The stunning late night operation, I had some
friends of mine execute a raid on my
neighbor Tom's house. He put up quite a
fight, but, we got through and he's in
custody.
I haven't liked what he's been doing over
there for a while now, so I've decided
to run his house myself.
He leaves his Christmas lights up too long.
He never trims his avocado tree that hangs
over my fence and, I believe he's running
fentanyl out of there. I can't prove the
last one but, it makes sense. I've seen
him speak Spanish.
I got rid of the wife as well.
I didn't really have a problem with her,
but we did do a fourth of July
block party and she brought empanadas. So
better safe than sorry. I've got them at
our residence in a couple towns over.
I've been using his home as my own
little man cave. Pretty great. It turns out
he has a fantastic
wine cellar that I have tapped into extensively.
Anyway, I'll be running his home until a
time when I can have a a safe
proper and judicious turnover to some other guy,
which probably won't be happening soon. And, just
a heads up, I plan to take over
some other neighbors homes as well. Phil, across
the street, has a pretty cool car I'd
like to be in charge of. And, Alex,
who lives catty corner from me, has a
wife who's a yoga instructor.
Be taking that one soon. Again, doing it
for the good of the neighborhood, so
stay tuned.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective
reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours breaks
free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of the day.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Tuesday, 01/06/2026.
Thank you for joining me today.
An interesting series of developments in this Venezuela
conversation.
We we had a recent
dive around,
you know, what we could prove at the
time and and different theories about what happened.
And, you know, and I still most of
almost everything what we covered is still, I
think, exactly it's very relevant to what we're
currently seeing,
and I don't think that we ultimately have
insight onto exactly how this is playing out
just yet.
But what's developed I was speaking with Robert
over the last couple of days as well,
and these are some things that were sort
of swirling around for me when we were
first going over this. But at the point,
it was really just, you know, just opinion.
And now there's some different developments with Delcee
Rodriguez, the way that the conversation's gone down,
how Trump has discussed it, what she said.
You know? And and just kind of the
the the discrepancy within within all of that
that opened up different possibilities, which is very
much discussed right now. Over the last couple
days, I've seen this discussed quite broadly, which
I'm glad to see. Because in the past,
people tend to have, you know, a tendency
to be
worried about
having these kind of conversations, as we all
know, because typically people that strike out ahead
and have, you know, thought provoking
theories tend to get disregarded by the partisanship.
But the point comes down to like I
like I titled this today, is it possible
that Maduro
made a deal?
My mind would say likely through coercion, but
still ultimately made a deal with Trump
to execute what happened.
And then beyond that, just to explain the
title, is it possible that if that's the
case and we'll go into the other sides
of that as if that wasn't the case,
as it hypothetically, if it was the case
and go over what makes more sense. But
if there was an agreement made, and let's
say that was with Delsey that ultimately, that
was part of that would be Delsey Rodriguez
carrying this out. Not to say that that
means she's necessarily on the side of the
Venezuelan people or Maduro and his administration. There's
a lot of interesting parts to get into
around her connections that go way back with
Trump and the US administration.
But the point would be even if that's
the case, is it possible that now she,
through other dynamics and other interests of the
people around her, are are in a way
double crossing Trump or his administration? But it
does seem to be Donald Trump spearheading this
seemingly with Stephen Miller largely. But is it
possible that we're seeing just a multifaceted kind
of agenda playing out and then, ultimately, they
strong armed this into into a certain situation,
got what they wanted at least, and we're
getting Maduro out of the way, thinking that
they, like last time, by the way, had
enough influence with the with the larger administration.
They failed last time. And we'll go over
this again briefly, brought it up last time
where they thought they had enough influence. They
were told by insiders that they had that
the that the military was gonna turn and
jump on their side, and they and they
lied to them and made them look really
bad, sided with Maduro. And so now, at
this point, the question is, where does that
reside? Because that's really what
typically, historically, is where that
this the the final rather, the most important
factor, where the enforcement arm leans clearly. And
that makes sense. So today, with what we're
gonna go through, these are questions we should
be asking.
And I get the sense that there is
more going on, that even, like I said,
if there was an an agreement that was
made, which does seem to be likely right
now, then ultimately,
you could even argue that would be just
out of self interest. That doesn't mean that
they're necessarily on the side. But I argue,
to start out with this obvious point, that
what happens next will tell us everything.
I should say everything. It's rarely the case.
But, ultimately, what they do, what she does.
Where
probably the most important one, what happens to
the assets of this country? Not necessarily what
they're just grabbing and stealing, right, but, like,
the processes through it, like, what she decides
to do is if there if there's some
removal
of the you know, there's more than just
oil, nationalized assets in regard to selling out
to corporations, and she's in line with that
decision and goes through the actual government to
make that happen.
If there's more sort of sellout of
Venezuelan interests in the interest of multinational corporations,
I think that will say everything, even if
it's just that she's no longer in control,
as we're gonna get into, because she's being
threatened by outside powers. Or, again, maybe it's
just that she was always on the other
side, and maybe she sold out Maduro. So
let's go through all this and discuss it
because
it's always the way that this game tends
to work inside the partisanship is that there's
a narrative that's picked up on, and that
narrative will be hammered in,
jamming that round peg in the square hole
or vice versa
until it becomes very clear that just no
one's paying attention anymore, and that that kind
of shifts into some alternative version that maybe
allows some steam to release but still continues
to lie. We saw that with a lot
with Israel's propaganda. It's still happening right now.
So ask ourselves whether that could be the
case or, you know, many different factors. But
today, we're gonna go over
some starting points that I think are very
relevant, as I think always are, of just,
and I believe this is unprecedented. And not
this clearly not happened before. Propaganda,
AI videos, and all that has always been
there in the sense of, let's just say,
manipulated content has always been there. But right
now, just like I said last time, when
I also agreed then, it was I've never
seen that much, it's now stepped even further.
I honestly have yet to find any honest
content
in the realm of the whole team sport
politics.
You know, Venezuelans are crying because they're so
happy. And that's not to say that doesn't
exist. I can almost guarantee to some degree
that's out there. But if they have to
constantly make everything up, what does that tell
you? And I just think that it could
just be that it's they find that whoever's
managing the narrative, Elon Musk, whatever it is,
I'm just kinda being facetious.
Is it more that it's just easy to
cultivate the narrative if you just make it
all up even though there might be real
examples?
It's an interesting time that we're in, but
I think it's very important to highlight how
much of that. And then even Grok will
show all of the main people in the
right side are the ones I mean, you
name it. Like, a who's who of the
right wing team sport manipulators, and it's like
this I'll show you. It's it's humorous to
me. All of them listed from top to
bottom sharing the either the same videos amongst
themselves or variations of the lies. I mean,
it it's we'll go through it. It's it
speaks for itself. And and some other discussions
around that, articles written about the perspective,
people who are a couple of points of
people who were going regime change bad and
now going, yay, free oil, even though that's
never the way that works out, at least
not for you,
and some conversation about the way that this
is happening. Totally not a war, we're told.
It's totally within the law, you know, despite
those both being completely
incorrect
and the reality of the the legalities around
all of this, the point about oil
resources more broadly.
I wanna make a very clear point about
Delsey Rodriguez today and how interesting it is
that there are there's multiple even corporate media
articles talking about deals that were made before,
her inside connections, and, really, it's just come
out clearly already. And this is, I believe,
from the Wall Street Journal.
This is from yesterday.
CIA concluded regime loyalists were best placed to
lead after Maduro.
So then what was all the Machado conversation
about? Is that something they decided last minute
because they realized nobody was gonna support them,
which is kind of my point all the
time. He's not another Guido. But the the
you know, realizing that they
needed some level of consistency here or rather
just continuity,
which means that either she is on his
side or, you know, we'll get into all
the the what's and what ifs. But that
the CIA made the decision, is that democracy,
which did they decide, not the Venezuelan people?
You know, it's it's just kind of a
it mocks the entire argument of what they
claim this is all about, which in and
of itself shows you that these people don't
care about any of that. But that it's
ultimately showing that there was a decision made,
at least they're arguing, to lean into her.
The question is, is she part of that
conversation,
or is she even aware of that? But,
obviously, that's very relevant.
And, of course, the overlap with China and
the possibility of a deal that might have
been made,
And a lot of other points we can
get into, I think, just to possibly depending
on time and some overlapping. One large point
that I wanna get to at the end
is the
network state part, which maybe we could push
that off because I don't think that's, I
mean, I very much personally, as you know,
think that's very relevant to this conversation.
But it's important, I think, just to make
sure we understand the the, you know, meat
and potatoes of what's happening here. But I
very much think, as I think we'll have
time for, that this is a central part
of this, at least when it comes to
the powerhouses that you know, the oligarchs, the
technocrats
who are behind the scenes funding most everything
we're talking about. And they have very clear
designs. And, I mean, there's multifaceted. Let's just
make it's not just one group all the
time, but, I mean, in the sense of
they the people interested in this, The pernomial
capital part of this, the the start up
cities elements. Like, these are groups that are
you can very clearly weave together predominantly with
teal type funding
are all interested in a lot of this.
Greenland, Venezuela.
And openly about charter cities, freedom cities, smart
cities, all the same thing.
Very interesting to me. And, as I said
before, I think these are all just buy
like, there's multiple agendas playing out at once.
And it's up for you to decide if
you think one's driving the rest of them
or the other way around. But it's important
to recognize that that is part of this,
and we'll go through it. And I think
that it's that, to me, the reason it's
so important is because that's a longer term
dynamic. It's not just about taking control of
this for x outcome,
but really about trying to reshape the way
that we engage with government, the way that
our society operates, the way that we exist
amongst ourselves. Like, it's weird and on the
surface, and it gets not it doesn't even
get enough attention in my mind amongst the
independent media. But, again, I I could be
wrong. But I'm gonna continue to always show
you what I think is important because that's
what you're here for. And if I if
I just simply tailored what I covered based
on what I think you want to hear,
that would make me like every other part
of the mainstream alternative media. We're not gonna
do that. So to start off with this,
shout out to this guy. I just think
this was absolutely
oh, come on.
Compare
lately in the Anyway, guys, I'm not it's
not letting me share. There we go. Thank
god. I was about to freak
out.
It's on it's like you guys know that
we're following it. This is just, like, one
step away from all this stuff. Just not
we're dealing with some just ridiculous stuff. I'm
not gonna get into that today. I was
right there for some reason that it wasn't
bringing up the share window, and that would
just be just me talking the whole time,
which I would do anyway. But so shout
out to this guy. This is just where
I saw it first. Molly Plouffkin shared this.
Man conducts regime change in his neighborhood in
the spirit of Trump's takeover of Venezuela.
And so this is actually this guy here,
and I wanna make one quick point about
this. I've I've I've seen him around, wasn't
familiar with his name, Jamie Kayler,
caller.
Probably call Kayler. I'm you pick.
He's only got about six 7,000 followers. He's,
on Tacoma
FD. You might have seen that on, you
know, a show, my my boys and different
things.
So this video, by the way, has made
the rounds. I mean, you guys have seen
it. I I bring this up. Talk about
and wake up this morning, and it seems
to be I mean, even this guy shared
this and almost has a million views or
rather Molly shared this. Almost a million views.
Right? This is how broken and ridiculous this
false,
I don't even know what you call it.
You know, I keep talking about that there
is no organic viral anymore. This needs to
make this point very clear. I think you
guys already agree with this. But so here
he is sharing this. K? This is him.
This is his video. He post this video.
K? Now now it that's who's to say
whether or not it's,
you know, like, look, this is probably more
popular over here. Yeah. This has gotten more
engagement on TikTok for sure. But
why is it not something so it gets
posted here and it gets shared around on
Twitter, but yet his post itself where he
posted this doesn't seem to get much engagement.
I just think it shows you what I'm
talking about is Twitter alone, by the way.
This platform, and I think it's the same
everywhere else, very
clearly, I think it's it's about who and
how and where, not just organic flow of
who likes it and when and whether you
know, that that's what it should be, just
an organic flow of the way things are
shared. But I think we all know it's
not how it works. On that point though
aside, which I'm sure you guys are already
well familiar with,
I just think this was a very well
put together video. Of course, it gets regarded
as partisan,
and he probably I mean, I forgot I
don't know his politics. Most things seem to
be today.
But aside from all of that, even if
he is being driven by an I hate
Trump motive,
it's it's it's like it is exactly the
reality. Right? You're doing this be like, this
is what I was trying to say before.
I'm like, hey. Wake up this morning and
others is that I don't even if, like,
you agree with what's happening. Like, there's a
lot of this kind of, like, I'm so
proud to be an American, you know, as
you're watching bombs go and kill people in
other countries like we always did the media
always does.
There's nothing about this in any way
that aligns with what at least, let's just
say, Republicans or any money for that matter,
at least express they think things should be
or what they claim we should want. Freedom,
liberty, democracy, whatever it is. You know? And
they also talk about might makes right and
having a good military. But at the end
of the day, it's not that at all
costs we take what we want. That is
basically the way this plays out, but that's
not what people are expressing. The idea is
that this is about freedom and stopping the
evildoers and helping everybody in the world and
saving the Venezuelans.
But that doesn't even that that itself does
not line up with the actions being taken.
There is there is international law. There is
domestic law, neither of which allows what what
just happened. We'll get into the lie article
two and the way that they play this
game. There is no reality in which the
way this just went down is just okay
to do and then we'll follow-up with congress.
Now I'm aware of the way that's supposed
to work. But we the article two dynamic
and even the way that they play this
for the for me since I've been alive,
it's always taken advantage of, the national security
dynamic, as well as the fact that this
in no way is about national security in
any which way they play it. They've already
removed the fentanyl claim and everything else from
the indictment, so they're just laughing at you.
But why would taking things without authorization,
seizing assets from the Venezuelan people
during all of that be somehow about freedom?
You know? And then that's why this is
such a good video because it's identical to
the reality, just a smaller example.
I'm gonna take his house because I don't
like what he's doing. I'm gonna seize this
one next because he's got cool things. I
mean, it's just funny to me how perfectly
made that video is. But, you know, you
get people regard engage with it the way
that they wanna see it. But check shout
out to him for doing a really well
timed video on that. So on that same
note, though, you what you're getting in it
this is I argue these are the kind
of people that are desperate you know, whatever
the word is,
acting like that's not accurate because that guy
hates Trump even though him hating Trump has
nothing to do with whether it's accurate. That
just becomes kind of the defect the deflective,
you know, just reflex, excuse me, deflection of
anything that highlights the point. Well, as I
said, and Shipwreck posted that on the fourth,
all of the usual suspects
from this and this is even even more
ridiculously obvious today.
From Nick Sorder to Alex Jones to Benny
Johnson are being caught,
even by Twitter,
sharing blatantly fake images and videos of Venezuela
and Iran, by the way. Venezuela seems to
be the current focal point more than anything
else, but Iran is still going on. Robert
is working on something right now. I'll share
his article at the end today, where I
already showed you guys, but it's just it's
very, very clear what's going on. The Shah
that they keep pointing to, the son of
the previous Shah, he's got
zero following in Iran. Like, not zero, but
he has no popular support. Not here, not
there. It is
just exiled monarchists and governments,
as usual. But back to Venezuela,
the same kind of thing, though. You're seeing
them just boot scream out things. And all
of them, Alex, the rest, they just continually,
at the very least,
repeat and share things without any due diligence,
which, by the way, shouldn't be that shocking.
They're caught for this stuff every day. But
on top of that, they're manufacturing some of
this stuff. They're making false things. And I
think what we need to continue to see
is these people are deliberately trying to mislead
people for the agenda. Shouldn't be that shocking
to most of you. This is just a
screenshot. I'll show you the actual clips or
rather post. This is Betty Johnson. Massive crowds
have taken to the streets of Venezuela. Nope.
That's actually Chile.
Sorry. You know? And what's funny to me
is they don't some of them delete it.
I'll show you, like, Wall Street Apes deleted
one. But here it is.
It's a fake video. He's fact checked. This
thing has almost 2,000,000 views. But if you
look at most of the comments,
other than that's funny. Even even people that
tend to support what they're doing, it's like,
hey. That's not the right place. But it's
good that it's being called out. I those
are I haven't seen Derek's and so on,
but the majority of the flow of this
content is people that are using it, sharing
it. I mean, look at the quote tweets.
Look at everyone that shares it, which is
the point. It becomes Alex and Nick and
all the rest who then share from him
and tag each other and share, and it
becomes this million follower circle of control. Like,
that becomes and think of it like this.
These platforms
weigh heavily towards the influence. So if you've
got millions of followers, that's considered a weighted
more of a valuable piece of content. So
when you have all of this inner circle
of million follower people,
like, basically circling around false information, it creates
a false perspective even from the AI's perspective.
You know, it's just it's they're doing this
very deliberately if you want my gut opinion.
Here is Alex Jones.
This video shows protests that are from July
2024, and he's saying millions of Venezuelans flood
the streets and others in celebration of the
ouster of Nicolas Maduro. So you can't try
to be like, no. He just means they're
happy in general and they hate him in
general. No. That's what they're all trying to
do. No. He said as if it was
after he was taken. He's just repeating what
other people are pointing to. Now, clearly, as
you can see, this is something he posted.
So either he decided to grab it from
somebody else that shared it without crediting them
that they do all the damn time, or
he just lied to people, knew it was
fake. Or I don't who knows? Clearly, they're
incorrect. And certainly in an honest world, that
should make a difference, shouldn't it?
Here, Alex Jones again. What a surprise. Using
a video that is
from the World Cup celebration. So that's multiple
posts. And by the way, you could go
through and look. I'll show you something from
Grok pointing them out, which I find funny.
The corporate media is refusing to cover Venezuelans
celebrating around the world. Incorrect. Not even not
even that, oh, he meant Venezuelans anywhere. Nope.
That's also not in Miami, guys. This is
a a video from the World Cup celebration.
All around, this is happening.
What is it? 2,000,000 views. Let's see how
much has gone up since we grabbed this
earlier today.
Look at that. It went up a 100,000
views
since we grabbed this, even though it's posted
as fake. Oh, look at this. I'm so
glad this happened. This is what I was
gonna point out a second ago. Did you
know do you know what's now not there
anymore?
This is so incredibly important because this is
provably fake. Or, excuse me, not fake, but
provably
from,
a previous time, the the World Cup. There's
other examples of this too. Here's this one,
which they also took away. This is absolutely
crazy to
me. I had these upfront because they had
the Twitter things. You can prove, by the
way, that these are
not what they claim.
Look it up for yourself. And I'll even
show you what Grok is saying. But here's
what's interesting.
Right now, Twitter or who knows, Elon Musk,
as he tends to manipulate these from the
back, he's removing the screenshots. In fact, check
this out. I'm pretty sure I even grabbed
one to make sure just in case. Now
that's the other one. I'll show you in
a second.
Make sure I didn't take a screenshot of
it. But this is so wild to me
that they're removing these in real time. So
even though we know it's fake, even though
Twitter already said it's fake, they take away
the community note. Why would that possibly be
what happens? See, look. I knew somebody see,
Simon Godek is on it because we're watching
this. You should stop tweeting for a while,
and it's getting embarrassing.
But it's gone now. See what it said
thirty seconds ago? The the video shows crowds
celebrating in Argentina 2022, which I verified. You
can check for yourself. It's actually very easy
by what they're showing. In Buenos Aires.
Why does it not say that anymore?
That's absolutely crazy to me. And I shouldn't
say it's crazy. We all know this. So
this we have to understand, this is Twitter,
maybe Grok in and of itself or Elon
or somebody influencing this, taking away a community
note that very clearly identifies this as a
fake or rather a
a misattributed
video.
Isn't that important?
It should be. Same thing here. Venezuelans celebrate
the capture of Maduro. No. That's the same
post. It's the same place, but they took
it away. This one has 9,000,000
views.
See, we're people are being gaslit. Now this
is not some accidental
or, you know, I believe the wrong narrative.
This is platforms and Twitter or their accounts
on Twitter and the platform itself
cultivating a false narrative. This is deliberate. This
is straight up cultivating, gaslighting,
trying to convince you of things that aren't
true. But they, you know, they got 9,000,000
views, so all they do is just quietly
remove the community note, and then nobody knows
any better. And then it becomes, oh, Democrats
down here arguing about, you know, whatever. That's
the easy way to ignore this. Here's Nick
Shirley.
Wait a minute. The mainstream media has lied
to us again. The people of Venezuela didn't
actually lie. Nope. Actually, that's Miami. That one's
still there. Let's see if that goes away.
Still there.
Sharing pictures from Miami, Nick Nick Shirley, of
course. Here's Wall Street Apes. This one's still
up. A crying woman.
Right? Saying Venezuelans are crying on their knees,
thanking Trump and America for freeing them, except
that's an AI generated video that you could
easily verify for yourself.
I mean, it's wild, isn't it? Like, for
those that haven't seen this, you're probably going,
what? That's I mean, this is this is
like a fraction of how much is going
on out there. This is completely fake.
Why would they two things need to make
it fake if they're so obvious.
Secondarily,
these people are not checking anything,
which you should know by now.
Biggest back simply says, Elon Musk, we treated
that video, which he did. Here's a whole
article on it. Musk reshares AI generated Venezuelan
celebration clip. But that's not new. He did
this during the South Africa genocide discussion. He
did this during the Venezuela last discussion, the
the elections where he claimed they were stealing
things. Nope. That ended up being an old
video when those air conditioners,
It just doesn't change anything. They just keep
screaming.
Which, by the way, to be clear, I'm
not calling for them to be censored. They
have every right to lie. They can stand
up every day and be wrong and lie
all they want. The only reason this becomes
a problem is because the government's working with
them to completely gaslight you on top of
it or censoring you for calling it out.
I mean, this is everywhere you look right
now. What we need is not more censorship.
What we need is more words, more conversation,
more information
on top of everything else because it's all
there. If this was an honest engagement, everybody
would already know they were lying and it
wouldn't be as manipulative,
but they are manipulating.
Now this is just Grock asking for a
list, and what's funny is you I put
a list of all the examples you can
find. And just quickly, first one that responds,
of course, Nick Shirley, Alex Jones, Elon Musk,
Laura Lohmer. No surprise there. But I gave
me five and I said, okay. Wait a
minute. I said, now give me 10 more.
Links, please. Oh, and what do you know?
I managed to find 10 more. Wall Street
Apes, I'm EMILY FOR I AM, VISER GRAD
24. Don't miss the obvious Zionist overlapped emoji.
Gunther Eagleman, Eric Doherty, Red Line News, MAGA
Voice, Barron Trump. You could have guessed this
and written this out and known this without
how it would work out. I mean, look
at this. And I say, give me 20
more
With only with only with the community notes
listed. You know, and the point is, you
couldn't have given me all these to begin
with? Wallstreetapes, Wallstreetapes, Nick Shirley, Alex Jones, Breaking
nine one one, Mia Joy. It's the same
people you see every single time.
Incredible. Now here's one that Wall Street Apes
deleted.
Still there, you can check it. In regard
to, you know, there's an archive. That link,
I mean, is still there. And I just
simply showed this one again. This is Wall
Street Apes and I'm just, every single time,
shameless scripters.
Here's another one they shared, which is all
and just to be clear, all of these
are fake.
Whether because you could prove it in independent
you know, showing an old video from a
different time, out of context, or in this
case, AI created information. This one was also
taken away
by Twitter. But as Grok will list for
you, if you look at the link I
just shared, these are all listed as incorrect
content.
But this one's still there. That's why he
didn't delete it, I guess, in regard to
not having the community note anymore. Same with
this.
All of these down and let me see
if this one still has it.
Nope.
These are all out of context either claiming
they are but they're not or an AI
thing or, you know, or some outdated content.
Same with this one. Or not this one.
This one this was this one here. I
mean, therefore I am showing this old video,
and here's Megatron even calling him out. Be
aware. Propaganda war. Basically, all the Zionist Trump
propagandists are posting old videos labeling them as,
oh my god. People are celebrating the fall
of Maduro. This is an old video from
September 2023 showing Venezuelans
celebrating a soccer win. You see? They go,
I just meant they were Venezuelans. Well, guess
what? In many of these videos, they're not
even celebrating what they claim they're celebrating. But
think about this and then ask yourself why
they would take away the note. Same point.
It's now gone.
Just keeps happening.
Barron Trump. Now we showed you most of
these. This one up here, you can see.
These are all either AI or fake or
from somewhere else. The whole
thing. Barron Trump news.
Just in, fake news is losing it. Isn't
that the perfect thing to see? The fake
news is losing it while you lie about
what your narrative is? But that's that's all
it takes to get people to go, yeah.
The Democrats are all liars or vice versa.
That, yeah, the Nazis are all gonna lie.
You know, it's just the the partisan
blindness.
Alex Jones, of course, and he he's he's
tagging this amongst other tweets he was putting
out. He says, for the people who are
geopolitically illiterate and don't understand why Trump did
what he did, this may help. Yeah. This
may help. I I can't even believe he's
this ridiculous. He posts a video from a
Jack Ryan show from Prime Video.
No. That's not a joke. Literally I mean,
I mean, this is exactly I agree with
what Dave said. Thank you, Alex Jones, for
providing a clip from a TV show that
the CIA helped produce, easily verifiable, to explain
to us why we need war with Venezuela.
This guy is a cartoon, man. You're he
says you're witnessing your return to the Monroe
doctrine.
First of all, I don't he if he
does statements like that, almost does make it
sound as if he's like like, is that
a good thing, Alex? He might argue he
meant that as a bad thing. Well, watch
the way he shares this. He's all rah
rah Trump freedom America at this point, acting
like this is saving everybody better oil prices.
What you're pointing to is straight up government
propaganda to explain why we should believe the
government narrative?
You might as well be CNN, bud. I
mean, that's embarrassing. But here we are.
Al MacLeod
says Santiago Horea saying, no. No. You don't
understand. Trump crossed a line. This has to
be resolved with international law, showing a video
of people being tortured.
But guess what? That's actually a scene from
a Netflix show, and that's what Allan McLeod
is pointing out, and that's what it says
down here. He says the video showing Maduro
allegedly torturing Venezuelan dissidents that's going around and
going viral, 15,000,000 views.
Only problem, it's actually from a movie.
I mean, just think about how grotesque this
all is, and yet it continues. You'll probably
bump into people that act like this is
real, even you once you prove it's false,
and they go, no. That's probably just them
faking the community notes. Just like a willful
disregard for the information.
Okay. Here's hint, Hindustan Times. Fact check. Did
Trump share an old video claiming millions of
Venezuelans were celebrating his capture? Yes. Yes. He
did. He released a video that claims to
show large crowds celebrating the recent capture of
Maduro. However, that was actually from 2024,
but they don't care.
