Liberals hate ICE because they think it's about
border policy. It's not why I hate ICE.
I hate ICE because while we were all
arguing about politics, they were importing the software
from Gaza's genocide.
Talking about a company called Paragon Solutions. They
make a spyware called Graphite
that was used to track and target Palestinians
in real time. They took that exact same
technology,
rebranded it as immigration OS, and then sold
it to ICE to use on us. This
is no longer about stopping illegal immigrants.
This is about creating a digital prison for
every American citizen. They're using the same digital
twin technology that mapped every single person, car,
and building in Gaza to create a live
real time map of your neighborhood,
your phone, your car, you. The goal has
never been about security. The goal is total
control, and this is the foundational system for
the new world order. It's the b system
everyone talks about, but it's not a prophecy.
It's a product. It's already here.
They tested it on Gaza.
They saw how perfectly the AI could automate
targeting,
how it could remove human conscience from the
equation, and just follow the code. They saw
that it worked.
Now they're rolling it out on us.
So don't talk to me about left or
right. It's bullshit.
It's about a system of technological control that's
so vast,
so complete that it makes all of our
political opinions completely irrelevant. So while we're fighting
over bullshit in politics,
they've brought the AI
that they built for war back to us.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours
breaks free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of the day.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Tuesday, 03/24/2026.
Thank you for joining me today.
Quite a bit to get to today.
Plenty more to get to at the rest
of the week. For those that didn't catch
yesterday's show, we're planning to go full week
today all the way until the end of
the week. If we can make that happen,
that's the plan.
Lots to catch up on, consecutive conversations. And
so, really, today, I wanna make sure we
continue to follow-up on, as the title highlighted,
the conversation of the alleged negotiator that Trump
is talking to.
I actually find this story to be more
important than many may feel that it is.
It's not just about a lie in my
opinion. I think this potentially ties into a
lot of other,
you know, the way the the way that
I see this being played. This is based
on my opinion, the way I see this,
you know, based on the facts rather of
what the what we're seeing, what we can
prove. But the fact is nobody out there
truly knows all the ins and outs of
everybody's intentions of what's going on. So with
what we can prove, the way I think
this is leaning, I think that this is
an important point
of where we're now seeing
whether or not this is something that is
like, the conversation around whether Trump is being
played, for example. And there's an interesting conversation
being had about that right now. I actually
invited, Dan Cohen on if just today, so
I'll see if he gets back. We're all
busy. But, ultimately,
to discuss the point about whether or not
Trump is controlled by Israel, whether he is
being played, or whether he wants to go
after Iran. And my point was, I mean,
I see it clearly somewhere in the middle.
I think Trump clearly was aggressive. Like, moment
after he got elected, he turned to say,
Iran, Iran, and pointed to and Vance and
all the rest. They started really hyping the
idea of Iran
even though the the team didn't want that.
And so but then we get to this
point, and it's so my point is it's
clear that Trump wanted that or at least
claimed to.
But then we get into it, of course,
and there's parts that seem that Israel was
playing just just the US government.
And I think that Trump may be you
know, I it's all hypothesis, but the point
is there is a level, I believe, my
opinion, that Trump is the US government rather
is being manipulated around a lot of different
war fronts. And that that's not just like
a a ploy of making them think something's
happened when it's not, but coercion, blackmail, all
sorts of stuff that I believe is happening.
So both of those things exist in this
conversation, in my opinion. So I think it
needs to be that kind of nuanced perspective
that it's not all one or all the
other.
I think that's really important for that and
a lot of other conversations
that have Israel as a part of it,
and, really, others as well, but as it
pertains to today's conversation.
And I I made the image today, as
you might have seen.
And what's what's funny is that there you
know, you tend to get a framing, especially
when people who decide to pretend that nothing
about Israel is ever true that we're talking
about, that, you know, you didn't look at
the titles, look at things, and just assume
based on what you're pointing to, Oh, here
we go again. They're talking about Israel. It's
really interesting to me. One, the point is,
obviously,
that the image today was meant to insinuate
that Trump is talking to somebody other than
somebody in Iran.
And to just be funny, I obviously don't
think it's literally Netanyahu, but who knows? The
point, though, is that it's interesting to me.
Very and plenty of people plenty of people
that you guys that we've overlapped with, people
that we've talked to, worked with. There's plenty
of things going on today where there's a
lot of people you guys can see. Hopefully,
if you've been paying attention the entire time
that any of us have been doing this
and watch the evolution of conversations and opinions
and watch when suddenly October 7 forward, a
lot of people had a very different turn.
And I don't mean, like, dishonestly necessarily. I
think there's part of that within all of
this. But, ultimately, that there is an obvious
change.
Like, just to jump to the main point,
is it how is it possible today that
anybody,
honest, objective, even remotely,
can stand back and act like people are
obsessed with Israel? Now, of course, there are
that does exist. There are people obsessed with
any number of things.
Obviously, that's been there. It's still there today,
whether Israel or Jews or Muslims or whatever
else. Funny how both those two groups point
to each other. As always, there's the binary.
But the point, though, is that with where
we're at today, with Israel verbally, proudly saying
what they're doing and telling you Zionism is
a major part of this, our own government
telling the military it's a religious war for
Armageddon, And then somebody turns and say, when
we criticize Israel, not Jewish people, but Israel's
government, that that's somehow
incorrect or that we're over focused or we
just can't stop talking about Israel, it's actually
wild to me.
And I get in some cases that I
feel that some of these people just don't
see it, which I don't even know how
that's possible.
That they they that the, you know, the
other option is that this is a choice
for whatever reason. We've talked about a lot
of the funding discussions, but it's it's important
that we stand back and realize whatever the
motivation,
that this is not something that is inappropriate
to be discussing any number of these things.
Whether or not Israel is influencing the government
is the same as saying whether or not
China is influencing the government. Why one is
decidedly
inappropriate or racist or you're only you know,
you get the point.
It doesn't make sense, especially when there's a
mountain of fact to back up what we're
talking about. But, see, the reason this is
important,
the general sense of this is because what
we're gonna get into today, like plenty of
the stuff we've been discussing extensively well before
October 7 and a lot more since then
for obvious reasons, is the conversation of whether
multitude of factors of driving with the Iran
war, but whether Israel is influencing the US
government's direction. And that is a very important
part of the conversation.
But see, all like, all that I just
said is is was to build to the
point
that we're now going, okay, Israel is doing
this.
And people go, oh, here we go again.
Just the very you know, I I related
to something similarly when I I see, you
know, people that in the Republican are rather
just partisan conversation,
who
rightly so picked up on all the ridiculousness
of the woke direction
and the absurdities of it and the dangerous
parts of it. And it just and the
psychological operation that a lot of it was.
But then and and, you know, clearly, there
were issues there, but then kind of went
way too far. Sort of like with COVID
nineteen, people, like, stop washing their hands because,
well, that's everything's wrong. Well, no, there's a
there's a balance here that a lot of
people in that point started ultimately feeling like,
oh, you know, you watch a TV show
and there's a black person that walks out
and they go, oh, here we go. It's
like, well, wait a minute though, that is
real. And there are but yes, there is
overcompensation. So we have to be careful of
those kind of traps, those mental traps that
create the situation where we otherwise things that
we'd otherwise absorb and discuss and talk about,
we deflect. We push away because I've been
told that that's not supposed to be the
thing or whatever.
Question everything.
Consider all possibilities.
So today, what we're gonna get into, obviously,
is the wrong negotiating point, but we're gonna
start with some important stuff that I think
is not getting as much attention as it
deserves. One is the interesting thing that I'm
sure you guys have seen from Elon's court
case.
And we all should be aware that there
is political manipulation, there is political persecution. I
myself have dealt with lawfare. But we should
also consider whether that's not the case. Fifty
fifty. Equal. Not just what side seems to
make the most sense. And so we'll go
into what I think is very, very valid
are very valid allegations, and then the consideration
of whether there might have been an unfair
situation from where it took place.
And then talk about a more important conversation
around the SEC
and the SEC enforcement,
the, what was it again? It was the,
enforcement chief, the one that recently resigned
in protest. Well, I guess, technically just resigned.
But the what's now coming out is that
this person was very frustrated in the effort
to investigate
specifically businesses that swirled around Trump's family and
Elon Musk. One of them being World Liberty
Financial, who is
largely funded and backed by a person who
was accused of massive
fraud
connected to Elon Musk. Funny how it all
works together. Now, of course, it could all
be a bunch of political lies.
But with all that we see and all
that we can prove,
I flatly I mean, reality is it does
not appear to be at all because these
people are breaking the law everywhere I can
look, but we should consider every time whether
there is more of a lie around these
things or not. But the point being is
that this is an indication of where this
country is going, where our government is driving
us left and right, and that it's just
lawless.
And then whether or not that itself is
being driven by something else. But we'll also
talk about some points around partisanship that I
think is just important not to miss, but
a part about Palantir
and the AI military fusion. And
we've been calling this out for a very
long time. And remember the people who told
you not to care about this and how
continually,
all encompassing this story can
it it's it's not just war. It's not
just surveillance. It's not just control. It's the
whole damn thing. Guys, we need to understand
how serious this is. And it's not even
just Palantir, but it's one of the points
that makes this easy to see, and then
how they're right now involved in a multistate,
multinational
state nation, if I can speak correctly, genocide,
using their AI to commit genocide in real
time while they're now using this to
the core AI of our military.
And a lot of other points we'll get
to around Iran that I didn't mention, but
points that will are, you know, relevant to
the larger conversation. So I wanna actually start
by pointing out,
something that Elton Marrow said to me. I
haven't got a chance to go through it
all, but I I'm gonna, after this, try
to set up an interview with her. She
has been dealing with something on her farm.
So if you remember correct if you remember,
she moved to a a farm, put her
money where her mouth is, like a lot
of us are trying to do. And now
is dealing with an issue with this is
kind of a really important point of bringing
all this together. We'll get into this when
I talk to her. Now
it's coming to her. Now they're trying to
build a five g massive tower right on
her neighbor's property. And, apparently, the ins and
outs of it, there's you know, not only
is she going through the science and showing
they're basically claiming it's gonna have no effect
on anything, and you can literally prove that
the the opposite does not do that justice.
That is a flat out lie, and they
just hide from the information, and this is
happening under the Maha direction. Right? It's rolling
out and and it's an important story that
she's trying to fight. So I wanted to
help give her attention for that. Make sure
you check it out. It'll be in the
show notes at the top, and I'll try
to get her on to talk about this.
But just think about that. You know, you're
moving away to try to get away, and
it should it's it's this is going to
change the face of the Earth if we
allow this to continue.
And it shouldn't it shouldn't matter that some
of us don't want that in a world
where we pretend that we have influence over
our government. It certainly should. Now in regard
to fraud,
you might have seen this. This is a
case, Courthouse News reported and plenty of others.
San Francisco jury finds Elon Musk defrauded Twitter
investors during $44,000,000,000
takeover. Now, it's worth reading. We've talked about
this already. It's largely it stems around the
way he was acting during the sale, which
was pretty crazy if you wanna be honest
about it. He was you know, the argument,
and now the court has found that they're
correct, was that he was lying and manipulating
and basically tried to make an allegation, which
is interesting by the way, about bots on
Twitter.
And I'm of the mind that it was
kind of a misrepresentation.
We know there are bots that are just
overwhelmingly on this platform. But we I I
hope we can all
put partisanship aside and very clearly acknowledge this
platform is way worse than it's ever been,
Aggressively worse, whether it's bots, suppression, and some
of it's a little bit more soft handed
and manipulative, but it's way worse
aside from the team sport politics screamers that
have a very, very clear agenda.
The point though is that they he the
argument is he misrepresented the situation and then
used that to lower the price. And then
even then, they had to, like, sue him
to get him to buy it. Like, it
was very weird the way this all went
down. The overall story, if you wanna read
through it, is that he manipulated the process.
They found he defrauded them. I think that's
important, guys. And if you're just gonna dismiss
this because you're an Elon side, well, you're
not an honest person. That may well be
the case. They, well, they might have just
completely lied about him and trapped it, but
then find the evidence of that. Make the
case. If you read through this and you
remember how this went down, the only dispute
is whether he like, this will go forward.
He's claiming he's gonna dispute it, so we'll
talk about it when it happens.
But the idea that people choose a side
before they even know the facts is what
partisanship does. Now this is actually a smaller
part to me. I'm very I'm of the
mind that this is literally how Elon Musk
and Trump, by the way, does business. I
think they praise this kind of manipulation.
I mean, I don't even say I think.
You can read their books. You can look
at their statements online. They praise this kind
of manipulation whether you think this happened or
not. In this case, you can look or
rather in other cases, you can look at
Elon's practices
about I mean, look at I mean, damn
near the Cybertruck or or even even the
the, the Tesla or the, his SpaceX rockets.
And you realize you can clearly look back
and prove that he and and look, I'm
gonna be I can I will be the
first person to promote in certain circumstances the
whole fake it till you make it business
mentality because sometimes you just gotta go for
it? Right? But he does this in a
way that's sort of defrauding people where he
goes, this thing's perfect and great and ready,
and you find out later it was, like,
bare bones patched together and they weren't even
close, but got funding because they claimed it
was and stuff like that. Maybe you think
that's the way it should work. I don't.
I think that's bad practice. I think that's
dishonesty. I think that's
the kind of thing we should all generally
argue is, you know,
what's the best word for it? Disrespectful. Like,
if these you know, it's funny that even
dishonesty
from people like Stephen Miller is weak.
Oh, you're just a you're just a weak
person for caring about people. Like, that's the
way they frame this today. That caring whether
somebody has integrity and is honest and practices
things with morals, well, that that's just all
weak Democrat stuff, apparently.
Not according to most of humanity, by the
way, in case we haven't gotten there yet.
But
SEC announces enforcement division director judge Margaret a
Ryan has resigned from the agency.
Now this is important. Now this is just
the article from the SEC where it basically
goes, everything's great. We're moving forward, and we're
perfect, you know, as usual.
But Reuters had some different information added to
this, but I wanna include it in case
you want to dive through what they said.
US SEC's ex enforcement chief clashed with bosses
over Trump cases before leaving.
It says the US Securities and Exchange Commission's
top enforcement official, who left abruptly last week,
has clashed with agency leaders over the direction
of its enforcement program, including the handling of
cases with ties to Donald Trump and his
family, according to pre three people familiar with
the matter.
SEC enforcement division director Margaret Ryan resigned last
Monday, which by the way, let's look back
just over the last year plus and look
at how many people, just like the last
time, are fleeing and fired and moving on.
This is not normal. And it's and it's
it's actually even specifically more intense with Trump's
in power. I'm not even sure exactly why
that is other than, I think, the obvious
points.
Because, I mean, I've seen some, like, you
know, similar, but it's it's every time. His
last administration was the same. People get fired.
They're the best person in the world, then
they're fired. Or or people leave because they
they recognize in this case, recognize corruption, recognize
they're being forced or told to do things
that compromise their principles.
And who cares, right? Because the team is
what plenty of people are actually pushing. I
don't believe that's even what most Republicans think,
or Democrats, or any partisans. The team sport
players are these cartoonish versions of what they
want people to think the situation is like.
I'm convinced of that today.
So in this case,
the point I was making is that, you
know, you can see the examples of many
other people in positions that have done the
same thing. Or, for example, the person who
quit claiming that Israel was liter like, they
remember the, here I'll just play it real
quick. This is actually a relevant time to
play this clip even though we played it
many times before. This is for the state
department. This guy resigned. Why? Because they let
Israel cover up the rape of a child.
We have to condemn the atrocities that happen
every day to Palestinians in the West Bank.
You mentioned sexual violence.
I was part of the human rights vetting
process for arms going to Israel,
and a charity called Defense of Children International
Palestine,
drew our attention at the state department to
the sexual assault, actually the rape of a
13 year old boy that occurred in an
Israeli prison in the Muscovyya in Jerusalem.
We examined these allegations.
We believe they were credible.
We put them to Israel to, the government
of Israel.
And do you know what happened the next
day?
The IDF went into the DCIP offices and
removed all their computers and declared them a
terrorist entity.
I think it is vital that atrocities not
happen to anyone, not sexual atrocity, not sexual
violations,
not any kind of gross violation of human
rights. We are looking at a situation where
there is so much dehumidification
where
Very clear.
Right? And so that's one of many examples
of people in the US government that resign
in protest and many, many more than usual
over the last so many years, Biden and
Trump, specifically.
I think we know why if we're paying
attention. We're watching this very clear, rapid, you
know,
like, dissolving of what we ever at least
what we pretend we are, and I believe
believe in many cases what we have been.
So continuing,
her resignation email,
seen by Reuters, this is the first time
they're reporting this inside part of it, did
not say why she was leaving. Now Ryan
declined to comment, when reached by phone.
Two of the people said Ryan wanted to
be more aggressive in pursuing charges for fraud
and other misconduct, including cases that touched the
president's circle, but faced resistance from SEC chair
Paul Atkins.
Insider. Right? This is this is my point.
This is the whole idea of having the
team sport players.
You know, like, the ridiculous Mark Wayne person
we're gonna talk about a second just briefly
because it's not even worth the time, but
amazing
squeaks by eight to seven.
Rand Paul did vote no. I'm glad to
see that since he was pushing back so
much, but,
well, I'm plenty of points to make on
that. But the idea being, right,
that the that they bring people in that
are team players
in positions that are supposed to be, you
know, necessary not, you know, basic in a
way adversarial to the to the executive, like
an investigatory position. You know? That's like Bondi.
That person rightly made that point that you
you you are working for the White House.
That's not how this is supposed to be.
They don't care. So this is what you're
gonna get. This is this is a dumber,
worse version of Nome, if you can believe
that. That that's how this is gonna play
out. But the point is they they,
Atkins, in this case, from the SEC, is
the one that sort of pushed back on
this, and I think because this person was
another tapped person for this kind of situation.
And this goes left and right. This is
always how this goes. It's about trying to
create a situation where you can hold the
line. I've just never seen it this clumsy,
this obvious, and this all encompassing than this
administration. I really think that's more of an
indictment of the continual collapse of our government
than just Trump himself.
But it continues to say and other top
Republican political appointees,
said the same. White House spokespeople did not
immediately respond for comment as usual. One case
that sparked tension involved cryptocurrency
entrepreneur, Justin Sun,
a major backer of the Trump family's World
Liberty Financial venture,
which is just a textbook pump and dump
if we're gonna be honest about it and
clearly has continued to be used in a
lot of very manipulative ways behind the scenes.
And so this person, Sun, is also connected
to Elon Musk. And it says in another
involved Tesla boss, Elon Musk, a big donor
to Trump's campaign who briefly served as a
president's special adviser, the two people said. Now
those are separate things, by the way. The
other involved Elon Musk, a big donor to
Trump's campaign. Those are the separate cases that,
to some part, just interesting. The point, though,
is that these are things that were being
investigated.
And and things, by the way, that I
think are pretty evident.
Right? That there was clear, at the very
least, that there was a lot of criticism
because it was, you know, the kind of
conflicts of interest we're not used to seeing
so brazenly.
The tensions between Ryan and the and top
SEC officials,
which have not previously been reported, were ongoing
and shed light about how this went down.
And the point is that there was a
shift in in the way this actually operates,
and this is what I'm seeing everywhere,
A consolidation.
In this case, under Trump's second administration, the
chair and commissioners
have sought more control.
Now, it's not hard to understand why. It's
not like this is a person that is
on their side and ultimately just does not
toe the line, so they get kicked aside
and somebody else comes into play. And it
it tightens the line and it tightens the
line. And, eventually, you get people who realize,
well, either I do what I'm told whether
or not I agree with it or I
don't, I get removed. And I sure want
the power in the paycheck. That's the kind
of people you get. Are we not are
we not does that not obvious? I can't
wait to let you watch what we showed
this morning of Miller telling you that this
is the example of a meritocracy.
Some of the dumbest and most unqualified people
I've ever seen in these positions.
It's just it's just gaslighting, guys. It's what
it is. That's desperation when you can see
how clear this is.
And it says, rev basically, under their
Trump's second administration, they sought more control revoking
enforcement staff authority
to open formal probes and requiring they seek
commissioner's approval. So So all you did was
cut them out of the legs, at the
knees. You said you this is her job
to be the enforcement part, and they basically
said, nope. You have to go through us
to start the investigation. That mean, that that
that is clearly about trying to control
what they're investigating.
And why would that be? Because they're breaking
the law. That's pretty obvious. And I think
in ways that are actually the US government
has always broke the law my entire life,
whether it's foreign policy or against us. This
is special this is specific to just them
enriching themselves, which again is kinda what we
always see, but this is such special level,
guys. My opinion, but I think that's pretty
self what we're all seeing, and I think
that's why this was more focused on.
Now it says and this is actually really
interesting. In an internal meeting last year, she
criticized
defense attorneys.
Ryan's the one who resigned, including a person
named Brad Bondy, a Paul a Paul Hastings
partner who was also Atkins' former counselor,
for what she saw as attempts to go
above career staff's heads on enforcement matters. Two
of the sources told
them, approaching top SEC officials about enforcement cases
is, however, permissible in certain circumstances.
Bondi, who is attorney general Pam Bondi's brother,
surprise, surprise, did not respond to Reuters' questions
sent by email and text message. A Paul
Hastings spokesperson did not spoke
spokesperson did not immediately respond to emails.
Now that may be nothing, but I just
find it a little bit interesting that Bondi's
brother is the one that happens to be
involved with a case where she's investigating fraud
when we can see how much other fraud,
you know, oh, Noam, it looks like you're
shockingly breaking the law with all these fraud
things. We'll kick you over to a new
thing and pretend like we ignore who you
are now. Noam's not even here anymore. Let's
ignore the fact that she just stole million
dollars from the American people in two different
circumstances to a company that no one's ever
heard of that doesn't have a name or
a location, but, you know, now she's got
a new job, so shut up.
Guess that's it, guys. Isn't it interesting how
congress or Democrats who were told are adversarial
to Trump that hate him will do anything
to bring him down, Just don't continue to
go after Noem. Isn't that funny? Funny how
that always works out every single time, left
or right.
I'm sure you're I'm laying it on pretty
thick. I hope you're getting the point. The
idea here, guys, is that it's weird to
me that he's involved, but that's just an
interesting point to appoint
it's an interesting place to make that point.
But I feel like there's something to that.
Like, there's more but either way, the fraud
is off the chain in this administration. Now
it says among the cases that that three
of the people familiar with the tensions said
were a source of frustration for Ryan, the
one who resigned, was an SEC settlement
disclosed this month
to resolve charges that the watchdog's previous Democratic
leadership brought against Sun,
the one who's involved with World Liberty Financial.
In 2023,
the SEC sued the crypto entrepreneur and three
of his companies, alleging Sun generated more than
$31,000,000
through fraudulent trades.
In a deal negotiated by Brad Bondi and
other lawyers, one of the Sun's companies paid
$10,000,000
to settle the fraud charges. Though it did
not admit or deny the SEC's findings, agency
dismissed other related charges. So aside from all
the narrative, a essentially, Sun gave the government
$10,000,000
and the charges went away.
