It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality. Reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours
breaks free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of the day.
Help your own emotions. Your own emotions.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Monday, 03/16/2026.
Thank you for joining me today. Have a
limited time frame today. Pro still about a
couple hours just so you can set the
table before we start. I'll be, recording with
Propaganda and Co
after this. Not sure if that's live. If
that's out there, maybe tune in. Jump in
the comments, say hello.
Sorry for the delay to start there. I
don't wanna get into it right now, but
there's something weird going on with Rockfin as
you guys may have seen. Not that that
platform is necessarily on the side of independent
media today. Very clearly has been shown to
disregard a lot of people on that platform,
straight up censored people. So in no way
is that a platform that I really support
today. Nonetheless, it is a platform that we
utilize like YouTube, any of the rest. And
it turns out a huge portion of our
library is just not there anymore.
Interestingly focused around certain content, but that could
just be a coincidence.
Now I reached out. No one's responding. The
reason I'm bringing this up today, I wasn't
planning on it, is before I went live,
the there was a lot of weird errors
going on with the the starting. I then
all of a sudden, the whole thing went
blank, and I had to, like, open a
private browser. It was very weird. I'm just
wondering if there's something going on there. Just
wanna put on the record in case something
comes up later down the line. Very strange.
But, you know, I think everybody is
trying to work this out for themselves as
this goes in this direction. Is it gonna
get worse? Is it gonna get better? Rocklin's
clearly taken the direction to go away for
independent medium. I understand why, but handling it
the right way is important.
Now today,
what I'm largely gonna be talking about with
the time that I have, and if I
don't get to some of the stuff at
the end, we'll be talking about it tomorrow.
But largely,
updates on Iran, what's going on with the
ongoing war, and how that interconnects with a
lot of different points. And, you know, this
is gonna be, as I said recently, continually.
We're gonna update as we continue to see
how this goes forward. Not always every single,
you know, attack and response and missile and
because most of that, by the way, is
it's hard to know what you can verify
when it's in the midst of an ongoing
war because both sides always lie. I'm saying
that because there's a lot of people out
there who want the moment to moment reporting.
You're not gonna get that here in regard
to who bombed and how they responded unless
I find it relevant. And as always, it's
sound to what I think is gonna be
most important for you. But I'm gonna include
a lot that I wanna start with today
that I think is relevant for just what
we're always talking about and the dishonesty around
this administration,
like our government in general, make clear.
But what's important to see, the title today,
is not just the growing awareness of
the two party illusion and and how, you
know, whether they people wanna vote again next
time or they wanna choose a side again
next time. Right in this moment, the awareness
is very easy to see and also around
Israel's influence on this government. And for those
that wanna immediately try to make that about
something other than exactly what I just said,
then that's a choice for people
to deviate, to deflect, to disregard,
to be dishonest. In this case, Israel's government's
committing crimes. Whether you think that's connected to
their religion, whether you think it's connected to
one person or another, you can decide that.
But for anybody to pretend like we can't
see what they're doing is just disgustingly dishonest.
The war crimes, the ongoing genocide, the history,
the long history, the origin point to today,
which we'll end with today regardless of time,
a great video talking about Zionism and what
it really is and the ongoing reality of
how that's people are becoming aware of that
and the increasing push to make people who
call out the political organization that it is
and what they're doing
racist,
despite that not really even making sense when
you understand what we're actually talking about. And
even if you may think that I misunderstand
that it is Judaism, Ryan, well, I don't
think that. So how in the world would
it be called you know, this this gets
into the weird territory of, like, inadvertent racism
or or somehow I'm racist even though I
don't think that. To me, it's all about
the intent. People can be inadvertently any number
of things, but it matters to me where
they mean to be. And it should matter
to everybody else as well. But all of
this to that point to be made all
or that point to be said about
right now and how it's clear with the
Iran war that Israel's government is, I mean,
I I at this point, dictating the the
actions being taken,
which is not that
big of a bombshell for those that understand
what we've already been talking about over the
years. But in this case, just Iran's war
the war on Iran and what they've been
trying to accomplish and the actions taken thus
far. But going back,
if you really start to look at what
we've been highlighting and what you're you're maybe
just seeing for the first time, you'll see
those markers everywhere else.
You'll You'll see it in the Obama administration.
You'll see it in the Bush administration. You
will see this and it's not just about
one thing or one group, but these things
are there, and you have to be honest
about that. So what it matters for today
is this and I'm not gonna make a
hard point about this today, but we've already
touched on it a lot. And it there
are some points where it connects to the
Zionism part of the conversation where this is
I mean, they told you. It's a religious
war. Iran's not saying that.
Shiites aren't saying that.
Hegseth is saying that. Rubio is saying that.
Graham is saying that. Left and right were
ultimately getting these same points, and all of
them seem to support the Israeli Zionist religious
agenda.
And that's driving The US actions on the
ground. That's killing American servicemen
for Israel's war.
And from what I can see, from where
I'm sitting, more than anything, Republicans are starting
to see that. And this is where it
becomes hard for certain people to make this
choice. There's the Charlie Kirk point to this
conversation. If you get my meaning, There's a
very clear awakening happening even with those people
who I would argue are otherwise dishonest for
partisanship,
who are starting to see that Zionism has
flipped slipped its way in and is manipulating
their group.
And maybe we'd even disagree on every single
thing other than that, but they'll still go,
I see what Zionism is doing. And they
might then work this out to make it
seem in their their mind that Trump had
to or Zionism did it. Well, you know,
maybe. But you can understand if you look
at everything else that Trump is a player
in this game, guys. But that's a different
conversation for this point. But to understand how
this all continues and why it's so important
for us to call this out now
before the next, I mean, midterm presidential election,
whatever you think might change the future, we
need to be on the same page now
before we get into the next political chaos
situation. I mean, every moment we see these
things.
Now, as I ramble to open today, I
want to make sure we get into this
right now because I want to make sure
we get into some of the bulk of
the show today before we run out of
time. So if you see me nearing close
to 08:30 central time and I'm still going,
please comment in the chat and let me
know that I got my arm set. So
let's get into this. So I wanna start
today with a point about,
I I guess, just dishonesty,
two party illusion stuff as we often do.
You know, just some of the different things
we see that I think are important to
make sure you see for any number of
reasons. One of these are,
the absurdity of what they're I mean, I
would look I would categorize this under the
the heading of deflection.
But, you know, it's it's easy to do
that. That's a distraction. Deflection. Look over there,
which I think is almost always part of
you know, whenever the big story happening, that's
part of the story. That's that's happening. I
see it everywhere. But it's not only that
in some cases. Right? But in this case,
hey. We're announcing a new thing that sounds
mysteriously exactly like Doge, but it's brand new,
and it's gonna change everything. I mean, imagine
the desperation of trying to reinitiate the thing
that you failed in doing with a slightly
different framing. I mean, not even it's other
than it'd be called Doge, it's identical to
what he's talking about. I'll play it for
I'll I'll read it for you anyway. And
so they're discussing this new thing that that
we're all gonna champion, and JD Vance apparently
is gonna be involved. And I just it
just it kills me that this, like, okay.
Let's just say they do this and it
starts to actually make positive effects. I think
that's good. I I I don't care how
it happens. I want these things. I want
the actual fraud and the actual corruption. But
from people who are showing you that they're
lying every single day, people who are involved
with corruption, people who are pardoning, people who
are literal criminals,
then it's kinda hard to take it at
face value that they want to end fraud
and corruption. Right? It's kinda silly, but that's
how partisans play this game. It's about their
side versus the other. Nothing else seems to
matter. I'm of the mind that's a rapidly
diminishing perspective.
Happening soon. President Trump will soon
sign, excuse me, an executive order this afternoon
in the Oval Office alongside
Vance to officially establish and launch
a fraud task force,
a whole of government effort to hunt down
and prosecute.
Sounds familiar? Massive waste, fraud, and abuse of
ripping off American taxpayers. You know, aside from
the 75 people oh, I don't know, like
15 people that Trump has pardoned for I
mean,
literally that. I'm literally defrauding American people. COVID
nineteen.
You know, whatever. I I shouldn't even need
to go any further. That's how ridiculous that
is, and everybody knows about that. There's just
people that jump in and go, it was
political persecution. Well, maybe, probably. He also broke
the law, though. That matters to me. In
regard to the people they pardon, I could
go down the list. I mean, some of
these people have even gotten caught again and
went back to jail. It's just ridiculous.
And and before you jump down the throat,
that's not unique to Trump, guys. Biden was
just as corrupt. Quote, this is another promise
made and kept by promise by president Trump.
He announces this, and this is leave it.
He announced this in the state the State
of the Union address and announced that the
that vice president will be overseeing this task
force. This is really going to establish a
whole of government effort to fight fraud
at both the state and federal level. So
this feels like we're just using this momentum,
this narrative, to get further involved in local
state discussions where it pertains to maybe ICE
or whatever else or any number of things.
Or the idea that a whole of government
anything right now where we can see who's
driving the whole of government direction should be
a little bit concerning with what Palantir is
doing, with what the AI direction is doing,
with the lack of constitutional rights, or rather
they're caring about them.
You know, all that aside, this should be
alarming with what we know we are. But
just the main point,
I said, yeah. This that's that's called Doge.
We did this. And it turned out to
be one huge bait and switch. Everybody can
see that. I mean, there's only people that
are, like, pretending it didn't really happen and
those who acknowledge it because we're here now
and none of that stuff happened.
More government spending, bigger government. I mean, in
fact, you can literally look into what they
were doing and see that it was all
about AI, data control,
merging things for the AI data systems,
gaining Israel access, Palantir. All of this happened
during that time frame. And now you've got
Amy Gleason just sidling up next to the
digital ID discussion because that's what it always
was. Digital services turned into Doge. Now, apparently,
that's just same Doge, I guess, but she's
over there talking about wearables with RK Jr.
And now they're starting a new one, which,
guess what, guys? Will cost more money. More
taxpayer dollars for the lowering of more spending.
It's counterintuitive.
And then it's and and I continued by
saying,
as many of us warned at the time
in the beginning of this, not because we
were psychic, but because we were skeptical. And
every moment that we saw it go worse
and worse, we kept going, so that's what
I worried about. Here we are. And, of
course, it was to hide massive AI data
grabs and the building of a new building
of a new surveillance grid. But, sure, let's
trust the plan, trademark,
because I'm sure he's not lying this time.
I'll also include a,
article Derek wrote with the interview with the,
debate down at the bottom
of a debate with him and Naomi Wolf.
Now you might have seen this building. I
think this is just relevant to include for
many different reasons
because it's just a it's a lesson in
old media versus new media. Actually, I shouldn't
say a lesson. That's the wrong way to
frame that. But it's a lesson in in
bad debate tactics. It's a lesson in dishonesty.
I I just it's it blew me away.
I mean, I I had a very and
a partisan opinion of her over the years,
how she sidled next to, you know, cited
next to Joneses and Infowars and was very
I mean, you look at her timeline. She's
retweeting some of the most egregiously manipulative
Israeli propagandists.
Ilya Lakhoby or, you know, Elon Levy. Like,
people that are, like, in
I can't even think of a word grand
enough to how bad and obvious they are.
Like, been caught lying a thousand times and
sharing those things about Iran and sharing those
things about whatever they say. So, you can
decide whether dishonest or just blind or
partisan, but these are people that are showing
themselves to be stuck in an old thing
or still being dishonest for a larger reason
as far as I'm concerned. You can disagree
with my framing. Watch this, and I don't
think you'll be able to. Exposing the Iran
war hype lessons from a one-sided debate with
Naomi Wolf.
I it's I I'll leave it at that.
I'll you you form your own opinions about
this. It's very hard. Every possible straw and
every possible
fallacy. I mean, I don't even wanna go
into it because I'll talk about it for
ten minutes because it's just it's so crazy
to me how quickly this showed, you know,
a almost a deliberate effort to treat him
like he's a child or to ignore basic
fundamentals of how debates process or, you know,
on and on and on. And it was
all rooted in
Iran war good, and bombing needs to happen
because bad guy Iran. That's essentially the argument.
You can watch it for yourself if you
think I'm being too critical.
Now on the Iran part, because I wanna
make sure we get into this right in
the beginning before we get into
save act, digital ID, plenty of other connected
points,
is just to understand that this is so
we're I mean, what is it now? Weeks?
It first of all, way past the, we
guess, War Powers Act. Who cares? Right? Right
back in that same old spin where you
had all people going, boom boom boom. I
didn't do it. But Bush didn't do it.
And then guess what? They okay. Now it's
not happening. And, oh, now we'll just move
forward.
Right. Like I said, those of you going,
but they didn't do it. Is that because
you wanted it to continue happening? Apparently so,
because you let him do it too.
Like, why would the logic be to to
to criticize the people trying to stop the
bad thing because they failed to call it
out before?
Why would the logic be to do that
instead of going, okay. Well, you're a hypocrite,
but we can all agree this is bad.
Because the people doing that inside there are
children or at least acting juvenile because it's
not about even what they claim they want.
It's about a team sport game. I think
everyone is seeing this at this point. But
so the reality of this is that we're
so quickly like, this just basically start well,
again, you re you know that this goes
back decades. Operation Ajax, even before. The point,
though, is that in the normie perspective, this
just started, and the estimated cost of the
war in Iran has already surpassed estimated
21,000,000,000.
I mean, even the even the conservative ones
are saying 11,000,000,000.
No war, no more spending, and, yes, guess
what? You get extra of both. Hashtag winning.
And, I mean, look, if you wanna argue
that this is necessary for the freedom of
the world, then make your case. Some people
are making that argument.
You're gonna have a hard time selling anybody
with a brain on why that makes sense
while you're committing genocide and while Iran's doing
none of the things you claim they're doing.
But either way, you don't get these honest
arguments. You don't get the real, well, this
needs that. You get the argument of, well,
they're terrorists and they're invading everywhere, and they're
they're in funding everything that's terroristic in the
world. These are blatantly false claims.
But on top of that, with with 21
bill billion dollars
estimated to be spending on top spent on
top of everything else, Shocker for Donald Trump
as US Treasury budget deficit off to one
of the worst starts in history. What Americans
need to know. Now you can read this
for yourself.
In February, it jumped to 308,000,000,000.
I mean, it's on border it's one of
the worst starts in history is the best
way to frame it. Now you could argue
it's necessary. You could argue it's because we're
doing this, x, y, and z. And when
this happens later, this will go back down.
It's always the same argument. They'll go up,
but then they'll go back down because freedom,
whatever.
Maybe.
But I hate I don't like these hypothetical
next step game. Look at deal with what's
in front of you and the facts at
the hand the facts at hand and whether
they're honest, whether they've said what they've they've
done excuse me. I can't talk right now.
Whether they've done what they've said or whether
they've deviated.
To my point, this is not at all
what we were promised. What conservatives thought would
happen now, right? Maybe, you know, a month
from now, a year from now, it's better
than ever. And you can look back and
go, See? I told you. I hope so.
I hope so, because that would mean that
this is not going in a bad direction,
at least in, I guess, a American financial
sense. But
engage with it right now. And you have
to be honest that this is going in
the wrong direction. Now, Donald Trump's administration's announced
a coalition to escort ships through the Strait
Of Hormuz. Now, this is a really important
point. Because, as you know, we've been talking
about this a lot
just because it was weird to me. Right?
And I'm gonna I'll come back to this
in general. It's the same thing I've been
showing you. At first, it was sort of
like, well, it doesn't appear to be shut
down at all.
And and but everyone, like, instantaneously
reported I'll say this right now, by the
way. Catherine Austin Fitts has more of an
art more of an opinion. And And we
I'll I'll point to our IMA panel in
a second.
One, about this all being connected to a
greater control, great kind of global direction, which
I agree with.
