Hammer of justice is coming for Epstein's friends.
Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? I
don't believe anything the government tells me. Question
everything. The government said it. Why would they
lie? What are you brainwashed or something? We're
getting justice for COVID tyranny. Trump is partnering
with Pfizer, five d chess. I'm voting for
the peace president. Bombing The Middle East and
Africa, blowing up votes and regime change in
Venezuela? This is what I voted for. The
deep state and technocrats are running scared. Palantir,
OpenAI, and other big tech firms are only
getting hundreds of millions worth of government contracts
because they love me and America and wanna
protect us. The Democrats want socialism. The US
government is taking stakes in private companies. We
may get stimulus checks, farmer bailouts, daddy's home.
Hate speech is still free speech. Woah, hate
speech against people I like is not free
speech. The Democrats are gonna destroy this country
with reckless spending and debt. If you don't
support reckless spending and debt, you're a Democrat.
The Democrats are waging war on the Constitution.
Are you still talking about the Constitution? My
liberty is obviously more important than your safety.
Papers, please. Of
Constitution? My liberty is obviously more important than
your safety. Papers, please. Of course my safety
is more important than your liberty. If your
principles change based on who's in power and
what they do, you're not living in principle
or freedom. You're living in a cult. One
popular cult talking point is Kamala would have
been worse. And yet if Kamala had one,
many maggots would be up in arms about
many of the same violations they're excusing from
Trump. That said, many Trump voters have since
withdrawn their support in light of all the
broken promises, flagrant hypocrisy, and lies. This deserves
praise. It's not easy to break free of
such powerful programming, but it is way too
easy to see through one politician. But keep
subscribing to the same system that attracts dishonest,
power hungry people and to continue to fall
for the false promises of other authoritarian politicians
who will seek power after Trump. Truly breaking
free doesn't just mean snapping out of the
trance of one politician or movement, but questioning
and rejecting the nature of the power itself
and reclaiming your own.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
Welcome to the daily wrap
up.
Thursday, 02/05/2026.
Thank you for joining me today.
Always a great day to start with some
Carrie Wedler.
You know, it's such an important point, obviously,
that we've a lot of us have been
making for such a long time. And it's
interesting how in these moments,
that video
will be taken as an attack on one
side.
And you could definitely see it that way.
And in essence, right now, it kind of
is. But what you have to understand about
what she's been doing consistently her entire career
is exactly that, no matter who's in power,
if it's contradictory,
if it lacks principle. And she I mean,
you can look for yourself. If you care
to check, she has been doing exactly that
kind of work as long as I've known
her. And she is out there breaking it
down because not Republicans are bad, but partisans,
blind following team sport Republicans and Democrats are
the same thing. And here's an example of
the the Republicans
contradicting themselves when they were pointing at the
Democrats saying this was a problem before. The
same point she made about Democrats
during COVID nineteen and on and on and
on and on. It's just really important to
say that. I know all of you who
are regulars to this show, you know this.
But there we get new people every day,
and it's important to peep to not allow
them to fall into those cracks of kind
of seeing the partisan media that they they
won, but recognizing we are making those points.
If you're here for contradiction, to call out
crimes, and so on, but about all sides.
Very important. And what she's highlighting there, it's
just self it's self evident. It's it's very
clear that people are making contradictory statements,
siding with things they would otherwise call out,
praising Trump's socialist
actions, you know, when they would have called
it otherwise or whatever term you wanna call
these things. The point is it would be
called out if it was done on the
other side. And the larger point on all
of this, as I've been saying, I don't
think that's the majority. I think as and
I'm so glad to see that she gives
a nod to the people out there who
are breaking through. Even if it's for the
first time in their entire lives and we've
thought it's been that obvious the entire time,
people are, for whatever reason, I think there's
a lot of obvious reasons, beginning to stand
up and just not just look for a
new party or a new candidate, but start
going, okay.
There's something much, much, you know, something rotten
in Denmark. You know, whatever these old sayings
are. Like, there's a large, very clear problem,
and it's not just about one aspect, but
the entire damn thing. And this is what
I say when I talk about government and
what people are starting to see. That's why
I think a lot of this is happening,
that people are just recognizing, okay, wait a
minute. Not just party, not just country, not
just law, but maybe the whole damn thing.
Now may that may sound too much for
some people out there. And maybe it's just
not possible. Maybe it's naive to even think
that we can restructure where we're going. But
but take a step back and realize, guess
what? It's exactly what the power structure is
doing to you right now
Without you knowing it, really, but trying to
get you to transition into the new structure
they're building because they recognize that we are
tired of the old one. At the very
least, consider the reality of where we are
and whether you can have a hand in
actually creating that next future instead of just
pointing at the other side and waking up
inside of your prison.
But I also I wanna start with one
comment before we get right into it today.
So a lot of,
some interesting stuff to get into. More of
some Epstein stuff that I wasn't sure I
was gonna be getting into today, but there
are some more important points that I wanna
follow-up on. But I wanna start with Iran,
which I really want you guys to see,
which I think is very interesting in regard
to the astroturf that took place, which, again,
most of you know this if you've been
watching our show or anybody else who's been
calling out sort of the same cycle of
what Israel and The US and The UK
do to Iran,
it seems like, every so many years on
on on, you know, routine.
But it's important to see how wild that
is, how clear it is, the reporting coming
out about billions of fake tweets and manipulations
for Raasub Baal Levy. Nobody supports this guy,
and you can now literally prove that with
their efforts in Iran.
But important just to recognize that's happening.
A quick point to start about some some
two party illusion stuff I want you to
see around the Somalia day care conversation.
But from there, we're largely gonna get into
two main points today, which is the continual
some of the information it's kind of a
mixed back and forth part conversation, but, really,
it's about some new comments about the new
world order, which, you know, I'm gonna point
out that I think is relevant to the
larger point that I'm seeing
from this administration, but then some new information
coming out about Palantir,
Peter Thiel, and and Epstein. But in
of Epstein files aside,
this is an important conversation for what it
shows around how immersed Palantir and Thiel are
with governments around the world. And this is
particularly about the UK government. But then on
top of that, the connection through the Epstein
files today and what that's showing and the
the willingness to ignore or,
really, run screaming, like, with your hair on
fire. I just don't know the way I
frame it, but, know, that's probably probably feeling
inside. But people who are acting like it's
not happening but internally are just having a
meltdown because everyone sees this, and I'm talking
about the partisan players out there.
But, ultimately, I wanna get into some more
Epstein censorship, some stuff that's happening on the
files that you have seen. Really, a lot
of follow-up to what we just discussed. More
censorship around Donald Trump's name, the term Rothschild.
What was another big one that I wanted
to highlight in there?
Oh, specific examples of things that we can
just prove are being deleted. And I think
this should be a major story in and
of itself.
And then again, actually, an overlap to why
there might be an argument that, like, maybe
this is a setup of the narrative to
make the argument for why
this has to be you know, things are
being deleted. Essentially, that they were just clumsy.
You know? Whoops. Well, like I told you,
by the way, we let out nude images
of underage girls and oops. We let out
names of of of of victims that we
that have not identified themselves before. Whoopsie. Despite
building our entire argument around, we need to
protect them, and that's why this is taking
so long. And then
oopsie, let out their personal address,
their phone number. Here's a naked picture of
you. Sorry. I mean, that's just I can't
even wrap my mind around how that how
crazy that is. And so here we are
with this
kind of, like, accidental, we made a mistake
situation where there should be legal accountability, but
it doesn't seem like that's gonna happen. And
then saying, oh, well, that's why we have
to go through and, like, redact and pull
back. And there's all this mistake everywhere. And
I bet you that's what the excuse becomes.
Just a thought to think about.
But let's get into
to start out here,
just as always, including the link to Carrie's
amazing video that I do think is important.
I hope it reaches people. I hope it
reaches people that need to see it, not
just those making fun of the other side
because that's that that's why I made that
comment is that tends to be shown that
way. One last thing in on that opening
point that I thought from our Telegram chat,
which you should join if you're not out
there. Seeing as how we're fending off bots,
like, every twenty seconds on that platform, it's
like, join the Marco Rubio Telegram channel or
come join this casino. It's just, like, it's
just wild. I don't know if everyone else
deals with the same thing, but it's, you
know, probably to some degree. But just funny
how this happens and how it I can,
like, make a comment about him and I
get 75 that day. It's, like, clearly, it's
people. But, anyway,
on this point, I was mentioning this before
we went live in the Telegram, Victus says,
MAGA 2024.
There's a bunch of unidentified military age males
coming across the border that are going to
make an army to take away your rights.
MAGA twenty twenty six. How dare you criticize
the unidentified military age males in an army
that is taking away your rights. Now that
it's a little more abstract since it's you
know, we're talking about the infiltration of foreign
governments, which is real. Think is real if
you wanna care about the reality of that
story. But overall, that you could make the
same argument, you know, unidentified, people who are
legally,
required to identify themselves, masking, breaking the law,
and taking away your rights. It just there's
so much contradiction within the partisan game going
both directions.
I'm convinced that most people are truly starting
to see that.
So two or rather three or four quick
points
around
contradiction, two party illusion, and I wanna talk
about Iran and how that plays right into
it and how this is a massive astroturfing
campaign against you right now in this country.
We talked yesterday, rather I think I included
it just in case I didn't.
Day before yesterday.
Planning on doing a show tomorrow for those,
if if the timing allows, but probably three
or four more shows.
Let's see. Or probably three maybe four more
shows this week. That's the plan.
This last show here,
Epstein Files. Is it is this about accountability
or pacification?
And it's a we we'll get into a
really important part of this conversation about
whether this and it's it's not a lot
of people having this conversation, which I'm really
glad to see. Like, just considering, is this
really about accountability, or is this some kind
of, you know, last ditch effort to to
not allow that? Like, to to let us
feel like things are happening. And the simple
point to make not to go into the
larger you know, there's like, I I I
played the, former FBI agent, for example, who
was making this long argument. I think I
do have one tweet I will read when
we get into this. But, you know, the
overall idea
that this was about trying to flood the
conversation with so much information and in a
lot of ways, valid,
alarming information. But so you get so many
directions and comments and points. It connects to
such a large thing that it almost like
nobody expects it to change or I mean,
however you it's it's the way we respond
to it is different, but the reaction seems
to be similar in a way that it's
just overwhelming almost. And that
enough distraction or bombing Iran or whatever else
that people it just goes away
almost because they revealed so much. At least
that's a thought going around, and there's other
variations to the way that looks. But the
point simply being that this information was given
to us with the purpose of trying to
or rather just hoping that it didn't end
up coming to some kind of accountability. And
that would have been the design of why
they did it this way, why they helped
didn't redact this or that or all these
interesting contradictions. So it's important show, I think.
Check it out.
I guess it looks like I didn't include
it. I'll include that for today.
So first, just this point, which is such
a small I mean, it's not a small
point actually, but it's these are the kind
of points that I'm really hoping that I
don't need to even report, that everybody out
there is already aware of this if they
choose to look, which is that you might
have seen. Massey, by the way, I'm not
gonna I I think I might have it.
Yeah. This no. It's this link, I think.
Yeah. Yeah. So he this link here, if
you wanted just the two one behind the
one I'm sharing, he's got a whole thread
of all these different things that he wanted
to stop that every American largely agrees with.
And most Republican
candidates,
more per in particular, America First candidates were
the ones screaming about how all this has
to go this way, and then none of
them cared. Most importantly,
$5,000,000,000,
as we recently discussed, to provide cash benefits,
health care, day care, and job programs to
refugees. Now I'm not saying good or bad.
Plenty of people disagree with the way it's
being framed by Republicans. The point was not
about whether good or bad in this point
of the conversation, but that plenty of Republicans
got an entire momentum around a story that
was built on a lot of misinformation,
not the major story. There have been people
arrested for this, and most of them were
arrested under Biden's administration. There was fraud, and
it continues. But the Nick Shirley element of
the day cares and him showing up in
front of doors, none of that has ever
been actually proven to be what he claims
it is
if he went in front of congress. I
mean, it it's it's actually kinda crazy when
you watch him discuss these things. It's all
based on didn't you watch captain Phillips kind
of arguments? And I'm not saying that the
the the fraud is fake. That's important to
understand. It is real. And it and my
point about Elon Omar, for example, is about
if not left or right, look at how
much money she's made there. Who knows if
it's connected? The point is they're all profiteering
from you. You can prove this pretty easily
if you stand back and look at the
big picture.
But they made an entire argument about why
this was such a big deal, and it's
all Democrats, and we can't allow it. And
then and then Republicans, which I'll show you
who voted for it, allow this to continue.
I mean, it just it it needs to
make you stand back and just exactly what
I said. And, oh, and this is what
he wrote. Trump said a judge said Trump
can't withhold day care funds from states where
his administration believes fraud is occurring. That's what
they're pointing to. We weren't allowed to. So
Massey offered up this amendment to the omnibus
bill they're putting forward, which contains the day
care program funding,
to ambiguously give Trump the power to throttle
those funds. It was blocked by Republicans.
I mean, there's just no way you misunderstand
that, guys. And if this if this was
something he didn't want, Trump would be screaming
about it right now. No. They lied to
you. They wanted you to think something was
important when really they were just trying to
distract, in my opinion. So all this hype
about Somali day care fraud only for the
Republicans to largely allow it to continue? The
government is not on your side, guys. Wake
up. It is actively playing us against ourselves,
I think, so nothing changes. In fact,
just until they need it to change. Right?
Which is kinda what I'm getting at. Right?
They need the status quo to maintain until
they can decide to change it for their
benefit.
Mary simply asked, Grock, list,
list list the names of everyone who blocked
this. Put a, well, that is irrelevant because
none of them are. She basically says put
an asterisk in the name if they're facing
a challenger. But Grock says
you can read them. Ralph, Chip, Nick. Republican,
Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican, all
all of them Republicans. As of now, none
of them face primary challengers.
Okay? I mean, I'm not you can take
that for what it is. I'm not saying
that this was a plan. You the simple
reality is this is it should be a
huge deal to the very people who built
an entire propaganda narrative around why that needs
to stop, and now they don't care. So
the only way you can look at this
is either they don't care about it, and
that was either distraction or whatever you think
it was, or they do, and somebody else
somehow lobbied or convinced or threatened them to
not do it. Either way, it's time to
wake up and realize where our government actually
is.
So on the point of dig just very
quick around the Somali day care point day
care point and Kash Patel, I'm only gonna
play a quick part of this. You know,
frankly, I've got a mixed feeling about all
of this right now. O'Keefe Media, James himself,
the the whole thing. Now it's not saying
I'd like you know, I don't ignore anything.
I will listen to the information, but I'm
very skeptical about the way these have always
gone. It's always been very
selectively edited. Let's put it that way. But
that does not mean false, by the way.
As they often point out, it's right out
of their own mouth, and that's why I've
always shown
usually what these things are because I do
find it irrelevant. But with a grain of
salt, especially since since this has become so
prominent, I find it almost hard to believe
that some of these guys don't pick up
on these, or at least when it was
in its heyday. Right? But right now, this
is an FBI agent saying something I do
think is relevant, especially since I think it's
easy to prove this is what's going on.
There's been multiple reports from other FBI elements
saying this about Kash Patel. I found it
interesting where it comes up around specifically
whether there'll be arrests around the Somali day
care camp conversation.
Now this is a very partisan report. It
come you know, he'll I I might play
the part, I forget how long ago, where
he says, oh, and the great reporting from
Nick Shirley, which I think is just embarrassing.
I'm sure somebody in this chat disagrees.
The guy can't even tie his shoes properly,
it seems. The guy you listen to the
way he talks. This I I'm convinced, personal
opinion, this is somebody being propped up for
something. I don't know how in the world
this guy makes it into this level of
prominence with that kind of reporting, but then
we know why because we're all being astroturfed,
in my opinion.
But
that be that aside, the point is still
that Cash isn't going to arrest somebody. But
yet
so, essentially, you have to walk away going,
is is James O'Keefe and are they calling
out the Trump administration? Kind of, but not
really. Well, you get a lot of this
from the corporate the the corporate. It is
the corporate media and the corporate mainstream alternative
media. But ultimately, you make the case. Like,
this is a bad thing. We can't allow
this. How come no one's been arrested? Elon
keeps saying about the Epstein files. But note
how he doesn't go, why aren't you doing
that, Trump?
Calling for accountability, Cash?
Bongino? No. No. Or rather, yeah, Bondi? Nope.
Doesn't do that. He just goes, no arrests.
This is wrong. But then
if you really get into it, he'll make
an argument about why it's the Democrats somehow
not allowing what needs to happen. This is
the game they play. You understand? So listen
to this clip, then we'll go forward on
this, which I think is important because everyone
sees that they're not complete they're not doing
what the even their team thinks they should
be doing, let alone what they should be
doing.
You're just like a diva. Is that 110%
he's a diva. Are you serious? Oh, and
they start by saying Kash Patel is a
diva, which that's like that's like the story
that's everywhere. I mean, he must do the
the jacket he wore, the whole thing, like,
it's come out pretty embarrassingly, but that's not
the important part.
110%.
Oh. He's lazy as hell. He's not getting
his job. I've said that if arrests do
not happen, if people are not held to
account,
investigate the investigators
themselves. Okay. Does that mean Nick Shirley then?
Probably not. Does that mean anybody in the
Trump administration? Probably not. Hey. I could be
wrong. All I'm saying is, who else is
supposed to be accountable for this process? You
know, you realize the Biden administration arrested, like,
74 people. Most of them were indicted. I've
covered this already. That does not mean trust
the Biden administration. It just means for whatever
reason, that happened under his administration. You know
how many arrests we've seen around the Somali
decade conversation that weren't stemming from that point?
As far as I know, basically zero. And
that's not to say Trump bad. It just
means those are facts that you can look
at for yourself. So I find it interesting
the way this continues to be a sort
of, you know,
pointing out a problem, but not trying to
contextualize
who's responsible for that problem in many cases.
I am a security specialist at the FBI.
So I do, background checks, investigations, that type
of stuff. I've been working there for five
years now. On hidden camera, this FBI security
specialist tells us the quiet part out loud.
So you don't think there's gonna be any,
like, major arrests, like, with
Castro Tower
No. The FBI? No. Also, nobody I don't
think anybody would ever go to prison. Now
thanks to the brave work of citizen journalists
like Nick Shirley, Americans were able to see
what actually happens in Minnesota outside these day
care centers. I guess outside them, right, demanding
to have access to a child that you
don't know and have no reason to access,
it's a very weird way they frame this.