Just doesn't stop. Here's why. Disinformation
floods social media after Nicolas Maduro's capture. Some
people shared old videos across social media platforms
falsely claiming that they showed the attack on
Venezuelan capital Caracas. Now remember, just like we
told you with the Ukraine part, they wanted
people to think that this was just collapsing
at the capital to cause the reaction that
they didn't have to view like, they could
invade militarily and do that, and then that
people would react to the collapse of the
country if they were capable of doing that.
The question is if they are.
Or they could just pretend that happened, and
people might react as if that's the way
it happened, and then almost cause that with
no real effort.
Now that works if you have enough control
over the narrative, but ultimately, they don't today.
And it says on TikTok, Instagram, and Twitter,
people shared AI generated images and videos that
claimed to show
the du you the DEA
and various law enforcement personnel arresting Maduro. In
recent years now, remember, this was on the
third. Now what's interesting is even in the
beginning of this, Grok was disagreeing that he
was being arrested. He was saying that's not
true. In recent years, major global incidents have
triggered huge amounts of disinformation on social media
as tech companies have pulled back efforts to
moderate their platforms.
Yeah, guys. Don't you get it? We can't
just allow them to lie to us so
they're gonna just censor everybody. Right? Doesn't that
make sense? Shouldn't
Elon Musk censor us all because he's lying
to us? Let's fall right into that lazy
trap. That's what they're doing in one way,
using never let a good crisis go to
waste.
Just think of, Mountain Head, the movie we
talked about. Feels very similar, doesn't it? Not
deepfakes necessarily, but we're getting into that territory
where major global events are being completely,
you know, like
you know, I I won't say destabilized, but,
like, an event that's already causing chaos is
being driven into absolute mayhem because of this
flow. Now this flow of disinformation is not
about just allowing people to say what they
want. People have always been allowed to say
what they want in some degree. This is
because of the way that they're using
this whole system
By
by propping up false morons out there to
let them scream what they're basically being driven
to do in order to use that to
cultivate your own narrative. It's sort of how,
like, the FBI will throw tips to themselves
then point to the tip of the media
and be like, no. We can act.
That's how this is working, guys. It's being
engineered.
I mean, and whether it's every part of
it or not, that is a provable idea.
And it says many accounts have sought to
take advantage of these lax rules to boost
engagement and gain followers.
Yes. But the idea that saying things like,
you're allowed to be dishonest, guys. It's dishonest,
and I'll call you a dishonest person, but
you're allowed to lie. You're allowed to put
you're allowed to be wrong in the world
they're trying to create with this by using
them by them deliberately misleading you and allowing
very prominent idiots out there to constantly lie
to you using fake information is that's the
real that's the
we're all allowed to do that. It is
the way it's being propped up and the
way it's being used against you that's the
problem. So as before, not more less words,
more information,
more conversation. If we're just able to have
an actual conversation about the way this is
working,
things might be different.
Now it says within minutes of the news
of Maduro's arrest breaking, an image claiming to
show two DEA agents flanking Venezuelan presidents spread
widely on multiple platforms. However
and this is one that, by the way,
people are still using almost predominantly for the
video the, you know, the representation of that
event.
It turns out
a technology developed by Google DeepMind claims that
it's actually an AI generated image. Wired was
able to confirm it was likely fake.
That's the one that we've all seen. The
question now is, like, is he even actually
being taken the way they said? You know,
it's like
if there is a deal, which we'll get
into more, it's quite possible that there might
be an entirely different thing going down across
the board.
I don't know if I'm necessarily leaning that
way, but it's just there's a lot of
very weird anomalous points in this. Now it
says, while Twitter's AI chatbot, Grok, also confirmed
that the image was fake when asked by
several ex users, it falsely claimed, this is
what I was saying earlier, that the image
was an altered version of the arrest of
Mexican drug boss, oh, this is different, Demosolopoulos
Nunez in 2017.
So,
point being, then all the Crock could likely
be wrong about the first point. Or maybe
that was sort of added to muddy the
waters about the fact that the first part
was false. Let's not let's not forget that
this is something that is actively being manipulated
from behind the scenes. That's not an opinion.
It's happened almost every time Elon Musk has
gotten into a weird situation with a narrative,
and then it get then Grok gets caught
being altered, like the South African genocide where
it was screaming, there's a genocide in South
Africa, and people were asking for the weather
that day.
That we all forget this? You know? Or
or the many times it's basically admitted I
was altered by my makers. It's so very
clear. So in that case, we have to
consider whether that was something that was done
in that same way. It says, as well
as the likely image fake image, some people
have used AI tools to create videos from
the image that purport to show Maduro's arrest.
On TikTok, multiple examples of these apparently AI
generated videos racked up hundreds of thousands of
views,
millions, within hours of his capture.
A number of the TikTok videos appear to
be based on AI generated images originally posted
on Instagram by a digital creator named Ruben
Dario and viewed over 12,000 times. Similar videos
have appeared on Twitter as well. So like
that, that means the person who originally grabbed
that knew that it was fake and made
the decision as a prominent creator to then
post it as if he got it from
source some secret, big, big, big secret source
and then
allowed people to think that.
Now, this continues by it says, emphatically,
pro Trump influencer
Laura Loomer, of course, because you know she's
involved in lying to you, was among dozens
who shared video footage showing a poster of
Maduro
being taken down. I showed you that one.
Remember that? Writing on Twitter, following the capture
of Maduro.
Forces earlier this morning, the people of Venezuela
ripping down posters of Maduro. We showed you
this one. Right? The footage was actually in
2024.
And now I made the point even back
then that the argument of what was happening
there was completely up in the air, but
they're lying to you or
doing what they always do, which is share
whatever lands in front of them if it
aligns with what they think or what they
want you to think more accurately.
Every day, these people are caught doing lazy
stuff like this. And every day, they get
more and more influential in the false media
sphere because that's what the power structure wants.
My opinion.
Another video claiming to show footage of the
US assault on Caracas was posted by which
didn't happen, was posted by an account or
excuse me, in the sense of the what
the larger actions they claim were happening, Venezuela
collapsing and so on, was posted by an
account called Defense Intelligence shortly after Trump announced
Maduro's capture and has been viewed over 2,000,000
times. The footage in question was originally posted
on TikTok in November 2025 and was used
again. At the point at the time of
publication, it's still up on Twitter, gaining views
and traction.
Pretty interesting. I mean, it's it's like at
the larger point of, like, where we are
in a social cons like, social engineering
perspective. It's just it's very interesting
and very, you know, ex explains a lot,
doesn't it? Now Janice Gurl points out that
Steve Witkoff's son,
Alex,
falsely blames Maduro for his brother Andrew's OxyContin
overdose. You know, he hadn't caught up yet
because this was on the fourth, I think,
yeah, of the fact that they're just ignoring
the drug part now. Like, they're slush saying
it maybe here and there in the narrative,
but you read the indictment, apparently, it has
nothing to do, which we all know, for
not lying to ourselves, that was not what
it was really about.
So why not just lump in the the
Sackler family, you know, and, you know, the
what they're responsible for. Just, Bam, Maduro, OxyContin.
Blame the Sacklers for causing the OxyContin epidemic.
It says, Maduro had nothing to do with
your brother's overdose, but you shamelessly used his
tragedy to fake a political statement. Sick. Now
here is even a fact check.
Nope. Well, so here's what he said. Yesterday,
my family would have been celebrating my brother
Andrew's 30 birthday. Think about how grotesque this
is. You're you're you know or just that
he's too stupid to know that that's not
what happened. Instead instead, he he's gone and
overtaken by a drug overdose, which is sad.
The fact that anybody, in any case, has
had a family member taken away from them.
Now it says, it's surreal that on his
birthday, president Trump successfully captured Maduro, an illegitimate
narcoterrorist dictator with an active US drug arrest.
His networks have helped poison entire generation. Anyone
who defends not even close, by the way.
Even if you wanna look at what you
can prove is the small amount that we
can discuss provably that comes through this country.
You cannot verify, despite what they claim, that
Maduro was in part of that. Wouldn't surprise
me if he was. On top of that,
if you compare it with just about everything
else in the world, it is a fraction.
Cocaine or otherwise, by the way. It's just
ridiculous. Letting ignoring for the moment that fentanyl
was what they used to make this case
and acting like that's somehow the same as
OxyContin.
No. The the the argument of this comes
directly correlated with the surge of opium that
was created by their occupation of Afghanistan.
It's very it's identical, and you can quite
literally prove the overlap of where it came
from and how this all went down. But,
of course, even Twitter says, nope. That's not
the case.
OxyContin is an opioid and was developed by
Purdue Pharma. It's not related to Venezuela or
Maduro.
It's just sad, isn't it? Shameless is what
it is.
Ale Bhutama points an important point out. For
months,
he's been hearing Max Blumenthal explain the cartel
of the sons. Right? The one that they're
using to argue this is all what's going
on in terrorism. Right?
Max has been telling you it's not real.
We talked about that. Right? I think it
was when was that? Not that long ago.
Maybe a week ago, I pointed to him
saying that.
And if you look at his work, it's
it's well done. And he says, now that
The US has abducted Nicolas Maduro to steal
Venezuela's oil, the Trump administration just doesn't need
to lie about that anymore. No big deal.
Right? Justice department drops the claim that Venice
Mills Cartel
de la Souls is an actual group.
You have to understand, this was the entire
reason that they used the argument of the
the cartels and the trafficking and the terrorism,
narco terrorism.
They abandoned the claim that the group exists.
That's not a we changed our mind. That
is it's not needed anymore. The lie was
never really bought. Only our our own pushers
were the ones yelling that, and now we
just drop it entirely.
It just doesn't get any more clear than
that, guys. So who's no one's at least
I'm no one on my side here is
saying Maduro is a good guy.
I'm telling you he's lying. They're lying about
him in every way imaginable
in regard to what they claim. That doesn't
mean he's not out there breaking law. You
know my opinion. I think these governments are
extorting and manipulating everywhere they can.
But what they're claiming is a lie, and
they continue to be caught lying about what
he's doing, what's happening, and yet we pretend
like, you know, anybody pretends like that doesn't
show you that they're making it up.
This is important to understand about all of
it. Even the old the the Biden overlap
to the invasion and the, you know, deployment.
It's they've manufactured
this like they always do, guys. Here's an
article from Zero Hedge. Trump DOJ admits Venezuela's
cartel, De La Salle, isn't an actual organization.
Both the Treasury and the State Department
had officially
designated that nonexistent group as a terrorist organization.
I mean, they're laughing at us. This is
why I argue continually that actual conservatives out
there are going, okay, man. You know, I'm
really trying to pretend this all makes sense.
And they laugh in your face with stuff
like this. If they can if they can
designate it a terror organization and then the
moment they get Maduro, they just drop the
entire pretense,
what was that all about? That means, what
about Antifa? What about anything they've designated? What
about the random people, Issa? They're lying to
you. And that's not to say that there's
not extremism in Antifa or anywhere else. It's
about the picture they're using and whether they
even cared about the group they're ending at.
They don't. They care about controlling you. That's
what it comes down to.
James Lee covers this, generally, briefly about the
as what he calls a Zionist operation.
Here it is. World's greatest independent journalist, Nick
Shirley, is claiming right now that World Cup
style celebrations are erupting
all across Venezuela at the moment. Congratulations
to all the people of Venezuela,
Quet Dios te Bendiga.
Except, oh, no. Wait a minute. That video
is from Miami, Florida. Other accounts like Wall
Street Apes are posting that Venezuelans are, quote,
crying on their knees thanking Trump and America
for freeing them from Nicolas Maduro, except the
video is just a 100% entirely AI slop.
This is happening across a bunch of massive
accounts
all across social media. So my question is
if Venezuelans were actually happy about their leader
getting abducted,
we probably wouldn't need to rely on AI
slot videos to do propaganda.
Right?
Yep.
I mean, it's a simple question, and I
think it's always worth pointing out, guys.
You know, it's it's you don't need to
lie about these things if it's as clear
as you're claiming. Right?
I appreciate this this this image. I don't
know if David made this, but somebody posted
this.
What we should have done.
Now look. To be very clear,
I'm not suggesting you do the same unilateral,
internationally illegal thing with anybody else.
Right now,
for those in the podcast, it's this it's
the image of Maduro and the DEA, you
know, taking them on January 3, but with
a,
superimposing Netanyahu space on the on the body.
So Netanyahu
has multiple arrest warrants around the world for
multiple countries, in particular, from the international community
and the ICC and the ICJ overlap.
He has been he is a war criminal
by every definition of the word. As even
the joke, you can look up. I I'm
I'm not gonna try and find it right
now. I forgot about it, but Grok has
been going back and forth on that. Actually,
I could just type in war criminal, see
if it pops up.
Oh, maybe that's it. Look at that.
Yeah. That's so funny. And don't forget, Grok
deleted the one that he posted. So this
is Resonance, or rather they made him do
that,
it. Damn
it. Hey, Grock. Remove the picture of the
war criminal. Now this is happening all over
the place. There's one where they asked him
to remove the the pedophile, and they removed
Donald Trump. I mean, it's it's real, guys.
This what whatever is driving this, and they
have been trying to basically manipulate this to
stop doing it. They've done it twice now,
it seems. But
he has to remove the war criminal,
and it removed Netanyahu. And it gave you
a picture of just Netanyahu or rather just
Khamenei without Netanyahu,
saying that between the leader of Iran and
the leader of Israel, that the leader of
Israel is the war criminal because that's the
facts, guys. That doesn't mean the other guy's
good or bad. It means that you can
prove one is an actual, by definition, war
criminal. The other one has accusations.
That's the truth. And what's funny is it
got deleted, the post, either by Grock or
by them making that happen, but it still
has this. Grock, can you demonstrate why you
removed the man on the right, which is
Netanyahu?
And it says, the request was to remove
the war criminal. Benjamin Netanyahu has an ICC
arrest warrants for his war crimes like starvation
and method of warfare. Right? Ali Khamenei faces
accusations.
Again, human rights abuses and so on,
but no warrants.
Pretty damn simple, isn't it?
So I worth noting again that they made
that why would you delete that? That's straight
up covering up what you did. That is,
gaslighting, or rather, you know, scrubbing or trying
to, like, cultivate with their I'm looking for
a different word, but that's just dishonest. So
the point
over
here is that if you're dealing with this
guy, first of all, he has Netanyahu,
has warrants.
However, I still would argue that it shouldn't
be Iran unilaterally grabbing him and bring him
to Iran to be tried in Iranian courts
because that would be ridiculous, wouldn't it? I
mean, you could make this argument in any
other context and it would be like, that's
crazy.
Nobody be okay with that. Can Germany grab
the leader can can Germany come grab Donald
Trump and go charge him at a German
court because Donald Trump's provably a war criminal
because he is? So is Biden? No. They
can't do that because that's ridiculous. Right?
Pretty simple.
But in this case, had anybody
even if it was unilateral, which I still
argue the process would be to go through
some kind of international body and discuss how
this would be you know? But to grab
him and bring him to it, The Hague,
for example, an international dynamic and actually charge
him for war crimes. I would agree with
that. Even though I argue it shouldn't be
done without you know? The point is when
you have a unilateral action from one state,
it changes what's going on.
To argue to grabbing to Maduro being grabbed
with no process other than what The US
argues because they have a US court that
said what they wanted is just childishly
silly, guys. But here we are with everyone
going, I'm so proud to be an American.
I don't believe that's real. I
nobody I'm talking to is like, yes. That's
the the best thing ever. It's like, well,
he was a bad guy. That's, like, the
best you're gonna get from people I'm talking
to. And I'm constantly putting out my feelers
to people around, people that I know are
very much partisan and mainstream,
What we actually should have done. If if
if there was any justice in this situation,
this person is the only real war criminal
we're talking about right now in in regard
to the actual provable mean definition of the
words.
Not today.
Let me include that for you too. I
still just can't get passed out. They're just
so blatant. I just removed the post. Netanyahu's
like, hey, man. Get that off there. Okay,
buddy. I'm sorry. I'll do what I'm told.
Well, in regard to the hypocrisy,
people like this and, again, it's worth noting
what a clown this person is. Like, you
can't get beyond that. And it's just like,
I'm gonna show you Tulsi Gabbard doing the
same thing. As Moctar said, is this you?
Here's Tim Pool.
2019.
Ending because this is what they were pushing
at the time because even though Trump's last
administration did the same things, ending private prisons,
ending the death penalty, ending regime change war,
just he says, that's just my top three.
Well, okay. Trump loves his private prisons. Trump
definitely loves the death penalty. He definitely loves
regime change wars, but doesn't matter because it's
not really about caring about anything that Tim
Pool's doing. It's about yelling narratives they want
you to think they care about. So here
it is on January 3. The US economy
is about to boom. Tons of free oil
heading our way.
What a sad, sad person. First of all,
that's embarrassing.
That's exactly what they said after Iraq. It's
not what happened because they don't care about
you. They care about their corporations.
They care about their private interests. They care
about their lobbyists.
Tim, I mean, if he's in any way
barely paying attention to what's going on, he
already knows that, which I believe. This is
about narrative management.
Just sad, though. And they they know you
see this today. They don't care.
Here's an example. Another gigantic influencer, Joey,
Manon how do you say that? Manario.
He says in 2025,
a few months ago, absolutely no regime change
wars sponsored by America or that America participates
in. No.
Because that's what they were claiming yet again.
Here he is. January 3. We're taking the
oil. Let's go.
What a clown, guys. Make sure you make
a point of this. Do not forget which
these peep these people are not real. They're
ridiculous and worthy of ridicule.
Here is a couple of good compilations that
Steve showed me this morning that are worth
playing, in case you didn't see it. And
And here's what's funny about this. I made
this point this morning. This is CNN, which
I don't under like, I've always pointed out
how many times both ways
that you can see CNN or any other
court a Democrat platform
absolutely ignoring something that would take somebody down,
whether that's illegal actions overseas, whether that's illegal
actions at home, left and right, Biden or
Trump and Obama and Bush, they all do
the same things, and yet they never really
hold each other to account. Nobody ever goes
to prison. You have to be able to
see this by now, especially while they're not
arresting anybody around Epstein or Social Security or
January 6 or anything that matters.
So the point, though, is that CNN, in
this case, decides to call out Trump being
inconsistent with war. The only reason I personally
think that's happening,
and there's plenty it could be, but it's
because it's so obvious
that this has to happen in order to
gain some level of influence to be able
to continue propagandizing
people. Or it could be that somehow this
was an individual's action. You know, whatever it
is, many possibilities.
But I just want you to remember, at
least in my perspective, that
there's a endless amount of opportunities for them
to bring each other down, and they never
really do it, not in earnest. So why
this happens now? I I genuinely think it's
because they're the what they're doing is just
falling flat.
Flat. Like, it's just completely blowing up on
their face. They're shooting themselves in both feet.
Like, it's just not working. That's why I
think this has happened. Now all that aside,
CNN or not,
this is contradictory.
So you get the responses like I was
joking about this morning. Like, oh, go cry
your liberal tears. Like, okay. What does that
have to do with anything? That's obviously so
you don't care that Trump is lying to
you because
Democrats suck? Yeah. That's the kind of childish
responses you're getting. So check this out.
Compare what he's been saying lately
in the last few days about foreign interventions
to the kinds of things he said previously
campaign trail and as he was running for
office.
Colombia is very
sick, run by a sick man
who likes making cocaine and selling it to
The United States, and he's not gonna be
doing it very long. Let me tell you.
We believe that the job of the United
States military is not to wage endless regime
change wars. You have to do something with
Mexico. Mexico has to get their act together
because
they're pouring through Mexico,
cartels
that they're working with in many provable ways.
But don't just ignore that. Don't mind the
man behind the curtain.
It's not nice to say that the cartels
the cartels are running Mexico.
We will stop racing to topple
foreign
and and you understand this.
Foreign
regimes that we know nothing about,
that we shouldn't be involved with.
Do you know there's been, protesters killed in
Iran?
If they start killing people like they have
in the past,
I think they're gonna get hit very hard
by The United States. I've done it. Back
regime change in Iraq, regime change in Libya,
regime change in Syria,
and every other globalist disaster for half a
century.
We need Greenland
from the standpoint of national security,
and Denmark is not gonna be able to
do it. We're getting out of the nation
building business and instead focusing on creating
stability
in the world. The American
dominance in the Western Hemisphere
will never be questioned again. Stupid Yeah. Those
are clearly the same statement. Right? Wars in
countries that you've never heard of.
This Tuesday is your chance to stand up
and declare
that you're not going to take
In countries you never heard
of? May think about what a silly thing
to say that is. Like, I know you're
all too down to know where these places
are. Like, that's that's oh, excuse me. My
my thing's still in.
Still have to. That's crazy. But the the
the interesting
overlap, though, you know, just how, like, it's
not even debatable. Like, that is a that
is the opposite stance
because narrative. And that's all we're ever saying
is that it just becomes, okay, the narrative
is now that we need to because, you
know, AI or because there are bad things
that are being done over
there. Okay. Even if you agree with that,
it doesn't change the statement that was originally
there that we're not gonna be involved in
the not if we're not gonna be involved
in the nation building unless they do bad
things, unless they yell the wrong words, unless
we claim they did something. It's just silly.
But this happens every time. When you say
don't kill those protesters, that's literally saying, okay,
go ahead, Mossad. Go ahead and shoot some
people. We'll blame Iran every single time. Now,
maybe not. I'm not gonna say they're not
capable of shooting people. Of course, they are.
Historically, though, you can show that that's what
typically happens. It's not my opinion. You know?
It's just it's always there. Here's the same
point with, JD Vance. And this is hot
spots showing you what he was saying just
back in May. Had a long experiment in
our foreign policy that traded
national defense and the maintenance
of our alliances
for nation building and meddling
in foreign countries' affairs,
even when those foreign countries had very little
to do with core American interests.
What we're seeing from president Trump is a
generational shift in policy
with profound
implications
for the job that each and every one
of you will be asked to do.
And now it's just, you know, Iran bad
guy regime change. Right? They the reason they
were saying
no more regime change because that's what Tulsi
was really pushing in a good way. Right?
That was something that she very much got
momentum for even though it should be a
no brainer.
They just tapped into whatever you wanted to
hear, guys. And and and this is him
in May, so that point is really about
just keeping that narrative going.
Well, we're doing all sorts of terrible things,
but if we just keep saying this is
what we're doing and it's the like, we're
we're just gonna yell what we want you
to repeat. Don't look at what we're doing.
Just remind yourself that that's against that's Democrat
stuff. Don't look. Just remind just say what
we want you to say because that's what
the team does, and people repeat it. Oh,
this is simply them
lying to you. I mean, very clumsily, but
it's working for some. Here's Dolce Gabbard. This
continues to be just you know? You know?
It's it's always worth noting.
Obviously, there's people that are far worse and
more dishonest.
Right? But there's something especially, like,
bothersome about somebody who
fronts.
Right? Somebody like her or you know, look.
It's all like with RK Jr, for example,
which doesn't he doesn't get a lot of
talk today. It's weird. It's just I think
we know why. But then, ultimately,
you
know, they could be manipulated, blackmailed. That's always
possible, but I'd like evidence before I start
just letting that be the thing that gets
carried. But it doesn't change the fact that
they're now doing something that is the opposite
of what they were claiming, and not just
like a a statement of want and desire,
but like a principled stance that they're now
just going, not I changed my mind, but
just,
you know, this is the right thing. But
you just got them telling us, like, we're
gonna show you that that's never the right
thing. And now here it is because Trump's
a hero. You know? It just shows you
that they're either choosing to play ball for
any number of reasons, money, influence, power, or
that they're being blackmailed, which is always possible.
But my point is that there's something far
more irksome coming from somebody who starts out
there then goes the other direction than somebody
who's just always gaslit and lied to you.
You know? Always promises one thing, which pretty
much every politician in my experience. All that
that's all to say simply that people tend
to criticize you like, well, there's so many
worse. Why do you go after her? Because
they they have a soft spot for them.
It's that's why. Because it's you know?
There's so many examples you could make about,
you know, why people go after certain people
who are smaller on the field. You know?
It's really because there's something that bothers,
I would argue everybody who hoped for the
best and ultimately got double crossed. That's just
worse. You know? But here here is the
clip. This is Tulsi Gabbard who she posted
this back in 2019. I said, hey, Gabbard.
What happened to this person? 2019. I'll play
the clip, but she says this is what
she wrote. Throughout history,
every time I agree with that. Every time
US topples a foreign country's dictator government, the
outcome has been disastrous.
Same right now. Same with Syria. Same with
everywhere.
Civil war military intervention in Venezuela will wreak
death and destruction to the Venezuelan people and
increase tensions that threaten our national security and,
of course, increase the very immigration that they're
claiming is because of Biden that was actually
because of their ongoing manipulations of the South
and everywhere else.
But here's what she said back then. Where
is this person?
Here now exclusively congresswoman Chelsea Gabbard of Hawaii,
a combat veteran, and 2020 democratic presidential
candidate. You know, what's your reaction to that?
You heard Kellyanne Conway counselor to the president
there. What we are hearing is is an
increased saber rattling intention saying The United States
needs to send in the US military now
to wage yet another wasteful counterproductive
regime change
war. And once again, it's being done under
the guise of humanitarianism.
When we look through
Just like right now.
Same person, by the way. It's also Trump.
Throughout history, every time The United States goes
into another country
and topples a dictator or topples a government,
the outcome has been disastrous for the people
in these countries. That's why we should use
our leadership in the world
to try to broker a diplomatic
solution,
working with countries like Russia that have great
influence over Venezuela
so that there is a peaceful outcome. Because
I can tell you as a soldier, Martha,
I've seen firsthand the high cost of war
and pushing for this civil war, pushing for
the use of military force will only end
up with more suffering and death and disaster
for the Venezuelan people. What to speak of
increasing these tensions that threaten our own national
security. Anytime we're in this situation where you
have tensions being ratcheted up and this conflict
being pushed closer and closer between nuclear armed
countries like The United States,
and countries like Russia and China.
This is something that poses an existential threat
to the American people.
I mean, there's nothing different now.
It's exactly the same situation.
Legitimate I mean, other than Trump's narratives around
everything, it's been the same situation the entire
time. So here's this this you account
calling out Paulsy Gabbard because she actually said
something. Everyone's been kind of waiting to see
what she would put out there because she's
been a little bit quiet for obvious reasons.
She says president Trump promised the American people
he would secure our borders, confront narcoterrorism,
dangerous drug cartels, and drug traffickers.
Kudos to our servicemen and women and intelligence
operators for their flawless execution of Trump's order
to deliver on his promise through Operation Out.
That's a very crafty political
statement because she doesn't say I support this.
She doesn't say he did the right thing.