But she also argues more so that it
at least could be that Iran is involved
with all of that. And I think that
is very much worth considering, just like anything
like COVID nineteen. We should consider whether we're
all be that's much harder for the average
person to wrap their mind around. But truth
is truth. If you believe that's the case,
then make your argument. I think the facts
do back that up to a degree. But
that's just an that's important to think about
because that could be one of the factors
here. Now, I'm more leaning toward that they're
another government that would be willing to do
everything the US government is doing, just don't
have the current influence and power to do
so. But at the moment, they're not exactly
what the US government frames them as. And
it just comes down to the truth. They're
not doing what they're claiming. They're not as
extreme as they claim in many ways. But
bad plenty
alarming to me. And any many and just
from a status perspective, I think all of
them are bad. But, anyway, the point that's
there's, I guess, the nuance from how I
look at this and why that's relevant to
this
is that I first thought towards her opinion,
why would everybody say it's closed, and why
wouldn't they stand up and scream about that?
Like, well, you're lying about that. And maybe
they did, and I missed it. But I
thought that spoke maybe to
some larger coordination. Now as it came around
and developed, my thought well, I argued, well,
it seems they're not closing the straight.
They're just basically through rhetoric and threats
hindering it. Like, rather, doing ultimately nothing as
far even the even the minds turned out
to be ultimately a fake story. That's happened
before, and it wouldn't surprise me if they're
currently there. But I haven't been able to
verify that. And it ultimately was like a
one day story, and I haven't seen it
again. So my point, though, is that I
get the mind that this is Iran using
the narrative
to into effect what and they're and they're
doing well, by the way, to have the
different companies associated with Israel and The United
States more tentative, lose money because they don't
want to do so, worry about getting you
know, and, really, there's nothing happening.
So then it came to the point where
Iran basically said, look. We're not we're only
stopping people who are enemies. Now that came
out a couple days ago, but it's still
being discussed as if it was closed. All
the mainstream media, all the mainstream alternative, basically
closed straight, closed down, affecting world trade. Now,
here's what I think. Because, clearly, you can
see that's not the case. Now, it has
been restricted, again, based on saying, we'll bomb
things, and then having that just by effect
stop people from coming through. But, also, it
seems that they are directly claiming, we're not
gonna let Israel, US, and, I guess, the
the kind of unknown, if you're still part
of their team, you may be targeted kind
of mindset, which is their prerogative at this
point.
But so that makes me think that this
is about trying to use that to hurt
the US government and Israel and their allies
by the restriction of that trade and flow,
but not by doing it in a way
that restricts anybody else if they know they
can go through it. So, now you've got
Trump and everybody else trying to make the
argument that it's been closed because that makes
the world turn against Iran. But if it's
not closed, and, effectively, through crafty narratives, they've
convinced Trump or the rest of them to
at least act that way, well, you got
plenty of ships passing through. So other countries
who are not necessarily in the side right
now are going, well, I'm getting through just
fine. So I'm not gonna do anything about
it. That's why you get now we're gonna
get into them pushing back on Trump calling
for them to help people through the through
the straight. Now why would they do that
if it's only the enemies who are being
restricted? And the world can see that they're
actively doing things that are against the law,
genocide.
So Wall Street Journal reported that he's announcing
a coalition. Now that's a very friendly way
to frame that. It seems as if you
have no basically, The UK seems to be
flirting with the idea. Now that might have
changed over the last so many hours, but
last I checked, most of them are bucking
the whole program, saying that we were looking
for other paths or whatever the word he
used. We're looking for other solutions. But most
of them said no. In fact, said one
of them, I'll read you in a second,
said we will not be bullied by The
United States, which is exactly what the world
is beginning to recognize who may have not
caught on yet to Trump's tactics, strong-arm tactics
to the extreme.
So this is making it sound like we're
starting a friendly thing to work together. This
is Trump going, please bail me out of
what I just got us in, ultimately, because
it seems that they are not doing as
well as they're claiming. And Israel is the
one that drove them here. And I you
could either argue Trump did it because he
didn't have a choice, because he is in
line with the agenda, or he's now realizing
he was played. Either way, it puts us
in the same position when it comes to
the outcome, I think. Now here's The Guardian.
Trump draws
backlash.
Trump draws backlash
for comment on Iran war. Maybe we shouldn't
even be there. Now this is such an
interesting statement. Oh, oh, I did wanna add
one more thing, by the way. Because of
time and a few other things today, some
of this stuff may be, like, mildly out
of, like, just as what what I normally
do when I prep the show is I'll
bring up pretty much everything that I think
I wanna look at, articles I'll read through
and highlight and get the kind of get
my mind in the organization, and then I'll
organize it. Different categories. Sometimes,
yeah, it takes a while. Right? And so
today, because of time, I some of it
might not be exactly organized the way I
want. Just keep that in mind. Not that
that is that important. So Trump draws backlash
for comment on Iran war. Maybe we shouldn't
even be there. Now think about saying this
right now. To me, this is the same
old sort of, like, I'm just, like, an
independent observer, Trump. Like, I'm not really making
decisions. I'm not I just I don't know.
Maybe we you know, why don't like, it's
it's yeah. As if he acts like he's
commenting on something from the side. Right?
Shouldn't even be there? I mean, people have
got rightly upset about this. People family members
of servicemen that have been killed. Going, well,
what are you talking about? We should maybe
we shouldn't even be there? Like, it's a
like, a game like, this this is what
people have come to see that it's whether
you think this is him
framing it like it's just kind of a
passive thing, like wishy washy, a game,
or he's doing this, which is more what
I'm leaning towards, to sort of give himself
an out.
See, like, right now, he knows this knife's
edge. Well, I can't be too clear about
Israel controlling this because then I look weak,
or then it shows that Israel is controlling
the US government. But I can also kind
of
touch that a little bit, just barely lean
into it to make people think that I'm
not able to like, it's not my fault.
It's their fault. If you don't think this
calculus is happening behind the scenes, I'm telling
you guys, these people know the world sees
it. And I think that right now, it's
about playing the the game of, like, chicken,
essentially, of who ends up holding the bag.
That's how these people operate. Donald Trump drew
a backlash on Sunday for suggesting US efforts
to protect the Strait Of Hormuz were unnecessary
and that maybe,
quote, we shouldn't even be there at all.
Now what he's talking about is the US
government, essentially, or the military can helping with
the, you know, the
basically, helping ship through the Strait that hasn't
started yet, as I understand it. But the
idea that we're going to be doing that
now remember, there is a ship down there
on the other side of the territorial waters
inside the strait, but not on Iran side.
And if it if it is gonna go
through there, ultimately like, so here, let me
show you this again.
That right here,
you get close enough.
Oh, it's not showing it for some reason.
Well, basically, there's you know, you consider
halfway through this waterway on the side towards
Iran. Well, that's considered their regional water. And
then you got the line that begins on
the other side of the mass, which would
be considered the regional waters of The UAE
in different locations over here. Now, as you
can see, there is US ships.
There are, excuse me, you I thought well,
is. I think there's one
in inside
as it were, like inside the straight area
but Oh, here. This will show what I
think.
Come on, screen. There we go.
So this
there, the USS Michael Murphy is inside. You
know, it's it's beyond the the the Strait.
Oh, wait. There it goes. So you see
those little lines right there? So essentially, on
this side of the line, that's considered, you
know, a ro that's like, you know, if
you're on the coast of The United States,
that's their regional water. It's, like, their controlled
area. And then this middle area would arguably
be
open, and then what's near here is considered
theirs. That's why they're over here.
Technically, international water is right there.
But the point being is that Iran
is controlling this by threatening this little choke
point, essentially.
So
and saying that we should even be there
in regard to helping people pass through that.
Now
the argument is that we need to do
that. Doesn't seem to be the case for
anybody other than Israel and United States. It's
sort of like what happened with the Houthis
and their shipping where they tried to make
this big issue about what they were doing.
And, you know, it got a lot of
talk, but the Houthis basically won that exchange
because everybody recognized that there was a genocide
taking place and the Houthis were not stealing.
They weren't actually killing or bombing or sinking
any ships. They were in
wild displays of restraint,
bombing to stop it and then letting them
go. The ship didn't sink. They didn't steal
anything. They didn't kill anybody, and yet and
that happened multiple times, and yet they're pirates?
Well, you guys commit genocide and steal and
bomb people with no bomb ships without even
carrying this you know, it's crazy the the
overlap there. So in this case, they're arguing
that we need to continue to help them
through because Iran's gonna bomb them. I haven't
seen the indication of that, and most of
them are saying, ultimately, no. But now he's
shifting because nobody wants to help by saying,
well, we shouldn't even be the ones. It
should be all of you guys. Because the
president made the contradictory comment to reporters in
Air Force One after pleading with European and
NATO allies to enter the war. NATO basically
being The United States anyway, which is kind
of I don't maybe he doesn't understand that.
Enter the war into in Iran to help
The US secure the strait amid the largest
oil supply disruption in history. And why is
that? Because of their illegal war. Simple. It's
exactly why we've talked about this for a
decade, about the Bob 0 Manda Strait, about
Yemen, because this was always coming, guys. Always
coming. How many times have we had this
conversation?
This was always coming because Israel told you
it was coming and told you The US
would do it. And here we are. I
mean, it's wild that we I mean, that's
why I kinda laughed about it before when
people were like, oh my God, they predicted
the Iran war. It's like, come on, guys.
A three year old could have predicted this
because it's been told it's been said a
thousand times all over you know, as far
as I've been doing this, as long as
I've been doing this.
But the idea that it's that clear and
then yet now it's not still engaged within
the corporate, it's just very crazy. And so
the point was you've they knew this was
gonna happen because Israel's always been wanting it.
So they've been trying to find ways to
control the other ways, other waterways. This is
the Bab El Mandeb Strait, which arguably they
do not control because they've yet to actually
take over Yemen.
And that's why that was happening, guys. And
so at least at least one part of
the conversation. And so here we are, where
they always do this would happen. And now
imagine Trump and them claiming, like, why? We
didn't know they would do that, or we
didn't expect them to bomb these other countries.
It it either shows a a shocking lack
of, I guess,
understanding
of the basics of the situation, or he's
just saying that to frame it as them
being belligerent. We'll get to that in a
second.
It says, really, I'm demanding that these countries
come in and protect their own territory
because it's their territory. So then that means
what he's ultimately saying is then, Oman,
UAE, you guys have to get in there
and do something, which okay. Now that's creates
an interesting point where
since the last time Iran basically well, Trump
Trump embarrassingly claimed they surrendered,
Iran said, look. When they they bombed all
these countries, all of which they were bases
or fueling or weaponry, which makes them belligerence
by every single possible
of international law rather than just understanding international
law.
And they bombed them. They never responded, and
then they stopped. They said, look. We'll stop
bombing you if you guys stop helping them
with this war. Trump said they surrendered, which
is so embarrassing.
But so now that's where they're at, where
these countries are
basically in the middle,
technically, on the side of Israel United States
because of everything they're doing, their policy, not
the people's, the installed governments.
But so here we are. Well, now they're
basically saying,
well, you have to go do something, and
I doubt they're going to because then that
creates situation where they will be targeted by
Iran, and legally so, by the way. They
should come and they should help us protect
it. You could make the case that maybe
we shouldn't even be there at all. Well,
you're damn right. But see, that's not what
he meant to say. He means it as
if we shouldn't have to be the one
that does it. You shouldn't be there at
all is something you probably need to think
about now. The reality of what he said
meaning something else is more real than you
more true than you realize.
Why is the US government there at all?
Other side of the world as they criticize
other places from, you know, the idea just
narratives about how they might support something on
the other side of the world. It's just
it's so embarrassing where we're at today, where
the world is long since understood this, but
the
the difference of the change today is that
Americans
are starting to understand this. That's what I
believe.
So continuing.
Trump received criticism. Oh, oh, that I'm glad
I didn't skip this part. It says they
should come and and help protect us.
And that we shouldn't be there all because
we don't need it, he says. And what
does he mean by it? This is very
revealing to me. Oil.
We have a lot of oil, he says.
We're the number one producer anywhere in the
world. Two times. Okay. Well, so it's not
just about the flow of oil, but it's
clearly he's letting I mean, we know that.
It's not a secret. But there's a lot
more on the table than just the flow
of oil. But
he cares about that because American gas prices
and, you know, he's very, very,
you know, I guess the framing of success
oriented.
But he says, we're the number one oil
producer anywhere in the world times two. Now,
if you look into this, you'll you'll find
that this is
argued to be accurate. I mean, technically, it
is currently accurate. But here's what's interesting, the
reason I say technically. If you think about
this on a longer scale, and look look
into like, you could do this on a
couple different places.
Venezuela
alone
has the largest, way larger, even the Saudi
Arabia, the largest unrealized, untapped oil resources in
the world.
You don't think that's a factor of why
they're trying I mean, look. Even did even
Delsey Rodriguez, that was the original the first
point. Oil. He knew that because they were
aiming at Iran. They knew this was coming.
And we already know that because Israel said
that. Because it's been admitted they planned this
with the Kurds a month before. We know
all this stuff. If you're following independent media,
you know all this. It's funny to watch
the the mainstream or mainstream alternative, you know,
grapple with either trying to lie or not
even know what they're doing.
But how important is that? Well, the point
was, though. So think about Venezuela.
So
if
The United States, if other countries helping them
hadn't continued to sanction, suppress, and
keep them from developing
my entire life, in fact. You go back
I mean, I've never seen a point in
which they weren't threatening Venezuela.
Had they not done that, you could argue
that they might have been able to develop.
And this is that same point about why
they keep countries in Africa and elsewhere
under their foot because if they were to
develop, they could grow to a place to
where they could actually have some ability to
have a military and exert their own will.
That doesn't even mean bad guy, you understand.
Terrorism, it just mean in fact, the point
is the opposite.
Terrorists, they can work with. What they want
is pea they don't want people who can
become strong and independent and have some kind
of a democracy because they have the ability
to actually push back or representative government or
whatever you wanna call it. Think Thinking I'm
gonna play that as a clip in a
second to make this point. But the Venezuela
thing, if they had not done that, Venezuela
could arguably have the largest, over anybody,
oil production in the world.
And, you know, and there's just plenty of
nuance points to that. And and, you know,
the real point is whether they're able to
effectively do it because there's more than just
being able to drill it, but that's the
whole point, isn't it? It's development, industrial, and
they've made sure to stop this country from
getting anywhere
you know, keeping it under its thumb so
it could be abused.
So now that he's screaming that, you could
argue it's at least
in that position because of what they've done
elsewhere. But either way, there's still a lot
of oil to be seen. Now we play
the script really quickly to make the point
that I was just saying there about keeping
these countries in a position where they cannot
become self, you know, independent, have you know,
not rely on other countries. And isn't it
it's exactly what the Trump claims he wants
to happen to The United States. And this
is about funding Al Qaeda, funding the Ukrainian
Nazi elements, or any number of things you're
talking about in order to keep these states
controllable.
What they've always done. Same. Now the difference,
Iran fought back. Brzezinski was the strategist for
Jimmy Carter and convinced Jimmy Carter to say,
look. The Russians are dominating,
Afghanistan
with a civilian secular government.
Let's create Al Qaeda. Let's, back Osama bin
Laden and give his supporters
weapons to begin fighting the Russians. And, we
can pull a coup d'etat there. And, the
Russians will fight back, and then we'll say
the Russians invaded. And it worked. Saudi Arabia
made a deal with America that they would
push the Wahhabi,
extremists,
the Al Qaeda, the most right wing wing
of Islamic parties, and it worked. Essentially, Al
Qaeda is a contract army, for The United
States. Well, the same thing was happening
in in Russia. What Brzezinski wrote was that
America is faced with a possibility of not
being able to rule the world unilaterally.
Any country's
economic ability to be self sufficient
means,
potential
military power. And in order to prevent any
country from threatening America militarily,
you have to prevent it from developing economically.
The American nightmare, Brzezinski wrote, was that Russia
would get together with Germany
and with Western Europe, creating Russian raw materials,
German industry, and somehow, finally, Russia would become
westernized.