Am I misreading that?
Sure. This is I always laugh about this
like Wells Fargo. Our government goes, You broke
the law. Gave us a million dollars, and
no one goes to jail, and we call
that justice.
No. That's a payoff, ladies and gentlemen. If
you if you jaywalk in certain places, you
go to if you think about how crazy
the application of law is in this case.
If you're rich and famous and wealthy and
influential, you don't ever really get held accountable.
Poor people go to jail. Rich people get
lawyers,
or if they even need them.
And this is just important to think about.
And by the way, it's something I actually
didn't say, which I'm glad he's remembered, which
was the whole point of this post and
of Elon Musk's connection to it,
was think about this. I'm sure you've already
made this connection in your mind. Right? But
Elon Musk is being
found guilty of defrauding Twitter investors.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the man
leading the effort to remove fraud in our
government.
I mean, you just it's just insulting to
our intelligence. Of course, be be objective. Maybe
that you think this isn't the case. Look
into it. I think it's pretty obvious.
But isn't that interesting? Right? So these are
the people that are removing fraud, the criminals.
The most obvious example of criminals or fraudsters
I've ever seen are the ones removing these
things from our government. No. No. That's quite
the opposite if you're just not completely blind
to partisanship.
My opinion, of course. The agency dismissed the
other related charges.
So, Sun,
in Biden's administration,
guys, Biden's administration,
at a at a time when we're being
told this is the we think our democrats
going after everybody, Trump, because of his last
administration. Right? But this is connected to Trump.
And, I mean, even right now, the point
is they still I mean, it just I
wanna make sure we understand there's a thousand
ways that they I mean, on top of
the fact that we're being told they lie
about him all the time. So if they're
just making things up to go after him,
why do they continue to ignore the things
that are very provable and do nothing but
go after the ones that aren't there? Because
it's not supposed to go anywhere, in my
opinion.
Like with Clinton, like with James Comey, like
with Letitia James, like with everybody else. Left
or right? Where's Obama? Why isn't Pelosi in
jail? I'm sure we can piece this together.
He paid $10,000,000 and by his administration, let
it go, including all of the very serious
crimes that he was included involved in. Separately
and, you know, fraud. I should say, make
sure it's clear. Financial crimes. Separately, March court
filings show that the SEC is in talks
with Musk to settle charges that he waited
too long to disclose in 2022.
Now this is interestingly an overlap with the
same sort of case.
Sure. Settle to settle charges that he waited
too long to disclose in 2022 that he
had amassed a large stake in Twitter,
which he later bought and renamed x. Now
the point is that there was all this
stuff he was doing behind the scenes to
very clearly manipulate the situation, and that's why
he just got ruled guilty for fraud. Right?
And so in this case, there this is
a part of that that adds to this
story. So right now, the SEC is working
with him to settle these charges while he
just got found guilty of fraud.
Clearly, this is a weaponized situation of our
government left and right. It's not about left
versus right. It's about the government versus everything
else, and it's very clear. I think him
taking over Twitter was part of a larger
actual intelligence operation, my opinion. And I think
that's why this was made to be the
reality.
That allowed Musk to buy more shares at
artificially low prices. That's one of the cases
that's one of the allegations of the fraud
case. The agency filed the charges a week
before Trump took power in January.
Nothing's happened, though. Isn't that interesting?
But but, clearly, she was trying to do
things, and she got frustrated and resigned.
Over here, he's getting found guilty
for fraud in a similar case, but from
a state from a state from a, you
know,
from a
court in San Francisco.
During a March 4 court hearing, the details
of which were first reported by the Financial
Times, a lawyer for Musk said those talks
were with officials above
the SEC staff working on the case.
That's in the transcript. So Musk literally admitted
what this story is reporting, that they were
basically being allowed to go around the in
the the enforcement arm to work with people
like Adkins who are clearly in line with
Trump's agenda, and Elon Musk, I argue, got
a pass.
Now it says, while it is common for
the agency to settle litigation out of court,
it has strong cases against both Sun and
Musk and a good chance of winning tougher
penalties in court according to security lawyers who
had been tracking the proceedings, but
nothing's happening.
And she resigned, I think, in frustration
based on the reality that they
clearly, that she's not able to do her
job.
I think that's really important, guys, and I
think this relates to a much larger situation.
We're just getting little crack through the door
insights in what's really happening.
I think that's going to become more important
as this goes forward.
Now in other examples from, you know, just
partisanship conversation
and just dishonesty and fraud,
this is actually I actually I think stories
like this that just drift out of the
media because clearly, the people who tried to,
like, shout you down from talking about
it don't want you talking about this. You
know, remember remember the the idea that our
government killed two Americans in the middle of
the street for literally not like, this they
lied about them in broad daylight in front
of everybody that Cash and Bondi, all of
them, Noem got up and blatantly misled you
about what happened and then got called out
for it in front of court, in front
of Congress. And yet the
Matt Walshes and Croakers and all the rest
of them are just still lying to you.
They're still outright telling you that a radical
leftist shot Trevor shot,
you know, was the shooter in any one
of these cases, whether we're talking about Butler,
whether we're talking about the point is that
these things have not been fleshed out. You
realize Robinson has not even been they they
he's not he's he hasn't even gone through
court process yet. And for them to claim
that he's he is the guy, you could
argue you think that based on the evidence.
The evidence doesn't even really back that up,
and they would be the ones to say
that if it's situation was reversed. But the
idea is clearly that you until he's found
guilty, you can't say that. And these so
called journalists are out there screaming that. And
the left part is what kills me. Because
still to this day, there is no in
in definitive evidence that he was one way
or the other.
And you can ask Grock. You can look
it up. You can look at the original
post. You can look at what he says
online. It's very close and subjective. So when
Matt Walsh and others wanna keep saying that,
that's a choice.
They know they're being subjective. That's their opinion.
They frame it as fact because they have
an agenda.
That I mean, that's that's that can't even
be opinion, guys. That's just the basic reality.
So back to this, Minnesota is now suing
the Trump administration.
Why? To get access to the evidence in
the killing of Alex Prady and Renee Goode,
both of the American citizens who were murdered
in the street,
because they stopped them. Because there's never really
been an investigation from any other anything other
than whatever the hell Kash Patel was doing,
probably hanging out with people on the side.
This is insane to me. Because not only
is this a problem that they killed American
citizens, obviously, and what ICE is doing, but
that they aggressively
stopped any real investigation. They weren't able to
go to the scene. They didn't do any
any evi the the everybody other than the
executive branch people.
I was just
beyond the pale.
If you care, if you actually have integrity
and principles, this should bother the hell out
of you. Oh, and by the way,
miss you know, all what what right now,
you have Trump and Hegseth trying to frame
everything they're doing is somehow some religiously guided
thing while they're commit genocide and murder people
on top of that telling their own military
that it's
the end times. They're doing this for the
Armageddon, which is so obviously religious Zionism. It
make me makes me sick.
This is what Trump put out in Memphis.
Make this one for Jesus, Trump says when
talking about the Save Act.
Now I just had to point this out,
like, as a Christian myself, and I do
I'm I it's important to me to not
get into the religious perspectives when it comes
to facts and reporting facts. And I'm not
gonna do that now. My point, though, is
that from just speaking as a Christian or
just really anybody who who I mean, it
honestly doesn't have to be religious out there.
Just somebody who cares about principles
or, you know, integrity.
The idea that you're gonna say pass a
bill, a piece of legislation that plenty of
Christians out there who are left or right
disagree with
because that's the truth. I'm one of them.
I disagree. Obviously, I think the same act
is about digital ID manipulation as I keep
pointing out. You don't need real ID compliance
to get what they want from this bill,
so they're tricking you, guys. So the point
is that for him to come out and
say, make do this for Jesus. I mean,
doesn't that just sound insulting to you? That
Donald Trump, who, by the way, if you
care to look barely, is not really religious
at all. He was previously a Democrat. These
people lie to you. But the point is
they want you to think they're something because
that's what you want to hear. But for
him to just sit there, this is what
he does. He thinks, okay. This we need
to pass this. Right? Who are we talking
to? Republicans. What should I say to make
them wanna do this? Oh, I don't know.
Do it for God. Go go have fun
with your crypto, guys. It's the same sentiment.
He's saying whatever he thinks you need to
hear to get the thing done.
Why would you do it for God? Why
would you pass a piece of legislation that
has to do with voter ID for God?
Doesn't that seem petty and manipulative? It should
because it's disgusting.
Not whether you're religious or not. It's abuse
of what he knows you care about.
For something, by the way, that is manipulative
and many would argue associates with the idea
of the beast. This is the mark of
the beast. But who cares? Right? Maybe that
should make make it for specifically the religious
perspective. Think a little bit deeper on what
you think he's trying to convince you it's
about.
On top of that, here's what Hegseth just
actually said.
We negotiate with bombs, he says.
He claims to be a Christian, Ryan writes,
but has zero value for human lives. This
idiot will be the fall guy for this
war. I happen to agree, but he is
too stupid to see it. Here's what he
said.
Pose with and destroy the enemy as viciously
as possible from moment one. And that's why
we see ourselves as part of this negotiation
as well.
We're we we negotiate,
with bombs.
You have a choice as we loiter over
the top of Tehran, as the president talked
about, about your future. President has made it
clear that you will not have a nuclear
weapon. The war department agrees. Our job is
to ensure that.
Right. Right. You know, the thing that they
don't, and their evidence shows that. And their
own intelligence told them that and, you know,
blah blah blah, which everyone with a brain
is already very fully digested.
Doesn't matter, though. I'll just keep lying. And,
his point is well taken.
I don't care whether you think they're terrorists
or not. If you're a Christian, if you're
religious, if you believe that there's saint you
know, the sanctity of life, then you don't
just casually discuss the idea of negotiating with
bombs.
That's terrorist speak, guys.
That's what you're looking at. Because if you've
ever really wanted to stand back and understand
what terrorism looks like, it's always been right
there. If you truly understand how this works.
But of course, that might be a little
too extreme for some of the people that
are, you know,
little,
whatever. That's right. I make a joke about
it. But you know, the idea is that
we need to stop being so
When there's something like I've talked about, like
the funding of ISIS and all kind of
that we can quite literally prove
Just because other people have yet to digest
that or
refuse to accept that or, like, whether it's
Zionism and certain people in the conversation who
just can't seem to come to the reality
or won't allow themselves to be honest about
it, we shouldn't have to tap tap dance
or tap dance around their willful ignorance. We
should just be obvious about it. If we
can't see by now what they have done
our entire lives, and you could even compare
that to what they claim Iran has always
done, and it's night and day. You could
compare it to what they claim f
ISIS has done.
Think about that for a second. Everything they
claim they've ever done, compare that to what
the US government alone has done in our
lives, it is un it's there's no parallel.
This is just this is why when you
really look at the war of dare, millions
upon millions of people have been killed.
But I digress.
Drive people away because the facts are too
uncomfortable. The point is negotiate with bombs is
not what you would argue is a Christian
perspective.
That has to matter for people who are
claiming that this is, you know,
whatever,
guided by especially those people claiming this is
about some kind of religious war. Well, you're
on the wrong side if that's the case,
and I don't even mean that you should
be on the wrong side. That just that
this is not what you think it is.
And be and realize Iran's not claiming they're
fighting a religious war. Maybe they think that,
but that's not what they're saying. I'll include
this as always if you wanna read more
about the Save Act.
Now Thomas Massie also put this out. There's
a lot of these stories that drift into
the background. Like, as,
Jason rightly pointed out the other day, the
East Palestine, you know, no one talks about
it anymore. They're still suffering. Same with, Conyers,
Georgia, by the way, and all the stories
we've covered. It doesn't matter.
And I'm only doing that to make a
point. I know you guys care, and I
know that I actually think the majority does.
But the point is that there are people
out there who feign the concern and can't
pretend to be fighting for you and out
there in the in the trenches of the
media who are just aggressively
either lost or dishonest.
He points out, I believe FBI arrested the
wrong person in the January 6 pipe bomb
case. Well, we already talked about this. This
is clearly a manipulated story. Kash Patel
appears to be arresting an innocent person for
I guess, to look like he's doing something.
Analysis indicates stark physical differences between Cole and
the hoodie suspect, including the matter of walking,
manner of walking, body shape, features, eyesight, shoe
size, neck length, mannerisms. But, you know, they
got a guy. Hooray. We win.
The point clearly is that this came out
before. The gate was very he the the
studies were showing it was, like, 96%
match to somebody who worked for Capitol Police.
And then this comes out? Now you can
read it more. We've talked about this already.
Blaze Media. Brian Coles Junior's physical presence, posture,
mannerisms are no match for FBI's hoodie clad
pipe bomb suspect.
March 23.
And that doesn't matter, though. They're gonna this
this guy is being now re it's important
to read this. I'm not it's I I
might go through this again on the show.
I just wanna make this a passing point.
But it it feels, yet again, like they're
taking advantage of somebody. And, usually, that'd be
that's somebody with limited capacity. That's how this
tends to go. That's so disgusting when you
understand what they're doing. Like, they like, this
story, for example,
which I've I've brought up many times.
And this this goes back to, the Free
Thought Project.
Parents catch FBI and plot to force mentally
ill son to be a rattling terrorist. It's
a very real story, and it's exactly what
it sounds like. Literally caught.
It's just disgusting how this continues to be
the reality.
Now he also points out
this is about the point that Trump's administration
is currently like everyone else before him, including
his last one, re,
not initiating, but,
re upping, I guess. I'm missing the term
I'm I'm missing the term I'm looking for.
But re upping on the FISA warrants,
continuing to kick that can down the road,
Even as he points out the hypocrisy is
off the chain, he said, I'll continue to
support the valid constitutional position that Trump,
Jordan, and Vance have all expressed strongly
in the past when they could yell about
Democrats being bad.
No FISA reauthorization,
that's the word I was looking for, without
warrant requirements.
And guess what they say? No. We disagree.
We wanna be able to spy on you
no matter what because bad Democrats or whatever.
Because I guess that's people are dumb enough
to fall for that.
You go ahead and do the bad illegal
thing as long as you only aim at
that guy.
Guess what? They'll aim at you too or
the next administration will do the same, and
we have to be able to realize that.
But Trump, kill FISA. It was illegally used
against me and many others, and now they're
using it against you.
Now this is not a joke. That's very
clear. Mike Johnson already said we're going to
reauthorize it. How in the world can we
not be clear about this? How can you
look at them all saying, including two from
Trump?
Two of them. And now they're supporting it
because it's a tool they want to use.
These people are all the same thing. It's
about time we realized that.
Now here is an example
of Kash Patel being told to talk up
Trump. I think this is important. And I'll
play the next one from the the point
Miller about, the point with Miller about meritocracy.
But it just as as he writes, straight
up North Korea vibes.
I mean, we know this is what this
has turned into. That's why Mark Wayne is
a is a perfect addition because he will
tow the line about whatever Trump says, even
if it contradicts what he said thirty seconds
ago because that's who these people are. So
Miller goes off about how great Trump is
because he always does, even as he's puffing
and rolling his eyes while Trump speaks thirty
seconds before that. And then he turns and
goes, dude, how can you what does he
say? Mister,
Cash, let's see if you could top that.
Like, literally goes, go ahead. May talk about
how great I am is what Trump does.
Now you could argue it's a joke, but
we know it's not based on how we
can see all the engagement and how these
people walk on eggshells to try to not
avoid irritating Trump even when they're in the
right.
Work that president Trump is doing, not only
in Memphis, not only in Washington DC, but
all over the country,
ultimately,
it will save and is saving
tens of thousands of American lives. Incorrect. It
is. I'll use that word again. What president
Trump has done on border security
and public safety
is a national
miracle that will be studied, not only for
generations. Of course, it will or not at
all, and that we'll laugh about this going
forward. But the idea that you're literally trying
to say that his policy I mean, that
that's the same as saying these shots have
saved ten million lives.
There's no way you could ever even verify
that. You're talking about you you've stopped something
from happening, and therefore, that has saved all
these lives. Maybe. I mean, the facts are
very clear that they've lied about these numbers
from day one.
That's not to say the same as that
we should not we should you know, the
idea is there's a middle ground in all
of these that if you enforce the law.
Yes.
Of course, if we're forced to live within
the state of society, but the point is
that that's not what they're doing.
And they're lying about what they want you
to think in order to get small minded
people in a position where they agree with
whatever he screams out. This is a very
dangerous man. He's probably one of the most
alarming people in this entire administration.
But just realize what he's saying there. We
say, oh, these lives with all of our
aggressive policies that killed Americans, that drove us
to war, that created us a police state,
that's created a national surveillance state that allowed
Israel to have access to all of our
personal information. Yeah. But it's great, though, because
Trump's amazing, apparently.
Oh, and by the way, while
double crossing on every single promise he made,
even immigration according to core Republicans, because the
numbers aren't even close.
But go ahead, Miller. Tell us how great
it is. For centuries to come. Thank you,
president Trump. Thank you, Steve.
So, Cash,
see if you can top that. I don't
I don't know. That's a tough one, Cash.
What a movie. That's tough. You know, mister
president? You realize how how belittling that is?
I mean, that Trump's the emperor in the
room. He turned, go, Cash. Your turn. Let's
see if you could do better than that.
Joke or not,
that means you see Cash as a child
in the room. You know you have to
you you know you could admit this if
you're not partisan. That's a demeaning thing to
do. And then cash goes on and, you
know, you're so great, Trump. You're the greatest.
That's what they're doing. It's it's it's cringey,
guys. Left or right, up, down, it's just
disgusting. It's it's any of our government doing
this to any of our government. It's gross.
As I look around I don't I
don't know. That's a tough one, Cash. That
is tough. You know, mister president, as I
look around, this venue, I see and I'm
reminded again why we have the greatest warriors
on God's green earth. The men and women
serving in uniform, the men and women serving
and wearing the badge, and law enforcement, our
police, our sheriffs around the state of Tennessee.
I'm reminded that Americans exist to protect this
country day in and day out, and they've
done it like we've done it here. We
exist
to protect this country?
I mean, I hope you could really think
about that statement. He's just trying to sound
like the rest of them,
and and Gore steps in it like always.
We're not we don't exist to protect the
he means, by the way, the government is
what he means. That's how they see all
this. But even if you think he doesn't,
we don't exist to do anything for the
the we well, the way we believe this
is supposed to operate is we exist to
make our own choices, that we exist to
go in the direction that we want to,
ex including if that means going somewhere else
in the world. But according to him, we
exist to defend this country.
That is the only that that is only
from a mindset where we serve the power
structure,
which apparently a lot of people even believe
is synonymous with the constitution.
But what we didn't have was you. We
didn't have a commander in chief or back
out, and they've done it like we've done
it here. But what we didn't have was
you. We didn't have a commander in chief
who backed the blue, who resourced the blue,
who funded the military Yeah. Who did whatever
it takes. Just looking at him.
This isn't doesn't this make you sick? I
don't care if it was Biden and and
blinking. I mean, it's just weird, guys.
Go ahead,
Cash. Talk at me and tell me how
great I am. I this is just embarrassing.
Not even just North Korea vibes. It's just
it's like it's like, what's funny is, at
least in North Korea, and I shouldn't even
say at least, it's just it almost it's
almost like it's very clear that they all
know it's just a show
in the sense of, like, he's just, you
know, doing it because I'm in power, whereas
this feels more weird and, like, uncomfortable,
where it's like, we're totally not forced, but
I'm gonna do it anyway because I'm such
a pandering
sigh you know? That's what it is. These
people are just sidling up next to power
and just
in a in a,
I can't think of the right word, but
that that's the real important way to see
this, is that you're watching the decline of
this empire where people just grabbing for what
they can take and shoving their pockets full
of whatever's yours.
To safeguard every single life. And here in
Memphis, Tennessee,
you have put on a show for the
world. You have allowed us to go out
there and capture gangbangers, rapists, murderers, drug dealers,
every yeah. You know, and American citizens who
aren't guilty, innocent people did nothing wrong, which
is, by the way, the vast majority of
the things he mentioned there. But, yeah, maybe
one rapist and a and a murderer too.
I'm sure that's possible. Sure that actually happened.
But, you know, it totally matters to me
that what you're doing within that, even with
the rapist of murder, is breaking the law
to do it. Does that matter to anybody?
Apparently not. But you get the point.
Now here is Miller in that same setting
telling you how what a meritocracy it is.
Again, in a position
literally sitting next to some of the stupidest
people I've ever seen in politics. Bondi is
right there. Cash Patel, Dan or not Dan
anymore, but right there. They're sitting right down
the line. These people are not qualified for
the positions. That's even Trump has derided them.
And even people in high level Republican talking,
you know, podcasters and influencers in media are
the ones now saying these people better start
doing something or gonna be thrown in the
bus. And he wants to sit there and
tell you that this is the best administration
in the history of our government.
Now I I'm not gonna say that, like,
what what did it means to be better
than another corrupt, war mongering, corrupt, you know,
war criminal administration? That's hard to say. What
I do know is these people are some
of the most incompetent,
unqualified
even if they're all criminals too. That has
to matter to me, and this is just
hard to watch.
Nobody could have ever predicted such an achievement
would be possible.
The second thing I wanna thank president Trump
for is assembling
the greatest national security and public safety team
in in American history.
Because president Trump believes
in merit, incompetence,
and people who get things done. So you
Did you say merit incompetence
by accident?
Get things done. So you look around the
table of tents and people who get in
merit, incompetence,
and peep Merit,
incompetence.
Pretty sure that's not the way you're supposed
to say that. So maybe he just said
the re what he really thinks. These people
are all bunch of morons, and he did
great, Trump. That's what I think the reality
is,
genuinely, that this is being done to us.
This person is obviously,
like, objectively
acting in the interest of a
another agenda. And I do think there's multiple
things to point out right there, but the
obvious connection is how all of these people,
in regard to Trump's administration, are outwardly publicly
telling you that they're Zionist.
Now
why that suddenly doesn't matter because I'm racist
apparently is beyond me. Fine. Pretend that I'm
racist if you go to if it allows
you to ignore the point.
But Zionism exists. Right? Yep. Yeah. We know
that. Okay. Now, they're telling you this is
for Zionism. Right? Yes. Okay. And Zionism, they
tell you, represents everything Israel does. Right? Okay.
And And then when I go, Zionism is
involved, they go, you're racist.
What now? Should I run through that again,
or does doesn't that show you the whole
point? It really should. And so my point
is these people will tell you. Hegseth,
Besent, they'll tell you that.
And then we understand that this is being
driven from a religious Zionism point, which is
discussing the end times, and they just told
their military this is for harm again. My
point again is people out there who are
trying to claim, they're obsessed with this.
How can you possibly make that argument with
what we can prove today?
You gotta start making note of these people.
Those who get things done. So you look
around the table of who president Trump chose
for these jobs.
You start with Rob or Gatti or Pam
or Pete Yeah. And Cash. Pam and
Cash. Todd, Terry,
the whole entire team.
What president Trump put together
has never been rivaled in history. That's
In history. Okay. Now we went beyond the
US government.
