Trump Confirms Plan To Declare National Emergency For “Mass Deportations” Using “Military Assets”

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
These are decisions
for
now is the moment for Israel to return
to its founding premise. The Jewish state
has an absolute
right
to exist.
A divine gift, gifted to a divine nation,
charged with a divine purpose. Israel has an
absolute

(00:21):
and unequivocal
right and responsibility
to defend itself to the fullest,
applying the only language that its adversaries
understand,
the language of force.
So what would David Ben Gurion say today?
He would say don't depend
on anybody else's fleeting sympathies or permission

(00:42):
to do it. If Israel and Mossad want
to pull off Munich 2.0 and take out
every last leader of Hamas, wherever they may
be hiding from Doha to Dresden,
host a red wedding at the Four Seasons
in Qatar. The next time Haniyeh and Michelle
show up, they should go ahead and do
it.
If Israel
wants to at long last abandon the myth

(01:05):
of a 2 state solution,
Israel should go ahead and abandon a 2
state solution.
The rest of the Arab world can absorb
a Palestinians
just as the Jews absorb their people out
of 22 countries they were kicked out of
since 1948.
The Islamic world cannot continue to condone
the slaughtering of Jews while continuing

(01:27):
to disown the Palestinians.
That is the hard truth
that neither member of either political party is
willing to speak out loud to the Arab
world. I will.

(01:57):
Welcome to the daily wrap up, a concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last 24 hours.
Monday, November 18, 2024.
Thank you for joining me today.
Man, if you caught that opening clip, that

(02:18):
is some dangerous language to go along with
what Trump has been saying or what pretty
much his entire cabinet thus far has been
saying.
To go after Hamas, whatever that means to
them, a group, by the way, that Israel
has funded up until 2024,
wherever they reside.
And and and by whose word? Who who
do we go to to know who is
Hamas and who decides whether they're the ones

(02:39):
they should be? I mean, think about how
alarming that is. Of course, they I'm sure
they would mean anywhere in the Middle East.
But what he said was anywhere they reside,
which is eerily the same as what Israel
has said many times. That they could legislate
anywhere in the world. They're not bound by
international law and that they will go after
them anywhere in the world.
So what if they argue that there's something
in the United States? What if they argue

(03:00):
that Trump or Biden or whoever's currently there
is not doing enough about it? I mean,
this is terrifying stuff to hear from somebody
about to be in a position of power.
I guess we'll see how that works out.
Or
forego the 2 state solution?
And the way he says that in a
way to allude to the fact that they
have always wanted to do that, but they
haven't been able to? Well, yeah, that's exactly
the point.

(03:20):
They've been lying about trying to maintain that
the entire time. That's a terrifying thing to
see right there. And before we get into
all that, today's the latter half of the
show will be getting more into foreign policy.
I know recently I had said the the
next coming one will be more focused on
that. There will be a overlap today, but
if I don't get to it today based
on time, the very I will be getting
to the next show. And I know I

(03:41):
do say that sometimes and it doesn't happen.
Just realize that you never know what's gonna
happen over the next day, the next couple
of hours in this field and, ultimately, have
to make the decision. We come to it,
but I mean it when I say it.
And so tomorrow or the next show, ultimately,
I'm planning for that will be more focused
on the ins and outs of just continuing
to document the genocide and the and the
foreign policy and other dynamic other dynamics. I

(04:03):
will make a couple of points about this
today, specifically Russia and Ukraine, and how that
overlaps with the many different points we'll make
today regarding Trump's administration picks, regarding
the conversation of free speech, and then just
getting into some foreign policy in general about
the ongoing starvation tactics, the United Nations report
that's been out for a while now and
how many people are disregarding that.

(04:23):
But I wanted to say something quick before
we got started.
I've this this group has been sending me
their physical newspapers for quite a while. And,
I mean, honestly, I chump I more often
than you realize, I have notes to, you
know, acknowledge this person, thank somebody for a
note, and it just there's just so much
swirling around half the time that I forget
to do it. And then I always get
mad at myself because I hope you guys
know how much it all means to me.

(04:44):
The the the kind words of encouragement, the
the the directing me in a point into
something I haven't seen before, the donations, the
the continual support. It's it's it's what keeps
me going. So I just hope you know
that for all of you out there sending
things in whether it's the mailbox or just
donating to the different platforms. It is not
just the fact that the finances are what
keep this going,

(05:06):
but keeps me going
spiritually, physically, mentally,
everything.
So thank you for being who you are.
But I wanted to say thank you to
this group because I love that this is
happening in general. Now I'm sure there are
things in these papers that I that I
wouldn't necessarily exactly agree with and so on.
And frankly, nothing comes to mind, but just
always saying that the objective, But it's called
Druthers,

(05:27):
and this is an old one, by the
way, and this is the joy of defiance.
And it's an actual real paper, you know,
and you you flip through this and it
gets into all the kind of stuff we're
talking about. And
and and for the most part, it seems
to me to be pretty nonpartisan and objective.
And either way, I just wanna give a
shout out for them because they're all, like,
consistently sending me these, a few of them
that I place out on the table for
anyone that comes through here. I just think

(05:48):
that's an important thing to to first thank
them for, but highlight the fact that there's
a lot of great work being done out
there that's not on the Internet, that's not,
you know, through these platforms
that just, you know, the grueling day in,
day in, day out effort to try to
inform people that many people don't see. That
let's see. Half of most of you in
this chat are doing that every single day.
So an acknowledgment to you all as well.
So thank you for these newspapers. I think

(06:09):
that's important work. Whitney and I have talked
about over the years and Matthew not too
long ago about potentially trying to do something
in a physical form.
It's just a lot of work that goes
along on top of everything else. But now
I don't wanna get too much in just
opening stuff because I have a lot to
get to. I This is probably gonna be
a very long show. I'm hoping to, you
know, who cares? Right? Let's go let it
go as long as it will. There's a

(06:30):
lot to talk about. And I think in
general,
a lot of this very much connects today,
kind of in the way we have been
over the last, you know, so many shows,
I guess, highlighting the the Israel focus on
the cabinets and other things that I think
are important,
what that shows for what's coming, and really
as I see how that connects into what
I see the larger agenda that would be
happening either way and trying to highlight and

(06:51):
elucidate and and, you know, those different things
that I think people need to see. But
as always, just giving you the facts around
it that you can conclude whatever you want
from them. And I'll always give my opinion
around how I think they line up, but
it's important and I will always emphasize that
you should come to your conclusions about what
those show. That's very important. Now we'll also
talk, as I said, about Ukraine and Russia

(07:11):
and how that plays in and some interesting
overlaps into that with Elon Musk as well
as some foreign policy dynamics. But, again, getting
into the kind of predictions and statements about
what they're gonna be doing and whether they're
holding true to that
thus far, at which I think is pretty
clear that's not happening at least in a
lot of different ways and some interesting developments
around Trump's predictions. And then the main point

(07:32):
today, which I use for the title, is
about the idea of the that that was
already floated. It's been discussed a lot. And
now Trump just it it, it confirmed it
via Truth Social.
And I believe it was
I believe it was just wanna make sure
I said they get the person right. Yeah.
It was Tom Fitton
on Truth Social who stated the reality of

(07:52):
what it was gonna be using military assets
as he put it to basically immediately conduct
mass deportations.
And Trump tagged that and rather highlighted it
and said true with exclamation point. So that's
about as much as you're gonna get a
confirmation from things right now before we actually
get to the point the
point where they're actually in place.
But I think it's a really alarming thing

(08:13):
for a lot of different reasons, and we'll
get into that pretty early today Around I
mean, there's a lot of conversations. Posse comitatus
is an obvious one, but, of course, there's
nuances to National Guard in particular when they're
in their own state. And there's I mean,
so there's always ways around this stuff. But
it's alarming for the different reasons. The declaration
of national emergency,
which regardless of the logic always opens up

(08:34):
government abuse.
And I get people wanna believe that this
is their person and they're gonna do the
things they the way they want to, but
that's never the way this ends up. And
even then, realize that in most cases, as
you can look for the COVID stuff or
even the opioid crisis. These are national emergencies
that have gone on through multiple administrations when
we don't we just pretend they're not even
there anymore. And so I think that's also
one of the things to consider. But just

(08:55):
the idea of discussing military, whether national guard
or anything else,
in the United States, domestically, it's always a
very sensitive conversation. And then using it it
it as the the national emergency in order
to effectively
roll all of this out, it it causes
a very kind of opaque circumstance
where
even if you think even if Trump is
doing exactly what he thinks you want,

(09:17):
there's a whole dark, you know, fuzzy area
there where all sorts of individuals could take
advantage. During COVID 19 exam for example, We
saw the governors left and right take advantage
of all sorts of things that you could
argue neither Trump nor Biden, whoever was the
the whatever time frame we're in, actually wanted
those things to happen,
and yet there's always abuse.

(09:37):
So we'll get into all of this and
why I think this is a problem. Of
course, the main point that I think I'll
make to start is the worry
the problematic nature of the partisan game in
all of this. That no matter what you
think, even if you have every faith that
the point is that simply you should be
critical
about where this goes and ask whether that
is the right step. Even if you believe
in what they're trying to accomplish. Because they

(09:58):
were supposed to pretend that there are certain
channels this is supposed to be done through.
Right? Of course, the problem is always that
it's already set up. Well, because the Democrats
won't let it, so then we have to
circumvent it in order to stop them from
doing what
okay. That may line up to you. What
you're really saying is we're all gonna basically
ignore the rules, the laws, the in order
because the other side is doing the same
thing. You know my statements about that. Now

(10:20):
even if that's true, the point is you
are creating a a
ongoing cycle of ignoring like, I I somebody
recently said on, I think it was a
Fox show, that we're looking forward to Trump
getting in there and just executive ordering his
way through this.
Now now that's not what we're we're calling
for that now, the idea that we want
them to sort of circumvent the process. Well,
yes. Like, in the logic I'm I'll be

(10:41):
the first to point out how broken congress
is and by design, arguably. Of course, ignoring
the influence and why that's the way it
is from outside forces. But my point is
that we can acknowledge that problem, but the
solution should not be more of the problem.
That seems pretty silly to me. But, there's
a a lot of things that we're seeing
today in regard to trying to acknowledge these
problems.
And

(11:02):
people that will refuse to
acknowledge them at all unless there's a solution
presented.
And this I think I said this online
recently. It's like saying, you know, it's like
us it's like we're stuck in mud right
now, and we're not supposed to be allowed
to point out that that's the reality. That
we're supposed to just be positive about it.
Don't worry. The weather will change. We'll make
our way through it. Instead of it going,
but wait a minute.

(11:23):
No matter whose fault it is, we're currently
stuck in the same place. But But let's
first acknowledge that. No. No. What's your solution?
Then never mind. We're gonna keep acting like
nothing is the problem. That is everywhere, and
I think we all sense that.
So it's obviously important to acknowledge the problem
exists
before we even know the solution.
Otherwise, we won't be able to come to
that. And I think that's part of these
the issues is that we can rush through

(11:44):
problems that I see as being manufactured
by the power structure in order to rush
you into the solution that's already prepared. It's
a classic concept. And I think what's problematic
is a lot of people, and it happened
during the left with COVID 19, that you
see people on the right that are willing
to overlook how uncomfortable these would be coming
from
anybody else. I mean, we just came off
a national emergency conversation with COVID 19. Can

(12:06):
you imagine the response if it was Kamala
Harris or Clinton or Biden or anybody else
for any logical reason?
That same criticism should be applied no matter
who is in position.
So let's start today
with one thing I thought was really interesting.
I just I I I was not planning
on showing you this right before I got
started. This was just almost entertaining, but kinda

(12:26):
crazy, and it's nothing new. It's straight up
censorship and, of course, from Facebook, you know,
the old school version. We're all on Twitter
censorship today. The point is that Facebook,
it just it's hilarious to me. So here's
the one of these random this is still
one of the pirate accounts that I use
since the last one was deleted and the
one before that.
The point is that this I shared the
Odysee link and for whatever reason, it just
shared this isn't usually like this today or

(12:47):
it isn't usually like this, but today, it
just shared a thing that was, like, literally
just says odyssey.
There's no other information on there and the
link takes you to the current video, but
there's no link, there's no information.
Now what's funny
is this is you know, I just that's
just what it looked like and it's and
it's partly false.
Similar to another post reviewed by 3rd party
fact checkers. What exactly? The odyssey title? The
non image?