I begin for the fifth time or third
time. I'm not suggesting there's not fraud, but
I sure as hell would like to prove
that this daycare is in fact fraud defrauding
people in many case all the different you
know, it's simply become Somali daycares everywhere. Or
for this is the kind of thing the
partisan game does.
What?
Standing outside asking questions and then having that
be spotlighted by the Elon Musk of the
world is not journalism. Okay? Do you think
they're gonna arrest the people, like, that are
dealing with the daycare stuff? I think by
the time that case is
done even being,
like, looked at, being ready to go to
court, Trump won't even be in office.
See, what a what a weird response,
which means, to my opinion, which you can
watch the rest of it. This is the
only opening.
But this is about, you know, well, like,
okay. Well, it's that administration. So are they
going to? He said no. Well, then it
gets deeper. Are well, are are we are
they gonna, you know, arrest anybody? Well, it'll
be after that when it happens. K. But
you just started by suggesting they're not even
going to. So what do you it's like
it's like you're trying to protect Trump right
there is the feeling I get. But either
way, let's just even say it happens afterward.
Okay. Usually, four years can go by and
you don't you realize this is not a
new story. This does not begin when Nick
Shirley pointed to a front door. This was
going on before. Their evidence has been there.
You realize they just pointed to something that
was already in the process. So when they
say it probably takes until then, what is
he even referring to? What evidence okay. What
about the of the other parts that were
ongoing?
Why would it take four years, three years
to investigate fraud in your and what all
of you have told us is absolute. We
can see it. It's right there. That one.
Right there. I mean, come on, guys. You
either have to accept that they've lied, which
shouldn't be that hard. Most Republicans are realizing
that about all sides, same with Democrats.
But realize that this is
even this person on his team saying he's
a diva, he's not gonna arrest anybody, so
they're not going to go this direction according
to him. Now, that's an opinion, but I
agree with that. And you have to realize
that if it was as big as they
said it was, then it wouldn't be something
they ignore.
Time to wake up, guys. It's very clear
what's going on. Now, of course, this is
why Cash Patel is out there going, oh
my god. 55 arrests, which I can't verify.
Doesn't mean they don't exist. They're very close
to the chest today. But pretty sure 55
people arrested on a massive drug trafficking in
Georgia is not a massive drug trafficking anything.
On top of that, it was cannabis and
fentanyl and a lot of different things. So
if you break that down, that is not
a large drug bust that does not make,
in my opinion, especially when you look at
the reality of what busts have happened before.
But my point is always, mister here's a
Fox News article. This is your like, this
is his official way of reporting to you.
Fox News said, I did thing. Here's screenshot.
And with alleged China supplier? No. No. No.
We're talking I mean, the same thing with
the BioLab point
could be. The reality is it's actually largely
more so connected back to US things. But
because Chinese National, we just make that the
story. And I'm not saying I know. But
either way, 55 arrests in a drug ring
is not at the end of the day,
is you trying to go, look, look, I'm
doing something. Please pretend like I'm doing something,
when nobody on your team thinks you're doing
anything. And on top of that,
these are indictments. They've been arrested. They have
not been found guilty yet. You can read
it for yourself. So think about how weird
that is. Why would you come out and
be like, we have people we haven't found
guilty yet. Look at how much I'm doing.
You you realize how many things he's done
like this that have ended up petering out
and going nowhere, like the Halloween plot and
all the rest? Because that's what they do.
He's so desperate to go, look, look, look
at me. And everyone around him knows it.
That must be pretty
uncomfortable,
Lonely.
But either way, that's you that's what you
get. Now let's I'll I'll try to keep
up on this. There's so many things to
remember to see whether these 55 people even
end up being charged with something. They probably
will. It seems like there was drugs going
on. Because on top of that,
do republicans care about people using drugs? I
mean, it used to be the argument, but
realize we're talking about freedom and liberty, and
you're talk you're making a big deal about
arresting people who are selling cannabis and fentanyl,
whatever else, which if we understand liberty and
freedom, people can do what they want with
their own bodies. You know, it just becomes
this abs that's what we're doing to save
the country. It's sad. Now last point on
this. Michael Knowles says no kings,
shouted the oligarchs and makes an excellent point
that you could look at the funding and
find out that there was a lot of
high level funding that went in there. Same
point we made back then. But there's many
points to make around this because the reality
is if you if from the way I
would take this, and we'll get into some
comments below,
is that this is what's going on. You
do have oligarchs, manipulators on left and right.
Alex Carr, Peter Thiel,
Kamala, Donald Trump.
Very easy to see how that works. Now
they both shuffle over to Trump because Trump's
the one that that's how this tends to
work. Okay? The reality is they did fund
this. Now you could argue that were people
you know, this this is like, for example,
Bill Ackman
gave $10,000
to the GoFundMe to I think it was
was it which one was it? The shooter
of the Renee Goode conversation
and then gave $10,000
to I think it was Alex Petty's family
or some other the other direction it seemed.
And I if I remember that correctly, it's
off the top of my head. So
the point being, does that then make both
of them compromised by a lot bill Ackman?
It's a smaller amount of money. I'm just
making a point.
People can do this wherever they want. People
can choose to do this and then try
to make that the reason they manipulate, or
maybe you could think that they're literally manipulating
it with that money in the moment it's
going, or maybe they're in charge of that
group, and that's how you can prove that.
But these things are all different points, and
you have to realize that people dumping money
in the front of protests and movements happen
all the time with no more than just
the interest of being a part of what
they're doing or trying to manipulate it from
the company level down. But then on top
of that, you have people that go out
and protest and organize at their level, and
people donate through things they don't have control.
People donate to me all the time on
this platform. I don't have control who donates.
That would be like saying that you could
blame me, which PayPal tried to do for
Iranian
donating to me, which somehow makes me suspect.
I'm not in control of that. It's a
small point, but this is the same larger
conversation. So now let's make it about, I
don't know, the Soros group. Okay.
You know I can I'm very aware of
the manipulations, the color evolution dynamics that have
been covering that my entire career.
It matters, and we should care if these
groups are getting involved.
But when there's we're when they were talking
about people putting money into groups, that's the
group's decision to take it or not. You
can then decide to look at that group
differently if they take money from people you
disagree with. But if there's no crimes being
committed, and there are in some cases, but
in a broad sense, people going out and
protesting. Is it a crime because George Soros
funds them with the intention of trying to
manipulate their agenda? Not for the people doing
it. And even with George Soros, that's not
illegal. Then we should have a conversation about
how these things work. But you have to
understand
the moment you allow the government to step
in and do that or the other sides
to create this dynamic, they will always
kick that door open and never let it
close. And they're doing it right now with
everything.
The law has to matter here.
And all they're really doing is aiming about
in in individual people out there protesting
because they have signs or whatever else, really
because they're calling out the government. And, yes,
there are astroturf elements on both sides. We've
always called this out. But when they point
it and they make it about them, all
they do is make it about the individuals
because that's what the government wants. So no
king, shouted the oligarchs. Well, no. So too
did all the individual people on the ground.
So too did all of the millions of
people across the country who protested without violence.
That's what happened, if you remember correctly. Despite
all the screaming claims of absolute revolution and
chaos, not a single example outside of them
attacking the protesters. You can ask Rock.
So I think that's relevant, isn't it? Acknowledge
that there's funding coming from people who might
or might not be able to influence the
the choice, the action, the signs,
and let that influence your opinion until you
can prove something that should be an opinion.
And unless there's a crime being committed, there's
nothing to stop them from protesting. It's so
basic.
Now this person says six groups up put
up, and this is what it says. You
could read it. 296,000,000
for rallies. Okay. That's a lot of money.
Right? Elon Musk put up 300,000,000 to Trump,
and that's one person.
He and it's a very good point, but
it happens everywhere.
If you have problems with one or not
and not the other, you're likely the problem.
I agree with that point in every partisan
sense.
And this person says, now tell me how
much Kamala received. Now that's a good point
to make, but the way he just did
it in response shows you that it's about,
well, then, well, it's okay because she did
it first. That's childish and ridiculous.
But aside from the way he did it
to respond, the point matters that she also
gets that, and we can acknowledge that. They
get money from people like Musk or Karp
or Thiel. They all do.
But the point should be, if you care
about this happening, you should care for Trump,
for Kamala, for Elon, for all of them.
It should matter equally no matter where it's
happening. That's the point the guy was making.
And he goes, also, why would rallies need
this much money to rally? That's an irrelevant
point. You're now using your opinion to make
the case. It might suggest that, but the
right point to make is I agree with
this person. It's so bizarre that MAGA or
anybody, because you see, you genuinely, if you
remember, got the same arguments about the trucker
convoy, for example.
It is so bizarre that MAGA or partisans,
I would argue, have invented this standard where
all protesters well, this is more specific to
what MAGA's been saying, but you can see
this using applying in very similar ways. That
invented a standard where all protesters must be
comprised of only the of people who, through
no communication or coordination with other people, also
how happened to show up at the same
place at the same time. Newsflash,
protests are coordinated.
Now that and he's saying it let's just
take it as an honest sense of just
people who go, hey. Hey, TLAB community. Let's
go out and protest this mask mandate. Right?
And maybe you get funding from somebody. Maybe
people donated for that. Maybe you decide to
get science, so you're all coordinated. That does
not make a crime. Doesn't even make anything
you should be concerned about other than people's
rights.
But it could also be overlapped with something
that would be nefarious,
which happens everywhere.
That's why groups like this will donate, and
the people involved don't even realize that that's
happening. And then through a series of events,
maybe they're able to influence. Maybe they get
a person at the top of the administration.
That's how this tends to go. But what
you're getting is random MAGA supporters who are
attacking Jane on the street who cares that
ICE is hurting her neighbor.
It's just so frustrating, isn't it? But realize
they're all like this. No kings! Shouted the
oligarchs.
Marc Andreessen going, waiting to save you from
the bad guys. It's so clear to me
right now, and I hope you guys can
see that. Not that it's clear to me,
but see what I think is clear. Now
let's talk about Iran and talking about astroturfing.
This is what they're doing to you, and
I hope people can see that.
Here's Marco Rubio.
Realize this is happening now, by the way.
It when Trump the reporting has been like,
Trump doesn't wanna bomb Iran and Israel wants
him to.
I don't know why we engage with such
frivolous reporting. It may be the case, but
it's just they've been wrong about everything all
the time.
I'm waiting for action. What we know is
that Trump is influenced by Israel. What we
know is Israel wants Israel Trump to bomb
Iran. We know all of that. They've said
as much. So I wait for action. And
the interim narrative converse control is never what
ultimately you know, even Trump in the last
example, Trump was coming out and saying, we
don't wanna do this, then allowed Israel to
bomb or and joined him in bombing. They
did that, like, right afterward. It was about
deflection. Anyway, he comes out and says, Marco
Rubio lays out the four US demands for
Iran. Here we are yet again. And the
nuclear program, which the whole world knows isn't
actually there outside of civilian, which they have
a legal right to own, because even Tulsi
Gabbard said that in this administration. The last
administration said the same thing. The State Department
said that for quite a while. International observing,
UN, but let's keep pretending because Netanyahu, who's
also just coincidentally
carrying out a genocide and caught lying about
damn near everything, tells you so.
But he goes, limit ballistic missiles, which is
this new addition, which is just laughable to
anybody with a brain, anybody involved with this
who's ever followed the process. That's not what
you do. That's that's the say that's the
equivalent of saying you can't have guns anywhere.
You're not allowed to have a flag. Just
an arbitrary thing because we don't like it,
therefore, you can't no law exists where they
can do that.
And support for proxies like Hezbollah, which means
support,
not proxies.
You could prove this, by the way, in
my opinion anyway, but the reality being that
they have allies just like The US does.
And you can quite clearly prove that these
groups have been supported. But what I can't
prove, which doesn't mean it's not real, but
you could try and I bet you can't
prove it as well. The evidence doesn't exist
to prove that Hezbollah is a proxy of
Iran or that Hamas is a proxy of
Iran. You can prove, by the way, that
there's evidence that Israel used it that way
for at least a period of time. But
let's not talk about the facts. Keep yelling
the narrative.
Anyway,
Scott Horton, who you should follow, says, Iran
has an unalienable
right
to assimilate nuclear program as members of the
NPT. They do. Nonproliferation treaty.
I guess that just doesn't matter, though. Like,
does don't these facts matter?
Why do you have the right to say,
except Iran? Guess what, guys? They don't. But
they have Israel's support. They have Israel going
to us in The UK manipulating the UN
and everybody else kinda coercing and driving and
threatening and regime changing, and this is where
we end up.
Still start with the same point. They have
no legal right to do it. US has
no authority to insist on limits on their
missiles ranges. No pretended
United, Nation Security Council resolution or anything. None
can reach America.
So they're simply making this about Israel's concerns.
Hezbollah is Israel's problem, not The US's. And,
frankly, they're only a problem because they've invaded
and continue to invade Lebanon. Right now, they're
occupying Lebanon. Right now, they're bombing civilian locations
in Lebanon during the so called ceasefire. This
seems to never stop as Israel bombs every
day. Funny how that works. They kill Al
Qaeda and ISIS, our actual enemies. Hezbollah does.
Easily proven. Same with Soleimani.
Protecting the Iranian people is the weakest hoax
of an excuse for war since Obama attacked
and destroyed Libya, he says. He continues, there
are Americans,
not counting Israeli dual citizens now, who buy
this? Seriously?
Colin Powell's cartoons of Saddam's bio weapons lab
trucks would be ashamed
of your naivety.
I agree.
Here
is AIPAC thinking
vice president
Vance.
He says, if the Iranians get nuclear weapons,
you know who's gonna get one next?
The next day, he says Saudi Arabia's.
What?
Like, this just shows you how either one
of two things, either how completely desperate they
are, they don't know what to do, or
that Vance is just this bad and doesn't
understand how what a dumb statement that is.
Saudi Arabia?
You mean your chief ally in the area?
Like, the ID you guys have constantly, without
fail,
looked around Saudi Arabia while you talk about
extremism, while you talk about when when they're
the most obvious authoritarian extreme location in the
area,
which, by the way, the Wahhabi mindset, the
actual terrorist driving
ideology behind almost everything we're talking about comes
from their ideology.
But, yeah, who cares though? Right? Because they're
our ally. We need oil. Whatever. Okay. But
then coming to say this,
by the way, Saudi Arabia was already discussing
getting technology from Israel. I'm willing to bet
you they already have that technology just like
Israel facilitated that for China from The United
States. You could look all those up. The
reality is the Saudi Arabians getting a nuclear
weapon, whether you think that should happen or
not, is an insane thing to say as
if you don't want it to happen while
you've supported them their entire
lifespan,
and that they're doing terrible things around the
world. It's just it's a crazy thing to
say. So if they're not allowed to have
it, then why are you partnered with them?
You see? I just think they don't know
what to do right now. But, again, it
could be that's what I think. And at
the reality, this is all some crafted narrative
that will end up a certain place. But,
I mean, explain why this isn't like, this
is a weird thing to say with what
we know. I think these people, this administration
are aimed at the lowest common denominator. They
are just trying to aim at the average
Americans that have never really paid attention to
this stuff and to get them to come
out. Like, what else are you gonna do?
Tap into the group that's not really get
them to stand up and scream because what
you're you're adding another element to the conversation.
Right now, everyone sees you for what you
are.
So, Ray, this 20% that's sitting on the
couch not paying attention, let's get involved with
them somehow. I'm just, you know, making up
numbers, but realize that that seems to make
sense. You have to bring in some more
people because you've lost control of the narrative.
What else are you gonna do when nobody
believes you? But APAC says, thank you, JD
Vance. Nuclear weapons proliferation is danger to America
and the world. Yeah. That's actually why the
Non Proliferation Treaty was created. So everybody would
start to roll back their weapons, except that
never happened. Now they're making more, but we
still pretend like that treaty binds other countries
because that's that's the broken clown world that
we live in. Right?
What makes the danger the danger to the
country is the fact that Israel has hundreds
and thousands of unidentify un
acknowledged nuclear weapons and a Samson option. A
literal plan to destroy the world should they
start to lose control. Easy to look up.
Seymour Hersh wrote a book about it. Quote,
Iran can't have nuclear weapons, so you don't
get crazy people with nuclear weapons. Yeah. You
mean, like, Israel, The UK, The United States,
or all of you together? It's insane what
he's saying. But coming from
APAC, as Dana McAdams says, APAC thanking JD
Vance is not the win Vance might think
it is. They've just alienated almost every under
40 Republican voted for 2028.
APAC is no longer a force multiplier you
want on your side and out front. It's
a political liability you want to remain in
the background,
which is what it's already slowly becoming in
my opinion.
Now here's what Trump had to say about
the supreme leader. But let's act like, you
know, the smart thing to do is to
threaten them and then say, let's make a
deal. It's what it's what he does. I
I don't think he's in has any interest
in making a deal. Well, I take that
back. You could argue that maybe he personally
does,
but I'm of the mind that he personally
wanting things or his personal wants and desires
aren't playing a factor right now. I don't
think it's his choice.
Be worried right now?
I would say he should be very worried.
Yeah. He should be. As you know, they're
negotiating with us. I know they are, but
the protesters have said, you know, where are
the Americans? You promised them we we would
have their back. Do we still have their
back? We've had their back, and, look. That
country is a mess right now because of
us. We Do you hear that?
So first of all, the protesters, they well,
this has been a lie that has been
continuing to embarrass them. I mean, it's come
out I mean, that's what we're gonna do
next. It's coming out in French media. It's
coming out all over the world. They're lying,
guys. The whole world's laughing at them. But
I guess when you're desperate, in my opinion,
what else are you gonna do? That's why
that makes sense to me. But, again, that's
my opinion. The reality being that the lies
about the protests or deaths, where that came
from. I mean, then you could track this
back for yourself.
It's largely come to Israeli media, Israeli intelligence,
and they lie about everything. Doesn't mean false,
but I also can't verify the information. I
could also prove to you lies that they
put forward through that information. I can also
prove to you what the people in Iran
are saying. I can prove to you what
the unions who were originally supporting the protests
are now saying about what's going on.
They're lying to you, guys. And so the
point of you told them they'd be there.
