. They're
already saying that everyone lefty is a terrorist.
They're already saying that if you support Palestine,
therefore, you're potentially a national security risk, and
we won't we'll revoke your visa even though
it's shockingly illegal.
It doesn't so what how do you not
see what that means?
Now you're going, I think they're committing a
genocide. Now you're a national security risk, probably
working for China.
They just made the most flimsy case I've
ever seen in my life with Luna.
This is what they're doing, guys. And look,
I don't the argument with where we are
today is they don't even need these arguments
anymore. Apparently, Apparently, they can just arrest you
and throw you in El Salvador and then
skip you between three countries and you know
no one can find you anymore. No crime.
Right?
That's happening.
Where are all the people from Alcatraz? Alligator,
Alcatraz. There's a whole group of people that
have vanished.
They know they learned from the last mistakes.
They're not gonna let them they're not gonna
send them one place and let them sit
there. They're gonna shuffle them around so they
get lost in the wind, and there's no
crime anymore. At least from a court's perspective,
they can't prove what happened. These people are
monsters, guys, and it's not just one side
of it. I can shell Michael Shellenberger says
it's wonderful for journalism
and America that CBS News was made
Barry Weiss was given editor in chief position.
You know, nepotism, basically. Nobody has done more
to platform overlooked voices and create opportunities for
young reporters.
These are the Twitter files, guys, by the
way. Now then some cases, Michael Shellenberger's done
some great work, but he seems to be
weirdly blind when it comes to this Twitter
files overlap to a lot of different topics
outside of COVID nineteen. But she says she
will bring to CBS the fresh perspective the
New York Times couldn't tolerate.
My God. And what she says is her
Twitter files part two back in 2022. That's
right. Let's not forget that she was part
of the whole Twitter files deception.
The absolute lie that was the Twitter files
or actually the Twitter screenshots
that they never ever ever ever gave you
source material despite all of the claims that
I was crazy for asking, Ryan. Of course,
they're gonna do that. And then never did.
Or no Fauci files or no any a
lot of things they promised would happen. They
gave you a bunch of claims, which I
argue were largely provable before that anyway. And
that was the point, to get you to
trust what they presented without evidence, which is
what Jones and the rest are. That's what
they do every day.
But don't worry. Barry Weiss is on your
side, guys. Freedom.
Well, new CBS owner, David Ellison, member of
Larry Ellison's family, met with top Israeli generals
in a scheme to spy on Americans.
Yep. That's happening. But don't worry. Barry Weiss
is on your side. The reality is this
is everywhere you look, whether it's the,
dream the faith works, Israel overlap with Turning
Point USA, surveilling and geofencing Americans, whether it's
CBS owner working with Barry Weiss to spy
on Americans, whether it's Palantir spying on all
of you, whether it's Israel accessing all of
your data to train their AI models, or
Pentagon or I'm sorry, a Paragon Solutions or
NSO Group or, you know, any number of
the 13 ways Israel is currently surveilling Americans.
I guess we're all crazy for pointing it
out. Right?
Adam points out, Instagram's doing the same thing.
Crackdown on Instagram. All of a sudden after
TikTok, Instagram is now undergoing mass censorship. Now
it's been there.
I can testify to that, but now it's
happening. I've heard this a lot last so
many few this is, an increase over the
last so many days around largely Israel conversation
saying,
Israel conspiracy,
comment trend detected.
Think about how Orwellian that is. Delete it.
Comment trend detected. Nine eleven comparisons?
Pedophile criticism? That's what they that's what the
Instagram Instagram is saying. Doesn't that sound a
bit like left woke kinda thing? Yeah. Guess
what? They're the same thing if you're paying
attention.
Old drop site news points out
all, the overall Israel's earmarked over half a
billion shekels, $145,000,000,000,
in its twenty twenty five budget to weaponize
social media and chat GPT
and its largest US propaganda push since it
began carrying out a genocide in Gaza
according to foreign documents. And that's okay?
Literally, registered foreign agent acting in this country
to propagandize Americans, and that's no big deal?
Not to a Zionist occupied government, apparently. Israel's
foreign ministry hired
the firm Clocktower,
run by Trump's ex campaign manager, Brad Parscale,
we already talked about that, to shape online
discourse.
That's crazy. That's publicly what they're doing, including
attempts to engineer how AI systems like ChatGPT,
Grok,
Gemini, respond to queries about Israel. They've been
doing that on Twitter the whole time. The
campaign called project four five four
aims for 40 50,000,000 monthly impressions
with 80% of its content aimed at Gen
z on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube. A parallel program,
project Esther,
is bankrolling US influencers. Contracts allow payments of
up to $900,000
with a monthly budget of $250,000.
You heard about the whole $7,000
opposed? It's not the it's not debatable. I
don't I'm not gonna say I know everyone's
doing it, but they probably put this out
there.
Later expanding into larger networks with American agencies
and Israeli content creators.