(13:08):
So my point is I just had this,
like, static always, like, fake news no matter
what I put out there, which is pretty
much what we always expect today. And you
actually click on it and it look what
it says. Fact check. Video about COVID 19
recycles
disproven claims and do wait. What? What? We're
not even talking about COVID 19. There's not
even a tangential well, I guess there's one
point today but that's not the title. There's
no tag for it. It's not like they

(13:30):
actually picked up on that. This is my
opinion. Facebook just going, you know, fake news,
misinformation,
whatever you wanna pick. Go ahead and choose.
Throw it at the wall, whatever works because
that platform, that account is supposed to be
suppressed. And I'll show you right now live.
So again, the odyssey link, if you click
on it, just takes you to the video
of today. Right? Which has nothing to do

(13:51):
with COVID 19.
And by the way, there's no information there,
so Facebook wouldn't know that. But you click
on let's see why, and it says it
right there.
I just think that's hilarious.
So it wouldn't to me, it shows this
industrialized version or rather the systematic
systemic censorship that's just about suppressing flow of
information no matter what we're talking about. Like,

(14:11):
I got the COVID 19 misinformation tag well
beyond when we were fully talking about it
like we were. I'd be I'd be talking
about Israel that day and they go misinformation,
medical misinformation, and censor the video. Just because
they that's you get the point. We all
see that. And Twitter
is just as bad today. We have to
be honest about that in different ways, but
it's happening constantly. People are screaming about it.

(14:33):
Even conservatives where people just wanna pretend it's
not there. I just thought this was entertaining
in a way because of how lazy that
is. Almost almost embarrassing that they would continue
to do that, but who cares? Because Facebook
is, in my opinion,
not interesting or important anymore, but in any
case
oh, and I was just gonna oh, that's
right. It doesn't matter. I was just gonna
do it live so you could see it
on there. And if you share it, it

(14:54):
pops up like this on the actual
like, it says to say, oh, I guess
it didn't work that day. Oh, here's the
interest this is actually even more interesting. So
that time, it actually shared, and it actually
shared my video with the link. And guess
what? There's no tag. But for whatever reason,
be the one that
is
not
it it doesn't make any sense. That's just

(15:17):
funny to me. Anyway, it's not worth the
time. It's these these platforms are ridiculous. And
it look. It it's if you think this
is unique to Biden
versus Trump or whatever else is going on,
guys, this has been the ongoing reality or
the Twitter dynamic acting like we're fighting the
GARM infrastructure when they literally partnered with GARM.
You know? It's just it's it's infuriating that
we have to fight against these partisan children

(15:37):
screaming about narratives they've never truly investigated because
of what somebody said online. You know? This
this is what we need to try to
and again, you know, and again, I I'm
trying to temper myself, even what I just
said right there. I'm trying to make myself
better and try not to be so belittling,
frankly, even when people deserve to be belittled.
And I'm I I you know I say
that, but that deserves ridicule. I mean that.

(15:59):
There are things out there that deserve to
be called out for as stupid as they
are. But I'm kinda trying to go through
a process where I'm thinking, even even those
things, is it worth it? Does it have
the right is it does is it my
thought in the past has been sort of
like almost highlighting why people shouldn't you know,
if you read that exchange before you look
at it, you might think, oh, well, you
know, there's a reason to be consider but
in the maybe that will cause people to

(16:21):
not look at it at all, which goes
against what I believe in. You know, anyway,
you can see, I'm trying to go through
a process and asking myself whether those things
are worth it. And I think we should
all reflect on that. Because trying to find
a bridge, even with people that are, y'know,
trying to find the truth but maybe missing
it is an important thing. But I think
we know there's a huge portion of the
conversation that are people that are not trying

(16:42):
to do that. They're deliberately trying to sabotage.
And that's that's where I'm always trying to
suss out and sometimes, I guess what I'm
getting at is even when that's the case,
I should just walk away. Right? Anyway, you
didn't need to hear all that. But I
think it's important for us to realize that
we're all dealing with something really, really, I
don't know, just overwhelming. And it's been going
on a long time.
But on the point about,
censorship and overlapping, I just wanted to point

(17:04):
out that this is something that is just
as prevalent on Twitter and I think it's
important to make sure we see that. Now,
I wanted to start with a point a
a a tweet from Carrie Wedler.
And this gets into the kind of, you
know, kind of bridging from that into the
point about the
incoming administration and the kind of the blindness
to how obvious even if you think Trump's
on your side that the people that are

(17:24):
being picked, the actions that are that are
already beginning
are just already examples of abuse of power
and willing to overlook that because you think
it'll be abused in the right way. There's
a great clip actually from one of the
people that are being picked by Trump where
he makes this exact point that we should
not be afraid to use our power aggressively
against our opponents under the mindset that that
we know they're wrong or they're the bad

(17:44):
guy. And even if you think that's right,
the point is at the end of the
day,
more government power, more suppression. Even if you
think the people in that moment deserve to
be suppressed. Interestingly, kinda what I was just
saying. The point being that we have to
think about it in the long term.
Even if you think the government power is
being used correctly today, just recognize that we
should not be calling for more government power

(18:06):
over our lives.
That's that is kind of the slippery slope
we've been on for a really long time.
Now she says lots of people are saying
you're blackpilled if you don't if you call
out Trump's emerging cabinet for the many Bush
admin, neocon, and APAC appointments.
But to me, she says it's actually a
white pill to recognize that the ruling powers
have their own agenda, and it's not serving

(18:27):
the people.
And even, like, here's what's funny is even
if we're wrong,
it's not it's these terms have become meaningless
just like antisemitism
or anything else because of the way they're
misused by people trying to manipulate the the
people out there genuinely wanting the good thing
but being played by the partisan situation.
The point being is that black pill is
the opposite. Even if we're wrong, we're trying

(18:49):
to highlight the fact that we're pushing back
on power. But we could still be wrong.
Black pill is to act like there's nothing
we can do. They've already got we're just
too powerful. They're spying on all of us.
Just give up.
Which is weirdly more
aligned with the kind of lesser evils perspective
than pushing back on the whole thing.
But she says it's actually a white pill
to recognize the ruling powers have their own

(19:09):
agenda. Seeing this shatters old programming
that politicians represent us and frees up consciousness
to imagine and implement
decentralized
voluntary solutions.
If you feel optimistic about a few of
the appointments, I do understand.
And I hope that doesn't just lull people
back into apathy and slumber because they think
daddy government loves them now and is going

(19:30):
to fix everything. That's kind of the same
point I was saying is that whether or
not some of them line up or even
all of them,
it's still government control. It's still government, and
we should be pushing back more. Again, we
have to realize, even going what most Republicans
would think they align with is kind of
the origin point, the constitutional republic founding fathers
mindset, which was the opposite, by and large,

(19:51):
than more government and more power in order
to keep you safe. It's the exact opposite
of what this idea was about.
And I think what's scary is a lot
of people who are actually with good intentions
being ideologically
trapped in something where they don't realize that
they're they're they're challenging what they truly believe.
It's just being displayed in a way that
makes them not realize that. David Icke says,

(20:12):
just watch the last episode or just watch
the last episode of of their,
iconic show. And absolutely must watch if you
have if you've bought the Trump, Musk, Thiel,
Teal, fake alternative media psyop. If you want
to hold your current belief in the Trump
fantasy, give it a miss.
But meaning, don't watch if you don't want
your illusion to be shattered.
Now the show is worth watching as usual.

(20:32):
The point, nonetheless, is the or the point
on top of that is what people are
engaging with it about. There's a lot of
points like that today.
This person says, yeah. But you're offering no
real world tangible solutions.
So why should I listen? You see my
point?
So you can understand the problem. And he
maybe you already do. Maybe you disagree with
him. But you don't know the information until
you engage with it. Just because somebody does

(20:54):
not solution does not mean it's not worthy
of investigation.
The ultimate point is that if you're gonna
disregard it because there's no provided solution, you
are ignoring a problem.
So you don't care that there's never gonna
be a solution if everybody acts like that?
Well, that's kinda the whole point, is we've
been conditioned to feel like we need to
be provided the solution before we can start
taking the steps. This is what I bump

(21:15):
up against every time in the conversation about
voting.
We can all acknowledge, seemingly
everywhere in every context outside of the moment
we're pushed into a voting lesser of evils,
that the whole thing's screwed. It's broken. This
doesn't work. They cheat. Russia inflow. Whatever the
narrative is. But then when it comes down
to it, and we talk about the voting
machines, we talk about however you wanna view
it, just the democrats, whatever you think, that

(21:37):
we can all acknowledge that there's so much
corruption that is so invest so immersed with
every part of this election process, even comparing
it to what we pretend is the 3rd
world, we look like we're ridiculous today.
So I keep and we we talk about
the Princeton study and the idea that we
have a near zero, minuscule,
statistically insignificant
outcome on policy. Our

(21:59):
our vote doesn't translate, guys. Everything we have
in front of us shows us that. And
then when we acknowledge that, we all shake
our heads, and then I go and then
they go, okay.
Well, like, are you gonna vote? Well, yeah.
I've gotta vote.
That's every time for me. I know very
few people that end up going, okay. Well,
I'm not gonna do the thing that we
just established has no effect.
So what else are we gonna do? We
don't know. Okay. But we're definitely not gonna

(22:20):
fall back and and do the same thing.
Right?
I just don't get why the response for
a lot of people is to go back
to the thing that we all acknowledge doesn't
really have an effect because what else are
we gonna do? That's the trap.
Now you can disagree. Absolutely. I could be
wrong. But if you can agree with everything
else we've talked about, then the answer should
be let's find the solution. Let's find an

(22:40):
alternative path because we know this that's the
point. But we've all been conditioned to sort
of expect that the government will provide those
things for you. Right? Or whatever authority figure
you're bowing to, which is ultimately that they
go, yes. Here's the issue, but here's what
we're gonna do about it. We watch our
TV or government processes when I mean, there's
so much that most of that's an illusion
to me, but that's aside from the point.

(23:02):
So, obviously, we should be engaging with this
information.
Considering it for yourself, looking at both the
left and the right or whatever you wanna
look at it, looking at everything, and then
you decide what you think makes sense. Not
because of some show or some podcast, but
consider them, but you make your decision. And
Craig says, why should everyone else come up
with the solutions?
He's presenting a possible scenario for us. We

(23:22):
need to come up with the possible solutions.
Rely on your own instincts. Never rely on
someone or anyone for answers that we already
have. And they go, oh, right. Like I
said, big.
Yeah. This is just this now, that's black
pill to me. That you just need to
be if you're not handed the solution, then
never mind.
That's sad to me. And they say, yeah,
you gotta buy us books to learn the

(23:42):
answers. Guys, that's so dumb. No. Because if
you actually listen to them talk outside of
this one I mean, the point is just
like we have things we can discuss that
I don't come to a solution in the
moment we're discussing it, but they're constantly laying
these things out. So are all of us.
But because you didn't get it as in
a 2:40 tweet, you move on. That's engineered,
in my opinion.

(24:03):
Here is a post we put out about
the RFK
fluoride example.
I briefly made the point in the last
show about how I think it's important to
think about that either way this goes,
let the point being about RFK Jr and
people already citing what he had to say,
in regard to why they're they may remove
fluoride from their water in a specific county.