We are there. Well, yes, we know that.
Israel's admitted that. Pompeo's admitted that. Trump's admitted
that. Iran and rather, Israel has assets on
the ground. US government has assets on the
ground. They're stoking these revolutions.
It's not organic. It's what they've done every
single time. It's very easy to see. The
media like this guy just does what they're
supposed to do and tows the lie the
narrative. This you know, the the there there's
certain levels of pushback, but largely when it
comes to the core narratives like Israel and
war, they're always on the same page.
But listen to what he said again. The
second part. We still have their back. We've
had their back and, look, that country's a
mess right now because of us. We went
in, we wiped out their nuclear.
So I didn't think we want See, he
he does this. I think he realized he
made a mistake.
He didn't wipe out anything, by the way.
That's that's the crazy part. I mean, that's
of course, explain to me how you wiping
out the nuclear weapons now turns into stop
your nuclear program. This is what you do
when you lie about everything. They don't know
what else to do, in my opinion. The
point, though, is the whole country's a mess
because of us. This is what Trump does
that gets him in trouble,
unless there's some kind of plan to this.
It's also possible. But I tend to think
this is he speaks off the cuff because
he's full of hubris and narcissism and ultimately
says things that makes him look bad, which
I mean, think about this statement.
This is what I wrote,
where we just after the quote, just refer
she's saying referring to Iran. Look. That country
is a mess right now because of us.
Right. But you've been telling us the entire
time it's about mismanagement.
Right? Same with Venezuela. Same conversation. Same
point. Oh, they can't even manage their infrastructure.
Well, right now, you could point out, and
Venezuela in the past, there are arguments and
examples. Put it this way. Whether or not
that's the case, Iran in the past has
shut off its own infrastructure to stop from,
you know, cyberattacks,
surveillance, and so on, which is obviously very
relevant with what we know is going on
in the world.
But we can prove that they have attacked
the grid, brought it down, and claimed it
was them in the past. So that's what
consider that going on now. In Venezuela, same
thing. Abby Martin covered this
extensively and how they lied about everything they
were doing from the starvation, everything, and then
blamed it on them. The people knew what
was going on. But once your children are
starving in your arms, at some point, you
stop carrying who's responsible. You just want it
to stop. That's what their goal is, and
you could look up their past discussions
about sanctions, about how it's meant to drive
desperation from the people they claim they're trying
to save.
This is what terrorism actually looks like. They
have they have fundamentally,
deliberately
destroyed targeted destroyed this country. They have brought
down its its money. They have attacked their
infrastructure, and now they look around and go,
look how bad it is over there.
And then claim that's why they need to
go in and help people. Look at what
the Iranians are suffering. Yes.
Right there. This is terrorism.
Now find out that they built that entire
thing and they're hurting Iranians based on an
absolute lie. Now Abir is the one that
shared this. Thank you. It's just a post
to Reddit, but there's the link to the
actual article. That's why I appreciate your work.
Here's the actual article
entitled fake accounts,
likes, and Shah of Iran in the shadow
Israel's digital war against the Islamic Republic.
Says for several months, researchers and disinformation specialists
have noted the rise of coordinated campaigns targeting
the Iranian public carried out from abroad and
based on networks of inauthentic accounts
and content,
manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence. So coming
from corporate media, it should matter.
Not that that means it's true. Never is
that the case. But it matters that it's
at a high level and this is prominent,
and you could prove this. There's reports showing
this. We know it's always been going on
like this. They've admitted this themselves
in this case and the past. But what
I want you to see is not that
they're there to support the the people of
Iran, but they've literally manufactured
what they claim is the support for Reza
Pahlavi, which anybody paying attention, I think, has
probably sussed that out. It's actually pretty bad.
Of all their agendas on the table, this
one was really bad. Like, really obviously falling
apart. They just kept yelling it. But some
people still need to see it.
The scale and sophistication of the manipulations observed
in the Persian speaking space reveal the involvement
of a state actor, explains Jeff Goldberg, founder
of the independent organization
Social Forensics,
specializing in the analysis of manipulation on digital
platforms.
And this was massive. So this is a
major, major astroturfing campaign in order to justify
or rather drive the overthrowing of an entire
country.
These dynamics can be measured. Social forensics list
4,765
different accounts publishing more than a 100 messages
per day for a total of eight forty
three million tweets over their lifespan. Another 11,421
accounts are characterized by abnormally high interaction activity,
accumulating 1,700,000,000
likes.
So 1,700,000,000
people were influenced by this, and this is
only one example,
one of their larger practice. And The US
does this. The UK does this. They all
do it, in my opinion.
And it says, 8,830
accounts have also changed their username several times,
a practice commonly associated with coordinated operations. Finally,
3,361
accounts linked to these conversations were suspended by
the platform.
A report on published on in fall twenty
twenty five by Citizen Lab, a cybersecurity laboratory
attached to the University of Toronto and cited
by Herets,
describes an influence campaign called Prison Break
created in 2023.
These profiles remain largely inactive for almost two
years before suddenly activating in early twenty twenty
five. See, I've seen this myself where you
have these accounts with basically no engagement, you're
like they created in 2023 and just sat
on a shelf somewhere.
At a time of rising military tensions between
Israel and Iran, their objective is explicit.
According to the report, the operation aims to
encourage regime change in Iran by amplifying narratives
of uprising, civil disobedience,
and disintegration
of state authority.
Now realize that these are largely
using gripes that exist, but not aiming for
somebody else to be involved and then creating
an entire false movement around, you know, basically,
people out there going, we want reform, and
then that turns into burning buildings down. And
those people who are out there
clear very rapidly in the beginning, and this
is what we've already shown you. Even the
unions pointed this out. They leave. They're this
is not what we wanted, and then everyone
starts going, well, all we have now are
a bunch of black clad people out there
burning buildings down, and you can clearly prove
foreign involvement.
And, And, again, if you I mean, remember,
Israel and, most of them have admitted we're
on the ground. We're out there helping technologically.
I mean, they've made these statements. In Israeli
media, they literally said they were handing out
guns.
I mean, you just you can't ignore this.
The Citizen Lab highlights classic markers of coordination
such as synchronized publication schedules or the absence
of a credible identity. Above all, he highlights
the close synchronization between certain publications and military
events. Quote, several contents,
were released before some, similar information was reported
by local sources of Iranian media. The report
estimates that, quote, the degree of coordination observed
is incompatible with organic dynamics and indicates centralized
planning.
These operations can, rely on powerful private companies
made up of former Israeli intelligence agents. It's
just it's always the same. Who sell their
know how and influence operations on social networks
such as Black Cube,
Cyber.
Continues, says, for, Or Yisachar,
Iran specialist at the David Institute in Jerusalem,
this strategy is part of a global trend.
But with marked Israeli special,
spec
specificities,
Quote, all the great powers today carry out
influence operations on social networks. I agree with
that. What distinguishes Israel is not the intention,
but the level of technological and narrative mastery.
So clearly, he's in Jerusalem. Sounds like he's
praising this direction, but acknowledging little less that
it exists. The reality being that this is
a mastery of their digital manipulation.
Now I argue most groups that can are
doing this, but not every group out there
has the ability and the capacity, the capability
that The US and Israel do. Among the
obvious objectives of these campaigns is the promotion
of Reza Pahlavi. The guy they want you
to believe is the popular supported hero is
just
embarrassingly not the case. That's why they laugh
about this in Iran because it's common knowledge
that this is just absurd.
A crown prince for democracy? Like, this is
how dumb they think everybody is.
The social forensics report estimates that more than
95%
more than 95%
of these
account that had the crown or the the
new symbol they all share turned out to
be inauthentic.
More than 95%.
Pretty easy to tell that they have to
astroturf the entire thing because nobody supports them.
And I'll show that tweet in a second.
Public figures then play the role of transformation.
People like you you remember Emily Schrader and
the rest. Right? They play these rules of
trans, transmission belts between these different circles. So
they create these different circles, and they come
up and they, you know, create something or
connect them. You know, they're they're playing a
larger role in the the digital
astroturfing.
The Persian account of, as you well knows
or you know well, Hananiyan of Thali, the
guy who got caught, one of the earliest
lies about what missile came from where, deleted
his post, went with the other nar. I
mean, the their their whole design was to
lie to the mass. Even if you see
them lie, it's about not lying to the
ones who didn't see it yet. Like, they
just are they're okay being dishonest. They're okay
being seen as a manipulating liar.
Wild to me. Digital communications adviser to the
Israeli prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu. That's Hanania Naftali.
It says that his account follows numerous inauthentic
profiles
already integrated into the monarchist ecosystem,
facilitating the circulation and amplification of his tweets.
The same phenomenon is observed around Emily Schrader,
surprise surprise,
communicator and director of a digital marketing agency
working with Israel institutions.
Its well, she was part of the Israeli
government as well. Its posts benefit from increased
visibility fueled by the same networks of inauthentic
accounts that support institutional messages, meaning that they
put something out and it gets a million
views because all these same fake account in
organizations
will upvote or rather,
like and upvote whatever account we're talking about.
We know this. So you should very much
consider this for all these 7,000 paid Israel
bots out there or manipulators.
Or or whether or not that's the case,
people out there who are continually
getting caught lying or
deceiving or being wrong,
who seem to continually get support by Elon
and the infrastructure and get millions of and
they're getting laughed at every day by most
people. Think about why.
This is Emily Schrader also has publicly admitted
in July 2026
to having participated in a vast influence operation
on social media networks.
Here's the article. You can read it for
yourself.
Oh, wait.
There it is. Here is Emily Schrader's post.
Now very relevant to think about. Oh, actually,
that's why. I I will show it next.
I'll read this in a second. It's relevant
to the next part we're gonna get into.
First, though, to connect this with what Rubio
was saying in the beginning and how he's
just lying to you as always, department of
state puts this out. Rubio on why Iranian
regime cannot provide the people of Iran the
quality of life they deserve. Right. Trump literally
just said the country is in chaos because
of what they did to it.
We know this. As Aaron Mate frankly points
out, Scott Pissent just told you very candidly
that they created this chaos. I might just
play this clip again from Rudy Giuliani because
it does make the point. They're spending all
their resources on terrorism, he says.
What terrorism are you talking about? Can you
point to this terrorism?
Like, you wanna you wanna I mean, or
even if you wanna point to Hezbollah, that's
not it. Even point to everything Hezbollah is
doing. That you don't wanna pretend is terror.
That still barely scratches the surface compared to
what you're all doing. Or Hamas, which is
clearly not the same conversation as Israel funded.
What what about anything else you could argue?
As I've said so many times over the
years, if you take every argument they've ever
made about Iran, everything,
everything you know is false, but just pretend
all of it's proven,
and compare it to even a fraction a
fraction of what you know for a fact
Israel
or the Israel, respectively, or combined, have done,
it doesn't even it pales in comparison. And
realize, again, what I said was what they
claim,
not even what you can prove.
Meaning that if it's what you prove, it's
even a smaller fraction compared to what they
have provenly
proven to have done.
So it just kills me. Funding terrorism, are
they the ones invading countries? Are they the
ones literally bombing and destroying and raping and
torturing? No. They're not. And the whole world
can see this. And so as Aaron Mate
says, well, the Senate had something different to
say last time. President Trump ordered Treasury to
put maximum pressure on Iran, he said. And
it's worked because in December, their economy collapsed.
You can't just keep these both out there.
How what is this if not desperation?
I I mean, I'm certainly could be that
they just don't care. Maybe maybe I'm over,
estimating the the the amount of, you know,
what they feel. I don't know. But you've
got to acknowledge that it's just blatant reason.
There's lie as he just said the opposite.
Now it says they are not able to
get imports, Pesent said, and this is why
people took to the street. So this is
economic street craft. No shots fired. The things
are moving in a very positive way here.
He just literally told you, we caused this.
They were on the streets because of what
we did.
To me, that's just being bad at your
job. The job that we know they actually
have, which is deceiving you for their agenda.
Coming out and telling you the quiet part
out loud is not what they're supposed to
do.
So here, let me play this again.
I do think this is very relevant to
where we are because this goes back to,
I believe, Trump's first administration. Right? And the
idea that he was work this is a
speech he gave in front of the MEK,
a group that was previously on the terrorist
watch list.
This is a group they want to be
in charge of Iran. It's to some degree,
has always been in the circle. Right now,
they're pointing to Reza Pahlavi more than anything,
but the MEK has been a huge part
of this. And this clip shows you Rudy
Giuliani, a clip I argue you never expected
to be public like this, praising that we
are starving people to death. And that's how
you start a good revolution.
So now tell me that you're not a
serious threat.
It's the regime we're trying to overthrow sees
us as a threat.
You are a threat.
It is a reality.
The protests are getting worse. I don't know
when we're going to overthrow them. It could
be in a few days, months, a couple
of years, but it's gonna happen.
They are going to be overthrown.
The people of Iran obviously have now had
enough.
The sanctions are working.
The currency
is going to nothing.
They're where Russia was. They're where Poland was.
We see signs of young men and women
saying, give me some food.
We saw a sign of a man trying
to sell his internal organs for 500 American
dollars,
probably a fortune in Iran today.
This is truly pitiful.
These are the kinds of conditions that lead
to
successful revolution.
Just can't believe,
you know, the statement. Yeah. We got people
selling their organs for food. This is how
you start a good revolution. And the I've
played this many times.
There's really no misunderstanding that. And you can
go on to everything else that was said.
You can watch the entire speech. There's plenty
of crazier things he or
equally crazy statements he makes in the speech.
So here's Emily Schrader. Remember when we what
we just talked about? The astroturfing, the Israeli
intelligence
on the ground, the whole thing. Right? Here's
what she says. As Iran approaches two weeks
of a complete communications blackout,
it doesn't have to remain this way.
I am thrilled to announce I am part
of a historic, highly confidential
alliance
of Israeli tech vent veterans. Oh, you know,
eight you did 8,200,
like you've never heard of them before. And
Iranian underground operatives, meaning the people that they
are manipulating inside of Iran, likely threatening family
threat. This is what they've done in the
past, coercing people inside of Iran to do
things. Otherwise, they're gonna do something to them.
Together, we are building the digital and financial
infrastructure for a g seven nation
before the regime falls,
starting with two stealth ventures that simultaneously
sever the dictator's
ship's two main choke holds, connectivity and capital.
So, literally, like, you are on the record
trying to bring down every aspect of the
country so you can take over. But the
entire argument is based on, are we doing
this to save the Iranian people? Well, what
about we'll be able to die in the
process of all this? Oh, that's okay. We'll
just get I mean, they don't care for
a second about these people. They're trying to
take over probably to make another freedom city,
you know, smart city network state dynamic.
As I've told you so many times, they
don't want you to know
Tehran
is very technologically advanced. This is something different
than what they they want they want to
collapse this for their own interest, period.
And it says, now we want you to
be involved. If you're an angel investor who
wants to take part, great. Palantir, come dump
millions so they can continue to overtake this
country for your agenda. Watch as these connections
continue to grow.
I mean, think about this. We have an
alliance of is in Israeli intelligence entities with
and and Iranian operatives who wanna build a
new g seven nation
infrastructure for Iran. I mean, it's just so
on the surface, guys. Now think about this
u and a 200 overlap with the way
the world is going
and the obvious connections between the people behind
it, the people literally with a strategic partnership
with Israel involved with exactly the tech she
was pointing to, like Palantir,
and every other part of it tapped into
what is currently transitioning
our society. Now just from the statements,
here's Vance.
I mean, another person yet again. I this
can't be by accident.
These things have a there's a reason these
things start. Now look. You could also argue
just because it depends on how your your
impression of who these people are.
You can look at it like this as
them planting this for an agenda,
and maybe that means they have a larger
plan.
But you could also genuinely and you know
this makes sense too. Just think that they're
just victims of their own social media. Like,
this this because this term has been floating
around lately more so that somehow somebody says
it to them and it becomes like they
just use the term. Maybe Trump started saying
it in their inner circles because he also
just follows along on social media. Like, that
almost kinda makes sense, doesn't it?
But
my gut tells me there's more to it.
My point though is here he is yet
again using the term new world order, which
I find hard to be an accident.
But the way he says it,
I mean, it's it's you can't misunderstand this
for anything other than a globalist
new world order that's America first.
What's happening culturally in Europe? What's their crackdowns
on free on free speech? And they they
just look less and less like we do.
Yeah. And there's a real question about whether
Think about that. I Megan Kelly is such
a joke today. Or has been. Like, think
about the idea of
The UK just don't look like us anymore.
You know? First of all, we know what
she's actually saying right there. That's about that's
about a racial thing. And you can watch
her work if you don't believe me. But
the reality
is the censorship she's trying to act like
is un is are you serious right now?
Like, they're so willfully dishonest about what Elon
Musk and Twitter are doing, the massive censorship
happening in this country for the same reasons.
I mean, they're censoring for Israel more than
anything, but the reality is they're censoring what
they say is hate speech. They're censoring people
saying things they don't like.
And but they're just look so different than
us today.
No. They're basically identical to what this country's
doing, but in in some ways more extreme,
in other ways more subtle. But the reality
is they're lockstep for their agenda. I think
anybody who's not a complete mindless partisan manipulator
can probably see that.
Happening culturally in Europe. What's their crackdowns on
free on free speech? They they just look
less and less like we do. Yeah. And
there's a real question about whether there's a
massive shift happening now in terms of world
alliances long term. Oh, you mean like I've
been talking about. Right? Well, she said alliances,
but
see.
My feeling is that they are start aware
that people like me and others are starting
to see, discuss, and routinely,
incessantly
discuss what they're doing.
And this very well may be a way
to set the table for, yeah, you know,
a transition, but in the good way. Right?
We're the rebels transition. We're we're the Patriot
transition, whatever it is. We're the new world
order Patriot style. We're the great reset for
the good guys.
Doesn't that feel like the oligarch, same battle
of the arc? It's the same thing, guys.
It's the same problem framed as the one
needed. Right? Or we need to break this
because they started it or because if we
don't, they'll be able to take it back
or whatever. It's it's the same thing. Aside
from narrative, it's the same thing. So I
find it interesting that she frames it like
that, but then listen to the way he
respond. I'll let it play through right now.
Her crackdowns on free on free speech, and
they they just look less and less like
we do. Yeah. And there's a real question
about whether there's a massive shift happening now
in terms of world alliances long term. Well,
it's definitely, I think, a new world order.