Influencers can earn anywhere from tens of thousands
to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yeah. You
know who we talked about. Consider that at
the very least. I think we can wait.
I think it's easy to point out who'd
most likely.
Netanyahu personally met with the influencers in New
York earlier this month called social media Israel's
eighth front and declared the most important weapon
today is social media.
Imagine if that was China.
Well, here's a great clip by the way.
Now I I I forgot I was gonna
grab his name. I've seen he's pointing the
chat who he is, by the way. He's
got a con good clips he's put out.
I believe he's partisan. Either way, it doesn't
change the fact that what he's saying is
accurate.
And save our citizenships posted this, and it
says, the oligarchs who have taken hold of
the US administration,
both now and historically, see, they people can
see this in a broad way, and I
think that's most people right now, have never
been more blatant about their complete disregard
and malignant
intent
towards the American people.
However, people still believe that the the lie
that they were the good guys who were
standing up for freedom of expression on either
side of it. Right? That your team's the
one fighting the bad guys, the deep state
Democrats or vice versa, the fascist right. But
both of them are the similar overlaps to
all of those things. And it says, once
you feed people conspiracy theories, they will believe
anything you tell them. Now I don't like
the use of the term that way because
I think you we should be conspiring. Or,
I mean, theorizing about how they conspire.
To say it means, like, it's false. It's
not. I mean, there's plenty of valid conspiracies
out there that you can literally prove. But
I guess the point is when they feed
you the what what we've the term has
become. What a lot of the like I
just said in the day and wake up
today. Like, a story breaks out that's, like,
partisan, and both sides build these complete castles
of BS around every story
every time. And that's what I argue is
what we would deem that care. I still
like to use the term that way, but
that happens every time. So the point is
when you get people believing all the nonsense
from both sides,
you miss the real picture.
And I don't think anybody put the name
in there. Let me know. Oh, is it
absolutely Gary? Is that what it is?
Oh, no. Sorry. That's you're saying that's somebody
else in the chat. If you guys know
who the person is, let me know in
the chat. I wanna make sure I shout
them out. Great clip, by the way. I
really hard to deny this. TikTok is still
accessible. What this deal ensures is that the
American entity and the American investors will actually
control the algorithm. Am I the only one
that thinks it might not be entirely a
coincidence that the popular narrative has spent the
last several decades sort of ushering conspiracy
theorists over to the right, saying it's a
right wing conspiracy. It's a right wing conspiracy.
Conspiracies
belong on the right, only to then completely
flip the script and usher in the most
generic big brother style techno feudalist oligarchical
big government
authoritarian
regime
under the umbrella of a populist right wing
movement. This man is out here selling you
the idea that a small collection of tech
billionaires and media moguls having near total control
of your access to expression and information is
a good thing, good for your freedom. I
mean, aren't they doing all of the things
you were afraid they were gonna do? They're
building Yes. Yes. I mean, god
guys, think about how ridiculous it is.
I mean, I'm not even sure where this
guy's from, but it seems like somebody outside
The United States maybe with his accent. The
point is it's like, this is so shockingly
obvious. And this is my point. He's gonna
make it right now in criticizing Alex Jones.
Everybody like that was was, you know, a
long time ago building this exact issue about
camps, about everything.
And now they're cheering it. Those of us
that have been honest about this have been
calling it out a long time and are
now going, oh my God, it's happening.
I just think it's really conspicuous how obvious
that is. And it must make you question
these people's intentions. Not that they can prove
it, but question it. Because they should be
the ones more than ever going like, if
Alex Jones is so so hell bent on
convincing you that he's always right about everything,
which is such an easy thing to disprove,
Why wouldn't he be doing that right now
about all of this and going, I told
you. I told you. Everything I told you,
but not. That's very compelling to me.
Collection of tech billionaires
and media moguls having near total control of
your access to expression
and information is a good thing, good for
your freedom. I mean, aren't they doing all
of the things you were afraid they were
gonna do? They're building internment camps where people
are
by the thousands without a trial, without a
trace. They're taking
billions of dollars worth of bribes in broad
daylight. They're cracking down on media critics. They're
cracking down on speech. They're illegalizing
wrongthink.
They got men in boots on American streets
clashing with American citizens. They're silencing victims covering
the trails of sex traffickers to protect the
reputation of
billionaire child predators? Isn't this, like, literally all
of the things? Isn't this exactly precisely
generically
the terrifying
future regime that Alex Jones was ranting about
back in, like,
2011. And in many ways, which was very
abstract and nothing of real substance, by the
way, for that very reason and kinda just
trying to, like, pair it and emulate what
Cooper was really doing before the real truth
teller who eventually called out Jones before he
died as the absolute manipulator in the conversation.
And so too, the seven other people that
have left his circle, including Schroer oh, oh,
excuse me. Owen Schroer who just recently left.
The point is that you can make those
claims when it matters,
when it truly matters.
Who's actually fighting on the line right now
is what you have really look at. When
it comes to a head, who is actually
fighting it?