Basically, just kudos on our servicemen for doing
what he call you know, with flawless conduct
conduct of what he asked of them and
says Trump promised these things.
That's a that's she's hiding. It makes me
sad. Okay? I just called her a hypocrite,
and everyone else is doing very similar things
down here,
as well as people just simply calling out
what she said then. 2019. The US must
stay out of Venezuela while the people determine
their own future. US meddling in Latin America
has been disastrous to people of countries where
we intervene. Pence's demand is inappropriate and dangerous.
And now it's like, yes. Trump's doing the
right thing. It's just insulting.
It lowers the opinion of lowers the opinion,
lowers the opinion.
Sad.
So here's Mike Johnson trying to convince you
that this is totally not. I mean, think
about
there's a difference between conducting a war
and acts of war. Right? You could bomb
a country, and that's an act of war.
But is that a is are you commit
are you, you know, did you declare war?
Are you in a war? But, see, the
point is that they play with this. Nonetheless,
it is required to have a congressional approval.
That's the reality. Now they play with this
national security article two overlap,
which, guys, if you actually believe that there's
just the article two means he can just
do what he wants when he feels there's
an issue, then nothing means anything.
Nothing means anything because that's not how that
was put together. Even the term of national
security has been so shockingly abused to where
the word means basically whatever they wanted to,
whenever they wanted to. So what he's doing
here is exactly that.
Well, I mean, you we can go through,
which we have many times over the years,
the legalities, the law the way that the
everything about why this is illegitimate. And Massey's
out there making the right points. You know,
it's very easy to prove. But what they're
doing here is just trying to act like
what he did was totally okay. Because article
two, that's basically his argument. I'll play it.
But ask yourself.
So if if, apparently,
in the dead of night, kidnapping or arresting
a foreign leader and removing them from their
country to be held to be brought to
court in a foreign country system.
And that's just okay because article two. Like,
how is that not the most extreme level
of active war? You are it's an extrajudicial,
you know, or, like, extreme, this extreme rendition
or is not that's not the word.
Anyway, it's rendition, but there's the term. I
think it's extreme. Or this is something that
is completely
disconnected from all the stuff they're talking about.
This is meant to be I mean, remember,
even like Osama bin Laden,
despite the reality of what that character was
and the connection to the US government and
the much more deep part of the story,
The claim of how that went down is
forever riddled with suspicion
that they dumped his body. I mean, the
whole thing. There's more to that story, guys.
The guy was an asset from the very
beginning. But the question is, hypothetically, had it
been the way it went down, I don't
believe that.
That still is a crime, guys. We just
didn't really talk about it because it was
like, oh, the big murderer bad guy. And
we were so lost in the hyperbolic conversation
of the war on terror.
If we're if we are what we pretend
we are or they are the government, then
there would be a process to that. It's
just, you know, improving all the things you've
claimed, you know, but this this is where
we are today. So back to Maduro or
the assassination of Soleimani under the guise of
diplomacy, like, these these are criminal activities, guys,
even if everything they said is true. That
has to be understood.
When this happens and you're removing this person
at night to go be held in a
you know, to be charged with crimes,
like, at what level like, where would the
war line start? You know what I mean?
Like, it's not just killing people. Like, we
have cyberattacks, for example. Is that not an
act of war? So just I think you
get my point. This is just they're just
trying to muddy the waters on what this
looks like. And only when you've got soldiers
marching down the street. And like like Kirby
tried to do. Remember that with was it
Kirby? I think it was Kirby. In in
regard to,
Gaza, I think. Or is it I forget
which one it was now. I mean, there's
so many blend together. But remember, they basically
said, like, that's not the reality unless they're
marching down the streets and and that ultimately
happened, and they still didn't make that claim.
They just tried to create this, like, archaic
version of what they claim war is. No.
Everything they're doing is war. Fifth fourth gen
fifth generation warfare is in fact where we
are today, and it doesn't look the way
it used to. So let me play this
clip.
With regard to the war powers
and the compliance with federal law,
we are not at war.
We do not have US armed forces in
Venezuela, and we are not
By the way, that's not true. Well, let's
just be clear. That's not true either. But
that's let's pretend it is for the same
conversation.
Occupying that country.
The constitution gives congress the power to declare
war. That is true. But it also vests
the president of The United States with,
vast authorities as commander in chief.
Under article two of the constitution,
the president has the authority, as all presidents
do, to deploy military forces to address threats
to The US and to enforce US law.
That is what happened here. The War Powers
Act states that notification should be made to
Congress within forty eight hours following the initiation
of hostilities.
As we've noted and I've made many public
comments, that happened almost instantaneously
here. My first call was at 4AM by
secretary of state Rubio.
Despite the claims by some of my colleagues
under the War Powers Act, there is no
requirement for prior congressional approval
or prior notification. And in fact, in this
case,
the intelligence was so sensitive,
the conditions had to be perfect. There was
no predetermination
of when exactly it would occur. This is
important. You see, what they're at what he's
doing and this is not inaccurate entirely. The
point is, what that's supposed to overlap is
some kind of extreme issue. Right? Where, like,
there's people literally marching inside, you know, like,
on the border or in the state or
coming up from Mexico. And so that, you
know, the to deliberate and and vote would
be a risk to the country is the
argument. Right? So that makes sense if whether
it's shockingly abused every time. But what he's
doing right there, what they're doing is pointing
to their justification.
Right? That they conduct they decided to conduct
this operation not because there's an immediate risk.
That's the game they're playing with the drugs
and the boats. It's not true. That will
not hold up in court. But so they
outline what they wanna do, then say, well,
that is a sensitive act operation. Therefore, we
can't tell you. Otherwise, that very telling may
cause the operation to fail. You see how
completely different that is than an invasion that
people's immediately they're playing everyone.
My this guy's not stupid. He knows exactly
what he's doing.
Just really think about how completely dishonest that
is on its face. Where's the immediate risk
to anybody? Whether even if everything they're saying
about the drugs is true, which it's not,
that's still not an immediate risk. It's just
not. There's not a justification for anything they're
doing.
And if there had been prior notice, even
assembling the gang of eight,
for example, during the December
holiday,
it would have set off alerts and very
likely might have been a leaked situation, which
could have caused great damage to our to
our our forces. Okay. Let's just say hypothetically
that is in an absolute requirement, which technically
I mean, let's just you know, playing within
his narrative.
So you're saying that you don't wanna do
what's legally required because, well, that may cause
our our a problem.
It's the same game they're playing. Well, we
can't give them all due process. That just
takes too long. These aren't fit are these
aren't honest
or logical arguments.
If you believe in the constitution, if you
don't, well, then do whatever you want. That's
all that means. They're creating a world in
which we're we're we're tired. You know? I
don't like what that says. It doesn't work
for me. I have too many situations on
the grid. You know, the point is that
whatever we tell you, it's because that makes
what we wanna accomplish
too more too difficult, take too long.
And people who support them go, yeah. Do
the thing we want. You know? It's just
it's if you truly believe in the principles
of these things, you would not find a
reason to go
it's the same point as always. During COVID
nineteen, what did you say? It didn't say
shall not be infringed, asterisk, unless there's a
pathogen. Same point with every other part of
the constitution. It's our troops there.
Any claims to the contrary about the War
Powers Act
either misunderstand the statute and long standing precedent
or they're just being disingenuous.
Congress retains full oversight authority and the administration
is acting consistent with the law, and that's
what we discussed in the room tonight. No.
This is simply not true. But let's not
forget, you know, as they're all cheering, yeah.
That's right. We support. That's the guy they
told you was a liar. That's a rhino.
That's not on your side. That's always manipulating
Republican people
Republican party.
But now because he's blindly a Trump you
know, whatever Trump told him to say, now,
yay. He's the right guy. You know? It's
but now Massey's the evil one even though
he's more America first than all of them
put together.
It's very sad. Here here's here's what article
two. Just for you know, I didn't plan
it. Let's just look through it real quickly.
Because, you know, it's so these things are
are designed in a way
where this is like, I mean, you have
to understand the entire point of all this
was meant to make something that did not,
you know, at least created the circumstances
where it was less likely if we are
actually engaged to allow power to collect in
one spot versus the others. Right? The idea
was that you're that's always going to happen.
Always.
But in this case but the way that
this is put together is to allow,
basically, that the powers check themselves. That was
the idea, the checks and balances. Doesn't obviously,
it doesn't work, especially when people stop involving
themselves or allowing the power to manipulate you
for any number of reasons.
But if we argue that there was ever
a point at which it allowed them to
just circumvent the rest of it, well, then
that means you actually don't understand the entire
reason the way that this was put together.
The executive branch shall be vested in a
president the executive branch shall be vested in
a president of The United States Of America.
He shall hold his office during the term
for four years. Now remember, right there alone,
the executive branch is just what's connected to
the executive branch. It's not the others. It's
not foreign policy. It's executive orders only apply
to the executive branch. So when they're writing
these things and trying to change entire policies
that go well beyond that, that's just not
legitimate.
But it's it's just order by dictate. It's
what they've been doing for a long time.
And and like Obama and the rest, they
did it too. Everyone has that interest because
they like having that power. They just don't
want, you know,
others peep you know, I don't even know
how to frame that, that I I tend
to not think that they're even fighting at
the end of the day. But the point
is, all of them would relish more power.
Each state shall appoint in such manner. There's
plenty of I I didn't I just put
this up, so I would have highlighted the
exact part of it. I'm we'll just go
through real quick. Number of electors,
let's
see.
The electors shall meet and they represent I
think it's part two is where it really
gets into it. Let me just skim real
quick.
Let's see. Greatest number of electors. If the
congress may determine the time of of choosing
the electors. That's interesting. And the day on
which they shall give their votes, no person
except a natural born citizen or citizen of
The United States at the times of adoptions
of constitution shall be eligible for the office
of president.
No person except a natural born citizen or
a citizen. Yeah. You know, this is just
interesting where we get into the point about
them claiming that people aren't, you know, that
you weren't born here. You know, it's it's
clear that the peep just that there was
a bar set for being a US citizen.
That's really what mattered. Neither shall a person
be eligible at office, do not have attained
the age of 35 years.
Case in the case of removal of the
president from office or his death, resignation, or
inability to discharge the powers of the duty,
the the same shall
devolve on the vice president. Right. Just the
succession.
President shall at stated times receive his service
compensation. Yeah. I believe it's right down here.
Yeah.
So it says, the president shall be commander
in chief of the army and navy of
the United States and of the militia of
several of the several states. When called into
the actual service of The United States, which
is different, by the way. It's not always.
It's when they're called into service. But he
may require the opinion in writing of the
principal officer in each of the executive branch
departments upon any subject relating to the duties
in their respective offices, and he shall have
powers to grant reprieves and pardons for office
offenses against The United States, except in cases
of impeachment. He shall have power by and
with the advice and consent of the senate
to make treaties provided two thirds of the
senators present concur, present,
and he shall nominate and buy and and
by and with the advice of the consent
of the senate shall appoint ambassadors. It's all
the foreign policy.
Judge and appoint judges. The appointments are not
herein otherwise provided for and shall be established
by law, but Congress
may, by law, vest the appointment in searching
for your offices as they think proper, and
the president alone, in courts of law, or
at the department. The president shall have power
to fill up all vacancies.
That that may happen during the recess of
by the senate.
Section three, he shall, from time to time,
give the congress information of the State of
the Union.
Yeah. I mean, you tell me where this
is explicitly saying you have the right to
circumvent. You know? Look. You guys take the
time to actually read through
any number of our founding documents and find
how shockingly these things are misrepresented.
It's just it's just constant. But there's always
something about, like the idea comes down to,
like, the power vested in the president in
regard to the army and, you know, that
he can assign. It's just a way what
they do is they get people who have
law degrees, who their very job, and you
know this as lawyers, is to find an
argument.
Not necessarily that it's the most accurate or
the most honest, but the argument that suits
the
the agenda. Right? Like, or in a case
of a law
a court case to get you get you
not held accountable, especially if you're guilty. That's
actually what lawyers are supposed to do. So
just realize how very much they're misrepresenting so
much of this. And, you know, this guy
who's now I mean, even I think Marjorie
Taylor Greene made it clear that he remember,
he's not supposed to be the extension of
the executive branch. He's supposed to represent the
houses of congress. Here he is, basically, an
extension of Trump, which is what everyone's saying.
On top of that, tell me it's not
a war. Okay? First of all, Trump said
nobody was killed. Well, that's provably false at
this point, including the fact that there was
a bunch of civilians that were killed. Cuba
says 32 Cuban officers were killed in their
operation.
But, yeah, we're gonna pretend like this was
just an, nonchalant
operation to remove. No, guys. There this is
an act of war, whether war has been
declared or not. That requires congressional approval,
most importantly, when there's not some imminent threat,
which there is not. Doesn't matter what they
wanna pretend or all the screaming idiots online
pretend that drugs in the water are somehow
represented immediately. They're just paying what works for
the agenda. Nobody believes that. If Biden made
that argument for any reason, they would laugh
at him. It's just sad how obvious that
is today. So let's get into the interesting
parts of Del C Rodriguez.
And I think this is fascinating. Like, how
this might have gone down, the previous overlaps,
and just kind of, like, trying to read
out. You know, it's it's like one of
these, you know, it's it's like a
I'm trying to think of it. Like,
there's a term for it. You know, basically,
what you're talking you're dealing with is the
kind of the Game of Thrones kind of
dynamic. Right? Where you have people making deals
behind the scenes. There's more to the story
than what's being stated out loud, and it's
all about controlling the power, the seed of
power. So Wall Street Journal put this out
yesterday. CIA concluded regime loyalists were best placed
to lead Venezuela after Maduro.
So obvious point right at the beginning is
is that what democracy looks like? That you
guys pick what's best for US interests? Well,
no. I mean, that's everything we talk about.
I play that clip of Patrick Clausen in
Iran. You know, normally, what guides war is
what's best for US interests. Right? Yes. Always.
It's not about what's legal or what's correct
or what is best for the Venezuelan people.
It's about what the government wants for its
interests.
That's I mean, historically, the most easy thing
to prove in the entire conversation.
So it says,
starting with the first part, I was gonna
read the top. It's brief on intelligence. But
it says, a recent classified US intelligence assessment
determined
top members of Nicolas Maduro's regime, including
vice president, Delsey Rodrigues,
would be best positioned to lead a temporary
government in Caracas and maintain near term stability
if the autocrat lost power, people familiar with
the matter said.
So already planned, went back a long way.
So that means we should question the whole
Machado point and everything else they were doing.
I mean, I'll come to it in a
second, but didn't they just tell you somebody
else was the legal winner of that election?
But now they're leaning in with whoever works
best for them? They nothing means anything to
these guys. Right? It's all what they want.
We'll get into that. The the, Gonzales guy
is supposed to be the one that's in
power. Right? They didn't they all tell us
that? Didn't all of their lackeys online scream?
He was the real president. But now it's
just whoever works.
Right?
But it's overall with this. You know, what
we need to be asking is whether or
not this person was
more dealt with than just being the one
that they thought would allow this to continue.
It says the analysis by the CIA was
briefed to president Trump and shared with a
small circle of senior administration officials according to
two other people. It was a factor in
Trump's decision
to back Maduro's vice president instead of opposition
leader who has no popular support just like
the guy there the Shah from Iran.
The and and the Nobel Peace Prize winner,
Maria,
Corina Machado, some of the people said. And
I mean, how long we were telling you
that? She's not supported in Venezuela. And all
the Betty Johnsons and all, they come out
like, oh, she's the most popular person. Everybody
hates Maduro.
Nobody supports her there other than people that
are in their inner circles, which you're seeing
right now. That's why Trump went the other
direction. I just think it's worth reflecting on
that.
Every moment, you have an example of how
these people will lie for you, their immediate
agenda, and they just jump to the next
lie. It's clumsy.
The assessment provides insight into Trump's decision not
to support the opposition's bid for control of
Venezuela
following the brazen US military operation to capture
Maduro last week and bring him to The
US for trial, which I just laugh about.
Why would that make sense to anybody? We're
not the policeman of the world, but we're
gonna literally hide arrest global leaders and try
them in The United States. It's this is
so ridiculous.
As in his first term, Trump was convinced
that that near term stability
in Venezuela could be maintained only if Maduro's
replacement had the support of the country's armed
forces.
And the elites. So
the interest seems to be
keeping her because you couldn't control it otherwise
because the people who really have the power
are not really her. And she's she's got
a lot of influence as we're gonna get
into. There's two main people that were at
his wings, Maduro, who lead the armed forces,
who seem to still be in control and
that she ultimately has influence over, but the
argument goes that she's not really the one
that can you know, if they disagree with
her in regard to what's best for the
country, it's argued that they'll go their own
path and align with what Maduro wanted.
And so what's interesting is this could have
been a way to try to keep that
going. You know, making the deal with the
person like Delsey to hope that they will
think that she's really a a Chavista. She's
out there fighting for their agenda. Right?
It goes on to say the report concluded
that Edmundo Gonzalez,
widely seen as the actual winner, which is
ridiculous to me, by The Wall Street Journal,
New York Times, and and the US government.
Everybody else seems to understand the reality of
what the you know, it's as I've shown
you every single time, you can't have
international observers from all over the place who
will testify that what they're saying is false,
then just go with whatever the government says.
Consider that they're honest, but they've how many
times they've been caught lying? They They want
you to think Guaido was in power. You
know? It's like and then we just pretend
like this is the reality. Guys, it's so
obvious
that he is largely support. At the very
least, Maduro supported more than the people they
wanna point to. As even Trump is now
saying, they don't have any popular support. How
can you go from telling us Gonzalez was
the one that won to now saying that
they don't have enough support to be in
power, and so we're gonna go with Delce?
That's just comical, guys. These were points that
we need to highlight because it shows you
without question that they were being dishonest. Right?
Now it says, widely seen as the actual
winner,
against Maduro, Gonzales, and Machado with the her
their his second,
would struggle to gain legitimacy
as leaders while facing resistance from pro regime
security services. Now it's not just that. It's
clear that as we're as Trump let out,
they don't have support. And it says drug
trafficking networks, political opponents, you know, all all
fighting them, I guess. Machado, who closely aligned
herself with the Trump administration and another example
of how nothing means anything to these people
and that they will use you every single
day of the week and then throw you
off when they don't need you anymore even
if you don't get what you were promised,
She has consistently praised Donald Trump's policies against
Maduro. In October, she said Trump deserved the
Nobel Peace Prize that she had won and
dedicated it to him for his decisive support,
and that still didn't matter. There is a
very arg prominent argument going around that he'd
snubbed her because he's petty and felt he
deserved that. Honestly, that does not sound that
out of character for Trump. Seems a little
bit more petty than I would expect when
this kind of thing is going on, but
who knows? Wouldn't surprise me, to be honest.
And she even came out recently in a
new podcast going like, here, take it, Trump.
Like, seems pretty clear that's what she thinks
too.
Now it goes on to say David,
Smiled,
smiled,
s m I l d e, a professor
at Tulane University who focuses on Venezuela, said
it was magical realism
to expect that Machado or other opposition leaders
could sweep the power sweep into power. The
better course after ousting Maduro, he said, was
to compel Rodriguez to initiate a transfer of
power.
But the problem is that it doesn't appear
that, quote, anyone in The US is actively
engaging in negotiations,
which, by the way, would tell me
either
they're lying to you about having influence or
that they already do and there's no need
for negotiations,
that that possibly Delsey is their person.
I mean, those are the only two things
that make sense with what we're seeing. You
know? And going in with this information showing
us that they decided a while ago that
she was the one that made the most
sense. And we're gonna get into why that
makes sense in regard to her previous connections
with this with a lot of stuff. It
says, quote, the president and his national security
team are making realistic decisions to finally ensure
Venezuela aligns with the interest of The United
States. That's what Caroline Leavitt said.
Like, I don't even think they hear what
they say sometimes.
The president and his national security team are
making realistic decisions
for Venezuela
to finally ensure, finally, that Venezuela aligns with
what we want it to be.
You're ridiculous. Like, yes, you just said the
quiet part out loud. But, you know, and
then she adds and become better for Venezuelans.
Right. But I guess what's best for them
is whatever the government wants from The United
States.
No. Nobody thinks that. Venezuelans don't think that.
But this is just her saying what she's
supposed to, I guess, just by I mean,
I don't think it's very well thought out.
Right? It's so obvious that that's not democracy,
that's not self determination, that's not sovereignty when
you're dictating what they want.
It's just sad, but, yep, they say it.
The Trump administration has offered shifting narratives for
how it aims to work with Rodriguez,
Venezuela's acting president currently,
who is seen by The US,
as Wall Street Journal frames, as a pragmatic
political operator.
Despite initially striking a defiant tone, which he
did immediately,
Right? We demand proof of life. We demand
that you let him go. We we were
invaded by Zionist forces. Those are things that
she all said publicly. And if there is
a deal, it actually makes sense to me
that the argument is to make sure people
think that you are fighting the power, probably
even with Israel saying call a scientist, that'll
work. That's not a joke. Like, there's a
real overlap to the way that plays out.
Not saying I can think prove that or
that I think that's even the case. But
if that's the way it went, that would
line up for me. You know, the idea
that it as it says, basically took on
a defiant tone, But on Sunday,
in, like, less than twenty four hours, it
seems, or or how long was it, you
know, very short period of time, she signaled
her willingness to work with The US and
has spoken with Ruby already.
To me, that's pretty clear. At the very
least, that she either buckled very quickly for
a number of reasons or that she was
never really standing up for Maduro.
But I'm I'm still kind of on the
fence, to be honest, but that's why, you
know, which we'll get into some more points
here. The question needs to be, is she
then playing them as, like, a third dimension?
Right? Like, is it ultimately
convincing them that she is working with them
in order to get what she can, get
them to back off, and ultimately maintain control
for Venezuela? You know, it's it's worth considering.
Because none of this is lining up in
a few ways, but it could just be
that there's, you know, like like, once we
get into the China overlap and stuff, I
think that it could be a much larger
play. As I've reached I've I've I talked
about that in the very the first show
on this. The interesting overlap of China being
there, I mentioned as them maybe, like, being
a mediator in some way. It's interesting.
But it says, quote, we're in we're in
charge, he told reporters. This is Trump. We
need total access. We need access to the
oil and do other things in their country
that allow us to rebuild their of course,
because you're gonna use their assets to help
rebuild their country. Right? How'd that work out
for Afghanistan, for Iraq, for Syria?
Yeah. Keep keep watching, guys. Let's see how
long it take. Like, that it's just it's
it's a tired
regime change narrative. As I've joked about for
years, they have play one, two, and three,
and it seems to be the only thing
they're capable of. We're gonna save them. Freedom.
Bring democracy. We're gonna rebuild. It just never
happens. What's gonna happen is you're gonna bring
in people, if you have control, that will
sell out everything, that will exploit everything, and
you'll create another country that is, you know
basically, they'll turn it into what they made
it become with their sanctions
while removing the sanctions and allowing all of
their people and their assets to profit wildly.
And then they'll only show that group as
how great Venezuela is. Unless they want it
to look bad, then they'll show everything else
and say, Venezuela is such a bad country
and then use it again later. You know?
So it's look at what they've done for
Libya or any other country they claim they've
saved. They keep it and they exploit it
forever.
He says pre it goes on to say,
previously, Trump and his top allies had publicly
elevated Machado's opposition movement
as the best choice to inherit power in
the transition.
In a true social post on January, Trump
praised Machado
for peacefully expressing the voices, in the will
of the Venezuelan people.
Rubio,
one of her most prominent backers,
who has said she, has said he has
spoken with her many, many times over the
years, signaled a letter excuse me. Signed a
letter
nominating her for the Nobel Peace Prize. Others
close to Trump, including his son, Donald Trump
junior,
also frequently promoted her as the fut future
Venezuela democracy.
Right now, there are people in the US
government who are still claiming that she is
the leader.
I mean, you can't go from saying that
Gonzales is the president to then just going,
we're gonna do what we want. We're gonna
pick who we want. That's not you can't
that's I mean, none of this is democracy,
self representation,
but that's just a slap in the face,
which is what they did with Guaido. The
moment that they wanted something from Maduro, Guaido
just ceased to exist. It's how this works.
But so they're still pointing to her. So
we'll have to see how this plays out.
This is but privately, Trump has been wary
of backing Venezuela's opposition after concluding
it failed to deliver in his first term.
That makes sense to me. This is says
Juan Cruz, who served as the top White
House official handling Latin American policy at the
time. Now this is what I keep pointing
to. Trump imposed sweeping sanctions on Venezuela's state
oil company,
isolated Maduro diplomatically, and sought to spur a
rebellion in the military, one of the many
failed regime changes in the past. The effort
failed when neither the armed forces this is
his last administration.
Neither the armed forces nor the broader population
rose up, reinforcing Trump's view that the opposition
overpromised and underperformed.
I guess you could blame them. The reality
was that you guys were over like, the
art the I tend to think they buy
into their own narratives far too often and
believe that everybody wants American freedom, you know,
whatever they're claiming. And the truth is that
the military of Venezuela
very clearly played them and made them look
ridiculous
because they thought too highly of their own
stance, of their own warcraft or whatever you
wanna call it, spycraft.
And so now
the argument being made is that he's
spurned by that and blames Machado and the
opposition forces for why he wasn't able to
regime change the country. It makes sense, but
you can decide whether that's really what's going
on. Maybe there's more to come. Maybe she
does get put in place. But it says
Trump sees the opposition as losers. Sure sounds
like him, doesn't it? As they failed to
deliver, Cruz says. It is it is an
it's an opposition that he sees as unimpressive
and having come up short. So why would
you just turn it over to them?
Well, you know, I I'm they're a group
of bad people in my opinion, but what's
funny is, well, because you had an agreement,
man, because you made a deal with these
people, that you clearly use them to get
this influence to manipulate to into what you
wanted, and then the moment you got what
you wanted, you said, oh, they're terrible. I'm
gonna pick this person instead. It's just funny.
It's exactly what we're always showing you about
US foreign policy. They will turn on anybody
and historically
always do.
So a couple more points. Like I was
saying before, here's Bennett Johnson because he was
clearly driven to do this or rather just
followed with whatever they was told. 08/01/2024.
Breaking, the United States Department of State issues
a statement recognizing Edmundo Gonzalez as the new
president of elect of Venezuela,
saying overwhelming evidence shows he defeated Nicolas Maduro.
I mean, it's just not true, by the
way, but what's funny to me, how do
you go from this? How do you tell
us that he was overwhelmingly the president? Why
wouldn't you just immediately put him in place?
Isn't that how this is supposed to go?
I'm not I'm I'm being facetious because clearly
what they do is never but that's what
they're telling us.