Never been rivaled in history. We're gonna pretend
that there's never been a grouping of people
in politics that have been better than them
and more competent, better liars even.
In every possible way,
the answer is yes. A 100 times over.
I mean, you could it's you could throw
a stone and hit a grouping of people
to be better than these people right here.
How you get things done. He chooses people
based on their skill, their competence, their ability,
their determination, their dedication, and their loyalty. Yes.
Their blind loyalty, that's the one thing he
said is correct. Blind loyalty to whatever Trump
says today is the agenda, even if that
changes by tomorrow.
That's the truth. Anybody who's not blind can
already see that. And, again, in case you
guys tuned in, if you've some somehow assumed
that I'm only doing this because of hatred,
you're wrong. Biden was just as ridiculous.
It's only gotten worse, and it's gotten worse
every time. From Trump to Biden, it got
worse. From Biden to Trump, it's getting worse.
The same thing as you look back.
The point is that it's all the same.
And that is always what throws people for
a loop because they feel like they can
make it about you suddenly being a Democrat,
and you just have Trump deranged with syndrome.
But then when you make it clear that
it's a bigger picture, that's why people just
don't really even call us out anymore.
Not really. Not the ones that like, we're
the reality is that this is difficult to
the only argument you get from people like
that are that you are just the other
side.
You see it every day.
Oh, the liberals and crying or, you know,
you're welcome. Whatever.
You have no argument when you start to
make it about the two party illusion
because they're manipulators, guys, in many cases anyway.
So
on top of that, he's the most meritocracy
based government, and then they confirm Mark Wayne
Mullen,
literally, to lead the Homeland Security Department.
Now I was gonna do this before I
had them all lined up, and I ended
up just getting into something else. And I
don't find this person to be very relevant
other than the fact that he's in a
very influential position. But as I we I
think we've already acknowledged, he's not the one
making the decision. So, you know, but who
knows? I think but the important part, though,
is for you at least to see the
kind of the quality, the caliber of person
that we're talking about. If you could, for
one second, pretend that this is the most
the per the most deserving person for this
position,
I mean, I I just you're not a
serious person. You know? And this is where
we are today. So that happened. Right? And
they did it's I think it was eight
to seven. He barely made it through.
So here's a clip of when he genuinely
stood up and tried to fight somebody in
congress,
which I'm this is my point today. There
are people who proudly tell you why this
is how they why they want him there.
These are children. And I'm not saying that
because you think, you know, I I'm trying
to be a an adult, and I'm trying
to be too serious. It's about the fact
that that's a ridiculous thing to do.
If, really, your response to somebody is to
stand up and literally try to fight them
in front of the entire in front of
the American people, that means you have no
argument. That means you are an infant and
a juvenile person and very petty and small.
But this is what everybody else in this
government seems to be like, or the vast
majority, I would argue. Watch this, guys. I
was I I couldn't believe this is actually
what went down. Now the point is this
guy he's talking to, apparently, they had a
little back and forth online. And so this
guy comes into congress, and Mark Mark Wayne
literally says when he begins his his discussion,
starts by basically calling him out going, oh,
you're a real tough guy, Well, now we're
here. What are you gonna do?
I'm not making that up. It's insane. Like,
I think what he wanted was for the
guy to to to back down because
we're not dumb enough to get in a
fight in congress, and then he would pretend
that they all see he's he backed down
because I'm the strong one. That's what he
was trying to do. And then he well,
I'll let it play for itself. I mean,
it's just it's incredible.
And, Sky, there is probably 17 videos that
I could play of this guy making an
utter fool of himself,
like, incorrectly speaking about things, saying like, not
being speaking with improper grammar or just being
just being a dumb person and very clearly
uneducated when it comes to what he needs
to know for this position.
I was in this here in the last
time. Him and I kinda had a back
and forth. Appreciate your demeanor today. It's quite
different. But after you left here, you got
pretty excited about the keyboard. In fact, you
About the keyboard. Read it at me
one, two,
three, four You printed these out. Five times.
So let me read what the last one
said. So just to be clear, by the
way, this has literally nothing to do with
why this guy is here. So he decides
to take taxpayer time that you guys are
funding to just settle a petty squabble between
somebody yet online because we live in the
in the era of social media governance, guys.
These are children. These are people that are
literally that's like that's like Peg Peg Seth
and caring more about
memes or literally Dan and Cash being exposed
for caring more about how they would play
this back and forth on Twitter than how
they would investigate the crime they were playing
back and forth on Twitter. That's a real
story.
Said
greedy CEO who pretends
like he's self made.
Sir, I wish he was in the truck
with me when I was building my plumbing
company myself,
and my wife was running the office because
I sure remember working pretty hard. Yeah. This
is really happening.
We're off topic,
and now he's just airing out his irritated
petty grievances about why the guy misrepresented him.
The smallness of this can't be overstated.
In long hours.
Pretends like he's self made. What a clown.
Thoraclean.
Always has been,
always will be.
Quit the tough guy act in these senate
hearings. You Now get this. He gets called
out for the tough guy act, and so
his response is to play out the tough
guy
act. You know where to find me? Any
place, anytime,
cowboy.
Sir, this is a time. This is a
place. Wow. If you wanna run your mouth,
we can beat two consenting adults. We can
finish it here. Okay. That's fine. Perfect. You
wanna do it now? I'd love to do
it right now. Well, stand your butt up
then. You stand your butt up. Oh, hold
on. Oh, stop it. We can tell you
a solution every time. No. No. Sit down.
Fire. Clean out. Okay. Yeah. No. You're a
United States senator. Sit down. Active. Okay. Sit
down, please. Alright. Can I respond? Mister You
know, just to be clear, the way I
read this is that this guy played the
the hell out of Mark Twain.
Now or or you could argue that he
just responded after this that made it look
that way. That's possible too. But it seems
to me that this guy was trying to
get a rise out of him in order
to make him think that was the case,
and all he meant well, we all it'll
play. It just goes, well, I just meant
for us to talk it out. And so
you got Mark Twain to literally stand up
and act like he was gonna fight somebody
in congress, which ultimately made him look like
a fool. Hold it. Hold it.
If we can no. I have the mind.
I'm sorry. This is what he said. You'll
have your time. Okay. Can I respond? Oh,
no. You can't.
This is a hearing.
And God knows the American people have enough
contempt
for congress. Let's not I don't like drugs
and police. You have And that's I don't
like you because you described yourself.
Oh, you know what? Shorter clip. You have
the mic. Yeah. You have time. That's it.
Just a statement. Well, probably for the better.
I probably would have ended up watching more
than I wanted to. But there they so
that was just the the quick part where
he stands up. What happens is, ultimately,
it goes on. Bernie Sanders makes this whole
thing about, let's you know, you're a man
you know, let's let's act our, you know,
decorum and the whole thing.
And then he literally goes right back to
it
Right after that and goes, oh, you know,
and then you tweeted this. And Bernie has
to say something, like, three more times, and
he just keeps going. And then the point
is, when he basically puts him to it,
he goes, you know, what what do you
mean by stand up? And he goes, well,
I thought we could talk her talk it
out. And then Mark didn't even really know
what to say. You know? And it just
it just really shows you the kind of
like,
I just can't believe we're at a place
where I have to explain why that kind
of response, whether you feel justified or not.
Look, guys. There's plenty of examples where whether
justified or not, but in many cases, I
would argue I'd like to believe it's justified.
I would respond. The point is we all
have moments where we respond, where people where
we feel we're insulted or, I mean, there's
many cases, you know, your your family are
being threatened or something. And I would not
hesitate for a second to stand up and
defend myself. I have in the past. And
maybe I got like, what I was kind
of saying there confusingly is I'm sure there's
a case where I might even emotionally respond
inappropriately.
The point is that in a circumstance like
this, one, where you know that that won't
really happen, first of all, that you're fronting
because you know that nobody in this room
is gonna let it happen. It's like holding
your friend's arm in front of you and
trying to fight somebody. It's clear that you
knew that wouldn't go on. The point though
is that this is not a respectable thing
to do
in any circumstance like this.
Whether adult or not, I would I would
argue children would know better than that. And
this is where we're being driven to, the
smallest petty, lowest common denominator.
That's alarming to me, guys. This is the
kind of person that is being shoved in
front of us. This country is being degraded
by that kind of action. How is that
happening? I don't believe that you're being voted
in these positions. This country is being destroyed.
My opinion, clearly.
Now
in that very vain thought, because this is
what this very group of people and the
one before it is bringing into reality, because
realize this has been going on long before
this administration,
Palantir AI helped of course, Jason Basler posted
this on the twenty fourth.
Palantir AI helped detect, prioritize, and strike
1,000
plus targets in Iran
in just the first twenty four hours.
And as he rightly points out, which was
the same day where a 175
children were killed when an all girls school
was hit by a US Tomahawk cruise missile,
which they lied about. Remember that? Where they
lied and they said, no. It was not.
Or Trump said, well, tomah any peep a
lot of people have tomahawks and he was
wrong, by the way, what he said was
wrong. And the point is then came came
back around, US intelligence and even reports from
multiple platforms said, yep. That was a US
missile. Yep. It looks like it was US.
It still could have been Israel, by the
way. In fact, that's what makes the most
sense to me. Or the idea that what
remember, the maps that Hegseth showed, I highly
doubt he would show that if he realized
that's the re what what that showed.
He the map that he showed at the
bombing patterns put the school right in the
red part of one of their bombings.
We know where this is coming from. The
intelligence is coming from Palantir. It's coming from
Israel.
So you could argue they whoops. You made
a mistake, or you could argue that this
is how this is being engineered.
Both make
sense, but the future of War, he writes,
is now outsourcing life and death decisions to
algorithms built by defense contractors.
Now that's the there's more he could have
added to that about what Palantir seems to
be involved in, what they're very clearly doing,
but this is just a basic point. That
is what they're doing. At the most benign
sense of the conversation,
we're outsourcing these actions,
which, by the way, this is why I
included these, are already happening without human engagement.
This is the same point. We got people
trying to shout this back, but it's now
the reality is this is Palantir
in working in Israel with Gaza or in
in the genocide in Gaza.
We'll grab that.
Oh, wait. It was
there. I've shown this plenty of times, but
just so you guys can see it for
the point, in case you guys didn't realize
that they had created a strategic partnership with
Israel in the midst of the genocide.
By the way, same kind of thing. Most
of the people you'll find that will tell
you that we're overlooking this or obsessed with
this will also tell you there's no genocide
happening and also tell you that no one's
being starved to death and also tell you
that Israel totally didn't get caught raping people
in their prisons that they've been praised on
live TV and then the policy was actually
pointed to. You know, they'll tell you that's
all fake news, apparently. Not a joke. But
a partnership in the
height of the genocide.
And that's what this is.
Habsora
and Lavender.
And if you read these from the Israeli
platform nine seven two, they'll tell you that
these people are being driven to make choices
without engagement, to trust the AI. So they
claim human involvement because somebody's blindly sitting there
pressing the button every twenty seconds. And what
they tell you is they're driven
to get the most in a shorter period
of time, which means they're being driven to
not engage and think it through, but to
trust the AI. It's what they'll tell you.
So, yeah, they'll lie and say there's human
engagement, but that's not actually what's happening.
And now
this is where it's heading.
Oh, and I'll include the show of we
did about the school girl's school, which is
verifiable at this point. And don't forget all
the Zionists that tried to pretend it wasn't
Iran or it was another country or it
was actually in Afghanistan. Whatever lie you absorbed,
and it was shared by all the people
we make fun of every time, all the
sorters and Johnsons, they're all all sharing a
variation of the lie that we can prove
was a lie. But now it comes here.
Pentagon to adopt Palantir AI as core US
military system. Now this is actually not even
new. It's already essentially de facto been the
reality, as they'll even tell you in this
article, as we've been halt calling out long
before this administration. But the point and Jason
himself, Alec,
Derek and Whitney and all the rest of
us, the point is that this is now
becoming official.
And that's the that's the main point, is
that this is now becoming the like, this
is part of your government. And if we
can prove, which we can, that there's invasive
parts of this, parts that work for the
interest of foreign governments or the reality that
this is I mean, the all the points
we've covered. It it would take so long
to go over. In fact, this is probably
one of the best ones as always.
Derek's article about the welcome to the Palantir
world order, I think, was 2024.
No. Twenty twenty five, April. And showing you
that and and just outlining where we are
now. And it even then, half this wasn't
happening, and now here's here we are.
So this is an important article
showing you what we've already largely reported.
Palantir's Maven artificial intelligence system will now become
an official program of record. Deputy secretary of
defense Steve Feinberg, of course, the person who
seems to really run the Pentagon, said in
a letter to Pentagon leaders,
a move that locks in long term use
of Palantir's weapons targeting technology across the US
military. Now we're gonna come to a point
in a minute. I think actually pretty close
here.
Oh, no. Actually, it's way down here. Maybe
I'll jump to that for a sec. But
we're gonna come back to the point about
the these clips we often point out, right,
about booby trapping devices all over the world
as Mossad
ex Mossad had told us, or the pager
attack. And the reality that we're talking about
the open admission of Israel booby trapping technology
they work with,
that alone should be enough to be aware
weary of how this overlaps. But then we
know that we have the examples of these
things overlapping, and we should be worried about
how that plays out. We're gonna come to
a story today about
Russia discovering a bunch of shoes that were
sent from Ukraine
that had bombs in them that their soldiers
were gonna wear if they hadn't caught it.
And we'll get to the overlap of Ukraine
and Israel, if that makes sense to you.
My point, though,
is that this is alarming, that this is
now something that is gonna be ultimately the
AI will be you know, this is not
like the like, before, you would talk about
military personnel and then, you know, whatever information
they were using. But this is becoming where
AI is become is the decision maker. Yes.
They're telling you that there's people involved. But
as we showed you, that's going to become
less and less important or already being driven
out of it.
So the question then is who is
potentially able to manipulate the AI?
That's already been answered for you.
And it says, in March
in a in the March 9 letter to
senior Pentagon leaders and US military commanders, Feinberg
said, embedding Palantir's Maven smart system would provide
warfighters, quote, with the latest tools necessary to
detect, deter, and dominate our adversaries
in all domains,
including at home.
And the point is, as we get into,
this is the control grid, guys. Of course,
it's always framed as the other and the
bad guy, but this is home already. It's
already here. ICE and the rest of it.
It's this is the same program, and this
is what capital and the rest of us
have highlighted as the building out of this
control grid. And you can disagree with that,
but we're here now.
This wasn't happening. All these different parts, whether
ICE or Gotham, these things weren't truly happening
that way. And we're watching this system click
into place.
I'm not asking you to blindly trust us.
Look at the information, but recognize how objectively
clear it is that these things are happening.
I just have to be real about that.
Otherwise, I mean, who knows? Maybe we'll end
up up in where you think it's helped
us all. Maybe that's the case. I certainly
hope so. I just want people to know
what's happening so we can make decisions based
on the the truth and not the the
partisan just, you know, deflection or division.
The decision is is expected to go into
effect by the close of the current fiscal
year, which ends in September. According to the
letter, which it was review reviewed by Reuters
and has not been previously reported,
Maven is a command and control software platform
that analyzes battlefield data and identifies targets.
It is already the primary AI operating system
for the US military, which has carried out
thousands of targeted strikes in against Iran, which
has been killing civilians
in crazy amounts.
That they're basically admitting that at this point.
Just do they're just kinda going with the
casual argument of, well, you know, they were
in the places where we were told were
military targets or the it's it's normalizing the
idea that AI decides and whatever happens is
justified.
And here we are. They're telling you, as
Jason just did, this was used. That was
the school they bombed.
And so this is now the main primary
yes.
Designating
Maven as a program of record will streamline
its adoption across all arms of the military
and provide stable long term funding.
Great for Palantir, by the way. So the
reality
is that if we were worried about, like,
multiple points, whether it's the Palantir point or
just the the conversation of the disconnect between
the executive branch and the military,
doesn't this open that door a little bit
further?
If we're worried, which we already are seeing,
that there are actions being taken that don't
connect with what Trump is doing, that maybe
this is another example of that. This is
sort of a a technological coup, if you
will. The memo ordered oversight of Maven will
be moved from the and this is actually
really alarming to me too. The memo ordered
oversight of this program to be moved from
the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
to the Pentagon's chief digital artificial office intelligence
office within 30 days. Same with the SEC.
Same with this. That's consolidating control.
And this is not in the interest of
accountability, guys. They're just controlling this, and it's
tight to the executive branch. That's what they're
doing.
Future contracting with Palantir will be handled by
the army.
Told you.
And it's imperative it is imperative that we
invest now, he says, and with focus to
deepen the integration of artificial intelligence across the
joint force and establish AI enabled decision making
as the cornerstone of our strategy,
Feinberg wrote.
So I just certainly wish we all could
have been on this a long time ago.
Feinberg order Feinberg's order was a significant win
for Palantir, which has landed a growing stream
of contracts with the US government. You know,
that small thing the Democrats don't like, we
were told.
Including a deal announced last summer with the
US army worth up to $10,000,000,000.
Those awards have helped double the company's stock
price in the last past year, lifting its
market value to nearly $360,000,000,000.
Maven can rapidly analyze huge amounts of data
from satellites, drones, radar sensors, intelligence reports, and
use AI to automatically identify potential threats or
targets, like enemies, military vehicles, buildings, and weapons
stockpiles, or, you know, rogue Americans.
Palantir says its software does not make lethal
decisions and humans remain responsible for selecting and
proving targets. Fake.
In fact, that's the
token argument.
As we can read in their own discussions
of these things, not only I mean, okay,
it comes down to the person using it.
And the Israeli government has been driving this
in a use that is it's made to
make the
human part of this,
irrelevant.
That it's just you just go with it.
You trust the system, and the system knows.
It's like what we said a long time
ago, that they told you that this would
be making decisions. Eric Schmidt made this literal
point. Whitney and I talked about this. That
it will get to a point where AI
is making decisions that we may find immoral,
but it will know better. That's exactly what
he said years ago. Here we are. In
May 2025, the Pentagon increased the contract ceiling
to $1,300,000,000.
One potential complication in deeper mavens dot maven
adoption is the software's use of Anthropic,
Anthropic made Claude, their AI tool. Reuters pre
Reuters
Reuters previously reported on this. Anthropic was recently
deemed a supply chain risk by the Pentagon
amid a month long spat over safety guardrails.
And if you forget, it's because they said
we will not allow autonomous weapons, and we
will not allow, what was it?
Now I'm blanking on
it. Probably in the chat, but that's that's
the main one. There was two things. And
and it's insane that we could argue that
that is somehow
what was that? There's no oversight or the
point was things that we all care about,
that everyone in the world is concerned about.
And and that's all they said, and the
the Pentagon said no.
So there's only one way to take that.
That means they clearly want
autonomous weapons, which is the opposite of what
Palantir just said, Meaning that they can make
the decision without human involvement. And that's what
Anthropic tried to make their line about, and
The US said no. You can't misunderstand this.
And what's crazy about it is they then
push back and call them a supply chain
risk, and then went on to use them
in the bombings of Iran.
And so what it seems is they said,
basically, that it seems that the the amid
the spat that ultimately they've got they've gained
ground. And that seems because I I think
they've just given in.
Trying to see if any way,
human oversight was what I that's the one
I pointed out. But anyway, that's the main
point. There was two things they said, and
they just refused.
And now they're still using it. Now think
about this, guys. It's a reason that they
needed these things. They're they're building out the
future system of this, and they needed these
parts, and they're willing to threaten and lie,
coerce
anything, anybody.
Oh, yeah. And these were the
Palantir articles. And then, of course, we have
I showed you this one back in,
oh, wait. You know what? This might be
a new one, actually. That's crazy. I thought
this was the old one I showed you.
So this is actually the update, it looks
like. This is from March 23. Look at
that. I actually thought this was from, like,
a month ago. The the basically, this has
been an ongoing conversation for The UK. I
just grabbed it to make the point that
in The UK, Palantir is invading everything there
too, and people are very concerned about it
within the government, or rather at least feigning
concern.
And now you got members of parliament urging
the UK government to halt the contract, giving
Palantir FCA data access.
This this is just an this is a
takeover, and this is what it looks like,
guys.
And JD Vance is now hosting a fundraising
dinner at Palantir cofounder
Joe Lonsdale's home in Austin according to the
invitation that went out, with tickets priced at
50,000 to a 100,000 per per couple.
The ardent Zionist, Lonsdale, has long advocated
regime change in Iran and is currently supportive
of the war.
I just it's you can't miss this. If
you you're either blind, like, willfully ignoring all
of this. I'm not I'm not trying to
say anything other than exactly what is at
what we are gonna read in the headlines,
what Palantir says is happening. It concerns me.
It also concerns me what I believe the
real agenda is, but just the surface level
claims.
This is alarming, guys. I don't know why
we can't acknowledge that in certain circles. Now
to the Iran point of this,
we discussed this in the 20 this was
yesterday. Iranian revolution yet again exposed as Israeli
plot. Now that's important because this was very
clearly
every time I've seen this before, it's been
shown to be an artificial
response.
Usually started with something real, but then just
manipulated, and that has now come out explicitly
clear. The the most important parts are coming
from Netanyahu's own inner circle, where the reality
is that they were talking about how we
have to get this done because Trump might
end the war.
So all that has to show you is
that that means Israel is getting what it
wants, and it's manipulating the other side of
it. Now that doesn't mean Trump doesn't want
this. That's my point from earlier. I believe
he's very much in line with a lot
of this. Maybe the parts where he sees
his own legacy, you know, who knows?
But there's also, I think, a part where
Netanyahu is playing him. Now even if they,
like, let's say they sat down and agreed,
let's go after Iran. Here's how we'll do
it. I argue, based on history, Israel would
still find ways to screw him over and
find ways to benefit themselves at the expense
of them because that's what they seem to
do. It's about demonstrating control or, you know,
showing weakness for them. I think that's always
happening. And I often point it out where
Trump, that happens and they never called it
out.
So I think it's somewhere in the middle.
Now we also talked about the alleged negotiation.
Now that's what we're gonna largely finish with
here. Before that,
More Perfect Union posted this, and I thought
this was interesting. Only 20%
27% of Americans, according to this platform, agree
with Trump's war in Iran. I think it's
actually far less than that. But but on
TV,
what you'll see,
left and right, important to think about that,
left and right, You'll get one expert after
another coming on to say, war good. Support
this. Go after Iran.
Turns out, most of those so called experts,
as Robert has always pointed out,
are just from a few think tanks. Many
of most of which have never been to
Iran. Most of which are so called experts
put on the information the US government claims
is about Iran, and most of that's false.
And most of them don't even seem to
know that half the time, but you can
decide that part. And she says most of
these think tanks get funding from the military
industrial complex. And I'll add, and it's clear,
and you can look it up for yourself
like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies,
funded by Israel
and many Zionist groups.