What are you doing? Really all of the
things? Isn't this exactly,
generically the
terrifying future regime
that Alex Jones was ranting about back in,
like, 2011? And what are you doing?
You're applauding.
Why why are you applauding? But they said
they were Christian, and immigration is bad. And,
well, I'm Christian, and I think
and immigration is bad. And, well, I'm Christian,
and I think immigration is bad. So if
I've counted my chickens correctly,
that means big brother is good. Did you
forget about lying?
Maybe they're just lying. Maybe they're just feeding
you the lies that you need to hear
for you to feel like you're winning some
kind of cultural war, so you sit there
placidly with a smile on your face while
the shackles clamp down and restrain you
once and for all. Or, you know, maybe
you're right. Maybe these are the good guy,
technocrat, billionaire oligarchs. Right? The big brother for
Jesus.
It's really hard to deny that. Right? I
mean, it really is.
You can try to pretend now I argue
the people that need to hear that the
most aren't gonna listen to it. But I'll
tell you, that is just whether he said
it or not, you could read that written
on a piece of paper. And it's like,
how in the world did every single thing
with a certain right flavor to it to
make you think it's totally not what you
said Obama was gonna do, even though it's
literally exactly what you said Obama was gonna
do? You know, it's and and and many,
many, many things Obama did led to this
very point. Many, many things that Obama that
Biden did led to this very point. Many
things that Trump did led to this very
point. Now Trump's carrying them out.
Now just some somebody posted the chat, by
the way, just if you since you're watching
and if you wanna support this platform and
what we're doing and the work we're doing
and the objective source material backed conversation,
there's a lot of ways you could support
it. One of which is to help, buy
some shirts from the store we have listed
on the website, question everything as well as
the one I like right now, which is
the free speech absolutist t shirt
or just the the they, the hierarchy enslaving
you. But thanks for posting on the chat,
guys. I appreciate it.
Now Insurrection Act. Last two parts we'll finish
with here today. Do pretty quickly.
He came out and said he's ready, you
know, to considering. I don't I don't wanna
misguide anybody. He didn't say absolutely, but he
very much did when it was asked, which
I argue is usually how it's kind of
set up, that that's something he would
that's go considering as we speak. He says
Trump's ready to invoke the Insurrection Act.
And here's Stephen Miller.
Now and this this was on the fourth.
Has now declared this Trump appointed judge an
insurrectionist.
To emphasize, the judge painstakingly examined all the
protests happening in Portland, and that's what he's
arguing anyway, Melnick, before Trump activated the guard.
She noted that there hadn't been any violence
and protests since mid July. Now they claim
she's lying, but I think the evidence shows
that's largely the case. And they called it
war torn, really referencing one of the past
protests.
I'm not saying there's not issues to be
dealt with, but national guard, martial law, violations
of policy comitatus, ignoring constitutional rights. Yeah. Pretty
sure no matter what's happening, that's not the
answer. But he says legal insurrection.
See? He's already building this narrative. The president
is the commander in chief of the armed
forces, not an Oregon judge. You see, this
is a guy who either shockingly does not
understand states' rights or the constitution
or deliberately pretends not to to sell you
on a false narrative just to, what, deliver
authoritarian
control?
Because bad guy Democrats.
There are a lot of good people who
are falling for this monster.
It's he he says it, and it sounds
like he knows what he's talking about. But
the reality is just because he's got a
mandate or his commander in chief does not
mean he has can do whatever he wants
whenever he wants at any time. It's just
not the reality.
The point is that when you come to
many of these situations, the governor absolutely does
have right. Like, this is where the constitution
supersedes everything. Because national emergency, national security, those
things do not supersede the constitution. We just
have accepted that today. It's like fire in
a theater. Doesn't change the reality. We just
kind of, you know they're wedging it forward
more and more, little wedges, little more, little
further. And then we look back and it
doesn't even exist anymore.
But he goes on, there's more local law
enforcement officers in Oregon than there are guns
and badges. This is an organized terror attack
on federal government. So all I'm trying to
highlight is the fact that you're calling it
insurrection, that you're claiming that a judge acting
in their capacity, whether you agree with them
or not, is somehow insurrection or political violence
or that what you're doing here is organized
terror attacks.
All of which, as every other conversation, he
has the right to say even if he's
lying. As an individual,
you could you could sue him for libel
if he's lying about you. And you could
also say, look at what people did out
there because of what he said, and I'm
gonna try to make a case to be
irresponsible as an individual. That's my right. But
from a government perspective, no matter what he
says, I argue that's not, it's free speech.
You could argue he's responsible, but I can't
argue legally that he has accountability for what
other people do because I have principle. I
have consistency in my logic. My point though
is that this is identical to what they're
claiming the left. The left called me a
fascist.
That's what they're saying. So therefore,
they killed Charlie Kirk because they called Trump
a fascist three weeks ago? I mean, it's
it's just the most clumsy overlap. But if
you're gonna claim that, despite the 10 times
you can show Trump calling left fascist or
Stephen Miller calling them fascist because he's just
a clown,
the point is that he made this case.