I think the president has sought to it.
There's a new world order in trade. There's
a new world order in globalization and the
way that we invest in our economy versus,
you know, foreign supply chains.
There's a new world order and and that
the president is willing to shake up some
old alliance structures. I mean, NATO, I think,
is much different because of the president's leadership
than it was ten years ago. Sort of
coasting, it was effectively a protectorate of The
United States Of America. Obviously, you saw what
happened to Venezuela.
Not what that was supposed to be. It's
funny he even says it to me. The
president is putting a stamp
on world history,
but fundamentally in America first way. Like Every
single thing he just said is a global
perspective.
A stamp on global history and America First
globalization.
Like, guys, that's just a lazy way to
make you think it's not globalization. It's America
First
globalization.
Okay. That's just a nuance. That's just okay.
We're gonna make globalization, but with an America
lens.
Okay. What's the difference? It's still a globalist
entity. This is what's so embarrassing
for the Alex Jones who are still out
there tap dancing for you, really trying to
make it sound. Totally not. Don't look at
Palantir. They're a small thing as we're gonna
show you the exact opposite. I mean, think
about what he's saying right there. New world
order and globalization and the New world order
and globalization.
Now realize, remember the point is the new
world order doesn't have to mean, like, the
new world order, whatever you think that is,
some entity or group in a circle.
It could be just the or the a
new order
of the world.
So a new financial order.
But isn't it the same point when you
understand and get away from all the buzzwords
and and and our abstract theory? The reality
is that's what it always meant. And it
yes. That ultimately could come to represent an
organization of people who wanted to be the
ones creating that new order for their benefit.
See, not everything is so wildly ridiculous. It's
just it's the way it's the way that
these terms become ridiculous. Sort of like the
Pizzagate argument over the top of the actual
trafficking conversation. Even though there was some level
of information there, it was used in order
to make it look like a cartoon.
So when you're talking about them creating an
order for the world, that should be alarming
in and of itself, if even if it
means exactly what the words mean.
And it's not a national idea.
If you are changing the globalization,
you're not changing anything other than the way
globalization
is rolled out.
Isn't that just insane how clear this is?
I mean, it just kills me.
Now this is just a statement. I'm I'm
I'm reading into a statement to make that
clear. Everything else we've gone over shows you
that that's happening.
That's what I think is so incredible. The
actions are all there right now.
This is them just putting a word on
it.
The world alliances long term. Well, it's definitely,
I think, a new world order. I think
the president has sought to it. There's a
new world order in trade. There's a new
world order in globalization and the way that
we invest in our economy versus, you know,
foreign supply chains.
There's a new world order and and that
the president is willing to shake up some
old alliance structures. I mean, NATO, I think,
is much different because of the president's leadership
than it was ten years ago. Sort of
coasting. It was effectively a protectorate of The
United States Of America. Obviously, you saw what
happened to Venezuela. So, yeah, the president is
putting a stamp
on world history,
but fundamentally in America first way. Like Yeah.
So as long as America first way. Now
you could argue too that this is him
saying the global order will change
to only us caring about ourselves.
You could make that argument. It's not the
way you would say it. That's not how
you would frame that, but it's certainly possible.
So like I said, completely my opinion. Right?
But I think it's important with all the
rest of the things we've seen that that
this is being planted in our mind to
some degree.
It's also gonna be, some look at the
new world order that president Trump is creating.
Right. You know, so it it continues to
be stated.
You don't create a new world order if
your only point is to make something national.
Even if your argument is our national presence
will then change it, you're still arguing you
have an influence on the rest of the
world. But, anyway, it's nuance. You could decide
for yourself. Just all I want is people
to be aware and and on guard for
what I think I see coming here. Now,
as, of course, as
High ImpactFlix, Brian says, the New World Order
is totally fine when Trump does it, as
as usual. So let's talk about this this
article here. This is an important one. Byline
times, I wasn't familiar with. This is, the
one I traced it back to. 02/04/2026
came out yesterday.
Now this is an on top of what
we recently discussed, on top of the points
from the Epstein files, the more continue to
come out. This is sort of an overlap
of what has been coming out from the
files,
but also what's already been there, and this
is from more of a UK perspective. So
think about The US side of this. I
mean, the unprecedented reality of what Palantir is
doing in this country, and then simultaneously, in
Israel, commit a genocide with AI, and then
using that same AI to surveil you arguably
for immigration despite that being about everybody, the
unsalid information,
the Gotham elite, all the different programs they're
using to surveil, the cameras, the ident the
biometrics.
I mean, it's it's so far beyond immigration.
It's
unnerving.
So guess what? It's also happening in The
UK if you don't know that. Jeffrey Epstein
co owned
that's a that's a a quote, not the
if the argument is that's not the reality,
but that's a direct quote from Ehud Barak.
Jeffrey Epstein
co owned
Palantir
founders Valor Venture Fund. That's Peter Thiel.
So Ibu Barak, former prime minister of Israel,
was on the record on the email saying
that Epstein co owned the venture fund that
talent that Thiel was using
to fund these projects.
That makes a huge implication for
everything that touched,
including the different network state agenda conversations, including
Palantir itself.
And it says as Palantir entered the UK
government.
Now what's really fascinating to me, by the
way, which I'm sure you've all seen, is
this really, really, really obvious effort for basically
every corporate media platform to be like, Epstein
was a Russian spy despite even though I
mean, certainly possible,
along with all the rest of it. We'll
let Bill to be clear too about whether
he was an asset for the CIA, an
asset for Mossad or Russia, or an agent
for the CIA, Mossad or Russia, or all
of them, or one of them independently.
Very big difference, isn't there? Somebody could be
an asset for tons of different, you know,
whatever benefits him.
But the evidence as in my opinion, and
what I think the evidence supports is he
very much was asset or an agent of
both the CIA and Assad. Largely probably an
asset if I if the way that I
feel like broke down, hard to know. Especially
with his late Maxwell's father, it could be
more than that. But asset for sure in
my opinion.
But the fact that they're all doing this,
it just no. Let's put it this way.
It's not that you shouldn't consider that there's
a connection because there are things you could
point to. Epstein files, emails, there are things
in there. But then instead,
in lieu of the obvious, you only point
to that.
To me, it's
insultingly obvious, and everybody sees it. You know,
if they had just come out and be
like, you know, which kind of this article
does, but you'll see the points where it
just clearly wants to shove you in the
direction of Russia. It also does point out
the Mossad points and Israel.
So if they'd come out as the corporate
media and said, here are the connections to
foreign intelligence. There's some point to Russia, some
point to Israel. You can decide. You could
take that as you know, people would respect
that. Of course, not what they do. I
think you know why. Because the Zionist elements,
not Jewish alone, the Zionist elements which exist
all over, including on an atheist side, are
absolutely involved with manipulating what you see and
talk about. It's not a secret. It's not
even a conspiracy theory. It's very clear in
public. So it's important to recognize is that
this is them trying to make you think
it's only Russia ignoring
the far larger body of evidence showing the
connection to Israel. So making that point,
this article does some good stuff in here,
but multiple times tries to make it only
about Russia. And I think that just tells
me something. So it speaks to the platform,
but also just the larger kind of higher
you know, rather
corporate adjacent media and mainstream.
So it says the Metropolitan Police investigation into
Peter mandel Mandelson
over the leaking of sensitive information of Jeffrey
Epstein has established an unambiguous
principle in The UK.
Those who seek to compromise The UK's secrets
to foreign intelligence linked sexual predators
forfeit their access to power.
Now whether they mean that or not, I
find it hard to believe, and I guess
time will tell. There has been a ton
of lot more action
in most places other than The US, which
is pretty embarrassing, pretty telling.
So what's interesting is as they're doing this
and people are being let go and jobs
and, you know, all their stuff's coming out,
whether it's all just moving pieces around with
no accountability, which, again, we'll see how this
ends up. It's still a ton more than
what we're seeing. Trump is basically telling you
to dismiss it right now.
Again, I'll play that in a second. But
realizing that
in
Epstein connection, but ties to foreign governments through
that on the core of the conversation.
It just shows you the difference between the
media. Like, they're they're acting like that's a
conspiracy theory over here. So man Mandelson was
sacked as he as also, by the way,
was the US ambassador.
I think that perfectly makes sense.
So he's the US ambassador. And in The
UK, he's ultimately the one that got fired
for his connection to Epstein and, as you'll
get here more, relaying state secrets.
And so he just so happens to be
The US ambassador. I think that's probably one
of the main you know, one of the
connections there, has resigned his membership of the
Labor Party, Mandelson, and has been forced to
quit the House of Lords over ongoing revelations
about his relationship to Epstein. Wouldn't that be
amazing if all these people, all of our
government, it would seem, resign because they have
connections to him? That would be Trump. That
would be Elon. That would be everybody.
Not in this country, though. They tell you
to shut up. Now he faces potential criminal
charges for misconduct in public office. Now to
be clear, I'm kind of joking. I'm not
arguing UK is doing the right thing. I
don't believe any of these governments are, but
I just think it's worth comparing, you know,
the difference the way it's being handled.
Now it says, yet the same convicted sex
offender who received state secrets from Mandelson was
described by former prime minister of Israel, Ebirak,
as an owner, direct quote, of a Silicon
Valley venture fund controlled by Peter Thiel, the
billionaire founder of defense analytics giant, Palantir Technologies,
which now holds more than £670,000,000
in UK government contracts. You know, that tiny
thing that Liberals obsessed with, if you wanna
ask Alec Jones. Now I'm not talking about
all money investment. It's about the influence and
the control, which, by the way, is a
point you made about Epstein.
Right? You could show many examples where, you
know, it's it's almost subtle, but the influence
is there. The idea that he may not
be the primary investor, but people acknowledge that
he's the one that makes the decisions. Right?
That's it's not just always what's on paper.
So when they make when when they make
the arguments, whoever, like, spoon fed that to
Alex, the argument is, well, the look at
that. A whole bunch of money, you know,
Google and everybody else invested. Okay. That's a
fair point. But if you can't stand back
and look
objectively at how clearly Palantir is, like, the
entity right now in regard to all of
this and how much that's can I tied
to just every other large agenda, I mean,
that's willfully ignorant?
And it says,
contracts spanning nuclear weapon systems,
the NHS patents, records, min Ministry of Defense
operations, police intelligence. See, that's the point too.
Maybe they have, $10,000,000,000
in, you know, I'm trying to think of
something funny, like, you know, mail delivery services.
Okay. Well, you could say, look at all
the money. Well, over here, they've got £670
invested in nuclear technology and health and defense
operations and police intelligence.
The point is, I'm just made out of
the I'm just making a joke right there.
The point is
what they're involved in matters, obviously. And when
Palantir has its fingers in everything this country
is doing, surveillance, personal information, databases,
military, health, and it's the same way in
The UK? Can you point out another entity
like that
across multiple countries? I can't.
Not like that.
This is unique, in my opinion, unprecedented in
what's happening. This is a global change in
my mind. You know I think that. I'm
not gonna shy away from pointing it out,
but I'll always make it clear that's my
opinion
until it's not. In a communication with German
technology investor Nicole Junckerman,
which comes up a lot right now, Ibu
Barak asked Junckerman to attend a meeting with
Valar Ventures executives,
who are seniors in a new investment fund
owned by Peter Thiel and Jeffrey Epstein. That's
in quotes.
That's owned.
Or either no. That was the other one.
It was a he says, who are seniors
in a new investment fund. So this is
Igor Barak
in communication with German technology inventor, Nicole Junkerman.
And it says the email shows that Epstein
and Barak planned to pitch an Israeli tech
surveillance firm,
then called Reporti,
later renamed to Carbine,
rather to Carbine nine one one, later renamed
to Carbine. We've talked about that to Valor
Ventures.
Rather they call their,
what was it? The the email shows that
Epstein and Barack plan to pitch a new
Israeli tech surveillance firm then called Reporti, later
named Carbine, to they're pitching it to Balaban
Balaban Ventures. Excuse me. In 2018,
remember the timing?
At two I mean,
where was it? 2008?
Forget the exact date. But 2018,
this guy was a convicted sexual predator.
Teal's other venture,
Founders Fund, that we've talked about, invested in
the Epstein Barrack firm.
K. So you can see this interconnected point.
It goes back a long way. My point,
other than just how this is compromising,
is that clearly, you've got Peter Thiel, who's
embedded like a tick in this administration, who
is tied directly to somebody who is an
asset for intelligence, but also that they're involved
with a funding overlap for a venture like,
a capital a funding element like for for
almost capital that it's out there funding their
projects.
And then this is what led to where
we are now. So even if you think
Epstein was only a passing part of this,
recognize
what he represents.
Epstein was a player, as a tool, as
a piece in the larger game. He was
not the he did not control,
or rather, he was not the head of
the snake.
So in this case, when you have this
overlap and this part of it is still
going on today, ask yourself whether that is
a continual extension of whatever all of this
was.
Now it goes on to say now remember,
reportedly I mean, let me think if I
wanna do this right now.
Yeah. Why not? Let's jump over really quickly
to carbine and from, Whitney's article on that,
which I've read before, and we'll come right
back to this.
So the prince and the spy. Whitney wrote
this for the last American Vagabond twenty twenty
three.
A T Lab investigation has found that Eric
Prince, the man behind the Blackwater mercenary group,
recently teamed up with Israeli spy,
creating a front company with her to help
Israeli defense technology providers exploit loopholes
in and sell their products to American military.
Remember, him being the token American, they got
to pretend it was an American entity and
they could sell directly to American companies. Just
like the star Stardust Solutions, geoengineering,
it's a Delaware US company except for literally
every part of it is out of Israel.
The what they make, what they do, their
research, everyone who evolved with it, the people
who run it, it's all Israeli intelligence. Or
rather, most of them, the nuclear technology people,
but it's the same kind of point. But
it's Delaware because that's what they wrote on
paper. I mean, this is such an obvious
manipulation. So in this case, as I'll read
again that one part about how they make
those companies, this is about understanding
Carbide nine one one being one of them.
That's the overlap. Is that this is something
that's been going on a long time. Now
whether Palantir is one of those things is
something you should actually ask. But either way,
it's something that is involved with this whole
process. Now as it says,
Carbine was originally founded as Reporti
in 2014 by Leshem. That's this woman here
working with him for a different Israeli intelligence
company to sell to American military.
Pretty interesting, isn't it?
Now remember, reportedly,
our reportee
was in the emails which showed that Epstein
and Barack
plan to pitch this company to Balor Ventures.
And in 2018,
T. O. Other venture, Founders Fund, invested in
this one. So it ended up being their
Founders Fund who invested in Carbine, but it
started as the first one, Balor Ventures. But
either way, is
Epstein and these other Israel connected elements and
pat Peter Thiel invested in what became Carbine,
which is an Israeli overlap surveillance element, guys.
We'll show I'll go over this right here.
Now it says,
Leshem and Ilchi are unit eighty two hundred
veterans.
So right there, you can easily see the
overlap of them investing in that back to
Teal. But it says while the other previously
worked for Israel's prime minister office, before it
was revealed
that Jeffrey Epstein had poured at least $1,000,000
into the company at the behest of his
close associate, Ehud Barak, Carbine's board of directors,
which Barak chaired, included the former commander of
unit a two hundred,
Pinchas,
Birches,
purchase,
as well as Epstein associate turned venture capitalist
Nicole Junkerman.
What you wrote this in 2023?
2023.
Yeah.
Just showing you this was all there long
before this was coming out today. You know?
As usual,
in the wake of the Epstein scandal, Birches,
Barack, and Junkerman Barrack, excuse me, not, you
know, Ehud,
among others, were removed from the board and
were largely replaced with veterans
and former heads of American intelligence and law
enforcement agencies. Leshum had left the company in
2017 but has continued to own shares in
the company. So it's a restart. You start
to get people to pay attention, and so
you pull them into the background. But you
realize what didn't change?
Peter Thiel's investment, who still represents a connection
to that same origin point.
See how see how that see what that
shows you? Now that's opinion, but realize that
this may be the very thing going on
today.
Carbine is a next generation nine one one,
what they call an n g nine one
one platform, and the explicit goal of NG
nine one one is for all nine one
one sent systems nationwide
to be interconnected.
It is currently active throughout The United States,
its main target market. It's think about that.
Why would Israel make that their main target
market? Its software has been criticized due to
serious privacy concerns about the amount of information
it harvests from smartphones that call 911 call
centers dirt running Karbine software. Why would that
be necessary?
For instance, Carbine's smartphone app extracts the following
information from phones,
on which it is installed.
Device location, video livestream, smartphone, the call center,
text messages in a two way chat window,
any data from the user phone if they
have the Carbine app, and any information that
comes over the data link.
That seems like it's necessary. Right? Carbine stores
all data on past calls and events in
order to enable, quote, decision makers to accurately
analyze the past and present behavior of their
callers,
react accordingly, and in time predict future patterns.
So we're talking about precrime. As a result,
Carbine, along with other Israeli intelligence connected companies
seeking to dominate the American public safety market,
has the potential to facilitate
controversial
predictive
policing, precrime policies. In addition to Carbine, Leshem
also worked for Black Cube, who we've mentioned
plenty of times. Think,
Weinstein,
which has since been removed from her LinkedIn.
There, she has been been, she has had
been
there. She had been the firm's director of
marketing. Black Cube was specifically outed as an
Israeli intelligence front organization in 2019,
published an article published by Catalyst Tech. Right?
This is a reality, guys. And and this
is Epstein
hiring former unit eight thousand two hundred Israeli
intelligence to go spy and and and possibly
attack and threaten
his victims.
I mean, all of this connects.
Now it says that same article also contains
a stunning revelation that many Israeli companies, including
Black Cube, have been founded as fronts for
intelligence operations. I've read you this more than
once. It states that in 2012, cyber related
and intelligence projects were previously carried out in
house in the Israeli military, and Israel's main
intelligence arms are transferred to companies that in
some cases were built for the exact purpose.
It adds that in some cases, managers of
development projects
in the Israeli military and intelligence arms were
encouraged by the Israeli government to form their
own companies, which then took over the military
or intelligence project.
That's what this is.
Seems pretty damn simple.
So now going back to this point, 2018,
Thiel shifted switched to founders funds and invested
in a reportee, which was later renamed to
Karbon. So that is an Israeli investment, which
you already know this, though. But just to
make this larger point about how this connects
to the bigger picture of what this is
today and that Palantir is embedded in The
UK and the US governments and plenty more
around the world. A spokesman for Peter Thiel
denied that Epstein was a co owner of
the fund with Thiel, but confirmed that he
was a partner.