Both Turn on the news. In the last
few weeks, you've probably noticed a trend. This
is a regime that needs to go want
this regime gone? You take a run off
the map. There has to be some force
on the ground. United States and Israel must
be prepared to fight for extended period of
time. Everywhere you look, whether it's ABC, CNN,
Fox News, or even the Late Show with
Stephen Colbert. The case, I don't think, has
been made to the American people, as I
think it can be made. Foreign policy experts
are all insisting on one thing: the war
in Iran is mostly good, and it must
go on. This is all a bit jarring,
considering that only 27%
of Americans agree with the war, and yet
you almost never hear a dissenting voice. And
that's as true on ABC as it is
on Fox News. Every single time. And I
really hope this can break through for somebody
today who needs to hear it. This is
the same thing every time. Ever wore left
and right as far back as you wanna
look, guys, and it's the same thing right
now. I know people really, really wanna believe
that this is for the right reasons or
you know, I know I as always, I
hope that I'm wrong about that, but I
don't know how that's possible with what we're
watching since this is an objectively illegal war.
But at the end of the day,
it's the same situation.
And what you're seeing is blind, nonpartisan support
for the war agenda and for what Israel's
driving this country to do because those are
the same thing.
Who are these experts and why are they
so different from the rest of us? Well,
it's no accident that the majority of the
experts you're hearing from work at think tanks,
a kind of nonprofit that may sound independent,
but which often sustains itself by taking money
from large corporations like weapons manufacturers.
And not just a little money, weapons manufacturers
are funneling millions into think tanks, and coincidentally,
the experts that work there tend to push
pro war narratives in the media. Take the
Hudson Institute. Since 2019,
they've taken over $4,000,000
from military contractors, contractors that make hand over
fist cash anytime Obama's dropped. One of the
Institute's largest donors, Northrop Grumman, is raking in
the cash as their $2,000,000,000
B-two bombers are being used right now to
bomb Iran. And RTX is another huge donor
to Hudson. They produced Tomahawk missiles, the same
ones The US just dropped on an Iranian
elementary school that killed 168
mostly school aged children. The Atlantic Council is
another think tank you're likely seeing everywhere right
now. They also happen to take more weapons
money than basically anyone else in Washington. And
last year, they put out this interesting report
calling for The United States to purchase more
THAAD and SM-three missiles to fight Iran. And
guess what we're doing this year? We're using
those same missiles
right now to bomb Iran. Right. You have
to I think this speaks for itself. But
in case you're not realizing that, this means
that they knew this would happen, or at
the very least that they expected it to
happen.
So let's be clear about that imminent threat
that didn't exist. K?
Oh, and surprise, surprise, the companies that produce
those weapons, RTX and Lockheed Martin, have gifted
the Atlantic Council over over $1,000,000 since 2019.
And these are just two of the think
tanks that Dane publicly share their funding. Approximately
40% of America's think tanks are dark money
organizations,
meaning they don't disclose their donors at all.
The Foundation for for Defense of Democracies is
one of these dark marketing tanks, and they've
been calling for regime change in Iran for
years. It's one of the most obvious cutouts.
I mean, it's basically
like, in look. This is not if you
take time to look into it, it's it's
it's pretty commonly known this is a Zionist
Zionist influenced, Israel influenced platform.
But you could argue I mean, that to
be clear again, like we were talking about
a second ago, that's not some secret conspiracy
theory. It's objective. It's on the surface. You
can look at who's involved. You can see
that. Now whether you think that means something
or not is that's the different question. It's
it's obvious that influence is there. Like, it's
saying it's obvious that The US influences the
USAID. It's obvious. Right? That's that's that's not
something you can deny, but people do because
they don't want you to look past the
surface when it comes to certain groups and
certain topics.
And we can only guess as to why.
Oh, and the best part is their experts
appear before Congress more than almost any other
think tank in Washington. Mhmm. We have no
idea where their funding comes from. I think
what's so astonishing to me is how many
of these same groups pushed for the war
in Iraq. But what's interesting is this is
a very mainstream y type platform. Right? But
and I think that people like that are
afraid to call it Israel for obvious reasons.
So look into it for yourself. It's not
hard to see. But either way, her points
are correct. That's that this is a a
dark money thing that's influencing this war that
they've always wanted. I'm sure you can connect
those dots. And don't assume, what I that's
what I'm saying, but look into it. Prove
it.
Then when public opinion changed, they all suddenly
pretended like they never did. The Foundation for
Defense of Democracies went so far as to
delete their support for the Iraq war from
their website. But don't worry. I'm sure this
time it will be totally different.
You can recognize that, guys. Why would they
do that? Because they don't want you to
recognize that they've always been advocating for war
for the American people against the country that
they want you to go to war with.
And this is, you know, it's the same
converse like, the the the post, by the
way, that the US government put out on
the White House page about the 992
Americans they claim Iran's in their long term
war on America have killed even though 90%
of it was Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda. You
know? And the examples of Iran were largely
in Iraq when they were illegally invading Iraq.
You know, the nuance, of course. And 992,
I'm pretty sure even that the number they
claim is not thousands
as they've been saying or millions as Trump
says.
Facts matter, don't they? But the reality being
that this group is very clearly or, well,
the point I made is that they're the
ones that put that list out that Trump
just used.
That's just a point that I wanna include,
and that it just shows you they're just
parroting what the that group was saying before,
but it's very clear to see where that
influence comes from. And then I would argue
this platform would be
wary of of making that point. Wary.
Here is a,
a stub substack post from Ken Klippenstein that
I thought was interesting that speaks to the
kind of growing
control over not just media, but, like, satellite
imagery and, like, what what he calls the
little brother and the big brother conversation.
Now, Eric, the Pentagon has quietly dictated to
spy satellite companies, one which we've referenced many
times in the past, one that was utilized
pretty manipulatively
during the Ukraine war, Maxar Technologies, which is,
again, same kind of point. It's pretty easily
it's recognized as basically a CIA cutout,
which doesn't mean that everything it does is
always one thing, but it's influence
that is there should it be needed is
the main point. Same thing with the other
platform we just mentioned. But in this case,
we've
that clip we played about where in Bucha,
I think they got caught dragging the body
in and so on, these things were that
Maxar was the one that lied about that
and got caught lying about where these things
were taking place. In this case, though, he's
what he's talking about is that kind of
company, but many others as well, including Palantir
and and things like,
Starlink and and Elon Musk companies. But it
says, did,
the Pentagon has quietly dictated to spy satellite
companies
what to say about the Iran war,
exercising censorship over what the American public is
allowed to know. That should bother people who
care about the free flow of information from
private companies.
Military sources tell me, Ken, that the level
of secrecy surrounding the specifics of the Iran
war is unprecedented, which I think we know
why, with barely any data being released about
the level of bombing, the targets being attacked,
or the assessed effects
even after the fact. Because I understand the
previous part of it of just, you know,
we're gonna do this tomorrow. It doesn't make
much sense in the wars. But but after
the fact, they're still not giving you the
information about how and when, where and who
and how. Like, things that won't even affect
their their strategy.
And I I think we know why. Just
like Israel and Gaza or other wars you
could discuss where they were afraid to show
you what they were really doing, whether it
involved Israel or The United States or not.
It's obvious to see
how that if it was happening, they would
cover the flow of information. Just because they're
doing that doesn't then prove that they're breaking
the law, but we can prove they're doing
that in many other examples. But the idea
of the way that they're doing this, I
think, suggests that they know that we are
gonna see things they don't want us to.
Of course, the typical argument is, well, we
know the media is gonna lie, so we
don't wanna give you the opportunity, which is
just a they all do, and they always
will. That's not the that that is not
an appropriate answer because it does it's, first
of all, not your you're not the idea
that you can censor this flow of information
to hide what you're doing just speaks to
the dishonesty of you, not the fact that
the media will lie about you. But it's
also free speech.
But it's same same thing with, like, the
Democrats in ICE where we they're gonna attack
them, and there's no evidence of what they
claim in that larger sense. But even if
they did, well, they could be charged with
a crime. The answer is not to break
the law in response to them allegedly breaking
the law. Easy to play people who believe
in partisanship.
Now the Trump administration is trying to further
control what private companies say in a behind
the scenes effort not been previously reported.
Oh, it says,
Iran's war is unprecedented. The specifics surrounding it
and the secrecy with barely any data being
released about the level of bombing. As the
American and Israeli bombing of Iran commenced on
February 28, the military promptly issued guidance to
satellite operators of what, quote, language and terms
to avoid.
When describing damage caused by Iran to American
bases in The Middle East, according to a
copy of the guidance looked leaked to Ken,
which means, as they'll say right here, they
said, okay, when they attack a base like
ours, then make sure you don't say that
it was attacked. Make sure you frame it
in a way that doesn't make it look
like we actually are losing or at the
very least like we got hit. But But
you could frame it as so we don't
look like we're losing because that very much
applies to what I think is happening. But
even if you argue they're winning entirely, they're
still making sure you don't know that they
actually got one through, as we'll make a
point in a minute about the USS Lincoln
and the allegations and the absurdity of what
they came seem to be putting forward. I
mean, are we really of the mind that
they're they are they are they genuinely trying
to argue that it's, like, impossible for Iran
to hit or strike a tanker that they
argue they already have or that you know,
it's it's a weird thing to happen. We'll
come back to that.
It says the guidance includes the following examples
of what to say and what not to
say. So in that kind of example, that
they would do something they did, and the
response would be to say the to frame
it in a way that doesn't look like
they actually got hit. So dishonesty, guys.
Saying it says, avoid language that implies battle
damage assessment
or operational conclusions.
One slide produced the US Space Force says
it says it goes on to warn against
using phrases like target destroyed, target eliminated,
structure right or inoperable.
It says, basically, you could image shows the
structure largely collapsed with debris covering the footprint.
Just ways that make it sound more watered
down. While the Pentagon guidance to the commercial
companies is framed as an advisory,
the companies comply because their contracting relationships with
the government make them afraid to bite the
hand and feed them, especially under Trump. As
a result, private companies are increasingly becoming a
controlled and auxiliary
little brother
to The US intelligence machine. And this is
a trend I reported on last year, he
writes. Space Force has issued the guidance that
he obtained to virtually all commercial satellite companies
in the form of written requests.
This includes not just companies in the classified
space, but even those that work on the
collection and dissemination of public,
open source materials
that inform the news media, which means that
this is what I talk about with the
propaganda
multiplier and, like, Reuters and AP and how
that's what most Fox and CNN, they just
repeat what they get from those. Same thing
that we do in some ways, not repeat
it, but get the flow of information from
those same groups, and then it'll use a
lot more sources than mainstream does. And so
the case
where was I?
Yeah. So what that that ultimately, that means
that from even Fox and CNN level, that
they they that's what I mean is half
the time, I don't even think they're aware
that they're being misled, not that they would
even care, but that they're already breaking down
the source before it even reaches them to
water down what being said. This is just
controlled information. This is not what we pretend
we are. But in many ways, what this
government has always been,
open source.
While there's a case to be made, it
says that they, the companies, should fight it.
Almost everyone makes the vast majority of their
revenue from the government contracts in this industry
aft as and after anthropic,
nobody's interested in putting up a fight.
You know why. They made this very clear.
We will destroy you even if we end
up being charged or even if it's obviously
corrupt what we're doing. We'll do it because
we want to we believe it's important for
the AI against China or whatever their narrative
is
while they reap the benefits of this destruction
of our country.
It says,
I think it's also another layer of trying
to make things about the war seem less
bad than they are, obviously.
Since February, Anthropic has refused to allow its
AI model, Claude,
to be used for certain missions involving mass
domestic that's what it was. The mass surveillance
of Americans and autonomous weapons.
And the US government said, no. That's too
far. We need both those things. That's what
they said. And
yet we're quibbling about whether they're doing that?
The Pentagon in response has threatened to invoke
the Defense Production Act. So, basically, as I've
said,
production martial law, forcing their hand as a
private company.
Totally not fascism at all. Pentagon pressure or
communism or you know, what? Same same overarching
idea. Government can centralize to control you. And
they're not the same thing, mind you, but
the points are very similar when you come
to that idea.
Pentagon pressure has already yielded results. It says
Planet Labs is one of the largest commercial
satellite imaging companies in the world and has
blocked public access
to imagery of the entire Iran war theater
by imposing a ninety six hour delay when
it started because the government told them to
or advised,
then extending it to a fourteen day blackout
on March 10. The company claims the decision
was its own, made after consulting military intelligence
expert. Okay. So
a open source, rather public commercial satellite imaging
where you can go to get access to
information
that the government won't want you to see,
not because it's a crime, just because they
don't want you to know what's going on.
They were
asked, and we know what that meant based
on the what we just just read, and
they
complied. And they're censoring that information. Now why
would that be? Well, wouldn't they want you
to see how much they're destroying?
This kind of soft censorship is not unique
to Trump's administration, nor is it partisan phenomenon.
I'm glad he said that. Whether it is
artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, unmanned vehicles, and now remote
sensing satellites, you know, the control grid being
built around us, corporations have grown so powerful
that they are starting to rival nation states
in terms of resources. Guys, that ship has
sailed. That's a long he's right. But that
was there a long time ago. We should
have been fighting it then. We can still
fight it now. But little brother is happy
to co cooperate with big brother.
I think it's very important with where we
are. Bottom line, they're lying to you what's
going on from the highest levels of information.
Now as Dan Cohen rightly pointed out, and
I think it's an important thought as I
said earlier,
but I I'm unfortunately, citing Michael Tracey, somebody
who I think is, you know, worth criticism
and making sure you question what he's putting
forward.
And, oh, wait. I will grab this actually
since we did, had this interview with him,
which I really do think is a good
interview.
He came on and we I think we
I've had more than one with him, I
believe. And we discussed
the manufactured
Middle East plight and the Zionism linchpin. As
a Jewish person himself, he's calling exactly out
what I'm talking about when it comes to
the issue of Zionism that is not the
same thing as Judaism.
Same thing, though, by the way. It's interesting
how people like that will try to make
it out there being racist and then somehow
try to
spin themselves into a pretzel to make the
argument somehow fit for somebody like that. But
at the end of the day, the the
the argument here, he says to claim that
Israel compelled Trump to attack Iran requires a
lobotomy.
Regular social media consumption or large piles of
cash sent via thousands of shell accounts on
Stripe, PayPal, Substack, etcetera.
Now I get the feel I get where
that sentiment comes from
Because it's obvious from a just fact based
perspective that Trump was all about this. Right?
And he he's not right. He's not wrong
to point that out. It's clear that he
was in line with this. Right? And so
I feel like it is like I said
early, that it was a way to get
to try to give him the pass. And
I still think that applies, but more and
more evidence has come around that makes me
think that there is obviously a level of
coercion manipulation
even if Trump was in line with this
larger agenda. Right? For example, I'm all he
was all about the trick and the lie
to make this all happen,
and then got didn't realize or maybe was
lied about whether they would go after oil
facilities.
Right? Think about that. And so now Trump's
going, ma'am. Okay. Now this is hurting me
at home.
Even though we could lie we could lie
them into supporting a war, but their gas
prices are being affected. Right? So I can
see a world in which that suddenly became
an issue even though they agree with the
war. All hypothetical. I'm just trying to make
a hypothetical example where you can see a
sudden division, and then you can recognize that
they might be Israel that played them or
tricked them or I think it goes back
to the beginning of it. But I do
believe that there was a level of manipulation
here even though they were in line with
the larger agenda.
But that's I what I said right here,
it's an it's an important point to flesh
out. I feel it's some of the both.
It's clear that Trump was all about based
on what I said, saying that, you know,
but feel that it's clear that Israel was
playing him, but more accurately, the US government
in many ways.
So, hopefully, he reaches out. I'd like to
get him on for the review anyway because
I think his work is great.
But so keeping this in mind, the larger
point, right, about whether or not
there's both
in play,
whether Trump is in many ways being, you
know, played with certain points, and then whether
he isn't fully involved or in line with
his agenda. Now this is another article from
New York Times from the twenty first.
I think this is more revealing
for the opposite reason of last time. And
we this is why you just in any
sense, whether it's me or any platform, you
can't trust a source. You have to question
it. Right? You can you can get, you
know, get to a point where you feel
that sources are more consistent, but you gotta
always question it no matter who it is,
no matter where it comes from, question it
and consider all possibilities.
And that's the same point, because that lost
article he did, I think was great.
Not because the New York Times is great,
but because the information that was being used
for for whatever reason, was something that was
coming out that platform. And there's all sorts
of reasons even sometimes that people just wanna
put out the right thing and it somehow
happens.
End of the day, never trust these platforms
because there's a lot of manipulation that takes
place, and this is interesting to me. Trump
is hiding the truth about the Iran war.
Right?
And I believe that is 100%
accurate. But now look at the way that
they spin this.
It says, from his first announcement of the
attack on Iran,
on February 28, president Trump has issued a
stream of falsehoods about the war. I agree.
He has said Iran wants to engage in
negotiations,
though its government shows no sign of it.
I mean, that's how they start this. You
mean aside from constantly being in the I
mean, this you have to laugh at this
because whoever this is, the editorial board of
the entire New York Times, apparently. How embarrassing.
That you're gonna tell me that you don't
know. Like, you could argue that they weren't
necessarily
truly wanting to,
but that's speaking to intent.
If you do that, you're not a journalist,
bud. You're a propagandist, which is kind of
the point. But the reality is that they
were constantly meeting for negotiations. For crying out
loud, they literally met and had a deal
that Trump violated. And then since then, even
though he's been the one that's constantly been
the one the disruptor,
they met with him numerous times, then they
bombed them. Then they met with them again
multiple times, and they bombed again. And and
now they're going, we don't want them. We
don't and and this is how they frame
that? So you just have to realize what
a deliberately dishonest or just shockingly
unaware kind of statement that is.
So what I'm trying to show you, and
we'll keep going on this, is that what
we're they're they're giving you a point that's
accurate. Trump is lying about what's going on.
In many ways, you can prove that. Not
in every single point, but many ways.
And then they turn this around and but
and and we you could also argue I'm
wrong, that maybe Iran is the biggest evil,
you know, terrorist in the world, and that
also Trump's lying. That's also possible. What I
think I can show you here is that
that's not the larger case about the way
they're lying about this is pretty easy to
prove, but also Trump is misleading you about
certain things. And this article, I argue, is
meant to create a circumstance where you ignore
that Trump is lying for what interest?
For the war to continue. Or at the
very least, to get what they want from
it. And I think that is that Israel
wants this to be complete destruction of Iran,
even if that means battering the US government
till it's gone or the country until it's
just decimated
to get that. But think as we go
forward, I think you'll see this more.
So, again,
he said Iran wants to negotiate, but there's
no sign of it, which is so obviously
not true. He has claimed that The United
States destroyed a 100% of their military capability,
which that's not what they well, I guess
you could argue recently he's been saying that,
so fair enough. But I think what they
meant was the ongoing
like, the earlier parts of their, nuclear capacity,
which wasn't true also, but they did destroy
the new enrichment facility, which is why the
lies about nukes even being continuing, even though
it wasn't happening in the first place, are
also lies according to all the facts, including
their own intelligence, blah, blah, blah. But in
this case, he has been arguing he's destroyed
every single part of them. That's provably not
true. In fact, we'll get into the reality
of how they seem to be proving them,
you know, the increase in their attacks.
And it says when Tehran continues to inflict
damage throughout the region, which is true right
up until today, or rather until the last
bombing exchange, which might still be happening amongst
the Israel bombings, but there's a interesting void
right now in the reporting, so it's hard
to know in regard to what Trump is
doing.
But it says he has said the war
is almost complete even as he calls in
reinforcements from around the globe.
Lying is standard behavior for mister Trump, of
course. And, yep, I agree. Just like Biden
or Obama or Bush. Yep. I agree.
Iran's murderous government does indeed present a threat.
Okay?
Right? So this is a kind of argument,
like, to what?
In what way? If they pose a threat,
then so too does every government everywhere.
The idea that you wanna pretend they pose
a unique threat to anybody beyond the simple
reality that they could use military force against
anybody they want, like any other government could,
is irrational. And it's based on lies built
by a government that's done that their entire
my entire life.
Criminal activities.
Terrorism, bombing, destruction, occupation,
colonialism,
authoritarianism.
That and and yet to say that they're
clearly a threat is just building into this
idea.
The threat if if the threat, click on
the link, nuclear bombs and terrorism, it's just
not true.
Ron's murderous government does indeed present a threat,
they write, to its own people,
to its region and global stability. Are you
kidding me? Like, this is the New York
Times, their entire editorial board. We need to
understand how wrong this statement is. You could
argue that they're a government that could do
all the same things that our government can
do, and we should obviously be aware of
that and obviously call it out when they
break the law. But this idea that they're
this massive, nebulous threat to the world that
we must stop is just painfully wrong, guys.
And it's and let's just put it this
way too.
Left to their own devices with no with
you know, in a vacuum,
they probably would end up that way because
I believe most governments end up that way
over time because what we're seeing in this
country happens,
where bad people gravitate to power, and it
slowly changes because people become apathetic.
Today,
the obvious reality of a threat to its
own people, a region of global stability, are
the very people claiming they're fighting that.
Mister Trump could make a fast a fact
based argument for confronting the regime now,
especially to prevent it from menacing its neighbors
and, above all, from developing a nuclear weapon.
We are skeptical, but we acknowledge there's a
case to be made. That's what they just
wrote. You're starting off by claiming he's lying
about everything, but then you still go, yeah,
but Iran war and bad stuff and go
after Iran. We all agree Iran bad. We
all agree nukes are bad. We all agree
on that. Do that. But Trump's lying.
That's the gist of their article.
So go for the war. Do what Israel
wants. They're lie about the nukes. Lie about
terrorism, but Trump lies about things within that.
I just can't even believe this is where
we are. This is the same as all
of our government, all supporting Iran war, and
yet we pretend there's some kind of division
taking place.
Mister Trump is not making it.
Instead,
he has,
he has lied about the reasons for the
war and about his progress.
And it appears to him to disguise his
poor planning
and his war is questionable basis.
The war that you just logically argued should
have happened, but yet he shouldn't have done
it the way you just I mean, it's
it's so counterintuitive.
It's all about trying to create the idea
that they just hate Trump no matter what,
which is essentially what they're doing. And then
you get the situation where people who see
that argue that if you blindly just hate
Trump, then everything you're saying must be false.
And, therefore, a work rather, weirdly enough, at
the same time, Iran war is still good,
but lying about Trump means he's doing it
for the right reasons. Like, you're basically creating
a situation where everybody supports the ongoing war.
And that's not whatever
like, I don't think I've ever seen a
more unpopular war in this country.
This is what this is what this is
their their article. Trump is hiding the truth
about the Iran war, which essentially argues that
the war should continue.
We are taken, guys. I mean, it's just
overwhelming. Now to the point about the so
called negotiation.
Now, back to this. Remember, this is what
for this is what got a lot most
of the reach. The images were, in fact,
old. But down here where he says, you
know, that they were old and, you know,
hours later after he got called up for
it, claimed he used them just as a
fill in.
Interestingly, he followed up later
under this
even after this guy who he claims was
the one going to meet him speaks up
and says,
no negotiations have been held and that Israel
is trapping you. That's what he just said,
but that could be his cover. Right?