He called out a particular judge, and then
her house burned down.
So does that mean that that he's responsible?
Well, by their broken logic, yeah, he'd be
legally responsible. But if you care about the
constitution, no, he wouldn't be. But from a
personal perspective, they could make that case.
I just think it's worth pointing this out.
Judge, $1,500,000
beachfront home was burned to the ground, and
her senator husband was rushed to the hospital.
It's a crazy video, actually. The entire thing
burned down.
So look. Let's let's con let's be consistent
with the logic. Let me clear. I have
in no way just becoming the stupid, you
know, playing the same thing back like a
lot of partisans do. The argument being that
he should be held accountable for his terroristic
rhetoric. He's inciting violence. No. Because that wouldn't
be constitutional.
He'd like he probably is trying to do
that. Still wouldn't argue he's responsible for whatever
idiot did that, unless you can prove that
he funded them, you know, literally directed them
through the government. Like, then you can make
a case. I doubt that's the case. The
point is this guy is being a hypocrite.
That's the case today. Here is the article.
Sir, it's, circuit court judge Diane Goldstein, which
is the only one other thing I was
gonna read here. It says, just last month,
she was involved in a controversial case in
determining if voters personal information in South Carolina
could be handed over the government.
Right.
And he called her a terrorist.
Here's Grock.
Says judge Diane Goldstein, a South Carolina circuit
judge, that's her, has been directly involved in
high profile recent cases that drew sharp criticism
from the Trump administration. So couldn't you, by
that logic, argue that they're calling her a
terrorist, caused someone to burn her house down?
You very well could make that case. From
a government's perspective, they're not allowed to be
involved from a constitutional perspective.
But consistent logic, they're being hypocrites is my
point. And it says the case centers on
the voter data, access to administration's push for
election integrity measures. This is the main point.
Stephen Miller personally on October 4, I just
showed you,
Trump's deep check, deputy chief of staff posted
on egg criticizing left wing judges and lawyers.
So, see, this is such a far more
like, somebody calling Trump a fascist, by your
logic means that that's why they killed Charlie
Kirk. In this case, he quite literally says,
judges
are terrorists
are in the is it where was it?
The,
legal insurrection and the word terrorist,
specifically about judges, and then a judge's house
burns down days later, if not the next
day.
See my point?
Don't take this from me telling you he
should be accountable. I don't think that.
But if they're gonna make that case, then
they damn well better acknowledge what they're doing
in reverse. They're never gonna do that because
I argue both sides rather from a government
perspective, not both, the government is using this
argument to get you to accept that that
is the case so they can come after
you for wearing a red hat, so they
can come after you for holding a Palestinian
flag. So they can come after you because
they decided to. That's what this is. And
you have a lot of people who actually
want good, who are falling for these kind
of monsters.
It says
he posted about left wing judges and lawyers
engaging in legal insurrection,
which is funny to me. If it's legal,
then how in the world is it insurrection?
See, he's an idiot.
If you're acting legally, then it's not insurrection.
That's the case they're making. See, they're doing
it legally, and they're not no, they're not.
The case is they're not breaking the law
then. And it's not insurrection. You're just making
an insurrection because you don't like the ruling.
And it says, and acting as a shadow
commander in chief. Come on. Such a such
shocking ignorance.
He didn't name Goldstein, but tied his remarks
to similar cases,
including hers, fueling a narrative of judging sabotage
or judicial sabotage after Trump's agenda. Miller later
defended his rhetoric when Democrats,
linked it to threats against Goldstein.
See, they're just doing the same thing back
because I argue it comes to the same
point for the government to use. Online Trump
supporters on Twitter, formally, on Twitter, labeled her
as a liberal activist judge. An easy case
to make. So if and when they literally
try to bring this to some kind of
head and go after an American for something
they've said, You have a justice of valid
case to go after Miller for doing that.
Hopefully, neither happened because that would be the
destruction of our constitution.
But he's doing he's here's Stephen Miller on
the sixth
saying
the left are the problem. As always, doing
the same thing. He's calling his incitement. The
point is not that he should be accountable,
but he's a hypocrite,
causing the thing he's pointing to to create
what I argue is internal division and the
collapse of anything that's even remotely set. Any
kind of, like, actual
accountability for the government. What he's doing is
creating justification for more authority and control, which
only benefits the Israeli government that's taking everything
they can from this country. Don't know of
any evidence that there's some kind of vast,
underlying
organization funding them. Is that what you're indicating?
K. So nobody has made a provable case
that even though you can easily prove like
a Soros overlap, by the way, in some
cases that there's funding that leads to cases
that are maybe organized violence. Right? That's not
what they're doing. They point to Soros when
they wanna make the case for people to
follow along with, but they're pointing to current
events. Okay.