You took you've removed Maduro, so wouldn't you
you know, either they don't have the power
to, which is one of those options that
Trump is simply pretending he's influencing the Venezuelan,
but he's not for many reasons.
But either way, this needs to be called
out because this is them.
This shows you that they either do not
care what they claim they care about
or they're not in control.
Probably both to some degree.
Eva go, Gollinger makes a good point about
this, and this gets into the sort of,
like, background potential deal.
She writes,
have been saying all along that the pseudo
experts on Venezuela that popped up over the
past few months were miscalculating
the internal situation in the country and government.
And to be clear, this is just your
opinion, but I I believe that just makes
a lot of sense as one of the
possibles. It says the story the opposition and
Machado were telling was not the reality inside
the country. So that could be part of
the reason that they were selling, selling, selling
on their influence and that they didn't really
have it, which is part of the way
they play that, part part of the way
the US government always lies about the people
they support. But, again, I think they tend
to buy their narrative these days. Like, it's
it's the hubris they allowed to build.
But so they were not being honest in
reality in the country, but they were platformed
on all major worldwide media, typical. Right? Even
though they're not real, even though they don't
have the support, but they go to Venezuela
and people want this. No. They don't.
And had the ear of governments throughout Europe
and The US.
And most think tanks regurgitated the same talking
points, like always. It's just so tired. This
has been the case for years, decades, really.
They were wrong. And just like Robert says
about the Iranian experts who have never been
to Iran, who circle all the corporate media
platforms and now the mainstream alternative media platforms.
They don't even know what they're talking about,
but they know exactly how to claim they
do in The US propaganda way. And I
think they even tend to think that they
know what they're talking about. It's just it's
it's interesting.
This is just a a it says, this
is just a simple overview.
The government in Venezuela has been, comprised
of several groups
that have a power sharing pact. They control
different sectors of the apparatus, security, militia, Pueblo
collectives, collectivos,
institutions, judiciary, oil industry, business, etcetera. One of
those groups, Delsea and her brother, Jorge,
have now taken power through a meticulous and,
she writes, evil genius negotiation with the Trump
administration. That's been ongoing for months behind the
scenes. Now that does seem to be verifiable
that there's been discussions.
We'll get into that in a second. So
it's worth asking whether there was something Maduro
was involved in and wasn't being in fold
filled in entirely from Delphi, or maybe this
was completely off the grid and this was
about just them. It says note that the
new indictment includes Maduro and Celia or against
them, includes both Maduro's son and,
Diosdado.
This is purposefully to put them on alert
that they are next, should they betray, the
Rodriguez siblings. Again, that's her take on it,
which is definitely possible.
CIA is now operating inside Venezuela. That's my
point about claiming there's no people on the
ground. That's always a lie, especially since they
already admitted it was an inside job. So
you can make it about boots and troops,
but it's the ultimate it's the same point.
There's US forces that have been operating on
the ground
for a long time and likely have been
there, you know, in many different factors or
rather different capacities.
Just like I said, Afghanistan, which I was
proven right about because it's pretty damn consistent.
Where was I? The yeah. It says the
CIA is now operating inside the Venezuela and
can execute other extraordinary rendition, that's what it
was, at any time on Trump's orders. So
basically saying that right now, everyone's on eggshells
because they they're in, and they can just
grab who they want and leave because that's
international law. That's that's, you know, that's liberty
and democracy. Right? Delsea has allowed them in
and permitted them to stay. The US embassy
is returning along with all of its intel
and military support.
The calculation was that the most important thing
for the Bolivarian movement,
they do not represent Chavismo,
they long ago betrayed Chavez and his legacy,
as she writes, and their own interests, power,
wealth, accumulation,
was for them to maintain power no matter
the cost, including sacrificing Maduro.
There was zero chance they would ever cede
power to Machado, the exiled opposition. They represent
a system, not a government taking its turn.
They they will do whatever it takes to
retain control of the country, even negotiating and
comp and compromising with Trump, as she writes,
the evil empire.
The lobby began months ago. Like, right there,
you can make the point that it's sort
of the way sanctions operate. And this is
kinda why I think in a way, it's
an argument that it's a play for Trump
and them to be so bombastic about their
military adventurism
Because then you show people, Look, we're not
messing around. You know? So, argument becomes sort
of the way they use sanctions
that you demonstrate that, Look, we're coming for
you. And we will make your lives an
absolute like, more than we have before when
everyone's starving to death. We will make your
life terrible. And so then, knowing how that's
gone before, you have people behind Maduro who
go, You know what? Let's just let's
let's make an agreement in some way to
retain control but not let this happen. Maduro
seems hell bent on allowing this to continue.
You know, and so it's not about liberty
or fighting for your country. It's about your
interests, which sometimes can be the same thing
for governments, but rarely it seems. It's all
hypothetical. But so that could be a reason
why some of these groups, Del C, made
it like, hey. We we want to, you
know, make an agreement with you.
But to deal with the devil doesn't usually
work, you know, doesn't usually work out for
you as a as a metaphor. Like, the
point being that they double cross everybody. I
think that's where this tends to go.
But lobbying began months ago, both with the
Trump administration and the media. Delsey was positioned
in the international media as the moderate and
the most pragmatic to deal with. This made
it clear that the cards had been dealt.
In her mind, once Maduro was out, Delsey
was in. It does make sense. In the
coming days, more businesses
more business deals will be made. She wrote
this on the fifth yesterday.
Some sanctions may be loosened and prisoners released,
which I always find funny. This is what
we're talking about from from Rubio and the
rest about what they need to do to
help the oil. I mean, the stolen oil.
Like, you realize the only reason there's any
even issue with these oil dynamics because of
their illegitimate sanctions. They sanction it and say
you can't do this because we don't like
you, and then all of a sudden, they're
what they do is illegal. And so,
obviously, removing the sanctions now that if the
case is you're in control is not any
change of leadership, it's that you guys are
removing the block that was stopping it's it's
it's always the case. Same thing in Syria,
the same thing everywhere. Now suddenly they're removed,
the caesarea, now they can rebuild, look at
how much great the leadership is. No, you
guys have arbitrarily kept your foot on their
neck because you don't want Assad or you
didn't want him to be seen as somebody
rebuilding the country. It's the same thing everywhere.
That is so malicious. It's disgusting. While they
claim they're fighting for the people that they're
hurting.
Now, of course, they may loosen the sanctions,
which I guarantee they're gonna do if they're
actually in control. They will continue to appease
Trump with lucrative deals, opening up Venezuela's rich
resources. That's already happening whether they want it
or not. Oil, rare earth oil, gold, rare
earths, heavy metals, minerals, coastline, etcetera, to Trump
and his friends, which is happening.
Perhaps a Trump resort in Margarita Island or
Las Rocas.
All these things Machado promised, but without her
involved. Trump has no interest in democracy or
Machado. He never met with her. He never
invited her to the White House like George
w Bush did with the height of the
attempts to overthrow Chavez. Trump resents her Nobel
Prize, which he believes he deserves, she writes,
but also understands the truth. Machado cannot command
the country right now. She does not have
the support, even though they lied about that,
from the groups in power or their enablers.
Delsey Delsey and Jorge,
brother and sister, and she's the VIP but
now the leader, promised Trump stability and control
for now, as she argues.
If sanctions ease, life can improve inside the
country and will inevitably get better, and that's
because of the US government loosening the noose,
which will calm tensions over the US invasion
and Maduro's violent capture, which it will. People's
lives will suddenly get less tense and less
problematic, and so people will tend to ignore
that. That's how this whole game works, guys.
It is a game of like, most people
in foreign countries are very aware of who's
responsible for why their lives are terrible. But
if their lives get less terrible, sometimes that's
all that matters. And if you make it
just bad enough, people will only want it
to stop.
No doubt that the remaining Chavista and leftist
movements in the country, they she writes, are
not happy with this betrayal. Over time, there
will be a growing internal opposition, which I
agree, to the government, but they will likely
employ the same tactics as before, The government,
any dissent, will be treated as treason and
repressed, especially now with Trump's arsenal hovering over
Caracas. They will tell the people that this
is necessary
to continue the Chavista movement. Doesn't that sound
familiar? Even though their true interest in is
their own power and wealth. However, the biggest
wild card is Trump. His volatility, his lack
of strategy shows he can change his mind
at any time, and it's very dangerous for
Venezuela.
But think about this one point.
It's like everything else Trump's doing, or rather
just the government's doing through Trump. Right?
They're gonna convince people or try to, and
it's her opinion, but it makes sense, that
what they're doing is not a chance. We're
not we we got we didn't we got
rid of Maduro to save the Chavista movement.
It's it's about saving,
the you know, acting in Chavez in in
Hugo Chavez's memory. Not the opposite, even though
that's exactly what it is. Right? That's the
same thing we're doing now. We're saving democracy.
We're fighting for the constitution as they destroy
it all.
It seems to be an area that they
think works right now. And frankly, it seems
to be working.
So now on that note, just showing you
right this of course, remember, this is breaking
nine one one, the group that was sharing
fake Venezuela information. So let's make sure we
question all of this. But as far as
I could tell, this does appear to be
a video from Venezuela. But really hard to
tell in the midst of all the breaking
the fog of breaking news as the fake
news puts it.
But it's basically heavy gunfire being reported near
the Presidential Palace. So, hypothetically,
if it were true, what that shows me
on the fifth,
well after that's supposed to be something that
changed, is that there are groups
that are not okay with this, if that
is actually happening. So and I do think
this is where we are. I think we're
at a point where there's gonna be tons
of groups in there that believe that they're
fighting for what Venezuelan people actually want, and
very well may be. And they'll be frightened
as the terrorists because that's not the person
in control.
Always how this tends to work. So here's
another article, The Financial
Times. This one is from yesterday.
The woman with Donald Trump's nod to leave
Venezuela.
It says The US operation to capture Maduro
at the weekend and
spirit him out of Venezuela for trial in
New York left in charge a woman Washington
already knew well,
vice president Delsey Rodriguez.
Rodriguez,
a canny political operator, was envisioned, envisioned
envisioned envisioned
Let's just go with envision since he's here
to say. Vision is as as head it's
not what it says. I'm just joking. As
head of now a transnational government in secret
talks with her political or polit politician
brother,
head of train they they vision her as
the head of the transitional, excuse me, government
in secret talks with her brother, led with
Washington last year
about a post Maduro future
according to two people familiar with the discussion.
So, of course, they could be lying. Right?
But the argument is now being put forward
that she was,
last year,
making agreements,
which arguably could make that overlapping with Biden's
administration, which really wouldn't surprise me, that they
were making a deal for a post Maduro
future, which, by the way, every government, as
far back as I can look, has been
trying to remove whoever's in power in Venezuela.
So clearly,
that would show you that there's a long
standing, at least,
back channel between the person currently, which makes
me very uncomfortable for the reality.
This is at that time, the negotiations had
involved Maduro going safely into exile. So this
is really interesting, isn't it? So
arguably, there could have been a deal made.
And that's what I was thinking, that Maduro
would be, like, you know, only reason be
the is if if you knew it was
gonna happen regardless and you wanna try to
save yourself or save the country, whatever it
is, and ultimately try to make a deal
for him to go into exile safely and
allow a transition of power. It's possible even
that that was agreed to and they just
double crossed him when it happened. That wouldn't
surprise me at all. So the Trump administration
has been telegraphing
that they were building this transition around Delphi
for some time now.
It's just that's so crazy to me that
this is being now discussed as an openly
discussed like, we've been built so that will
quickly become public if that's the reality and
the people will not support Delphi in Venezuela,
which will show you that they don't support
anything The US is doing in their country
despite yelling the opposite
if that comes to pass.
The 56 year old's ascent has left her
walking on a tightrope.
A on the one hand, she must placate
domestic audiences.
On the same time at the same time,
she faces alternate praise and threats from Trump.
This This is interesting. It says, who on
Sunday has said that if Venezuela's new leaders,
quote, don't behave,
we will do a second strike.
Yeah. But don't worry. We're not in control.
Like, that's just you puppeteering this country.
And we'll continue forever to be the case.
And it says that Rodriguez could, quote, face
a situation probably worse than Maduro. That's what
Trump actually said out loud. Now, of course,
if they have an agreement,
that could be him just front you know,
just making that look that way. But even
if he's just doing it for the sake
of making the point to act like they're
not in league with each other, it's still
exactly what could happen. And she Campbell knows
that. The moment that you go afoul of
what Trump does or just do something that
makes him feel dumb about himself, suddenly you're
screwed.
That's what we're dealing with. It seems like
a gigantic toddler in the room. Ultimately, just
everyone placated to whatever he needs, all that,
and it leaves a lot of his bad
choices.
But right now,
you are being threatened as the leader. So
no matter what the reality is, that's not
what we're all talking about. That's not democracy.
That's not that that is a government seizing
power
through force.
Is that not everything that was what about
Russia and Ukraine? I thought we were all
open arms about that. Wasn't that a bad
guy thing? Not us and being facetious. Clearly,
the corporate media and the mainstream alternative. Why
is that any different?
Because you feel that you're justified? I mean,
guys, we can't be this ridiculous.
I know you guys aren't. I'm speaking to
maybe the one person who happens to accidentally
stumble in here from, you know, out of
link they didn't know they clicked because no
one's able to see it. But continuing,
on Sunday night, Rodriguez struck a conciliatory tone
towards The United States in a statement on
social media saying her government's priority was to,
quote, move toward a balanced and respectful international
relationship between The US and Venezuela.
Yeah. Right after you stood all tough and
strong and said, we demand proof of life,
and this is still his country, and I
and then you do that.
Doesn't that to me feels very wrong. It
either it is either that that was the
fake statement to make people feel like you
were fighting for Venezuela to then just but
to me, it makes it sound feels more
like she was threatened or
that's what she said in the beginning and
then suddenly she's like, okay, this is my
only option.
So it feels like, but it's hard to
say. But it says in an at an
impromptu cabinet meeting on Saturday afternoon, she swore
fealty
to the ousted Maduro
while flanked by top military and political officials
in an early sign of her need to
keep Venezuelan hardliners on her side, as well
as possibly her own ideological,
in what is that? Intransignance?
But here's the point.
Or rather my thought, right, is that couldn't
you just as easily see through this that
she's playing the Trump administration?
Right? So, yeah, don't worry. I'm gonna play
them to make sure they think I'm on
their side, she's telling Trump, while going over
here and going, I got him right where
I want him. We've got control. Let him
think we're we're dealing with them until we
have, you know, until we absolutely have to
let that cat out of the bag. Let's
let him think they're in control.
I mean, why why isn't that possible, right?
I mean, see, but especially with what we're
gonna get into with these specific hardliners who
are clearly the ones that are in control
of the military, who do not seem, at
least right now, to be on the side
of the of the US government or anybody
but Maduro. And they were the ones last
time that double crossed the US government. So
it's unlikely, it feels, but who knows? I
mean, I didn't expect to see what happened
in Syria either. Right? That that was I
think took a lot of people by surprise.
So they're always capable of something like this.
And it goes on to say, quote, there
is only one president in the country, and
his name is Nicolas Maduro, Rodriguez said out
loud. But like I said, it what matters
is the follow through, what she does next,
what deal she makes with Donald Trump. It's
gonna make a difference. Saying that's very easy,
and will sure as hell win you the
support of people who support him, which seems
to be the majority of the country.
The and by the way, again, even as
they now sort of admit backwardly,
the Venezuelan Supreme Court bestowed on her presidential
powers on an act her presidential powers on
an acting basis.
The US secretary of state Marco Rubio, who
has acknowledged being in contact with Rodriguez
on Sunday appeared to recognize that her remarks
were designed for domestic consumption.
I mean, this is what's funny. You don't
think that Venezuelan people are gonna get wind
of these of these back and forth statements?
He says, we're going to make an assessment
on the basis of what they do, not
what they say publicly in the interim, not
what they've done in the past many past
in many cases, but what they do moving
forward.
Excuse me.
Rubio said this of v v Venezuela's de
facto leadership. So we're going to find out.
Meaning, it's not about what she's yelling out
loud right now. It's what we actually do
in the end, which I agree with. But
think about that in the sense of what
that means. It could just be him waiting
to see if she actually take you know,
it it her actions will tell him whether
or not she's on their side. During the
Biden administration, Rodriguez impressed executives with her pragmatism
and grasp of detail when she led talks
with international oil companies,
including Chevron, which led to them being granted
limited access to operate in Venezuela, one of
the only ones. So right there, that makes
me very suspicious about her real interest. And,
you know, going back to the Biden administration,
like I said,
now, you know, I thought were are isn't
the Democrats and Biden the deep state? So
now Trump is effectively carrying forward the deep
state agenda? Yeah. Don't think too hard into
his narratives because it all falls apart, guys.
They're all on the same side. So this
continues to say, the Rodriguez siblings' roles leading
negotiations
with international investors and The US under both
the Biden and second Trump administration put them
in a powerful position to argue in Washington
that they are the only people inside Venezuela
capable of delivering quickly what Americans want. What
Americans want. That's even how they frame it.
That ultimately, you're here going, we'll give you
what you need. Because that's what's happening. They're
not even hiding this anymore, guys. But meanwhile,
screaming to the mindless followers online that it's
about saving the Venezuelan people. I don't even
think they believe that. It's just it's sort
of ridiculous.
But so they've been dealing with the US
government for a very long time. So it's,
you know, that's why it seems quite likely
that one of the one of the most
obvious possibilities is they double cross to
Venezuela
to seize power.
The idea goes on was to present a
more acceptable alternative to Maduro's regime.
This is just a discussion of her,
and that possible transition and the discussions with
the US government. The idea was to present
a more acceptable alternative to Maduro's regime while
giving him, with the re the original agreement,
a safe exit to a third country, said
people familiar with their ongoing negotiations.
So the very fact that they're arguing, which
very but let's be clear. Stating this may
in and of itself be a play to
weaken
people supporting Maduro in the country. That actually
makes sense to me. But or it could
be if this is the truth that they've
been dealing with Maduro and a possible transition
for quite a long time,
which, you know, does kinda make sense with
the way it went down. And that they
ultimately maybe just screwed him over because they
don't care about people they work with or
especially people they've called bad guys. Even if
they make a deal and they sign something,
you know, they just take him and or,
you know, or third, I guess, they did
make a deal and he's not actually arrested
and those fake pictures were fake for a
reason. You know, this is why it's just
so confounding for some people because this is
how you honestly engage with this, guys. We
don't know. And anybody claiming otherwise is either
in the know of some kind of information
that we can't verify because they're not showing
it to you, or they're just telling you
what they think and framing it as facts.
The reality is is there's a lot of
things up in the air right now, as
it tends to be.
And this is also why people don't want
that. They wanna just be have someone tell
them what they're supposed to think. Well, that's
not true. If you want that, there's plenty
of fake platforms out there screaming what you
want to what you wanna hear. It says
even after Maduro's removal,
his regime remains in place. This is even
from the Financial Times, including
its two main security officials, Vladimir Padrino Lopez,
head of the armed forces,
and, Diosdaro
Cabello, minister of the interior and head of
the country's feared informal militias known as.
They and they they write feared, but who
knows? For sure, that's some degree the case.
They, not Rodriguez, as the Financial Times writes,
hold direct sway over the security forces.
Right? So this could be another dimension of
the game. I think very clearly it is,
unless it's all part of some kind of
transition that they agreed with. Then ultimately,
the play for Delce could have been their
last effort to maybe make this happen. Because
as I said, and as it was easy
to prove, and it always was, and now
they're admitting, Machado or Gonzales did not have
the influence.
Though they mean and they they're all clearly
of the aware of the facts that they
didn't win. So for them to force that
in, they would have huge resistance from the
very groups that they lost to last time.
So the effort could have been made to
say Delsea is the one, our last opportunity
to maybe make this work.
So that makes sense to me.
And it says, as a sign of that
or I think it goes on to say,
they and Rodriguez hold sway over the security
forces. There is an also deep distrust between
the civilian and military sides,
which makes sense because of the way they've
been played off each other forever. It says,
as a sign of that, Cabello was listening
in the room as Rodriguez spoke to Rubio.
That's interesting if that's true, According to one
person with connections to Venezuela's ruling elite.
So that's what scene like Cena taking a
step further back. Here she is talking about
r Rubio, but here's the people who are
on their side listening over it, which seems
to say more. Right? But see, this is
public writing. So group they I would argue,
if they're in any way incompetent, which they
kinda don't seem to be, but Rubio would
get wind of this and see this. Right?
It got finishes by saying Vanessa Newman, a
Venezuelan defense industry entrepreneur and former opposition envoy
with close ties to The US security establishment
said, quote, Washington seems to be thinking
that some sort of US Praetorian Guard will
surround Delsea and start to increase oil production
and prosperity.
The question is, will it work?
I think, she writes, Delsea is going to
dance the tango with the Trump team
and then with team Trump, and then she's
going to be stabbed in the back by
the the second you know, by by Diosdado
and and Padrino Lopez, the two people at
her side. And then Trump will be back
in the kinetic sense.
That's one of the possibilities. Right? But if
you see the way this is played out,
if you get what I was just laying
out and the different factors, like, I guess
I I mean, it almost seems more likely
here that this is either
them playing Trump's administration yet again and Delsea's
the play that they're using as the real
military power
or that their effort is to try their
best to use Delsea to maybe convince them
that they're that she's really in power and
they're not influencing her. Those seem to be
the most likely as I can see, but,
again, it's completely up in the air. Right?
But I find this to be very revealing.
So here is Delsey Rodriguez.
And this is on the fifth.
Venezuelan they they write Venezuelan dictator Nicholas Maduro's
vice president and now interim president, Delce Rodriguez,
which wasn't funny. Why would if he's a
dictator, wouldn't that make her just vice dictator?
Why would she suddenly be the choice? It's
just so funny how these people are just
anything goes or whatever we call it. But
so the point would be that she embraced
the ambassadors of China, Russia, and Iran at
her swearing in ceremony.
This is her right there, hugging and and
embracing all of them. Now, that doesn't necessarily
prove anything, right? But it's interesting.
So, again, the question becomes, was there more
to this story? Now, again, two ways I'm
I'm gonna engage with those mostly. The two
ways to look at it. There's plenty more.
Is that there there was a double cross,
right? And And that would ultimately be her
playing everybody else. But if you remember and
if that's the case, if China, who was
there when this took down went down, could
have been that China was the mediator to
some kind of a deal, and then Maduro
got screwed over. Right? Or or there's more
behind the scenes between them
and that China being there was sort of
her guarantee. I mean, it's hard to say.
These are all just hypotheticals. Right? But it's
interesting that there is more overlap there. And
clearly, China, Russia, and Iran have a very
very much interest in Venezuela being in their
sphere of influence.
So
News highlights what China said on the fifth.
China tells the UN Security Council that it's,
quote, deeply shocked and by the strongly
excuse me. Deeply shocked by and strongly condemns
the unilateral illegal and bullying acts of The
US regarding its attack on Venezuela and capture
of Maduro and his wife. It says The
US has disregarded the grave concerns of the
international community and wantonly trampled over Venezuela's sovereignty,
security, and legitimate interests because because they were
there. Remember, there was a delegation of Chinese
a Chinese delegation that was with them with
or rather just in Venezuela when Maduro was
taken.
And it says, we urge The US to
heed the overwhelming voice of the international community,
abide by international law, all of which, you
know, they're not, cease infringing upon the sovereignty
and security of other countries, stop toppling the
government of Venezuela, and return to the path
of political solutions through dialogue and negotiations.
Remind me when that ever was because I
don't remember that time. Quote, we call in
The US to ensure the personal safety of
Maduro and his wife to release them at
once. Now, you know, again, hypothetically, what if
they just released them? Because they and he
which I doubt. But it's you know, you
could see how this could go a lot
of different ways. And it what that would
mean would we don't when we see more
developing,
information, it'll add more to this. Yeah. Because
right now, I think it's just so many
possible ways this could go. Even even arguing
that this could have been an original, you
know, certain plan that then alters because everyone's
seeing through it, like, which has happened a
lot lately in my opinion. The lessons of
history are a stark warning, they write. Military
means are not the solution to problems.
The US bypassed the council to launch military
operations against Iraq, blatantly attacked Iran's nuclear facilities,
imposed economic sanctions, military strikes, and even armed
occupations on multiple countries in the Latin America
and The Caribbean. Very provable. These actions have
caused persistent conflict, instability, and have meant suffering
to the ordinary people. Now I'm in no
way saying China is an, you know, innocent
entity. Clearly, there's tons of things I'm very
concerned about with China. But in the one
sense to put the case they're making, show
me where China, other than you could argue
Taiwan, but there's a whole different dynamic to
that, seeing as how that's a that's like
a whole Hawaii US dynamic, and you know
that's different even though I'd make the same
case. And I stand with anybody wanting to
declare independence in a legitimate sense, and that
very well could be that case, but The
US is not the legitimate actor. The point
is that you show me where China is
toppling countries and occupying foreign territory.
This is if you can't pretend like that's
not obvious,
US, Israel, pretty much the the leaders in
that game today, no country can act as
the world's police, it says, nor can any
state presume to be the international judge. China
firmly supports the government and people of Venezuela
in safeguarding their sovereignty and security and legitimate
rights and interests. We firmly support the regional
countries in upholding the status of the Latin
American and Caribbean as a zone of peace.
We demand that The US change its course,
cease its bullying and coercive practices, and develop
relations relations
with incorporation with regional countries on the basis
of mutual respect, equality, and noninterference.
Oh, those are rogue things. Right? The audio,
the video, or you could watch it for
yourself. But, you know, just basic
the claim the things they claim they're upholding
and fighting for.
Now here's a clip from, Scott Ritter
telling you quite frankly in his mind that
this was a a scripted
play, essentially.
And,
we don't wanna dig into how this was
so easy, how the CIA
probably paid hundreds of millions of dollars directly
or indirectly
to the political elite, including the military and
security forces of Venezuela to step aside and
let us do this this staged event. Because
this was a staged event. You don't go
in with two troops of Delta Force into
a hostile capital city and launch an assault
of this nature unless everything was cleared in
advance.
That's the quickest way to lose 35
delta troops. Robert made the same point about
the response. Right? Apparently, there was no, you
know, air anti aircraft. Like, there's a lot
of things that could have happened that didn't.
You could explain that by any number of
things, especially an inside job. Right? If they
really did have people on inside these positions,
they could have effectively stopped all this. But
I ultimately agree. In the bigger picture, I
find it very unlikely that this went down
the way it did without
them, like, wholesale buying off the power structure,
you know, which would be including the people
we're talking about. So that's this is, you
know, this is a different perspective on the
idea that, ultimately, this means that the military
would have been involved.