The point is, he follows up later and
says, the Islamic regime cannot hide the fact
that it's engaged in indirect negotiations despite publicly
denying them. Now we're gonna conceal it around.
So the bottom line doesn't mean false. Doesn't
mean wrong. Doesn't mean he's incorrect. But that
clearly he's coming from a place where Iran
bad guy and we have to call Iran.
And that flavors people's opinions.
It can, anyway.
So all that being said, this the report
was widely shared, millions of views on this,
claiming that this guy,
his name was,
Galiba Galiboff, I guess. In he's in the
Iranian government. That was his thing right there.
He's the speaker of his of the Islamic
Republic Of Iran in the parliament
and claiming that he was going to meet
with Trump or somebody, a representative of them,
and that Israel allowed the plane to leave.
Now people dispute a lot of this. Very
well may be the case, but let's go
through this because what I believe is that
there's more evidence that's been added to this
that really does start to make this even
more suspect.
One way or the other, it seems like
where the stands will go through that
either that this is something
where Trump is being manipulated and believes it's
happening. You'll see what I mean in this
little moment open where he sit with his
recent statements where it makes it clear that
he's been convinced this person is real if
what he's saying is that is is genuine
or he could be lying. Right? And I
wonder whether that's somebody else in there playing
that role. But, again, one of the possibilities
is he's genuinely speaking with somebody within Iran.
But there's so much evidence that challenges that
being possible for a lot of reasons, some
of which we'll go over right now.
Now here are just a couple of articles
from mainstream.
Van Hollen, yes, a Democrat.
It shouldn't matter one way or the other.
Question what every politician says. Question them because
they all lie to you. But also consider
it. Trump is lying about talks with Iranians.
Here's what he says.
He said Monday that president Trump is lying
about holding talks with Iranian officials. Now, this
is specifically about this alleged five day pause
and the negotiate and we'll get into his
current statements of today. He says, quote, we
know he's lying when he says that the
Iranians are talking with us and they're lying,
and they're about to give Trump everything he
wants. Yes. That's a lie. He said that
very flatly. Also, Monday, the president said that
US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner spoke
with their Iranian counterparts. You know, the ones
that just publicly told all of us that
they're not doing that.
And also that the diplomats involved has all
told us that Steve and Jared are basically
representing Israel. That's public statements within the team
of diplomats.
So we should question whether this is actually
happening when these people I mean, Trump's the
one that basically threw them under the bus
and said, that's what Jared told me.
So we can clearly see a disconnect where
he seems to be taking at face value
what people who are not honest are telling
him. It says, but the president declined to
say to whom they spoke with, saying you
did not wanna get him killed, as I
joked about yesterday. I mean, think about how
stupid this is.
I mean, okay.
This is either one of those one of
the most painfully stupid moves I've ever seen,
or he's trying to sell you the on
the idea he's talking to it. Because realize,
he stands up and goes you know, they
go, who are you talking to? Is is
there some defector in Iran? He goes, well,
I'm not gonna tell you. I don't wanna
get him killed.
So what you just did, essentially, is admit
that you are speaking with somebody in Iran's
government or somebody within the situation, which then
you Iran knows they can see these things.
They saw what you said. So you are
actually claiming you just admitted publicly to a
person you're negotiating with about defecting from Iran
before you finish negotiations?
Again, I actually can see a world in
which Trump would be that stupid just to
be like, I'm the one in control. Look,
you know, pounding his chest, going, look at
how great I am. I'm the one that
got the deal going, knowing that that or,
I guess, not being aware that that might
get him killed.
Just the statement of the fact that you
might think about that, which, honestly, if I
have to pick a side, I'm leaning more
towards that that for that reason, doesn't line
up, that he says that to make you
think that's happening or because somebody else is
telling him he's speaking with somebody and he's
actually not.
It's all hypothetical.
It's all we can do when we get
no information from the government.
Now it goes on to say, also, Monday,
the president said, where was I?
We're dealing with a man who I believe
is the most respected
and the leader, Trump said.
Now I had an interesting thought about this.
What if
now aside from what I just said, like,
these are other different because look. It for
this point, especially, aside from what I just
said, what if he's just literally talking to
the Shah?
What if he's literally talking to,
Rajavi
from the MEK?
Both of which we have been told by
Trump and others that those are the likely
leaders. He's kinda made fun of the prince,
but that doesn't change things in the past.
He made fun of Delphi too. The point
is that if he was talking to one
of these people, maybe let's just say, first
of all, he knows he's talking to the
Shah
because Iran doesn't wanna talk to him. So
he goes to the Shah who they claim
is the leader and says, we'll make a
deal with you, and then presents that to
the world as if he's making a deal
with the Iranian government because he tells you
that's the Iranian government. You see my point?
That seems like one of the likely possibilities
or Ravi in the same way. And then
once they just keep bombing and killing or
whatever they end up doing, they just try
to force that in. Now or he's talking
to one of them and isn't aware he's
talking to one of them, and that's where
you come into the other elements being played.
All these are different possible thoughts. I think
it is worth considering things like this.
Now Now as he said, we're dealing with
a man who I believe is the most
respected.
And he goes on as Axios reported Monday,
citing an Israeli official
that Witkoff and Kushner were in touch with
Mohammed Bagheer
Galibif
or Galiboff,
the speaker of the Iranian parliament. Okay. So
here's where this gets even more interesting. That's
at that's that's
the hill
telling you that an Israeli official
yesterday
publicly stated that they were speaking with this
guy who came out and said that that
wasn't happening
on Monday.
No negotiations have been held with The US,
and fake news is used to manipulate the
financial and oil markets and escape the quagmire
in which The US and Israel are trapped.
So, again, either he's lying because he wants
to hide the fact and he doesn't wanna
get killed, or if that's the way you
think it'll happen, that's possible.
But I think it's interesting that Israel, as
usual, seems to be the middle person in
the conversation, and they're telling you it's a
guy who just said it didn't do it.
Interesting. Which only to me adds more doubt
to whether they're ever even talking to this
guy or talking to anybody or, you know,
one of the variations of what I just
talked about. Says,
however, as they write, he, on Monday, denied
negotiations.
Oil prices fell. Stocks surged on Monday, of
course, because Trump said these things.
Announced the five day pause. Now what's interesting,
well, he goes, but von Hulen said that
oil and gas prices will increase. They will.
These are all inorganic moves, guys. They're manipulating
things by dumping oil that shouldn't be and
when they refill the I mean, this will
come to a point where there will be
a increase unless they stop what they're doing.
All they're doing is giving you a they
did this. It jumped it went down, and
it's already back up a bunch. I mean,
who knows? They went down again, but that's
our last check. But it is continually staying
at a higher level than it was before.
And the only reason it's not skyrocketing is
because they're manipulating the prices so you feel
better.
In but doing it in ways that almost
seem to guarantee that there's going to be
a problem.
Like everything else they're doing, they're just short
sighted and aiming for like, right now, it
seems so obvious that Trump is so aggressively
results oriented, and it doesn't even matter about
the consequences. Just show me that I'm give
me what I wanna see. That's that's all
he does, in my opinion, anyway.
But so what's interesting though,
the oil prices and stocks, fell and surged
on Monday after the five day pause is
the bombing.
Well, I'll I'll point it out in a
second, I think, right here. But a lot
of the reporting,
we're we're claiming this was sort of a
five day pause in hostilities.
Now as he actually said, and it will
make clear in some of these articles, that
it was more about a pause on specifically
the the threats on the which, by the
way, would be illegal attacks
in addition to an ongoing illegal war
on in energy facilities.
But when you look at the way it
went down, it was largely reported in a
lot of ways in the first day as
sort of like a pause of hostilities.
So what's important to see is that they
very much did continue. And but two things.
They continue bombing in general, both Israel and
The United States, which I thought was relevant.
But let's just say you wanna make it
out to be only oil and energy things.
Israel kept bombing those things. It's still bombing
them right now.
That's very relevant.
Now next, we're gonna get into the independent.
Are Trump's peace talks with Iran fake news?
This was today.
Donald Trump has been accused of creating fake
news in an attempt to soothe financial markets
after he hit a pause on striking Iran's
energy infrastructure and announced that The US
was having productive discussions with Tehran on ending
the war.
Now what I think is interesting about this
article, and maybe I will play a video
that I wasn't going to, but, I I
I, you know, you can look at this
one or two ways.
Either you Iran is trying to
frustrate Trump with making him frustrated angry, like,
making fun of him in ways to drive
some kind of a response.
You know? Or, you know, it's that's how
you can look at a lot of ways
to think. But what I'm interested in is
whether or not this is suggestive of of,
in this case,
either Trump
failing or the government, the US government losing
in this regard and essentially trying to make
it look like they're the ones that created
a stop to it
so they don't look like they lost or
the opposite. In the sense that this is
Iran trying to front very hard about how
much they're winning to hide that. Now I
I think the evidence backs up the first
part, but you can decide. Now I'll show
you what I mean by that, and I'll
play that clip I was talking about. All
it's saying is
that he basically lied about all this in
order
to create that illusion that it wasn't him
kind of losing in his objectives. He told
reporters Iran wanted to make a deal, you
know, despite everywhere else them saying wasn't true.
And up until that point, Trump saying he
wouldn't make a deal without total surrender and
then says this.
And he claimed US envoy Steve Witkoff and
his son Jared Kushner of son-in-law had held
talks with an Iranian leader on Sunday.
But that's not actually what you know, there's
inconsistent reporting across the platforms. That's also relevant.
UK prime minister, sir,
Keir Starmer indicated that he was aware of
talks without giving further details.
Speaker from, speaking from Memphis, Tennessee on Monday,
the president said, quote, we were planning tomorrow
on shooting down some of their power plants.
Shooting down
some of their power plants.
It's worth making fun of if you ask
my opinion. We're gonna hold that up. Hopefully,
we won't have to do that. Well, yeah,
good. Because those would be crimes.
No way around it, guys. Those are not
military targets. And even Iran was only claiming
to do it back if they did it
first.
Either way, even if they did it in
response, I would still argue it's a crime
for Iran or anybody. And I'd like to
believe that if you're trying to do it
in a way that shows you're not the
same as them, that you wouldn't fall to
that level. But either way, it would the
war started with their legal actions. So whatever
happens is because of what they're doing. But
at the end of the day, they're the
ones openly threatening in the midst of a
point where right now, that would be a
crime under any law.
And he's just openly using that threat.
But then goes, but we're not gonna do
it because they made a deal, which doesn't
seem to be the truth. Quote, we are
now having really good discussions, he says. They
started last night.
But then again, he just said in another
video that he did it three days ago,
even before. Like, it's
he does this. When he's off the cuff,
he's inconsistent across the board.
He says, we are now having really good
conversations. They started last night, a little bit
before the night before that. I think they're
really good. They want peace. They agreed. They
will not have a nuclear weapon, which again,
guys, they already did that. First of all,
they never did. They first, second of all,
they agreed with the JCPOA. Third of all,
they already agreed before you started this war
that they wouldn't have the bombs and they
would give up their risk material.
As we're gonna show you yet again in
a second, they that was all publicly discussed
because the foreign minister of Oman came out
and said it. And then you could see
the information, and then they bombed before that
could actually take place.
So when they make the when he's claiming
today, which he is aggressively now that they
told us, they promised they won't have the
weapon. That's not true because they wouldn't do
that seeing as how the evidence is not
there and that they already agreed to it.
Unless the point is they said, if there
even is a conversation taking place, that they
said, yes. Again, yes. We already told you
that. And then Trump simply frames that as
they fought and they conceded,
which is very like him. And you know
it if you're being honest. In respond I
mean, it's the same as saying they all
surrendered when all they did was
tell their
Middle East counterparts to say, don't keep bombing
or we'll bomb you again, and he called
that surrender. I mean, how else can you
read this? It's desperate.
In response, Iranian state television showed a TV
banner which read, quote,
US president backs down following Iran's firm warning.
Now to me, that's them playing back at
his game because that's what he does every
time. But in this case, if they're accurate
or if what I'm saying turns out to
be the case, which is that there was
no negotiation, then they're right,
which probably drove him crazy.
Right? But even if there is an ongoing
conversation, that would still probably frustrate him because
he that's all he cares about as far
as I could tell is just the perception.
Despite Monday's claim by mister Trump that the
war in Iran could soon come to a
close, Israel launched new attacks on Tehran,
saying it was targeting infrastructure. Like, literally, what
Trump just said he would pause,
they they they publicly said they were targeting.
That's not by accident, and they're doing it
today too.
Explosions were heard in multiple locations.
So, yes, those are war crimes like every
other thing they seem to do, but they're
targeting illegal, nonmilitary things and saying so
because Trump said he was pausing. If you
have him paying attention, you don't know what
I mean by that, guys. It's what they
do every time.
And it's it's demonstrating to anybody paying attention
that they're in control and that Trump doesn't
call it out. Don't you think he right
now would be like, hey.
I'm in control. What are you doing? You're
ruining my my agreement. No. He doesn't even
speak up.
Professor Maziar,
Gayabi, the director of the Center for Persian
and Iranian Studies at the University of ex
Exeter,
said, quote, the offer of five days to
reach a deal by US president Donald Trump
has provided relief to financial markets. However, while
the US president announced diplomatic communication with the
his Iranian counterpart, if that's real, the Israeli
Air Force carried out extensive bombing of Iranian
infrastructure.
Yep. The objectives of The United States and
Israel appear to differ even though they call
it a joint war and even though it's
clear one is driving the bus, with Tel
Aviv preparing for a prolonged conflict. Right? They've
been saying that.
They've made it clear. They've got bombings planned
out for the next month. And it says
so far has had only limited material impact
compared to the extent experienced by the GCC
countries and US bases.
Quote, the key question is whether the US
administration will be able
to disentangle itself from Israeli strategy
or whether it will be drawn into a
prolonged war with global repercussions as well as
domestic unpopularity
due to Israel's military offensive. Based on pre
precedence, it is unlikely Israel will restrain from
the current strategy unless there is strong US
pressure, which is currently lacking. You have to
understand this,
a decade ago, would have been called exactly
the same kind of antisemitism
that you're that,
you know, more obvious observations are being called
today.
My point is that this would have never
likely been on most of these platforms today.
They would have just ignored it entirely. But
now this has become the norm because it
is real. It's always been there. But you
have created this awareness.
You, by caring about the truth, have driven
this fact into people's minds.
The same fact that you can easily prove
that plenty of people are telling you you're
obsessed with talking about and completely racist.
Now just like I said, I the same
kind of thing from yesterday. Just simply going
through this and showing you
the same kind of idea that ultimately, despite
what Trump said I mean, I I you
can read. I'll include it. That they did
continue to bomb, that both The US and
joint US Israeli strikes have continued. So I
want you to hear that not only Israel.
Right? Not Israel was targeting infrastructure regardless, but
that the US government involved with their joint
strikes
were also doing so even though Trump just
said they paused that. You have to see
what that is.
That's US military personnel carrying an attack that
Trump, the ex the the commander in chief,
told you yesterday weren't going to be happening,
but are continuing because, well, they're apparently working
alongside Israel.
Do I even explain that?
Now here's what Trump said.
I'm blown away by this, to be honest,
because
I my mind is that this speaks to
something else, just my opinion.
Here's what he said.
This app,
They shot down three planes with our missiles.
They have to be our planes, but the
pilots made it. Can you imagine the pilots
making it? The pilots are always coming.
And they said there was a patriots. We're
not gonna escape patriots, and they got out
of there pretty quick, Pete. Right? Pretty amazing
that
they got out. The three pilots lived to
find in fact, they're flying today. It was
the Kuwaiti that actually fired the person? Yeah.
The Kuwaitis
made a mistake. They thought they thought they
were firing at
the enemy. Oh, you know, the enemy with
the big US symbol inside of the jet.
Right? As as the expression goes, friendly fire.
Oh, yeah. But,
the pilots are great. They're flying today. Three
of them apparently.
Because one and then two and then three.
Oh, now we see. Now we can tell
that they're obviously US planes. Or maybe not.
Maybe there's more of the story. It was
foggy. I don't know.
Pretty amazing when when you think of it.
Yeah.
President Trump,
on a human level, how hopeful are you
that, this peace deal will work out? I
guess We'll get into this in a second,
the next response. But, you know, just case
you didn't hear the beginning.
Little mishap.
They shot down three planes with our missiles.
They happen to be our planes, but the
pilots made it. Can you imagine the pilots
making it? The pilots are always coming. Right.
So let's just casually drift into the next
part of the conversation. Yeah. That that's real,
guys. I actually had to check to make
sure this wasn't AI.
Little mishap. They
they shut down three planes with our missiles.
Kuwaitis. He claims Kuwaitis shut down three US
planes by accident, which, of course, certainly possible
for anybody.
But shouldn't we be asking because of where
we are with all this that there might
be something else happening?
I mean, there's so many ways you can
consider this, and you should ask all these
different questions because it's clear that they're always,
like, with the flow of information about general
things from satellite imagery, they just don't want
you to see what's going on. They're gaslighting
you at everything. And, frankly, that's really, that's
US wars my entire life. So it's not
unique to him. But the point
is that right now with where we are,
we should ask whether this was something else.
Or, you know, here's a simple point. Maybe
that was Iran. Maybe Iran literally just shot
down US planes. And even though they could
use that to marshal up support, they don't
wanna seem weak. They don't wanna look like
they're losing. And they've been telling you that
Iran's inept. They fired everything. They don't know
how they they're done. They don't have any
munitions anymore.
Then that would make him look like a
a liar. Right? I mean, that's one of
the possibilities, which would be very likely almost.
But then you could ask whether it was
somebody else. Like, I believe right now, we
can clearly see that Israel has been taking
shots at things. They're trying to cause more
chaos, whether it's oil facilities, whether
it's allies they want to think were attacked
by Iran. I mean, the,
the recent base. What was it called?
It was a a a hyphen name. What
was the name of the base? The point
James,
Lee did a a good clip about that,
which the evidence seems pretty clear that it
it does not appear to have been Iran.
This seems to have been a false flag
attempt. Now I'm wondering whether this is where
I'm interested in this more than more than
usual, is that if Trump is being played
and he's starting to recognize that, which I
think is a real thing we should consider.
That doesn't mean he didn't again, he was
clearly in in line, wanted this to happen,
but then also doesn't wanna be played. And
so if there's that level of understanding Zionism
or whatever else, like char the Charlie Kirk
point, as I call it, then maybe
he's starting to see that, like Tucker Carlson,
if that's real. But question whether it's all
a lie. Right? My point is if he
is seeing that,
maybe he started to go, okay. I see
the game you're playing. And so instead of
going, Iran, they go, oh, that was this
or ignore it. Move on. Knowing that that
was Israel trying to force their hand. In
fact, that happened during Biden's administration where it
was almost borderline admitted to that that was
just Israel, that they were just that that's
what they want to accomplish. It was clear
they were trying to drive the action of
The US Government. So in this case,
was this something else happening here? Whether Kuwait's
or something else using US missiles, bombing three
US planes,
and then just claiming it was a whoopsie.
I just don't buy that, quite frankly. That
feels hard to wrap my mind around. Three
US jets
and very expensive Patriot missiles, and just to
move on, it was an accident. I don't
know. Maybe.
Yeah. I mean, okay. Good example. Someone in
the chat says Iran hacked missiles. That's possible
too. Right? We we should and the the
idea of the way he presents this just
doesn't feel plausible to me.
But you can consider for yourself.
The idea that they're shooting down, if that
is the case, their own planes,
doesn't speak well to where they're going right
now.
Now here's what Eric Dougherty shared, and we'll
get into the ongoing conversations of today about
the negotiation.
It's just I always have to laugh at
these people. It's just hard. I mean, I
think I even posted something down here. Oh,
no. It wasn't on this one. The the
I'll go ahead and post this so you
guys can see it. We made fun of
this this morning on a wake up. Somebody
this I forget who it was. I think
it was somebody in our Telegram chat
made this, this this image
based on what I jokingly called them
off the cuff in the recent show,
which is the red light holy crap, guys,
which is exactly I actually the for a
little one of the rare times, he doesn't
say holy crap, but he has today already.
But it's just kinda funny to me. But
so that that's what these these guys are.
Just these kind of hyperbolic
shock at the thing he said, whatever. You
know? In this case, president Trump has reportedly
splintered the Iranian regime, and they're desperate to
make a deal, panicked behind the scenes. Okay.
You know, come on. So what we get
is Trump says these things, and this is
the four the red light breaking news. Breaking
news?
Guys, this is 7PM, bud. This was going
on all day. But, you know, he I
guess he woke up and had to use
the red light once. Breaking.
The bottom line is that this is just
the hyperbolic framing of whatever the team says,
which might be true.
But still for one second pretend these are
journalists.
Then he goes on to just kinda quote
what this very, very childish person had to
say. Now this is Jesse Watters, who, again,
you can't call this journalism. This is a
repetition of the talking points, which is what
CNN, Fox News, corporate media, mainstream alternative, it's
what they do in large ways. But listen
to this. I will pause it. There's some
points I wanna laugh about here. But this
is what you're framing as the news, the
update, the report? I mean, how often do
we need to see Fox or CNN shamelessly
lie for their team before we stand back
and go they you know, obviously, the point
is that honest people who are not blind
to bipartisanship
remember that.
People who are not just choose to ignore
their team's version of those things.
With the Iranians.
They think the Iranians are telling the truth,
and Trump's just making it all up. Okay.
So cutting into a point where
they're siding with the Iranians, which is not
the same as saying, I believe Trump is
lying. So, essentially, it's always, you're with them
or you're with us. That's the kind of
dumb, you know, ignorance is the not dumb.
Kind of ignorance you get from this kind
of reporting, which is
you're with us or you're with the enemy,
which there's plenty of more choices than that,
which is that maybe you don't agree with
Iran and what they're doing. Maybe you want
them to be overthrown, but you can also
acknowledge that Trump is lying. Right? Or consider
that. Not in Jesse's world. You either support
Iran or you support Trump. And so in
this point, it's about the fact that there's
a lot of suggestion evidence
to show that there's doubt here.
And people are going, maybe he's not speaking
with somebody. And so what he's saying is
they're choosing to so side with them. Well,
we can't prove what Trump is saying. So
all you're really saying is choose to blindly
trust Trump instead of blindly trusting Iran.
Okay. Well, you're blindly trusting regardless. So but
that's what they want you to end up
doing is sort of going, well, they're so
bad that you gotta kinda side with this
less bad. Oh, okay. So the lesser of
evil's in your one point decision making process
and everything else in your entire life. Just
always go with the lesser of bad because
that's American culture apparently today. Think how stupid
that is.
They think the Iranians are telling the truth,
and Trump's just making it all up. Which
is certainly possible and has happened plenty of
times. But, you know, don't ever consider that
possibility because bad guy Iran. These are the
same Iranians who last week claimed they sunk
one of our carriers. The same Iranians. You
mean, you know, so in a report that
came out about them firing on, not sinking,
a ship
because that's what happened.