America,
under Burzynski's
strategy, said this would be a disaster because
if Russia's westernized,
if it becomes democratic,
if if,
Europe and Russia are prosperous,
then we cannot control them anymore, and they
will have no reason to be NATO. We've
got to stop Russia, and the place to
stop this Russian European,
conglomeration
is to split it right at the border,
down Ukraine. Let's do in Ukraine
what, we did in Afghanistan.
Let's, back the crazies. Well, most of them
are,
the the former, neo Nazi groups that have
been,
so prominent that fly the Nazi. Fly the
fly the fly.
That's very important. Now what's important to understand
is the model
that they've continued.
The same model from getting responses to claim
them as the aggressor to proxy elements where
you know, this is what they do, and
this is why they accuse everybody of that
which they're guilty, which does they're just as
likely involved with similar tactics.
But when they claim it, I look and
I can't prove it. What I can prove
is that this is what they do, and
it's the history shows that. You know? And
the idea of creating that situation
in order to keep people under your thumb
under the guise of fighting for freedom and
liberty, like, these are villainous people, guys. That
doesn't mean that everybody
manipulated by what they're doing is aware of
that. Now, Now, interestingly, a point that I'll
get to at the end when I play
a clip about
to go out the show today, you know,
it it makes a similar point. You know,
that this is what I'm trying to say
about partisanship today, about independent media. It doesn't
mean you should
people should be devoid of responsibility for their
actions because they've been tricked. Like I say
with Trump, they're still responsible, but they're changing
a little bit of it. But just be
aware that there's a lot of people that
don't realize,
aren't aware that they're being played and believe
that they're acting with good intention. It's like
military personnel going out and fighting for, you
know, the war in Iraq.
Then come back and go, my god. I
had no idea what I was doing. The
same thing's happening with the Iran conversation. But
you see, when they left,
they had in their mind that they were
fighting for you, for freedom, for liberty. And,
you know, even if you you know, the
point is I've always said this over the
years. It is
honorable. Respect I mean, it it you those
people deserve your respect
because of the intention. That's like I said
in the beginning. Right? They believe they were
doing it for you selflessly.
And then the question is when they then
find out, do they then change their actions?
Well, Brad Miller, for example. Local per I've
interviewed him more than once. He I greatly
respect the man. Each stood by his principles.
Right? But that's that's what's important.
So coming back to this.
Trump received criticism in the early stages of
The US and Israel's three week war in
Iran
for failing to convey clear reasons for launching
military strikes.
He has made a number of antithetical statement
sends, including telling The UK, which he called
a once great ally.
Just you know, this is my point about
the the type of tactics.
Why do you think that's, like, that's not
that's either bully tactics or whatever you wanna
call it. You don't do the mindset is
do that to then kinda force them back
into position.
Because thirty seconds later, he's asking them to
do something. Why would they if you just
basically were insulted? Because it's just it's this
is how they operate, guys. Because they're changing
the way the world runs or more so
showing you the way it's really run this
entire time, and we now have an opportunity
to truly change it.
It says
he has made a number of antithetical statements
saying that its help was not needed to
The UK in Operation Epic Fury. Well, clearly,
that's not the case now. His comments on
Sunday his comment on Sunday was similarly questioned
in an immediate backlash on social media from
critics who accused him of starting an unnecessary
war, then demanding others step in and help
him out and help him end it. And
let's not forget, this this got such a
small it's important because
the timing. But it got such a small
amount of coverage. The only I mean, outside
of my reporting and a few other independent
media, the only person I saw cite this
was Dave Smith in a back and forth,
and I think it was on a Piers
Morgan show, but it what and I verified
it myself.
After the immediate action here, Donald Trump reached
out
and tried to convey a ceasefire deal through
his Italy counterparts,
and Iran flatly denied
declined. And they'll they'll they've been saying this
since then. We have no reason to make
a deal with you while you continue to
do what you're doing. That's what I've been
saying the entire time. Up until now, it
seems like they just were trying to make
this work through the normal processes. And you
or or you could argue that there's something
else happening there that we can't see. But,
again, all the evidence shows you that versus
what they're doing. You know, the idea, oh,
they're just an evil villainous group back there
doing something secret we can't see because Trump
said is a little bit naive. Certainly possible.
The facts are what matter. But this is
you know, it it's
the whole thing continues to be more and
more, like, absurd, clownish.
Like, just on its face that people continue
to act like this is not the most
clear thing we've ever seen. And this is
what he continues to do. Like, I'll get
into in a second. The idea that he
can, like, just talk his way out of
the next action. Well, Iran said no. They
flatly turned down that ceasefire, and since then,
that's when things have seeped continually.
You know, you get the lies about this
or the lie about that or we're stronger
than ever. They've been utterly defeated.
These things aren't true. Now that doesn't mean
the opposite is true, but why would they
lie about these things? You know, make it
makes you wonder, and then you get into
the actual data the evidence, and it shows
that it's look. If you're based on what
we can see and this is my estimate,
it seems pretty clear that The US is
in a very bad position, whether it's because
of the over the used munitions
or because,
you know, ultimately, that Iran has been planning
for this because of this circumstance for a
very long time and that the drone point
I mean, you can go through this for
a very for many different tactical points.
But what's interesting to me is that the
claim is, well, Iran's clearly losing because they're
not firing their missiles as much. Well, Iran
came out in the beginning and said, ultimately,
that we are measured. This is a long
term war. Now, that could have been a
lie to cover that, but that's not what
the data seems to show for me.
So, the fact that they offered that and
was denied, it shows you right out of
the gate that something was not something was
amiss. And don't forget, Israel
spoke up. This was also covered publicly and
said, why are you talking Iran without us?
And Trump's administration said we won't do it
again. You know, paraphrasing, but that's what happened.
And so it's it continues to show that
Israel is dictating these policies. And I and,
my question is whether Trump is becoming aware
of that or he's okay with it or
not able to change it.
It says on, one post referred to the
families of the 13 US servicemen. And, guys,
we know it's much more than that. Just
like it always has in the past, they
lie about this. I can't say how much.
Unfortunately, I believe it's more.
Families of 13 US servicemembers killed in the
conflict as of Sunday, and how they might
react to the president shouldn't even be their
suggestion. Now, again, he's talking about the straight,
but it's the same general point. Trump was
speaking on the same day as he revert
reversed his earlier position
over outside assistance and stepped up pressure on
a raft of other countries to become involved
in defending the strait. Which again, guys, my
point, that's why that was so relevant to
me. There's no need to defend the strait
if only you guys are being targeted. Why
would the rest of these countries do that
and then risk themselves being targeted as well?
See the point? I feel like Iran has
crafted this very well, I think, if I'm
reading it correctly.
It says Australia, France, and Japan are among
the countries that have said they have no
plans to send warships. Australia, France, Japan. These
are major,
like, hardcore
assets or or allies, if not vassal states,
if you will. And they're saying no, but
that just could be outwardly. We'll see what
actually happens.
That's interesting to me. Keir Starmer, The UK
prime minister, said on Monday that he was
working with European allies. This is what it
was, a viable plan
to reopen the strait, which, by the way,
is not closed. See my point? But insisted
the country will not be drawn into a
wider war. Now you have to ask yourself,
you know, they they have their agendas. And
it's pretty clear what really drives this to
me. But just like Trump is grappling with
what The US people want, so too do
these countries. They know how unpopular this is.
The whole world knows how unpopular this is.
They don't want to be seen to support.
They all need to at least be seen
to have the majority support of their peoples.
And maybe you think that's what actually guides
their people into power. You can decide. But
in the day, either way you look at
it, they need that. And so if people
don't want it, they're not gonna come out
and go, got you, Trump. We'll jump into
this and take all the butt. You know,
that's not gonna happen. At least not
cordially or, like, casually, they'll have to be
convinced, coerced,
threatened.
I think tariffs may come into play. Who
knows, guys?
Xavier Beddle, Luxembourg's
deputy prime minister, has said has said his
country would not give in to blackmail
from The US. Now that's very revealing.
I mean, we could you could argue that
he's just, I guess well, two things, that
they perceive it as blackmail, and they're wrong.
You could argue that this is only one
group out of the entire conversation that Trump
did blackmail,
or you could, you know, be logical,
Occam's razor, and stand back and go, well,
that's probably how he's engaging with all of
them, and that's why it's going this way.
And that's why most of them are not
and this is just the one that said,
you know what? We're not gonna be blackmailed,
which suggests that they're trying desperately to get
them to do it against their will.
And blackmail.
I don't Epstein files? I don't know. Maybe
it's Israel doing it. Genuinely ask these questions.
And know what's funny to me? I shouldn't
even say funny, but just kind of interesting?
That we're at a point today, we're asking
that question
to, like, the most average per like, people
that have never heard this. The average person
who's only tuned on done Twitter,
they go, you know what? That makes sense.
That's
crazy. It's great. It's positive. That's my point,
is that people are now understanding not just
that they should be asking these other questions,
but that these questions are not crazy. It's
not hyperbole.
Asking whether or not Israel may be using
the Epstein files to coerce countries into these
positions is actually more logical than damn near
everything people are saying in the mainstream field
today.
It's just crazy to me, isn't it? And
I think that's worth thinking about. Now,
last part here.
It says, Trump suggested that The US effort
to secure the strait was for the benefit
of other countries. And see, this is why
I started with that. Excuse me. Started with
that. It's about trying to convince everybody, dishonestly,
it seems, that everyone's equally affected. I think
that was day one report. That's why everybody
lockstep was like the streets closed.
It wasn't because that's what they expected. Right?
It's sort of like the Ukraine war situation.
And, again, this is actually really important to
think about. When the Ukraine war started, what
did we tell you? Well, there were reports
long before this that they had plans for
an ins or,
not insurrection, but,
insurgency,
which means that there are local entities fighting
from within, essentially. And so at the end
of the day,
when Russia started and I told you on
day one, you got main three reports across
the board, they're rolling into Kyiv. Well, they
didn't do that.
And this wasn't some fringe little platform. We're
talking about Fox and CNN. Why?
Because that was what the reporting was supposed
to be. They expected Russia to rush in
and take everything so they could then have
their ongoing forever insurgency
just like before. That's how I read that.
And Israel with The U the Nazav movement
and all the different radical elements they've been
funding, the CIA with project aerodynamic going back
to, like, 1947
before. They've been building a fascist entity just
like they funded the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to
fight Russia Soviet Union before. My point though
is that they expect these things and they
act as if. They respond. They move their
agendas based on the assumption that they do
what we do. And, apparently, that's not the
case.
I find that very revealing. Now it doesn't
mean good guy, bad guy, but it means
tactful versus, you know,
belligerent and clumsy, if you will.
It's almost like if we do it you
know, he said that Trump suggested The US
effort secure the straight was a benefit of
other countries. It is not. It's almost like
we do it for and, again, the point
was that they expected Iran to do that,
expected them to mine and break it down,
but Iran is tactful.
Right? They're they're clearly intelligent the way that
they conduct. They're militarily
intelligent
in the sense where they thought this through,
and this is my opinion. And they said,
well, that's what they want from us. If
we shut the straight down entirely, they'll tell
the world, and it will be correct, that
we're shit hindering everybody else's.
They didn't do
that. Again, be clear. This is completely the
way I read this. I could be way
off. But you see what I'm talking about.
This feels like it makes sense. And, again,
why the entire media left and right who's
supposed to be against Trump? All you reported
the same? It dealt you know excuse me.
My throat's
keeps clogging up. But, you know why in
my opinion. At least why what my opinion
is. He says it's almost like we do
it for habit.
That's a weird statement. But we also do
it for some very good allies that we
have in The Middle East.
Okay?
We do it for habit?
What are you talking about right there? Do
what?
Hypothetically
engage with some kind of protection mechanism for
ships in the Strait Of Hormuz?
How is that habit? When's the last time
that happened? You see my point see, this
guy often speaks off the cuff and he
shows you things he's not supposed to. Habit
is
military adventurism.
Authoritarianism.
They're they're they're constant colonials, what they're doing
in the world. Yes. It's habit. They
Strait. I mean, where are we right now?
NATO. You know what I mean? Like, it's
just and, like, I actually don't even believe
that that's even a like, if you don't
think that I mean, The US has a
very clear influence over the NATO.
Ultimately, it's what initiated the war on terror
global military's
dynamic of attack one, attack all, was only
ever once used in this circumstance
after nine eleven.
So this to me, I feel like this
is more theater, to be quite honest.
Now, Yousef points out, imagine having the world's
largest navy, by far, starting a war of
choice that hurts the globe
and could have been easily avoided, then asking
your much smaller allies who you have habitually
insulted to bail you out.
Genius.
It says France, Germany, Japan, Australia have reportedly
rejected escorting these tankers through.
Now as I said, and this is their
direct report. This the statement from them. Again,
take it for what you will. They could
be lying. Hormuz open to most, Iran says.
This is a new article. Closed only to
enemies. Iran allows limited oil transit amid war.
Now, yeah, I look. My point has always
has been that this like, if this was
restricted to anything other than Israel, The US,
and anything considered a legal belligerent, I would
criticize it. From what I can see, that's
not what's happening. So I don't see a
point at which this becomes against the law.
Their it's their territorial waters.
Right? And now and, of course, that would
apply to anybody in those waters regarding that
side. But, of course, you can go around
the other side.
But they're restricting US and Israel, and they're
arguably in a war footing with them despite
neither of them declaring war. So if you're
gonna claim over here that you have the
right to bomb them because of and when
you haven't declared war, then the static reality
is that you guys are defective, de facto
war, and so that means that your ships
are targets
even though I argue the same thing that
The US is conducting an illegal war. Now
from Iran's perspective, I'm not privy to their
dynamics of whether I I don't think the
government cares or the people think in regard
to whether they can initiate war, which you
should think about. In this country, pretend that
we do, and they still don't care.
Exactly what Tila was reporting the entire time.
And I said, you know, well, because we
have eyes. Because you can see that there
were ships coming through. I found that so
strange.
But
it's because I think, ultimately, it's about creating
the idea that Iran is attacking everybody, and
that shows desperation to me. Now, again, in
case you didn't see it before, here is
just the full map with all the ships
that we can see. This is,
general I mean, essentially live. It's a real
real time map. There's the time right there,
universal time. But, yeah, I mean, look. You
know, I mean, you you can zoom back
out and look at, like, the general traffic.
Now it could just be because it's a
smaller spot, but it looks pretty
traffic y to me. But, ultimately, it is,
by everyone's account, restricted, the trade and so
on. And I think they've played this very
smart.
Now The
US, after this, this is just I mean,
this just kinda speaks speaks to, you know
I'm not trying to think of a good
analogy. Like, these people could literally do the
most embarrassing,
clumsy thing you've ever seen. They would stand
up and act like they just made up
a a cool new, you know,
parkour move or something. I don't even know
how to frame it. My point is that
these they do things like this, and it's
just like, does anybody
believe that like, this is it's cringey is
the right word for it. The US is
allowing Iranian oil tankers through the Strait Of
Hormuz, says Soros backed Zionist percent.
Funny how the right now people going the
the Soros,
what is it? Talking about Tucker what was
it? No. So, anyway, people that are, like,
Soros this or BlackRock that, but then people
on the side
never call it out when it's rumble or
there are people in Trump's cabinet or that
Flurry Fink is, like, his right hand man
at this point. But, you know, anyway, I
digress. The point about this
is that,
I mean, are they so right now, they're
asking for help support to get any ships
through, which means they don't have control. And
everybody knows that and yet to come out
and go, oh, we're allowing them. It's we're
we're just choosing not to stop them. It's
like that's that's desperate, guys. That's desperate. That's
embarrassing
because they don't have control. Iran's the one
that clearly has the control over the situation
in in the Strait Of Hormuz, and they
just need to make it look like what
it is allowing Ron
to have their own free access, and that's
look somehow, like, that's their decision.
Do you really believe that they would allow
that? I mean, it's just it's it is
sad.