No. They went in. It was cleared hot
to go in. It was a it was
a permissive environment. They got their made for
TV moment, and, and then they left. And
Donald Trump's gonna build on that. But I
think what you're gonna see is that we
have,
over the course of the past several months,
exploited,
both the sanctions
and the possibility of lifting sanctions and the
reality of the oil of the money that's,
that's attached to the flow of oil.
And
we bought out the,
the political and economic elite of Venezuela, including
those who,
just a week ago, were saying that they're
standing with, Maduro for life.
Now he doesn't explicitly say it. You know?
Like, I mean, he may not very well
think that the military was part of that,
but you if you bought off the leader
the elite
controlling
elements,
that doesn't necessarily,
guarantee that that's gonna be the military forces
too, the average you know? So I think
what the point though is that the argument,
if that's the way it went down, to
me, would clearly suggest the military had to
be a part of that, or at the
very least, they were following orders from somebody
who was in control.
But then, you know, if the knowledge was
maybe maybe they're out of the loop too.
Was that Maduro's being taken? I doubt that
would've happened. You know? It's it's it is
interesting.
But, overall, I agree. I there there is
some level of this that's undeniable. There there
was an agreement that was made. And if
you look back as we were just highlighting
and realize that they were making that Maduro,
at least as they claim,
was in agree was in negotiate
excuse me, was in negotiations to give up,
essentially. You know? Like, that that's I don't
know how we ignore something like that.
So next here is another post or rather
just an audio clip, of of the White
House. You can listen to it for yourself.
You've already heard the statement, but DG
DD Geopolitics
saying US Donald Trump says acting Venezuelan president
Del Delsey Rodriguez on the fourth is cooperating
with The United States. Right? So he did
say that right away, and he said a
lot of things right away.
She came out right away and said,
you know, demand, proof of life, and he's
the president, and, you know, Zionists have have
infiltrated our country.
So, again, the question was, was he making
this up at the time? Or was he
aware? Was he was he being too like,
was he not supposed to say that? You
know? Or how how do you see this
playing out? Just the timing I do think
is important. So on the sixth, Rick Scott
comes out and says this today. Delsey Rodriguez
is not the president of Venezuela.
He says she is simply another corrupt leader
of the Maduro Maduro regime.
She would do well to remember that any
step she takes outside of The United States'
wishes will result in the same fate as
her former partner in crime.
I mean, how do you take this seriously?
Okay. So you're willing to work with a
criminal
if you get what you want? And that
doesn't make you bad too?
I mean, how do you like, realistically, like,
if the whole argument is we got Maduro
out of the way because he's a criminal,
then why would you let her be in
power?
That's not consistent at all. On or or
is it really just you threatening her with
that because you wanna make sure she stays
in line, which seems to suggest to me
that they're questioning whether she's on their side.
It's hard to say. It's just Rick Scott.
There's there's other sentiments, but it's not you
know, this isn't directly from Trump or from
the, you know, White House. But I you
know, to me, it just it screams some
kind of uncertainty, doesn't
it? But the the whole point seems to
make me laugh. You know, that that she's
just another part of the evil, corrupt okay.
But now Trump's like, she's gonna she's gonna
work and, you know, we're gonna work with
her. It's it's the whole Guaido thing all
over again. You can't scream that he's the
only legitimate one and then work with the
guy you told us was a terrorist because,
well, oil, which is exactly what happened. And
now they removed him. You know? It's just
it's sad.
But you could read the comments. People are
kinda ripping apart for this because it's ridiculous.
It's also completely illegitimate. So let's just say
it's all democracy and and liberty.
Why why is she why does she have
to do what you say? Shouldn't she be
doing what the Venezuelan people want? You know?
It's different than what the US government wants
from them, isn't it? They're they're just they've
taken the mask off, guys. It's very clear.
Now, the, Robert Page Pape here puts out
a a good point
that ultimately,
he simply writes Venezuela is primed for resistance
to US controlling controlling the oil. Perfect terrain
for insurgency.
Plenty of armed groups already.
Far worse than Iraq. Chaos is coming. And
maybe that's the whole point. Just mire it
in some kind of ongoing, never ending conflict
and they can exploit that. Right? But overall,
this person just says, Popeye is one of
the greatest living experts in insurgencies, to where
I saw it first, is that ultimately
oops. Ultimately,
even if everything that if all of this
is part of their plan, I'm of the
mind that there's going to be groups that
are very much still in support Maduro because
I think even they've doubted that's the majority
people who support Maduro who are gonna make
this very difficult.
That's just what I'm sensing. I tend to
agree with that.
So let's talk about some updates in this
article here that I think are important. Now
this
is the Associated Press
from yesterday, but it's really just a point
I think are are relevant that that, pop
up in here.
And this so this one is entitled Trump
officials give nearly two hour briefing to top
lawmakers on Venezuela.
So this was just just simply says, again,
this is on the fifth. Mike speaker Mike
Johnson after said after receiving the briefing from
secretary of state Rubio
and other officials, he doesn't expect The United
States to deploy troops to Venezuela, which again
is in an illegitimate
it's dishonest from the start, my opinion, but
also the fact that as just because they
say that doesn't mean anything. They just said,
we're probably not gonna you know, no more
bombing. We got what we wanted, but then
we might have to do it if she
doesn't do what we want. So clearly, they'll
do whatever they want all the time. That's
pretty clear, I think.
And it says, it doesn't expect more troops
or it says senate democratic leader Schumer said
the session that they just, with their information,
posed more questions than it answered. Yeah. Real
critical of their illegitimate corrupt actions. Right?
No. The right state the right response would
be war crimes. Nope. Because they're all on
the same side. Deposed Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro
declared himself innocent and a decent man, those
are both quotes, as he pleaded not guilty
to federal drug trafficking charges in a US
courtroom. Good luck even making the case for
how you can prove those things. I doubt
this ever comes to any real process. And
his first court appearance for what was likely
to be a prolonged legal fight. Now
him saying that could be the agreement, or
it could be that he's now double crossed.
And he's why would he say that, though?
You know, it's innocent, decent man, doesn't go
along with the way, you know, any number
of overlaps here, even what Del C. Rodrigo's
currently saying. He says, I'm innocent. I'm not
guilty. I'm a decent man. The president of
my country is what he said.
Now down here, you got,
Brian Mast.
Israeli military Brian Mast. He says this, of
course, chair of the foreign relations committee, said
the administration intended for acting Venezuelan president, Del
C. Rodriguez, to be in place until potential
free and fair elections could be held.
Right. So the US government's deciding. Is that
you know, did they tell them what to
do? Because from what Delsea and the Venezuelan
side's projecting is that that was their discussion.
They decided that. Everyone in the US government
is going, we decided that Delsea's gonna stay
in power. And they're being very clear about
that, which shouldn't insult Venezuelans.
Then it says, That's why she's in place,
to work to maintain stability in there. And
there's an expectation that stability will be maintained.
They just can't help but make them like,
She damn well better do what we told
her.
They don't even realize that they're basically being
clumsy with their you know, but I think
people like mask and the rest, they love
to project that it's just like Trump. It's
hubris.
Lastly, there's one other part. This is from
senator Rand Paul.
He said there's said that there is are
probably a dozen leaders around the world
that The US could say is a violation
of could say is a violation of international
law or human rights law, including the US
government every single day. But he goes, quote,
and we have never gone in and plucked
them out of a country.
So it sets a very bad precedent for
doing this, and it's unconstitutional.
It's amazing that he the lone voices. And
they're the people that they feigned they were
gonna work with. They were almost like, yeah,
they're the greatest. And now they're the ones
going, This is a crime. And the conversation's
just like deflecting away from that, ignoring that.
Yes, it very much is a crime. Everything
they're doing is a crime. And he says,
There's no way you can say bombing a
capital and removing the president of a foreign
country is not
an initiation of war. It's exactly my point.
I mean, I didn't even include the fact
that they bombed
relentlessly in the in the in the area
and killed civilians and fit 43 Cubans. I
mean, it's so obviously an act of war.
It's painful that we have to defend otherwise.
But he goes, Paul was a rare it
it writes, Paul was a rare Republican critic
of the administration's actions in Venezuela as lawmakers
return to the Capitol on Monday. Because pretty
much all of these frauds are out there
going, oh, I'm so proud to be American.
It's pretty sad.
Oh, and this I'm glad I didn't forget
this one. This one's this one brings us
into the resources side of the conversation.
China has first claim
on Venezuela's oil,
complicating Trump's plans. Interesting. Well, of course, they
don't care at all about anything that's rights
or agreements. It's just they're gonna take what
they're gonna take. That's piracy for you. But
it says one complication to getting US oil
companies to invest in Venezuela.
China
has first dibs on much of what comes
out of the ground. Now, this is coming
from the Associated Press. And now this contradicts
what Stephen Miller's out there screaming. We're gonna
go over that next. China, it says, has
lent tens of billions of dollars to Venezuela.
They have. In recent years, under contracts that
require cash proceeds
from oil sales to go to Beijing first.
Now even if you wanna get into the
very dishonest arguments coming out of Miller about
how they own all this somehow,
It doesn't stu change the fact that China
has very much been on the ground investing
and and making agreements, and they do have
infrastructure and money invested. Does that I mean,
especially from Trump of all people. That doesn't
mean anything? They just get screwed over because
you know what I mean? Like, the idea
of that is so completely illegitimate.
But
if they're lying in the beginning of all
this, by the way, they the idea that
they somehow have rights and own
the access of the Venezuelan people, it's just
it's ridiculous. But But they're gonna say what
they're gonna say. Right? But it goes on
to say, it's unclear how much China is
still owed because Venezuela stopped reporting figures years
ago, but the
IOU could be as much as $10,000,000,000.
And it says Chinese lending could frustrate Trump
as elsewhere in Latin America
as he seeks to shape the region's politics
under a new Monroe doctrine.
Parks, Parks say, Parks says every dollar donated
or lent by Washington in the region in
the ten years through 2023
has been matched by $3 from Beijing.
Very interesting. So keep that in mind. Right?
As we overlap this with all the different
things you like, the the point of of
the possible agreements,
China being there when this took place,
they clearly have a huge financial interest
in the oil industry and other factors of
Venezuela. So it very much makes sense to
me that they would be involved in some
kind of a transition to power, especially with
the way Trump operates. I mean, look, the
game has always been the same. You know,
he plays into the narratives, especially to the
people that support him, but he nothing is
sacred to these people. He'll deal with anybody.
Clearly, if you're gonna be standing
lockstep next to a genocide committer, the point
is that whether you're supposed to be fighting
Russia or China, Trump will make a deal
for what he thinks best interests or benefits
the people around him. And if China is
willing to make an agreement
for allowing them to seize power in Venezuela
so they can see their money returned, well,
I don't think that would be a problem
for anybody.
Unless you only, you know, other than those
that adhere to what they claim they believe.
You know? Like, it's like saying, oh my
god. They did something that's unconstitutional. It's like,
well, do they do it every single day?
Just because they yell out loud that we
don't do that doesn't mean they don't do
that. Like, they they don't believe in anything,
it seems. So next,
let's talk about the oil
and the resources, really, because it's way more
than just oil. But I think we need
to really set this table for some people
that don't know that we've talked about this
many times in the past.
The oil is unreal.
And And there was even a time where
they tried to argue somehow. I think Trump
at one point tried to argue that this
was that they had more oil in The
United States. It's just not true. They was
just trying to get you to be to
feel like you were refocusing on America first.
It was never like that for him. Just
really quickly,
Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the
world. It's estimated to be 17,000,000,000,000
with a t.
I mean, really take a second to let
that sink in and ask yourself with what's
going on
with massive, massive debt in this country. And
selling you out to everybody else, $17,000,000,000,000
or a fraction of that would be a
huge benefit to I mean, if you wanna
pretend it's gonna somehow go to our debt,
which I doubt will ever happen,
ultimately, it'll be a boon to the people
right around Trump's administration. And it will be
an unrealistic,
just a skyrocket.
$17,000,000,000,000.
Now that's not obviously just in one lump
sum, guys. It's a whole it's a process,
but it's a it's a gravy train. And
that's just one aspect of this. So Stephen
Miller
says, quote, we discovered the oil. We created
the technology to extract the oil. We invested
in the platforms, and we built the refineries
to process that heavy crude. Sort of like
sounds like, you know, very Israeli like. You
heard cherry tomatoes? We made that. We've created
that. You have a piece of phone, you
have a phone in your pocket that comes
from Israel. Everything, everything's Israel. It's just that's
simply not true in almost every single way.
But
this
oh, I guess the red. I don't I
think I oh, I don't think I had
much in here anyway.
It's simply about the claim. Right? So here
he is making these claims that we just
we did this entire like, even if it's
all true, you still did this at the
allowance of the Venezuelan government.
That's simply the reality, guys. Or are you
claiming that you did this illegally the entire
time and then somehow that makes your argument
for you?
I've genuinely, as I've always said, if you
haven't watched the show in the past, of
all the people in this administration, I believe
this guy is the most dangerous. I believe
that Stephen Miller is quite literally,
almost on the surface,
actively undermining this country in every possible way
he can. Even with the statements he makes
on Fox News that then get cheered on
by far too many Republicans and don't realize
he's basically making fun of you, it's I
think it's quite obvious.
His as statements are promoting
what's are what what is the opposite
of everything we believe in in this country.
Everything that conservatives say they're fighting for. But
because he makes an eloquent argument for why
Democrats
are you know, whatever it is, it's a
way to manipulate you into cheering on the
thing that's actually against your interest. So in
this case, he's, first of all, not that's
not true. Let's put it that way first.
Maybe there is something down here. Oh, no.
I just had this click for some reason.
So let's let's let's look at what the
Republican controlled Grock says. You don't need to
because it's quite easy to look up the
reality, first of all, of just the ownership.
But just to make it quick, Grock asking,
is this accurate?
No. It's not. I just find this hilarious.
Now somebody recently was like, stop pointing at
Grock. I've made this comment many times.
I I I've said from the very beginning,
we had a whole panel on it. There
are there are values to this. I also
question half the time whether there it's good.
I think I've I've clearly, my mindset is
that showing this in a lens that is
we know this platform is manipulated. I've proven
I've done parts on this show that show
you Grok is wrong
most half half the time it seems.
It's about using this to show people that
this is something if a Republican is listening
to the show, they think we hate Trump,
they think Stephen Rhodes is on the side,
and you show them information they're gonna you
know, to maybe if you show them that
this is Grok making the point, it might
make them think twice about it. Or just
to make the case that here's even the
Grok can republican manipulated grok, and it's still
telling you the point. I find it to
be valuable. But, you know, I hear you
guys. I ultimately think that there's a a
mixed bag where all this stuff. And then
at the end of the day,
there's uses. But it's it's like the whole
Internet and in, you know, work but it's
that's why in that main conversation we had,
it was really about drawing those lines for
yourself
and realizing where those may be and and
just stowing standing by your principles, you know?
But at the end of the day, it
simply just says, Miller statements appear to be
politically
re political rhetoric exaggerating
US exclusivity
to justify claims over Venezuelan oil. See? Now,
if you're a Republican, I feel like that
would have some level of weight. And it
should for anybody really just because the idea
is that this is supposed to be something
scooping up. Don't blindly trust it ever. This
platform's wrong all the time. But at the
end of the day, the reality of the
history is very clear. He's just yelling out
the narrative that they want people to repeat.
And my whole point about Miller is he
does it in a way that's actually very
easy to demonstrate he's wrong.
And so that's almost a way to make
everybody look stupid or to bull rush the
narrative in knowing you're gonna end up being
proven wrong and then just doubling down even
harder because you're this is how this game
is being worked. And we're ultimately, like, not
only does that divide us amongst ourselves,
but it creates an impression that Americans are
just too stupid to tie their own shoes.
I don't believe that for a second, but
that's what they're very clearly creating, I think.
But here is Massey responding to JD Vance,
where JD Vance, on the fourth,
says, you see a lot of claims that
Venezuela has nothing to do with drugs most
because most of the fentanyl comes from elsewhere.
I want to address this. First off, fentanyl
isn't the only drug in the world. Okay.
Then why was that the only drug that
you made the case about from Venezuela? Because
cocaine or any of the others are not
it's a blip on the map. Fentanyl doesn't
even come from Venezuela. He's just trying to
pivot, guys. It's what they do. It's also
because fentanyl or any measure of drugs wasn't
even mentioned in the indictment.
So, how are you still trying to make
the case that they're in any way involved
with why you did this?
But he goes, it's it's not the only
drug in the world and there is fentanyl
coming out of Venezuela, or at least there
was. Oh, no. The evidence shows otherwise, Vance,
but that's why he ended with or at
least there was. It said MS thirteen. Maybe
he doesn't now. You know, it's pathetic.
Second, cocaine, which is the main drug traffic
out of Venezuela, is a profit center for
all Latin American cartels. Note that he didn't
make the case of how much.
Sure. Cocaine comes out of Venezuela. Comes out
of a lot of places. And all of
which you guys are completely involved with as
I've shown a 100 times over. I'll just
do this one again just because it's funny
that he's mentioning the cartels
as this was literally the Forbes article from
August.
The DEA laundered money, $19,000,000
worth for the cartels. But let's fight the
cartels.
That's what he's talking about right there.
Maine drug traffic is a profit center for
the cartels. Yep. And you're involved. If you
cut out the money from the cocaine or
you reduce it, you substantially weaken the cartels.
Well, then why did you start with the
smallest example? Why wouldn't you go to Colombia
first? You're now suddenly making the case, but
you see, there's an obvious game being played
here. And says, third, yes, a lot of
fentanyl is coming out of Mexico. Not a
lot, the majority. And on top of that,
in regard to The United States, that China
is the one facilitating that. There was a
US politician who just got caught recently for
facilitating the creation of that in Mexico.
Let's pretend like that wasn't an obvious overlap
to create that. You know, it's in my
opinion, anyway. And it says this continues to
be focus of our policy in Mexico, and
it's why Trump let shut down the border.
Oh, is that why? I thought it was
Venezuelan trendy aragu gangs and Biden invasion.
These people just can't even keep their narrative
straight. Fourth, I see a lot of criticism
about oil.
About twenty years ago, Venezuela expropriated
American oil. I mean, the idea that they
can even try to make this claim, American
oil property, and until recently used that stolen
property to get rich. Okay. Venezuela is a
country that has rights to what's under its
ground. The reason that this happened in the
first place is because US companies manipulated their
way into having an agreement, which never was
just we owned everything. It was that you
were given rights in some ways to be
able to drill that. And with your illegitimate
actions, including
the collusion of these companies,
they pulled that away,
which, by the way, I'm pretty sure is
their right whether or not there was contracts,
which I would argue there's a legal coin
to be made about violating contracts. But if
we're gonna start debating violation of contracts, maybe
we should look into how ominous that happens
from the US government. In no way does
that make it legitimate to do on the
other side. One right does two rights don't
make a wrong or two wrongs don't make
a right. Excuse me. But just realize that
that's the point of them.
You you UN resolutions or or agreements or
deals they've made or the JCPOA,
they violate damn near everything. I just wanna
think I think that's very important to understand
that if you're, at the very least, gonna
make the argument that they should have upheld
their end of the bargain,
let's be real about who often how often
that happens on one side versus the other.
But
To argue to frame this as them owning
this or that this is their property. It
just seems
lazy almost.
This is but we are just supposed to
allow the communist to steal our stuff, you
know, it's it's just a crazy way to
frame this but as Thomas Massie. Right So
this is why I think it's important overlap.
It's sort of the same idea. Massie's a
Republican. Massie has shown himself to be far
more principled than all of them, at least
so at least to maintain that so far.
So for him to come out and say
very clearly, it's not American oil. It's Venezuelan
oil. Oil companies entered into risky deals to
develop oil,
in most cases hoping that this kind of
thing would happen so they could just seize
what they wanted,
and the deals were canceled by a prior
Venezuelan government. Now, again, my point, you could
make an argument that those were illegitimately canceled
or that violated some kind of a clause.
I don't I mean, that doesn't seem to
be the case based on what, you know,
the the the way that it went down
because if you look into the way that
these companies manipulated the situation as well, going
back well before this, We talk you know,
go back to other regime changes. It's not
secret. There's been a fascist to overlap for
quite a long time.
It it just
it's a wholesale dishonest tactic. What they're trying
to do is create the idea that they
were stolen from so they can justify doing
whatever they want.
Because what's happening? Lives of US soldiers are
being risked to make those oil companies more
profitable.
Trump's all but made that clear.
Now here is Mel, Melanie
pointing out Trump,
And and this has been pointed out by
Massey and plenty of others. He says very
clearly that he talks to the oil companies
before this went down.
That means, which is pretty objectively clear, that
he talked to oil companies before he even
told congress what was gonna happen.
Before the operation took place? Yes. Would you
maybe tip them off now? Before and after.
And they wanna go in,
and they're gonna do a great job for
the people of Venezuela,
and they're gonna represent us well.
I just I think that's very important.
And as she writes, oil companies were notified
before congress. This is what an authoritarian oligarchy
looks like or many different terms you could
use.
But that's not what you know, anything any
of the framing they used to have described
themselves. That's not what that looks like. That
is
you know, I mean, you're selling out the
American people, guys, in every possible way. Now
again,
just the oil, $17,000,000,000,000
estimate.
And the article, how The US control could
reshape global power map.
Because, yes, this has a huge, huge outcome,
especially if they literally seize control of this.
That may that that's a massive surge. That
will change a lot.
Now, on top of that or actually, first,
these these parts are very relevant. This just
gets into the overlap of the, you know,
the whole,
confessions of an economic hitman kind of dynamic,
right? Where they're just re
completely exploiting the country the moment they get
in in, control of parts of it. And
this is, Moe tactic pointing out, and the
court appointed
special master who facilitated the gifting of Citgo
to the Zionist billionaires hedge fund in this
proud Zionist and APAC board member, Robert Pictus.
And it goes on for more. The point
here was
that,
Paul Singer
and his
financial interests are the ones predominantly benefiting from
this right now. That's what this article is
about. Just oops. Going back here to the,
Al Jazeera article.
He said this says, if this was about
stealing the oil of Venezuela for American people,
that would be ugly enough. But no. This
is about stealing the oil of Venezuela for
Zionist billionaire Paul Singer's hedge fund. Now, it's
not as simple as that, but that's a
major factor. Like I was saying before, there's
you can't you have to acknowledge that. But
these could be byproducts of a larger agenda,
you know, or just like point being,
it's evolved.
It could very well be the only reason,
but I doubt that. I think there's a
lot of other factors. But it says the
American people won't see this, c s h
I t. That's what these cattle are cheering.
And Ryan Grim says The US stole Citgo,
the the oil company, and now is trying
to give Venezuela's oil reserves to Paul Singer,
who's a hedge fund titan and huge pro
Israel donor and also amusingly the guy behind
the free beacon, the media, which is completely
which I actually don't think I was gonna
get into this today.
Let me see if I have that real
quick. You know, just the one of these
overlapping upping points that I think is important.
That's not the one. One second. It was
about a media point. If I if it's
not right here, I'll just move on.
Yeah. I'll just leave it for now. But
there the point was something made a good
I probably haven't included here somewhere, like I
usually do, and then I forgot. But a
point about media. And now, the argument they
made was simply that Trump's just a Trump
billionaire allies are are in charge of just
about every single media thing you point to
right now. And that's why the narrative is
being controlled. You know? And and a lot
of other ways, obviously.
That's funny. I thought that was down there
somewhere. Oh, well.
Here is David Miller.
Meet Paul Singer,
the Jewish supremacist billionaire set to make massive
profits from the actions of the Zionist proxy
forces known as the US military in kidnapping
president Maduro and his wife.
Singer is a sean, one of thousands of
overseas operatives
who can be called upon by the Mossad
and thus a foot soldier in the emergence
of Pax judicia.
No. That's his opinion. And I think it's
very active very accurate when it comes to
the way this is operated.
Paul Singer started his career as a real
estate attorney at the investment bank Donaldson, Lufkin
and and Generate.
Singer was went on to found the hedge
fund firm, Elliott Management, in 1977, of which
he is the president and co CEO as
of 2025.
Singer would also,
move towards activist investing
and distressed debt investing after the nineteen eighty
seven stock market
crash. See if I there's a lot to
read. I'm just gonna leave it at that.
But the the the point was simply to
get into the more nuanced background of the
people involved and understand that this is, as
I said before, whether it's just a, you
know, byproduct of the larger geopolitical agenda that
just happens to benefit the Zionist involved or
it's the driving factor. It is part of
this. And none of this is about democracy
or liberty or whatever they claim it's about.
Now Thomas Massie makes the same point, but
reference McGraw had to say.
According to Grock, oops,
Paul Singer, globalist, republican, mega donor, globalist. Right?
They're finding out these are the people that
are circling around Trump, but they're all fighting
for just America. You know, it is a
globalist agenda. You just gotta stop denying that,
guys. It's exactly what we were all fighting.
So here's Paul Singer, a globalist, republican mega
donor, who's already spent $1,000,000
to defeat this America First person called Thomas
Massie in the next election, stands to make
billions of dollars on his distressed Citco investment
now that his administration has taken over Venezuela.
For where we are. They're one of a
few Zionists who are funding to remove Thomas
Massie.
It's never been more clear.
Now here's an article from The Guardian.
Trump suggests
that you, American citizens, could reimburse
the oil firms
for Venezuela investment.
This is not a joke. This is from
January 6. Donald Trump has suggested that US
taxpayers could reimburse energy companies for repairing Venezuelan
infrastructure for extracting and shipping oil.
Trump acknowledged that a lot of money would
need to be spent to increase oil production
in Venezuela after US forces ousted Nicolas Maduro,
but suggested his government could pay oil companies
to do the work. Quote, a tremendous amount
of money will have to be spent and
the oil companies will spend it, and then
they'll be reimbursed by us or through revenue.
The US energy secretary Chris Wright reportedly plans
to meet representatives of Chevron, ConocoPhillips,
ExxonMobil,
at at the Goldman Sachs Energy Clean Tech
and Utilities Conference in Miami. Right? All the
good guys, guys. All the good ones. Right?
I mean, how many more times do we
need to see this administration just welcome into
the fold all of the worst people in
the conversation? All the merchants of death, all
of the
oligarch technocratic billionaires that are just absolutely I
mean, everyone involved with the gain of function
overlap.
I mean, it's just every single part of
this. The Great Reset, just welcome on in,
guys. The oil companies that have exploited everything
and could cover it up with, you know,
spills and coverups and yeah. But they're the
people we wanna work with to help exploit
another country and not benefit Americans despite the
narrative. But you'll pay for it. Representatives of
Trump administration are planning to meet executives to
discuss increasing Venezuelan production.
Right. Venezuelan production.