They lied about their new program and Oh,
yeah. The missile program or the nuclear program.
All the things that are not verified have
been lied about by the US government. But
Jesse Waters blindly states what the state department
says because, you know, adversarial independent media. Right,
guys? But here's the main thing.
Or the at least the first thing. So
this this is what's important to understand. Now,
yes, what you'll find is a lot of
manipulative media who may very well be Iranian
media
or people who are pretending to be like
we get from a lot of the, you
know, MES, MES, MESEME, MESMRI,
or Israel, Novasad, or CIA type back or,
you know, Voice of America.
It's just they're sort of overwhelmed with fake
Iranian experts. The point
is this is the Fosseen News Agency that
reported on the day this happened,
Iran hits US aircraft carrier.
K. So what they reported was the aircraft
carrier Abraham Lincoln, which could be a lie,
which has approached 340
kilometers from Iran's maritime borders in the Sea
Of Oman in a bid to manage the
Strait Of Hormuz was hit by drones of
the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard.
Now why is that even hard? Like, that
is the most basic, like, yes. That's possible.
If anyone's claiming that's just not possible because
we're so great, it's just a child.
Yes. Iran has the capability to very much
get past US defenses. They've demonstrated that a
thousand times or Israel. So this weird response
that they just didn't hit this or sink
it because somebody online claimed they sunk it
on top of that because people lie in
online media, it's not what they said.
It says the spokesman added the ship rapidly
fled with its destroyers
and is now a thousand miles away.
Oh. Oh, okay. So Jesse was wrong
about what they said.
I'm shocked. I'm shocked. Civilians they slaughtered.
Into last week claimed they sunk one of
our carriers. Did they? They lied about their
new program and Okay. So just, you know,
just the casual lying. And it's not about
even casual lying. I bet you this guy
doesn't even care. I bet you he has
a talking list or a talking point list
of what Republicans are supposed to be saying.
They didn't lie about I mean, I can
go down the list, but I'm not gonna
waste your time. I just think it's important
to recognize that these kind of people,
this is not journalism. This is repetition of
propaganda. And, frankly, because it's so lazy, it's
not even good propaganda.
How many civilians they slaughtered?
Maybe Iran's trying to look tough to keep
their population in line or maybe Let's just
blindly assume about what makes them look bad.
Maybe they killed millions of people like the
US government in Israel have, or maybe they
shot people you were invading the country with,
or maybe they're somewhere in the middle and
killed people like every government does. But let's
just keep guessing, Jesse, because that's what good
journalists do. Right? Maybe since they're all hiding
with no cell phones. Are they? Or is
that what the state department says who's been
long wrong about everything my entire life or
deliberately misled us our entire lives? But he'll
trust him because he knows.
They don't know who's talking to who. Oh,
do they? Whom? You mean? But, you know,
who who we talking about? Who who doesn't
know who they're talking
to? The what the CIA tells us or
what Trump is claiming? You know, after they
do the things every day that they keep
telling us they're not capable of doing.
It's just exhausting having to ever pretend like
these people are worthy of your respect and
attention.
The gay Ayatollah's MIA, the CIA. I mean,
this idea who maybe he's gay. Who knows?
I mean, this this crazy idea. Like, are
we actually of the mind that we can't
put together the possibility that they might just
make up a story like that in order
to try to
insult them, to try to make them upset,
to try to make certain people in our
conversation hate them for wrong
really? Or maybe he's gay. Who cares?
The fact that they make that a point
shows you how small they are.
A thinks he's wounded, and he might not
even know he's in charge. We haven't seen
proof of life.
Okay.
So you murder them and continue to tell
us that you're murdering everybody else behind them.
Level two and level three, Trump says, we
murdered them too. And then go, but he
won't even show his face. Maybe he's done
maybe because you guys are killing everybody without
any kind of legal justification.
I mean, it's painful.
And you could all the like, back to
the point about the gay thing, well, that's
because they lie about what Iran does to
gay people every single day. Now there's examples
you could point out just like you could
see in Israel, by the way, but it's
not what they claim. Like most things they
say about Iran, that's probably why they do
that, to make it seem like hypocrisy, I
guess. But why would we believe what they
have to say about their adversaries?
It's just stupid.
And while he's on an IV drip, the
Republican guards consolidating power.
But some ran What does that even mean?
Mean as if it's like now it's like
a rogue government, like, military control?
Maybe. But, like, why are we listening to
what this guy has to say about things
he's been wrong about his entire life?
I don't know why this makes sense to
anybody. Woods and haven't been seen since.
Literally.
The head of Iran's militia
escaped into a forest and pitched a tent.
So so our state department tells us. So
the CIA claims. Right? The argument that he
was killed seems to be reality.
But this whole construct about I mean, maybe.
I just don't know why we give credence
to these claims.
I mean, what difference does it make? What
what if he was going in the forest
to conduct an operation and you killed him?
Would that make it less relevant? Or are
you just trying desperately to make it seem
like they're so scared and they're fleeing into
the woods and making tents and fires, and
I guess that's just extra details for no
reason? Sure.
Maybe you should question it. Maybe you should
ask when a liar starts giving too many
details that maybe there's a reason for that.
At the end of the day,
they lie about everything. And what we need
to recognize is that what they keep saying
about Iran and their abilities
at a very easy, provable level are not
true. Now that doesn't mean that Iran's winning
the war. Maybe they are failing. Maybe they
are desperately fleeing and about to lose. But
they're also lying about a lot of what's
going on. That's easy to prove. We need
to see that. And, usually, when you're lying,
it speaks to something else. But that's why,
as TLAB always will, we're remaining objective until
we can prove something. Ordinary Iranian spotted them
making a fire, So we're told. Mossad So
we're told. And the IDF And, yeah, guess
who that came from? That came from
Mossad. Took him out with a missile strike.
Reports say Iran's security forces are on the
run.
Oh, reports. Can you guess where that came
from? The Iranian regime is in chaos.
This is Hitler's bunker. Hitler's dead. Oh, right.
Goring is dead. The
most of what you're seeing are lone wolf
activities.
Trump can't even say who he is. You
mean the lone wolf activities that you guys
tried to pretend you were hiding from us
and then tried to scare everybody with that
was I mean,
why?
Negotiating
with. It's too risky.
I don't want him to be killed.
Yeah. Okay. And now we're gonna insult your
intelligence by pretending like we think Iran doesn't
see this. And it's and this didn't somehow
explode your secret squirrel discussion.
I I just don't know why that I
mean, again, that has got to be either
the stupidest thing I've ever seen or it
shows you they're making this up. I don't
know why they do that, but come on.
I mean, we we can't I mean, am
I wrong?
You think Iran's not gonna see this and
then go, oh, so you're is it you?
Alright. Everybody line up. We're checking all your
pockets. Like, whatever your that just seems ridiculous
to me. Hey. I don't want them to
be killed. Mister president, you deploy me. Nobody
wants to be that nobody wants that job
right now. You know? Nobody's exactly looking forward
to be You mean other than the ones
that have taken it? Or the fact that
you can or you you know, you can
see the support they have in the country.
That is one of the easiest things to
actually see. That doesn't mean they're don't have
groups that don't support them. In fact, that's
every country. You can look at this country
and see that the vast majority of the
Americans do not support the presidency. That's actually
provable right now. So based on that logic,
apparently, Iran show over through our government. Right?
No.
Being the head of that particular country, but
perhaps we'll be able to solve that problem.
Trump's announcing he's negotiating with the Iranians
makes what's left of the regime not really
trust each other.
Oh, yeah. That's a nice nice nice assumption
to to wrap it all up. Right? I'm
gonna go ahead and speak intellectual about what
they feel when Trump says things about what
might be happening.
Great journal from Jesse. You knock it out
of the park.
So, of course, Eric goes in, woo hoo.
What he just said. We're so great. Holy
crap. We're breaking everything. So
lied about that. And like everything else, again,
this is the guy that they're telling you
he's speaking with that Israel said they're speaking
with who has said that's not happening. But,
again, if he really was being spoken with,
he's probably going, shut up. You're gonna get
me killed. Like, or whatever. That that wouldn't
I mean, let's be real about this. That
he might get killed
is not unique to a terrorist organization.
This is our government would call that treason
and literally kill somebody, especially this government.
Most governments in the world would argue that
catching a spy or a or a,
defector who is committing treason, that that's I
mean, I'm never advocating for the death of
anybody. The point is that's what they would
argue is the is the punishment.
So don't let them convince you that just
because that might happen, if it does, that
is somehow uniquely terroristic.
But
he says it's not happening like the Iran
government says.
Trump says The US is talking with an
Iranian leader. An official is calling it fake
news.
Now it says they the Trump told reporters
Iran wants to make a deal, and he
claims The US envoy, Witkoff and and Kushner,
told him that's the case.
He did not say who it was, but
said The US has not talked to the
supreme leader. So that means, literally, they're talking
or, you you know, that's obviously the the
point is that he's talking to somebody other
than the current leader. But,
you know, this this is where it comes
down to the idea of the claim where
they put forward of democracy.
So you keep telling us you've assassinated extra
leaders, but Trump is the one that said
once Khamenei was gone, first of all, that
that would be the end of it. And,
clearly, they knew that wasn't true. They lied
to us all about that or else they
lied to Trump about that. Then he said,
whoever's next, and I think someone good. And
then Israel kept attacking them. So then he
just kind of pretended that was his plan
too. I don't know why most people can't
see that, how Trump will come out and
say the first point, or Trump offering a
ceasefire on day two and then getting chastised
by Israel or by the state department anyway,
and they pull back. But the point clearly
is that you can see many examples of
who is in charge,
who's driving the bus here. Because if he
came out, which he did, and made and
suggested the person behind him might be a
little bit better,
and then
after Israel kept bombing whoever and Israel is
the one that said, we're gonna keep bombing
whoever's in power.
Clearly showing you that they have no interest
in any kind of semblance of government. They
wanna take over while Trump wants to pretend
what he wants is just to give them
the Iranian people's will.
You can prove to yourself with their actions
and statements that that's never been on the
table.
And they all know that. So you're either
out there blind like, they're they're the grouping
in this, in my opinion, are people who
know very well that all they want is
control and power, and they who don't care
about what the Iranian people go through, and
people that have been convinced because they can't
see the obvious that that's what they're trying
to do. And then everybody else
who can see what's happening.
Iran denied talks that have been held, As
you just said, here's the actual tweet from
like we showed you.
Now it says, Trump said if a deal
is reached, The US would move to take
Iran's enriched uranium.
We're still doing this, which is critical to
the disrupt
to its disputed nuclear program. Iran has adamantly
refused such demands in the past, insisting it
has the right to enrich uranium for fee
peaceful purposes, by the way, or for nuclear
weapons like every government in the world. But
the point,
as you know well,
is that this was already discussed.
First of all,
like we said,
the evidence going back as far as it
shows you, they have never been doing that.
This administration's own intelligence said the same. Tulsi
Gabbard pointed out. It's
everything that the the state department says, the
International Atomic Energy Agency says, at the end
of the year, they are within their safeguards.
I'll show you in a second again.
Then so understand that that was the case
before. Or even the j c p JCPOA,
the Iran deal before that, where Iran was
meeting those requirements until Trump unilaterally pulled out
because Iran,
Israel, convinced him to.
Either again, lying back then, telling him they're
making nukes, and they were not. And because
Trump pulled out is why that started to
happen because it was article 36 from within
the JCPOA
that allowed that to happen within the deal,
and then they pointed to that movement as
the violation. I mean, you you can't you
almost can't I I almost say the opposite.
Like I said, you can't make this up,
but you can quite literally see how they
made this up. It's like it's it's
it's only baking on the fact that people
don't know the most basic things of these
agreements.
So, all that then comes to this point
where they now allege they claim they're in
negotiations, which we knew they were already planning
to bomb them. That's already come out. They
were already arming the Kurds. They were already
arming the protesters on the ground. As they
publicly told you, both Assad and US intelligence
and people in Trump's administration were arming the
protesters. I can't believe they said that.
The Kurds. And that Israel told you they
planned the date well before they had that
last meeting for their alleged peace, so they
lied to him. And so the point is
what they agreed on the day before they
bombed.
As the per the foreign minister of Oman
says, peace within reach
as Iran agrees
to no
nuclear stockpile.
So the main parts of this yeah. It's
not that much. I'll read it really quickly.
Is that and then the fact that they
agreed to get rid of all of their
rich uranium.
Iran agreed during indirect talks with The United
States to never stockpile enriched uranium.
It says and, of course, you can call
them liars, but that's where you come back
to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which I'll
show you again in a second, that makes
very clear that there's a air watertight
undeniable system, and we will make sure they
don't and they knew that. That's what Trump
and Israel exploded with the last deal.
So it says a peace deal is within
our reach if we just allow diplomacy the
space it needs, he says. That night, they
bombed him.
Quote, if the ultimate objective is to ensure
forever that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb,
it's not because that's not really what they
care about. They're using that as a tool
to get to them, but they don't want
them to have it, obviously, because if they
did, they wouldn't do what they're doing right
now, but ultimately realize that's not the real
guiding point. It's the justification to get what
they want.
And it says, if the ultimate objective is
to stop the nuclear bomb, well, he says,
I think we have cracked that problem through
these negotiations
by agreeing on a very important breakthrough that
has never been achieved any time before. He
says, The single most important achievement No, that's
the part about giving up their
in uranium they have, in addition to not
stockpiling anymore.
He says, The single most important achievement, I
believe, is the agreement that Iran will never
ever have a nuclear material. Okay. So here's
Trump today going, they finally agreed,
like, today, saying that that's what the secret
negotiator told him. But that was the already
agreement, guys.
So is Trump being lied to by Kushner?
Yes. We know that. Is he being lied
to by Witkoff? We know that. The question
is whether he knows that they're being misled
or is part of that lie.
Or, I guess, that that's the same thing.
Whether he's part of the lie or whether
he's being misled.
Because you can argue that they're all part
of this, lying about them and have no
intention to do it, or you could argue
Trump thought they would have an agreement, and
he thought they were making nuclear bombs and
he's been lied to. Either is possible.
And, again, for the date, this is
February 28. The night ultimately, the that night
they bombed them. It says,
now we are talking about zero stockpiling. And
that is very, very important because if you
can't stockpile material that's enriched, then you have
no way to make an actual bomb. He
says, there would be also be, quote, full
and comprehensive verification by the IAEA.
Oman's top diplomat also said Iran would degrade
its current stockpile of nuclear material to the
lowest possible level so that it would convert
it to fuel if it will be reversible,
meaning they would downgrade or
export all of their enriched uranium. That's what
he said in the interview. You can watch
right here.
And it says, this is something new, completely
new. It really makes the enrichment argument less
relevant because now we're talking about zero stockpiling.
Iran, on the record, agreed to that and
agreed to have the IAEA confirm that. As
far as I can tell and as far
as everybody will tell, there's no way to
circumvent that.
As I said down here, and as it
said in contradiction to what Witkoff lied about,
he says, as the director general, I stated
2025,
in my most recent report,
based on the inspections of Iran's facilities that
their uranium stockpiles remain under safeguards in accordance
with Iran's comprehensive safeguard agreements. And he references
literally the enriched uranium at 60%, the 400
plus kilograms that Witkoff claimed they bragged about.
That
remains
within their safeguards, meaning that they that was
allowed.
So why do you lie about that? Well,
because Witkoff is clearly working for something other
than US interest or the truth.
So the point again
is that they already had that agreement on
February 28 to no nuclear weapon, which is
what they claim they want, and not only
no no more enriched uranium, but to give
up what they currently have.
And that night, they bombed them.
You really can't misunderstand this. So
Trump says if a deal was reached with
this phantom negotiator, apparently,
that they would move to take their uranium.
So what they already agreed to, the Israel
stopped. Right? Which is crucial to its disputed
nuclear program. Iran has adamantly refused these demands
in the past, but has agreed now
in regard to the giving up of the
stockpile. Because their argument is correct. They have
a legal right for the I mean, the
just from the energy perspective, that's very valuable
to them, both for their own use of
energy and also for any a number of
other purposes, not for military.
Can be. Sure. But so does every other
government. Trump threatened over the weekend to obliterate
Iran's power plants unless the country releases the
stranglehold. That was the last before we got
here.
The deadline would have expired late Monday. Right?
So in the midst of that moment, which
we knew he was blustering about, he pretends
to be in a negotiation,
I think.
The five day extension was subject to the
success of the ongoing meetings and discuss and
discussions.
Speaking later in Tennessee, Trump said his administration
has been negotiating for a long time with
Iran. You see how that works? It went
from just the night before to, you know,
it's
off the cuff.
They want peace, Trump said. They've engaged they
will not have a nuclear weapon, you know,
etcetera, etcetera, but we'll see.
What's that even mean? And he said there
because that's just like he's just going through
talking points. He said there's very good chance
the deal will be reached this week,
crediting his threat to blow up their power
plants, literally. Because I threatened to commit war
crimes and then
thought didn't follow through. Apparently, that scare I
mean, that doesn't even make sense.
In the wake of Trump's turnaround,
Iran's semi official FARS and Tasnim news agencies
portrayed the American president as
backing down, which I'm sure bothered him. Honestly,
I think it's kind of a bad tactic
for them because what if he really was
backing down? What if he really was recognizing
Israel's playing him and then you poke him
in the eye and that you turn him
into the person who's gonna burn your house
down for no reason other than you insulted
him? That's Trump. He will I I would
literally argue he would destroy his own legacy
just to make sure that you he didn't
look like he backed down. That's who he
seems to be to me.
Seems like a bad tactic, I to be
honest. Like, I feel like that's a you
know, and and like I said earlier, maybe
it may suggest that they are failing. But
it says, quote, since the start of the
war, messages have been sent to Tehran by
some mediators,
but Iran's clear response has been that it
will continue its defense until
the required level of deterrence is chief, meaning
they're no longer threatening us with everything they
have.
With this kind of psychological warfare, neither the
Strait Of Hormuz
will,
will will will
return to pre work conditions nor will CALM
return to the energy markets.
And lastly, it says, and again, all of
this was sparked
started with their illegal actions.
Israel and United States, with no air in
that conversation.
Israel launched new attacks Monday on Tehran saying
it was targeted infrastruct targeting infrastructure.
Explosions were heard in multiple locations. It wasn't
immediately clear what had been hit. Israel is
also battling the Iranian linked Hezbollah, which isn't
it's just an ally. They're they're literally conducting
a secondary war in in Lebanon because they
covet their territory. It's always been the case.
You can go back to before Hetasibullah existed
and they were already bombing what the you
know, there are reports of killing 60 Arabs
in Lebanon or bombing locations, and they've always
been doing this.
In recent days, Israel has hit apartment buildings
in Beirut,
you know, like Downtown New York or, you
know, San Francisco,
and bomb bridges over the Litany River. This
is CTV News casually reporting massive war crimes.
They're bombing apartment buildings, and no one's even
it's as if they've created this carve out
where Israel just does whatever it wants. It's
always been that way, but now we're on
we're admitting it. Before, it used to be
don't report on it or claim it was
something else. Now it's just, yeah, they killed
children. Shut up. It's Israel. Don't don't care
about it. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said
Israel will continue to strike Iran and Lebanon
even as US considers a cease fire. That's
what he just
said. Is that anybody confused about that? We
don't care what Trump does. We are the
ones in troll in control. The UN peacekeeping
force in Southern Lebanon,
UNIFIL, has reported for, what, the fifteenth time,
they bombed a UN headquarter location. Happens every
time.
Authorities say Israeli strikes have killed more than
a thousand people in Lebanon and displaced more
than 1,000,000 people. But that's just another another
Tuesday, another Wednesday. No big deal. Iran's death
toll has surpassed fifteen hundred.
But I guess that's just no big deal.
Right? I guess it's just what that's war
we're told by the warmongers who pushed us
into this with lies.
Now as I said, it's clear that they
already had all this. They already had what
Trump claims he's about to get. So keep
that in mind.
Here's a gore here's Gunther Eagle and like
the rest of them, Trump confirmed Iran agreed
to what nobody else could convince them to
do. Trump reports that Iran has bent the
knee and agreed to never possess nuclear weapons.
These guys are just clowns, man. They're clowns.
First of all, as I just said, that
was never the reality based on the US
government's own assessments.
And remember, oh, it doesn't matter. The point,
though, I think at the end of the
day, is that Trump is now trying to
create the illusion that what was already the
static reality is what he somehow managed to
force into play. To me, that speaks to
that they are in a bad position, and
he's just trying to find a way to
make it look like he's already won. That's
why they announced victory in the middle of
already in in the midst of an ongoing
war.
They've agreed we'll never have nuclear weapons. They've
agreed to that. Again, this phantom negotiator, we're
told.
So what we're hearing, like before, is that
Trump is discussing, well, they'll have to deploy
troops to seize the uranium that
they already told you they would give up.
I made that point before, but realize how
constructed this is based on things they were
already getting.
And, again, the International Atomic Energy Agency telling
you that they were not reaching that level.
And, again, like I said at the very
bottom, it says the IAEA can guarantee
through a watertight inspection system that nuclear weapons
will not be developed in Iran.
They don't care about any of these guys.
It's about using the claim of that.
Now here's what Trump said.
DD Geopolitics shared this, and this is about,
oh, the this is basically the claim that
Gunther was just bragging about. Same point. Even
though we just told you, the evidence doesn't
back this up. Point
to make you want to pursue a ceasefire.
A few days ago, you you know, you
you said you wanted to continue bombing Iran.
Now you wanna pursue peace talks. Was there
something that happened? They're talking to us, and
they're talking sense.
Right. And that's the thing that people, you
know, like, argument is he's saying she said
why in case it was low for you?
You just said, you you know, like you
said, we're gonna bomb until complete surrender. Well,
it's very different than suddenly well, that you
know, that's not unless they talk to me
because they were already talking to you. So
he claims that now they're talking to me,
but they already were. And now they said
something again that we already knew they offered.
So, again, this is my point.
Just right here, you can already recognize this
either means that Trump is being misled by
somebody around him, maybe Israel,
or he's lying to you about this back
and forth. And that's not about the the
alleged negotiator. That's about just generally about what
Iran was doing before. He's lying about that.
We have to be able to see that,
guys, so that speaks to something. You can
decide what that is.
And, remember, it all starts with they cannot
have a nuclear weapon. Just you know, I
said yesterday, what are they said? What are
the top 10? I said, well, number one,
two, and three is they can't have a
nuclear weapon.
That's just,
it's a it's
well, we put the you know, what? Inch
accentuate the point. Why not make it one
through five? It's meaningless.
It's just doesn't it's just meaningless. It's and
it all it shows is he's trying to
really stress the idea that I made sure
I did. I'm the one. I made sure
they would not have it. They didn't before.
They don't want it now.
It's just stupid.
And, they're not gonna have a nuclear weapon.
And we're talking about that, and I I
don't wanna say in advance, but they've agreed
they will never have a nuclear weapon. They
will hate to You gotta love how he
does that. I don't wanna say in advance,
but I'm gonna say in advance.