It's a sad state, guys. These people are
are, I mean, either desperate to make themselves
look like they're not ineffectual, Zionist controlled people
or they're just think we're that stupid. Or
I don't you know, you could think of
other things, I think. Behind the curtain, Trump's
escalation trap. This is Axios,
and this one was
today.
The Iran war, now entering week three,
is the first time Trump's style has made
it impossible for him to easily talk or
improvise his way out. Why it matters, they
write. Trump could wind up trapped between his
caprice and the realities of war. He expects
a quick, clear victory. But unlike tariffs that
can be swiftly imposed and rescinded, the war's
outcome is beyond unilateral control and fix quick
fixes.
And Iran gets a say, as they already
did when they turned down his cease fire
offer.
To help break the Persian Gulf oil jam,
sir, Trump is try is working to break
the oil jam, they say. But in doing
so, he risks getting caught in an escalation
trap,
which is, I argue, exactly how Israel set
this up, where a stronger force is incentivized
to keep attacking to demonstrate dominance amid diminishing
returns. I mean, is that not exactly who
these people are? Who cares about who we're
killing or whether it commits US to wars
we don't want or whether nobody supports this?
We can't just look weak.
I mean, if you like, that should not
that's not even laugh worthy. That's terrifying.
Because that's who these people are, standing up
there, pounding their chest, and acting like we're
strong. And it's just a sign of weakness,
guys. And it's very much showing to people
right now
to incentivize to keep attacking
regardless of the military
incentive
or whether it's in your benefit because, well,
dominance. You know, might makes right. A senior
Trump administration official practically admitted as much, telling
Axios, Mark Caputo,
Axios' Mark Caputo, the Iranians effing around with
the straight makes Trump makes,
Trump dig in more, essentially.
So, again, this is where you come into
the idea that, like, okay. If anybody like,
if I knew that, if people who barely
understand if you I mean, the idea was
always that this is what Iran would do.
I'm surprised they haven't done it in the
past. Twelve day war or even plenty of
other examples before.
So they knew it, guys. And yet his
argument is that because they did the thing
we always knew, that that made him dig
in more to a thing he claims he
doesn't want.
Other or aside from every other time he
speaks out loud about why it's the best
thing in the world and everybody just wanted
or why he wants it, but then comes
over here and says, we don't want more.
It's insane what's happening. It's schizophrenic.
But so I I felt insulted, so I
had to kill people. That's that's the very
government thing to do. State of play. Israel
wants regime change in Iran and more dramatic
military destruction as it weighs an invasion of
Lebanon.
I can't even believe like, first of all,
this shows you the
the what we have done as independent media
or any of you out there supporting this
to change the conversation. Why Zionism is being
talked about, why Israel is being called out,
but the fact that they're even mentioning Lebanon.
Because realize, guys,
weighing an invasion? Guys, they've been occupying Lebanon
my entire like, if I mean, I when
when was it? If it were give me
the date exactly of when Southern Lebanon was
officially occupied, because I can't remember exactly off
the top of my head. But a long
time. And they have continued to bomb them
despite ceasefires
well before October 7. But right now, like,
thousands of times after October 7. So just
when it says weighing an invasion is so
frustrating to me because Axios knows well anybody
knows. Who cares to look at the facts
that that's already happening? When you realize this
was posted today, over the last week, I
could show you that they're occupying areas. You
think they don't know that, so it shows
you a willful deception right there. But at
least they're mentioning it, which I'm not giving
them credit for. I'm saying that's because of
you.
Bibi Netanyahu has shown several times that when
it comes to Iran, he has the ability
to convince Trump to take his side. Crazy.
Right? Even that passive, small,
like, benign way of writing that, you never
would have seen something like that. That would
have been called antisemitic,
and it probably is right now by all
the Zionist screaming about why they shouldn't say
that. You're claiming Jews control the no. That's
not what they said. They said Netanyahu has
influence over Trump because he does.
And even mainstream media is being forced to
call it out, forced to call it out
because they can't lose every shred of credibility
which they're already about to do. Averaging we're
what we're watching, averaging out the timelines mentioned
by Trump and his aids,
it's fair to assume the administration
expected an intense military operation lasting about four
to six weeks, weirdly timed right around the
War Powers Act argument.
That's just funny to me how they've, you
know, that's the the the the they didn't
happen. So, technically, they're not bound by that,
which just makes it generally illegal and congress
doesn't care.
But that's what they were aiming for. But
the point is it's clearly going to go
longer than that unless Israel and US stop.
So that makes April
'33
of the war, a real gut check moment.
But in Washington and in capitals around the
world, officials are preparing for a much larger
crisis. Now before I move past that, the
real point of this is not because of
anything they claim legally binds them. It's because
of what Americans were promised. Well, if you
can't see by now that they haven't kept
any of the promises, Trump or Biden or
anybody else, then I I don't know how
to help you. I mean, we should be
aware that that's likely not going to matter.
Maybe they stop before that for whatever reason
they decide, but it will not be in
my mind because they care what you think
or because you don't want it to continue.
I don't think they care. Otherwise, this wouldn't
be happening in the first place.
So when it gets there, I argue this
will continue, but just recognize that this was
you know,
it's not about whether he's
the the the base wants this or not.
It's about what Israel wants, which is kinda
a larger point for today. But in Washington
and in capitals around the world, officials are
preparing for a much longer crisis because everyone
can see it. Axios' Barak Ravid, who is
a very clear Zionist influencer,
tells us he's heard from three different people
in the administration and in allied countries who
believe the instability in The Middle East and
The US involvement could continue until September
even if the war shifts to a low
intensity conflict.
Israel's told journalists it plans to at least
three more weeks of attacks on thousands of
additional targets. I mean, think about that. To
what end? What are we talking about? If
this was some kind of a coercive action
to get some kind of an outcome, then
why would they which is where we got
weeks planned ahead. All that shows you is
Israel always planned this as we knew, and
they just have their targets. They planned. It
doesn't matter what else happens. We're gonna right
now, they feel they've got the opening. That's
why they're beginning to get the
ramping up and publicly so the illegal actions
in Lebanon.
And, by the way, never stop what they're
doing at Gaza. This is simply the I
think Netanyahu's last effort, he thinks he's gonna
get this done.
Greater Israel, whatever you think is driving it.
So in this case,
we've got three weeks more, which puts you
well over what Trump said would happen, and
that's what their plan is. So how much
you wanna bet that's exactly where this goes
and probably longer because Israel's decided that?
Trump doesn't have a say. That's what it
looks like.
And you may argue he will try to,
but let's wait and see what happens. This
will be an important point for people that
are on that fence.
Does he try to stop it or not?
You know he you know he knows you
don't want this to happen.
Multiple targets, well, they've been bombing schools and
hospitals. And, guys, if you understand this by
now, this is not Gaza.
People can lie. They lie all the I
mean, I've seen more lies on the Republican
side of the MAGA conversation rather than the
fake MAGA Patriot side on Twitter more than
I've ever seen in this last couple of
weeks. It's insane. And I'm that's coming from
me covering this stuff. Guys, it's crazy what
they're doing right now. Blatant whole cloth, just
outright lies to get you distracted, to lie
about people being killed. It's all over the
place.
I was gonna say one more thing and
I just lost it. But anyway, the point
is clearly,
it's it's a special time for what's going
on. And I think this is kind of
the fruition of what they're trying to accomplish.
I was going somewhere with that. There's no
other point, but I mean, yeah, s somebody
mentioned in the chat. I mean, I'm not
gonna get into it today just because it's
it's un I mean, as far as I'm
concerned, it's an unverified claim that Netanyahu was
killed. I mean,
at the end of the day, it's always
two things for me. When anybody any human
being. I don't believe it's it's right for
us,
whether religious or not, to rejoice in people
being killed. I just don't think that's the
right thing to do. However, I think the
world would be a better place with somebody
like Netanyahu doesn't exist. Now, with that being
said, I don't think the evidence backs up
that he's been killed. I've seen all the
same things. I've seen I I mean, I
saw that weird AI thing, when it came
out, like, five days ago, whenever it was.
And I thought, okay. Well, that could be
any number of things. They could be doing
it to, you know, for some other weird,
manipulative propaganda reason. They could be doing it
to to make it look like he was
killed. They could be doing it because he
was tired. You know, who knows, guys? Or
he could because he was killed.
What's interesting is that a lot you know,
look. There's tons of people out there that
I would I almost I I wanna say
that I, well, what I just I would've
expected people to wait for more evidence from
the caliber of people talking about it. And
I'm surprised, in fact. Now look, I we
can talk about the hypothetical and we maybe
this, maybe that, but I've seen a lot
of weird overfocus on this when there doesn't
seem to be enough evidence to verify it's
happening.
There's been videos put out, but, yes, they
could fake that too. Right? But so where
I'm at is, I don't know. That's the
honest response. We don't know. There's evidence suggested
might be the case, but it's not fleshed
out. And if you guys have more information,
please tell me because that's an important story.
And it will show you, as I do
think is the case, that Iran is not
in the on its back foot like they're
trying to claim.
Now it says the president said Sunday in
a phone call with the Financial Times,
Ed Luce, we've essentially decimated Iran. He just
they just keep doing this. Now, look, I'm
not like I said before, if
I have a hard time even verifying this,
but this would surprise me. And I'm gonna
go ahead and argue that the case probably
likely is based on the evidence that they've
sunk tons of Iranian navy ships. But I
think they expected that. Like, in fact, there's
been reports of that in that, like, this
was always about the home basically tightening whatever
was the the frame the phrase bat and
hatches or whatever, you know, just tightening down
and defending the way that they are and
and the long game, as they said right
from the beginning. And look, that's why Rubio
said right then,
and I think they regret saying this now,
that it was because and this was after
they said, oh, Israel will attack first, then
they changed their narrative, then they switched back
to it now. We'll get there in a
second. But the idea that, well, they have
drones and stuff, and they're building to a
point where we won't be able to stop
it.
And I said then, I said, well, what's
why why is that so you're literally saying
because they're doing something that everyone can do
in in a legal fashion?
We have to stop that because we don't
want them. So you're going to illegally bomb
them because they're doing something that they can
legally because that might make them stronger than
you. What does that show you that they're
the bad guy in this situation? Doesn't I
don't I even say good guy versus bad
guy. But in this case, what they're doing
is wrong. What they're doing is evil.
And that's what they said. So my point
then is about the idea
of their their capabilities when it comes to
the drone conversation, and that's when it came
out early. We're, what, $50,000
drone being taken down by million dollar equipment,
and they took down their eyes in Qatar.
They took down many locations they're not admitting
to. From what I can tell from people
like Douglas McGregor, for example, that Iran is,
you could even argue, potentially winning this war.
I'm not gonna say I can tell that.
I think the evidence is still hard to
read right now. But decimating Iran is simply
not true, and that's what's so hard because
it could be that they're winning, but why
would he have to lie about that? Why
wouldn't he just come out and say, We're
winning? You know, it's gotta be, We obliterated
them. I love you. I love you. He
says, Totally obliterated. Well, that's, like, that's redundant.
Obliterated means obliterated. Just funny. But he's just
trying to accentuate how completely destroyed. Well, didn't
he say he obliterated their nuclear facilities, then
kinda walked that back?
They have no Navy, no anti aircraft, no
Air Force. Everything is gone. The only thing
they can do is make a little trouble
by putting a mine in the water, which
appears to not even be what's actually happening.
But see, why would he focus on that
when he could have said drones? Right? Because
drones, they don't want you to think about
it. I don't think not in the moment
where they might be losing. The mines, they
want you to think about because they want
people to think they're shutting down the strait
and that they're terrorists. Let's not forget this
happened with Bolton.
The limpet mines?
They made that up. We know that. They
were exposed for it. So I'm not like
I've said before, I believe they do have
the ability and the means to put those
in the water. I don't think they are
now. And last time, they got lied about
too.
Even when he goes, a nuisance, but nuisance
but the nuisance can cause problems.
He just can't his ego can't allow it
to be presented as something that might even
be some like, even even suggesting it might
be something difficult to stop. He can't even
do that. And, oh, I'm so strong, and
then that I could beat him anything no
matter what. It's just always what he is.
It's hyperbole on hyperbole. It's embarrassing.
And it's I've I've never seen that. Like,
not like that. That's just a tactical of
his own or rather just a trait that
I think is embarrassing. Anna Kelly, the White
House's principal deputy press secretary, emphasized to us
that Operation Epic Fury is the result of
months
and months of meticulous planning. Now here's what's
funny to me. You know why this is
coming around? Because now they're being criticized for
bumbling into this without being prepared.
How often do I say this? Where they
lie about everything, they'll contradict a previous lie?
What was the narrative like twenty seconds ago?
Well, they were gonna attack and we had
to respond.
But Israel was gonna do or rather, Iran
was gonna do something, and so we had
to respond.
Okay. So it wasn't planned then. It wasn't
a long term plan to invade Iran. It
wasn't a long term plan to arm the
Kurds to invade from the ground. It wasn't
a long term plan. I mean, guys, Israel
admitted that you guys were discussing you had
already chosen a day while you were still
in the midst of your negotiations, after which
you made them meet in that room and
you killed them under the guise of diplomacy.
But so now now, apparently,
months of no p planning because clearly we
were ready and we were prepared. Well, then
it was an illegal war. We already know
that, though.
With ample options provided to the president who
took all of his top officials' views into
account as he made the final decision. Right.
And what they mean by that is Israel
presented him two very clear plans, both of
which helped Israel if they said, you're so
smart, Trump. You picked the best one. And
he goes, That one. Oh, you did the
best choice. And that's everything they want. I
mean, I'm joking, in a way.
But that's how you play somebody with ego
who thinks he's the mastermind of everything, everyone
around. I mean, if you have somebody like
him who's genuinely listening to somebody like Laura
Loomer, that speaks that alone,
by itself, shows you what we're dealing with.
Trump could pull out tomorrow, it says, but
the Iranians could keep the Strait Of Hormuz
closed and push oil prices so high that
America would have to reengage. That's an interesting
point. Right? Because what what they're saying is
that it's not closed is they could just
maintain the pressure, which will have an effect
on their ability to go through the area,
which will affect their decisions,
their financial issue,
situation.
And that's not gonna affect I mean, they
could do it in a way if they
did it right, even helping with the Yemenis,
the Houthis, to where they effectively hurt only
Israel and The United States and anybody helping
them. And I don't know why anybody else
would want to risk that same situation.
And so, that would force them to have
to then go back to militarily engaging
based on I mean, you know how embarrassing
that would be? I I I think they're
thinking about this now. We can't do that
because we'd probably be forced back into it.
And that would not only expose everything we're
doing, but it would also show that we're
weak.
And they can't abide that, clearly,
even though it's the case most of the
times. Trump has grown accustomed to doing what
he wants and then quickly improvising if such
things go sell. That's a very generous way
of framing that. He's accustomed to doing what
he wants. And then when everything's go when
things spin out and go ridiculous because nothing's
really thought through, well, then he just yells
something different, yells a different narrative, claims it
was all the same. We did it, and
we won, even though they lost. You know,
that that's what he's used to. And I'm
surprised that worked ever.
Propaganda.
But that's not the case when Iran can
just go, well, we're still involved. Says, but
this time, some in his inner circle have
what one official called buyer's remorse,
fearing growing fears that attacking Iran was a
mistake.
Crazy way to frame that. A source close
to the close to the administration said some
key officials around Trump were reluctant or wanted
more time.
Meaning, when this was being bullied by Israel,
they were like, woah. Like, let's make sure
we're ready. So these these statements suggest they
belie the earlier statements.
We want more time. We gotta make sure
we're prepared for this. It says he ended
up saying and this has been quoted by
a lot of different people. You could argue
it's still misrep Like, I guarantee if it
hurts Trump, he'll claim it's false anyway. He's
claimed things are false more times than I
can count that turned out to be true.
He ended up saying, quote, I just want
to do it, the source said. He grossly
overestimated his ability to topple the regime short
of sending in ground troops.