Because it's their decision? Apparently so. The meetings
are crucial to the Trump administration's hopes of
getting top oil companies back into South American
nations after its government, nearly two decades ago,
took control of US led energy companies that
they allowed to be there in the first
place.
It's just the way they even frame that.
You know? So, overall,
their hopes are to create the money making
industry that they weren't allowed to have because
they are warmongers.
Nobody in those three companies had had has
had conversations with the White House, which is
not true. As we've already shown you, even
Trump admitted they discussed this beforehand, but clearly
now there's an effort to hide, as I
read it, the idea that they spoke beforehand.
Because I think, as usual, Trump was clumsy
about that and didn't spoke off the cuff
and said something he wasn't supposed to. So
they all scrambled and said, we didn't talk
to anybody. We we you know, that's what
that's what this is about. The meet the
upcoming meetings will be crucial to the administration's
hopes to increase production and ex and exports
of heavy,
you know, basically
everything from Venezuela's oil oil industry.
Achieving that goal will require years of work
and billions of dollars investment.
Is that is that America first?
Years of work for Venezuela
right now, starting now, with investment in oil
companies that will come out of American taxpayers.
But America First, guys, see, this is why,
as always, and I make the point every
time, there are flocks of conservatives beginning to
go, what the f, man? This is not
in any way. Even if this in every
way meets what he says it does. Even
if everything about this is to keep America
safe and national security,
this is not America first.
This would be America second, even if it's
in American interests.
That does not matter? I mean, it's dishonest.
And on top of that,
if you think for one second any of
this is gonna trickle back in to help
the average American, where have you been my
entire life? Every single US agenda I've ever
seen in my life. It does not happen
that way. That's why right now, the Tim
Poolers are being made fun of for making
the claim about free oil.
That's what they said after Iraq, guys.
Ask George Galloway.
It's not the reality. Okay? It says, quote,
all of our oil companies are already and
willing to make big investments in Venezuela that
will rebuild their oil infrastructure, which was destroyed
by the illegitimate Maduro regime. Oh, was it?
They destroyed it? I mean, you get to
think about how shockingly embarrassing this is.
So they just blew up their own oil
fields or their own homes? No. You guys
sanctioned the industry around them
and stopped people from dealing with them. You
effectively destroyed the industry that hurt the company
and hurt everybody else because of your interests.
And then you blame Maduro? Why? Because that
that's the equivalent of you holding your brother's
hand and going, stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting
yourself. You did it and then told them
to stop doing what they were doing to
get back what they owe in the first
place. That's piracy, guys. That's terrorism.
The oil companies were absolutely aware that we
were thinking about doing something, he said. But
we didn't tell them. I mean, you already
said you did. And I think it's quite
clear that there's already been motion. You can
prove this in regard to what they're doing
right now. They were made aware there was
gonna be something happening. At the very least,
I think we know what's going on here.
Trump said hours after Maduro capture, he expects
the biggest oil companies to spend billions of
dollars to increase Venezuela's oil production after it
dropped to about a third of its peak
over the last two decades because of underinvestment
and sanctions.
You is that was that their choice? No.
The underinvestment was because of the sanctions. Sanctions
are what stopped it all from happening. But
those plans will be hindered by lack of
infrastructure, it says, along with deep uncertainty over
the country's political future, legal framework, and long
term US policy according to industry analysts.
So whatever Delsey does next will tell us
everything.
Now here is a couple of overlapping points.
Massey, and this is just him pointing the
same thing out. It's and this is the
Trump clip from, you know, basically saying what
we showed you in the last show, that
we will control the oil and we'll control
the country. He says, it seems obvious from
this video on the fourth
that the Trump administration worked with big oil
companies before the attack to line up billions
of dollars in capital for developing Venezuela's oil
reserves. Yet, they couldn't be bothered to consult
Congress.
I think that's objective. I mean, how it's
pretty clear to me, guys, that the actions
that were taken before anyone could know, this
is gonna come out very provably before. He
was clumsy with the way he delivered this,
like he tends to be.
Now, overlapping this with other interests, here's one
that I didn't think or that I didn't
think about.
I forgot about this too, because we've talked
about this in regard to Venezuela at the
time shifting away from certain things to, you
know, try to circumvent sanctions, right? This is
from the fourth. Venezuela's
$60,000,000,000
Bitcoin shadow reserve
could shape global Bitcoin markets. Guess who stands
to reap the benefits?
BlackRock.
You know, because they're the good guys, right,
as long as Trump's in power. That makes
sense. Venezuela's long rumored Bitcoin hoard has come
into sharp focus following the January 2026 US
led operation that captured Maduro. So explain for
me why they would seize Bitcoin if it
was a Venezuelan asset. Is that about the
Venezuelan people? It's
I mean, I I can just stop even
making I don't think any of you are
about following for any other narratives. It's just
transparent. It's embarrassing. This is straight up piracy,
guys. They're just robbing the country like they
do every single time, like they did with
the gold they took from Maduro the last
time that only went to everybody else. You
think that's gonna come back to help Venezuelans
today? No.
$60,000,000,000
is a lot of money. Intelligence reports indicate
the country
may have been amassed or that the country
may have amassed a shadow reserve of 600,000
to 660,000
Bitcoin valued between 60 and $67,000,000,000,
making it one of the largest holders in
Bitcoin. Now, here's the interesting overlap. $17,000,000,000,000
in the oil reserves is obviously more,
but that's something that has to be worked
toward and not all at once. You're gonna
get a flow of oil and the sell
the sale of the oil and probably some
resistance from certain people in the world. Iran?
In this case,
if this is the reality, you get $60,000,000,000
in your hand.
I think that's a very, very interesting prospect
for people involved in all of this.
And wildly unaccountable. Because that's exactly how it
should be, except now they're changing that for
you while making sure they can hide from
you. Overall,
BlackRock being involved in this, I think says
everything.
It says, with an alleged Bitcoin stockpile, which
I remember this being discussed, I believe there
is a Bitcoin stockpile,
in, of the Bitcoin tokens, Venezuela may easily
rival institutional
giants like BlackRock.
So BlackRock already we talked about already has
one of the largest holdings of Bitcoin and
says, and MicroStrategy,
the revelation could fundamentally alter supply dynamics
and market sentiment for Bitcoin. By the way,
something that is so obviously a huge thing
for Trump's administration.
Must just be another one of those coincidences.
Right?
Oh, and so the the overabbing point that
I just I didn't think I highlighted was
just that ultimately, it seems that BlackRock stands
to be one of the largest benefits of
this overlap.
Crazy to me.
Here,
Bark writes breaking United States seizes Venezuela's 1,000,000,000,000
in precious metals.
Less than twenty four hours after the invasion
of Venezuela, the US government quietly secured a
massive smelter deal to process Venezuelans $1,000,000,000,000 worth
of precious metals. Cost of the new facility,
$8,000,000,000.
New the financier, JPMorgan. Right? All the good
guys. Oh, this is all the deep state
fighters. Right? Connect the dots. She this is
how they write. JPMorgan is underwater on massive
physical silver short position. I mean, see, this
is so interesting. This is what I'm always
talking about, like, the multiple agendas, byproducts, whatever
else. Clearly,
overlapping with China, as we were talking about,
there's an important there's an issue right now
for many of their inside players in regard
to the market.
This may very well may have been one
of the overlapping interest for why this was
taking the taking place. And so they were
already in a massive short position, which always
shows you, by the way, why they manipulate
the silver and gold prices because they're gambling
on it, basically, and then have the ability
to manipulate the price. And it says, Venezuela
sits on the arco monero trillions in un
minted gold and silver. The US military removes
the one guy standing in the way of
the mines.
Coincidence?
And it says this wasn't a drug bust.
It's a hostile takeover of sovereign nations resource
sheet. I agree. They built the smelter facility
before they even invaded.
Think about that. This is the article,
01/04/2026.
US secures silver smelter deal to process Latham
Metals. Financed by JP Morgan jointly owned by
the US DOD.
That's crazy. Under the plan, the US Department
of Defense will hold a 40% stake in
JPMorgan's fine financed smelter. You know why? Because
that's the kind of deal Trump makes. Even
though it's completely illegitimate in regard to the
government being involved with a company, that's fascism
for you. It's supposed to be a conflict
of interest, but they like Trump has deals
with all the rest of them. So he
makes a deal and says, we'll give you
this access which will, you know, help your
position if you give us 40% of the
state. There you go. This is the most
incestuous thing ever. This is fascism, guys. This
is a government
collecting too much power at the top, blurring
together with the industry. And this is just
the and don't this is wild. They're literally
telling you that they want to transition into
some CEO run country.
Might as well be what they're
doing. Welcome to JPMorgan
USA.
But, you know, the reality here, guys, is
this is just wild on top of just
seizing their assets,
basically creating a situation where you can continue
to outsource the wealth of Venezuela.
You think JPMorgan and the US government are
gonna be kicking back resources they mined from
their minds to the Venezuela people? If you
if you think of for one second, I
don't know what you've been paying attention to
your entire life.
On top of that, Sam Parker points out,
Venezuela, anatomy of an economic hit job. The
story of how our favorite ethnic oligarchs stole
Venezuela for their international empire, but made it
look like it was for our American empire.
That's what they're selling people on. He says
question was the Venezuelan action good for America.
He says well in my opinion that was
wrong question. The right question is was it
what
was it was
was it better for our greatest ally, which
basically was better for Israel than it was
for The United States? He saw the outline,
then explained my answer. Timeline.
I was just jump jump. The triple point
was twenty fourteen. You know, what we've been
talking about,
Oil plummeted, hitting Venezuela's main revenue source. And
we went over most of this in the
past. 2015, Venezuelan bonds based on that oil
effect officially became distressed. Paul Singer's Elliot Management,
began buying these bonds at a discount, which
were then trading at 50 to 70¢ on
the dollar. 2016,
BlackRock was also buying these distressed bonds.
In May 2017, Goldman Sachs purchased $2,800,000,000
of these bonds at 31¢ on the dollar.
August 2017, Trump begins placing sanctions on Venezuela.
He will increase the sanctions again in 2018,
2019, and 2020. And I like, we act
like that's not a an obvious by like,
direct action for interest of the of control
of the country, but also to benefit their
allies.
And that that destroys the economy. That's not
anyone's fault other than the actions being taken
by this administration and any other all of
them, left and right, who have done the
same thing. But Trump very clearly has been
leading this. And when you find out that
Suzy Wiles seems to basically be a representative
lobbyist for Venezuela, then it all kinda comes
together and then Israel driving that for their
own purposes. It says by the 2017,
as a result of the sanctions, the distressed
Venezuelan bonds go into default. December 2017, Venezuela
announced the Petro, a state backed cryptocurrency tied
to oil reserves as a sanctions bypass tool.
The regime also begins Bitcoin mining operations.
Twenty eighteen, twenty twenty, gold to Bitcoin swaps.
Venezuela exported 73 tons
of,
Orinoco gold to countries like Turkey and The
UAE. The proceeds were converted into Bitcoin at
at the then current prices of 5 to
$10,000,
forming the initial Bitcoin reserve. Bitcoin was used
also used to import from Iran and Turkey.
Twenty nineteen, twenty twenty two, Venezuela began subsidizing
electricity, making it a Bitcoin mining hub, which
saw Chinese Bitcoin operations move in. May 2021,
Robert Pictus is appointed by a US judge
as special master to oversee the auction of
PDV Holdings, the Venezuelan oil, to pay off
the bond debt. Twenty twenty three twenty twenty
five, Venezuela's oil to USD to Bitcoin pivot.
State oil firm, PDVSA,
demanded payments in Tether for exports up to
80% by late twenty twenty five to evade
frozen accounts.
Tether holdings were converted to Bitcoin. Total holdings
swelled to $60,000,000,000.
2024,
special master Robert Pictus, who that was the
image we showed you earlier, recommends Venezuelan oil
assets to be sold to Paul Singer's Amber
Energy.
2025,
The US judge approves the sale.
PDB, Citgo, to Paul Singer's Amber Energy for
$5,900,000,000
over the objections of Venezuela, which appealed the
ruling, of course, because they're stealing their assets.
Amber Energy will pay 2,100,000,000.0
to bondholders.
Summary analysis. This is for noticers, Goldman Sachs,
BlackRock, Paul Singer, Robert Pincus,
you know, Zionist Jewish influencers. With the help
of the Zion Don and hijacked US military,
Israel first Jewish billionaires will get the long
awaited payout on their distressed investment, gamble, and
seize control of Venezuela's oil while the US
government will take the strategic Bitcoin reserve. So,
see, this is where my point is when
it comes full circle. Now clearly, in the
meantime, there were positions where people were losing,
like JPMorgan right now for there's lots of
examples where they're gambling based on the an
uncertain field. But if they lean in with
the power structure like we're seeing, and like
like we saw with Honduras and Prospera,
They manipulate situation to ultimately benefit their inner
circle. That's the point. And it says, it's
unclear so far the ultimate fate of that
Bitcoin,
but I'm sure the crypto bros who bankrolled
Trump's 2024 campaign will be very happy. And
I'm sure plenty will find its way into
into BlackRock, which is what I'm I believe
the reality is, helping to strengthen its grip
over the financial system. The Silicon Valley tech
bros will also now get to plunder other
Venezuelan mineral resources to build and power their
tech at a discount and increase their relative
power over us little guys too. We'll get
to that next. Couple points on that. With
full access to and control over Venezuelan oil,
Israel and the Zionist,
governments will end,
but what and the oh, and the Zionist
controlled US government are poised to make another
run at Iran while simultaneously grabbing OPEC by
the balls, he writes, and further stressing China's
access to oil, which buys 89 percent of
Iran's oil and 45% of Venezuela's.
He says, I think we see now why
the Israel first crowd
and Netanyahu were so happy about this action.
Now, it's way more than that, in my
opinion. I mean, the money is a huge
part of this, but I think that's not
the driving force.
Not to mention that Venezuela was firmly anti
Zionist while being an important trading partner with
Iran, helping both of them evade sanctions. This
has helped Iran check Israel's power in The
Middle East.
The main benefits to this intervention
look to accrue to Jewish and Zionist billionaires,
financiers, tech oligarchs, Israel and other Zionist aligned
people and entities? Well, that's an easy thing
to argue, I agree, when when you realize
that that's most of the US government at
this point. And it says, does strengthening and
enriching these powers help America first Americans? Is
giving Silicon Valley even more relative power good
or bad for American first sovereignty? Is making
BlackRock more powerful, good for us? Obviously, that's
not true. Not at his point, it's not.
He goes, yes, it does help to preserve
the petrodollar,
which by the way, nobody should want. And
anybody that was on this team who thought
they were fighting for what Trump was saying
does not believe. They're basically, right before this,
even with the Bitcoin people,
the argument was these things were going away,
that Bitcoin would circumvent these things. Trump even
sort of alluded to certain ideas.
It was never the case, guys. They used
what you supported to bolster the system that
we were fighting. You got played
or you just went to make money, which,
you know, that's up for you to decide.
And it says, but the petrodollar play feels
like it's just the bribing of Americans so
that we won't object to our own country
being occupied and plundered by the same people
plundering Venezuela. Does the petrodollar help us regain
our sovereignty, or does it just keep us
complacent? I I I think the whole thing
is go back to sound money in my
opinion. And doesn't it also help our overseers
who also deal in dollars and dominate the
world's financial system?
Whom does it help? Who does it help?
Who does it help
more on a relative basis? Aren't we just
making our master stronger relative to us further
bolstering their grasp over us? Are we really
building American empire? Or are we pair, is
is it parasitical
America on America to build the international Jewish
empire in Greater Israel? Now see, I mean,
I I think we disagree, he and I,
on this overarching point, and I've seen him
make the points. I very much don't think
it's I think, as I've said, endless amounts
of times, and quite frankly, I think it's
very easy to prove that it's about Zionism
through the Jewish religion, which is exactly the
history, which you could prove to yourself.
But that does mean there's a Jewish overlap
to this. But to make it just about
the Jewish empire, I flatly disagree with that.
I think there's tons of Jewish people that
are right now screaming about what Zionism is
doing. I think that makes the case very
clearly. And I think on top of that,
you can prove going back to where this
released not that there's not overlapping point. Go
back to the Ashkenazi point. There's very clear
points to make. My point is where we're
dealing with today stems directly from the Zionist
creation of Israel.
I think that's very obvious. So I think
it's important to not overfocus on one element
because Herzl and all the founding elements of
Zionism were atheists or nonreligious.
Easy proven. I've made this point many times.
You can ask Rock if you want. I'll
tell you the same thing. But, anyway, the
point is that this is what we're talking
about. The Zionist Greater Israel Project that is
a globalist agenda that is very much being
leaned into and selling out American interest by
people telling you they're America first. And it
says, which will then allow them to dominate
us even harder, or they already do. He
says, my opinion, they're playing on our collective
American ego and and creature comforts to sleepwalk
us a digital control grip. Yep. Project Stargate,
CBDC, AI, all the yep. I agree. At
what and it says, I'm at the point
now where if they want something, I don't
want them to have it. Simple as that.
Is Venezuela really a Monroe Doctrine? Or is
the globalist Talmudic doctrine selling you snake oil
labeled as Monroe Doctrine? Now, look, I don't
it's it's an interesting framing to me. I
don't understand why we think that this makes
sense. Why is it something that we agree
with that we should argue that somehow South
America is just our sphere of influence and
we control? That's a globalist mindset that we
are influencing that America or just one state
is the policy setter for everyone in that
sphere. That's that's very much a step in
that direction. So why
is it
is it, you know, basically,
it's being framed in a lot of ways
by people I wouldn't expect as somehow, like,
that it's almost a good thing. I just
don't understand where people's minds go with this
stuff, guys. But overall,
I agree with most of what he's saying
there. And on Janice Girl makes some great
points on the back of this. And she
says, very nice analysis. Here are two additional
examples.
Now, and this is important for a lot
of reasons down here while she's playing. Oops.
Saying timeline of US sanctions that fueled migration.
Elon Musk's uranium goals in Venezuela. So first,
if you watch this play out, you're gonna
what you it's a exact correlation
is that when they increase the sanctions, guess
what? It drives migration
because you're making people's lives suffer, or rather
you're taking people suffer. You're creating circumstances that
maybe will starve to death. You're creating circumstances
where people lose their money. So you're driving
people to desperately flee from a bad situation
and then blame the government of Maduro. That's
what you do. So what they did in
Iran, what they do in Syria, every single
time. But so what you can see here,
just to quickly speed it up,
is the reality that as they increase sanctions,
it skyrockets
migrants. And then they turn around and blame
that on anybody else they want to and
then use that to attack you, Americans. Use
that to remove your rights and claim that
it's you know, you would point to another
part of our own country and say they
did it to us, and now we're fighting
within them. And it's it's just a very
lazy dynamic.
Now I keep I say that for a
reason, by the way, because you could make
an argument
that was much like, you could find things
that you you could even create false situations
and point to them. They're just making up
narratives that are completely rudderless.
I don't know why. I think I honestly
go back to the point that I think
it's because there's an interest in making this
country look ridiculous and collapse. But right here
is a part of that. The weaponized migration,
you cannot
deny, is driving at least in part from
Israel's agenda and their religious Zionist perspectives. They'll
openly tell you that the way they bring
this on is to flood the West with
immigrants. It's just it's insane how clear this
stuff is. But here, it's important to understand
that wherever whatever you think of that, that
their actions have literally driven this. Is that
because Zionists are driving that from our government?
Possibly. Is it because their belligerent actions are
causing it? They don't care about the outcome?
Possibly.
You can decide.
But she points out another really important aspect
to this that I hadn't considered.
Elon Musk's motivation to overthrow Maduro.
Uranium.
Very important.
Now my mind, it's just one more part.
So, yes, it is part. But one more
part of a multifaceted agenda, as always.
But this is really interesting to me. So
two things to talk about here. One is
that this is just one more, you know,
interest in
exploiting this country.
But ask
yourself actually, I'll wait to make that second
point because I'm gonna show you something next.
So here's your article. Elon Musk's motivation to
overthrow Maduro, uranium.
At first glance, Musk's obsessive position to Maduro
opposition, excuse me, to Maduro
is a bit of a head scratcher. Why
is this guy so obsessed and why has
he joined a squad of nefarious actors with
a history of working to overthrow governments and
states,
spread state backed propaganda?
Well, first of all, he did the same
thing with Bolivia and he said, well, cool
whoever we want. Lithium. Right? That's very clear
for his AI interests. But he goes on
to list a whole bunch of, state backed
propaganda groups they've overlapped with. And it's pretty
sure it's US politicians blinking, you know, gateway
pundits and all the people that just, you
know, bought armies, Israeli influencers, and she tags
a bunch of stuff. It's out there. It's
like when I say Alex Jones and so
on. Like, there's plenty of times where he
says things you could point to that aren't
inaccurate.
But there is a endless amount of times
that you can prove in real time that
he's straight up lying to you. So that's
the point they're making here with the say
with the statements or rather the links, is
that state backed propaganda, they're provably deceiving you
when it comes to very important agendas.
But she says, a good example of a
leader aspect or rather a a puppet, Javier
Malay,
is a bit of a clue, she says.
Since taking office, he has sold mining rights
to his country to his country's resources to
an array of global resource pillagers. That's exactly
what they want everywhere, guys. You think I
mean, look at what happened to Argentina. They
basically collapsed. They had to be bailed out.
This is because they're out there exploiting this
country. And then just going, yay, libertarianism.
Yay, freedom. Yay, MAGA team. And then just
dumping around with
you know, it's a show. It's performative theater
because what he's doing has hurt the country.
And it goes on to say, while this
country has spiraled into poverty, so what natural
resources does Venezuela have that Elon Musk wants?
Well, she points out uranium on top of
everything else. Venezuela does not mine rate radioactive,
does not mine radioactive minerals,
but the government estimates that it estimates that
it sits on 50 tons
of unexploited uranium.
Or now it says, you may not think
50 tons are very much, but if you
look at the top list of countries with
uranium, Venezuela actually sits in the top 20
behind Jordan. So it's relevant, guys, especially if
they're already mining these elsewhere. This is an
untapped resource. And it says the listed countries
all have established uranium mining with contractors.
Venezuela does not. For anyone looking to tap
into a resource that's needed for nuclear energy
and, say, nuclear thermal propulsion,
like Elon Musk, Venezuela is an untapped little
gold mine, or should we say uranium mine.
It's no secret that Musk is a strong
proponent of nuclear energy, but his interest in
the specific location
go beyond wanting the fuel
at the
to fuel the world with alternative energy. He
wants to be, and just her argument, but
I agree, the pioneer who landed humans on
Mars. And this seems to be a very
important aspect of that potential
drive.
Now it says
yeah.
DARPA NASA 2022 worked on this overlapping point
with your nuclear thermal proportion, and SpaceX was
working with NASA in the same direction.
Now it says China
in 2020 March 2024, China announced the completion
of a prototype engine for a nuclear powered
spaceship to Mars and a successful global test.
So they claim, as always, we should question
whether this is a new space race kind
of thing. But it says their announcement indicates
that they are far less ahead of
that they are far less ahead of the
competition
from Musk's perspective, And Musk may not achieve
his legacy as the first man to land
on people on Mars, which I think we
know, especially with Musk and Trump, that they're
very insecure when it comes to their legacy.
I think that's pretty clear. Even though they're,
you know, the richest man and whatever else,
like they're so clearly overzealously going after what
they think is who they're seen as, right?
At least I agree with that. And so
if China suddenly starts to appear to be
the one that might do it first, what
might they do to make that get to
get what they want
is the argument. So what does this have
to do with Venezuela? She writes, well, China
and Venezuela have developed a very close relationship
over the last decade, positioning China as a
lead contender for any licensing rights to mining
uranium. So on top of the oil discussion
for Venezuela, which China was very clearly invested
in, there's there's also uranium overlap, which would
again go back to the original conversation, add
more to the story of whether China might
have been involved in an agreement because they're
so invested. Now Venezuela and and Western Looters
is the title. It says Venezuela's natural resources
are state owned. Western corporations and governments have
long wanted access to Venezuela's natural resources, but
the hindrance as of late has been Maduro's
socialist government who controls these resources.
Due to a century of bad geopolitical relations
with The US and Western colonial states seeking
to control Venezuela,
culminating in a nearly thousand Western sanctions,
which is just probably even more than that
on the country.
Venezuela, Maduro, under Maduro, it broke relations with
The United States, which means no licensing rights
for any of the mining of The US.
Now, right there, you can clearly make the
point that that was not because of anything
other than their belligerent foreign policy. And had
they not done that, these companies would still
be profiting from the oil industry in this
in this area. Now it says what the
US government and Western corporations would like to
happen is for Venezuela to be governed by
US backed figure like Javier Millet. Not him
personally, but somebody like him in Argentina who
is privatizing his country's resources to global pillagers.
Cue Maria Carina Machado, which as we just
went over, doesn't seem to be what Trump's
leaning into, but we have yet to see
this play out.
It says The US backed leader, at the
least and still was the time and still
is by a lot of The US,
of the, of the opposition party who is
behind several attempts at overthrowing the Venezuelan government,
including, as we pointed out, literally asking net
Netanyahu to regime change the country in a
written letter in 2018.
And it says, overthrow the government and install
her as the leader after that, and if
an offense that barred her from seeking election
for fifteen years.
Right. Think about that. I mean, obviously, you're
reaching out to a foreign government going, Kim,
put me in power, and then she gets
removed and they make that to be an
illegitimate
government, and she's the real one. It's quite
obvious what's happening. All of the actors listed
at the beginning of this article support Machado
and her puppet presidential candidate, Gonzales.
Elon Musk has dedicated
every day since election night to express his
support for Machado and fuel the overthrow of
Maduro.
What while the motivations are not identical, they
do have a commonality,
which is installing a US backed leader who
will grant access to Venezuela's natural resources
and sever ties with US western rivals like
Russia, China, and Iran.
For Musk, this is an opportunity to solve
a resource obstacle by gaining control of an
untapped uranium mine for a Starship endeavor that
will require
the per, the nuclear technical,
nuclear thermal propulsion
integration.
Musk is not unfamiliar with cutting out the
middleman in the mineral acquisition process in 2023
When Musk realized that lithium refinery obstacles were
a hindrance to his Tesla output goals, Musk
and Tesla broke ground on a massive Texas
lithium refinery in order to gain better access
and efficiency. Additionally, Elon Musk, the Boring Company,
is involved in the construction of tunnels, which
involves excavation. So this move is well within
his wheelhouse. Let's also not forget that I
think his interest in driving or supporting the
regime change in Bolivia
was for the same reason, right around the
same time frames. Says for someone like mosque
she finishes whose goal is to leave a
legacy behind that changes human history. She says
I can see the trade off of destroying
and subjugating an entire nation
to the whims of global looters is worth
the opportunity to change human history. But as
one among the humans perhaps he should consider
the rest of us believe it's worth whether
the rest of us believe it's worth it.