(24:25):
And, ultimately,
that that's a positive. No matter how I
mean, no matter what the whether that positive
is being used to blind you to a
larger negative, it still is an ultimate positive.
That's my point, first of all, which is
that's important to think about. But on top
of that,
that it's crazy that we can have decades
of peer reviewed science that's only just now
being acknowledged by

(24:46):
people that just happened to see the conversation
on corporate media about the trial that turned
out that fluoride was dangerous, which we've already
known. The point is the science has been
there.
So why are these local scientific, you know,
whatever, the health county
supervisor, whatever the call the local plus job
is, why are they not being guided by
the actual information? And why are they deciding
to be swayed by RFK saying it? We

(25:08):
which is still a positive thing.
And I'm it's not even a knock on
RFK Junior. It's simply more so to know
whoever that may be. Why why isn't it
the actual data driving their choices? And I
just think that's important to think about. And
so I think that's what the the general
framing of the tweet was. And the person
says, do you do you do what you
do so that you get a pat on
the back?

(25:28):
See, this is the kind of response you
get from stuff. What are you talking about?
This has nothing to do with me or
the point is that what they're I guess
they're trying to allude to is that the
only reason they do it is to get
a benefit from it, which I wasn't that's
not point anyone's making here other than, I
guess, what they were assuming my point was.
And doesn't matter who the average person thinks
thanks for this, it's a win, which is
exactly what I said. Don't let the perfect

(25:49):
be the enemy of the good, which is
more of what I was getting at today
in this. So I get I just don't
I think people are, I myself included, very
on guard,
thinking that I'm secretly fighting for the Democrats.
I'm trying to sway you into some way.
Certainly possible. Consider that. But I think that's
almost like a
a parasitic mindset that's been driving people to
just ignore everything.
But it says I I responded by saying

(26:09):
there's a simple it that's an idiom. I've
said this before.
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
That's that's an idiom, and and these things
mostly have inherent truths to them. But none
of them, most of them, I think almost
none I've ever heard of, are absolute or
universal. Right?
There are plenty of examples where letting
settling for good instead of perfect is exactly

(26:30):
the opposite of what we should be doing.
My point is, in this case,
that is lesser of evils as a worldview,
to pretend that we let's if if you
were constantly playing the game where you're settling
for what's in front of you but picking
between the less bad candidate, well, as we've
already talked about, that is a guaranteed cycle
of decline,
And that's where we are. It's just this
nonstop game where we're seeing the worst and

(26:52):
worst people, and I I think we've all
are beginning to sense that. And that could
be by design from outside influence or whatever
else you wanna think about. But I simply
said,
demand the best.
Right? Because this will inevitably lead us to
slow decline away from what we want, which
I think is quite by design.
But so I think I that's my point
about thinking about what this all means.

(27:14):
Right? We need to be asking for more
than what we like, demanding the best,
not just settling for the middle ground. Now
because I mean, look. Let's put it this
way. One last point on this is that
if we were in a position where this
was the one anomaly or the few anomalies
where we get something that's not just the
best, It just works out that way. But
the the next one, look at that. They're
the shining beacon of the top top of

(27:35):
the country.
Can you look back at any election in
your lifetime where you ever thought people on
that stage were the best of the best?
You know you can you know that's not
true. So this is my point. And it's
don't let the I mean, I mean, how
many times we've been hearing this? Don't let
perfect be the enemy of good. In the
context of this, it's everywhere. Like, purity test
and black pill. All these things bubbled up

(27:55):
to the conversation, and it's not coming from
organic conversation.
Now on the point of fluoride, very quickly,
I thought this was wild. This is the
point I made about discussing the idea of
RFK saying that he wouldn't, if in that
position, which hasn't happened yet, would ultimately not
force these locations, but let the information
influence
them. Well, that's the way it's already been,
quite frankly. Now, yes, it seems he's already

(28:17):
having an influence in some locations by simply
saying these things, but here's Kathy Hochul,
governor from, what is it, New York,
saying
she signs a pediatric
fluoride bill to boost dental health. You know,
the thing that it literally doesn't do at
all, in fact, hurts you. But and we
talked about all this.
Fluoride is a neurotoxin. That's what the trial

(28:38):
just found. The National Toxicology
Program, an element of the US government in,
what, like 7 different versions has found without
question,
according to their research, that it is a
neurotoxin, which we already knew,
and that it does lower the IQ of
children at levels that it's currently found in
water. And you also have the toothpaste, your
food, and your shower, and everything else.

(28:58):
And here she is, I guess, either completely
ignorant of that or being driven by lobbyists
just pushing this out today. How crazy is
that? No. Really, it shouldn't be
any more crazy than it has been over
the last decade because the science has already
been there. The fact that people are only
aware of this because of Fox or CNN
finally pointing to something we've been screaming about
for 10 years, that should be the problem.

(29:20):
Either way, the point is that
cat Caitlin says, isn't this against the law
now? And that's the secondary problem.
No. It's not. Should be, frankly. But the
point is that, ultimately, people have gone pacified
by that discussion even though the US government
is currently still dragging its feet It is
still debating about levels, and
they know what they're doing.

(29:40):
And that frustrates me that we don't with
it.
Oh, okay. Back to the main point. I
always get pulled into different thoughts because I
could talk about this for an hour. Is
that, ultimately,
this is what's gonna continue. You're gonna have
ideological differences that aren't based around science just
like with COVID 19, and people like this
will still make their locations
do use what shouldn't be used. Now, obviously,

(30:01):
many people will probably leave because of that.
But not everybody, most importantly people that don't
have the money, aren't able to flee their
state. Which is usually how that works.
So my point is that if we know
this is dangerous,
a neurotoxin, which it is, then it should
just be removed. It shouldn't be a question.
That's the point about, like, dioxins and EPA,
which I'll mention in one brief moment in

(30:21):
a second.
We know it's dangerous and they just don't
do anything. And in every other circumstance, they're
willing to restrict your entire life to fight
for Israel, but in these cases, they my
point is always that I don't think they
should exist at all. I don't think the
state should be there because these things wouldn't
be existing without them and there'd be self
regulation to my point. But
because it is, it frustrates me to highlight

(30:42):
that they use their power to constantly force
you to do things to your detriment all
over the place. And when they finally have
a provable example in front of them that
shows that something they should use their power
for, will, we waffle, we debate.
And I'm not even calling for it. I'm
just simply highlighting how frustrating that is.
Now here,
Whitney Webb points out, now that Kennedy is
the HHS nominee, I would and, again, that's

(31:04):
important to think about. It looks like even
Elon Musk might get pushed back on from
the senate and which, again, I don't even
know if that weird
dual
co supervisor of a nongovernment location even needs
senate confirmation. Who knows what the hell that's
gonna I have a point about it in
a minute. But the point is it hasn't
happened yet. So let's wait until we see
people in position before we start get, you
know,

(31:24):
predicting rather not predicting, but stating that we
know what will happen or we know this
will happen because he's there and Trump and
Elon are gonna save the world. Now that
Kennedy is the nominee, she says, I would
really like to to know
his answers to the following questions.
Given all the hype around RFK Junior's team
up with Trump and what it means for
health care, her questions are many funders of
Trump such as Joe Lonsdale and Elon Musk,

(31:45):
as well as JD Vance himself have major
investments in biotechnology,
which is the same point as always. If
it was anybody even tangentially connected to a
left wing conversation, people would be screaming about
it. But because it's right on the surface,
but Trump and Elon are involved, we pretend
like it's either ignored or we ignore it
or we pretend like it's a good thing
because they're doing it. It's the good billionaire
technocrat AI. Right? No. These are the same

(32:07):
problems, guys. You know, it's the same direction.
It's the same mRNA platform. It's exactly it's
the same problem. They're all gung ho about
it. We're just pretending it's not there for
whatever reason. Gene therapies and they're all invested
in biotechnology,
gene therapies and companies deeply invested in mRNA,
DNA vaccine technology.
Trump stands by to this day, by the
way, I'll show you next. Operation Warp Speed,

(32:28):
which produced mRNA vaccines of dubious efficacy. They're
straight up deadly and dangerous. Let's be clear
about that. Some of which were made with
the help of companies tied to Lonsdale's VC
among others. Will RFK Junior be opposing the
use of these technologies as he seeks to
tackle the chronic disease epidemic in the US
in a future Trump administration?
That would be a pretty big deal.
If he have Let's just say he happens

(32:48):
to have the influence. Let's say he gets
the position of HHS that Howard Lutnick straight
up said wouldn't happen despite Trump now saying
that's what's supposed to happen.
Does he then say we're no longer gonna
allow mRNA technology which he's spoken out aggressively
about?
And then,
dramatically affect the finances of these pea I
mean, that's a pretty big deal. I sure
hope so. Something tells me that's not what's

(33:10):
gonna happen.
She says, will he allow the health DARPA,
ARPA h, to continue to operate, which was
created during Trump's last administration?
Will he allow Peter Thiel and Joe Lonsdale,
at cofounded pal will he allow the Peter
Thiel and Joe Lonsdale cofounded Palantir to continue
to collect and analyze American's health data, which
has been going on since COVID 19, and

(33:31):
genetic data with no meaningful oversight into how
they use that data? And if they share
it with other government agencies they contract for,
like the CIA or Israel and Mossad and
the same overlap that we already know is
taking place?
She says, I agree that there is a
major health care crisis in the US, but
identifying the problem is one thing. Will these
experimental technologies be used or promoted as a

(33:51):
part of the solution? I think it's important
to know and it seems like not many
are asking these types of questions. Now here's
a good point where you're just saying,
we wouldn't be able to have this conversation
if we heard hadn't first acknowledged the problem.
If we were standing back over there 20
steps away saying, well, let's wait till somebody
provides a solution to a problem we haven't
acknowledged yet, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

(34:12):
So that's the point. We know this. So
now let's start trying to find a way
paths away from it as as opposed to
just ex accepting the current reality.
And she says if Trump is still bragging
about the military run off warp speed, which
again, this is recent.
This is from 20 no. This is from
17th. And I this is you can look
it up on his truth social. He says

(34:33):
we're coming up on the 5 year anniversary
of COVID. And if you recall, under president
Trump's leadership, so that shows me clearly that
he's not writing those, which we all know
already, we had incredible public health policies.
Is that what you think?
And I know you love to blame everybody
else during his administration while blaming every small
hiccup that might not even be Biden's fault

(34:55):
to Biden during his administration. The point is
if we're gonna make a
if a president is responsible for what happens
under his administration, which I argue they are,
as a a leader, a true leader would
do, whether or not they're the one that
made the call, then we'd we apply it
equally. But we know that doesn't happen. The
point is the same here that during Trump
Trump's administration, there's plenty of things that governors
did that I wouldn't blame Trump for, but
he's the president. So his policies, his over

(35:18):
he the declaration of emergency, the stan this
the Defense Production Act, all of these things
created the circumstances for them to do those
things.
So do you think there was incredible health
policies?
The lockdowns?
The emergency?
The rushed injections? Come on, guys. We all
if we're honest, we know that's ridiculous. President
Trump's unparalleled
creation of Operation Warp Speed was like none

(35:40):
we've
like, it was like
wait. Was one like we've never seen before?
Oh, so they were sorry. I go I
didn't the I didn't the last part I
missed, doctor Ginnett. So they're quoting Fox News
saying that. The point
is that this is so shockingly
I mean, it's just a lie.
I I mean, guys, I we can we
all know. This is what's so embarrassing about

(36:01):
this one point that he refuses to go
back on, and even so was still elected
by those people if you think that's what
actually happened. I don't.
The point is that clearly his his base,
the vast majority of conservatives and republicans,
do not agree with that.
That's wild to me. And fact and the
fact is they're right. This was this was
one of the day most

(36:22):
this was unprecedented, and we all know that.
It was unprecedented, and it wasn't because of
ops it warp speed in a good way.
It was because of what they rolled out,
what's still happening because of it. And they
refuse,
refuse, or
he refuses to take to take
accountability for that.
I'm gonna grab real quickly some of the
work that Whitney did around this in some

(36:44):
of her interviews.
But she writes,
if Trump is still bragging about op warpsby,
which he did, military run, and the removal
of regulations, which by the way, that's what
they're also hinting about now, do you think
that's gonna apply
it will apply to the biomedical field. Especially
since Vivek and Vance and Teal, and all
of them are deeply invested, Musk as well,
in the microRNA

(37:04):
mRNA factories for CureVac.
So they're telling you we're gonna remove regulation.
What if that applies to which I we
it will is the point. That's I this
is where and this is my prediction, but
this is where this comes together.
The removal of regulations, it also entailed so
mRNA
vax tech could be finally taken to market
under the fog of a crisis

(37:25):
when it couldn't even get through animal trials
the entire decade preceding COVID due to safety
concerns over lipid nanoparticles
and near zero efficiency. And I've said this
so many times.
I've I've yet to get anybody who could
answer this, and we all know what it
really shows, that it what she's highlighting there
is the decade before, they weren't able to
succeed in any of these COVID injections. And
what they kept bumping up against was the

(37:46):
lipid nanoparticle, which, don't forget, Vivek and the
rest of them are like, that's our patent.
Were they hurting people because they had to
increase the lipid nanoparticle concentration
enough to where it would encapsulate the mRNA
instruction and and get to where it needed
to go. And every time they increased lipid
nanoparticles to enough to do that, it was
toxic for people.
Okay? So they weren't. And so now we

(38:07):
jump forward today and what they do? They
they wrote about how they had to increase
lipid nanoparticle concentration to make sure they have
more okay. How they solve the problem? Well,
clearly, we can see they did not. People
are suffering from these things.
So either way, I agree with their point
that ultimately this is about getting this out
in the market to normalize this project this
direction for something that I think has obviously
nothing to do with our health.