You say these Antifa people that were there
were part of it or prove it. Make
your case. Present the evidence. Oh, they've all
got organized signs. No. That's a that's a
data point. That's just your opinion. Maybe it
means that. I wouldn't disagree. Prove it. Show
me the files that prove a financial payment
from a certain group that's organized.
They don't have that. They're hoping you assume
that, and they're making the case against whoever
they don't like. If you do something against
them, you protest Trump's walking through the park,
you're an Antifa terrorist, and you're going to
jail. That's an unaccountable authoritarian government, and both
sides are gonna use it against you. Here's
his answer. Happening here? Yes. In fact, we
know that it's true. But, obviously You think
Tyler Robinson was being funded funded by by
some terrorist organization? No. What I said was
that you asked whether there was some larger
criminal conspiracy relating to domestic terrorism in this
country. And I said, yes. There absolutely is.
Now, of course, Antifa has been designated as
a domestic terrorist organization.
Okay. So now see this is using your
actions to justify the original claim. You clarinet
you you designating them terrorist does not then
prove that what they were always doing was
terrorism. That's like saying Crowder wearing a bulletproof
vest proves that he's in danger. No. That
just proves he thinks that. It could be
in that, and I wouldn't even deny that
in some cases. But you see the game
of, like, Zionist going, this is so terrible.
I have to have 17 security all the
time because Jews are under attack. Well, no.
That shows you think that. And largely, you
can prove it's not happening. But the the
the act the the fact that you have
them does not prove that you're in danger.
You see the game?
He's trying to make this case, and all
he's pointing to is the narrative of an
organized effort.
That doesn't prove anything.
There's only one example of many in which
we have now, of course, Antifa has been
designated as a domestic terrorist organization. Right. There's
only one example of many. Right. So he's
literally pointing to their action of them designating
them as that as the example of the
claim. That's circular logic.
Like, I'm telling you, this guy is not
that stupid. This is how dumb he thinks
you are.
He has disdain for you. I can see
you could see it in everything he does.
In which we have
it's a typically continuum of violence. It involves
both
organized doxing. It involves violent threats and Okay.
Great. There's a k there's a claim. Prove
it.
Give me the evidence you have that will
go to court
of somebody organized dot I don't even know
it exists. We can prove it does. My
point is they're not even trying because they
don't want to do that. They like the
broad claim so they can level this against
whoever they want.
Intimidation
and involves explicit calls
to commit violence against a targeted person. These
are individual acts, by the way. None of
this indicates anything of an organized network nature.
It could. He's not making that case, though.
He's making the case for an individual.
Damn.
Then that tends to escalate into physically violent
and obstructive acts. Oh, great. Guess what he
just made the case for? Your words are
violence.
That's what he just said, just like Bondi.
Hate speech is not free speech. Yes. It
is. You're both the left. And so it's
this continuum that we see over and over
again where they're trying to use
illegal
violence and intimidation
to disturb the operations the federal government. Yeah.
So they meaning what? This nebulous idea of
random people out there protesting your illegal actions?
If somebody's taking action that you think is
doing that, you arrested them. The game is
anybody we don't like who's standing against our
efforts are all part of an organized terrorist
network. This is the same thing this government's
been doing to anybody overseas. It's always how
long have we been telling you this was
coming home? How long have we been warning
that you were next on the the docket,
the US government agenda?
It's just in your face, guys. If you're
being honest with yourself and if you're not,
then you are dangerously allowing this to happen.
This is, this says, I also don't know
of any evidence. Oh, it's the same one.
This one is Jack Posobiec
talking about Trump possibly in in invoking the
Insurrection Act, and and Jack Posobiec says, invoke
it, mister president. The people will back you.
Hardly.
From my perspective, most Americans are absolutely not
okay with this. You can point that, you
know, the Joneses and mixed orders and Benny
Johnson, all the ones that are being presented
as what everyone thinks are screaming whatever Trump
said today.
Do you think most Americans are okay with
them declaring
an insurrection
when you haven't even proven any fraction of
that, and all you're doing is pointing at
everybody left who you argue doesn't agree with
your policies?
Guys, that's terrifying. That is exactly didn't Trump
tell you they were gonna go after Americans?
How many times have we brought this up?
He has floated the idea that you were
next.
Born here, naturalized.
Yep. He said both those things. Many what?
Five or six times now? Five I think
it was six, actually. He came out and
said that Americans
who bop old grandma's on the head or
whatever thing he threw out
can be deported?
I mean, we're in unprecedented territory here. And
if you're not a child, you can see
how this is coming together. Maybe you think
it's only aimed at the other side. I
don't know why you think that's okay.
Can't you recognize that the next person who's
in power can use it the same way?
And they know that because I think they
all they're the power structures who seem to
never go to jail despite them always pointing
each other, they know that.
Here he is again, same day. Breaking Americans
will back Trump if he invoked a breaking
news that you claim something about whatever one
of the country thinks?
Guys, these are jokes. These people are ridiculous.