So you do though. So you wanted to.
And you say you're now telling us they've
promised not to. You see my point though,
guys? Now let's just say this goes forward.
Let's just say that everything backs down and
it all goes forward, and then they just
start admitting to you. Yeah. They don't have
a weapon. That that it's because of me,
even though that's not true because they never
did and they don't want one.
You know, it doesn't and this is Israel
clearly is not gonna be okay with that.
That's the secondary factor is even if he
did that, Israel is gonna make sure this
continues. And that's very clear to anybody paying
attention.
The point simply though is that this is
just, like I said,
one way or the other, he it's very
clear that he's misleading you about the reality
of the situation.
Here's another clip.
And this is, this was the one about
the present. This is interesting.
Now this one, I think, is the most
revealing, and it's about the very end of
this clip. But what he says, essentially, is
that they gave they presented him with a
very special presence, and I just there's something
about this that feels very off. This is
why I'm leaning more towards in this point
that so if this is the direction of
it, that somebody,
another actor in the conversation is playing him.
Another question. You haven't been here in a
while. Well, in Iran,
can you give us any more sense of
who exactly
in Iran and is either with government or
others you're speaking with? Yeah. We had I
I hate to say this in front of
these
young people. They're not children. They've I spoke
to most of them. They sound like adults
to me even though they are sort of
children. Right? They'll always be your children.
But, I hate to say it, but
we killed all their leadership.
Well, in Iran Hold on. I wanna hear
that again. Can you give us any
war sense of who exactly
in Iran it is either with government pressure
and others I'm speaking with? Yeah. We had
I I hate to say this in front
of these young
people. They're not children. They've I spoke to
most of them. They sound like adults to
me even though they are What are they
saying? We had I I hate to Would
come to the ground you're under you're speaking
with? Yeah. We had I I hate to
say this in front of these young
people. They're not children. They've I spoke to
most of them. They sound like adults to
me. What the what is he even saying
right there? I can't believe I didn't catch
that earlier.
I I don't I don't I shouldn't even
waste time on this, but this is just
I just did something weird about this. Listen
to what he says. He's talking about the
people next to him. He's talking about,
Mark Wayne and Bondi sitting right there or
whoever he's pointing to.
Exactly.
You know? And they basically said, who's talking
to Iran? Witkoff, Kushner, which is what he
said. Iran, I mean, is it their Witkoff?
Another one you're speaking with? Yeah. We had
I I hate to say Look. I hate
look. I hate to say this. This in
front of these young In front of these
young, and he points to the media and
then Markwayne Bondi. People. They're not children. They've
I spoke to most of them. They sound
like adults.
What are you talking about? You mean the
adults right there next to you? You spoke
to them and they sounded like adults? He
must be losing his mind. I don't I
mean, that's come on. Let's be real. That's
that's weird. I didn't catch that before. That
doesn't even make sense, guys.
Unless I mean, tell me if I'm missing
something.
He points to them.
Right? Points to them at the left and
he says,
You love speaking with? Yeah. We had I
I hate to say this in front of
these young
people. They're not children. They've I spoke to
most of them. They sound like adults to
me even though they are sort of children.
Right? They're low. You're sort of children?
He's literally pointing at Mark Twain. He's so
patronizing. I mean, that's why I can't I
honestly can't believe that. I can't believe nobody
called that out. May I maybe they did.
I just didn't see it. Always be your
children. They're always be your children when you
just reference them.
Okay. I'm gonna I gotta let this go.
That's that's weird, man.
I I mean, I I don't I I
try to avoid, like, the, oh, he's going
senile because that's always overused. Oh, they tripped
up the stairs, and it's like, oh, and
and there are usually points to me. They
are old.
But tell me what on that is just
weird, man. Okay. Let's get past it.
But,
I hate to say it, but
we killed all their leadership. And why is
that the next statement after what you just
said?
It's just so weird. And then they met
to choose new leaders, and we killed all
of them. Israel did is the point because
he right then, it said, we're waiting to
see who they put, and then they killed
them, and then they bombed again. And that's
not even how that really went. They didn't
bomb level. They bombed Khamenei, and this is
the person who's after him. That this is
the way it went down. They bombed a
lot of other people too. But after the
bombing, this is who the who came in.
They're just trying to make it sound, like,
extra powerful. Like, this is why do you
need to lie about something like that? Now
we have a new group, and we can
easily do that. But Oh, you can easily
kill them too. You know, just casually.
That's not right, guys. Let's see how they
turn out. It's Okay. So let's see. Let's
let's give him time. You know, if we
don't like him, we'll just kill him. You
have to realize that's literally what he just
said.
All their leadership,
and then they met to choose new leaders,
and we killed all of them.
And now we have a new group, and
we can easily do that, but let's see
how they turn Let's see. We'll give it
time. We'll let you kill them if you
don't like them because that's freedom and democracy.
Really regime change. You know, this is a
change in the regime, because You know, the
very thing that they told you was totally
not the objective until they told you it
was the objective. And now they haven't done
it really, but they said, but they've changed
a little bit. So it's regime change,
so I win. Right? I'm the one. I
win. Right? Leaders are all very different than
the ones that we started off with that
created all those problems. So this was I
think we can say, Jason, this is regime
change. Oh, yeah. Yeah. It's if we did
it. Mission accomplished, guys. We we did it.
Hooray.
And it's because the guy is different. You
know, it's literally the the next person in
line, and we were told the whole thing
would be different. We're gonna save the world,
but we kinda were done. Right? But we're
gonna keep going though because he's a terrorist.
Make sense of that. Because that's where this
this is where it goes. Well, you know,
we're gonna see, but Israel right now is
trying to murder him because he's there with
a bad guy, we're told.
These people are just this bad at it.
I really wanna stress that. It's dishonesty
and corruption,
but they're also just really bad at this.
This guy, I don't know why people let
him just ramble. He screws himself over. But,
again, doesn't seem to change anything, so maybe
I'm wrong.
What makes you trust
them? I don't trust anybody. I don't trust
you. I mean,
that's only because I know you. But, if
I didn't know you, I'd probably have more
trust.
But,
I don't trust anyone. Why do you why
do you say that why do you say
what makes you try do you think I
trust them and I trust them? Then why
bother trying?
Because they're gonna make a deal. They're gonna
make a deal. They did something yesterday that
was amazing, actually. They Here we go. Gave
us a present. Okay. And the present arrived
today.
Oh,
arrived today. Okay. That's not the same as
saying that this was handed to him from
somebody he's speaking with or that he can
confirm that that's the case. It was a
very big present worth a tremendous amount of
money.
That was paying. Right? That that seems to
win him over. Here's a plane. Here's a
nice watch. Here's money and stuff.
That's what seems to influence him. And I'm
not gonna tell you what that present is,
but it was a very significant,
prize. Mhmm. And they gave it to us,
and they said they were gonna give it.
So that meant one thing to me would
deal with the right people. Oh, okay. So
they capitulated.
So as long as you get what you
want and they do what you're told they
are told that that he's just speaking to
things they're not really supposed to verbalize. They
don't want powerful leaders. They don't want people
who wanna run their countries. They want people
who will bow to them. They want people
who will do what's best for what he
wants, what he calls US interest because that's
how they do this. But that's what he
just said. We want people, and that's what
he said. Well, if they don't like him,
we'll just kill him. Alright? Del Rio Rodriguez,
give me one. We'll just remove her. But
democracy, they literally just don't even try anymore.
Prize.
And they gave it to us. And they
said they were gonna give it, so that
meant one thing to me would deal with
the right people. Is that nuclear related? No.
It wasn't nuclear related. It was oil and
gas related. Oh, oil and gas related. Don't
you love how they just work these things
out of him? Like, he's like, I'm not
gonna tell you anything. And this is cheap.
Part of me because he think he wants
to say it. But oil and gas related,
Very expensive prize.
We do I wonder if he's gonna claim
they now control Karg Island, you know, or
something like that, which is kinda where I
think. But the end of the day,
the real question is, who is he talking
about here?
And okay. So you're telling me that they
gave you something that's very valuable that somehow
the Iranian leadership wouldn't recognize was no longer
theirs or in control? Or
it's I mean, there's so many openings to
this.
It just I we will find out.
Some point, this is gonna conclude. It's gonna
be some kind of an endpoint, and either
they'll be in control or not, and we'll
know what's going on. And I think that
this will, if it fades away with some
kind of, like, just we're there and we
did it, that will tell you everything. And
it was a very nice thing they did,
but what it showed me is that we're
dealing with the right people. Because, you know,
you don't know because
the leadership was killed. All gone.
It's just that's just not true, by the
way, but they just love to do that
crap. As
the expression goes, the past supreme leader and
as
the leadership was killed. All gone.
Khomeini, all gone.
As the expression goes, the past supreme leader.
What?
Yeah. This guy's struggling, man. And then the
new supreme leader was,
racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty
good, and everyone else was gone.
And then many of the people in the
third tier are gone,
but we're dealing with a group of people
that I think, turn out and and they
Sorry, by the way, to make you sit
through all this nonsense. It's about what he
says right here. Present, the gift they made
to us was very significant, and they said
they were gonna do it, and it happened.
And they're the only ones that could have
done it, Jennifer. There it is.
You get what I'm you get what that
said?
So
it's just a thought, but think about what
he just said there. I'll play it one
more time real quick.
Very significant. And they said they were gonna
do it, and it happened.
And they're the only ones that could have
done it, Jennifer. Okay. So what he just
made clear
is that somebody offered something.
Basically, what it seems to be to prove
that this is genuine.
And then he said, well, they said they
would do it. They did it. And they're
the only ones that could have done it.
So, therefore, that it happened.
Now I know it's real, which would suggest
that he didn't know that before or might
not have. But either way, doesn't that seem
to stay stands to reason that somebody else
could be playing that role or that there
could be somebody else in that position that's
not really in charge of Iran or any
number of factors at play, or he's making
the whole thing up. Any one of these
things feel far more likely than the fact
that they're literally about to take over Iran
by dealing with one random defector who somehow
has power over everything. Well, that you know?
I mean,
I obviously, it could just be that they're
telling you the truth, that this is all
they're destroyed and they're brought to win. If
it happens, well, then we'll talk about that.
But understand,
it is never the wrong thing to question
what power tells you was happening, especially since
your entire life shows you that you should.
But it's that's not just what we're doing.
We're not just being contrarian. The evidence clearly
points well, let's put it this way. Let's
just say it turns out where that's that
what he said was true. We can still
prove they lied to you about every part
of it, And that's maybe just because they
wanted to keep you in the dark. But
we still are right in going, they're lying
to you, which I think suggests that they're
whole they're lying about the whole thing. That's
kinda my point. And I I know you
see it. As always, it's about being objective
as possible, especially for the new people to
the show. And I think what's really important
here is that right that last part and
everything else he said in between, it suggests
an opening for something
somebody playing him. Now, obviously, I believe Israel
is the most obvious culprit about trying to
drive this in a position that causes what
they want, usually at the expense of American
interests.
So as I said, we'll see where this
continues to go. There's one more clip here
we'll play.
And as d g, DDG of Politics says,
completely unhinged.
Kill will kill all their leadership, and then
they may need to choose new leaders, and
we will will and we killed all of
them.
And last one here. Oh, actually, this is,
not the last one. I think that's coming
up. Yeah. Right there. But so this drop
site news reports this today.
Tehran
mocks Donald Trump's claim of a gift
with a missile a missile strike video.
There's no no need for audio. It's just
like a missile sound,
but they basically just show a missile strike
like that.
And this was posted, like, in response to
it, and it says, Ron Media published footage
of what it said
was its first successful ground to ground missile
strike
directed at US base, which counter which, you
know, contradicts what they claim they're capable of
right now.
And says describing it as a gift we
sent to Trump.
The framing appears to directly mock Trump's Oval
Office remarks where he claimed Iran had given
The US a present, a very big present,
a very significant prize.
Far as news, citing an Iranian army statement,
said the strike targeted a key US position
in the Israel airport, which is a military
target. Now the point is that he's saying
that, and they're responding. But that could be
because they wanna or they don't know they're
talking with somebody. That's always possible.
But what I what I think this gets
at is their actual capabilities.
And what we'll get to in a second
here, one of these next posts, is a
framing of it that I think is worth
considering that this is and it's it's evidence
based, but as always, there could be more
to the story. First, this is what Trump
said on the twenty second. Now, yes, this
is a Zionist journalist and rather just Israeli
is the right way to frame it and
wonder whether they might be part of the
lie just like US media would be for
US arguments. Right? Consider that. But here's what
she's claiming Trump said to to her on
the twenty second and factor the same with
what he's telling you is happening now. And
so this is in the middle of this.
This is in the middle of what they
were claiming was happening. Allegedly, we're in this
moment where were he supposed to be speaking
with somebody and it says because that's his
time frame. Right? He said three days.
And so in the middle of that, he
says,
you'll find out what's gonna happen. They will
cave into what he says, you're gonna find
out soon about what will cave into the
ultimatum. It's going to be very good. Today,
total decimation of Iran, he says. It's gonna
work out very good.
He go and about NATO countries, they're they're
oh, that that's not the relevant part. Just,
you know, they're doing they're not doing anything.
Total decimation of Iran does not seem even
remotely similar to what he's telling you was
happening, and this is why he's supposed to
be in the middle of this conversation.
Come on. But he could just be blustering
like he does.
Now, Trump,
interestingly,
today,
in the midst of us being we're being
told that we're just about to be you
know, we're in the midst of this negotiation.
Israel is still currently bombing infrastructure
in in many cases with US support even
as he tells you they're not doing that.
And here's what he actually just said.
We've won this. This war has been won.
The only one that likes to keep it
going is the fake news. I mean, the
New York Times you read the New York
Times. It's like we're not winning a war
where they have no navy and they have
no air force and they have no nothing.
Well, yes. But there this is a different
war as Iran has been discussing
for a long time.
That's the truth, guys. Now, yes, he's not
wrong about some of the things he's saying.
There's there's some nuance to it, but they
knew this. You have to remember that this
was discussed before this started, especially since, remember,
on the twenty eighth, they put this forward
saying, in the UN, if you attack us,
clearly knowing what they were gonna do, that
we will bomb these locations, showing you, one,
they were not gonna bomb first, two, there
was no imminent threat, and three, that they
told you they were going to respond to
the legal targets which responds to your illegal
acts. And that they turned around and go,
look at what they're doing. They're terrorists. It's
just lazy.
Right? But so this point And they have
no nothing. The the reality of the actual
warfare, Iran said
in the beginning
that they prepared for this different warfare. That's
when we saw the missile locations move and
so on. But this was and what did
Rubio tell you right at the beginning? That
we saw them building their drones and other
things, and we had to stop that because
they would be eventually insurmountable. Well, that's where
they currently are. Those are the very same
drones they're using to circumvent what they claim
they have enough to stop. I think it's
pretty clear that they're wrong about Iran's capabilities
now. Now that who knows how it'll end
up? But he wants you to believe that
we did this over because he's being fed
that by people who want by people like
Hegseth, who need his approval, who need desperately
for him to go, Good job, hey. You're
doing a good job. And do whatever. Just
as long as I feel like I'm winning
and I can tell people I'm winning, you'll
be doing that's, I think, the reality.
Now if this goes awry and Pete Hegseth
is shown to not be the one in
charge, well, they'd probably gonna get fired.
And we literally have planes flying over Tehran
and other parts of their country. Was already
accepted as an immediate reality, like, before it
started. That once this starts, they'll get air
superiority. That was very like, publicly. And, I
mean, you can look this up. There was
public conversations. The the so called experts and
and others just in a in a kind
of waxing intellectual before we got here what
largely saying that, yes, that'll be right away.
And yet they made it out to be
some unprecedented
success because they needed a win. That was
HEGSAT. That was Netanyahu. But it was already
well aware that that would be an immediate
thing because there was not an effort to
fight in that realm.
That's the point.
Country.
They can't do a thing about it. For
instance, if I wanna take down that power
plant, that very big powerful power You know,
that massive war cry. About it. You're right.
Yeah. But here's the thing, because there's arguably
consequences.
You see, the thing is, guys, anybody can
commit a war crime. Anybody. Any government, no
matter how small, any individual can decide to
get a bomb and do something that kills
a lot of innocent people under the guise
of some government political action. Those are war
crimes.
It's not difficult to do that. He's acting
like it's somehow powered. I could bother anyone.
Well, so could anybody, ultimately, in in in
certain circumstances.
The point is just because you're able to
is not the point. The point is that
be you doing so would be a crime.
The very thing that you claim you're trying
to stop in the world, no more wars,
all peace, but you're gonna just we can
just casually bomb these things should we want
to. He is the problem here.
Just like Biden the rest, but the point
is anybody in this position doing this is
the problem, Whether Netanyahu or Iran's government,
this is the problem. And I believe the
world is becoming,
like,
uncomfortably aware with that
ubiquitous reality because we don't honestly, I think
we it's a hard thing.
I don't know where the path is.
I don't know how we get around
everything being in this position, all of our
governments and all of this, but we should
try.
Otherwise, we're just resigned to just let it
go in direction that nobody seems to want,
guys.
It's like take me. That's all they can
do.
And yet if you read the New York
Times tryna if you watch ABC fake news
or NBC fake news Or Fox fake news
or CNN fake news? You'd say
it's a close battle. It's not a close
battle.
Well, let's talk about that.
And, again, at some point I mean, why
okay. If we're being told that you've decimated
them and you're just absolutely in control, is
there anybody in the room who believes anybody
anywhere listening to this that believe that Trump,
of all people, would then just make a
deal?
Does that not that doesn't that, like, belie
everything he's ever written about? Everything about or,
you know, maneuvering from position of strength.
Right now, if he's saying the truth, you're
gonna believe that he would just back out
and let them control everything? Or at the
very least, do I mean, look at what
they've done everywhere else. Donald Trump, if given
the opportunity to absolutely take control, would absolutely
take control, and you damn well know it.
So just it's just lazy to argue that
somehow that that's the case. It's just about
what he wants people to think, guys.
Now here
is what Rosemary Kalanick has to say. Not
familiar with the work, but I think this
is an important thing to consider.
And just the evidence of the the the
reality of the circumstances make these points for
her. Now, she says, wars reveal information about
countries' relative military capabilities
and interests. That's one of the most important
insights from the bar the bargaining model of
war.
Iran believed before the war that fighting The
US would strengthen its bargaining position,
and they were correct.
The war has revealed that Iran wouldn't topple
after Khamenei's death like they claimed, that Iran
is highly resolved, and it can inflict damage
across The Gulf at low cost
indefinitely, which is being widely shown to this
very day despite the lies coming from the
administration.
It revealed that Iraq look, just to be
clear on that, guys, that the world can
see that. There's no hiding the fact that
they're doing this and getting successful attacks.
The only thing that's happening is they're just
going they're, you know, I guess, just lying
about it. And then interestingly,
the same fake news media that he claims
is misrepresenting it often pulls punches for him.
You see, because it's both. Like the New
York Times article I just showed you, we're
like, Trump's a big liar, but they're advocating
for the war to continue. It's how this
tends to work.
Now it says it revealed that Iran can
gain massive leverage
and perhaps even collect tolls
from controlling ships in the Strait Of Hermos.
Remember, the only one that I can see
that doesn't do that. If you haven't seen
that point, it's wild to me. Every straight
that you're thinking, the the ones The US
control, locations they control, the Strait of, you
know, the, Suez Canal, Panama,
they all charge lots of money for ships.
You know what location doesn't and hasn't? The
Strait Of Hormuz in Iran.
It just speaks for itself. And now they're
trying to dictate the control through this only
for people that are attacking them, not everybody
else like they've been claiming from the beginning.
By contrast, it says, the war has hurt
US and Israeli bargaining power compared to where
it was before Geneva talks in February.
That means we'll get worse terms now than
if we'd accepted Iran's proposal then.
So if Americans are thinking from an American
perspective and not just Trump and Israel,
you would have gotten a better situation then
versus where Israel's driven this country now. That's
her opinion anyway, but I agree.
She says, why is The US and Israel
position worse?
Decapitation strikes failed to induce Iran to surrender,
always an unlikely prospect according to just about
everybody. And even the CIA said the same
thing, and they ignored it and listened to
what Israel told them. That's on record.
Nullifying The US and Israeli theory of victory
on day three, no new plausibility
since then. Right? No new theory of how
victory will emerge,
despite still claiming a couple of weeks. And
it's doubtful one will emerge. That hurts The
US position. The world can see that. Anybody
who's not a blind follower has already come
to terms with that. Trump has proven highly
sensitive to oil marketing, market swings, and even
removed sanctions,
which is true on Iranian oil.
I've got that somewhere in here.
Wherever whatever it was. Somewhere.
Maybe not. I'm thought it did. We'll come
back to it. The point is that they
did remove sanctions, which is just ridiculous.
The idea that you're you're
attacking them and you're hurting on the evil
terrorists, but we're gonna give them money because
we put ourselves in a bad position.
You just it's just it's just embarrassing, guys.
And they try to act like it's somehow
a calculated move they always intended because they're
they're just it's that's that's embarrassing.
That shows you that this is not going
the way they thought it would.
That's not the same as saying they're losing,
but that's it could mean that.
Now they removed sanctions on Iranian oil. As,
Edward Fishman noted, Iran gained more sanctions relief
from closing Hormuz than any diplomatic means, including
the JCPOA.
The the just the the disruption to oil
markets and Trump's concern about them also hurts
The US position. It says now that their
war has bogged down into an attrition battle
where Iran can impose costs with cheap means,
like drones and missiles. And Israeli interceptors seem
to be running low, which is true. The
US and Israel are on the losing end
of the damage and casualties curve. Costs and
casualties will get worse, not better over time.
As Iran told you from day one, we're
in this for the long game.
And yet Trump and Netanyahu tried to scream
day one within day two, day three, and
make all the points they could because that's
what they do every time. And Iran sat
back and let them do it
and told you, we're not in this to
get these immediate wins. We're in this for
the long haul. And I think they're showing
that.
That further hurts The US Israeli bargaining leverage.
And again, the idea of these drones, we're
talking like $50,000
to millions of dollars
over and over and over and over. Trump
is now considering, frankly, as she writes, fullheartedly
military gambits, potentially to seize Karg, which is
what I argue we're talking about right there,
my opinion, islands in Hormuz or perhaps the
highly enriched uranium trapped somewhere under rubble in
Iran, which, again, does exist. But the reality
is it's not something they would even I
don't think even logically or justifiably go in
for because it wouldn't be worth the the
effort, I think. These would be significant escalations
to put US boots on the ground, which
I argue is already happening, is probably going
to happen still more so. None are likely
to end the war, and all would likely
cause US casualties.
In the business lingo, Trump's BATNA
best alternative to a negotiated agreement is always
worse or is way worse, not least because
of the shadows of Afghanistan.
US forces being surged into the Middle East,
which, by the way, I just briefly showed
you, we'll end with, more troops are being
sent,
are comparable to what George w Bush used
to invade Afghanistan in the 2001.