The source and it guaranteed that was Israel
right there going, we got you. We'll do
it. You're the strongest. We got the best
you. Iran's so weak right now. We killed
nobody's like, that's the whole point, guys. Where
they we killed the per or rather the,
twelve day war and our our obliteration of
the nuclear facilities, they're so weak. They can't
even stay. They've been doing that their entire
lives. It's seemingly never been true. But maybe
Trump bought it.
The source said Trump was high on his
own supply
after last summer's quick strikes in Iran and
January's abduction of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro.
He saw multiple decisive quick victories with extraordinary
military competence. Again, that's a very ridiculous way
to frame whatever the what they did does
not demonstrate anything other than the ability to
force your way into whatever you want.
Trump's war of choice certainly looks like a
military success so far, they write.
Really?
I mean, what? I mean, think about that
framing with what we know is happening right
now. Like, we you could argue that based
on the fact that you've bombed things and
sunk your ships. Maybe that's the case. But
there's real like, to argue that this has
been a success, in what way?
You could are you are you awash at
best because they've hurt The US in just
as many ways. They bombed their installations. They've
took I mean, taken out billion dollar installations.
So a success? I mean, that's a I
can't I'm actually shocked that they even they
would frame it with what they've wrote written
this article written. Iran's missile and drone launchers
have greatly decreased,
indicating it's running out of weapons or the
ability to fire. Why would that be the
indication?
I mean, we know they've been preparing for
this,
I mean, my entire life.
And of course, maybe maybe then you could
argue, yes, that could be the indication that
because they've slowed down, even though they told
you they were going to do that, that
that could be because they don't have the
ability to. But we just saw them over
the last many multiple days shoot have massive
ramp ups of of bombings.
Major like, the largest attack they've done so
far. Well, that doesn't seem to suggest that
they're getting getting weaker.
And really, it just means, I think, that
they're planning this in a long game, and
they don't need to be firing all of
their expensive missiles when they can be doing
what they're doing with the drones. And effectively,
you could argue, succeeding.
Some officials close to him had hoped he'd
be able to show some quick gains and
declare victory because because that's what we're doing.
We won already. It's over. Because that's embarrassing.
Now it's not apparent how he'd do that
convincingly. Well, yeah. We're seeing that. As Barack
reported, The US doesn't have clear enough lines
of communication
with the Iranian regime to make a deal
that's sure to stick.
Interesting that the person
the the ravid says that because they did.
And in fact, they do. But the difference,
as this inside Zionist reporter seems to know,
is that they're not allowed to do it
anymore because Israel told them to stop.
Now, who knows if they're following those rules?
But that did happen publicly, and it was
pretty embarrassing.
So as Daily Beast writes, an insider tells
Axios Trump was grossly overestimated his abilities, as
we just read. And I simply said, this
is what you get when you surround yourself
with profiteering,
incompetent yes men. While, of course, listening to
cartoons like Laura Loomer. I mean, what else
do you expect, guys? Do you think that
that's gonna give you the best advice? You
think that's a meritocracy?
This is funny. You know, we you guys
were calling that out twenty seconds ago. Maybe
you should start doing it. And, well, I
I take it back because I think most
of them are. But it's pretty embarrassing to
put these people in positions, like a salon
owner or these Fox News hosts or people
that wanna just hang out with all the
cool kids in their mind. These are these
these are people that are being used and
played and manipulated, and I don't mean by
Trump.
Now this is interesting to me.
Now we've this is this is not new,
by the way. But it's just important to
make sure we see the evolution of this
because we haven't had the thing has been,
like, a week since I've actually touched on
this point.
How this started?
Rubio comes out and says, as we know,
the president made the decision because we knew
an Israeli action. We knew that that would
pre precipitate
an attack against American forces. So we knew
Israel was gonna attack, and he even floated
the idea of them nuke using nukes,
and that we had to do it first.
And so everybody said, woah. Okay. So Israel,
either whether through manipulation or not, was able
to coerce you into that action. And I
stood back and said, look. This is being
jumped on by tons of Republicans to make
the case. See, we told you Trump didn't
do it on purpose because they were trying
to defend the we didn't wanna go to
war point.
But the argument then was Israel controlling policy?
I said,
Exactly. Fine. You can claim Trump's innocent. There's
plenty of other examples to make that clear.
He's not. The reality is we're all now
coming to the truth. That Israel, whether coercion
or manipulation or blackmail or whatever else, is
able to do this. And frankly, I think
it's obvious that the Rubios and and, you
know, Grahams of the world are bull I
I don't even think you need to pay
them. I think they're ardent supporters of this
religious Zionist agenda.
Either way,
here's what Trump said, and it just shows
you how this spun around. Well, I mean,
just as this was what he said first,
then he got contradicted.
Trump came out and basically said and this
is just the video. Rubio walks back the
comments after Trump contradicts him. Basically said, well,
no. No. You know, that wasn't the case.
We we are the ones that attacked in
the whole thing. Right? So here's where it
ends ends up essentially. Even though even though
right now, you already have sort of a
different narrative too.
They just they say what everything to say
in the moment. That's what he does. But
here's what he said.
Trump.
And all very quickly, we thought
and I thought maybe more so than most,
I could ask Marco,
but I thought we were going to have
a situation where we were gonna be attacked.
They were getting ready to attack
Israel.
They were getting ready to attack others. So
I guess that was the case then. Ignore
the thing I said in between. Well, now
we're back to this point. Like, we don't
have a memory. You're seeing that right now.
And a lot of those missiles that are
hitting in, those are stationary. Those were aimed
there for a long period of time at
these other countries. Yep. You know why? Because
they have US bases, because they're helping them
arm and refuel, and that makes them illegal
belligerence of the war, which all of them
know. Maybe he doesn't. That's embarrassing.
Real it doesn't matter, though. The reality is
clear. They keep trying to make the point
that, look at see? Look at what they're
bombing. We told you they were criminal terrorists.
I mean, guys, that that only will work
for the dumbest person in the room. How
do you see that but desperate? I don't
know.
So I think I was right about that.
We attacked first,
and if we didn't, it could have been,
you know, look. We're really,
decimating them. They're being decimated. Oh, yeah. Yeah.
Clearly.
We attacked first. Yeah. We got it. Same
thing I said last time. But first, as
I've wrote here,
now Trump says what Trump recently denied. How
ridiculous all this is. American servicemen are dying
to fight Israel's war again while Israel commits
a multi nation genocide with US government support.
Anyone defending this is not fighting for American
interests. This is Israel first.
I mean, that's that's not even debatable, guys.
That's exactly what's happening. How is this in
any way? You could argue that this might
be an inch The US' security interest. I
disagree.
But it's not even remotely America first, especially
since the America First
Team, not the not the government, but conservatives
don't want that. So I should no. But
Trump says, I'm MAGA. MAGA's me. And that's
causing more people to go, woah. Okay. Well,
then I was wrong about all of this.
I support the country. Right? Not not whatever
Trump says is the country that day.
That's my point. I think most people are
honest. They're just being played.
Now,
I know this this is the one this
is from before. This is on March 4.
If accurate, the point was so he says
we attack first. Just don't forget this point.
Right? Which means, as I said before, in
case you didn't hear it, there's only three
legal realities for why this would can be
considered a legal war.
Congressional approval, which never seems to happen, which
means congress is inept,
an authorization for use military force like in
the Iraq war, which they do not have,
or under the War Powers Act, which is
the only other possible option, if they have
an imminent attack,
which they told you they attacked first, guys.
So there's no world in which this makes
sense. They can't claim it's imminent for forty
seven years. There is and it even now,
it's come out even more so showing you
that there is zero evidence that Iran was
in any way going to attack. And Iran
came out and said that, of course, they
could be lying, and said there's no no
world where we're gonna attack you.
So either way, guys, you could argue that
they saw it for that they've never even
tried to prove that, and the evidence they
put out shows you that it wasn't imminent.
Rather, that Israel might attack, and that was
the point, and so Iran might respond afterward.
See, that's how they trap themselves by their
ridiculous narratives. Because if they if Rubio was
correct, and this is what Trump is now
repariting, that means that Israel was going to
attack and they knew Iran would respond. So
they had to attack first. How in what
world would that be an imminent strike? Strike,
guys. This is so basic.
And you they we're dealing with dishonest people
and people willing to call it out. That's
all this is. So that makes this an
illegal war, no matter what,
under the constitution.
Now you may disagree with that, then fine.
Make the case of why the constitution doesn't
matter anymore. I don't think that's where you're
going with it, though. If you wanna make
the case, then I'll listen. Break it down
with evidence. I'll probably disagree, But do not
pretend this is somehow justified because Ron's bad
or because forty seven years, it doesn't change
the legal reality.
Of course, Kelly and Levitt says, well, the
president had a feeling.
Very sound logic, which then very quickly changes
it from sound intelligence to that he thought,
which is just embarrassing. That's bad, guys.
Now here's a good clip that Fred and
Serkis put together. I believe he did. He
said that he tagged me and put it
on his account. He says, if you don't
know why we're at war with Iran, you've
clearly forgotten about October 7.
He we knew that there was going to
be an Israeli action. We knew that that
would precipitate an attack against American forces. And
we knew that if we didn't preemptively go
after them before they launch those attacks, we
would suffer higher casualties
and
Don't forget October 7. Don't forget all of
the things that that have happened over the
years. All
all caused by these people. So they are
among the most evil people ever on Earth.
They cut babies' heads off. They chop women
in half. What they did, take a look
at October 7. They go up, which they
will.
They'll also come down. They'll come down very
fast, and we will have gotten rid of
a major major cancer
on the face of the Earth. We will
have taken out a cancer.
You know, don't forget October 7.
Heads off. They chop women in half when
they ever heard her. They cut babies' heads
off.
I mean, can you I mean, this is
this is a really actually important thing to
think about.
What do you think is going on right
there? And there's I mean, there's there's there's
there's only a few ways you could possibly
view
this. Do you think Trump is just somehow
magically not aware that that story has been
debunked by even Israeli media?
That didn't happen. The rape the story the
the lies about the rape conversation as the
woman that they used for that campaign with
the blood on the back of her gray
pants literally is now free, and that didn't
happen.
She pop publicly said that or the many
other examples of them lying, but that's not
even this point. The point here is about
the beheaded babies. Guys, that came
out everywhere. The UN exposed that. Everybody and
he and then Biden said it. And we
went, oh my god. Did he just say
that over and over? Babies on a clothesline.
Babies in an oven. These were lies
proven in every possible angle of the conversation.
That's not opinion. I mean, directly proven that
they came out and admitted that the even
the guy who originally said it turned that
he said, well, it could've been emotional. Maybe
I was misunderstanding.
That's where that ended up.
All this time later, do you think Trump
doesn't know that? Or is he just choosing
to lie because that's what Israel wants? I
mean, Netanyahu still says that. Even though we
all know it's a false story, why is
he and now but understand, we're not talking
about Hamas. We're talking about Iran,
who is not Hamas.
I mean, it's just insane that we're even
pretending despite the funding coming from the Israel
side, if you wanna make the I mean,
it's just embarrassing.
But think about how crazy that is that
he's currently making the argument that somehow Iran
was involved with something that never even happened
in Gaza, and that's why this all needs
to happen.
Seriously, ask yourself whether this is him not
aware, which is I don't know what's more
alarming, or whether he's forced to do this.
All caused by these people. So I mean,
listen to all that again. I mean, this
is just beyond pale, guys. Saying that everything
in the world is because of Iran. It's
just insane. He's going to be an Israeli
don't forget October 7. Don't forget all of
the things that have happened
over the years. All
all caused by these people. So These people,
Iran. Or Or does he mean Shiites? Or
does he mean Iranians as people? Either way,
it's a lie, guys. It's just not true.
I mean, first of all, if you wanna
talk about any number of things, like, he
saw all the events, what, nine eleven? Well,
they're Sunni. That's Wahhabism. That's not Shiites, not
Iran. And and you guys tried to blame
it on Iran. That and even the New
York Times had to break down why that
was blatantly false and then you moved away
from it. Even after this recent point, you
had some Zionist trying to make the case
again, but it fell flat because it's just
not true. I mean, it's just insane to
me. Talk about any other event you wanna
discuss.
In what way have is Iran ever ever
proven to be regarded connected to any of
this stuff? That's not the same as saying
good guy, bad guy. It's just simply the
truth.
And he is either lying to you or
not actually aware of that. Again, I'm not
even sure what's more alarming, that he's just
completely out of, like, this bumbling guy who
thinks he's in charge, but me which means
they have complete control or somebody who's being
coerced. I honestly don't know.
They are among the most evil people ever
ordered.
They cut babies' heads off. They chop women
in half. When they did take a look
at October 7. They go up with Yeah.
If you're talking about Israel, then you'd be
correct. You say, well,
they'll also come down. They'll come down very
fast, and we will have gotten rid of
a major major cancer
on the face of the Earth. Okay. So
a case is unclear, and this is not
new.
He's talking about getting rid of the, I
guess, the Iranian government. We can pretend he
doesn't just mean all of Iran even though
every single US war has always been about
all of the country, all the peoples, complete
destruction. But, you know, this time will be
different, guys.
But,
what I mean, so what are we talking
about? Removing the cancer. So what the what
does that show you? Was this about defending
US interests? Was this about stop defending Israel?
No. This is about
kicking it on the chin
to stop the bad guy. Doesn't that sound
awfully familiar to what they the democrats told
us about Ukraine? It's funny how nothing do
under the sun. But, see, I'm sure people
who don't wanna see it will stomp their
feet and plug their ears and ignore it,
and it's different this time, Ryan. You understand.
It's not, though. We will take it out
of cancer.
Now don't forget October 7. I don't come
We were already in November when we sat
with the prime minister in a very small
forum. This is 03/05/2026.
And this is, again, we've reported this already,
but this is I'm actually glad that you
put this together. This is the this is
the actual clip of him saying this where
he told you, we planned this
a week before, meaning that while they were
pretending to be in negotiations,
they had planned this. And, of course, if
you really understand it, I don't I don't
honestly think they were ever truly engaged with
with negotiations.
I think it was like with Gaza, and
it was always about setting them up for
the best outcome,
which as businessman Trump, you know, devoid of
emotion, it seems, or human nature, ultimately, is
always in that position. Bam, Soleimani, whatever, gives
us the win
where they are, who they are.
Yeah. Don't forget
in November when I don't call We were
already in November when we sat with the
prime minister in a very small forum, and
the prime minister set a goal to eliminate
the Khamenei regime in November.
In November.
Right? Which we told you. And of course,
they didn't do that. Right?
Again, I mean, you know, what's funny is
how interesting would it be for all of
a sudden to find out the community was
never killed? There's nothing to back that up.
I just think that's an interesting thought as,
you know, if they were suit being played
to that degree, that would be pretty, you
know, an impactful thing to happen. But, yeah,
evidence shows clearly that they killed him and
might have belonged with a lot of other
people.
But what
happened? That they did they topple and collapse
because he was the only evil? No. It
wasn't even the reality of guys. I mean,
it's it's insane to look at what he's
done and the arguments about him.
Look at what Israel's doing right now. Look
at what Netanyahu is doing. Look at what
Trump's doing. Look at what their religious extremist
advisers
are doing. You know, whatever you wanna call
it. And it pales in comparison. It's just
the reality. I'm just I'm just we should
not be afraid to be real about this
anymore, about The US and Israel funding Al
Qaeda and ISIS and how it's always been
the reality. How I just we played the
clip of, you
know, of somebody, an intellectual discussing that or
I forget his name off the top of
my head. It was for the nation interview.
The point is it's not because he says
it is true, but it's just a casual
recitation of what we already know is the
reality. We can prove these things.
We just gotta be real about it. We
gotta stop pretending like this. You know what
it is is engaging with this hyperbolic sort
of pearl clutching partisan mainstream alternative media
that just always acts like you're not allowed
to say certain things
everywhere you look. Now, as to that very
point, Scott Horton telling you as it is.