But the that's the question about whether or
not it is, you know,
on paper one thing and the reality being
something else, which we know does happen. More
than a 100 documents from the files released
by the US State depart just, Department of
Justice seen by by this platform, by Line
Times, reveal that Peter Thiel personally
solicited and maintained a business partnership with Epstein
that stretched from 2014 through 2019
all the way up to his final arrest
and well after he was known to be
a sexual predator. During this period, internal documents
and communications confirm that Epstein was a significant
limited partner investor in a fund manager managed
by Thiel's Valor Venture firm, receiving confidential and
time sensitive investment opportunities and facilitating meetings between
Thiel and he writes Russian intelligence operatives. This
is according to different information in regard to
the emails. Consider that. It's not something we
should ignore. My point today is not about
whether or not he was part of necessarily,
you know, rather the different larger connections, but
rather to make the main connection between Epstein
and Peter Thiel. Even the Israel part of
it is secondary to the main point of
recognizing that he was simply connected through this.
And that compromise is something that is literally,
I mean, the surveillance apparatus for our country
right now. But the Russian part of it,
I think I'm I think we all sense
there's something being redirected right there. But don't
ignore the information. But it's interesting how Christopher
Steele is playing a role in this again.
It's very telling.
It says and the timeline reveals
a concerning convergence.
Mandelson leaked The UK's secrets to Epstein
between 2009,
2010.
You see, this is the way this works.
This guy should be in prison right now.
He shouldn't have just lost his position. He's
literally leaking state information
to an asset of a foreign government,
whether it be Russia or Israel. Clearly, Israel,
I think you can prove at this point,
but either way,
that's insane. And that's what we're seeing for
every part of these like, that's what's happening
right now.
I'm very much of the mind that these
people have been compromised by some sort of
Epstein network, and that's what's still being applied
right now. And it's Israel putting pushing those
pressure points. Four years later, Thiel urged Epstein
to meet the principles of his firm, Fowler
Ventures, with a view to confirming the sex
offender's multiple million investments.
The following year, Epstein invested $15,000,000
in Valid Ventures and became a limited partner
in Valid Ventures management managed fund. In 2018,
Palantir hired Mandelson's lobbying firm, Global Council, to
facilitate the company's penetration of The UK government
contracts. So at this point, you already have
an overlap, Teal, Epstein, which it goes way
deeper than just this company, but just to
make this clear on the, you know, document
record part,
clearly, there was an overlap.
Now you've got this the 15,000,000
on top of the first point, then you've
got Palantir hired
Mandelson's lobbying firm in order to specifically infiltrate
the UK government. So
there is an obvious connection right there to
an Israeli
intelligence as an element.
I think you can't deny that with what
we're dealing with and what when that all
of these countries
are lockstep in blindly gaslighting for that country
very clearly to their own detriment.
I think that says it for itself, but
question this like you should everything. At the
same time, Epstein remained an active valor
valor partner receiving confidential investments and opportunities from
Thiel's fund and responding to opportunities suggested
by the valor principles. If Mandelson's links to
Epstein disqualifies him from holding power,
why does the company controlled by Epstein's business
partner
retain access to Britain's most sensitive national security
infrastructure? It's a very good question. But you
see, you know the answer already.
Right? He doesn't even get in trouble. He
just got removed from his position.
Nobody goes to jail for this because they're
all in on it, in my opinion. The
reality, though, is that if it's enough to
disqualify him from his position,
why does it not matter that everybody else
who did the same things are still a
part of the UK government apparatus right now?
You realize that was the same connection to
the same people he leaked to. You think
they don't know that?
Now it says documents seen by Byline Times
revealed the depth and duration of Peter Thiel's
personal business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, a partnership
that continued
years after Epstein's 2,008 conviction for for soliciting
prostitution from a minor.
Don't you think that would change the opinion?
Like, if Peter Thiel and the rest don't
care about that, that says everything you need
to know about who they are.
The only question is to what degree they
go further that direction. That's how I would
look at it. You don't end up ignoring
this, or you could argue that it's that
same point, really.
Money and making that money is more important
than concerning yourself with who you're working with.
Maybe that's why they work with the genocide
and community government. I think it's more. I
think it's ideological. But either way, they're not
the people who they're pretending to be. That's
obvious.
And it says a partnership that continued after
his prosecution. The documents squarely contradict Thiel's suggestion
that he was not close to him, but
so too does Elon Musk and Donald Trump
and all the rest. They're just lying. Everyone
knows that right now. Dot and that that's
why we have to demand something beyond this,
not just embarrassment.
Documents show that Epstein quickly but secretly became
an a major investor in Thiel's fund.
Secretly.
On 11/15/2014,
Peter Thiel personally emailed Epstein soliciting 10 to
$20,000,000
for Valor Ventures.
Email's right there. A meeting in December 2014
was arranged at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse with Peter
Thiel's principals, Andrew McCormick and James Fitzgerald, the
same property that would later be notorious
as a location where numerous women said they
were sexually abused, but nothing to see there.
However, the former Israeli prime minister's email ascribing
joint ownership of the fund to Peter Thiel
and Jeffrey Epstein reveals that both Barack and
Epstein perceived this as a far deeper than
passive investment. That matters.
Far from being a mere distant associate, internal
Valor Ventures Communications
disclosed that in the Epstein files examined by
byline confirms or times byline excuse me.
Far from being a distant association,
the communications disclosed in the files that they
examined confirmed that Peter Thiel has his firm
treated
why why don't how do we miss these?
That Peter Thiel and his firm treated the
convicted convicted sex offender
as an active premium partner in a way
consistent with Eudbrock's description. Basically, point is that
you look at the way they engage with
him, it shows you they treat him as
if he is a main principal investor, not
some sideline person, which
is obvious.
In November 2018, Thiel's firm solicited additional capital
for Epstein,
continuing, like, right up until he was arrested
as late as March 2019,
four months before he was arrested on federal
sex trafficking charges.
This I think it was just it's so
crazy to me to think about how obvious
this is with where these people are right
now and what they're conducting.
The scale of Epstein's investment in Valor Ventures
grew significantly. The original 15,000,000
commitment grew to $40,000,000.
Epstein's stake is now worth approximately a 170,000,000,
making it the largest single asset in Epstein's
estate
according to estate filings.
So
the investment in Peter Thiel's company
so the Epstein stake in at in Ballard
Ventures
is right now the largest single asset in
his estate. Doesn't that mean something? He's got
more invested in Peter Thiel than anything else
in the conversation, but there's nothing to see
there.
I mean, this is just wild, guys. And
on top of that, Valor Ventures stake is
currently held by the nineteen fifty three trust,
which, if you forgot, Epstein signed two days
before he died or whatever actually happened. The
trust is administered by Epstein's longtime lawyer, Darren
k, Indyke,
and accountant, Richard d Conn, who serve as
coexecutors. I mean, imagine being able to just
shove all of your assets into a trust.
You know, the guy is a sex trafficker.
And the guy in the that this that
money that he was ill gotten is just
gonna sit there because of some legal this
is wild to me. They have to realize
I'm not suggesting that there'll be a a
lobby broken, but there's already been examples that
the government I mean, they
Trump's administration
has demonstrated a willingness to do anything they
want if they rationalize it. And I'm not
saying they should, but the and here's an
example from all these administrations where this just
continues to sit there. I'm of the mind
this is obviously a continuation of the same
thing.
The money doesn't the money now that just
sits the money gets to continue.
It's just as wild to me. But lastly,
between 2009 and 2010,
while serving as business secretary and then prime
minister Gordon Brown's government,
we now know that Peter Mandelson mand Mandelson
in The UK had systematically
leaked market sensitive government information to Jeffrey Epstein.
That pre the previous year, however, Palantir Technologies,
Teal's data surveillance company,
hired
Mandelson's lobbying firm,
Global Council. The explicit purpose was to position
Palantir
as a respectable partner to the British government.
So right so now you could argue that
Palantir represents this infiltrating
element or whatever you wanna look at it
as. Either way, the connections are there. It's
the same problem. And now they hire the
guy who was removed from his position and
his firm
to
get inside the UK government. Does that make
any sense whatsoever? They just removed the guy,
and they don't think they know that? Now
it says at this point, both Teal and
Mandelson were intimately connected to Epstein.
You realize what referring is before this moment,
but it's still right now is the circumstance.
This is raising the question of how much
Palantir's leadership and indeed Peter Thiel himself knew
about the nature and extent of Mandelson's relationship
with Epstein when they engaged in global council.
Come on.
Question it. Be objective.
But look at what we could see, and
look at the connectant here. The guy is
tied to him the same way they are.
He doing the same thing they wanted. I
mean, it's I think it's pretty obvious deductive
logic that there's a reason they went to
him in the first place. The documented records
show that Global Council's engagement with Palantir was
not passive advisory work but active high level
facilitation.
Matthew Swindells, who served as the deputy chief
executive of NHS England until July 2019,
joined global council just two months later in
September 2019, at which point he immediately began
advising Palantir on NHS contracts. What a coincidence.
Swindells would go on to chair Palantir's health
advisory board. It's just this big incestuous circle
of manipulation, guys, while simultaneously
serving as joint chair of four prominent NHS
hospital trusts, including Chelsea and Westminster Hospital,
the first to pilot Palantir Technologies. What do
you know? In December 2021, Peter Mandelson's global
council and Palantir
jointly hosted a webinar on, quote, the next
steps The UK should take in release realizing
The UK's life sciences vision. Life sciences. You
know exactly what Epstein, his eugenics mindset, was
investing in.
Swindells chaired the meeting. The webinar marked the
formal release of a Palantir white paper that
bore striking similarities to the NHS data strategy
published six months later, June 2022. Just a
coincidence, though, we're told. When Starmer traveled to
Washington in February 2025 for a meeting at
Palantir's headquarters, it was Mandelson, of course, who
arranged the prime minister's visit through the British
embassy.
Less than seven months after that that that
Starmer Palantir meeting, in September 2025,
Palantir won a £240
million a £240,000,000
prime, Ministry of Defense contract
without a competitive tender.
The full contract remains redacted, of course, because
that's what honest groups do today.
What the public knows is that Palantir software
now processes data across, quote,
all security classifications
for, quote, critical, strategic, tactical, and live operational
decision making
throughout Britain's defense apparatus with systems designed to
be inoperable
inoperable with NATO and other allied nations, Palantir
systems. You know, Israel included, by the way.
So you have an obvious connection here to
the very thing we're all concerned about, or
what I'm highlighting is something you should be
concerned about in my opinion. Palantir in particular,
who has used an Epstein associate to work
its way into the UK government. And now
what you're seeing
is that they're processing
all security classifications for all strategic tactical live
operational, like this huge,
huge mandate.
And this is a small thing? Alex Jones,
it's a small thing we shouldn't care about.
It's a small little thing. This is a
global
invest
infiltrating
security apparatus type of thing. Or I guess
apparatus is the wrong word.
But this is something well, I could be
wrong about what their intentions are. Maybe they
just wanna help everybody. I disagree with that.
But it's weird, is it not, to see
how this is connected to the genocide, to
what's going on in Gaza in general with
the new steps they're taking after that with
the Freedom City, smart city, tokenized world, to
the Freedom City, promos promos capital network state
discussion,
to the infiltration of our ICE surveillance,
to biometrics.
I mean, every single angle of this, this
is bigger than we can even,
you know, contextualize in our minds.
Should matter. And it it's also happened in
The UK and plenty of other places in
the world. It's a huge thing. And for
someone to call it a small thing that
you shouldn't care about should be alarming as
hell.
Meanwhile, the nerve has documented at least 34
Palantir contracts with UK government departments,
agencies, authorities, with a combined value exceeding £670,000,000
The true figure is likely higher as multiple
contracts remain unacknowledged or heavily redacted. Why would
that even be the case?
The deepest penetration has occurred in Britain's most
sensitive systems, the atomic weapons establishment.
Great.
Responsible for Britain's nuclear warheads. Holds Palantir contracts
worth £15,000,000,000
for cloud computing sport support of the nuclear
weapons program.
The pattern across all these UK government contracts
is consistent.
Minimal transparency,
heavy redaction,
direct awards without competition,
and a revolving door of former officials moving
from government positions to pound to your employment.
No big deal. Just the usual disgusting circle
of corruption.
The national security threat. The British government response
to the Mandelson scandal established a clear principle.
As I said in the beginning, those who
compromised British secrets Britain Britain's secrets and Jeffrey
Epstein forfeit the right to
access
power. Of course, they don't get their rights
restrict. They don't go to prison. They don't
get charged with a crime. They just get
they lose their access to power.
Right? You're on the inside, but now our
penalty is that you don't have any access
anymore. These are we're talking about major crimes,
selling state secrets with a guy who's sex
trafficking children. But, you know, you lose your
access to power. Like, even if they state
that, like, that's enough
shows you the whole thing.
Last part, the significance of this decision is
heightened given the mounting credible evidence that Epstein
was a vector for foreign influence operations.
The same logic applies to Peter Thiel and
Pounds Your Technologies. I couldn't agree more.
Thiel personally
solicited, obtained, and maintained a business partnership with
Jeffrey Epstein that stretched from 2014 to 2019,
I think before that as well. And both
principals and staff of his firm, Valor, maintained
a stream of regular communication with Epstein in
that period,
including regular efforts to pull in more investment
from him. No less than a former Israeli
prime minister who collaborated closely with him for,
for years described Peter Thiel and Epstein as
owners of the fund.
Embedding Palantir into The UK's most critical,
excuse me, and sensitive systems
represents an urgent national security risk precisely because
its chairman, Peter Thiel, was a co owner
with a convicted sex offender operating as a
vector for malign foreign influence
through whom he cultivated his own connections to
the senior Russian officials as they write
or
whatever else they're working with. Israel, UK,
US. The point being,
this is a guy you removed because of
this very connection.
And now you've allowed the company through that
connection to have such invasive and obvious control
over, and that's just not a problem. I
think this is the problem. I think this
is the end result of what this was
meant to distract from. The continuation of what
the plan really was.
This is not a company that shares Britain's
values. It is a company controlled by a
billionaire who actively partnered as he writes with
Russian intelligence linked sex trafficker. Really? I'm just
laughing at this. You just wrote up here
about the connection to literal Israeli prime ministers,
to the Israel overlap, to intelligence, 8,200.
And because of a couple of mentions of
Russian connection in the emails, you make the
argument to partnered with Russian intelligence link. He's
not a Russian intelligence link sex trafficker based
on what you just wrote.
At at best, he's a foreign intelligence, but
Israel is what you highlighted. So even their
article,
they write it a Russian intelligence linked sex
trafficker, which you could argue is not inaccurate,
but it's clearly,
what's the right term for that? You know,
they're like, you've got one data point here.
You've got a 100,000 over here. You don't
make it about the one data point. Right?
It's very weird. But like I said, consider
it like anything else.
But the point
if Palantir is a company controlled by a
billionaire who actively partnered with Jeffrey Epstein and
granted access to Britain's most sensitive systems by
a lobbying firm whose founder had compromised himself
to Jeffrey Epstein
and is now removed from power because of
it. The British government moved swiftly to sever
Mandelson's ties underscores the extent to which his
secretive and intimate relationship with Epstein posed an
ongoing security threat.
The logic that removed Mandelson must now be
applied to Palantir. Right?
You have to call this out. I mean,
the reality is this is the same point.
So clearly, they're making an exception for Palantir.
Why would that be? Maybe they don't have
the power to remove them. Britain's nuclear weapons
program,
NHS patient data, military operations, and police intelligence
should not be controlled by a company whose
founder was Jeffrey Epstein's business partner and somebody
who clearly
works for Israeli intelligence.
Think about that. Or any. Make it Russia
if that makes you feel better. Why would
you want a Russian linked anything and an
Israel linked intelligent anything to have control over
all those things?
Just
on,
like, a holder level, guys. This is just
so shockingly clear.
Now, again,
everybody look over there. Look at the Russian
connection. You know, the elephant in the room
being so obvious it says everything.
Here's what Thomas Massie had to say about
the Israel connection. I just thought it was
interesting seeing as how, you know, he's been
saying a lot of the quiet parts out
loud by design. You know? And I'm I'm
glad. Still be skeptical. Question him like you
would anybody.
Do you believe Netanyahu's
involvement with Trump is influencing the decision of
the Epstein file release?
I think,
Israel is influencing the Epstein file release because,
Israeli intelligence and our own CIA
was wrapped up with Epstein.
And so
it would be embarrassing to our own intelligence
agencies as well as Israel's intelligence agencies for
all that to come out. And if you
if you notice, there
are a lot of bots online and and
people who are paid.
Maybe they're not robots, but they are paid,
and they're going after Marjorie and I Mhmm.
Uniquely.
And I think it's because we are against
the war
that Israel has in Gaza right now,
and we want that to end. And we
don't vote for foreign aid, and we don't
vote for military aid for,
these other countries that are at war,
and we get in trouble for that.
Do you think Epstein's still alive?
No.
And do you think he was a Mossad
agent?
He I mean, what's it? Let's talk about
agent. I think he helped Mossad. Was he
collecting blackmail on our politicians and that's why
no one wants these released?
You know,
I don't know if it was blackmail,
but, like, does is let's say you were
a drug user and you bought drugs from
a drug dealer. The drug dealer doesn't blackmail
you. The drug dealer has what you want,
and then Mhmm. You start doing things for
the drug dealer. I think Epstein was a
That's certainly one way to look at it,
but there was blackmail. That's a provable reality.
Right? So it's a weird I don't know.
It's just it's an odd thing to say.
Also, I wanna point out a funny news.
Who who's people like, I don't know who
this woman is. This isn't funny how these
like, we're being so completely, like, you know,
I the people like this, you know, if
you listen to the way they talk and
the way they're discussing things, it's just funny
how we're being completely overrun with these new
people that are just, you know I don't
wanna downplay. Who knows? Maybe the intentions are
good. I just think it's interesting out there.