(38:27):
She says, I think R. F. K. Junior
really should address what his policies will be
on mRNA and other biotechnology injectables as head
of HHS
because since endorsing Trump, he's been silent on
the issue. Doesn't that concern people?
Should.
And VP Vance and many other prominent doe
Trump donors like Musk are deeply invested in
medical genetically engineered products.

(38:48):
So, yeah, I think he owes us something
to step up and say, yeah, I still
care about this. Or I'm gonna take action
that will will
immediately affect the team I'm on.
Seems crazy.
Now here on the
main page here under KeyLab team, you go
to Whitney Webb. You can see all the
different kind of series so far. And I
think there's a couple more that I need

(39:09):
to add on here. But we have
oh, you know what? And by the way,
we also had,
I'm gonna come back to something to make
you wait. I forgot the the actual tag
on there for the, exposed warp speed series
that we essentially were doing in interviews and
different conversations.
Yeah. I'll come back to that so I
don't have to make you wait. But I'll
open this just so you have this.

(39:30):
This one is the engineering contagion conversation,
and there's a lot of important stuff in
that conversation as well that goes exactly into
this, starting with the Emergence BioSolutions, which had
a whole role in this to beginning to
begin with, the Amerithrax conversation, the overlapping of
these for Dietrich, and all of this stuff.
It's very important. And I actually won't get
to that in one second. I was just
gonna jump to that. This point about what

(39:53):
former CDC director suddenly just said now that
we're into the Trump phase. It's very interesting
and telling.
But here's what high impact flicks had to
say. And I this is really important. There's
2 points like this today.
On all of this, I I'm convinced there's
this what whatever the CIA facade q add
on q operation, whatever, you know, which is
exactly what I think it is.

(40:14):
It didn't go away.
And I think very clearly we're beginning to
see that this is something that is
the the Trump following,
whatever that is, the whatever's driving I don't
mean all conservatives, Republicans, whatever, but there is
clearly this kind of mobile, this mobilization around
them all that I it's it's completely immersed
with the QNON conversation or queue. Whatever you
think the like, what's funny is they all
push back on, oh, it's only queue. Well,

(40:35):
I was around when this first started, and
it was definitely QNON. But either way,
the point is that in there's all these
different things popping up now that show you
this is not just there. It seems to
be prominent in conversations, and I think a
lot of Republicans don't even realize that they're
being influenced by it.
But this one is about Trump being the
savior, and this blows my mind. And I
pointed to this months ago.
It's about the idea of Operation Warp Speed,

(40:56):
and we're gonna get to one in a
minute, about saving Israel for last. They're literally
putting that forward now again. Acting like, no.
No. Israel's the bad guy, we know, but
he's secretly saving them for last for a
big plan.
Crazy. So, yeah, let them genocide this population
for our agenda for our agenda.
But
says the summary here actually, I'll read this
first.
It says their their original plan,

(41:18):
I guess the democrats, which is what they
always mean in this, was to slow roll
a vaccine
after 10 years of lockdowns,
involuntarily
detaining people into quarantine camps.
When the vax was finally released,
it would have been mandatory
and dissenters would be detained in camps.
Sure. Anything's possible, but how in the world

(41:38):
do we pretend we know that?
Cue. And some cryptic thing on a chat
board. But it says Warp Speed, stop the
FEMA camps. Oh, I see. So Donald Trump's
Operation Warp Speed, which, by the way, was
rolled out in response to what this whatever
this was,
was the thing that they did to stop
the 10 years of lockdowns that would have
happened because of the thing that Warp Speed

(41:59):
was rolled out to respond to.
Yeah. That totally makes no sense.
Let's walk through that one more time. Okay.
So the idea is that they're claiming Operation
Warp Speed, Donald Trump's rolled out military operation
in a response to whatever you think that
was. COVID,
whatever. Whatever you think happened during that time
frame
was a response to that. And they want

(42:19):
you to believe
that this was something that was rolled out
to stop
the lockdowns,
which would have been in response to the
same thing.
Certainly possible that this was something long sought,
and the point is that they he rolled
out the injection process
that killed all these people, millions of people
around the world,
to stop 10 years of lockdowns,

(42:41):
which were I mean, you could it it
it's so ridiculous to me, which I anything
is possible.
But to pretend like now this is okay.
Right? The
obvious
operation that killed all these people that is
gonna genetically manipulate I mean and by the
way, is building the platform
for what's coming next that all of his
team is invested in. Oh, it's okay. It
was all just in your interest. All the

(43:03):
children that died, all of the myocarditis, all
of the heart problems, all of the cancer,
all of the, the
a the l a l s, and, I
mean, come on, guys, Was to stop the
thing that we can't prove? That works out
really well. And here's what he had to
say about it. The summary here is Trump
is our savior.
You know what it kinda sounds like to
me? It would have been worse if he
didn't get it. Same logic.

(43:25):
Right? How do we know?
10 years would have been there if you
didn't get the thing. The thing, it would
have been worse without it.
Guys, that's crazy. It's the exact same logic.
He says Trump is our savior is the
summary. If he hadn't stepped in and initiated
the military operation called warp speed, we would
have all been thrown into FEMA camps. In
the qanon propaganda below, Chad Vibas says Trump

(43:46):
is, quote, stopping the new world order right
now. You know, the new world order that
Elon Musk just said was coming.
And the biggest proof to me, he says,
is seeing Warp Speed stop the FEMA camps.
So this is a what's the term there?
I forget that. So you're presenting something that
we can't prove and saying because it didn't
happen, that's proof that what he did made
them stop. That's that's that's basic cue logic

(44:06):
for you. Chad's proof is that something didn't
happen. That's the best way to say it.
Meanwhile, Trump openly supported Zionism,
sunk us into $12,400,000,000,000
in national debt, and that was Donald Trump,
CARES Act and the the largest transfer of
wealth in US history
or
the any number of other things he did
that they don't like to acknowledge even outside
of COVID 19, like the bump stock ban

(44:27):
or the red flag laws, which relate to
I mean, there's so many different examples.
Shoveled shoveled trillions to corporate elitist in big
pharma, takes credit for a horribly disastrous clot
shot, initiated red flag, gun confiscation laws, and
a myriad of other freedom trampling actions. My
2 followers, because they operate
they operate on pure hopium,

(44:47):
chose not to see the obvious.
Now, of course, if you're in the assuming
mindset, you may already be pretending that we're
doing this because we believe the Democrats are
better. Well, you'd be stupid for thinking that
because that's not the case. They're all the
same thing, and they're all actively driving the
same direction. I know that
confounds
the only way you can make sense of
this conversation. But the reality is if you
wanna actually engage with the the way we

(45:08):
see this or I personally see it,
you have to admit to yourself that I
think they're all the same.
And that may be frustrating that you still
think we're backing not backing Trump, but the
only way people seem to be able to
rationalize this is that we are fighting for
one side versus the other. And it shows
you something.
But he goes on to say, why would
Trump have to initiate Warp Speed to stop
FEMA when he could just write an executive

(45:30):
order to do away with FEMA?
See? Perfect.
Always the the ever logical part nonpartisan Brian
from He
says he could have defunded the program, but
he didn't. He could have exposed the existence
of FEMA camps and the FEMA camp agenda,
but he didn't. Their hope has no rational
basis. Rather than
stemming the tide, Trump advances the NWO, the

(45:51):
new world order by his tyrannical actions.
I agree.
Now Carrie adds, the widespread euphoria in the
MAGA crowd because RFK or Trump
or whoever is going to is going to
save them from using government from save excuse
me. I'm jumping through it. The widespread euphoria
in the MAGA crowd because RFP or Trump

(46:12):
are going to save them using government
seems distinctly at odds with their self perceived
distrust of government
and disdain for dependence on the state.
She's right. There's a con inherent contradictory contradiction
there. That's because they've it's the same thing
kinda we were just doing. It's because it's
a binary worldview and the idea is that
Trump is the good side, and therefore, his

(46:33):
government is the good government. When in reality,
most of them, especially this weird string of
libertarians that pretend that they can support stay
what's going on here, pretend like that's he's
just gonna take it in a good direction.
Well, I certainly hope so. But I think
every single thing that's happened thus far has
showed that that's not the case.
Now,

(46:53):
Pine Pact Flix Brian also brings up an
important overlap because we're we're stepping into 2025
right now. And if you if you which
if you feel, which I I also have
a similar feeling that these vent two zero
one simulations always seem to play some role
in what happens later.
I mean, just look at your history, guys.
It's very obvious. Even the ones during 911
or before. It's very clear that these things
are in many cases, maybe not always, but

(47:15):
in many cases, predictive programming, social engineering.
Let's not forget the SPARS pandemic.
The exercise,
2025 to 2028,
right during Trump's administration.
He says, heads up for another possible event
to a one COVID 1984 scenario.
The original link to the document is in
the comments below, and I just added don't
miss Derek Bros. It's great coverage of this

(47:37):
because Derek wrote about this
a while ago.
Now there's plenty of people that covered it
before that. I'm not trying to say that
he somehow got it before anybody else. My
point though is that this is the work
that's put in from TLAB and Derek in
particular about trying to keep you ahead of
the curve. The sparse pandemic of 2025. He
wrote about this in 2020, guys. We were
looking at the next one already, saying echo
chambers and vaccine opposition.