No more BS about this war being waged
to hurt China or any other rationalization.
It's just it's the Likud. That's that's Netanyahu's
political party. They've seized control of the imperial
regime. Simple as that.
I happen to agree.
You can decide for yourself. Question it, guys.
Demand evidence. Prove it. I think this is
very easy to do so.
Disclosed TV. Now, in case you're watching for
the first time, this is not something we'll
get back to. We've discussed this a thousand
times. I've done entire shows breaking down that
exact point to a t.
And I'll probably do it again soon.
Disclosed TV. Trump on Iran war. He's literally
just said this. I had an obligation
to do this.
I didn't want to. I called it excursion.
I didn't wanna make this journey.
What kind of a weird statement is that?
Now I honestly think that this is, again,
sort of like with the way he plays
this.
You know, like, almost like a wink wink
secret, you know, to the people that read
into everything he says and assume whatever they
want out of it to give the best
outcuts, like, that's the cue thing, is that
ultimately, this is
him basically
suggesting
I mean, if if I'm reading it correctly,
like, it could just be a a weird
statement he put out. But that he had
like, he was all forced, obligated. Here's what
he said.
Can we wrap this war up this week?
He's hiding his hands down there, it looks
like.
Will we?
I don't think so, but it'll be soon.
Well, wait. Let's war up this Can we
wrap this war up this week?
Yeah. Sure.
Can we? Yeah. Sure. I don't think so,
though. Will we?
I don't think so, but it'll be so.
What a ridiculous answer. See, and Ducey clearly
knows what he did. Yeah. Sure. Why not?
Maybe. Cool. Whatever.
It's like, what a ridiculous
answer. He's asking a point blank question about
whether you think and the answer is I
maybe. That that's one that's one of the
many possibilities. That's just that's a that's a
weird answer. It's clearly meant to give the
impression that it will be done soon even
though you know it won't be. That's why
he asked again, will it? Well, probably not.
Had he left it there, you'd have MAGA
reporting across the board. He said a week
could be over in a week because we
know for sure. It's and I'm only talking
about the fringe partisan team sport players, which
I think is a rapidly diminishing number.
Won't be alone.
And we're gonna have a much safer world
when it's wrapped up. Oh, really? Is Israel
gonna be gone? Are you gonna continue to
stop
invading countries based on illegal justifications? Well, probably
not. So, no, we won't change. We'll be
wrapped up soon. We're gonna have a much
safer world.
I had an Just in case you missed
I didn't repeat that. It just said it
again because we don't obligation to do this.
I didn't wanna I called it an
I had an obligation to do this. I
didn't wanna I called it an excursion.
He sounds like he's slurring, by the way.
Just an objective observation. It sounds like he's
tired or sort of slurring or something. He
is dealing with a lot of stuff, so
it wouldn't surprise me. Not trying to suggest
that he's, you know it's just funny. I
mean, the guy is old, by the way.
It's funny how we have to, like, dance
around these points with these guys. Everyone's like,
no. It's he's fit. Help no matter what,
or he's the most seen out guy in
the room. You know, it's kind of both
for these people. I think they're all struggling.
But obligation. Now, you could argue it just
meant I'm obligated to do the right thing.
You you could try to argue that.
Good time selling that to anybody with a
brain. But
it's worth pointing out. Obligated.
I'm obligated.
Yep. I think it's worth considering in the
larger picture with what we see that the
ultimately is. Whether it's the Rothschilds buying him
out, knowing him from a long time ago
with his bankruptcies, or whether it's Israel and
blackmail and Epstein. Who knows?
Worth considering. Here's Phil Gereldi,
citing the Guardian.
Trump Iran airstrike decision to be guided by
Jared Kushner and Steve Butkov's advice?
That's an older article. So think of where
we are now and Trump basically going, well,
you know, Kushner said, which
is so embarrassing.
Blaming it on somebody else.
But, I mean, this is like a fire
in a theater point. Wouldn't it be
as the president, regardless of what Jared said,
wouldn't it be your obligation to, you know,
vet the information,
to look at it for yourself, to come
to your own conclusions? Apparently not. Not for
the president. Now whether it happened or not,
I don't think it's even within I think
this is about manipulation and blaming Jared was
his way to get out of it looking
like he made the mistake.
Again, my real opinion is that he's not
even a I think Israel is calling the
shots in a real sense. I've been saying
this for a long time. That doesn't have
to mean some kind of secret I mean,
you know, this is on the surface. You
could even just literally make it a lobbying
if you wanted to, but I think it's
much more nefarious than that. My point is
it's very self evident, guys. It's right on
the surface. And you've got people on the
highest level of the conversation outright saying it,
and yet we point to it and we're
still called racist. It's insane.
Witkoff and Kushner reportedly met with Trump prior
to the start of the war, as we
just heard from Israeli,
Katz, November. We knew that. They they were
arming the Kurds, like, a month before that.
Before they bombed, actually.
And he says, and urged him to act
against Iran. So on the record, you got
Witcoff
and Kushner, both clear Zionists, clear Israel supporters,
urging him to go out of Iran,
citing the clearly false intelligence provided by Israelis
regarding the eminence of nuclear developments in by
Iranians.
It's false. It's very easy to verify that
based on the evidence we have. As I've
always said, you could argue there's some secret
bomb they have that nobody can prove. Certainly
possible. But if all we have to engage
with is the evidence, which is all we
should be doing,
shows you that they lie about everything. The
Israelis, the US government, and the and what
you can prove shows you that not only
do they not have it, that they don't.
It's a religious thought where they do not
want to do it because it violates their
beliefs.
So, I mean, it's you could even argue
that if you turned it into what they
want to, that then they'll eventually be have
nuclear weapons because they don't have the similar
qualms. It's interesting to think of it like
that. But either way, the point is that
you can see how this is being manipulated.
So if you're if you're uncomfortable with considering
the Israeli influence point because somehow someone convinced
you that was racist, ask yourself whether you
can see a world in which Jared,
because of his allegiances, because of what he
believes, because maybe he thinks this is what's
best for America, is influencing Trump. And then
by default, that's Israel through him influencing Trump.
I mean, it's not that hard to see,
but people just don't wanna let themselves hear
it.
Now here's Trump in 2008
telling you that Bush should be impeached. Why?
Because they brought you to war
with a bunch of lies.
Yeah. I agree, Trump. It's good logic. Maybe
we should apply it today.
Nancy Pelosi, the speaker?
Well, you know, when she first
got in and was named speaker, I met
her, and I'm very impressed by her. I
think she's a very impressive person. I like
her a lot. Woah. But I was Was
that?
Just funny to me. You know, these people
don't believe in anything. They just say whatever
they did say. It's just so funny to
me, just in case you missed it. Pelosi
is a great she's very talented. She's very
intelligent.
She's it's just so funny to me. Not
what he's saying now. And, of course, I
mean, she's a very she's much older and
but
but same politics, guys. Same Paul. So what
do you what do you believe? Do you
think he just his entire worldview, Jay? He
they sell you what they need to, so
you believe them.
Well,
you know, when she first
got in and was named speaker, I met
her, and I'm very impressed by her. I
think she's a very impressive person. I like
her a lot.
I like I was surprised that she didn't
do more in terms of Bush and going
after Bush. It was almost
it just seemed like she was gonna really
look to impeach Bush and get him out
of office, which personally, I think would have
been a wonderful thing. To impeach him?
Absolutely. For the war. For the war. Because
of the conduct of the war. He lied.
He got us into the war with lies.
And,
I mean, look at the trouble
Bill Clinton got into
with something that was totally unimportant,
and they tried to impeach him, which was
nonsense.
And yet Bush got us into this horrible
war with
That's funny. Some of the chat's saying that's
not real. These days, who knows? It could
be who knows? The the amount of possibility
of deepfakes in AI. Follow-up with that, Wild
Rose. Let me know what you let me
know if you talk about this this clip.
Just for the record, by the way, if
that is the case, he has said this
exact sentiment more than once. He's made it
very clear in the past that ultimately, you
know, the, Iraq war we relied to. He
in in his run up to his first
administration,
he was saying that across every debate. Right?
But, anyway, just for the just wanna point
it out since someone in the chat made
that argument.
Lies by lying, by saying they had weapons
of mass destruction,
by saying all sorts of things that turned
out not to be true.
So the the point
is that is the case. They did lie
about all of it, and Trump has called
that out many times. So what's the difference
right now? You could argue he's not lying
about these things, but guess what? That's already
been shown to be the case about numerous
examples of all of this.
But to me, that's not even the point.
It's not about whether they lied. It's about
the legalities of the war. And so what
the point he's arguing is they lied about
the threat to initiate the war.
How is that not exactly what's happening right
now? It's identical to a situation, which is
why that is being played. Because there's no
consistency of logic. There's no principles. It is
we called it out then because that's what
I think we wanted to hear, because he
wanted to frame himself in a certain position,
or maybe that's what he actually thinks. But
today, doesn't matter because what Israel wants, Israel
gets.
Now here's an article from the New Republic.
Trump went to war with Iran because Jared
Kushner is a fool. Now I agree with
the influence, but I don't know if I
agree with the framing that this is sort
of them not understanding the nuclear conversation.
I don't buy that for a second, but
I'll show you what I mean. Several nuclear
experts have raised questions about the disastrous duo's
technical understanding of Iranian enrichment after they presented
an assessment of Iran's research research reactor that
made no sense, MS Now reported Monday.
Now what's more likely that these two people
have been put in the position
without knowing the details of how to engage
with the nuclear conversation?
That's certainly possible with the incompetence we see
today. Or is it more likely that they
chose to misrepresent the reality of it because
that was in the interest of Israel?
You can decide.
Both are very possible.
It mixes up different elements of the nuclear
program and their potential proliferation capabilities. One of
the experts says, research reactors are not capable
of doing enrichment of uranium, whether for civil
or military purposes. So in addition to the
point that I'll briefly make again about the
lie he made about the 60%
enrichment.
I shouldn't say lie, but the lie about
what they were bragging about it because 60%
was well within their safeguards according to the
director general of the IAEA.
But on top of that, remember that the
enrichment facility was one of the main places
that was proven to actually been bombed and
destroyed.
And so they can't technically even do that
right now.
So on top of the lie, this is
why he lied about it knowing that they
weren't gonna be able to change it for
the time being. He used the number they
had, which was not a crime, in order
to make it sound like that's the case.
But on top of that, they're claiming that
they even mixed up these certain elements.
Basically, they're saying the research reactors weren't even
capable of doing it anyway. It's same kind
of the same point, I think. And so,
ultimately, these experts are saying, based on what
they're saying, these people don't know what they're
talking about. Ah, but I argue they were
doing this deliberately.
Witkoff and Kushner chose not to have nuclear
technical experts present during the negotiations.
Gee, I wonder why. That sounds deliberate to
me when you're in a technical nuclear conversation.
Ahead of Trump's military campaign in The Middle
East, Witkoff claimed that Iran had amassed 460
kilograms of uranium and 60% enrichment. He did.
Now that wasn't the point.
It was that he said that then went
on to make the allegation that they bragged
about it, that they did so knowing they
were violating the Sea Grant.
That was a whole cloth lie.
Now, again, you could argue that he was
misinformed by somebody else, another another actor in
the conversation.
Either way, I'll show you why that's not
true. That it is 60 at four 265
is what it was at 60%
is within their safeguard agreement as of right
now. I'll show you in a second. Enough
to potentially make 11 bombs within a few
weeks. Yeah. Except for the fact that's not
even remotely the reality when it comes to
have to increase the enrichment above 90, then
create the material needed to make the bomb,
then make the bombs. But the whole point
is that you need the enrichment facility to
even do it in the first place, which
they do not have. They know all this.
However, during negotiations, Iranians offered to turn over
the uranium.
A fourth point to it. The Middle East
diplomat told MS Now. Now realize these diplomats,
from all sides of the conversation, came out
right afterward and accused Witkoff deliberately, but rather
explicitly, of deliberately
misrepresenting what happened.
The Iranian told Witkoff
that Kushner that and Kushner that they'd only
started enriching uranium, which is the truth, by
the way, which rather what the evidence shows,
after Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal,
the JCPOA, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
And as I've said every single time and
I had so many
repetitive conversations about this because when this was
in the news, they just kept lying about
it like everything else we do. And the
reality was that in the JCPOA, I believe
it was article 36, it said very clearly
that should the US government because apparently, they
knew they were gonna do this. Unilaterally pull
out of the deal that they were allowed
to enrich to a certain point until they
force them back into compliance.
They never did. So, in effect, the agreement
became null and void. It just kinda it
just became defunct.
And from that point forward, there was no
legal you know, but here's the difference. There
were still engagement with the IEA and Iran,
and they have maintained those safeguard agreements.
So there's really nothing going on other than
them hyping things that people don't understand or
just outright lying about it. And then the
Iranians told Witkoff and Kushner that they'd only
started enriching uranium after he withdrew. A senior
Trump official confirmed the Iranians, quote, talked about
turning over material to us, as we told
you before.
But talks ended, can you guess when, abruptly
when The United States and Israel launched an
attack, which as we've been already told by
other diplomats that they launched the attack after
the agreement was about to be made. The
old the foreign minister of Oman
came out and before the attack was going,
man, this is about to happen. We've got
good agreements. And then that night, they bombed.
And his argument later was they did this
because the deal seemed like it was possible.
Doesn't that sound familiar to every situation we
saw during Gaza? It does it should because
it's exactly the same tactic. They never wanted
this. They never wanted an agreement. They never
wanted a deal. Based on their actions, that
becomes pretty clear. So they on top of
everything, they were about offering to turn it
over because this is what Oman said. Right?
Or the foreign minister of Oman. He said
they were finally
willing to put on the table zero enrichment,
all of it. And what he say? What
they would hand it over, they would downgrade
it. That's what he said. And then they
attacked.
I mean, this just can't get more clear,
guys. Sadly enough, our show is gonna get
buried by the algorithm, and people will only
see it if they already likely understand what's
going on. That's how this works today. And
then other everybody else is corralled into one
of the ridiculous mainstream mainstream alternative shows that
only give you a fraction of the truth
and barely get into the details.
Now, for those who don't remember very quickly,
2025,
the International Atomic Energy Agency, the group that
The US and Israel would point to in
regard to investigating Iran, director general came out
and said,
specifically about the 60%,
as stated in my most recent report,
based on inspections conducted at the relevant facilities
in Iran,
Iran's uranium stockpiles
remain under safeguards in accordance with Iran's comprehensive
safeguard agreement.
Simple. And he goes on to make it
clear. You may recall that more than 400
kilograms
of this stockpile
isn't rich to 60%.
Which if you understand how English language works,
that is within safeguards.
So Witkoff came out and deliberately lied on
Fox News, and they gobbled it up because
they don't do their due diligence. And that's
how this works today. And the reality is,
as he says again down at the bottom,
is the I the IAEA
can indeed guarantee, through a watertight inspection system,
that nuclear weapons will not be developed in
Iran. And that's why Israel said screw that.
We're gonna lose. Bomb them. That's what I
think. I mean, in fact, I think that's
very clear by the evidence.
Now Trump claims, as of today,
Iran had plans to take over the Middle
East and eliminate Israel.
Come on. I mean, this is just what
point do you stand back and just go,
come on? At the it's over. The the
history as even Tucker told you. When's the
last Shiite terrorist attack? I don't that didn't
never happened in this country. The idea that
Iran is any indication of any of this,
bombings, anything,
taking over the Middle East, eliminating Israel? Guys,
it's just over the top for every piece
of evidence. Now on the other side of
the conversation, what do you think Israel's doing?
Lebanon,
Gaza, Syria,
Egypt. I mean, that's the great they're taking
over the Middle East. That's explicitly what their
actual goal is. That's the Greater Israel Project.
And, they have outwardly stated they want to
eliminate Iran. So, it's just insane that we
can't be honest about this, but I think
we know why. Because these people are part
of the agenda.
Simple. Iran had plans of taking over the
entire Middle East and completely obliterating Israel, even
using the same term. Isn't that funny?