That's a good point.
Now, I mean, I do believe there's there's
clearly an asset here and overlapping that with
just seizing it for the interest. Think about
the bigger point about Iran.
I mean, it's so it's so frustrating that
we're happy with it. The conversation is that
they're not allowed. I mean, even now just
to what make missiles
because they might have this. I mean, this
is not legitimate
on top of the fact that every country
in the world has a nuclear program,
both civilian and weapons, by the way, other
than very specific cases who either can't or,
like, with new North Korea, were forbid forbid
forboden.
And then they did it anyway, and now
suddenly they don't even come up with the
news anymore. That seems pretty clear. On top
of the fact that now
you have Iran, who, by all accounts, including
Tulsi Gabbard, is not seeking a nuclear weapon.
But they're refusing to allow them to have
a nuclear program. That's enriching uranium, you understand?
So keeping this in mind, where there's an
uranium interest in Venezuela,
here's what the US Department of Energy just
just posted yesterday. Yesterday,
US Department of Energy awards $2,700,000,000
to restore
American uranium enrichment.
I mean, of course, that's all because of
energy and yeah. You think that's not gonna
be weapons too? Because they never really stopped,
guys. This is the whole the whole nuclear
proliferation treaty. It seems like that doesn't even
matter. Because all of them are continuing to
they're supposed to be slowly decreasing their stockpiles.
No one does that anymore. And they're very
clearly leading into tactical nukes and all kind
of very alarming stuff that Trump largely spearheaded.
Now, they're putting almost $3,000,000,000
into continuing to enrich uranium.
Think about how insulting it is to claim
they're not allowed to while they're not even
doing what they claim they're doing while you
guys ramp up your interest even though this
is in contradiction to what's supposed to be
a decrease of Because realize, it's not about
energy. I mean, it is. But at the
end of the day, if they're doing this,
it is going to be about weapons. There's
just no way around that, especially since, feel
free to look it up, the endless amount
of times Donald Trump has leaned into the
tactical nuke discussion.
It says the US Department of Energy today
announced $2,700,000,000
to strengthen domestic enrichment services over the next
ten years. In support of Trump's commitment to
enhance energy security and reduce reliance on foreign
suppliers, the historic investment expands US capacity for
low enriched uranium
and jump starts new supply chains and innovations
for high assay low enriched uranium to create
American jobs and usher in the nation's nuclear
re re re re, renaissance.
Now look, I mean, the idea of whether
Americans want nuclear power, I personally don't think
that's the right path. But, you know, it's
not like it's I mean, I think it's
really comes down to the fact of how
it's used, how it's exploited, and what it
means. Because look, what they're doing right now,
even though there could be very clear paths
to making doing the same industries without exploiting
areas, without fracking the way they do any
number of things. My point would be the
same thing with this. Is if there's ways
you could do this that wouldn't necessarily destroy
the environment or not consider themselves at all.
But they don't do that. And I think
the real point is just the insulting nature
of what they're doing with Iran while they're
leaning in heavily to this, whether energy or
not.
It is. It's, I mean, it's it's contradictory.
It's insulting.
It's also illegitimate when regard to what, you
know, there's no legal reality in which they
can just declare a wrong, can't do that.
They do it anyway.
Now on top of that, Adam Cochran points
this out. Dawson s Field actually back in
2024 made this thread.
But it says, what the hell? What's Trump's
chief of staff was literally a Venezuelan lobbyist.
That's Susie Wiles for you. And for a
wealthy Venezuelan
tycoon
who wanted to oust Maduro. What do you
know? And who, in the first Trump administration,
said they would lift sanctions on on on
the person if he helped oust Maduro.
So this is interesting. Now just for time,
I'm prob yeah. I'm gonna cut the not
gonna read through the whole thing. I was
going to. Just read this though. There's a
bunch of good stuff in here. He just
kinda goes down the timeline. It's not that
long, but goes down the timeline, former GOP
member of congress indicted for being a foreign
agent of Venezuela. Funny how often that happens,
and we don't ever talk about how these
people are all selling out to the highest
bidder. But cut to the chase, goes through
a lot of kind of timeline development. He
simply highlights
that, really the second one into it. In
a Venice in a Venice in Venezuela's case,
they hired Fusion GPS, of course, to do
investigations and public relations for them, and that
efforts somehow succeeded in keeping Venezuela off the
Treasury's Patriot Act list of primary monetary laundering
concerns.
Now it gets really interesting when you realize
Trump's and this is at the time, Trump's
planned chief of staff 2024
that's who she sees Susie Wiles.
Was running Goren's registered lobbyist campaign to influence
Trump.
For the interest of overthrowing Venezuela. So here
you have her lobbying for that purpose becomes
his chief of staff, and then we see
this carry out under his administration.
I mean, it certainly could just be a
random
alignment events, but my god,
it I think what we come down to
is that there's a lot of moving factors
behind the scenes.
None of it is ever about American interests,
about liberty, about
moral, about, you know, about international law. It's
about whatever interests them. And the rest is
narrative.
Now let's not forget this moron. Okay? This
is from 2019,
from Jason Dits from, from,
antiwar.com.
Venezuela's
Guaido seeks military aid for regime change.
This is the guy they told you was
president
years after that was embarrassing
and still stuck with it until suddenly Trump
needed something from Maduro, and they just went
away and started dealing with Maduro.
I mean, you can't you have to laugh
at how dumb this is. And so now
you want us to believe? Now now it's
not even Gonzales. The guy you just told
us was in fact elected. Now it's just
the VP of the guy who told us
a terrorist because that's okay. And and, you
know, you can't even make sense of this
without laughing.
But here
we are. Now in,
regard to who's in charge.
I think we're gonna end with that, unfortunately,
just for time. And I I like I
said, I can get into this part later
more, but But I I already showed you
this, but it just gets more in-depth, but
it'll be better to flesh it out anyway.
We'll end with this part about who's in
charge. He said the news put this clip
out on the fourth, and you've probably already
seen it. But apparently, it came out that
Trump might have just spoke off the cuff
with this, and that kinda caught everybody off
guard. Who's to say whether that's really the
truth or that's what they want you to
think? But the way they respond and and
continue to to this day is it's very
it it says a lot.
We're going to run the country until such
time
as we can do a safe, proper, and
judicious
transition. So we're gonna stay until such time
as we're gonna run it, essentially, until such
time as a proper transition can take place.
The president said today that The US is
gonna be running the country. What does that
look like? Does that mean we're gonna see
Americans on the corners of Venezuela, in the
government of Venezuela? Are you prepared to have
troops on the ground in Venezuela?
Well, it means we we set the terms.
President Trump sets the terms,
and ultimately, he'll decide what the the iterations
are of that. So ultimately, we're gonna control
what happens next because of this brave decision.
President Trump has shown American leadership,
and he'll be able to dictate where we
go next. Mister secretary,
who is in charge? Are you running Venezuela
right now?
Yeah. I mean, I keep peep people, you
know, fixating on that. Here's the bottom line
on it is we expect to see changes
in Venezuela. Changes of all kinds, long term,
short term. We'd love to see all kinds
of changes, but the most immediate changes are
the ones that are in the national interest
of The United States. That's why we're involved
here. But, mister secretary, I think there's a
lot of questions about who the point people
are
during this transition.
President Trump said we're going to run the
country.
So is it you? Is it secretary Hegseth?
Who are those people who will be running
the country specifically?
Well, it's a it's not running the it's
running policy. The policy You know, it's just
deflection after deflection every single time. I mean,
it I mean, Hegseth is clearly more of
a yes man, you know? Just so desperately
wants to please Trump. It's very obvious that
he just goes, you know, whatever Trump's amazing
choices will be, we'll follow him through, you
know, whatever. But Rubio, clearly, you know, we
know historically, they hate each other. That's been
very clear. So this is more of a
he's not much of a yes man, but
he's more he is a team player.
Right? So here he is just clearly avoiding
the obvious. Of course, it's important to you
guys said you're gonna run the entire country
and that's completely illegal. Then, yes, we wanna
know what you mean by that. And they
just keep acting like everyone's over focusing on
that small point. You know, it's we're just
gonna we're gonna show the control policy. You
mean oh, you mean policy? You mean the
country? You mean literally the choices of the
government? What a I mean, this is playing
on ignorance of the average people.
If you don't know that controlling policy is
controlling the country, then what are we doing
here?
See, with regards to this, we want Venezuela
to move in a certain direction because not
only do we think it's good for the
people of Venezuela, it's in our national interest.
Oh, it just just so happens to be
the same thing. Right? I mean, why don't
we ask Venezuelans? Do we think that selling
out to foreign oil companies is in the
interest of Venezuelans? Has that ever been the
case? He knows that's not true.
It either touches on something that's a threat
to our national security or touches on something
that's either beneficial or harmful. And are you
involved in that? Right. So you see, he
just he he said it's beneficial to Venezuelans,
but also important to national security, and then
went on to make very two very clear
points that are only about national security. It's
either good for us or it hurts that.
They don't care about Venezuelans. I mean, it's
it's actually embarrassing that anybody's actually out there
making that argument. That's why you've got all
these very, very, very ridiculous people on Twitter
sharing AI generated information, and Alex Jones and
everybody else is cheering on to say, because
they're team players.
And I look. You don't think they know
they know we're calling them out, guys, and
they do it anyway. Transitions are pressuring
involved in this.
Well, of core I mean, I think everyone
knows I'm pretty involved on politics in this
hemisphere. Obviously, a secretary of state and national
security adviser are very involved in all these
elements. The Department of War plays a very
important role here along with the Department of
Justice, for example, because Not in they've got
they're the ones that have to go to
court. So this is a team effort by
the entire national security apparatus. Right. Right. Don't
blame just me. We're all guilty. Status of
our country, but it is running this policy.
And the goal of the policy is to
see changes in Venezuela that are beneficial
to The United States first and foremost because
Right.
Exactly the point.
First and foremost, what's best for American interests
is what we're gonna put on the Venezuelan
people. Like, so first, from an American first
perspective, you might go, yeah. But that's actually
not what they're doing. It's not you. They're
doing it for them and their inner circle,
not Joe on the corner. Okay? On top
of that,
explain for me why, first and foremost, we
wanna make sure it's what's best for American
interest is Venezuelan democracy.
Like, these people are completely trapped. They've painted
themselves into a,
info I don't know what information corner. Like,
you can't like I've always said, guys, you
can't just lie about every single possible thing
and then expect us to not recognize that
you're contradicting a previous manipulation. Like, that is
ridiculous.
So over here, they're going, we're doing it
for democracy. And then but it's about only
American interest first. Then that's not about their
democracy. It's not about their you could maybe
argue that everything Americans want is exactly what's
going to interest Venezuelans, but it's not true.
Otherwise, there wouldn't be a discrepancy, guys. And
it's not only about Maduro's government. Look at
what Venezuelans are talking about. Why do you
think they're voting in different peep ideological governments,
and you can prove that despite the government
narratives? You know, it's just but it's important
to make these points despite how obvious I
may find them. That's who we work for,
but also, we believe beneficial for the people
of Venezuela. Yeah. Right. Right. Right. As a
secondary afterthought. But, you know, also maybe for
them too, but we don't care.
So here's an article from, New Republic. Trump
wants Stephen Miller to have a terrifying new
role in Venezuela,
which has essentially been the reality, but there
it's like I said, everything's fluctuating.
Very well could be get him out of
the way, everybody sees what a maniac he
is. We'll find out. But right now, just
like most everything going on in this administration,
even over the the dual position Marco Rubio,
Miller seems to have more power than anybody.
That's not even my opinion. That's a very
common take for within the political conversation right
now. And he's an appointed adviser,
apparently appointed by Israel, if you want my
honest opinion, as always.
So in this conversation oh, it's right here.
What's important are a few different things. And
it's it's about the
fact that he's in a position in every
possible way. But what he's ultimately doing, what
he's been around before, like in charge with,
you know, immigration and so on. But what
who benefits from all this? Donald Trump is
reportedly weighing whether to tap the notoriously anti
immigrant deputy chief of staff to oversee Venezuela
in the coming months, according to at least
one insider that spoke with the Washington Post.
Miller played a central role in The US
efforts to oust Venezuela's leader. That plan came
to a head late Friday when US military
forces successfully captured Maduro, calling him back to
Manhattan on narcoterrorism
charges, which are very unlikely to hold up
in any honest court.
The decision in turn could hand Miller outsized
influence
regarding the future of the country.
Miller might be tasked with the day to
day nitty gritty responsibilities of supervising the regime
change that we're supposed to pretend isn't happening
under the office of secretary of Marco state
Marco Rubio.
That sure doesn't make sense to me. And
on top of the fact that everything we
just listed off, which many of which invest
is in Israeli interest, would allow him to
dictate the outcome for those interests. So it
wouldn't be about American people, let alone Trump's
administration at the very least.
It says, Rubio, I wanna add this part
too, a long time Venezuela hawk would be
the more obvious choice to oversee the regime
change, but his schedule is unfortunately already backed
up. Really?
I mean, I did that just seems like
a ridiculous argument. Clearly, you could be like,
even if you're just overseeing it and he's
doing it, you'd be in charge. This seems
to be an excuse to be like, I'm
just so busy. I can't even be involved.
In the one thing he's always been fighting
to accomplish, I find that really hard to
believe. It's like it's like overthrowing Iran with
Bolton behind you and going Bolton's gonna take
a back seat on this. He's gonna be
over there. He's not involved because he's just
so busy. Bolton would burn everything down to
be able to watch that happen. Same thing
here. He is so obsessively focused on Cuba
and Venezuela his entire career. It makes me
laugh that they argue he's just too busy
to be involved. The Trump administration has tapped
Rubio to serve not only as secretary of
state, but also as national security adviser since
Trump's last pick, Mike Waltz,
accidentally,
oopsie, admitted journalists into a classified signal group
chat discussing an imminent bombing of Yemen. Oh,
is that all, guys? Even this independent platform
seriously? Or was it very clearly that he
was using an Israeli intelligence
archive app that was archiving their signal chat?
Then the story got pivoted into signal.
Oops. We thought we we got a journalist
in there. That almost feels like the obvious
effort to deflect from the fact that he
was using and and this is not a
Israel run. This is an Israeli intelligence archive
app The target righteous government. You can go
through and watch this for yourself. It's called
TeleMessage. And they were literally or rather, Walsh
was literally using that inside the inner circle
conversation.
As I titled it, State Department revealed to
be using Israel Intelligence Link chat app involved
in Trump admin hack. That's insane to me.
I mean, it's like it's the point what
I'm my making there about this is it's
we're talking about people who are in intelligence
versus people who are claiming to be post
intelligence. Even though linked is what I use
in the title, the point is there's a
difference between the people who are, like,
okay. For example, the Stardust Solutions point.
Actually, that's a bad one since they're they
they left their positions in nuclear, like,
nuclear scientist for Israel's nuclear division to do
this. But, But, actually, I take that back.
I think they might still be involved. The
point was the people that are claiming to
be, like, retired intelligence running a new company
versus those that have current connections to intelligence.
And there's plenty of those too. That's my
point here is you could prove that. Plenty
of them. So that means you have direct
connection to their inner circle conversation,
which Walz is one of the many who
is a clear Zionist. So it's
wild to me that nobody's honest about that
conversation, or at least not honestly reporting it,
maybe not even deliberately.
But it says Miller was deeply involved in
efforts to spark a new war on drugs,
fixated on Mexican cartels, you know, the ones
they're working with, and Mexico's alleged drug traffickers.
But when that fell through, Miller shifted his
gaze to Venezuela, leading the charge on a
classified directive in July that would lay the
groundwork for months of air strikes against small
watercraft in Caribbean in The Caribbean, inciting new
tensions between The US and its supposedly new
puppet state.
Okay.
So if you can walk this back and
see Miller's
posts, memos, whatever driving this, you know, maybe
we should ask whether this has been orchestrated
by something else.
Right? I mean, everything, even,
James Lee, from his perspective, called this a
Zionist op. And it's not that farfetched to
realize it with Singer and all the different
parts involved and Miller seemingly driving the bus.
I'll include this show. I really like when
you watch this again. I find this to
be insane how little attention this really gets.
And here are a couple of clips. We'll
end with a few of these just to
show you that they're not even hiding this.
As Saul Stanaforth points out, occasionally,
they spell it out for you. Here's Walt
himself
telling you why they're really doing this in
front of the United Nations.
And not continue to have the largest energy
reserves in the world
under the control of adversaries of The United
States.
Couldn't that could that couldn't be more clear.
We can't continue to allow resources that we
covet to be in control of anybody else.
That's called national security, in case you got
confused there for a second. National security is
now, I'm gonna take whatever I want because
freedom. Because might makes right. Listen to a
bunch of these cackling idiots out there today.
Apparently, that's that's democracy.
I mean, this is where you get into
the inversion of words and that, you know,
that we're not even we're speaking the same
language, but apparently not the meanings of the
same words.
That's that's just that's not supposed to be
what we talk about, guys. That's supposed to
be the that's the quiet part. This is
the quiet part out loud. You are openly
saying and this is what I'm talking about
with why would that be the case?
Who does that interest? It doesn't interest Americans
because we're angry about that, even Republicans. It
doesn't interest the American government because it makes
them look like belligerent criminals.
So ask yourself who benefits from that.
I don't think it's that secret.
Here Aaron report points out what Miller had
to say We watched this morning with A
and Wake Up, and this is just it's
it speaks for itself.
As as Steve pointed out this morning, even,
Tapper is sort of just like going like
like getting tired of having to go you
know, because Miller just goes off on this
rant about poor superpower. We could do what
we want. And it just it's I mean,
they've never been this
they've never signaled it this clear.
Even though this has always been the case,
you know, regime change, fruit companies, and so
on. We know the stories. Right?
It they always pretended this was about something
more than just we're in control and we're
powerful. So now we will as Trump even
recently said, we'll no longer allow our reputation
to be undermined or whatever he said about
the global, you know, there this is a
dictatorial.
This is an authoritarian
stance. Don't forget, remember he said the plenary
authority, which is like a from straight from
a Nazi dialogue and it got cut real
quick and he just went silent for like
thirty seconds and he was like, Hello, you
still there? Very weird. And then CNN cut
that part out.
Because they're not fighting each other, guys.
Was this the one? Hold on. Where was
that? Oh, here it is. It was very
quick to say,
that the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize,
opposition opposition leader Machado in Venezuela
doesn't have the support in Venezuela,
to become the next,
president or the interim
leader. And I I I wonder where he
got that from given that her, basically, her
cutout, Gonzales,
won the election last year
over or two years ago to overwhelmingly
Today? 70% of the vote or something like
that. Why does the president think that Machado,
should not be the next leader? Why does
he think she's weak? Oopsie. Right? And so
this is this is humorous in its own
right because that look at what just happened
right there. Right? That's not supposed to be
what that he broke the narrative. And and
what if whatever reason, which tells me there's
another factor, not just typical US interests, right,
about selling us as they always do on
whoever puppet they want in place, there's something
else involved.
So Trump comes out and goes, not her.
We want the other. We want that. We
this is what we're gonna lean into, and
so there's just a different play happening. Now,
look. I I can be objective and stand
back and go, who knows? Maybe Trump is
out there double crossing the deep state. I
just highly doubt that for a thousand reasons
you could logically make, but who knows? You
know? Maybe you decided to suddenly go, I'm
gonna lean in with the person who's gonna
fight for Venezuelans.
Certainly possible. I mean, we we should consider
things like this, but there's a ton of
evidence that shows you what's really going on.
We went through it all today. But I
just think it's interesting. I'm gonna listen again,
and I'm gonna keep I'm gonna pull back
a little bit and play this through. Word
in Venezuela,
to become the next,
president. And the point last week was simply
to remember that that means
Trump admitted to you that they were lying
to you.
They Gonzales. Or at the very least, now
he's lying to you and hiding the fact
that they were actually winning. Either way, there's
dishonesty here. I think it's because they clearly
wanted you to believe that she was actually
the one that won, or rather he was,
and they were gonna take power,
so they like you about that. And now
it's very clear, and it always was if
you cared to look, that nobody actually supports
them. Just like nobody actually supports the Shah.
Not really. They don't have popular support, but
they push it anyway because that's their agenda.
And for whatever reason, you can decide, Trump
decided to change that on a on a
dime, and I think that's what he tended
to do. And even, you know, Jake Dapper's
going like, that doesn't make any sense. Here's
how Miller responds.
Interim leader. And I I I wonder where
he got that from given that her, basically,
her cutout, Gonzales,
won the election last year,
over or two years ago to overwhelmingly
70% of the vote or something like that.
Why does the president think that Machado,
should not be the next leader? Why does
he think she's weak?
First of all, all all of Venezuela experts
agree. All Venezuela experts agree that it would
be absurd and preposterous
for us to suddenly
fly her into the country and to put
her in charge? Or the the and the
military would follow her and the security forces
would follow her? This isn't this is not
a serious it's not even a serious question.
So should there be an election?
The let me
if if you give me the floor for
thirty seconds. Right. So so it doesn't make
any sense to bring in the person we've
been continually telling you is actually in charge.
Right?
Why not? Like, because the idea then is
that, well, nobody's gonna support her. Well, then
what are we talking about? Alright. So if
you're gonna make the argument that the military
forces
are still in power inside with Maduro,
then why did he get taken from them
while they were there? You You know, it's
like there there's just there's nothing. This is
them trying to cultivate a narrative out of
thin air.
Let me tell you what we are doing
here, Jake.
The United States this is this is sort
of foundational. The United States is using its
military
to secure our interests unapologetically
in our hemisphere. Right. See, that's clear. That's
the Monroe Doctrine. But he's, I guess, just
proudly stating that even though that is not
legally
you you so using your military to force
your interest on a foreign power is called
a crime,
Period. Doesn't matter. It happens a lot because
governments pretend it makes a it's okay because
they're bad guy, but it's a crime. There's
no legal reality there. So he's just standing
there going, this going forward is going to
be the truth. We can do what we
want because we're strong. Deal with it. It's
what we've been trying to tell you. Rampant
lawlessness.
We're a superpower, and under president Trump, we
are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower.
Yeah. See, that's just hubris, guys. That's I'm
powerful. Shut up. That's his response. It is
absurd
that we would allow a nation in our
own backyard
to become the supplier of resources to our
adversaries, but not to us. Okay. So let's
be clear. Resources, meaning oil.
Right? He's not talking not even talking about
the criminal activity that they claim is happening
that's probably not. He's talking about resources. So
what he just said was we're not gonna
allow
a foreign country to decide who they deal
with. If they don't deal with us, we're
gonna take it from them because it's our
national interest. I mean, in what world is
this? He's not even hiding that. I'm telling
you guys, this is a shift on purpose
to get Americans to support belligerence, to support
and you know what? Maybe they continue to
be in control. It doesn't change the fact
that we are now a pirate ship. It's
what then we always really have been if
you understand the way our governments operate. I
shouldn't say always, but for a long time,
my entire existence, that's how they've conducted themselves.
This person is not on your side.
To hoard weapons from our adversaries, to be
able to be positioned as an asset against
The United States. Yeah. You mean like you
do all around the world for every one
of your allies. That's what allies do. You
guys are making agreements. You're you're selling weapons
to everybody, including the worst people of the
world. In fact, you're arming and supporting most
of the worst groups you claim you're fighting.
But regardless, the idea that you're just you're
not allowed to help and work with other
people that we don't like. Yeah. They really
are, man. Are you in kindergarten? Like, I
don't understand the where's the logic of the
argument?
Rather than on behalf of The United States
Sovereign country should have And under
that we would allow a nation in our
own backyard
to become the supplier Monroe. Of resources to
our adversaries, but not to us. To hoard
weapons from our adversaries. To be able to
be positioned as an asset against The United
States rather than on behalf of The United
States. Sovereign countries should be able to do
what they want to do. Yeah. Right. Now
I I said this this morning. I hate
that we have to agree with Jake Tapper,
and it doesn't matter whether Chuck Tapper or
anybody else said it. That's and see, the
question is why don't they make these points
all the time? Whatever reason right now he's
making this point, I think it's because Miller
is being bombastically obvious about it. Does sovereign
countries don't get to make their own choices?
Yes. Wow. Finally. Welcome to the show conversation.
Like, where where have they you could have
said that about Syria, about Iraq, about Afghanistan,
but they don't. Mind you, they're doing it
now for some reason.
Make sure you recognize that. I don't think
Tapper or the rest really you know, at
the end of the day, you could make
that point about any number of countries that
they're manipulating. But what's important is that he
made it now and it is correct regardless
of Jake Tapper.
Why would they have the decision on what
they do? Okay. By the same logic,
which by the way, I'm it's actually a
good Germany trying to make deals with Russia
and Trump tried to stop them from doing
so. Or the the Nord Stream pipeline. We
know how that worked out. They we just
don't we just pretend like we don't know
that our own government bombed that. Right? I
mean, it's just wild. So what they're trying
to show you is that we like, what
I was trying to make them is a
bad example since they did push back. Is
that would it make sense for The UK
to simply say that US government, you can't
go deal with the government we don't like.
You have to only deal with us. Oh,
you what would Trump say?
Really? Like, you may be the the ins
the insanity is to pretend all it is
is a hierarchy. It's a caste system. Like,
they're a lower grade person. We don't have
to live they don't have the power to
tell us what to do. So we're that
is might makes right, guys. That is the
opposite of what even they pretend they're actually
doing, at least to the most part.
The Monroe doctrine and the Trump doctrine
is all about securing the national interest of
America. For for years, we sent our And
and what happened? Did Syria and Iraq make
you safer? Did Afghanistan make you safer? Did
Libya make you safer? Did Bolivia make you
safer? No. Every one of those actions hurt
American interests and made your life more difficult
because they don't care about you. They never
have. Soldiers to die in deserts in the
Middle East to try to build them parliaments
But, Steven. To try to build them democracies.
How is that different than what you're doing
in Venezuela? I mean, this guy's a clown.
You're talking about a regime change effort and
then going in to rebuild. That's exactly what
Trump's talking about in Venezuela.
He's just you know? And he probably knows
that. He just this is just what he
does. To try to give them more oil,
to try to give them more resources.
The future of the free world, Jake, depends
on America being able to assert
ourselves and our interests without apology. This this
whole period. A future of the free world
depends on whether the US government could do
whatever it wants. Look at our history.
Look at the last two administrations, and let's
pretend like that makes sense to anybody.