(47:58):
Important point, not to get into this too
deep now, is just to recognize the over
one thing that really stands out to me
in this that I we laugh about when
we talk about it in, like, a macabre
way is that they literally outline in this
ex ex, exercise
that they lie to people. I mean, you
have to realize this is a government engineer
I mean, it's Johns Hopkins and so on,
but it's still government.
They're at the table doing this exercise, and

(48:19):
they literally write into their experiment
exercise that they lied to us about the
whole thing.
And then because we find out, we don't
believe the vaccine. It's like it's literally it's
just crazy how they write it out exactly
and then we don't think about that? They
know they're being dishonest, guys. That's the whole
point.
Now

(48:39):
Uh-oh says, I'm old enough to remember TLAB
asking the same question years ago.
Former CDC director makes bombshell COVID claim
that, quote, there's a real possibility virus was
born in North Carolina. You know, Fort Detrick.
Trump's former CDC director makes bombshell claim. And
then, of course, Du makes an excellent point
and says, don't forget about Charles Lieber. And

(49:00):
the overlap with all of that, and I
tagged this as well, the Charles Lieber connection
from nanotechnology to COVID 19 to technocracy.
The point he's making is that this is
all interconnected.
Lieber being the ones working on the virus
sized particles
or virus sized transistors and these I mean,
we're talking about things the size of a
virus that are basically nanotechnology machines that can
this is this is from 2,011

(49:22):
at Harvard.
Weird how we don't talk about these things.
Now the point
is that we have to realize whether we're
talking about a nanotechnology device, whether we're talking
about a bacteria, whatever pathogen you think might
exist. The reality is they're working on things
at Fort Detrick, and we just played you
that clip at the beginning of yesterday, but
possibly in the context of something other than
a pathogen.
Dioxins or whatever else. But realize how crazy

(49:43):
it is that we can have so much
evidence around this. And, also, let's be clear,
as Danny Rancor pointed out, there's just as
much evidence that would highlight that it might
not even be there.
Either way, it's interesting to me that he
comes out as a Trump supporter now driving
this forward, which gives me the worry that
we're gonna have some u-turn around this where
they go, guess what? It was for Dietrich,
and it was Biden's administration or rather whatever

(50:05):
they can use it. But guess it would
have to be the administration before him or
blame it on Russia or blame it on
Iran or who knows where that goes.
Interesting. Because remember, even the conversation of, anthrax,
their argument was originally aimed at somebody else,
and they weaved it back through Fort Detrick
because there was an admission there. But realized
that we here, I'll just play the opening
thing I played, not the long one, but

(50:26):
the quick one just to refresh your memory
about Fort Detrick. We have over 1300
documented
cancer
victims right now just in a one mile
radius.
I'll be quite honest with you. It's changed
my life so radically. Sometimes I don't even
know who I am.
1300
people in a one mile radius.
What's causing so much sickness?

(50:48):
It turns out all these victims have one
thing in common. They live next to a
military base called Fort Detrick.
Yep.
Now it's obvious because before that, we had
many different examples
of leaks coming out of this, and this
is BSO 4. Ebola, corona
viruses, the worst.
And there's plenty of history showing you the

(51:08):
leaks that come out of this lab, whether
intentional or not.
Anthrax, the whole conversation.
And now he's suddenly going, it could've come
from there? Well, yeah. No. Duh. We were
talking about this the entire time.
But that doesn't mean that he's telling the
truth. This could be another deviate. I find
the timing to be very, very telling. So
let's be on guard, especially with the spar's
point and everything else about whether this is
rolled out during Trump's administration for obvious reasons.

(51:31):
There's been plenty that have predicted that.
Now we also recently talked about the dioxin
issue. And I just wanna make sure you
didn't miss this. On 17th, yesterday, we did
a a specific focus
on the dioxin. It's entitled murder by malfeasance,
dioxin contamination and the ongoing cover up.
Now I think this is done
it's I don't know how anyone could deny

(51:52):
the information we're highlighting.
It's all very clear, cited from even corporate
media, peer reviewed science, and then a bunch
of other,
tangential and and connected information that shows you
that we're living in a very an obvious
issue right now across the country, across the
world, in fact, around the willful ignorance that
dismiss
the the dismissal works, but, you know, the

(52:14):
idea of just ignoring the problem
around how clear it is, I think it's
because, obviously, they don't know what to do
about it. But I wanted to include that
for something that was shown to me right
after I got done yesterday, and this comes
from the 11th November of this year. And
it says, failings in the response to East
Palestine, training derailment, compounded human environmental impact.
Now the point we made yesterday is that
I spoke to Scott c Smith again. He's

(52:34):
still waiting on the final test results about
dioxins in particular, but he's
he reported to me that the EPA is
doing the same thing they did in East
Palestine, and they're currently refusing to test for
dioxins despite the fact that we know, again,
as a matter of fact, that dioxins are
produced because of what happened. The question is
how much? And they're again refusing to test
for them. It's the same point. There's something

(52:55):
bigger happening around all this. And it starts
in this article from 11th saying, a study
led by researchers at Purdue University in Indiana
has delivered a a multifaceted
overview of the contamination found in East Palestine
and its surrounding surroundings following what happened. The
team's review of released data, alongside their own
samples, highlights gaps in the official response to

(53:16):
the disaster. It also reveals that chemical exposure
continued for months following the derailment despite the
community returning to the area. Now it gets
into the same stuff we talk about. That's
not really what I wanna show you. 1st,
just to recognize, just like every other time
we've shown you, we were the ones saying
this based on the evidence at hand that
they were the the radius was too small,
and we got shouted down. Now we know

(53:38):
as according to The Guardian, it went 16
states across. We know according to the reports,
they can find, yeah, they failed you, they
didn't contaminate or they didn't they
can the exposure continued for months despite what
they told you was okay. People to this
very day are still getting sick. And on
top of that, we now have Conyers, Georgia.
We just talked about Bakersfield. These are provable
through the hacksaw releases.

(53:58):
Now the one I what I wanted to
show you is not just that, but this
example. How about the fact that this report
is November 2024.
Right?
It's by Purdue University.
Wouldn't you think that they have the body
of evidence to look at that would report
all the information? So what's 2 things you'd
think would be most certainly mentioned by now.
Right? The fact that it was treated vinyl

(54:19):
chloride,
which means that they didn't have to blow
it up. That's that was, again, released in
court, which I bring up every time for
those that see me go over this every
time. Because it's it's provable. The actual court
information is in the source material in this
episode.
Norfolk wide.
It was treated by Alachloride and these experts
told him it wouldn't explode which they did
not tell the fire chief.

(54:40):
So treated.
Not in there. I wonder why.
Not even
chloride or vital chloride. Okay. Interesting thing to
not discuss in the article about exactly what
happened there. Okay. So treated vital chloride, not
even mentioning the fact that that was not
okay. That blows my mind because this is

(55:01):
public.
How about the most obvious, the elephant in
the room?
Dioxin.
Well, look at that.
It's not in there.
So this is the point that I wanted
to make sure you didn't that you saw.
I should have had this in the last
show.
On November 11, 2024, a Purdue University study
around what happened there
still does not mention dioxins,

(55:23):
despite the fact that that was the issue.
And even the EPA was forced to acknowledge
that.
There's clearly
a some kind of a marching order that
they are not supposed to acknowledge this. I
argue, just like Steven Lester said in the
Guardian article, it's because they know they'll find
it, and they don't know how to solve
that problem. And you could argue that's by

(55:43):
design as Kaitlyn Austin 5th argued in the
great poisoning dynamic that this is about lowering
lifespans for financial reasons or plenty of other
nefarious ideas, or it could just be that
this is something they don't because they don't
care about you, they don't care about the
things they pretend to care about, and suddenly,
they because of their re some restricting
regulations or whatever else, this problem grew

(56:04):
even though they knew it was there. But
now they acknowledge that it's such a problem
that it's actually hurting people, but now they
don't know what to do because, what, if
they point it out, they still don't know
how to deal with it because they don't
know how to get rid of dioxins. They
don't. But on top of that, once they
admit that, it's an easy track back to
the point that they didn't do anything about
it. They chose to ignore it. So what
do they do? The new p EPA person

(56:24):
comes in and they go, well, I'm not
acknowledging that because then it's on me. So
they kick it down the road, like the
Vietnam war, like Afghanistan, like everything else because
they don't care about your health.
I'd like to believe Trump and RFK would
be different, but sadly, the information continues to
show me the same thing. I have hope
for a better idea,
but I'm expecting the worst.

(56:44):
That's just kinda frustrating to me that we're
in that position.
So let me add these really quickly for
you guys.
So you've included these, so you make sure
you can check out this information.
Spars as
well. And this one,
it really is incredible to me how much

(57:05):
information we have around all this.
But moving on to the conversation
of
Ukraine and Russia.
Now I I could've put this again with
other foreign policy, but this one kind of
overlaps interesting ways with what we're gonna get
into next. Now this is a report from
antiwar.com.
Biden allows Ukraine to strike Russia with long
range US missiles. Now the point here, to

(57:25):
make sure you understand, this is not new.
I mean, we've already even had this kind
of conversation before already. Now either way, the
reason I say it's not new, whether you've
never heard about it or not, is because
they're already conducting things well beyond what we
think is happening. The Times from the UK
reported,
I don't know, 6 months ago or more,
even more than that, that the they were
that that they were literally flying in. US

(57:47):
helicopters were flying in
members of the Azov movement and the Ukrainian
military
into Russia to conduct strikes inside of Russia.
Like, I would argue that's far more of
a brace than the long range. But either
way, the idea that this has been happening
or possible that they would be okay with
it, that has been going on the whole
time.
That's what I believe. And I think the
evidence shows that very clearly. So the Biden

(58:07):
allowing it to me just continues to add
to the absurdity
of
driving people to support Trump's administration because they
are gonna be rolling out some dangerous
nation shattering ideas
that begin the new direction. That's what I
believe.
And so just like the Kamala and everything
else,
they basically imploded in a cartoonish way right

(58:29):
before all this when they're already bad. They're
all the same thing to me, but to
a degree that was almost impossible to miss.
And now this is the case. And also
on top of that, I which I'll point
out what Trump just said, but I'm still
of the mind that it's obvious that if
the agenda was to continue this, that Trump
would be right on board with it. I
think this is about much bigger things now
in regard to what Israel is going through
as well as these new rollouts and this

(58:50):
just like I just like I posited earlier.
I don't know. Maybe a few shows ago,
maybe a couple weeks that this would be
the one bone you might get thrown. Or
and I think there's one other thing I
thought was also possible, which which this could
be something that they just decide to
say we don't support this anymore.
And I would still call that a positive
thing, but I that depends on how that's
done. But my point is always, I'm very

(59:12):
skeptical about how any of these things, positive
or not, might be used to hide something
worse.
So this is important because, obviously, at least
publicly shows this. So even if Biden or
or, Putin, which I do think is already
well aware of this, is on the spot
to sort of respond either way. Because publicly,
it does make a shift. So he has
to look you know, you see my point
is there's a lot goes on on the

(59:33):
stage of
it all. Where when like, Iran and Israel
are more than know about what's going on
back and forth, but when they publicly say
something, that's a public respond. And it it's
it's a it's more of a game in
a lot of ways. But so this is
changing something though, and it could arguably lead
to something much more disastrous
because of the reality that the Azov movement
is a bunch of neo Nazi maniacs supported
by Israel and United States, and what they

(59:53):
can carry out under this could be catastrophic.
But we already saw something happen. Now here's
what I think is really important to understand.
Ukraine, the Azov movement specifically, that is a
a proxy element run by the US and
Israel is very clearly
conducting false flags, psychological operations, killing civilians. Regardless
of whether you've ever cared to look into

(01:00:14):
all of this, it has been one of
the most obvious things in the conversation.
They were it's just like with Israel, by
the way, and I'm don't miss the overlap
right there because it is clearly funded by
Israel as I pointed out 55 times.
They were doing the same thing Israel does
now. They're posting videos of them hurting people,
sexually abusing people, caping them to to post
and sticking, you know, all the worst stuff.

(01:00:35):
They they were posting that on their own
social media. In the beginning, the Azov movement
themselves posted a video of them dicky, dipping
bullets into pig fat
for to for use against the Muslim fighters.
Of course, they rapidly tried to hide that
from everybody, but the point is this is
what we're actually dealing with. And so here,
hot spot highlights on 18th, Ukraine
tried to blame Russia for hitting a residential

(01:00:57):
area. That's what all the corporate media is
reporting.
Russia launches massive attack on Ukraine energy, killing
at least 7,
but a a u a blogger in Odessa
went to go review it for himself. The
old video is right here only to discover
that it's a missile that was an American
Patriot AD system.
On top of that, Che Bose points out,

(01:01:17):
again, western client media like BBC, CNN, lie
about Russia targeting civilians. The deception is endemic.
Large pieces of American Patriot air defense missile
which caused the destruction are clearly visible
on this film from Odessa. Now, of course,
it's obviously possible that this could have been
used in the in in the interest of
making you think that that was American.
But I do argue that these are not

(01:01:37):
this exact thing is not readily accessible as
easy as other things.
But I think it's important to highlight how
many times Ukraine has already been caught. The
railroad station, Bucha itself, the examples of where
or even the the, what was it?
I'm forgetting what country it was, but the
the rogue missile. Right? That that you that
Zelensky
continued to argue with Russia even though the

(01:01:59):
US admitted that it was actually theirs that
went haywire.
No. It wasn't haywire. That was a deliberate
attempt to blame Russia for killing innocent people,
and they all just washed it away because
it became very easily exposed. So I think
this is obviously what we're dealing with here.
The evidence continues to be shown that this
is an American missile that was used,
and I think it's because it the u
Ukraine is trying to create the dynamic to
justify what they're doing or blame Russia. And

(01:02:21):
I think that's in the interest of anything
but stopping what's going on.
But here, as Black and the Empire points
out, what CNN was saying about Ukraine
in 2022, you know, back when it was
okay to acknowledge what they really were. So
this is not just about the Nazi elements,
which, by the way, have been cultivated and
grown and funded by US and Israel, which
I can prove to you. I'll bring those
up as this is down.