Just like Iran itself, those plans are now
dead.
Oh, in other news, Iran just bombed multiple
locations, by the way. So, yeah, they're totally
obliterated.
Wild.
Now we're getting close to the time here,
but I wanna make sure we get to
a few more points. Now if I I
will mention the points about the safe act
save act. If we have to, we'll discuss
it more tomorrow because I believe right now
they're in the midst of these debates and
potential filibusters, which I'm not sure if it's
happening or not. But
here's what Trump just said. And I think
this is worth pointing out around the Iran
conversation and the bombings.
Now, again, this can speak to either shocking
incompetence and un being uneducated in the situation
or rather insulated by other dishonest people and
just other morons,
or he's just trying to lie to you
to make it sound like what they did
was illegal or just was representative of some
kind of maniacal perspective
as opposed to being the legal response that
international law says is completely within their response,
meaning that they can attack belligerence when you
initiate an illegal war or a legal war
for that matter. Here's what he
said.
Power. Look look what happened.
In the last two weeks,
they weren't supposed to go after all these
other countries in The Middle East. Except that's
quite literally what they threatened and quite literally
what we all talked about and quite literally
what any expert was telling you was on
the table.
But listen to Trump because that's what the
smart people do, apparently.
Those missiles were set to go after them.
Mhmm. So they hit
Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE,
Bahrain, Kuwait.
Nope. Nobody expected that. You forgot some. We
were shocked. No. You weren't, man. So this
is incredible. So what here's what's crazy. Did
you hear what he just said? And this
is how he played. I I think this
is just ridiculous. I think he's being clumsy.
You just said that they were aimed. They
were positioned at these locations.
Why? Because they know they're working with you.
They know you're refueling. They know you're arming.
They know you've got bases there.
That seems pretty simple, just like you were
aimed at their locations. Okay. Then the next
sentence is we were surprised?
We were shocked. I mean, why would they
do the thing that they were aimed at
doing and said they were gonna do? That
seems crazy.
I mean,
guys, you have to be honest about that.
That's either him just losing his footing or
I mean, that's just bad. You because the
argument is ultimately that it's supposed to be,
look at how crazy these terrorists are. They're
bombing everybody because they just don't care.
Well, you basically sold that narrative out of
the you you made it clear that wasn't
true by the way you started this. Well,
listen again.
And power.
Look look what happened.
In the last two weeks,
they weren't supposed to go after all these
other countries in the Middle East. They weren't
supposed to. Like, it's some kind of kindergarten
classroom. That wasn't allowed. I was informed that
they weren't gonna do that.
What kind of person is this? That's insane
for him to even say that.
Those missiles were set to go after them.
Okay.
So those two sentences seem to contradict each
other. Well, okay. Well, so you just they
were set. Okay.
But they weren't supposed to. Okay? Whatever that
means. But, again, we all knew this. The
legal reality is there. They were aimed at
it like he just said. So wouldn't the
logical thing be that they might do that
like they said they would and are aimed
at if we do something? Yes.
So they hit
Yeah. Qatar, Saudi Arabia,
UAE,
Bahrain,
Kuwait.
Nobody expected that.
Now how do you make sense of those
two statements other than that being aimed at
them?
Guys, this is propaganda, and he's just delivering
it poorly. This these are narratives that have
been constructed that are independent of the facts
that his people will then correct leave it.
We'll go, here's what he meant. Here's how
this actually connects. Let me rearrange it all
for you. And that's what he was trying
to say.
Whatever. At the end of the day, this
exposes itself.
As Justin Amash rightly says, we're governed by
complete morons. Now I entirely agree with that.
Whether or not this is him, like, confused
about why they would do it and but
just a bad political or he's lying in
a bad way, like, Columbus elite. Either way,
that's exactly what's happening right here. Now let's
not forget, by the way, for those that
have already just you know, have this has
been fallen by the wayside because the conversation
is directed elsewhere.
2,200
marines, and I believe it's more than that
based on the reality as how it started
as well as the fact that they lied
to us about everything,
headed to The Middle
East. We have reports from Preisner about people
being deployed weeks ago, boots on the ground.
We have I mean, this this is by
every definition of the term boots on the
ground since this is now in the theater
of war that they're deploying them to.
If if the argument was just not in
Iran, well, it's just a different the idea
is this is war. Right? They tried to
it's not a war, but, yeah, it's obvious
it's war because they called it a war.
It is a war by every definition.
Won't be boots on the ground, limited strikes.
No. They continue to bomb, and Israel's planning
for weeks, weeks out, months out. So now,
okay. Now we're gonna deploy the ground. It's
just this embarrassing mission creep that's not even
a mission creep because it happens, like, thirty
seconds after they sell you the lie.
But, Marie guys, I said this in the
beginning. There were people on the ground regardless,
intelligent and otherwise. I think that's always the
case. My opinion. But on top of that,
they armed and and and gave
resources to the protesters, if you wanna call
them that. I don't mean the real protesters.
I mean, the people that they put in
there. That was admitted by Mossad, admitted by
Pompeo, admitted by p I think even Trump
said something like that. Then you have the
example of the Kurds, which we now know
they've been doing for months, and the reality
being they've been no longer years in regards
to Kurds in general, and it came out
that they had planned that. So that's an
invasion, guys. That is an in that is
using an insurgency group to manipulate the country
and destabilize them and try to overthrow the
government. That's that's war. That's insurgency. That's invasion.
Everything he said wasn't gonna happen.
And now deploying Marines to the ground.
And as main account said, which I actually,
just caught me off. I laughed like crazy
when I saw this only because it's just
kind of a funny overlap in framing. But
I agree with the kind of the point.
And what I think he means or at
least what I mean when I say MAGA,
in this sense, are the people out there
who are pretending to care about this. I
see most conservatives
out there calling this out in my opinion,
like honest ones. But he says, Hegseth, no
boots on the ground. MAGA, America first. Hegseth,
2,500 marine to The Middle East. Then he
goes, and here's MAGA.
This is so ridiculous.
For those of the podcast, it's some girl
crying as she does some kind of weird
dance move for TikTok. And it's just like
she's so perfect. Where the world is right
now. You know, the lie and right hers
and the MAGA. Oh, you know, it's like
just kind of like move on, like, upset,
but, you know, kind of not worrying about
it. Like, it's just so perfect. And this
is what we're dealing with, guys. I don't
believe it's the majority, but they're very influential
manipulators out there who are just keeping this
drifting in the direction of what, apparently, Israel
wants, whether they know that or not. Now,
reports have come out
that I think are starting to show the
discrepancy between the narrative and what's actually happening,
Where Hegseth says Iran's leaders are desperately hiding
underground in their tunnels and what rats do,
cowards.
I guarantee you, he might even think that.
It's being fed to him through Israel. It
could be the truth. But there's been tons
of evidence coming out showing, for example, Iranian's
president just marching, walking through the streets, shaking
hands, no security guards. But, of course, that
could be all coordinated. It could be a
lie.
But it's interesting. The same thing
Assad used to do. Same thing Maduro used
to do. And now it's a lot more
I'm starting to think maybe not. And, you
know, I'm just kinda being facetious. I don't
think that's ever been the reality. I think
these people have large support in their populations
because they push back against states that have
been stealing from their countries their entire lives.
Doesn't mean everybody. Maybe it's fifty fifty. Point
is, it's not the same as we're seeing.
I mean, when you see American politicians do
that, you won't today. I'll tell you that
right now.
Now
Trump comes out and says, after there was
massive, massive support in Tehran, which, again, I've
said this in the beginning, I still think
it's provable right now. The vast majority of
Iranians support anything other than what Israel and
The US are doing.
He said Trump claims a crowd in, Iran
praising the new, Ayatollah and protesting his war
is totally AI generated, but e New York
Times
debunked it apparently saying it's a true image.
I don't care what the New York Times
has to say, frankly. I think you can
prove it for yourself. But they lie, guys.
It's what they do. This is what they
do.
Hey. On top of that, you have this
example. Oh, hold on. I lose that. Here
we go.
Ken Silva points out well, you've seen this.
Tucker Carlson, back in 2024,
there's somebody criticizing him, says
he claimed that the assassination attempts from Iran,
they claim on Trump, which has never really
been fleshed out, was Massad, essentially.
And that he made fun of him saying,
there's no evidence to back it up. Well,
maybe there wasn't. I I disagree. I think
there's plenty of evidence.
But New York Times, on top of that,
has corroborated Zucker's reporting that the Iranian assassination
conspiracy theories originated from Israel. Now that still
doesn't mean it's not the reality.
But you have to consider with a government
that lies about everything it's ever done, that
ultimately they're making this up to coerce Trump
into a certain position to go after Iran.
Right? Or maybe they work together to do
it. But then here's the article you read
it. Hegset's claim about killing a would be
assassin creates mystery. Very kind way of saying
there's nothing to back it up and it
looks like they're lying.
Israel's intelligence gathered the original information that Iran
was plotting to kill mister Trump and passed
it to The United States. Come on, guys.
Leading you by the nose if you can't
see how often they do this.
And on top of that, guy, the I
mean, how about even the recent examples, which
I'll probably go into more tomorrow? The rising
anti Muslim sentiment, or at least they're trying
to make it look like that. I don't
believe most of this country is following, but
you get these extreme or crazy people on
this on this platform, like a lumer, who
are driving this. And my point
is that you got these you know, there
are five different Islamic terror attacks over the
last couple of weeks. What are you talking
about? Like, the idea that somebody carries out
a violent attack and therefore because they're Muslim,
therefore that's a terror, that's insane. And on
top of the fact that they keep doing
this with anybody they claim
or ignoring it, this left right media, they
both do the same thing. The guy in
Texas, I mean, it certainly could be some
kind of an attack based on some ideology.
But why does that make it terrorism?
In every possible definition of the term, that's
not even close to what terrorism means. The
idea is that it could be that. Right?
It could be the guy's crazy. It could
be that he's angry with the shore store
owner. It could be that, like, it looks
like one of them was k the case
that is that Israel and The US murdered
his family in Lebanon, and he's upset about
that. Doesn't make it justified, but in his
mind, it does. But, sure, let's make that
all Islamic terrorism
or just blow back or people who are
crazy. But, see, this is what they do.
And Israel stokes those flames and and pays
their ridicule people. It it it's the same
cycle.
Caitlin Johnstone, highlighting this person, says, for forty
seven years, Iran has paid for almost every
terrorist attack. Didn't you just hear Trump lie
about that? That's where this they just parrot
what they're told.
It every terrorist attack in the region for
forty seven years, he says.
They have been at war for forty seven
years. And she rightly goes, this talking point
is so funny because I've never once heard
anyone say America's been at war for forty
seven years with Iran until this war just
started.
It's just like a it's
just a line Trumpers started mindlessly bleeding a
few days ago. I would I I think
I would have heard about a decades long
war before March.
That's why I appreciate her work. Regardless of
whether you agree with everything she says, it's
just it's a perfect framing because it's just
it's dumb. It's illogical.
Now, this is funny. If you wanna read
through the back and forth, it's funny. He
goes, you're utterly clueless on the topic of
the evil Iranian regime. And she says, show
me a tweet dating your before this you
know, he basically goes, you're crazy and you
don't know what we're talking about. I just
responded going, well, then show it.
Follow-up. Show the tweet that you claim is
there. It's not. It's just funny to me.
Now,
Afshan Rafsanne
going underground has a good
breakdown
of what I get. You know, I mean,
there's a lot you could always go a
step further back, But arguably, what really started
this
post operation Ajax
invasion control and how and and the response.
Now, history, you aren't taught, he says. Now,
we've covered this tons,
both written articles,
shows we've covered on this. But he says
the coup and I recommend you watch his
show. He does good work on a lot
of different things. The coup against Iran's prime
minister, Mohammed Mosaddegh, by the CIA
in and MI six in 1953.
Now, as I've said many times over the
years, and this is why he, in some
ways, goes on to break down,
he was
very pro whatever you wanna call democracy.
Right? Like I said, he he famous pictures
of him next to the Liberty Bell. He
he traveled because he he he cared about
this. He outwardly claimed that he cared about
these kind of societies.
Now that's not what The US and Israel
want. Like, I played that clip for you.
They want people they can manipulate and coerce
using
bribes,
sexual blackmail.
Look around. Look who they're working with right
now.
So the point is that this person was
amenable, but not rather open, but not willing
to completely, as I as the evidence I
think shows, completely hand over control. So he
was removed. Operation Ajax. And they put the
Shaw in place, who, if you wanna look
into the any of the evidence, you can
even ask Rock, and they'll tell you exactly
this. It was a despotic regime for the
vast majority of people outside of the inner
circle of the oligarchs from The US, Israel,
and Iran. That's the Shah group.
Most Iranians were starving. Most people were suffering.
It's and human rights abuses, restrictions. It's like
El Salvador where they go freedom and everything's
great, and they're restricting human rights and they're
putting people in prison without charge. That's the
reality.
Funny how the US freedom government is working
with all those kind of people. Saudi Arabia
is our best ally. Israel is our chief
ally.
Funny how we just can't piece that together.
Now it says Mosaddegh had pursued nationalist policies.
Now whatever you wanna think about what nationalism
is, the point is about focusing on Iran
and doing what's the interest of Iranians.
Funny how that's something that they're now fighting
to put in place a globalist dictator shah.
But
anti globalism.
It's so funny how counterintuitive all these partisans
are right now. Mosaddegh had pursued nationalist policies
and was widely popular, having nationalized Iran's oil
to stop British exploitation of Iran's natural resources.
Winston Churchill considered Iranian oil to be Britain's.
Funny how that works. And, of course, what
do you think happened when the Shah took
over? Well, they sold out immediately
to western interests, which, by the way, left
Iranian suffering like a du very same point
to this very day. Look at Venezuela. Look
at Bolivia. Look at every other country, Libby.
Every one of them, guys.
Contrary to The US and UK's claims to
promote democracy and freedom around the world, The
US and UK backed the Shah of Iran,
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, to overthrow Mosaddegh and return
Iran to authoritarianism
while being a complaint a complaint
compliance, excuse me, leader that followed Washington's and
London's orders.
Provably.
After the coup, Iran's oil was once again
privatized and divided up among The UK and
US and some European countries through a new
oil consortium in 1954.
Now, yes, you can look into this for
yourself.
That nowhere translated to the Iranian people.
Why would that be what Iranians want? To
sell out their interest to benefit Western oligarchs.
It's not the reality.
Rather, what Iranians want. 40% of the shares
went to the British oil company BP. Five
American oil companies had significant stakes in the
consortium. The dictatorship of Pahlavi, enforced by the
ruthless Savak, which you should look into, we
briefly touched on recently,
just horrifying stuff, this is what they support,
for Western oil companies to steal Iran's oil
triggered such anger from Iranian population, the very
population they claim want this again, that it
led to the revolution in 1979, which gave
birth to the Islam Islamic Republic of Iran,
which arguably would not even be here today
had they let Mosaddeq continue in the direction
he was going in, which, again, that's that
clip. They don't want them to be democratic
and and self reliant because that would would
then create military power that they might have
to face someday.
It's just it really is horrible.
The roots of the war on Iran today
are the MI six and CIA's attack on
Iranian democracy in '53. But The US and
Israel claimed to be per per,
per
perpetuating? That's weird.
Perpetuate? This this this step, destabilizing a disastrous
war on
to advance democracy and freedom. That's what they
claim anyway. History shows they are lying.
Oh, it's perpetrating. I'm an idiot. I got
I got, perpetuating in my mind and for
some reason couldn't get it out. Funny how
the mind works. Perpetrating. So, you know, doing
this to them, clearly. That's what happens when
you read for four hours straight.
It says, the destabilizing and disastrous war. It's
it's just it's very important to understand the
history
and why you need to understand what they're
doing. It's not new.