The the caliber, the quality
is just so lacking,
you know? And that's and there's a reason
that certain platforms are suppressed because it is
night and day. The analytical the the thought
process, the analytical, you know, understanding,
the breaking things down, the pattern acknowledgement,
you know? It's very different than just, you
know, surface level discussion about what we all
see, which is what most of it does
today. Now I'm no way knocking this problem
just in regard to the
the reality that he's speaking with somebody and
you're wondering why it's all pointing out. I
think that was it really for the clip.
Sex trafficker.
And so I'm not sure supplied the the
women. I'm not sure that he was blackmailing
his clients, but he was definitely
getting favors from them
by,
finding them women and offering women to them.
So I'm not sure and then, obviously, once
you've done enough of that, there is a
lot of blackmail material. You don't think there's,
like, hidden tapes anywhere buried in the the
ground in a bunker somewhere?
Yeah. I think there probably are tapes like
that. I I mean, some of the chats
say it might be his wife. I don't
know. It might make sense. Just seems like
an odd, you know, this this is getting
you know,
imagine if this was any one of us
with much more articulate questions and more invasive,
you know, it's just one it's that's just
not how it works today. That's why we
just gotta keep moving, keep doing our thing,
you know. But the bottom line,
he's very
like he said, asset, you know, agent. I
mean, it's it's
undeniable
at this point. It's been it's been acknowledged
and discussed many, many, many times. But as
Jason Baster points out, in kind of in
in, conjunction with the larger kind of new
world discussion,
Epstein to Peter Thiel. As always, here's the
actual email so you can check it for
yourself.
I represent the Rothschilds, he says.
Jason writes, this email explains more about how
the world actually works than any White House
presser or Trump's speech. The people at the
top don't just know each other. They operate
as a single insulated power network. And whether
you agree with that or not, here's the
email right here.
Starts down here
where it says, I'm in New Mexico 3
And 4 3rd 3rd And 4th if you'd
like to visit. From Jeff Jeffrey Epstein to
Peter Thiel.
This is Peter Thiel. It's important.
We will be hard as I'm scrambling to
get ready for China. Anyone else in New
Mexico? This is 2016.
How long their relationship went on? But I
don't know him that well. But it says,
as you probably know, I represent the Rothschilds.
Jeffrey Epstein said to Peter Thiel in 2016,
I was hoping to figure out a way
for the bank that has $1.60 160,000,000,000
in management can do something in tech. Best
client list in the world, prehistoric products. It
can wait. Good luck in China. I'll be
in Europe into again, 2028, then I then
Ireland. So if you wanna come around the
world
going west,
come to the island. Or if you want
would like to meet in Saudi at the
end of the month.
And he says, certainly not in Saudi. Just
think I'll avoid the Middle East for the
next decade or so.
Interesting thing to say with what they're doing
over there. Should be back on the East
Coast in late May. Okay. So I represent
the Rothschilds, he says. But, you know, you
could take it. They knew each other before
this. So it's a weird thing to say.
But either way,
the idea of the bank you know, you
could try you could always try to make
it into something else. But I think we
know the reality of this, guys, and I
think we know why it's important. It's not
some you know, other than the what they
might frame as provable things as conspiracy,
it's not some abstract thing. It's a wealthy
influential entity that's been around a long time
that gets very little coverage. And even when
you're discussing wealthy families, which says something, but
it matters in the larger connection that does
connect to Israel, that does connect to the
larger global conversation and power structures.
But I think that's relevant.
Now on that same note,
they're deleting information.
And as Dart points out, well, here, started
at 12/1973
when you search for Rothschild.
Later yesterday, 11/2012.
And a couple of hours ago, down to
11/1960.
Like, you can't deny this at this point,
guys. This has been going on continually. Now,
that's what I said earlier. The next article
we get get into discusses what they've failed
to redact, and that might be by design.
Or maybe they're gonna use their their clumsy
incompetent mistake to rationalize why now they're deleting.
You know? Who knows? But it's worth considering
because that they could go, well, we made
mistakes, and that's why we're removing stuff. It's
not nefarious.
And if it's if that's planned, then they
created a structure where then they can take
and leave and remove and add, and we'll
never know. That's it kinda makes sense in
a way. But, you know, I always say
it to be objective. I have a very
low opinion of of most of these people
right now. They've continually shown themselves to be
shockingly incompetent and just clumsy with what they
do. But that's not everybody, and it doesn't
mean they couldn't still come out with a
crafty move. But has anyone saved the entire
batch? See, they write. Well, here's what I
see right now. Let's update it and see.
11/1943.
So it stayed the same today for me.
But as even they're showing, the last one
they checked, 11860.
And you can see it right here.
So they have deleted more information since you
posted this on February 3, as it's now
down at a bunch more.
Very simple. If you're honest out there, that
should matter to you. They're deleting information without
telling anybody anything. They're not supposed to be
deleting anything. They're supposed to be adding more
since there's not enough. They haven't put everything
out by law, by the way. So if
all those out there trying to make there
was a post about moral panic.
Man, this isn't gonna work. Well, you know
what? There are gonna be some consequences because
of the way they handle this. Not not
even saying it should be that way. But
they have done this the way they've done
it and dragged their feet and hid this
from us forever. So now right rightly so,
people have pitchforks and torches, and we're saying
we demand this. And, yes, their clumsy actions,
by design or not, have allowed pea put
out information of people that shouldn't have
sexual pictures of people, images you know,
subjective claims that are being used to go
after people that might or might not be
guilty.
And then you got all these internal insiders
clutching their pearls and wringing their hands and
going, this isn't you're gonna hurt innocent people.
Well, yeah. So too did Epstein, though. I'm
not saying we should be hurting innocent people.
But you know what? I think the transparency
and the truth, that's, you know somebody releasing
a body of information you know, a database
of information that should have been public a
long time ago. And that because of your
actions leads to people's overreactions,
it's like fire in a theater. It's not
the you know, the person is gonna go,
oh my god. That guy's a guilty criminal
because of some crayon drawn picture. Is that's
their problem. Right? The truth still matters. But
doesn't mean there won't be some issues because
of that. And I, again, make it because
of the way they handled this. But you'll
see them out there talking about moral panic,
which is just insane. You're talking about people
who tortured and manip mutilated and traffic children.
It's information you can prove long before this
release.
Hold on. I was
I deviated into the moral panic, and I
was gonna make one more point than I
forgot. But, anyway, we'll get I don't think
I included that. But the reason I brought
it up was because people are starting to
act like, you know, we we this is
gonna you know, this is a problem, and
it's only we need to remove it all
because it's only gonna hurt. It just it
just seems like a very obvious self serving
empire serving narrative. But I do wanna reiterate,
like I said in the very beginning,
a lot of this is subjective and is
not provable information. I said that the very
first day this came out. The 14 year
old girl and all this stuff will be
there's there's enough evidence to where that should
be not not only not something you dismiss,
but something you give a lot of thought
to.
But that claim is just a report that
somebody claimed.
So they could be wrong. They could be
lying. They could paid to be lying. You
know, any number of things. That doesn't mean
dismiss it. Consider it. Keep it in the
database. Make sure you and and investigate is
the point. But right now, like I told
you, they will. You've got tons of people
out there pointing to that stuff like it
proves everything.
It doesn't.
But adds to what we can prove, and
I think that's important. But you also have
things like the Mossad claim
or specifically Trump being compromised by Israel, which,
you know, I think. In fact, I think
you can easily prove it long before I
had hiccups today.
Long before we got here. I mean, easily.
So now if you'll point at that one
screenshot, by the way, not even the link,
but the screenshot of the link on the
database and say, see, it says he was
compromised by Israel. Proof.
That is hurting what we're doing.
Good intention people are doing that. That is
not proof. That is a statement made by
somebody, which when you read it is clearly
subjective. It's their opinion they're stating. But I
also agree it's true, but that should not
be what we point to to make the
proof claim.
That's how this works today, guys. And I
I'm willing to bet you it will get
to a point where they have to acknowledge
something being removed or the database being changed
because everyone's you know, you guys aren't responsible
enough to deal with things like this. You
know, whatever ends up becoming. Or here's why
we need AI involved, even though that's already
largely part of why things are redacted weirdly,
in my opinion. They've already told you that.
Back to this.
So Rothschild's being censored. That's obvious. Okay. Well,
here, Trump, his name is also continually being
censored. As Ryan Ross beyond has been basically
covering and continuing to keep up on, this
is posted on the second, over 460
Epstein files on Trump have been removed.
And he says, yes. That one too. On
January 30, there were 5,361
files. February 2, there was 4,896.
The infamous file on Trump that is in
the video below has been removed. Now
most of these are the ones I'm talking
about that are not verifiable, but statements and
affidavits rather not even affidavits, just interviews
of people,
which is evidence. It matters. It's not proof,
but evidence, and evidence should never be ignored
or disregarded.
But what's interesting is as of today
oh, wait. This is the oh, that's right.
I just shared his his this basically just
showing you that as of my search,
it was 4816.
Let's see what it is now.
Oh, that went went down one more. That's
why I did this. So as of when
I started today, it was 4816.
Okay? Now it's 4800
and
'15.
That's that's a deleting of I mean, it's
believe beleaguered the point. I'm I'm belaboring the
point. It's still important.
They're literally deleting Epstein files. As we talk
about this, guys, get that in front of
somebody to see it. It's in that's right
there in front of you, and it's a
lot of it. And these are just topics
that are big ones. They're probably deleting stuff
that we can't even imagine. They're and on
top of everything else, if that's what they
put out, imagine what they haven't released.
So
that well, I I can't already went over
this. I just put that note for myself.
Like, the idea being, guys, oh, I guess
I kinda didn't, though. So the second point
I wanted to make there is other than
subjective information and making sure we're being honest
about what that is,
the the say the saying is always, don't
miss the forest for the trees. If you
don't know what that means, it simply means
don't overfocus
on on it can go it can go
really both ways, but I think the the
statement means don't overfocus on the broad and
miss what's right in front of you. And
I think that's really important. And I make
this case I make this point about so
many examples, Lahaina, East Palestine.
I mean, even with Gaza to some degree.
You know, is that and what and the
point to make it simple is that, like,
with East Palestine or anything else, it becomes
the focus on the larger narrative, which matters.
You know, whether it's a conspiracy, whether this
is about hiding something or, you know, a
national you know, something was going on with
the I mean, any number of ways you
could make it a larger story.
Right? And and so you focus on that,
like the the hurricane and lithium and okay.
Instead of recognizing that in on top of
rather, before you even get to that,
they committed crimes.
In Lahaina, in number of locations, they committed
crimes that we should be able to go,
okay. Wait a minute. They killed those people.
They stole from those people. They they dumped
chemicals here. People are sick. Like, that should
be held they should be held accountable.
But instead,
the the ridiculous,
you know, clapping seals and partisanship come come
out and get you to look at these
larger points. But in design to make
you basically consume yourself with something that can't
be proven, blue roofs and whatever else, which
are actually proven to be that that was
them as deceiving you. Or rather them being
deceived. Hard to tell.
They lied to you. Stu Peters literally changing
the color of of of,
Oprah's roof to claim it was blue. It
wasn't. I prove this. It's all so stupid,
but they do this so you miss that
they're literally just
painting over people's homes, lying to everybody. People
are missing. And instead,
we we
the crimes in the moment don't get held
accountable. Right? I mean, how about just even
COVID nineteen?
I mean, why has nobody ever been held
accountable for all the things we can prove?
Isn't that a a similar version of what's
happening right now? They know that they can
just muddy the waters with subjective information that's
probably true, but we will bury ourselves in
the abstract and miss the forest for the
trees. So let's not do that.
Let's demand accountability for basic crimes we can
prove and then move on to the larger
considerations.
Or do both, but make sure we don't
miss the fact that they're breaking the law
right now.
These people should all be in prison, but
we get distracted every time by design.
And here's a possible overlap to that. Now
this is interesting. Epstein files and it's also
just unnervingly disgusting.
Epstein files rife with uncensored
nudes
and victims' names despite redaction files. I mean,
come on.
I honestly have a hard time believing this
was by accident, but I do have a
very low opinion of people like Kash Patel
and Bahandi and the rest. Wouldn't surprise me.
You could see a couple things. You could
see them basically
being rushed
and using AI thinking that was good enough
because that's who they are, or that they
got rushed and, you know, they they basically
just said, screw it, put it out or
whatever. You know? Who you could see these
things happening with people like this.
Or there's a larger play here that we
don't see.
So this is yesterday. Nude photos.
The names of faces of sexual abuse victims.
Bank accounts. Social Security numbers. Remember all the
lip service they gave to doxxing and still
are even though they're not doxxing when you
call out the name of a person who's
supposed to legally give you their name, like
an ICE
person. But this is literally dot you're doxxing
the people you claim you were protecting,
whether by accident or not. And it shows
you that their aim was clearly not about
them. If the argument was this took so
long because we were protecting them, that that
means you took so long because you were
going out of your way to make sure
you didn't make those mistakes.
That's not what they were doing. Clearly, they
were covering up for their friends, and this
was what it shows you their clumsiness.
All of these things appear in the mountain
of documents released Friday by the US justice
department as part of its effort to comply
with a law requiring it to open its
investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein. That law was
intended to preserve important privacy protections for Epstein's
victims. Their names were supposed to have been
blacked out in documents.
In fact, that was the only thing they
claimed they were really doing. Right? Their faces
may be safe for national security. Their faces
and bodies were supposed to be obscured in
the photos.
Mistakes, though, have been rampant.
A review by the Associated Press. Now shouldn't
there be legal accountability accountability
just for that?
Like, genuinely speaking, like, somebody whether it's a
a small thing or not. And not I
mean, the action. I mean, whether it's a
small accountability measure or not. You're talking about
the fact that you released somebody who's already
been sexually
abused.
And they're now you're releasing their naked pictures
within a files about their abuse. That's just
like, oh, that's I mean, so dark. It
makes me,
like,
it makes me wonder why there was intentional.
Like, some kind of dark, disgusting overlap to
all of this. It really does.
I mean, think about how gross that is.
And then ask yourself whether people like Cash
should be accountable for that. Shouldn't there be
something that you did you what did you
just do? Was that I mean, fired at
the very least, but I doubt that'll happen
right now, at least not for this.
A photo of one girl
oh, it says Associated Press and other news
news organizations have found countless examples of sloppy,
inconsistent, or nonexistent redactions that have revealed sensitive
private information. On top of that, a photo
of one girl, who, by the way, was
underage when she was hired to give sexualized
massages to Epstein in Florida, appeared in a
chart of his alleged victims. Police reports with
the names of several of his victims, including
some of of who never stepped forward
to identify themselves publicly were released
with no redactions. So you have all these
victims up there who are saying, here's my
name. I'm okay with this coming out. Release
the damn files, you criminals.
And you say, we're trying to keep them
from, you know, their names being released. And
then you release the names of people who
have yet to even come forward.
Maybe also by design, by the way.
Despite the justice department's efforts to fix the
oversights,
what does that mean? Are they pulling things
back? Are they reredacting? No one's saying that.
That's probably what they're gonna say to justify
files disappearing.
A selfie
taken by a nude female in a bathroom
and another by a topless female remained on
the site.
Their age is unknown, but their face is
in full view as of Wednesday's evening as
when they posted this.
I just still can't get past that. I
couldn't believe it.
And now, essentially, what you're doing is downloading
child pornography.
Some accusers and their lawyers called this week
for the justice department to take down the
site
and appoint an independent monitor to prevent further
errors. You could you could argue that might
have been some crafty plan.
It's a it's a gamble for sure. Again,
I say that to be objective. I don't
think they're that crap. I have a low
opinion of them. I know you know that.
The failure here is not merely technical, it
says. It is a failure to safeguard human
beings who were promised protection by our government.
Until every document is properly redacted, that failure
is ongoing.
Whether you want more action or not, realize
they don't care about you guys. They use
you as the excuse when they need to.
We're fighting for them, and then they screw
them over. Ask the Kurds. Ask anybody they
pretend they're fighting for. Ask the Iranians. Ask
the Syrians. Ask anybody.
Annie Farmer, who said she was 16 when
she was sexually assaulted by Epstein, and his
confidant, Maxwell,
said that while her name has previously been
public,
other details that she kept private,
her birthday, her phone number,
were revealed in the documents.
That is just I mean, again, unless there's
some weird dark overlap to that, just incompetence.
At this point, she says, I'm feeling really
most of all angry about the way this
was on has unfolded.
The fact that it's been done in such
a beyond careless way where people have been
endangered because of it is really horrifying. Now
realize, guys, other people have been killed.
There's not this is not a a single
person. People are happy you could argue their
lives are at risk because of that, and
that's kind of what I meant by the
possible dark overlap.
Now it says the justice department has blamed
technical or human errors. Right? That's why we
need AI. Well, let's realize they've already used
AI.
But they say there's human errors and technical
on problems and said it has taken down
many of the problematic materials. You see how
that works? And now it's working to republish
properly redacted versions.
Law the law gave the justice department just
thirty days to release the files. It missed
the deadline, which was a crime, by the
way, in part because it said it needed
more time to comply with privacy protections that
it literally didn't even meet.
But maybe you think that makes sense. That's
why. See, they had to rush. But recognize,
guys, this has not been a thirty day
process. They've had these files for years.
So are you to pretend they've been doing
literally nothing? Probably.
But all that shows you is that they
don't care about any of this. And for
whatever reason, they're being forced, pressured.
They have no other choice than to do
what they're doing right now.
The database, which is posted on the,
justice department website, presents the largest release of
files to date in the years long investigation,
which is right.
And that regardless of how you think they're
intending to use this is something that Trump
is responsible for.
That's worth noting.
And maybe this will pan out in the
future where he gets shown to be the
guy who broke it all down. I certainly
hope so. I have no love for Trump
or any of them, but why would somebody
not want him to turn out to be
the good guy if what he's doing is
everything you want?
The only reason that wouldn't be something you
want is because you're a partisan who only
has
ideologically driven division tactics in your mind.
I don't like Trump, but if he came
out and did everything I ever wanted, why
would I be why would I be like,
no. Because Trump's bad. That's just stupid. That
means you hate Trump over everything else, even
against your own interests. But same thing goes
to Biden and the say left Democrats were
Republican. They all this is what they do
at that level, but it's a diminishing number.
They have also found many cases of overzealous
redactions.
This is just funny to me. This is
why I'm pretty clearly the things this AI.
In one news clipping including in the file,
the justice department apparently blacked out the name
of Joseph
from a photo caption describing a nativity scene
in California.