(01:02:42):
But about how they're reporting,
these the whether it's the Donbas or Crimea
locations,
they're
being ethnically cleansed and attacked by the people
from Kyiv. And remember, post 2014,
this was a US puppet puppet government,
and still is.
So CNN is reporting that they were being
murdered by these people. You know why? Because
they originally, they wanted you to see all

(01:03:02):
of this because it was gonna be blamed
on Russia,
and that blew up in their face.
So here, by the way and what you
know why that's the most obvious thing in
the world? Because on a dime, the narrative
changed the moment that this thing shifted.
So you can't have this and the other
be in the same conversation because these are
the same people we're talking about.
Petro Poroshenko will have a hard time winning

(01:03:24):
back hearts and minds in this city as
the people of Donetsk sweep up the debris
of their homes and livelihoods.
They are hardened against the president they say
is killing his own people.
We are Ukrainian, but they kill us, this
man says. So we probably need our own
country. The people in Kyiv, they are not
brothers for us. Okay. So the people in

(01:03:46):
Donetsk, Donetsk or Donbas in general for both
of them
are clearly of the mind that they wanna
go somewhere else, and then that's what happens.
Then guess what? Just like with Crimea, everyone
in the world in the supposed international community,
so basically just Europe and the United States,
scream that they were
they were occupied and taken and Russia is
taking terror.
Well, you guys are you can clearly see

(01:04:08):
that they want they want to move. So
if the point is it's not okay if
they want to move. They're not allowed to
declare independence or declare they wanna be part
of Russia. It's not allowed. They only endorse
independence when it's their puppets that are using
it or carrying it out when it's not
even what it's about, Like with the Neo
Nazis in Ukraine
or the people pretending to protest in Syria
that they end up shooting and blaming Assad.

(01:04:28):
The point
is that it's very easy to see that
these people had every reason to want to
leave. They were being attacked. And then when
they finally do, they just pretend that Russia
stole everything.
Just like Crimea, there was a clear referendum.
The vast majority voted for it, and they
just pretend that's not the case. Because the
people we're dealing with are not just
monsters.
They're juvenile.

(01:04:49):
They're childish. They act ridiculous. They it's almost
like they enjoy watching people
suffer
and ultimately playing out some kind of like,
ultimately, like you like with Israel, for example.
How often we see the like Netanyahu specifically
loves
to say one thing to the western media
and then run right over to the Israeli
media and almost boast about how we lied
to everybody or boast about how easy it

(01:05:10):
is to control them. Because and we all
can see that.
Not not the core element that doesn't look
anywhere else but see it on Fox News,
but most people can still recognize, and they
know that.
And there's a there's a a an element
of that which is something that they actively
do, I think. And this is the same
thing.
The shells hit these homes days ago,
but the tears are still fresh.

(01:05:41):
We live on the ground. It was
so hard for 2 weeks, especially for 27,
28, 29th,
but only today it's quiet.
Sorry. Sorry. I need to go.
2 people were killed outside this block of
flats last Wednesday. 1 of them was a
50 year old woman, the other a 34

(01:06:01):
year old woman.
Her husband, who won't talk to us, he
says he's in shock, managed to make it
down to the cellar with their little child,
but she just didn't have the time. And
this is a story that repeats itself over
and over in dozens of apartment blocks with
civilians being killed by the constant shelling around
Donetsk.
Right. And this is the government that is
provably put in place by the US government.

(01:06:22):
That's not a I have the clips I
can play for you for the 100th time.
The difference is simply that they just shifted
narratives because the the agenda changed because they
got exposed. They were building this narrative about
how they were the they were being driven
by something else.
Now let's let's be clear in case you
forget,
One of the most important ones

(01:06:44):
is Israel.
Rights groups demand Israel stop arming Neo Nazis
in Ukraine. This is from 2018,
specifically the Azov movement.
Doesn't that matter? Isn't it confusing to some
people of why they would be funding Neo
Nazis? Well, if it's confusing, take the time
to look into it because you'll find out
it's not that confusing.
It's actually historically correct in the sense that
that's what they've always done is my point.

(01:07:06):
Now Ian says, the US will provide the
location. The US will provide the appropriate warhead.
The US provides missile configuration.
The US provides satellite targeting guidance. The US
provides special forces on the ground and geolocation.
They provide the live feed, but then claim
they're not involved,
which by the way is like any whatever
left or right person is in that place,
it's the same way it goes. And that's

(01:07:27):
about what just happened. It's always that they're
like, it's same with Israel.
We're not we we don't know. They they
can answer for themselves while they're basically
running the genocide.
It's just always how this goes.
Now on top of that, let's not forget,
a $182,000,000,000
a 182,

(01:07:47):
990,000,000.
A 182,000,000,000, a 190,000,000, a 190,000,000,000.
That's how much has gone to Ukraine
since the beginning
of the ongoing, you know, Russia calling it
their special military operation, whatever else you wanna
call it.
That is unreal.
And really, to consider what's going to Israel
right now, it's gonna probably pale in comparison.

(01:08:10):
The bottom line is if you think that
your country, your government, whether during Trump or
Biden, is ever acting in your interest, at
least first,
your answer's right there. The truth is that's
never the case in my opinion, at least
not first. Frankly, I you know my perception
on these governments. But the bottom line is,
you know, people suffer in this country. Like,
there should never be a circumstance where that

(01:08:30):
much money is going somewhere else, especially when
plenty of people don't people in this country
don't agree with it, some of them anyway.
When there are people in this country that
can't, because of our government actions,
can't feed their family or because of government
policy, can't afford their home.
It's unreal. Now I'm not calling for social
programs here. My point is simply acknowledging that

(01:08:51):
the government taxes you and uses this somewhere
else. How about they just stop taking your
money?
Now Elon Musk chimes in and says, well,
he responds to the same account that's been
lying since the beginning of the Israeli
genocide.
And he doesn't care even though he's clearly
been an ex people have called it out
for using the things they share that are

(01:09:11):
false. But who, you know, who knows what's
driving their actions? Couldn't be the funding and
support from another country. But it says the
US cannot force us to sit down and
listen at the negotiating table, says Zelensky.
We are an independent country, he says. Now
that was worthy of laughing about because of
the current reality that the government is not.
The country, I would agree with in any

(01:09:32):
current circumstance, but the government that runs that
country is a complete bought off, bought and
paid for puppet regime put in place by
the US government in Israel.
And this person is well aware of that
because he is the puppet in chief, and
he's been put in that place as Scott
Ritter laughed about the beginning, where he literally
walked out and spoke to the Azov movement.
They laughed at him. They said, you're ridiculous
because he he's not in charge. The point

(01:09:53):
is that clearly, they're not an independent entity
right now because of what the US government
has done.
But he says his sense of humor is
amazing.
And and laughs about and there's an article
simply showing you in a BBC article
saying Ukraine says highlighting he's a comedian, which
is, I guess, to bolster his point.
But okay. So he's laughing at the fact.
So let's be clear about this. Elon Musk

(01:10:15):
is laughing because
this guy thinks he can do what he
wants.
Isn't that an interesting revelation or an admission
in a way? Which it shouldn't be surprising.
Let's be clear. The US government is completely
controlling with the Israel, with the outcome, the
the the Zelensky so called president himself. They're
funding him for sure, but more than that.
So first of all, you could argue just

(01:10:36):
the money is why you might say that.
We've been giving you so much money, you
don't get to decide for yourself. But how
isn't that contradictory?
From the government perspective, which Elon Musk is
now a part of, you're supposed to pretend
that they are a democracy,
and we're just funding them to stop the
bad guy Russia.
Now you realize even that that's not even
the Republican argument is the same.

(01:10:56):
And so he laughs because, no. You can't
do what you want because we're in charge.
That's the one thing I will always appreciate
with with Elon Musk continuing the the role
that Trump brings to the table.
Like in Syria, we'll just we're gonna take
the oil. Well, good. You're a criminal and
you should be locked up, but thank you
for being honest about it. Same thing. Because
I already see the sense that they're, they're
so
I think they think they're act they have

(01:11:17):
impunity, quite frankly.
He's telling you right there. That's, well, funny.
They don't run themselves. We do. Oops. I
was supposed to say that. But here's the
next part, which is really important.
Maybe it's more than that.
November 16th, Zelensky
con con Zelensky
confident that Ukraine's war with Russia,
quote, certain

(01:11:38):
to end with Trump in office. What? What?
Okay. So here's what tells me everything, and
this is completely my opinion with on on
the back of what Elon is saying,
that this is not about Zelensky is a
puppet. He's doing what he's told.
So if we're to believe that Zelensky, who's
been aggressively pointing out that we can't just
stop the war, we have keep going. It's
for the freedom of Ukraine. Right? Well, nothing

(01:12:00):
has changed. Russia has not Russia still takes
territory from them. They're still engaged. Ukraine's lost,
essentially.
And now he's gonna say Trump will end
the war? Now is he let's not pretend
like he means Ukraine wins all of a
sudden.
So he is now backing him up saying
that the war will end with Trump
without you getting what you need?

(01:12:20):
So it seems the more important interest is
to convince the world that Trump has done
something good even at the expense of Zelensky's
reputation, what he said he's fighting for, or
Ukraine succeeding.
Does that make sense to anybody? It shouldn't
because that doesn't line up at all.
To me, it shows that Israel and the
and the United States government are setting the
tone for whatever this puppet says out loud.
And now they're going, okay. We need a

(01:12:41):
win here, so let's shut this all down.
And Israel is focusing on other big things,
so we don't care about you anymore, so
let's just make this happen. And then we
will go for that's what I genuinely think.
Because to me, that doesn't make any sense
at all. But we'll have to wait and
see.
Now let's talk about the bigger picture of
the Trump appointments and the different floating of
where this all supposed to go. Again, with

(01:13:03):
the end one of the points being right
there that they're telling you they're gonna end
the Ukraine war.
Well, here's a quote that that adds to
that in a bigger picture about supposedly ending
all these
3 letter agencies and so on. Alex Jones
tweeted, Trump issues emergency World War 3 warning.
You gotta love the fever pitch that never
stops from Alex Jones. When the war fever
pitch is so funny. It's always about world

(01:13:23):
war 3 civil war over take like, I
just listened to a clip from Bill Hicks
going back a long time ago.
Or, was it,
not Hicks?
Shoot. I'm playing, what is his name now?
I think I have it right here. Hold
on. It's important to make sure you guys
get the, Bill Cooper. Excuse me. I was
thinking of the other. So Bill Cooper

(01:13:45):
has many clips out there where he just
calls out Alex Jones as a complete grifter,
which I've never heard before.
I'll actually I'll grab one and include it
for you in case you wanna see it
since I wasn't really gonna get into that.
But I find that fascinating for obvious reasons.
Here's just one of them on Bright Johan
of all places.

(01:14:06):
Where
he is openly calling out Alex Jones as
a complete chill, a manipulator,
making things up, talking about World War 3
to drive you in which is interesting because
people love to conflate the 2 of them.
Like, they're like, he is the secondary.
That's super telling to me. And that should
be very telling to people that like Cooper
as kind of an origin point of a
lot of the independent media direction.