Alright. Where are we here on time? So,
here, I'm gonna just do a couple more
things and we're gonna wrap up here so
I can prepare for the next interview we're
doing, but we will get into more of
this tomorrow. Another war crime on Iran, Israel
bombing a UN, excuse me, a UN fact
finding mission located another,
loc another bombing location that during the twelve
day war,
Israel bombed and was a war crime. And
now the UN mission has kind of fleshed
it out. Not that it should surprise you,
guys. It's it's what they do everywhere.
Even Harrison Smith, a a Infowars reporter, rightly
calling out the idea
that
as Cruz here says, the last five decades,
Iran has killed nearly a thousand Americans. And
this so I keep telling you that even
Trump tried to casually act like it might
have been millions. That's just bad propaganda. The
number is always the same because only thing
they're talking about is when they illegally invaded
Iraq and Iran with Soleimani
defended it.
That's it. And, yes, Americans died because of
the US government and Israel's belligerent war in
Iraq that was based on lies just like
today that even Trump told you. So when
they say a thousand Americans, well, those are
Americans that were killed because of the illegal
actions of The US and Israel. Period.
And even Harrison Smith will say things that
have killed more Americans than Iran in the
last fifty years. Powered lawnmower accidents, three thousand
two hundred.
Bee stings, three thousand nine hundred. Falling out
of bed, ten thousand three hundred. Mexico, around
4,000 Americans murdered in Mexico.
Sackler family, 500,000. But, yeah, let's keep claiming
that this, based on your illegal actions, is
even
meaningful in a larger conversation.
Ann Coulter.
People seem to be misunderstanding what she's saying
here. I don't support I think she's an
I mean, let's be clear. She is a
hardcore I mean, right now, she seems to
be calling out Trump. Like, a lot of
them, I think they're all just,
not profiteering, but,
what's so funny? I'm just blanking on this
stuff. They might the one I keep discussing
that I still can't remember right now. The
idea that we need to we need to
give them a motive to do the right
thing. Right? And so what I think is
a lot of them are are starting to
recognize that they gain more from saying what
we all talk about. Or, you know, who
knows? Maybe like I'm like I said earlier,
we're talk maybe they're finally coming around and
seeing it. We should actually hope for that.
My point saying all of that is recognize,
like a lot of them, like Derek's been
calling out,
anomaly, you know, because he's out there making
points that we agree. Like, Trump's doing the
wrong thing, and that's good. But let's recognize
they were screaming how bad we were for
trying to call this out before we got
here. Now that can't go on forever. We
have to eventually just, like, hope that they're
calling it out. That's why I'm sharing, like,
Harris and whatever else.
Because I think it's important regardless of what's
who's saying it, that if it's correct, we
show it. We talk about it wherever I
see it first.
But recognize that they were until recently going,
yay, Trump. America first. Freedom. We're saving the
world. And now with Iran, because that was
a huge line for a lot of people,
they're calling it out. But here's what she
says. And people seem to be misunderstanding this
as being sort of a pro
action. I but you tell me what you
think.
The article is, does Trump risk turning America
into rogue state? We just discussed this the
other day. Basically, admitting that nobody wants this
and what they're doing is
a a a crime. He says she says,
suppose Iran, hypothetically,
dispatched operatives to Mexico,
where, from the Texas border, they fired a
missile at an American base and unintentionally
but carelessly,
demolished a nearby American school killing a 175
people. Well, we already know that the Minhav
School was not careless. It was not an
accident. It was targeted, as we were shown,
likely by Israel's intelligence given to US US
Government, and they're just incompetent. But who knows?
So that's where she's trying to give you
an analogy for. So let's just remove the
unintentionally but carelessly. I don't agree with that
at all, but sake of conversation,
Suppose Iran did this and just back to
Mexico and then bombed The US school accidentally
or not. She goes, what if they then
blew up fuel depots in The United States,
showering a chemical rain on residents all over
The United States, then struck homes,
schools,
clinics, as they have been doing in Iran,
as Iran's leader warned that death, fire, and
fury would so pulverize America that it could
never be rebuilt, as Trump said about Iran.
In that case, she rightly points out, president
Trump and all of us would howl
at outrageous attacks on innocent civilians,
and we'd be right.
She's correct.
I think that's an important thing to think
about. Now, whether she's doing it because she
sees an opportunist, that's what I was thinking,
the word I couldn't
remember, whether it's opportunism,
or that she genuinely now sees it. At
this point, I in this moment, I don't
really care. It's about the reality that even
people like Ann Coulter or whoever else, major
supporters are going, woah.
Maybe they're just finally seeing it. Maybe you
know, like I said. But the reality, guys,
is that this is showing you that if
this was reversed, even from their perspective, then,
yes, everybody would be going, that's a crime.
So why can't Iran do that? Right? Why
can't Iran and their government, their people, stand
up and go, look at what you just
did. You just murdered a 175 children. You
just come
Israel's bombing relentlessly
civilian locations.
And they lie about it. Now you have
to either recognize that that means Donald Trump
has no control over the situation or he's
a part of it. I'm sure there's a
middle ground in there, but at this point,
those are the most
that's what it behooves us to recognize
where that falls.
Because if it's somewhere in the middle, those
things still both apply in my mind.
So this is important for the false flag
point. And then with the time, I think
I'm gonna play a couple of clips, a
clip from Whitney and then talk about the
save after finish. But this is just another
statement that I brought this up myself. This
is a possibility.
But the Iran foreign minister, the Americans have
built a drone similar to the the
the Shahid, excuse me, drone called the Lucas,
which is completely identical. And through it,
targets in Arab countries are attacked.
It is possible that Israel is behind the
attacks on civilian targets in Arab countries to
damage these countries' relations with Iran. I argued
a possible point.
So far, we have not targeted any civilian
or residential areas in the regions. Now, that
could be a lie.
In fact, you can let's see whether let's
just say first it was an accident and
they bombed a building and they didn't mean
to. Well, that would be an easy way
to lie your way out of it, which
I would expect all of them to do.
Now, let's say they chose to bomb them.
Maybe because they knew a person US or
Israeli personnel were there, yet they bombed it
knowing civilians were there. That would be an
easy way to avoid accountability for killing those
civilians because in no world is that a
legal target, no matter what Israel says.
Then you could consider that maybe they just
did it because they're bombing civilians and don't
care. So either way you look at it,
I can see a world which they would
lie about this to avoid that accountability, but
the evidence is what matters. There's no track
record. The history does not show you that.
Israel is caught doing this in other fields
of war in Gaza, in Syria. They do
this is what they do. And so consider
that this is because I don't see a
a an interest. Why Iran would do this,
I don't see the benefit to them. Doesn't
mean it wouldn't happen. But who benefits is
always the the most important question. Follow the
money. Who benefits? Now here,
it's about considering whether or not this is
going to get worse with these attacks and
why they keep hinting at the drone worry.
Just consider that as we go forward and
be skeptical.
Now what we're gonna get into in the
next show, it one, just recognize that Lebanon
is spinning. It's it's it's insane what they're
doing. They're pushing people out of the South,
telling them they have
to to evacuate, which is not their legal
right to do. And, you just because they
wanna claim that somehow is, like, the humane
thing to do, well, this is an illegal
war. They have no legal right to be
engaging, let alone bombing. But look how great
they are by telling them to move and
then bombing them anyway. Bombing them where they
go. It's just it's disgusting the way they
frame it as somehow humanitarian while they know
they're cheering on the death of these people.
And on top of that, they're continuing to
tell you that they're never gonna stop doing
this. Oh, it's also important to recognize it's
the largest Christian country in The Middle East.
Don't you think that Christians in America first,
Christians, Christ is king? Don't you think that
should matter to those people? Some of them
it does.
Even Sky News is now calling it out.
They've killed people in Lebanon. That's Sky News
for crying out loud. Let Israel says Lebanese
displaced won't return until its own citizens are
safe. Imagine if that okay. This is like
Mexico going, we're taking Texas, and we're not
gonna let you have it back until we
feel we're okay with the situation.
What do you think Trump would do? Let
alone whether he would be okay with that.
It's also just simply illegal. But Israel doesn't
have to care about international law like they've
told you their entire lives.
Israel is not bound by international law.
I was hoping that would pop up.
There's an article by Mondois.
There it is.
I'll include this because it cites direct,
Knesset documents from the Israeli government openly stating
verbatim that we do not we are not
bound by international law, so why should we
care anywhere else? You can read it. It
gets dismissed because that platform's okay. Well,
ignore look at the documents. He it says
verbatim, but, you know, people ignore what they
want to.
Drop site news. They're using white phosphorus in
Lebanon. Yet again, it's not new. Here's 2023.
White phosphorus in Gaza, Lebanon. Israel's doing it.
Katz again vows, and this is about Gaza.
Israel will never fully redraw withdraw from Gaza
Strip. That was 2025.
Why is that not important? You mean the
place you were gonna liberate and free everybody?
Well, we're never leaving like we told you
that was the case. That's Katz. Well, they're
saying the same thing about Lebanon, the same
thing about Syria. Guess what? Because it was
always the plan.
Now
Glenn Greenwald.
It's been obvious for months now that the
second Trump term serves Netanyahu, Palantir, Jared Kushner,
Ben Shapiro, Lindsey Graham, corporateist power, k Street,
sleaze, and Mark Levin.
Meaning, the second Trump term is fully shaped
by the exact factions Trump vowed to vanquish.
Time to be honest about it. He's literally
selling access to his national security briefings?
Isn't isn't that a crime? It's just it's
just incredible where we are. I think that's
just a cover, quite frankly.
I'll play this clip. I had a great
discussion with Whitney Webb. She co hosted the
daily wrap up, which she might be doing
more going forward, but we'll be doing a
show which, she discussed in this episode. We'll
be doing a show for Unlimited Hangout. Derek
and I discussing some of the written articles,
some more collaboration coming your way. But a
great discussion here on the thirteenth about a
lot of different things, including her recent article
overlapping or and o discussing Epstein's smuggling network.
Now it connects to a lot of different
things. It's important we understand.
But I'll play this clip,
and I think we'll just end there.
Include the IMA discussion that we just we
talked about where Catherine and a lot of
us discuss how this really does connect largely
to the control grid in a larger position.
Now, the save act point, I'll get two
more tomorrow. I'm not sure if they're gonna
be doing this filibuster thing they planned. It
seems like they tried to walk it back.
But overall, the reality is I agree with
this sentiment.
The phrase is same day voting, paper ballots,
photo IDs, like everywhere else in the world.
If you can't get the first two, at
least they're okay. I I think nobody should
disagree with that. I mean, I shouldn't say
that. You could disagree with anything, but the
logic is there. That's I don't know why
we would disagree with that. The point, though,
as I continue to point out for people,
is that you do not need I don't
think I over here. Real ID compliant ID,
which is what it well, technically, it's updated
to now simply just saying because this is
the new version. They went back and forth.
But same point, A form of identification issued
consistent with the requirements of Real ID Act
of 2005. That's what that means. Real ID
compliant identification
is not needed
to protect voting. It's just not. You're using
the desire to enforce the law to trick
Republicans into supporting back door digital ID. Remove
the real ID aspect of the bill, and
you get the exact same outcome.
Call it out, guys. Now this has become
the Save America Act. It's the same point.
They just added more onto it. So I'm
not even trying look. It's not about anything
other than that one point. You do not
need Real ID compliant identification or Real ID
anything or ID twenty twenty
involved at all to achieve this end. You
just don't. So ask yourself why that's the
case. It's probably multifaceted. I believe there's a
lot more going on here.
Now we'll get into more of this at
the end. Now I'm actually what was gonna
end with a clip from JD,
and this one too. I was gonna play
it. But we're going on all this tomorrow.
I think I'm gonna end with this clip
from Whitney. I think it's more powerful. But
you guys already know the reality of what's
going on in this country from this what
we do on this show. This is only
gonna make it more clear and a kind
of larger
technocratic
influence of the cabinet discussion.
But as always, Whitney nails it down.
We will get into more tomorrow, more of
the save act overlap with the technological side
of it, Twitter, Elon Musk, Authentix, and how
these how these connect, what's happening, AI data
centers exploding all over the country while people
aren't paying attention,
a insider from Palantir literally saying, I'm an
ex Palantir executive and is factually correct that
Palantir
intended to take over the US government while
heavily funding the effort. Many of my ex
colleagues are now installed in The US apparatus.
There's a reason the c suite of Palantir
has blocked me. That's a person who used
to work as an executive for Palantir.
We'll go into this more tomorrow. Keeping that
in mind and the Zionism connections of the
influence on this government, we'll leave you with
the clip from Whitney Webb and our recent
discussion. Thank you for tuning in today, guys.
I appreciate you all. I love you all.
As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
Where do you feel like a lot of
this is going? Is this just another administration
profiteering, or do you feel there's a larger
agenda in kind of what's happening right now?
You mean where the Trump administration is taking
us? Well, I think, the best summary of
it is to look at,
the big tech Silicon Valley oligarchs that installed
themselves in very insidious ways in the levers
of power via this administration.
And probably the best thing you can do
to learn about them is to buy Ian
Davis's
new book The Technocratic Dark State or, you
know, borrow a copy from someone else who
bought it or
it is the best most forensic breakdown,
of those people and what their interests are
and what they are doing.
And you can read some of Ian Davis's
articles,
about aspects of that. For example, he did
a amazing investigation into,
the city states,
sort of this this idea of the network
state and all of that and how it's
just as bad as the globalist global governance
that a lot of people in
right leaning
conspiracy
quote unquote conspiracy world are worried about you
know it's that on steroids and is being
marketed
to those people as the solution.
And a lot of these people are overt
transhumanists.
I mean, they call themselves techno optimists.
Again, sort of a play on that same
thing we were just talking about in the
Trump era where, like, we're the optimists and
avoid the negative Nancy's. Feel
good with us. They'll just make you feel
bad, and it's all about feeling, not about
facts.
Yeah. So,
I mean, there's obviously a lot of other
agendas that play too, but I think, obviously,
it's pretty clear that in the Trump administration,
there's going to be some type of,
big switcheroo
economically,
and we will see the rise of, you
know, stablecoins,
the Bitcoin dollar system as laid out by
Mark Goodwin back in 2021,
but I mean, that has definitely
played out. And so I think,
you know, a lot of that stuff with
digital
currency is going to advance, and then we're
going to be herded further into sort of
this techno feudal reality.
And then at the same time, you have,
you know, these other aspects of the Trump
administration,
at work that have, you know, this
very
deep set you know feeling about eschatology
like you know there's an overlap actually if
you look at people like Peter Thiel,
who's you know the person who basically created
JD Vance in a lab
and
his obsession with the antichrist
and and all of this stuff. A lot
of these people are obsessed with end times
things.
There's been plenty of, people pointing out recently
how this has influenced likely,
the current war with Iran.
So, you know, there's obviously a lot of
different angles,
to talk about, but, basically, you know, this
is not
fighting against global governance and global tyranny.
This is going to be a furtherance of
the same thing that every administration,
whether Democratic or Republican, has advanced, since 09/11
and obviously before that too, but it's they've
they sped it up.
You know, the type of gradualism
that they practice increased significantly,
after that point and,
the goal was to create, you know, an
AI powered surveillance state Mhmm.
That is authoritarian
in nature and neo feudal economically
and the vast majority of us are meant
to be,
surfs.
Or rather, if you wanna use the you
all know a Harari phrasing, we will become
the exploited because it's better than being expendable.
So, you know,
Trump works for bankers. Big surprise.
They all work for bankers,
and
these banker,
you know, cronies, what they do is they
steal your money,
and they use your tax dollars to build
your prison.
So, I mean, that's I don't really anticipate
seeing anything beyond that,
at this point. And so people that have
been going back looking either at my work
on Epstein or work on other stuff and
being like, wow. She was so early. Like,
okay. If you thought if I have this
track record now of, like, working for ten
years and I've been early on multiple big
stories,
maybe you should look at what I'm talking
about now. And, like, not just me, obviously,
but what a lot of people are talking
about now that we're right on a lot
of those things too.