This guy goes back to military intelligence, so
why don't you know why we listen to
this guy? I don't. I'm saying anybody. Call
on the national guard. Posi comatatus. Who cares?
Breaking news. Americans will back him because you
say so?
That's crazy to me.
Here's Jones. Breaking. America's officially entering the second
civil war, he says. Thank you, Tim Pool.
And guess what? And Trump is the Abraham
Lincoln trying to save the union.
Guys, these people are driving this into reality.
You want this to happen? You're literally going
sick. So what's the game? She's gonna save
us from the other bad so what does
that mean? All the leftists have to be
arrested? I mean, what are you actually arguing
here? That the what so the civil war
means war and that he's Lincoln, meaning he's
on the side of the the good side
even though that's historically inaccurate, by the way,
if you understand the bigger picture. I'm not
saying good, bad, anything. I'm saying both these
sides are abusive and manipulative.
The lie about him fighting for slavery, guys,
it's not a reality. He said publicly that
he could go either way with the issue,
that it mattered to how it could be
used in the ultimate outcome, that it wasn't
it was about states' rights.
And ultimately, you could argue that means the
union was trying to suppress whatever it was
about, largely slavery, their option to decide for
themselves.
Now you can make the argument from a
moral perspective that that's
I get it. But the point still comes
down to the idea that it was about
the the continual
growth of the empire,
and that's what he support. Yay. He's the
one.
You're supporting
a civil war against half the country. Because
you realize this is not about left, right
of the people who vote. This is about
anybody out there who does not agree with
what they're currently doing, and now they're the
lefty terrorists.
This guy this guy has I mean, I've
been saying it for a long time,
but I think we need to be really
obvious. So, you know, acknowledge
what we're seeing.
Here,
Where we at?
You know, I think I wanna make this
about let's just kinda wrap this real quickly.
Few more points just because I don't want
this is a a two minute clip. I'm
just ready to wrap up here, but the
point of this, which we'll get into the
next show, this is on, you know what?
Here, let me just play very quickly the
big and the just to make the point.
Being done out in the open. There's no
shame in it.
The getting right up into someone's face, spitting
at them in this,
conjured up rage.
Why is there no public
shame left or sense of embarrassment
or just general civility? It's
She's talking about only the left wing. Well,
you that you're that's absolutely gone, of course,
but you've been sort of framing this in
the conversation with the attorney general as a
moral failing,
which it is.
Some people's moral sensibilities
are very fragile.
And when they lose some of that structure
of society or if they're encouraged
to engage in certain aggressive outburst,
they will do so.
Yeah. This is just wild to me. Now
Drew very well may be making the case
about both sides of the paradigm.
She is very you know, but all of
them. Megyn Kelly, all she they're the same
thing. They're just and, honestly, if you really
listen to them, they're not very articulate. They
just repeat what they're told. They don't really
even know most likely what's going on. But
as they framed it,
we're living through mass formation again. The same
thing we saw during COVID. People are brainwashed
and delusionally believe those they disagree with are
less than human. Okay. Who exactly are you
talking about here? Are you really all are
you really arguing that it's what right now
only the left is doing? Look, I can
you can see this
pat like,
what's the right term? Like, it's an undeniable
obvious reality of the partisan sides about each
other.
Right? The fascist Nazis are disgusting. The democrat
pedophile rapist is just what the hell is
going on? The idea that you can claim
that that's anything but the governments we're talking
about,
it's wild to me. But if you're gonna
pretend right now, just to take it as
a one side thing, that the people on
the right are not out there going, Lefty,
terrorist, maniac, loser, disgusting.
That's what you're doing. That they that you
are delusionally believing that those they disagree with
are less than human. Isn't that exactly what
you're doing? Is that exactly what Israel is
doing with Palestine that you all support? It's
not left or right, though. The left is
doing the same thing. They did it during
COVID. They do it right. It's the partisan
team sport politics
that I'd like to believe most people are
starting to see through. But she the how
desperate she is to come out and go,
the thing we all see us doing right
now to them is what they're doing. Them,
they're the one. It's just again, it's like
we said, when you finally pull away from
this, it's like watching a cartoon.
How does anybody
fall for this ridiculous garbage? When you make
people less than human, you justify doing just
about anything. Yeah. You mean like what you're
doing about the entire left of the conversation?
It's just it's painful.
And attorney general Karen, Ken Paxton says, I'm
launching undercover operations
undercover
to infiltrate and uproot leftist terror cells in
Texas. Do they exist? Probably.
Just like you probably exist that really what
we're talking about is government
underbelly actions.
Left leftist political terrorism is a clear present
danger. There could be no compromise.
Okay. Oh, you got what about the Patriot
front stuff? No. No. That's not a problem.
They're gonna go after anybody that they argue
is like this, and I'm willing to bet
you it won't be any provable larger thing.
They're gonna find people protesting at Texas against
ICE. They're gonna call it terrorism. They're probably
gonna go after them. And they're gonna go,
we broke down a terror left way. You
know, that's what you'll probably see.