(01:14:28):
I find that interesting. Tell my point about
this. This is World War 3 warning, but
he says 20, 47
calls for an immediate ceasefire to Trump.
Immediate ceasefire to be declared by Ukraine and
Russia to stop the war escalating to nuclear
Armageddon.
He realized something. So, look, obviously, there's risk
to the neo Nazi element doing all sorts
of things.
But are we so let's this is what

(01:14:49):
continues to insult people. I mean, it's an
insulting point. It insults your intelligence.
For someone like this to never wanna get
into the Israel, to really talk about the
threat of Israel, what they are doing, the
the the leading element they play in the
globalist direction,
and then pretend that this is the one
we have to stop for the risk. You
mean we're not worried about the Samson option?
Alex Jones, we're not worried about them and

(01:15:10):
their nuclear weapons. They don't wanna acknowledge even
though we all know they're there as they're
openly continuing to ethnically cleanse an entire population.
Look. I I either way, if they can
stop the conflict for the interest whatever their
interest, but for the Ukrainian people to stop
dying, then yes. It's a good thing.
But realize that I'm so I keep trying
to tell you is that there are things

(01:15:30):
that are shifting over to rash to get
you to believe that the next step was
a net positive. Even as they roll you
into CBDCs and central social credit and whatever
else that I think is coming.
To recognize that people like this seem to
be completely ignoring the obvious.
Never been closer

(01:15:51):
to World War 3 than we are today.
Not because of Israel, but because of Ukraine,
apparently. Under Joe Biden,
a global conflict between nuclear armed powers would
mean death and destruction on a scale
unmatched in human history.
Yeah. I agree. And there's only one element
really causing that right now is Israel. Driving

(01:16:12):
Iran, Russia, the United States, Syria, everybody.
Driving everybody into a constant that in Ukraine
and Russia, of course, there's also a threat
even with the nuclear plant dynamic.
But it's incredible to me that you can
make this video, that you can share this
about a threat to World War 3. You're
not gonna see a similar one of Trump
and Alice Jones talking about the Israel dynamic.
So you're literally ignoring the number 10 risk

(01:16:33):
on the table and pointing to a number
1 and saying, but that's the one. That
is a sidestep.
That's not by accident.
It would be nuclear
Armageddon.
Nothing is more important than avoiding that nightmare.
We will avoid it, but we need new
leadership.
Every day, this proxy battle in Ukraine continues.

(01:16:54):
We risk global war.
We must be Proxy battle. That's interesting.
Okay. Who exactly is he arguing Ukraine is
being controlled by? Does he mean himself?
Is that it's my point. It's like this
is one thing I do appreciate, which I
don't think he's intentional from Donald Trump, is
sort of being clumsy about his speech and
letting things out of the bag, or he's
pointing Israel or something else. But, yeah, this

(01:17:15):
has always been a proxy war. That's what
this is. And they did this on purpose
to draw in Russia. Whatever you think about
Russia, it's not that they're all good. The
point is that at the end of the
day, you can prove it as we did
from day 1. The evidence has always been
there.
This was the plan.
Absolutely clear
that our objective is to immediately

(01:17:37):
have a total secession
of hostilities.
All shooting has to stop.
This is the central issue.
We need peace
without delay.
In addition, there must also be a complete
commitment to
dismantling
the entire globalist neocon establishment that is
perpetually dragging us into endless wars,

(01:18:00):
pretending to fight for freedom and democracy abroad.
Sure. You you think he's gonna mention Israel
and the obvious overlap of his entire cabinet?
Well, they turn us into a third world
country
and a third world
dictatorship
right here at home. But to be clear,
I'm I'm not laughing. Obviously, that's what seems

(01:18:22):
to be happening. But what's hilarious is he's
pointing it at what he's pointing at are
the democrats.
Like this, again, it's like I was saying
earlier, this is worthy of ridicule. That's simply
ridiculous in the larger context of what's going
on in the world.
Overlooking literally everything else. Now I'm not my
point is it's not ridiculous because the US
government is clearly a part of this, but

(01:18:42):
that's him too. That's everybody behind him. It's
absurd to break off just the Democrats and
act like they're somehow the world new ruler.
It's all of this government, and there's so
many different examples of how both sides of
this are a part of it.
State department, the defense bureaucracy,
the intelligence
services,
and all of the rest need to be

(01:19:04):
completely
overhauled
and reconstituted
to fire the deep staters.
Got it. Got it. So we're not getting
rid of anything. We're just gonna make it
ours.
We're gonna get rid of the ones we
don't like, but reconstitute it. So continue is
the point.
It's quite a bit different than what the
VV'K is putting forward. But who knows? We'll
have to wait and see. But I think
it's crazy to pretend that we know.

(01:19:26):
If you think for one second, based on
what he just said, that that means get
rid of these agencies,
even though that's what's being floated, he just
received he said reconstitute.
It's not what that word means. And, clearly,
get rid of the Deep Staters. Guys, your
his cabinet is packed with them.
Again, if they end up being the one
that happened after January.
And put America first. We have to put

(01:19:48):
America
first. Now that's the only thing they'll hear.
The ones that wanna pretend that they think
whatever that means to them, that that's what
he means.
Certainly could be, but you don't know what
that means to him. You don't know what
that means to anybody else that you both
pretend, oh, America first. Then I'm I'm old
for it.
Or you could just be lying because that's
totally not possible. Right?

(01:20:08):
Finally, we have to finish the process we
began under my administration of fundamentally reevaluating
NATO's purpose and NATO's mission.
Our foreign policy establishment
keeps trying to pull the world into conflict
with a nuclear armed Russia based on the
lie
that Russia represents our greatest threat.

(01:20:30):
But the greatest threat to Western civilization
today is Israel.
Not Russia. Nope. It's probably,
more than anything else, ourselves.
And some ourselves.
So I'm sure you can assume he doesn't
mean the Republicans and him standing there. Right?
So who would that be then? Who is
ourselves exactly? Can you guess? Of the horrible

(01:20:51):
USA
hating people. Okay. Who do you think that
is, guys?
That represent us. It's the it's the The
abolition
of our national borders. Damn crack. It's the
failure
to police our own cities. It's the destruction
of the rule of law from within.
It's the collapse of the nuclear family and

(01:21:11):
fertility rates,
like, nobody can believe is happening.
It's the Marxists who would have
us become a godless nation worshiping at the
altar of race
and gender. Think about saying that while you're
doing what you're doing with Israel.
God. I mean, it's incredible,
the lack of self awareness or the deliberate,

(01:21:33):
deception, misrepresentation.
Again, he's he's almost not saying it for
a reason.
He's literally without question, he's saying it clearly
highly. He is saying the democrats. They're the
problem. They're the new world order. They're the
deep state. Oh, all these people that we
can literally see every day, they're the deep
state, the unelected power structure. Yeah. That makes
a lot of sense.
It's just become so lazy, guys. And that's

(01:21:55):
my point about the QAnon overlap.
Of course, these people are part of a
larger just so too is everybody else in
our government if we're gonna make it that
simple. But, obviously, I'm of the mind that
most all of them in congress
are really not that much in the know.
Some of them may have a little bit
more insight, but the problem is that you
have people like this that wanna just say,
that's that side of our government. That's the

(01:22:16):
only thing, despite how many clear,
direct connections the Republicans also have with exactly
what we're talking about. And more cases right
now with the direct influence to what Israel's
carrying out, which is a leading aspect of
where this all goes.
Guys, I know you're out there listening and
you're conservatives and you feel that. You see
it and it scares you, but you're afraid
to call it out. Have the courage to

(01:22:37):
be clear about this because that is childishly
bad right now. You're trying to make it
about by the way, instead of recognizing the
the large threat to the world, highlighting Americans.
You're pointing at Americans
because that's what this ultimately comes down to.
Just like the immigration
game, where they make it about the weaponized
migration, but they turn around and act like
the immigrants themselves, illegal or other illegal or

(01:22:58):
otherwise, are the enemy as opposed to the
people using them.
Your own narratives make it clear that somebody's
using them, but then you make them the
enemy? It's the same thing. He's turning you
against yourselves, even if some people may be
even supporting what you think is happening.
It's he's making it about the Americans themselves.
You're gonna go after the democrats across the
street as opposed to the government that's putting

(01:23:19):
you in this position, as opposed to the
Israeli government that's driving a genocide and creating
the very things that Alex and the rest
pretend they're fighting. And
environment. And it's the globalist class that has
made us totally dependent on China
and other foreign countries that basically hate us.
Yeah. It's just they hate you. They hate

(01:23:41):
you guys. Oh, kinda like they hate your
freedom.
Weird. It's like we can't make up new
narratives. These globalists want to squander all of
America's strength,
blood, and treasure. Now we're talking about globalists,
but he's still meaning the democrats.
Despite the obvious globalist interest of most everyone
in his current cabinet and the obvious overlap
to what Israel is carrying out around the
world, the interest of both of them connected

(01:24:02):
to the deep state, the World Economic Forum,
the great reset, all of the things we're
talking about.
If you can ignore all of that, including
Trump's deliberate and willful and promotion of the
operation warp speed dynamic, which was if you
can ignore all of that and still just
go the Democrats,
I don't think you wanna see it.
Chasing monsters

(01:24:22):
and phantoms overseas
while keeping us distracted from the havoc
they're creating
right here at home.
These forces are doing more damage to America
than Russia and China could ever have dreamed.
Evicting the sick and corrupt establishment
is the monumental task for the next president.

(01:24:44):
Why didn't they do it last time?
It's a good question. And I'm the only
one who can do it. I'm the only
one that can get the job done. I
know exactly what has to be done.
Sure sounds convincing to me.
Yesterday,
authorized
heavy, long range precision nuclear capable missiles. Yep.

(01:25:06):
Same old stuff. You're gonna hear that in
just about every Republican talk. Of course, the
republican even connection to my family. So, oh
my god. That's the story we should be
talking about. See, we should have voted because
we knew that would happen well. Well,
certainly,
something we always do was there. Something was
already happening. Something was already this is a
sidestep. This is a deviation.
To me, all of this is about creating

(01:25:26):
something else to point at.
To begin raining down inside
Russia.
But he but he he literally just said
that he hoped Trump will help end the
war.
So how does that make sense? So why
we start raining down this is on Russia?
Well, my point is I agree, but I
think it's about something other than what they're
framing it as, and both all of our

(01:25:47):
government and Israel absolutely evolved if they want
that to happen.
But how does that make sense with what
was just said?
Which Putin has said will be an act
of war and that Russia will be officially
at war with the United States. Of course.
Of course. Because you're bombing their of course,
that would be. What that is trying to
do is get you about the idea hyped
up on the idea this is World War
3.
If you don't recognize that we've been in

(01:26:07):
a World War 3 scenario for years now,
again, don't don't wait for them to go,
now it's there. Now we're in the thing
that we want you to worry about.
What's your idea of World War 3? Well,
multiple countries involved in a state of war.
Well, guess what? We've been there
since World War 2. It's clear.
Syria, a guy every other dynamic.
Right now, they're involved in Ukraine. Right now,

(01:26:29):
they're involved with multiple countries in Palestine. Guys,
this is already happening.
They're just trying to get you on the
edge of your seat so you're always waiting
for the next shoe to drop, and he
is playing a central role in that. When
Biden first floated it two and a half
months ago,
Biden made the authorization
at 2 PM CST yesterday,

(01:26:50):
and then he went out and gave a
speech in the rainforest and wandered off into
the forest. He couldn't even talk at the
podium.
Mitch McConnell now gave a press conference and
could not talk.
That's who's in charge,
trying to start World War 3.
And Yeah. I'll let go.