Because clearly, they're always in the right. They're
always this I mean, does anybody in the
world even still go around pretending like the
US government just spreads democracy and freedom? I
mean, this is this is not the Barney
show. Okay? We're not in some kindergarten class.
That's,
like, the dumbest thing in the room, guys.
But this is I mean, either him desperately
holding on to that narrative or him knowing
that it makes us look stupid.
That happened after World War two where the
West began apologizing
and groveling and begging I I don't even
know. Engaging these massive talking about right now.
It's a without talking about, Jake, is the
idea and by the way, you do I
know you love doing that smarmy thing, Jake,
and I was hoping to hear that at
this time. I'm just I'm I asked you
about if there should be an election. Exactly.
Right. Right. Right. This is so funny. Of
course, pivot to attack. Democrats are so stupid.
Right? He asked you a very point I
I think Tate Tapper is ridiculous like all
of them. He asked you a question and
as usual, like he'd probably do in reverse,
you just tap danced around and made some
sprawling argument about how everything The US wants
is freedom. No matter what it is, it's
about freedom.
That's ridiculous. That's a clown. Like, that's something
that's worthy of ridicule
because nobody believes that.
I asked you if there would be an
election in Venezuela. That's what I asked. I
said, why was the president so quick to
dismiss Machado? You answered that question. The objective.
And then I said The objective, Jake, is
security and stability. Jason Kelly (zero twenty three:forty
three): Because what he did right there was
try to brush over the top because
when he explained the question he asked and
then Mueller was like, Wait, yeah, I did
ramble for thirty minutes about nothing that was
related to that. So, we just roll over
to the question, we answer it now.
It is always entertaining to me to watch
these people. It's just because it's ridiculous.
But I think I think it's a very
clear level. Most people are, you know, it's
like watching an old SNL skit half the
time.
Election. Exactly. I asked you if there would
be an election in Venezuela. That's what I
asked. I said, why was the president so
quick to dismiss Machado? You answered that question.
Objective. And then I said The objective, Jake,
is security and stability for the people of
Venezuela.
With our help and leadership,
that country will become more prosperous than it
has ever been in this whole history. Then
So his answer is to admit that she
has no influence. Oops. Because you there's no
other way to take that. Right? If if
what they did by not putting in there
was about the interest and and security and
and stability, that your answer is then she
doesn't have any of those things.
That's not what he's supposed to say. You
understand? Venezuela But the woman running Venezuela right
now is part of the majority regime. Off?
Yep. There will be there will be conversations,
Jake, about all of these guy posts along
the way. The reason why I was
Just ignore the details. Yeah. Just stop caring
about the facts. Let's get on the broad
picture that we're gonna save America freedom. We're
gonna save you, and it's gonna be great.
And then winning hashtag. Like, that's it's like
I keep saying. All flash, no substance.
Where is it? I mean, this it's it's
in Miller's almost I almost get the sense
he's, like, really not enjoying this all of
a sudden because I I get the sense
he loves doing this. But right now, he's
losing this back and forth. And I just
find it to be entertaining, but also important
to see how clear this is.
Oh, you do. I know you love doing
that smarmy thing, Jake, and I was hoping
it'd be better than that this time. I'm
just I'm I asked you about if there
should be an election. Exactly
I asked you if there would be an
election in Venezuela. That's what I asked. I
said, why was the president so quick to
dismiss Machado? You answered that question. Objective. And
then I said The objective, Jake, is security
and stability for the people of Venezuela. With
our help and leadership, that country will become
more prosperous than it has ever been in
its whole history. Venezuela But the woman running
Venezuela right now is part of the Maduro
regime. Better off. There will be there will
be conversations, Jake, about all of these guy
posts along the way. The reason why I
was giving you that speech, which I know
you didn't wanna hear, is because you're approaching
this from the wrong frame. This neoliberal frame,
The United States job is to go around
the world and go and and demanding immediate
elections be held everywhere immediately. Are you kidding
me?
I mean, you mean, like, exactly what Trump's
been doing his entire career as president? It's
like neoliberal no. It's it's the government. It's
what you guys do everywhere. Did you not
demand that from Syria? You know? Like, this
guy is such a joke. Like, I don't
even think he thinks these I think his
reaction but, you know, I take it back
immediately. Like, the point is, as always, I
believe this person is playing a role that's
designed to make us look like we're ridiculous.
I really do. Like, it I don't know
how else to take this every time he
plays these things out. Immediately, all the time
right away. Japan's vacuums. That's not what I
think, but you invaded the country. We took
the leader went into the country and we
seized the leader of Venezuela.
Damn straight we did. And I'm saying,
so is The US going to cloud new
elections. That we're not gonna let.
But you invaded the country. We took went
into the country and we seized the leader
of Venezuela.
Damn straight we did.
I mean, guys, this what do you we
this I mean, I don't even I don't
know. I just
it's like I don't feel like I need
to belabor the point with this, but, you
know,
it's such a transparent thing.
Why is it legal to do that in
any sense? You're damn right we did. Like,
it's just the brazen standing behind, you know,
the I don't know. It's not I just
think it's wild. I mean, it speaks for
itself, and it shows you that they're not
only doing the wrong thing, but they're proud
to do the wrong thing because they're powerful,
because that's how they look at themselves. Like,
that's the kind of narcissistic, hubris ridden maniacs
these guys are all like.
And I'm saying We're not gonna let the
So is The US gonna have new elections?
Is that we're not gonna let
Tim Pot communist dictators
send rapists into our country, send drugs into
our country. Okay. Now we're back right around
to the same old rig I mean, even
if every one of those things are true,
it doesn't even remotely address the question that's
being asked. It's the the pivot back into
the broad there, you know, it's just it's
like saying, you know, they hate us because
of our freedom. It's the same old broad
just that's what it's like. It doesn't mean
much. It's rooted in mostly dishonesty, but there
are some levels of truth to that, but
it doesn't address the point. Fine. Oh, that's
fine. That's all happening. What is gonna happen
with Delsey or with the election, or why
would she versus him? The whole point is
he's trying to make that Miller's screening away
from,
how does it make sense to put the
person that's VP to the terrorist you said
was running the country in power when you're
telling us that she's still influenced by you
know, it it doesn't add up to anybody
honest other than they'll do whatever they can,
wherever they will, wherever they will, wherever they
can in order to meet their interests,
which have nothing to do with American interests.
They have nothing to do with making money
for Americans that have to do with power
and control and exploitation
all the time. And that's what they're doing
right now. As we speak, they're exploiting this
country, and Miller's out there tap dancing to
get you to just to look anywhere else.
Send weapons into our country Okay. And we're
not gonna let a country fall into the
hands of our adversaries. The future of Venezuela
working Now we're back to that. Right? Because
if they didn't, China was. No. That's not
what it wasn't. China was making agreements. And
as usual, you prove to the world that
you are the belligerent by rushing in and
seizing it before they can make an agreement
that they were gonna meet together.
America
is going to be so bright and so
to our country. Okay. And we're not gonna
let a country fall into the hands of
our adversaries.
The future of Venezuela working with America
is going to be so bright and so
incredible True that point. And so positive, and
we'll have a conversation about everything that you
raised. But the priority right now is the
president has been made clear is a judicious,
thoughtful, careful transition
You know, and by do by judicious, he
means seizing by force and no process at
all.
That's how dumb they think you are if
you're watching. Process to secure a great future
for Venezuela
and to secure a great future for America.
Alright. Let's just take a moment and just
acknowledge, Jake, that we can't Yeah. Under president
Trump's leadership this last week is one of
the greatest foreign policy and military victories this
country has ever had. You know? Steven Miller,
thank you so much. Appreciate your time.
A lot.
I mean, I I look. I I have
a very low opinion of Jake Tapper and
all of them. But what's funny to me
is
is Miller next to any of them, despite
all of them being clowns, is
so much more ridiculous that it just that
he's literally laughing at him. Not because it's
the Democrat who hates the Republican, but because
what he said was cartoonish.
And even to Jake Tapper, it just it
just goes beyond the pale, guys. And if
you really take a step back and realize
what he's doing, it is just it's like
them posting a Top Gun meme and going,
We're winning. It's meaningless. It has no actual
value for the reality of the situation. It's
just yelling platitudes over the top of what
they're doing in hopes that you just go
rah rah rah America and go back to
sleep.
Sad, really.
Stephen Miller.
The US is running Venezuela by definition, is
what it says. And it says, what the
president said is true. The United States Of
America is running Venezuela by definition. That's true,
he said. And it's not that same interview.
And he goes on to say, we live
in a world in which you can talk
about international niceties,
That's what he said. And everything else,
I guess meaning the law.
But we live in a world, in the
real world, that is governed by strength.
He's not even hiding this. That is governed
by force. That is governed by power.
I mean, guys, this is identical to historical
authoritarians, authoritarians.
Hitler being one of them. And it says
these are the iron laws of the world
since the beginning of time. So the laws,
according to these people, are power. We take
what we want and anybody else has to
follow.
And each and the international
niceties?
I mean, this is just so be I
I'm not I've always had my very clear
criticisms of, you know, international I mean, inter
anything. The UN, anything.
But the
idea of, let's say, international human rights, the
idea of,
the right to free free the freedom of
movement. Like, these are things that are roundly
upheld. What he's saying is there is no
international law. The same thing that Israel pushes
every
single time it gets a chance. You think
that's a coincidence? That they have the right
to legislate anywhere in the world? That they
have the they don't have to they can
steal land anywhere in the world? That's what
they say openly.
I brought this up. I mean, here, I'll
bring it up again in case you wanna
check out the article. And this comes directly
from
an actual,
legislative document from
the Knesset.
Right here. Feel free to check-in. If you
actually care, and I'll just go, that can't
be real.
Look. You'll find that it's real.
And it's very clear. They They simply go,
although we can legislate any place in the
world that would let within we can
violate the sovereignty of foreign countries,
all that we were not allowed to take
the West Bank. That's what their argument is.
And that's many of them in the Knesset.
Just wild. So Stephen Miller is just basically
disregarding the idea of international law. While, by
the way, they force that notion down the
throats of people they don't like. Even though
they're lying about it half the time. You
know, international law for Syria, international law for
Iran. You revoke the agreements and the JCPOA.
They're ridiculous and don't hold anything sacred, but
yet they'll pretend
that everybody else has to adhere.
Or the ICC, for example, Bolton and all
the rest. You can't come after us, Lindsey
Graham says, because we're not, you know, whatever
their narrative is, even though in every way
they are accountable
or should be.
So Elon Musk,
here here is what Rubio just said, and
it's the same kind of idea.
For for you're you're wrong in your question.
Number one, Venezuela is a major source, and
the reason why is the following. And I've
seen a lot of this reporting, and it's
fake reporting, and I'll tell you why. It
says that somehow Venezuela is not involved in
the drug trade because the UN says they're
not involved in the udrano. Oh, not though.
I mean, not really. There's some drug trafficking
that comes through the country,
like a lot of countries.
But the idea, as always, of what they're
claiming is not backed up by the facts.
And as what he's dismissing right there are
UN reports that make that case using facts.
But that's typical for belligerent dying empires. Because
the UN says they're not involved in the
I don't the UN I don't care what
the UN says. The UN doesn't know what
they're talking about. Right. Okay. So screw them.
Right? But, yeah, I I I agree that
the UN is manipulative or has been manipulated.
There's plenty of points to be made. Doesn't
change the fact that that's attacking the source
instead of looking at the facts. What's the
facts, whether they come from the UN or
the t or the last American vagabond, will
show you very clearly that he's lying. There's
been tons of coverage on this. That's why
they pivoted from fentanyl because they realized how
embarrassing it was that they were caught lying
about that.
His point,
screw the UN. We don't care what they
have to say,
is international law. And that's not to say
that everything in the UN is not my
point, guys. What he's doing is disregarding the
only semblance of international dynamic that's there while
they stand there and use it against everybody
else.
It's embarrassing.
But guess what Elon Musk writes? Based.
Ridiculous with its own right. That's what he
does. Okay. Well, simultaneously, or rather alternatively, 2024,
here's Elon Musk.
Due to demands by justice,
Alexander in Brazil that would require us to
break in secret
Brazilian, Argentinian, American, and international
law. Twitter has no choice but to close
our operations.
Wow. Okay. So back then, he was pretending
that international law was so important that he
was just gonna shut down operations in certain
countries because he wouldn't violate it. But over
here, he goes, cool. You're so based because
you don't care about those things. They're all
ridiculous like that. They don't care about anything,
guys. These people are all about themselves.
They will point to international law when they
wanna claim Iran's violating it. They'll point to
international law when they wanna use it to
coerce things into action. But they'll always stand
back and go, screw them. They don't know.
International law means nothing when we want things
that we want.
They're all the same.
And on that note,
we we'll get into another discussion
exactly why they're attacking that in a lot
of things
across the board because they are literally trying
to redesign our society.
It's not even secret. This tie I I
titled this show Trump and the Zionist School
Bus Technocrats Are Building Your New Society Whether
You Like It or Not. It is quite
literally the network state coup,
which they call, many of them, tech Zionism.
It's not a joke.
This discussion, we go over the funding capital
the the funding arm for Nomos Capital. Andreessen,
Teal. Right? And the point that we're gonna
get in today, which I will go over
deeper, I made recently. I I reached out
to Jenny Cohen. She does a great job
on this.
Mark Lutter, who, by the way, has an
a a very clear interest in Venezuela for
charter cities as is outlined in this conversation.
And as she points out, whose nonprofit
made a lot of money from Teal backed
Emergent Ventures in 2018, or more specifically, as
it's right here,
launched with $1,000,000 grant from Teal Foundation Emergent
Ventures, which overlaps with Mark Lutter, who is
the founder of, specifically,
was it called, Charter Cities something. It's another
company. They're all it's it's my point I'm
trying to make quickly is that they're all
financially intertwined,
stemming back to the a very few people.
That's the it's the Tealverse, the the Andreessen,
all these different people who are funding this.
He's one, Mark Lutter, of the ones behind
one of these elements, one of these driving
forces to push in charter cities in a
lot of places, Venezuela being one of them.
And you can outline that very clearly in
these discussions. And on top of that,
here is Emergent Ventures simply pointing out
grant to Mark Lutter. That's where this start
this overlap comes from.
And Mark Lutter responds. So, her original post
simply said, Mark Lutter, whose nonprofit received money
from Teal, said, We're putting out a white
paper looking at Venezuela,
assuming this transfer of power does go through.
Interesting. Seems like they saw something coming. And
he says, me next time. Venezuela would benefit
from charter cities.
Interesting. And she responds going, hey, Mark. Isn't
the devil in the details, including the belief
that goals of those who will control
or exert influence over these proposed new cities.
Or, you know, basically, who will? In the
name of the transparency, will you let us
will you tell us who be who's behind
the Teal backed Emergent Ventures and has invested
in in the Frontier Foundation? Will you tell
us beyond Thiel and Andreessen and Fisher, who
we can prove are involved, has invested in
Pernomol's Capital or his venture as well? A
significant concern for me and others is that
your colleagues have expressed a desire to build
their own countries, a desire for,
deblumification,
a desire for abolished public education. Now my
civil point is just about the first discussion,
about reimagining our societies very much in line
with exactly what the great seat reset was
about.
So he responds to that too
And says, hi. I can only speak for
the char that's what it is, Charter Cities
Institute. That's what he that's what he runs.
Our nine ninety is publicly available. Our goal
is economic development, which we are very public
about, including publishing papers, hosting events, and podcasts.
I don't think we published a paper in
Venezuela. I mean, she goes to the article.
You can prove it. She goes, hi, Mark.
As you know, nine nineties don't list donors.
And as I'm sure you can appreciate your
lack of transparency, are you the Charter Cities
Institute and Frontier Foundation's donors, does little to
engender trust, nor for many of us do
the known links between your affiliated organizations and
the likes of Peter Thiel and Thiel Associates
like Joe Lonsdale, a proponent of public hangings,
whose so whose school gave a,
convocation at address titled a defense in of
inequality.
I hope you will request and make all
of your donors public. Now again,
doing your best to be an adult about
it and not overfocus on the certain partisan
points and just recognize the larger discussion, I
find it interesting how clearly this person is
obviously fighting for this agenda which you you
don't argue nefarious maybe it's not but the
fact that it is clearly there's an overlap
to Venezuela and the discussion was being had
and that overlaps with the inner circle of
Trump. You know that's relevant. It may just
be a coincidence. That is possible, but it's
relevant.
Seven seas points out, the government just took
$1,000,000,000
of your tax dollars and gave it to
three nuclear energy companies so they can be
used to power AI data centers. One of
them backed by Peter Thiel.
It cut this is a rapid thing that's
happening, and it is constantly growing while we're
looking elsewhere.
It's important to understand this. But she also
points out what did Venezuela, Greenland, Honduras, Nigeria,
and Freedom Cities have in common? The network
state cabal, which includes Peter Thiel, Andreessen, Joe
Lonsdale, has been circling them like vultures.
Well, before we got to all of those
things being focal points. Isn't that interesting?
You can look and I've done it myself.
Go back and look at all the discussions.
Weird how suddenly, then well, Venezuela's been focused
for a while. But Greenland, Honduras, Nigeria,
all simultaneously
being Trump's focuses when they all just so
happen to be focuses of freedom cities.
Yes. Now her little thread in here you
could break down, and I'll include that.
But here
are the parts we see we need to
remember.
Start up linked to Peter Thiel wants to
build the next great city in Greenland.
I made this point. This is February 6,
but this goes back a while.
This this is a driving factor to why
he's now saying this. Here's Trump. Or rather,
here's Miller. So in the same interview, can
you rule out The US going to take
Greenland by force? Miller says Greenland should be
part of The US. By what right does
Denmark assert control?
God, this guy is a monster. Like, he's
literally,
like, summoning the worst authoritarians in history.
I think it's on purpose. But here's Trump,
yet again, saying we're gonna take Greenland. We
want Greenland.
Need Greenland for national security.
Not for minerals. We had some we have
so many sites for minerals and oil and
everything. We have more oil than any other
country in the world. We need Greenland for
national security.
And if you take a look at Greenland,
you look up and down the coast, you
have Russian and Chinese ships all over the
coast. You know, they're doing it, bad guys.
You know, we need it for our interests.
Okay. So by that logic, they can just
go, we need Europe for our interests.
No different. It's the same exact thing.
I mean, why would it be different? Now
it's way more crazy, but it's all it's
about the logical
consistency about the law. Well, according to them,
there is no law. It's the fact that
we're powerful. So get out of the way,
Which, honestly, plenty of very belligerent people absolutely
love. And far too many of them, in
my experience, but not the majority.
But they're straight up telling you guys, we're
taking it. Right? Here's an example. Trump's Greenland
obsession may be about extracting metals for tech
billionaires.
Kind of the same conversation, guys. AI, the
same overlap.
Here.
Grant Glenn says Trump stands on his plane
threatening more regime change operations, including ones of
the neocons' decade long crown jewel, Cuba, while
Lindsey Graham stands next to him twitching in
glee and ecstasy
is a perfect illustration of MAGA foreign policy.
Sad. I wanna make sure I missed something
here.
Gosh. I think there was one other thing
I was gonna show you there.
What was that? Oh, you know what? It
was something about Joe Lonsdale. Where was that?
Hope I didn't actually close that.
Interesting.
Well, I'm gonna get into this, like I
said, that was just me breezing through it.
I you know, I'm gonna this topic, I
find very interesting for a lot of reasons,
but I don't see that.
Let me check one more spot real quick.
Because there was a it was included in
what she was talking about.
It was interesting.
Oh, well, I don't see it in there.
But the the point was that Joe Lonsdale
was involved with the same conversation. I feel
like I must have closed it by accident
because I know that was relevant. It was
about him being involved with the conversation around
Venezuela,
around a lot of different stuff.
And it's it's really the same conversation because
he's involved with this same kind of, you
know, the the charter city network state discussion.
Dang, where was that? I guess I must
have closed that. I do do that from
time to time when I'm opening, I just
accidentally bumped something.
But
back to the point.
To rapidly finish here, you know, we're talking
about taking green line for this, taking Mexico
for that.
But the peace president though, you know, Lindsey
Graham's all just ex
gleeful about it. Well, the cradle says following
talks in Paris,
Syria's new government, you know, the literal Hayat
al Sham Al Qaeda ISIS government. It's not
a joke. Literally what they are. Well, technically,
an extension of them through Hayat al Sham,
but it's it's the US government the one
telling you that moments ago. So it's silly
to pretend like it's not true.
Syria's new government and Israel,
nothing weird about that, will establish a US
supervised joint group
to share intelligence, pursue so called military de
escalation on the ground. The ones you know,
the military, the escalations they're creating, and coordinate
diplomatically according to a joint statement.
I mean, doesn't just think about how dumb
like, think about this. On the face, you're
talking about a Muslim government, rather, an ISIS
Al Qaeda terrorist led government that's
putting forward Muslim interest, and I think there's
plenty of that support are in their group.
But don't forget what Mohammed bin Salman from
Saudi Arabia told us before.
That the people that they've manipulated at the
fronts of these groups, ISIS al Qaeda, most
of them don't actually believe the ideology or
some of the leaders anyway. And it's about
manipulating people under them to buy into it.
So in this case, think about the idea
of Israel, of all groups collaborating with what
is essentially a terrorist Muslim country. Even if
what we understand to be is a manipulation
of that through what their policy is, not
that Muslims are out there, you know, that
it's all extreme Muslim terrorism, which does exist
like any of it does. But realize how
stupid that is.
It's like it's like not realizing that having
them work with Saudi Arabia, the rest of
it doesn't make any sense when what their
ideology shows you is the opposite.
It's just it's just wild. Because at the
end of the day, if they're fighting ISIS
and Al Qaeda, then this doesn't make any
sense. But the mainstream conversation and the new
media seems they just are happy and content
to pretend like this doesn't matter.
Very clear. But so regime change, manipulation, occupation,
everywhere you look.
Hey. Look. Elliot
Abrams
asked about the future of USAID to Israel.
Elliot Abrams laments there's new opposition against Israel
in both parties.
Yeah, guys, because the whole country,
every American largely sees what's going on, and
they're just unhappy about that. They'd love to
make it about hatred, but it's a rather
bigotry antisemitism.
It's not. It's just not. Some of it,
sure. Same time, I'll be showing you an
example of why it's not. Here is the
Israeli government and the military.
This is from January 3.
Despite the ceasefire, Israeli soldiers marked the new
year
by randomly firing at civilian homes in Gaza
and proudly sharing the footage of social media
like they do every day. But let's go
on pretending like we don't know exactly what's
going on in the country.
That's not a joke, guys. They're just proudly
posting that they were just opening fire on
a bunch of tents in the middle of
the night. Probably killed plenty of people we
never hear about.
That's why they hate Israel, guys. That's why.
Reza Pahlavi,
the Shah's son. Right? The crown prince of
democracy,
as Robert jokingly pointed out.
This is Reza Pahlavi saying, my op ed
in the Washington Post, which the Washington Post
gave him a platform to lie to the
world and says, setting out my plan to
bring an end to the criminal regime in
Iran, our roadmap to a prosperous and democratic
future. Yo, the guy who has no popular
support, that is just like in Venezuela, they
don't support him. But who cares, though? Because
it's not about anything other than Israel, US
interest, as Miller would tell you. We're powerful.
We're gonna take it.
Lastly,
here's it. Here's Reza Pahlavi. This is the
Shah's son. He's saying, I'm sharing my first
call with you today. This is today.
And invite you, he's speaking to Iranians, to
start chanting slogans this Thursday and Friday, eighteenth
and nineteenth, simultaneously at 8PM. All of you,
whether in the streets or even from your
own homes, based on the feedback in this
action, I will announce the next calls to
you. This guy's literally leading
an o an obvious regime change effort through
social media that is being puppeteered by the
US government and Israel very clearly. He doesn't
even hide those connections.
Nobody in regard to public support are backing
this guy, but now they're signaling to groups
that are gonna carry an action, which they'll
use to justify
regime change.
This is where it's going. It happens every
time, guys.
And I'll leave you with the article from
Robert that very, very well outlines the reality
of the lack of support this man shares.
It's constant, guys. Absolutely constant.
But we'll leave it there for today.
I think we'll end with a clip that's
always good to play
about Iran.
We'll leave it there for today, guys. I
mean, you know,
it is it's just it's hard to continue
to engage with this seriously when it's just
so, you know,
illegitimate.
I mean, it just in every possible way.
And my point is always, it's not just
that I disagree,
I do well plenty,
but then it's objectively false. You can prove
the opposite
in so many ways. And and then we
just it's like it's like the Israel Gaza
conversation. You know? You can go back to
the very first week and prove right then
that they were lying about a ton of
stuff. But it took a lot of people
a year of genocide to truly realize what
was going on. But it's there, guys. It's
been there the whole time. If you watch
the platform, if you agree with the content,
support what we're doing.
We can't do it without you. And it
seems to be a pretty short a pretty
large shortage right now of people out there
who care about being objective and nonpartisan and
actually discussing the facts. So thank you as
always for being here. I can't do without
you. Despite all the attacks, despite all the
suppression, all the technical glitches, everything else going
on, I'd I wouldn't rather be doing anything
else. And I and I I can only
do this because of you. I think about
that every day.
I love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
I frankly think that crisis initiation is really
tough,
and it's very hard for me to see
how The United States,
president can get us to war with Iran.
Which leads me to conclude that if, in
fact compromise is not comping,
that the traditional way of America gets to
war is what would be best for US
interests.
Some people might think that mister Roosevelt wanted
to get us into World War two as
David mentioned, you may recall we had to
wait for Pearl Harbor.
Some people might think mister Wilson wanted to
get us into World War one, you may
recall he had to wait for the Lusitania
episode.
Some people might think that mister Johnson wanted
to send troops to Vietnam, you may recall
we had to wait for The Gulf Of
Tonkin episode.
We didn't go to war with Spain until
the USS,
until the Maine exploded.
And may I point out that mister Lincoln
did not feel he could call out the
Federal Army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which
is why he ordered the commander at Fort
Sumter to do exactly that thing, which the
South Carolinians had said would cause
an attack.
So, if in fact the Iranians aren't gonna
compromise,
it would be best if somebody else started
the war.
But I would just like to suggest that,
one can combine other means of pressure with
sanctions.
I mentioned that explosion,
on August 17.
We could step up the pressure.
I mean, look people, Iranian submarines periodically go
down. Someday one of them might not come
up. Who would know why?
We can do a variety of things if
we wish to increase the pressure. I'm not
advocating that, but I'm just suggesting that,
it it it it's this this is not
a a either or proposition of, you know,
it's just sanctions has to has to succeed
or other things.
We are in the game
of using covert means against the Iranians.
We we could get nastier of that.