What started out as a limited mission to
topple the Taliban and capture Osama bin Laden,
who instead
escaped through Tora Bora Mountains, or if you
believe the way that went down and not
realize it, it's a person working with the
US government, evolved into a ground campaign that
eventually ballooned
to over 100 k US troops in 2011.
The clear imperative here is for Trump to
deescalate.
Credibility costs be damned.
This is why I think this is where
we're at. Like, the one of the logical
possibilities anyway that they're starting to see. And
again, that's why I inserted that maybe Trump
is realizing he's being played or even lying
that you wait that they're starting to see
that this is not gonna work out. And
if they don't stop now, that the long
run will hurt them more. That does make
a lot of sense with just the base.
Everything you're saying, you could verify. But, ultimately,
some of the parts that people dispute, but,
ultimately, there's most of the engagement with interceptors
and the drones. It's all very clearly understood.
And he might be willing to make himself
look bad in order to stop the worst
outcome.
And that but, see, right now, that makes
sense. But the argument that he's trying to
go, we made a deal with somebody who
agreed to the way it really is right
now. Think about that.
And they go, we did it. It's over.
The deal's done. And they walk away, and
they Ron goes, they lied, and he told
they just don't admit it. They just rely.
I bet you we see a world without
what happened. I still argue Israel wouldn't let
it happen, but that's what she's arguing in
a sense. That this war is
is existential for Iran, but not for The
United States. Iran will keep fighting with cheap
means like drones, and it will eventually outlast
The US just like the Taliban did in
Afghanistan.
That or Iran could fracture into chaos, creating
refugee flows and breeding terrorism for decades to
come. Well, again, the you could take that
as an indictment of Iran or just that
these locations because of outside forces always drive
to that. Like, with Syria, and it's not
because of Syria in particular. It's because of
what they flooded the area with. But either
way, same argument that if you you create
chaos,
that you the the the people that that
thrive on chaos will seek out the chaos.
And you know exactly what I'm talking about.
Terrorism isn't an existential threat to The United
States, but we should be,
shouldn't be creating it for conditions for it.
Trump doesn't like backing down, but that is
what needs to happen here and stat before
ill fated escalation leads to more needless deaths.
Now it's her opinion.
I think it's interesting and worth considering.
Now lastly, quickly,
you might have seen this.
I thought this was interesting for a few
reasons. I still can't see tell whether this
is necessarily connected or just kind of, adjacent
to. But so this random account puts out
I haven't seen it before. It says a
Saudi x account
reportedly posted a I can't confirm that it's
necessarily Saudi, but posted a specific threat targeting
the Motiva Refinery in Port Arthur.
Just it looks like it was two hours
before the explosion
at this facility.
So
I didn't know this at the time. I
couldn't verify it. It was just a random
thing. I looked up the tweet. I wasn't
able to find it.
And in case you don't so know what
this is, this is the this has been
going around. This is a facility in Texas
on the twenty third that had explosion and
fire.
And it's, of course, interestingly related to the
oil conversation, and you wonder whether this is
being done to us. It's hard not to
see the core the correlation, especially when Israel's
bombing them and hurting the prices and things
that Trump didn't want to happen. So you
wonder whether this is another thing that's supposed
to create the chaos or claim which a
lot of partisans did that Iran didn't, even
though that's not what the evidence seems to
back up.
Now, here's what he wrote.
Within a week, the largest gas refinery in
The United States, Motiva Enterprises, in the city
of Port Arthur, Texas on The US Gulf
Coast will be destroyed, which
was destroyed, but save the tweet, he says.
Okay. So I look into this.
Here's his account
with, you know, basically scrubbed.
Now I this is interesting the way this
went down. So this of all the other
things we tend to say, this is one
use, in fact, of this. You Grok can
still lie to you. But there's I would
argue nothing more
able to look into the internal dynamics of
Twitter than Grok. So I simply said,
he with it I I quoted exactly what
it said. That's it. And said, give me
the link to
this account saying that.
And it said, here's the direct link to
the post,
but it says the exact wording of your
query doesn't appear verbatim. Now, it's not the
same post. It says something and it's interesting
because what the what this goes on to
show is that he essentially
deleted a whole bunch of stuff and then
on the same day, went and posted a
bunch of somewhat abstract similar type posts. I
think it was designed to hide what he
said. Even if it was just like a
a guess that he doesn't want to be
able to think about. But what you'll find
in the account, it's very pro Israel. It's
very pro it's it's exactly what you'd expect.
Talking about Israeli Mossad and bombing thing, you
look for yourself. It's exactly what you'd expect.
So
I said, was it deleted? I'm asking about
this statement, not the one they suggested.
Grok says no. The post you asked about
was not deleted.
Here's the exact post, but it says that
wrong statement.
Not what I was asking.
So I responded saying, no, no, the post
I asked about, was that deleted?
And it says again, no, the post you
said was not deleted and then again cites
the wrong text.
I just yeah. It's a fun I just
it's I wonder always whether this is, you
know, something they've been engineered to ignore and
stuff like that because we know that's happened.
Elon has been caught doing that. In fact,
it just happened again that I didn't even
talk about recently where I was asking something
else, and it was like, no. The Houthis
didn't bomb something. And I'm like, okay. That's
South Africa all over again. That's that's the
platform being told to lie about things in
my opinion. Now because that did happen with
South Africa. Remember people said, like, what's the
baseball score today? It was like, there's no
genocide on Africa,
or that there is was the point. They
wanted you to think that, and the evidence
showed the opposite. But it was telling you
that when you asked about the weather because
and then later basically admitted that Elon tweaked
it to do that or to to answer,
and then it made it kind of have
a problem. Now back to the point, I
responded saying,
no. The text I asked about, not the
tweet you keep showing, the text I asked
about, was that posted and deleted? And it
says yes. So I'm going, wow. That was
difficult to get to that very clear question.
Right? And it says yes. The exact
it's very clear. The exact text you quoted
and listed off
was posted by this account on March 23
at approximately 05:45.
It says it was posted roughly forty five
to ninety minutes before the refinery explosion occurred.
The account then immediately deleted that specific post.
Now just be it could also be wrong.
That's the problem with these ridiculous things they're
using today and how it's gonna dictate our
lives in the future in the same way,
the person behind it. But
this does appear to be the reality based
on post, based on what this says, me
following up, other research, and it simply says,
so yes, the specific post with the text
you asked about was real, was posted, and
was deleted shortly afterward.
That's pretty damn interesting to me only because
what we're talking about is this post
telling you that this was going to be
bombed, and then hours later,
it was
on fire.
That's pretty damn interesting to me. So the
real question becomes,
was there foreknowledge here? Was this something other,
and was it just not meant to happen?
I mean, you could decide. I just like
to connect those dots and find out this
was real.
The timing is hard to miss right now.
Now on that note,
here's what Laura Loomer put out today.
Soon, there will be a massive Islamic terror
attack in America, and the perpetrators will likely
have financial ties to podcasters.
And those who are sowing discord for foreign
nations in America.
That sure seems convenient. Well, you know, think
about all of a sudden it's like this
new thing and, you know, ties to Ryan
or whatever, which don't exist because it's not
the case. But
that would be something or more likely somebody
more influential, but something like that. Like, she
probably tried to lob it at Tucker because
they seem to hate each other. But the
point is,
how in the world would she possibly know
that?
She goes, I predict there will be many
casualties. Let me clear, by the way.
This is not how a prediction looks.
It's far too specific.
There'll be an Islamic attack in America, and
the perpetrators will likely have financial ties to
podcasters who's sowing discord for America. Okay.
I'll predict there'll be many casualties in the
and and only then will it maybe set
in that people have been conned into supporting
a terrorist psyop.
No. She's not talking about Israel. You you
you'd be you'd be surprised. To distract you
from the threat of Islam.
While the enemy plotted to destroy our country.
Should you be concerned about Islam, possibly extreme
levels of it causing problems? Yeah. Should you
be concerned about Judaism, extreme levels of it
causing problems? Yeah. You should. Should you be
concerned about extreme levels of Christianity, maybe causing?
Yes. You should.
Should you listen to somebody who tells you
only one of those things in the world
could possibly cause problems? No. Well, yes. And
then you should call it ridiculous for saying
so. Consider everybody. Question everything. The reality
to make it about one only religion is
just
there's no logic to it. It doesn't make
sense. There's plenty of people who practice, you
know, like, people who live their lives, who
don't go to church or don't go to
synagogue or don't go that's that's the reality.
There's plenty of those people who call themselves
Christians, who call themselves Jews, who call themselves
Muslims. That's most of the population.
Then you got the Orthodox versions.
And within that, it's not even close to
the things they're pointing to. That's the truth,
whether it's any of them to be real.
Then you can get into the more extreme
levels of it, the extreme religious Zionism, the
extreme Muslim terrorism, the
extreme every one of these levels, Christianity
in history has done the exact same things.
I'm just so tired of having to pretend
like people like this are worth consideration.
But it's because I do know that there
are some honest people out there that do
seem to fall for this stuff. I don't
know why, but it happens. And so what
she's literally saying is it will be 10
times worse than nine eleven. Funny how we've
heard that exact sentiment from people in Israel,
from Netanyahu,
Trump. And it says, and it's going to
be traced right back to the woke Reich
in some way.
The woke Reich, of course,
like from the right arguing that that's sort
of what, the right
wing
Nazi elements tied to Muslims? Or what are
you saying right there? Or the woke Democrats,
right, who are calling Nazis out. Yeah. You're
dumb. Okay. That's just stupid. But either way,
the point here, guys, is about trying to
create the sentiment that bad things are coming.
This person is so obviously anti American. It's
it's alarming
to me how clear that is. And if
you wanna look deeper and understand that, you
know, like Tim Pool says everything's civil war
and and and Alex Jones says everything's World
War three, Laura Loomer rightly always not rightly,
continues to say everything is 911
and threaten people that 9 eleven's coming. That
9 eleven's coming. None over and over and
over and over.
If you don't see the common thread,
I don't know how much more clear I
can make that. These people are guiding this
direction, and not necessarily the action happening, but
the the the the emotional turmoil
to drive certain action.
Now, lastly,
Russia discovers hundreds of booby trapped boot insoles
rigged with explosives to blow soldiers' legs off.
Now this could be a random story. It
could be tied to any number of things,
but maybe it's connected. I think it's worth
knowing what's going on. Russia has impounded hundreds
of booby trapped boot insoles intended for Vladimir
Putin's foot soldiers,
say the Federal Security Service. The heated insoles
that are used in cold weather were rigged
with enough explosives to blow victims' limbs off.
Kinda sound familiar. Russian counterintelligence
blames the Ukrainian
secret services for a ploy to maim their
soldiers.
The insoles were a consignment
of humanitarian aid. It also that also sounds
like somebody we know, doesn't it?
But anyway, it says, the the detained man
from, Tajikistan
was a courier for the explosive insoles and
the FSB.
So
simple point, this could very well just be
lunatics in Ukraine to carry this out. But
then, of course, you have to make sure
you understand that that's been funded and armed
and grown by The US and Israel over
very long period of time.
Include the article discussing the CIA document that
discusses how they armed and funded fascist elements
in Ukraine to throw against the Soviet Union,
just like the Mojaheddin Afghanistan that became ISIS
and Al Qaeda. You know, the the usual
practice of these governments. And realize they've been
doing it for a very long time.
Either way, my point is they'd be responsible
for the lunatics that are doing this. But
the real point is to ask whether or
not this is connected to other things going
on today. And so it's worth drawing the
parallel. Right?
Here's what, oh, this was just to add
these loud this is what the Russian platform
says. The Ukrainian special services camouflage explosives as
household items,
the press warned.
According to the information, the explosives were previously
disguised as electric stoves, manuf
manicure inst instruments,
beauty products, perfume kits, power banks, speakers, religious
icons, church utensils,
car parts,
you know, normal stuff for normal people likely
not even used by military.
And doesn't that sound very familiar? It should
because the US government and Israel have been
doing this our entire lives.
Now
what's important to see is that there is
a very, very clear connection, sort of like
the IDF training people in this country. They
go back to even the Azov movement, quite
literally the group that we're talking about doing
this in Russia, who were literally trained by
and armed by Israel. Even in 2018, Haaretz
covered that rights activists were screaming about why
Israel's army neo Nazis.
You don't know if that seems strange to
you, then you're not paying attention because this
is more the norm than everything you're told.
Very easy to prove. Then here's another article.
Times of Israel 2022.
No other option. Israeli ex commandos said to
secretly train Ukrainian civilians. That was when they
tried to make it out to be they
were getting ready for the invasion of Russia,
which didn't ultimately happen the way they claimed
it did.
Now this goes to twenty twenty twenty fourteen.
Israeli training Ukrainian forces.
Here's electronic intifada twenty twenty two. Mercenaries in
Ukraine thank Israeli government. You know, the the
the Nazis
literally thanking them for training them.
This is from Middle East transparent.
This is interesting that goes into the bigger
picture today. Local spies with lethal gear. How
Israel and Ukraine reinvented covert action. That's December
2025.
A potent new fusion of old style human
spy craft with cutting edge technology is having
a big impact on high stakes conflict.
Right. So drones,
bombings, exactly like they're talking about. Now here's
where those videos come into play. Because you
know who is bragging
about doing things just like this.
You know, just as well as I do.
That ultimately
oh, wait. Hold on.
Had to grab it. Here's the I'll play
them in the reverse image, the reverse way
as usual. So this is the former Assad
head telling you
that where they do things like this, they
booby trap electronics
everywhere.
Do you have any surprises in Gaza? Surprises?
Yeah. Like the intelligence surprises. Pages, walkie talkies.
Do you know how many equipment I mean,
treated equipment that we have in these countries?
Mhmm.
You can't you don't. I do.
You mean taboo
trapped equipment?
Not only booby trapped and spying. Manipulated equipment.
Alright? In Spying and potentially booby trapped. Which
countries are you talking about? In all countries
that you can imagine. All countries that you
can imagine.
Okay.
So
in any country, it's possible. Let alone one
that they're literally training their neo Nazi fascist
elements to use against the people that they
wanna throw them at, apparently.
So that's the obvious one as well that
they're anywhere, but also the fact that they
quite literally did this Lebanon and let it
circulate for years, which hurt, maimed, and killed
mostly women and children.
How did you convince
Hezbollah
to buy this?
Well, obviously, they didn't know that they were
buying it from Israel. Who did they buy
it from? Or I think they were buying
it from. We have an incredible
array of possibilities
of creating
foreign companies
that have no way been traced back to
Israel, sell companies oversell companies who affect the
supply chain to our favor.
We create a pretend world. We are a
global production company. We write the screenplay.
We're the directors. We're the producers.
We're the main actors.
The world is our stage.
Yeah. Otherwise known as a very, very, very
easily identifiable crime.
You're you're committing crimes. You just very publicly
admitted that we commit crimes in every country
around the world and manipulate their supply chains
for our favor. And she's like, you're cool.
Hashtag freedom. Like, Like, think about sitting in
an interview and and this this
age old journalist
and literally being told what you've always called
terrorism and going cool. That's basically what she
did. They framed it like it was some
kind of tech savvy action. I mean, guys,
it's so obvious that that is what they've
always called that, and that's where it's always
come from. That's what this stems back to.
I mean, truly. I mean, why as well
take it one step further to understand the
stem point? I mean, certainly, the Zionists have
used it and brought it, in fact, to
the area. Terrorism as we know it today,
the planting of bombs in marketplaces and so
on and so forth, was, in fact, introduced
into The Middle East by the Zionists in
the twenties.
But the net result of of Zionist,
terrorism and and violence in the in the
first third of the twentieth century has brought
forth,
to my mind, the the anomaly,
the horrific and
unacceptable status in the Middle East today of
the state of Israel, which is in fact
an armed garrison state, which now exports more
arms and distributes violence all around the world,
vastly disproportionate to its size. I mean, in
that respect, I think it's a it's it's
a horrible cycle of of violence. But in
it all, I think the Palestinian is the
victim. It's no question about that.
So lastly here, back to the ending
points after that. I mean, the general idea
of just how clear that there is an
ongoing effort to drive this into everywhere, it
seems. But Trump faces, oh, this was the
sanctions part. I just I guess I forgot
to move it over there, but it had
next to the the oil
discussion. One of the most consistent vehement complaints
about Obama, Glenn says, was he released funds
of $1,700,000,000
to Iran
that they think Obama gifted to them rather
than release their funds that we stole, but
whatever.
It's just so frustrating
how many ridiculously incorrect and willfully stupid people
there are that seem to control the conversation.
He's right, by the way. I've said it
every single time. They didn't it's not like
it's pro Iran. It's just a simple reality.
They stole that money from Iran for whatever
reason. Like, if you think about it, if
you're gonna tell us that they're all evil
terrorists, then why wouldn't you just own that?
Why wouldn't you just say we took it
because they're terrorists? And then he gave it
back to them. It's like they can't even
be because they just always lied about that.
I mean, they literally just said they did
that with Venezuela, but here they still tell
you that they just gave them back gave
them money because they need to make it
look like Obama a bad guy for their
little internal game.
They didn't do that. They'd be stole it
from Iran. And it says Trump's lifting of
sanctions on Iran this week
could generate $14,000,000,000
for Iran. So you're all worked up about
them giving back money that you stole from
them. He's gonna give them $14,000,000,000
to make sure that they don't lose what
they're gonna get. Like, this is just not
about what they claim it is, guys. At
the very least, they have nothing means anything
to them.
Here's what general McMaster had to say, and
this very clearly
just like Furqan points out. They're literally trying
to ignite World War three to protect Israel.
General,
isn't Iran's potential control of the state of
Hormuz? Wasn't that the most obvious She met
the straight, by the way. Part they had
to play here. Why is it that it
seems that The US was not prepared for
this?
Well, Edra, we actually were prepared for it.
I don't know where this narrative came out
that I it was a big surprise. I
mean I can tell you
because they said that. Funny how that works
out. Right? Because they lied about that when
that first happened because they needed to make
a different narrative because of other lies they
told. That's what happened.
There was numerous examples that came from their
own people that made this argument. We never
expected that, Trump says, then later tells you
they aimed at it and we planned for
it. They just lie, guys. And now whether
that was the truth or the lie, which
one who knows? The point is they said
that to sell a lie in the moment.
So it's whether he knows it or not,
you know, I don't know where that came
from. We were prepared. Well, because they lied
to us about that. That's usually the case.
You know, we do an annual exercise with
up to 30 countries
and about the closure of the state Strait
Of Hormuz and how to reopen it. Remember,
I think Trump said something like, they're they're
they're not allowed to do that, or, like,
nobody told they weren't supposed to do that.
Remember he said that? Like,
silly. Somebody clearly fed him wrong information.
And so what you're seeing in the campaign
now, and I think this is really important
to understand,
is a continuation
of of the the joint you know, the
combined force of US and Israel
prioritizing
the missile and the drone capabilities, including their
manufacturing capabilities,
including their ability to reconstitute
their their missiles and drones with support from
Russia and China. There are a couple of
ships sailing right now with solid fuel from
China. I don't think they're gonna make it
to Iran.
Oh, okay. So just a casual ignition of
crime.
Why not?
Are they not allowed to go there? Is
it a crime for them to trade resources
with their allies? I guess only when The
US claims that. Like, it's clear that they're
suggesting they're taking action against these things. If
you saw the IDF in the last twenty
four, forty eight hours
striking ships in the Caspian Sea, in the
far north of Iran because Russia was smuggling
drones,
into into Iran to reconstitute,
their their capabilities. That's right. Great. So what
he's basically saying is that Israel's bombing Russia
and China, because that's not a big deal
at all. And, ultimately, to you know, isn't
it funny how you Russia can blink and
Jones will scream World War three, but you
have Trump bombing or rather Israel with Trump
bombing is
the two other nuclear powers at the same
time and, you know, nobody seems to be
screaming about that. You know, at the end
of the day, guys, I think this is
this is the final point about Israel's side
of this is they're going to drive this
wherever they want to. Trump will just
fall in line and make it sound like
that's what he always wanted. He's done it
over and over. I honestly think it's just
because he's just not it's not in him
to admit that he got drawn into it.
This is just alarming how where we are.
It's very clear that this is against what
he promised all of you at the very
least.
Again, Pentagon reveals or lastly, anyway, Pentagon reveals
attacks in Latin America are just the beginning.
With Operation Total Extermination, Trump's threats against Cuba,
expect more strikes in the region. Because why
not? You know? Let's just go after all
the illegal wars because we said none.
Hashtag peace president.
You gotta start being honest about this, guys.
And Pentagon prepares to send 3,000
more troops to the Middle East
to
basic and, that's actually the wrong point. There
was a the one they posted this.
It what? Oh, it's right there. To assist
with operations in Iran. That is what they're
saying.
So you guys can keep playing this tiptoe
dancer, you know, whatever you wanna call it.
The mental gymnastics.
These are troops
deployed for what's going on in Iran. That's
group. That's boots on the ground. It doesn't
have to be literally in the one location
you're talking about because even Israel is telling
you this is a multi regional war. There
already are anyway, especially if there are any
Kurds, especially if they're they're just keep growing.
If you cared about this, if you wanna
if you if you were angry about the
Iran war, you got to start taking a
stand. Now lastly, I'll leave you with a
point that I just saw on my phone
actually
that I'll end up getting into later, but
it just speaks to what I was saying
earlier.
And to be clear, it's a report, so
I haven't looked into it yet. But this
is from,
it says, Jeanine
Pirro, deputy admits DOJ has nothing on Jerome
Powell,
undercutting Trump claim of criminality, and that's from
the report.
Now, again, even if that ends up not
being the reality, I'm willing to bet you
that's the case right now because of every
other one of them. He screams about Jerome
Powell because he wants to create the enemy,
the other, and then the reality is they
never had real intention to do it
because there is no case.
Now that's very different than saying they're not
criminals.
You know what I think?
You look at the, you know, the class
of examples. They have everything they need. They
just don't really want to do it.
Time we start being honest about this because
nothing is ever gonna change if we keep
going through the same motions.
So I'll leave you there tonight.
Got plenty more to get in tomorrow.
Thank you for tuning in.
This platform doesn't exist without you. So So
if you could support the last American vagabond,
there's plenty of ways to do so below.
We'll keep going.
Thank you for all being here. I love
you all. As always,
question everything. Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
This starts and it's it's really fascinating to
go back. It starts, in 1996
with Netanyahu
who wrote a book called Fighting,
Terrorism.
And the thesis of the book is, quite,
straightforward and,
and and,
very dangerous.
He says, you know, there are there's Hamas.
There's Hezbollah. They oppose Israel. It's not good
for us to fight them directly,
That that won't work.
What we need to do is topple
the governments
that that back them. So what we need
is regime change throughout The Middle East.
And he actually gave a long list of
seven countries,
that included,
Syria,
Libya,
Iraq,
Iran,
Somalia,
Sudan,
and Lebanon.
And systematically,
The United States has done Netanyahu's bidding for
almost thirty years now going to war
with every one of them except for the
big one, that Netanyahu so much longs for,
which is the war directly
between The United States and Iran.