It's a church nativity scene. This is Mary,
Jesus, Mary, and redacted.
It's so stupid. But you could argue it's
because of an AI mistake, which is what
we keep seeing AI do, or there's a
a Joe that they were trying to cover
for that we don't know yet. You know?
It's like, who knows? But it says in
an email released, in the files,
a dog's name appeared to have been redacted.
It says, I spent an hour walking redacted
and then another hour bathing her, blow drying
her, and brushing her. I hope she smells
better. Or, yes, maybe not. That's pretty horrifying.
But it says the justice department said has
said,
staff tasked with preparing the files for release
were instructed to limit redactions
only to information related to victims and their
families.
Though, in many documents, easy to prove, by
the way, the names of many other people
are blacked out, including lawyers, public figures, so
that shouldn't have happened at all. But, of
course, they just yell national security, and I
guess that covers everything. It's also the thousands
of times Donald Trump's name has been removed.
But it says, Justice Department has said it
intended to black out any portion of a
photo showing nudity
and any and any photos of women that
could potentially show a victim. They did not
do that. Realize there was one example of
a a, was it something, a dawn something?
And the question could simply be that it
was about, you know, maybe it was a
Donald Trump point. Right? Where's the
the AI was about stopping all the Donald
stuff and it kinda covered that up too.
But it says in some photos revealed,
the redactions did obscure women's faces, but left
plenty of their bare skin exposed in a
way that would likely embarrass the women anyway.
Photos showed identifiable women trying on outfits in
clothing stores, dressed rooms, or lounging in bathing
suits. One set of more than a 100
images of young women's were nearly all blacked
out,
save for the very last image where you
saw her face.
God.
I mean, it was again, if it's incompetence,
it's exactly what I've expected, but it's worth
asking whether there's more to it.
Andrew Cote
makes a good argument here
and says there's really one only one thing
you need to see to understand the Epstein
files that he argues are a controlled disclosure
to shape public opinion without revealing much of
the truth.
A different framing because somebody else agreed with
arguing that it's about revealing the truth, but
in a way that will stop them from
from, you know, in the way they're doing
it, designed to stop things from actually changing
or accountability.
But saying here that you're not really receiving
much of the truth, but some of it.
He says, and it's this, a photo down
here.
This was one of the photos released.
A woman with her face removed, but a
SpaceX shirt on.
And it says,
a photo included in the files that is
clearly photoshopped to include a SpaceX logo on
the t shirt.
Why would they do this? Now you could
argue they just are stupid,
you know, but that's not the they'd always
rather be seen as as incompetent than criminal,
so consider that.
But it says it's easy to understand in
his opinion.
If you make the problem, in quotes, big
enough, and I do agree with that, and
diffuse enough
so it ambiguously touches almost every person of
wealth and power and influence, but without divulging
the real details that matter, that's what he
means by limited truth, Like the names of
people emailing things about murder, torture, etcetera, which
we've all seen. Redactions and don't protect victims,
which we've all seen, but instead protect criminals.
Then you do two things. The public, quote,
feels like it knows the truth,
that this was a disgusting and widespread ring
of corruption and evil, right,
while also obfuscating any actionable things, which is
what Trump is saying. But the whole team
is saying
anything actionable that would lead to people going
to jail, being punished for their crimes.
It becomes a general indictment of society
without any specific ammunition to bring justice about
does not feel like where this is going
as an added bonus the ambiguity of specific
guilt
with the preponderance of evidence of wrongdoing sets
everyone in each other's throats
instead of society versus evil become society versus
itself while evil gets off the hook.
Very well said it is likely that people
within the DOJ and FBI spent a long
time carefully pruning the set of materials to
be disclosed, ensuring there was enough there to
incite outrage, but not enough to be actionable.
Now
you could almost say yes because you realize
that most the parts that we're most angry
about are the redactions of the names. In
one of these other than Epstein, for example.
Can you prove that's what I was saying
before. There's plenty of damning information, but it
will never, in a court of law, put
any of them in jail right now unless
and that I mean, we'll see what continues
to come out of this.
But I feel like that's a very well,
I that's an important point. At this point,
he says you should basically have the mindset
of everything coming from official sources is constructed
with the intent to mislead, manipulate, obfuscate, and
shape public opinion to achieve some political end.
Yes. Think that, that doesn't mean ignore what
it shows. That's what the other person was
saying as well. Consider it, but also recognize
that it may be being used to deceive
you in some way. The truth.
It says FBI director Kash Patel going on
record saying there's no evidence of child trafficking,
which is just insane, while Maxwell's in prison
for child trafficking charges basically sums it up.
I agree.
The authorities are doing the bare minimum to
wash their hands of this entire affair to
make the public complicit in their complacency
and showing enough chaos and confusion to prevent
any kind of united front on the part
of the public demanding answers.
You are not being given the means of
finding justice, but being conditioned with the awareness
that injustice is beyond reproach,
omnipresent,
something too powerful to approach to to dethrone.
This is ultimately wrong. Injustice and evil exist
as extremely fragile structures that depend entirely on
socially constructed narrative, but it takes the public
gullibility to believe this narrative.
You are the media now, he says, And
the media's role in the democracy or whatever
you think it should be is to speak
truth to power,
to find what is real and false and
hold public officials to account. Now look, I
agree with that. Despite the ridiculous
mainstream alternative, we are the media now that's
meant to hide that. That's meant to coop.
That's what they do. The truth is you've
always been the media. If you wanna be,
you are. Everyone out there, Supreme Court, everything.
Constitution has always upheld that. You don't need
some credential to be a media, to be
a part of the media.
The problem though is that they claiming that
and so it's it's kind of made it
into a cartoon.
So the truth though, as I think he's
aiming at it, it's just anybody. You out
there. If you want to be reporting, if
you wanna be investigated, do it. Because no
one else, mainstream alternative, mainstream politician, they're not
doing it for you, clearly.
So I think that's important to think about.
Now and if you I'm sure you there's
varying ways you could frame this. But the
bigger picture,
consider all the information in this. Right? Don't
dismiss it. But think about even if it's
true, how it can be used to control
the way this comes out, especially if you
realize they were already at a very dangerous
moment
already being exposed. And they thought, okay,
doing nothing is going to make this worse.
What if we just dump it in their
lab?
You know, cultivated, though.
Very, very much worth thinking.
Now Micah simply points out one of these
kind of points, right, where here's this
bad
redaction.
That's, I agree, seems to be very clearly
Elon Musk's name.
So the question is, as it says,
hello,
Elon. Or no. It's it was right here.
Wait.
Oh, it's right there.
So it's says, shall we organize a lunch
for blank and Jeffrey to get together at
SpaceX in the coming weeks?
Then it says, Elon is generally available. It's
obviously SpaceX. Right? But, look, they they
they accidentally
show part of his name?
Maybe. Maybe it's incompetence.
But I think it's interesting. Right? And as
this person says
or excuse me, as the points we were
just talking about is ultimately if the question
whether or not that was somehow by design
to create
outrage, but we can't prove it's him. It's
redacted.
You know, it's pretty clear. They're all lying
to you.
And Ro Khanna says, Thomas Massey and I
have requested a meeting with Todd Blanche to
ask why the senders of these emails have
been redacted. That's the ones we're all talking
about.
Right? This one that says well, some of
them anyway. There's the worst ones they're not
showing. But new Brazilian just arrived. Sexy and
cute. Nine years
old. That's from Jeff to Jeffrey Epstein from
somebody. Why is that not being shown? It's
insane.
Or the one that says, thank you for
fun last night. Your littlest girl was a
little naughty. That was from Jeffrey Epstein to
blank.
That's insane. And it says concealing
the reputations of these powerful men is a
blatant violation of the transparency act. But going
back to what we just said, we realized
that was about specifically victims and that neither
of those things have to do with either.
So they're sensory to cover up four people,
guys. This is not even debatable anymore.
Now, I'm actually,
I'm gonna go ahead and wrap this up
right now. A couple more things, Just a
couple timing issues, but my plan is to
do another show tomorrow, save for one possible
change. My plan is to get back to
all of this for tomorrow and probably the
next few days in a row. That's the
that's the plan.
But what I wanna get into
in maybe a little bit now, but the
next show in general is the conversation of
the ice overlap. Now I'm gonna end with
this video either way
because it overlaps with human trafficking.
It's a lot to get into, and I
I don't think I don't wanna rush this
through at the end. But it's it's about
the reality of the training.
But first,
you know, you can't miss stuff like this.
Two days ago,
Donald Trump said, go talk to Bill Clinton.
He's all over the Epstein files. He visited
many times to deflect for himself. Right?
Well, here's what he says yesterday.
It bothers me that
somebody's going after Bill Clinton. See, I like
Bill Clinton. I still like Bill Clinton. What
do you like about him?
I like well, I liked his behavior toward
me.
I thought he got me. He understood me.
No. No. That's not AI, guys. Are you
sure you check it for yourself before you
pretend, you know, what allows you to ignore
it?
How do you make sense of that? Or,
you know, you you know how you make
sense of it? Realizing locker up turned into
they're good people. Let it go. Yeah. You
you can only be misled deliberately,
bombastically so many times before it becomes willful
ignorance.
That's what you if you're out there do
that's what you're doing if you're ignoring this
right now. You can't pretend that's not insane.
He's neither a pedophile, deep state, globalist, travel,
whatever,
or he's a good guy and I like
him. Or,
I'm blanking his name all of a sudden.
You know, the new, come on, come on,
the new
New York governor. You know, the point was
he was like this big they the media
side of it. And Trump, who stoked it,
wanted you to think he was this big
bad evil, which by the way, maybe that's
what he ultimately is anyway. But socialist Democrat,
we can't work him. He's gonna burn the
country down. He's a Sharia law. And then
Trump's like, oh, he's on our side. We're
good.
That's he's literally burning down his own movement,
and you have to see that by now.
I I wonder whether or not that's by
design.
But come on, guys.
Here's another example.
Oh oh, first of all, by the way,
I wanna see if this actually works again,
see if it just was for me while
I was getting ready. But look at this.
I searched for Bill Clinton specifically on Trump's
account. Look at what it shows you. For
those that do who don't know this, you
know, this is specific.
That's not Trump's account. That's that's Bill Clinton
showing up anywhere on the platform. Let me
search again and see if that's what happens.
Look at that, guys. That's not by accident.
I'm telling you. Elon Musk is so you'll
find examples where they very much right now,
with all the focus, I'm pretty sure they
don't want you diving through his account and
searching for specific things. But let's just go
Clinton.
You're telling me you're telling me Twitter wants
you to believe Donald Trump hasn't once posted
about Clinton anywhere? We know that's not true.
Look.
But I made I made the same point
about the CIA point he made. He said,
we need the CIA now. And he tried
to search for it, and it just, some
reason, didn't show up in his search results.
Even though it's there, I can bring it
up right now.
Come on, guys. This is straight up control.
This is censorship. This platform does not want
you to see what he's been saying. Maybe
it's just because they're just so desperate, they
don't want you to realize he just told
you he's a good guy. He's my friend.
Either way, Twitter is telling you there's never
been a statement by a word Clinton on
anything Donald Trump on this platform.
You know that's not true. I I mean,
Frank, okay, it doesn't matter. I don't need
to go any further. It's just a wild
to me, guys.
Now
here's what Trump had to say about this.
This is what we're gonna end with generally.
Him telling you nothing to see here, guys.
Move on. He's done it twice in the
last couple of days. As Kim Iverson said,
what a loser he has become.
Gotcha to get onto something else. You know,
now that,
nothing came out about me other than
it was a conspiracy against me. I mean,
is that really?
I mean, is it you really wanna ask
yourself right now, is this him being
manipulated? Is he so completely
devoid of his own understanding
that he actually believes the what people are
just I mean, how can he possibly not
know that? Okay. So if you recognize
that he knows his own involvement,
that he knows what those files showed. I
guess what I was saying, is it possible
that Cash and Bondi claimed there was nothing
there and that he pretends everything is fake?
I mean, I'm my point saying all that
is you can't believe that. So the only
way I can look at this is Donald
Trump is just in just sheer desperation
going,
there's nothing in there about me,
even though literally everybody knows that there is
that it's all over the place.
Mean, doesn't that just it's like laugh out
loud ridiculous.
This is a cartoon. You're literally saying to
the media that everyone's acknowledge they all in
the room know you're in those files, and
you go, no. It was great. It was
a great day for us. There's nothing in
there. We've been completely exonerated. Hooray. We're winning.
And everyone's like, what what? He's just really?
Okay. MS 13. You know, it's it's just
it's it's painful to watch.
Got you to get onto something else. You
know? Now that Right. Time to move on
to something else. Stop paying attention to what's
making me look bad. He's already tried that
before. We're We're still talking about the Epstein
files? And now you got more. Yes. We
are, Trump. Did he get onto something else?
You know, now that,
nothing came out about me other than Wow.
It was a conspiracy against me, literally, by
Epstein and other people.
But I think it's time now for the
country to maybe get onto something else. What
did you say? Like, a conspiracy for, for
a girl to give a signed affidavit for
the many people you manipulated?
Right? Or that you raped somebody alongside Epstein?
Now if who knows? Maybe she's lying about
it. But that's an example I'm gonna show
again that's an actual court document. It was
not some report from an FBI interview. It
was a signed document presented to a court
and signed by other witnesses.
So, like, you wanna explain for me why
that's not? I mean, look.
How in the world you can argue that
that itself is not
right here? I'll go through it again. You
know, this is the one that we showed
you before.
Where was it? Right here. I personally witnessed
Donald Trump, the plaintiff, telling the plaintiff that
she shouldn't ever say anything if she wanted
didn't wanna disappear like a 12 year old
female Maria. And it talks about raping and
all sorts of stuff, but it's a signed
document
under that of perjury.
I mean, isn't that and so you're gonna
pretend like that's nothing? There's nothing in there?
I mean, you already know this, guys. But
just realize how desperate that must be.
Don't they have got justice, mister president? For
the country to maybe get onto something else.
What would you say people don't they have
got justice, mister president? Something that people care
about. Yeah. What what did you say? Go
ahead. What would you what would you say
to the survivors who feel the day of
You are the worst reporter. No one should
see CNN has no ratings because of people
like you. You know, she's a young woman.
Same old desperate effort.
I mean, how is that not clear to
everybody? Your own people wanna know what she's
asking. What do you have to say to
survivors who are claiming that you just did
them wrong? You're so bad. You don't even
smile. You're such a gross person.
Very mature.
How do you not see what I see,
guys?
What would you say to people who feel
that they haven't gotten justice, mister president? Something
that people care about. Yeah. What what did
you say? Go ahead. What would you what
would you say to the survivors who built
data governance? You are the worst reporter. No
one to see CNN has no ratings because
of people like you. You know, she's a
young woman. I don't think I've ever seen
you smile. I've known you for ten years.
I don't think I've ever seen a smile
on your face. About surviving. You know why
you you know why you're not smiling? Because
you know you're not telling the truth. And
you're, you're a very dishonest organization,
and they should be ashamed of you. Okay.
Go ahead. For the presidential He it's just
it's just so childish.
Okay. Go ahead. I'm done. I'm done. I'm
done talking down to you as the peons
underneath my throne. You know what I mean?
It's just it's pathetic, guys.
That's it it's wielding that because you can.
And only and you didn't even let her
ask the question. And what was the so
the point was, let me hear what you
have to say. Oh, you're so bad and
gross and you suck. Okay. Well done. You
showed her. And then you get the the
ridiculous people like the Knicks orders out there
going,
Burn. She got told. Boom. Everything came crashing
down because Trump told the truth bomb. It's
like, oh, it's just pathetic.
And all she was asking was, what do
you have to say to the survivors who
don't oh, cut off. You're stupid.
How embarrassing. Like, truly, truly embarrassing.
So not your average liberal says France, Poland,
Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Austria, Turkey have all
launched investigations regarding the Epstein files and arresting
those involved.
The very files that the US government has
been releasing. And all these countries are the
ones going, woah. Okay. Criminal activity.
Except your government. Except the one fighting the
deep state. They're the ones out there going,
move on, guys. What are you still looking
these for? You're crazy.
America's calling it a Democrat hoax. Well, rather,
the the Republican administration is, while America's president
is suing the Epstein estate for politically damaging
him.
Now I've heard him say that. I haven't
proven that's happening, but if you know that,
let me know.
After all, he's only mentioned 38,000
times. Now I don't know if that's the
accurate number, but it's a ton.
It's just wild.
So
Trump,
of course, at the time, said he would
declassify the Epstein files when campaigning in 2024.
But, of course, as Katie Miller, which is
the point what the guy was saying before,
on the fourth
yesterday,
says the Epstein files is a Democrat hoax
perpetuated on the American people. Fantastic.
So here's what Trump had to say about
the Democrat hoax back in 2024.
If you were president, would you declassify you
can answer yes or no to this. Would
you declassify the nine eleven,
files? Yeah. Would you declassify JFK files? Yeah.
Would you I did. I did a lot
of it. Would you declassify the Epstein files?
Yeah. Yeah. I would.
Yeah. I guess it wasn't a hoax
at that time.
I mean, okay. So if the difference is
that you know is a hoax because they
they lied or added something, well, prove it
then. Couldn't that be the easiest thing in
the world? Look. I can prove it. I
was in charge back then, and I could
prove this was the way it was. Now
I can show you that they added all
this stuff that wasn't there before. I could
prove that. Boom. It's all over. Arrest the
deep state. We're done. Yeah. Not not what
they're doing, though, because the reality is he's
calling it a hoax because now he doesn't
want to do what he never planned to
do, who he probably never even thought we
would get here or I don't know. But
the reality was that was coming out. Now
when he's in charge and has the ability
to, now it's not real. Or anything bad
for you doesn't exist or it's Democrat hoax.
But, again, on top of all of it,
he is the one that released the files,
some of them anyway. That that is important
to put out there because it's dishonest to
pretend like it didn't happen under Trump. And
he does get credit for doing that, But
the rest of the conversation surely matters, doesn't
it?
So as Dave DeCamp writes well, first, this
this one this, oh, I think I have
the clip, actually. Yeah. So this is CNN,
mind you. After what, he's just all seen
on you're so bad. Well, guess what? Here's
CNN running cover for you, Trump, because they're
all the same thing.