Like, if you can prove actual network terror
that they produce your evidence and charge them,
do you think that's gonna happen, or is
this gonna work its way into an official
investigatory arm of going after anybody who they
say is left, therefore, terrorism?
I don't need I this is what's happening,
guys.
Now Miles Taylor, who claims to be yeah.
I he says, I co wrote Trump's first
anti terrorism plan in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen.
He says, he's not trying to stop left
wing terrorism.
He's staging it.
His troops deployments are false flag,
meant to provoke a response in order to
justify harsh crackdowns. This is now very obvious,
and I don't necessarily disagree.
If you can see the the the poop
two party illusion, it makes perfect sense that
you're just like you saw with the left
trying to do about the right, and it
didn't really work. This is, I guess, the
next effort to do it the other way
around.
To to create the thing they point to
to justify their actions, which are not about
left and right. It's about government control. Now
whether he sees it as only a one-sided
thing is irrelevant. It's interesting point to consider.
Do,
Nico House points out the hot spot says
Chicago police have actually ordered to stand down
as federal agents cornered by protesters.
We saw a lot of this. Nick Sore
and the rest sort of like, instigating things
on one side or the other. They're all
doing it to each other and planning the
other side of the problem. It's childish.
Multiple law enforcement sources confirmed Chicago were instructed
not to respond. This is from their website
saying cheap you know, no units will respond.
Ego House simply says, for context, ICE decided
it was good. I guess they accidentally or
deliberately gassed a bunch of Chicago police,
and then they said, well, we're not gonna
come out and help. And then they point
to that as saying, you know, ultimately, that
this is the reality that they're not supporting
us because left, right. They're both doing this
kind of game, and it's just very sad.
And these are people in power. Right? This
guy who already deleted something, Matt Tardio pointed
out, like, he was doing this whole thing
about he's already deleted a bunch of it
about building some kind of pushback. But here
he was on the sixth,
announcing he'll be creating his own tent encampment
tonight at the opposite of Antifa.
So he will be experimenting to see how
they react.
Oh, okay. So you're doing the same thing.
Right? You're gonna create your side, and you're
gonna be standing there and act like you're
the peaceful one, and you and they're both
doing it to each other. These are both
characters in a play that we're watching play
out in my opinion, whether they know it
or not. Here's an example of oh, this
was the Matt Matt Tardio saying coordinated instructions,
rally point. All this different, like, you know,
basically saying,
myself and Nick Sore will arrive to attempt
to parlay with Antifa. These people think way
to holly themselves. I will ask for you
to be silent this time. Please be respectful.
I mean, if you watch any of their
content, they're out there going dumb, lefty terrorist,
you know, very childish content and then going
out and acting like we're the ones trying
to be respectful. Don't come at us really
violent. Even though they're literally trying to set
this up. I believe this is them trying
to coerce something to be pointed to. I
think that's what they do. That's largely Nick
in my opinion.
But ultimately, this is his first point something
funny. I think at the end of the
day, this ultimately didn't happen, not in the
way that they wanted it to, but I
think they were trying to build this.
And this was an interesting one. Here's what
Nick wrote. Now let's not forget, it is
constitutionally protected roundly
held up by the Supreme Court that you
could burn an American flag or any flag.
It's free speech.
Except in this country, Trump will put you
in jail for an American flag, and he'll
put you in jail for an Israeli flag.
Very, very telling.
That violates your rights on how you spin
it. Nick doesn't like that. He doesn't like
it because he's per so he clutches his
pearls about the flag just like the left
does about woke speech. Same thing. Right? Same
thing all it comes down to. And he
says, I warned Netiva in Portland to stop
burning our flag. So you warned them not
to do something they're allowed to do. So
why you you are coming in and you
you're an individual. You're not the government. You
can go in there and try to stop
them. They have your right to do something
to stop you. Now if you flipped it
around and Nick and his team were out
there burning a Palestinian flag and they came
out and tried to stop him, what do
you think he would say? He'd probably call
it terrorism. Right? He'd probably call a violation
of my free speech even because he wouldn't
understand that means a government because they're all
stupid. But the point is I think you
can easily see that the reverse situation would
have caused probably a similar reaction. The point
is
they didn't listen to me.
The hubris these people get from being so
and and it's just it's crazy to me
the bubble they live in. But overall
so that he had to go in and
stomp on the flag they were burning. That's
what happened.
You can just it's right here. Nick walks
up and stomps to put out the flag.
It says, so we added another flag to
our collection even though they tried to stop
us. And this time, I had the entire
crew with me. We're two zero.
Good for you, man. You stopped them from
burning a flag on the ground. What what
we've saved the world. Right? What you really
did was stop somebody doing something that they
have a right to do. So you guys
are the suppressive force that you claim they
are, and you're both doing the same thing.
You just are so absorbed in your own
world view that you think everything you think
is right and just like they do.
He realized how people outside of this look
at you both like you're absolute children. That's
the reality of this, and people fall into
this. I'm able to believe that more and
more are falling out of it.