Oh, I'm just okay. I I I I
just I really agree with the president. I
think that most Americans just do not care
about this. This has been an obsession of
elites on the right, and now elites on
the left. Elites on the right were obsessed
with it when they thought they could use
it to hurt leftist, and now the left
is obsessed with it because they think they
can use it to hurt the right.
Now, of course, this is the token version
on the platform. Right? But what's really interesting
about this,
there's some level of truth to what you're
saying. You know, the idea that and this
is what I'm what we've been highlighting.
The reality of the information to wait to
to frame that is elitist care about.
They're the ones screaming or running from this
right now. It's just this is a pathetic
gatekeeping effort, and I I don't think she
even knows that. I think she's being told
or, you know, handed what you know, here's
your information.
You know, research are two things we handed
to you, and now you know what you're
talking about. That's how these things are controlled,
I think. They don't realize they're being played
in many ways. Still don't, you know, doesn't
mean they should have passed. But, it's all
I could also be wrong. But realize
that you're talking about information you could prove.
Tons of it.
And so, ultimately, it becomes,
the left wants to point at it. Like,
let's just take right now because they wanna
pretend that Trump's not doing anything. But I
I don't think that it by and large,
they really wanted to come out. As we
can see, it's hurting everybody.
So on the other side of it, you
can have the right doing the same thing,
like, as during during Biden's administration. They won't
release the files because they also don't want
it released. And somehow in there, they they
believed it would never happen. I don't think
any of them actually thought we'd be here.
That's what my my my feeling would be.
But but, see, what she's saying is that
is different. She's saying that only the elites,
elitists, really,
will want this to be shown. What what
are you talking about? What elitist what elites
are you pointing to? Show me the elites.
Well, what you might be saying is the
insiders in the files wanna pretend like they
wanted out when it suits their interests, and
that would be true. But overall, what she's
saying is there's nothing there. I agree with
the president. It's all a bunch of manipulation.
That's not true. So yet again, you've got
CNN doing their part just like Fox, just
like the rest of the mainstream government apparatus
manipulation.
Same as always, guys. Same as it always
was.
As David DeCamp writes, I have many friends
who have been interested in Epstein stuff for
years, and I can tell you they're not
elites. No offense, friends.
So Trump, again, this is a second time
or it could have been the first, and
that was the second. I think that either
way, twice Donald Trump has made this statement,
and I simply wrote literally no one other
than blind followers think this is the case.
No one.
Now that's my opinion.
But, you know, I rarely make those kind
of absolute statements, guys. I mean, this is
like basic, basic, basic levels of of acknowledgment
of what's in front of us versus
plugging your ears and stopping your feet.
Listen to what he says right here, and
you tell me you think anybody believes what
he's saying.
No. He made a statement about me and
Jeffrey Epstein's. I have nothing to do with
that. I have nothing to do with Jeffrey
Epstein. And in fact, if you look at
the DOJ, they announced, you know, they released
3,000,000 pages. It's like this is all they're
supposed to be doing.
And frankly, the DOJ, I think, should just
say,
we have other things to do because that
whole thing is turned out. I mean You
mean DOJ meaning, you know, you. Right?
Now it's not like, DOJ is its own
separate, but realize, he is the president. I
can't stand how he talks about it like
he's some kind of outside observer who has
no influence over the situation. He's just playing
stupid people. That's what he's doing.
Other than Bill Clinton and, you know, Bill
Gates and lots of that whole thing is
turned out. I mean, other than Bill Clinton
and, you know, Bill Gates and lots of
people that have
there are a lot of questions about it.
But Yeah. And oh, weird. Right? Now the
next day, Trump comes out and goes, oh,
it's too bad what they're doing to Bill
Clinton. I like the guy.
After saying you should look into him because
he's a pedophile, after claiming before he was
a rapist, after right here telling you you
should look at him.
It's just pathetic, guys. Why does anybody
not everyone should be laughing at these kind
of people.
Nothing on me, but it was even sort
of better than that because they found that
Jeffrey Epstein and this sleazebag writer named Michael
Wolf were conspiring
against Donald Trump to lose the election. Oh,
clearly, that's the story everyone's talking about. Right?
Can't you tell? Isn't that what everyone's discussing?
No. Not the left, not the right. No.
I mean, there are people trying to make
this the point, but not even his people,
not even the inner the republican minds they're
not even talking about that. Not really.
It's like they just show desperately
you could look into the point for me
is it seems like whether even accurate.
The reality is that he is in there
a 100,000 times over. And the and he
to deflect to the idea that he did
it's all a big conspiracy to make me
look bad. Well, that he has nothing to
do with all the things everyone's pointing to
that make you look bad. You're trying to
claim as if this one part over here
makes everything else go away. It does not.
It's just
sad.
So Epstein
was conspiring
with a writer.
Go go and repeat it two more times
since you didn't make it clear the first
time. You just said the same thing. For
me to lose the election.
So right there, you know that I had
nothing to do with it. Oh, is that
what you know? Right? So somebody can conspire
with somebody else to make a certain thing
happen, and that then somehow proves that you
didn't do this other thing even though it's
the same conversation. That's just lazy logic or
rather lack of logic. This guy. But,
yeah, it's a terrible thing. The the amount
of time that's being wasted. You know, when
Epstein was alive Wasted.
Aren't you guys telling us you're protecting survivors?
They're wasting time on revealing these sex trafficking
crimes? Didn't you guys tell us this was
the most important thing before you got here?
You can't miss these things. Like, ten years
ago, nobody cared about it.
But they're only doing it Oh oh, ten
years ago?
Is that what you want us to believe,
Trump?
2016, nobody cared? You mean right about then
when he was working with Peter Thiel to
manipulate the UK government that we talked about
today? Or tons of other weird disgusting things
happening, but nobody cared about it? Literally, everybody
in the independent media was talking about this.
But now it's it's really hitting back on
them because Bill Clinton is such a big
part of it. Oh. The Democrats are pushing
it. And the problem is that it's turning
out to be the Democrats that were with
and conspired with
Epstein. So I think you're probably gonna see
a little pullback from them. But but think
of it. That's that's directing.
That's what he wants to see.
They were working together to try and
help me lose the election. Here's the third
time. Go ahead and say it again. Maybe
it's school for four. But
this is the Oval Office, so I guess
that didn't work out too well. Oh, and
I win. That's how you end it. Right?
And I win because I'm the adult. I'm
the leader of the world. I win.
Oh, thanks, Tim Poole.
God. These are the people that are
ruling. How Okay. One more
Alright.
So this document, which you can go through
again if you wanna have nightmares,
is horrible.
This is a this is a literal court
document. This is a this is a lawsuit.
This is against Donald Trump and Epstein
by Jane Doe, and there's plenty of other
examples of statements from people that were there.
They claim anyway.
There's this is no did you dismiss something
like this?
You either argue this person lied about you
and then can go go after that person,
or you realize that the evidence they presented
does have evidence that there there is evidence,
not just statements. And the reality being that
nobody I I don't know if they investigated
this.
If that's the case, then somebody should be
in jail for perjury.
I think you know what's not going on.
Now
quickly, since I do have to go to
but the the,
clip here from
leave it, I do think it's relevant. And
it's this this is just a post highlighting
50 different Steve Tisch to Epstein emails. And
just really weird stuff like this one saying,
where was the main point?
Right here. So talking about a young girl,
very sweet girl, you know, send her over.
At the end of the day, he goes
curious to know. I will contact her. Is
she a pro or civilian?
Plenty of stuff like that to show you,
and it's about a Ukrainian girl. I don't
think you need to be explained what that
is. Here's what Leave it out to say.
And the DOJ and FBI have now concluded
there was no Jeffrey Epstein client list. What
do you tell MAGA supporters who say they
want anyone involved in Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes
to be held accountable? This administration wants anyone
who has ever committed a crime to be
held accountable, and I would argue this administration
has done more to lock up bad guys
than certainly the previous admin Okay. Yeah. There
you go. Right? Well, we did a lot,
and they didn't do as much.
What does that have to do with what
we're talking about? That's that's a what about
is in point. We wanna know what you're
gonna do now. You're lying about the list.
We have tons of evidence about the list,
but Biden didn't do as much.
Okay. That only works for childish people. And
it's an increasingly diminishing number because people, I
don't think, want to be in that camp,
and they're starting to realize that they are.
Jay Anderson says, I have and this is
Epstein's own email. It's right here.
From Epstein, it says I was re from
the main email, it says, recall I've told
you. I have met some very bad people.
None as bad as Trump.
Not one decent cell in his body. So,
yes, dangerous.
Now you could make the argument that that
somehow makes him not bad because Epstein's bad,
but that's not sound logic.
This is one of the most,
like,
pro like, foul like, this is Epstein is
a disgusting
entity.
Everything he did I mean, like, just the
darkest of the dark with what we know
was going on. This is a guy telling
you that Trump is a bad person.
I mean, that really has to
people need to think about that for a
second and realize where we actually are right
now.
Now, lastly, this is one of the things
in the files. They want you to tell
us that nothing there's no accountability here.
This person put this out. Here's the actual
document,
which is up and down. They said they
rotated it so it's easier for everyone to
see. And now I'm furious that there aren't
more arrests.
K? This is real. At first, I was
like, okay. This seems like unlikely, but guess
what, guys?
Here
is the actual file in the AppSync files.
You can rotate it. Look. That's a woman
being pinned to the ground and within what
appears to be abusing her with magnifying glasses.
And at first, I'm like, okay. Well, who
knows the well, guess what? Here's the actual
document.
2020.
It says
blank
Dale Martin, date of birth and blank blank
blank blank blank, whatever that says. Called the
FBI National Threat Operations Center to report a
viral video of what appears to be Jeffrey
Epstein torturing a young woman with a magnifying
glass. Remember, we have all this going around
about I love the torture video. Remember that?
It got brought up again recently. Now there's
one example of a torture chamber which comes
back from the Podesta emails. But in regard
to Epstein and the recent releases, there's an
example of him going, I love the torture
video.
Now
I sadly, there's probably more than one. But
in this case,
this is exactly what we're talking about.
That's what this is. Better yet here, so
you can actually see what he's talking about.
There's all these magnifying glasses pinned and then
burning her skin. Right? So this is someone
who called and reported this. Martin's daughter, Jessica
McQueen, date of birth blank, sent Martin a
piece of the video of what happened to
be a young white female, aged 11 to
13 years old, with dark colored hair tied
down and naked. The victim is tied to
the ground and spread eagle with a man.
So she's naked, guys, Who appears to be
Jeffrey Epstein holding a magnifying glass with a
claw and burning the victim. Martin described the
video as being blurry. However, the male subject
appeared to be very a very large man
with gray hair wearing jeans, a short sleeve
black shirt, and white tennis shoes. Martin stated
Facebook would not take the video down. In
the frame of the video, it says Epstein.
However, the video is blurry. Martin advised that
McQueen did not feel comfortable reporting information. However,
her friends are reporting it.
Doesn't that make I
mean, there's so much going on here, guys,
and it just kills me that this is
what we're talking about and that they're trying
to tell you nothing's going on. There's nothing
to see here.
Also, by the way,
as you can see
oh, damn it. It's gonna make me do
it again. Hold on.
The this one, actually.
Just so you can see the actual statement.
It says right there,
a young woman with a magnifying glass, which
is how I searched it the first time.
That's how I got this document. Well, as
I was going back to do it a
second time, I was gonna bring this up
to show you, and guess what? Doesn't show
up anymore.
So I don't know. I I have the
file open. I don't wanna close it in
case it disappears forever. Here's the link. But
I checked it again, and it says right
there, no results found.
So you can decide for yourself.
Now just lastly, here's what that here's what
Alex Jones is talking about. Epstein emails confirm
young girls were secretly giving birth to babies
at Zura Ranch who then disappeared off the
face of the Earth, which should be considered.
Right?
Well, guess what? This doesn't confirm anything he's
talking about. Because this is the email that
I showed you already
that is an email. It's an email that
somebody chose to send. Right? It's from somebody
you don't know to somebody you don't know.
Subject, Jeffrey Epstein. This could be anything to
anybody.
So that's why an honest reporter like myself
is gonna say, well, this is interesting. Why?
Because what I showed you was down here,
the the email is claiming to have attached
a whole bunch of videos. And some of
them say sex video, underage women, rape. Okay?
So for all we know, that that constituted
nothing. For all we know, it was a
scam or a joke or I don't believe
that. The point is to say it, can
this email
confirms anything
while you have stuff confirming a lot
is not just dishonest, it's deflecting.
This person is disgusting me right now. You
are doing everything you can to stop the
actual revelation from happening,
to ignore all the things you claim you've
been fighting your whole career. You this email
is an email that is unconfirmed.
You can look this up for yourself. It
is an email from people we don't know
or people we don't know about things he
claims. That's it.
My opinion? It does have something to it
because I everything else we know. This email
confirms nothing other than this email was sent.
But this is what you get from Alex
Jones. I hope that's clear by now.
Again, while you're not talking about what we're
all discussing today now I'm gonna leave it
there. Just you got people like remember I
told you at the beginning, you're gonna have
those that come out and go, I always
saw it, and we've been calling it out.
Well, here's Mario here's Mario Notfall.
Why are these emails not really being redacted?
Is everyone okay with it? Well, clearly not,
man, because everyone's made that same email point
75 times. Here's champagne joshy beneath you going,
hey, man. You just basically stole my post
and repurposed it. These people are trying to
glom on to the thing. Look, look, look
the thing. But guess what they're not doing?
Why are these redacted, Donald Trump's administration? What
about you, Kash Patel? Why aren't you doing
the right thing? No. No. It becomes this
screaming to the sky, why is this happening?
Who's gonna do something about it? And then
you're gonna lean into Trump the next thing
he says. Because they're all trying to grift
and manipulate you, in my opinion, whether they
even know that or not. Or Bennie Johnson
taking pictures next to,
Kid Rock and RFK Jr, saying people who
aren't in the Epstein list except, oops, he
is in the Epstein list. You're an idiot.
Or we don't know enough or don't care.
That's Benny Johnson for you. Mister plagiarizer.
But realize RFK is very much in the
Epstein list. And on top of that, there's
an email
from Jeffrey Epstein
in response to Mary Kennedy found dead in
the backyard where he writes, whoops.
It's not it's not a joke. Real email.
Twenty twenty twenty twelve. Epstein goes whoops when
told that Kennedy, his wife killed herself. He
also casually said whoops after this person who
you don't get to know sent him an
email that says turns out Ornella was raped
when she was 18. And he writes whoops.
Just to give you some context on the
way he would use that word, but it's
up in the air. I'm not gonna claim
that proves anything.
But now we have Nancy Mace going, get
Bill Gates in front of the committee so
we can krill him about things that we
otherwise can't prove. They don't want to get
to the bottom of anything. They wanna give
you subjective, endless conversation
about things we can't prove. Do I think
Bill Gates is guilty? 100%.
But what they're pointing to, what gate what
Joe Jones and the rest are pointing to
are things that will never hold up in
court, and I guarantee you that's by design.
Now we will come back to this in
the next show, but I'm gonna play this
on the way out to discuss the reality
of how right now ice
I found this absolutely mind blowing. It is
the reality too. It goes back to 2022
all the way to right now. The reality
being I'll just read directly from
the article from The Atlantic.
It says,
in one remarkable fact is that today, before
the recent hiring surge, and it's continued past
it, customs office and border patrol agents have
committed crimes.
I mean, provable crimes where they're actually held
accountable at per a per capita rate that
is greater
than the crime rate for people who immigrated
here illegally.
It's like point 40.5%.
It's
absolutely incredible. The group that's supposed to be
getting stopping illegal you know, people breaking the
law are breaking the law more than the
people they're going after.
That's not I'm not talking about subjective narratives,
partisan stuff. I'm not actual data on sheets.
They are the criminals. And that's only exponentially
worse now, and I mean that that word
the way it is today.
And you could check out all the information.
You can read it all for yourself.
And also recognize that, you know, the ADL
is, in fact, training with police and ICE.
Daily exchange, US sends hundreds of law enforcement
to Israel to learn the worst practices. ICE
and military
are two sides of the same coin. We
must resist both. And we're gonna get into
more about what ICE is actually doing right
now. And there's some pretty alarming stuff that
we're gonna get into about what they're actually
doing and how crazy this continues to be.
But we'll go back to that. And the
lies, by the way. Here's an AI creator
I briefly pointed out the other day, and
they're going, look at this. It's so terrible.
Sharia law everywhere, except that's AI, and she's
not real. But, yes, if they had to
lie about how bad Minnesota is, it's probably
true. Right, guys?
Well,
leave it there for today.
I will end with this clip,
which, by the way, is it's, you know,
it's just her speaking. It's it's,
this is a, I believe,
it's Elizabeth Zuna from Columbia Heights, Minnesota
agent, and she's just speaking about her experience.
There's been lawyer I have a clip of
a lawyer speaking up, saying very similar things,
but just to consider this overlapping point. Right?
Don't take it at face value. Life shouldn't
take anything. You should question everything. Right? But
think about this overlap.
Is it different just because they claim they're
fighting this? Right? So if we have a
situation where we got missing children, immigrants, foreign
policy,
And we know if we're being honest with
ourselves, this is a government problem, not a
partisan problem. We might wanna start asking ourselves
whether it's still happening.
So I'll leave you with this on the
way out. Thank you for tuning in today,
guys. Appreciate all of your support. I'll be,
my plan is to see you tomorrow. That's
if the plan is gonna be probably
mid afternoon. I'm gonna follow-up on the rest
of this. Plan a bunch more coming. So
appreciate your support.
Keep pushing this out there, guys. You know,
force people to be accountable.
Force people to consider
objective reality.
You know what I mean? Like, I don't
mean that in the sense of, like, being
violent or anything like that, but just, you
know, be challenging. Right? Don't just let things
fly by that don't I mean, again, there's
there's always points to be made about whether
you wanna cause uncomfortableness with your family or
ruin a dinner. You know, I consider those
things too. My point in a general sense
is where you think it's applicable, hopefully everywhere.
You think it's I do think it's necessary.
Challenge things. Discuss these things. It doesn't have
to be a screaming match, but just be
like, you know, I don't think that's correct.
You know, here's some facts that I think
you should consider. You know?
People are opening your minds to these things,
like, more than I've ever seen before. You
might be surprised
how many people you wouldn't expect would be
open to the things that you might wanna
bring their way. So thank you for tuning
in. Get out there and keep fighting, guys.
I love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.