But just recognize what would probably happen, it's
my opinion, but if the reverse was the
situation, they would probably call that violence. You're
bursting into our discussion. You know, it's the
same thing the left was doing the entire
time. The same thing Zionists were doing to
people in the Palestinian protest.
But the most important part, I think, is
that students at student at a center of
Cornell anti Israeli discrimination scandal
turns out to be a former Israeli spy.
Surprise, surprise. The student at the center of
the anti Israeli does discrimination
case is a former member of unit eighty
two hundred.
Orin Renner Rennerd filed a complaint against Cornell
claiming he was discriminated against when he was
barred from enrolling in the course. Gaza,
it says Gaza in the
in, what is that? Resistance, taught by Jewish
professor doctor Eric Schaeffetz.
Chaffetz's has since been suspended and the class
canceled. In turn, students accuse Raynard of secretly
spying on them and derailing class conversations about
Gaza. Unit eighty two hundred is the military's
largest, most controversial organization responsible you we've talked
about this plenty of times.
This is the reality. We have literal spies
running around that, you know, John Kirchow will
tell you that, that they can prove to
you that there's what? What did he say
last time? Like, 40 spies that they know
of that just don't talk about?
And this was all this was years ago.
This is what's actually going on. And you
have people like Nick Soder out there probably
without it, maybe not even knowing it, maybe
knowing it, working right alongside them to suppress
your rights.
Now here's Netanyahu last two points on the
way out. Iran could soon target US cities
with nukes. They're still playing this game. You
know, despite the fact that both Israel and
I mean, the state department from Trump's administration
recently admitted that that's not even true. Who
cares, though? Because they'll point to it next
time he says it anyway. And he says
Iran is developing intercontinental, you know, missiles like
every other government in the world. Not a
surprise. Another 3,000 they could target in New
York. Yeah. Like, you could target anywhere else.
The game that you're playing is is is
falling apart in front of you.
You've lied about this for forty years and
nobody believes you anymore and they're still pushing
it. The point is creating this narrative because
something's coming.
I believe I can we can a lot
of things are they're we're building towards some
kind of outcome, and hopefully, we can call
it out enough to stop what might happen.
But talking about some you know, building of
Trump creating left wing terrorism to be able
to stop it or Israel doing that through
that or Israel doing something larger in that
sense or who knows? Maybe we'll finally get
the vanilla ISIS
mold together. I hope not.
But we also have things like this. Maduro's
van Maduro has publicly said out loud,
I guess, same thing said,
that
there was a false flag bombing at the
embassy that he says were extremist forces that
were working with foreign entities.
This is not a new conversation. My point
is I think this is absolutely happening in
a lot of ways around the world. Like,
right in front of us, we're watching a
lot of these actions. And I've been saying
this since October 7 forward. I've been saying
this since last administration.
It's,
I mean, it's some cases, my opinion. But
in many ways, you could prove this continual
the, you know, the fever pitch, the end
the actions, the the near I mean, it
is building right now.
And as what we can what we can
do is continue to call this stuff out,
continue to inform people about what's happening, speak
to your politicians. If you think it makes
a difference, go out and protest, but just
continue to speak and show people that I
think the very real majority in this country,
for the first time maybe ever,
is seeing through the two party illusion. And
the reality is if you can convince enough
politicians that it's in their interest to call
that out,
this will change tomorrow
because the US government has the ability to
stop what they need to keep doing this.
So
don't ever think that you're incapable. Don't ever
think that you're inept. You out there have
more power than you realize, and they know
that. That's why they're doing what they're doing.
Stand up.
Speak about it. Because I think the reality
is more than you'll ever know. Just like
with COVID nineteen, you're not alone. The they
see it, the world sees it, and all
and we are on the precipice, guys. Just
one little push, and this whole thing could
change.
And imagine for a moment, they know that,
which I know they do.
And what do they do?
Well, let's build a world where that doesn't
matter anymore. Let's push them into a world
where their narratives and their ideas and their
doesn't just not only does not matter, it
won't exist anymore
because we'll have mechanisms through which they have
to get to to make those cases. Right?
The media is only what we say the
media is, and otherwise, you're a national security
risk or any other number of ways they
isolate and control and box in. And before
you know it,
they'll be there the mask is off and
they go, guess what? We don't care anymore.
Sit down.
Now I'm not trying to be over, hyperbolic.
I think we can all see what's happening.
And I deeply truly believe that we are
capable
and close to even actually making a difference
in this conversation. So don't take this for
we're doomed because I don't believe that.
So do something.
Thank you for your support.
If you wanna support this platform, there's plenty
of ways in the chat. Drop links for
me or underneath the videos. We always need
your support because we're under attack more than
you possibly know, guys. But I'm gonna keep
doing this because I believe in it. We
put the information out for free because we
want you to see it regardless of whether
you have 1¢ to put towards it. But
if you find value in it, show us
what it's worth to you. I love you
all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.