(01:27:10):
It's just so funny.
Yeah. It's not even worthy of ridicule. But
the point is, ultimately, guys, this is nothing
new.
Yeah. Biden's senile. They're all ridiculous. Half of
congress is taking senility drugs. The point is
that none of them are actually if we
can recognize the overwhelming influence from foreign entities,
you can make it Russia or China if
you want.
And we have to recognize that there's something

(01:27:32):
else going on. Whether Trump or anybody else,
I think you know where I'm getting at.
Of course, all all I think that's I
have that right here coming up next, I
think.
Yeah. It's right there. We'll come back to
it. I just tagged what Greg Rees said
underneath.
The religious zealots
and the left and right cults will now

(01:27:53):
fight each other
while their masters deploy the new digital banking
system. Never has there been a more important
time to question what you're being told.
Oh, interesting. I wonder why
Alex Jones is, you know, he Greg Reese
is still in full wars, I guess. It's
an interesting overlap. But don't forget what Whitney
Webb wrote for TLAB on March 2, 2022.
Ukraine and the new Al Qaeda.

(01:28:13):
They're always shifting these dynamic, guys, and this
was one there. We're watching another shift take
out take place right in front of us.
This is about recreating this. Now, this sort
of blew up in their face in my
opinion. But this was always there. You read
this, it'll you'll they won't the answers are
right there, they always have been. Your government,
left and right, are manufacturing a new war.
They're manufacturing a new boogeyman.

(01:28:34):
It but, of course, they ended up funding
them because it all the point is always
to remember that these things again, of course,
I could be wrong, but these things shift.
It's an it's an ongoing thing.
So there's always something. And then my point
is you could look at their own track
record. You look at what they were saying.
You can look at the way it was
being built. It's clear that there was a
rec there was an agenda, and then it
shifted
for whatever reason. And now now we're tracking

(01:28:55):
that. The point is that you can look
through the information here and recognize how clear
it is that things not only are going
in that direction, but that you are having
an effect.
That your information and your that's why I
think these new steps are coming because
it's very clear to them that they're no
longer able to completely influence and control the
narrative.
And doctor Groof says,
in regard to a vet here, speaking about

(01:29:16):
Elon Musk's,
oh, him and Elon Musk running Doge or
whatever we're gonna call it, says without tackling
the Pentagon and shutting down over 800 military
bases around the world, I'm sure there's more
than that, All their talk is BS smokescreen.
They tag Vivek. Or Vivek is talking about
this. We expect massive layoffs. We expect some
agencies to be completely eliminated. Okay. Well, let's

(01:29:36):
wait and see.
Trump just said reconstituted. Now, course, Trump could
be missing things or or rather not giving
you the full picture, and maybe V neck
knows more. Maybe V neck was V neck
was lied to. Maybe he doesn't know when
he's making it up. Who knows until it
actually happens? The point is that we should
not pretend we know, and we should not
we need to hold their feet to the
fire every step of the way for what
we actually want.

(01:29:58):
Because this
less government is a positive,
not a reorganization to get rid of the
ones you don't like and maintain the focus
and use the power of the people that
you think should be voting. That's the same
thing. That is a new direction weaponized
against Americans.
But I hope hope hope it happens.
Now interesting point we as we get into
this,

(01:30:19):
the BBC
and plenty of others are now saying there's
there's an issue with Donald with Elon Musk.
And apparently has alleged contact with Russia, which
again, I think is ridiculous overall. The same
thing with Colsie gathered the rest despite how
my opinion is that they're playing part of
the game right now and very clearly have
been.
The same time, you can still point out
how they're lying about, you know, all these
different groups are saying that she's a Russian

(01:30:40):
asset. It's I think these are ridiculous.
My point though is that nothing is set
in stone right now. Even Elon Musk, again,
whether or not he has to be confirmed
for whatever fantasy position they made up for
him,
It very well could end up where not
even he is on this administration because of
what happens with the senate. That's worthy of
considering
as we go forward.
Now this is already happening though, and this

(01:31:02):
is what I find crazy. Now I think
what we're seeing with the even appointments, it's
sort of an illusory thing in general, guys.
Power is not it doesn't necessitate some position.
Let alone and especially in a government that's
bought off by something else. The point is
that the power is already there.
And that could shift easily with Donald Trump
deciding Elon Musk because it's irritating him, which

(01:31:22):
kinda does seem to be floated right now
even by Trump's making jokes, but it's all
up in the air and it could be
just to trick somebody, so we're gonna wait
to see more as it goes forward. My
point though is that it rapidly changes around,
Trump's circle, and we know that.
But Elon Musk was apparently in a meeting
with an Iranian ambassador
on Monday, and this was last Monday.

(01:31:44):
Guys, if you don't realize why this is
terrifying,
at least
disconcerting,
then I think you're being blinded by the
fact that you just think Elon Musk is
the savior, the good guy, whatever. It doesn't
matter whether he's the most honest,
intelligent,
the best person in the world. This is
a person who is not currently in a
position, who is setting up meetings with a

(01:32:05):
with an ambassador to a foreign country that
there's currently hostile communication with.
Even if he had a position, he is
not an ambassador. He's not in a position
to do that. The Department of Government Efficiency
should not be making meetings with an Iranian
ambassador.
Now my question is, was this with Trump
and well, did he know about it? If
he was, why are we allowing somebody who's

(01:32:26):
not even the current government to have meetings
with an ambassador which clearly influences what may
happen between these countries?
That's just absolutely wild to me.
Why is Elon initiating foreign policy meetings? Now
my point is 2 fold on this. The
one that that's crazy that it's even happening
and what the implications could be or what
this consequence could be, but also just realizing
power when you can see it. The fact

(01:32:48):
that he even he doesn't even need this
position because Trump and them are doing it.
They're running their own thing, and he's clearly
gonna be given some level of power at
least right now.
That's more power than most people in government
have anyway.
Now this is from the New York Times
writer.
Elon Musk met with Iran's ambassador to the
United Nations,
Irani, on Monday according to Iranian officials. Now,

(01:33:11):
of course, you could also add that they
made it up.
Mister Musk requested the meeting, and the 2
discussed diffusing tensions between Iran and the US,
which again is is a good thing on
paper if that's actually what they're talking about
or actually what he will accomplish.
But it could just as easily be the
opposite because he offended somebody or whatever else
you wanna talk about. My point is that's
just what they're floating.

(01:33:31):
And just because he even has good intentions,
if that's the case, it's the overstep that
worries me. The willingness, the hubris of someone
like this to think they can even do
this right now. That's the kind of oligarch
billionaire technocrat mentality that scares pretty much everyone
that knows what's going on.
And, again, the kind of superseding of the
classical government power structure, which I think is

(01:33:52):
a huge part of this. That's the whole
Prospera overlap, which I'll kinda mention again at
the end of this segment.
I think we're watching some kind of new
transition into a new powering, a new governing
structure going forward. Now that's a little bit
more long term than people wanna hear right
now, but I see that coming.
The technocracy.
Now she goes on to say, the Iranians
said the meeting between Musk and ambassador the

(01:34:12):
ambassador lasted more than an hour and was
held at a secret location.
It's very weird. Asked about whether there was
such session. Now, by the way, you you
could couldn't you just like, right now, couldn't
you make an argument that that was a
crime?
That you have an American citizen who's not
part of the government meeting with a hostile
foreign government behind scenes at a closed secret
location?
Guys, in certain in other parts of I

(01:34:34):
mean, I'm not saying that should happen or
is even ranked justified. My point is that
in in other circumstances,
this government would call that a terrorist act.
I just think that's really crazy to think
about. This is asked about whether there was
such a session.
Stephen Chung, mister Trump's communications director, said, quote,
we do not comment on reports of private
meetings that did not did or did not

(01:34:54):
occur. That's weird.
Mister Musk did not respond to a request
for comment. So it's starting to sound like
they didn't want this to be heard.
The 2 Iranian officials said that the meeting
with Musk provided a workaround
for Iran,
allowing it to avoid sitting directly with an
American official.
Yeah. That's pretty wild. Now look. Anything that
my opinion would be ultimately that there shouldn't

(01:35:16):
be any legal restrictions on somebody choosing to
meet with somebody else of their own free
accord.
But aside from that, my point is not
that I think things should happen, but in
the context of what we know this government
acts like. Or what about the Democrats suddenly
decided to make a case about this? I
bet you're gonna hear something about this.
The idea that they're basically right there saying
that they're working around the current government to

(01:35:37):
speak with a hostile convert country. Guys, people
have been arrested for less than that, and
I'm not calling for that. In fact, if
that happens, I'll be actively defending the fact
that he shouldn't be arrested.
Even though I feel he's part of a
larger thing that's more dangerous, I'll still stand
by it because that's what principles are. Either
way, that is absolutely crazy to me, and
I think we're gonna be seeing more about
that.

(01:35:58):
Now in regard to the Doge conversation, the
department of government efficiency, whatever that looks like,
there's a lot of conversation coming up right
now about how this might even be nothing.
That it's ultimately a it's a kind of
a insult
as per that both of them getting the
position, which makes no sense, and whether this
is even an actual place or even actually
becomes a part of the government and it's
just a title.

(01:36:19):
I don't know.
I
it wouldn't surprise me.
We're gonna have to wait to see what
actually happens here.
Do we really think we need more government
to stop government? I mean, like, think about
it down that is. We need to expand
the government in order to restrict the government.
You don't need a new government institution and
multiple new people in order to reduce the

(01:36:41):
government, guys. That's what's so stupid about all
this.
So we'll have to wait and see what
actually happens. But right now, in the midst
of it, there's great points being made about
why this makes no sense. And this has
this relates to the COVID 19 or the
injection mRNA conversation.
Doctor Jane Ruby says you can't make this
up. Your new Doge chief,
which you guys all know this already, was
making the mRNA biological weapon vaccine all along,

(01:37:02):
which is not new information. But I'm glad
to see people starting to see the things
that we were all talking about during 2020
and 2021,
which this one was 2020. Tesla teams up
with CureVac to make RNA microfactories. We were
screaming about that. Musk says,
to be clear, he says, I do support
vaccines in general and COVID vaccines specifically.
The science is unequivocal, he says, in 2021.

(01:37:24):
Now I don't I think he's changed somewhat
what he says, but I haven't heard him
explicitly. Tell me so shed something to me
if you have something else, where he's coming
out saying, you're deadly and hurting everybody.
But that is what he said. And he
said that in multiple interviews too. So it
wasn't some one off thing.
And this is more in the same information.
Showing you the test Tesla and the rest
of it. Cure back. Now this is the

(01:37:44):
new one.
November 5th, 2024. Cure back to present at
the 12th International mRNA Health Conference.
So this is not stopping is the point.
And with Vivek part of this, with Vance
and Tio and the rest of all all
having their fingers in this pie, this is
not going away. Of all the things for
people in the conservative side of this to
ignore, how is that possible?

(01:38:09):
Now Whitney points something else out about the
overlap here. And this is Vivek saying, though
a reasonable formula to fix the US government
again, see, my point is, how about we
don't need it at all?
A Malay style cut on steroids.
Again, this is one of these fake libertarians,
like a lot of what's happening lately, like
Thiel himself. Here's what Whitney says. Millet has

(01:38:32):
been proposing replacing the ministries he wants to
axe with Facebook
AI and Google AI.
Yeah. Quite the libertarian outsider. Right?
She said, I have a feeling the Department
of Government Efficiency is going to follow a
similar playbook, and we will have a Silicon
Valley running the government even more under the
guise of efficiency.
That's what I'm talking about.

(01:38:52):
The idea of this kind of subtle shift
when they want you to it's still the
government, guys. It's still the government. But, like,
in Prospera,
if they win this lawsuit, the point is
they're still there,
but they don't have any power. All the
money, all the influence, all of the control
is ceded to this entity who won the
lawsuit. That's my point. Is that that is
a trial balloon for me in the concept

(01:39:14):
of technocracy.
If we see this shift
and what she just described takes place,
where you have a Silicon Valley as sort
of dynamic running the government under the guise
of efficiency, is that government actually in charge?
Are they sort of the sit in puppet
that we look to sort of like the
presidents of European countries that act underneath the

(01:39:35):
European Union, if you will. It's not exactly
the same, but it's it's an analogy to
look to. So we can see that right
now clearly.
Where
the real power is the von der Linde
high European Union dynamic.
In this case, I think this is what
we're seeing. It says no wonder Zuckerberg and
Bezos are trying to rebrand as libertarian right
now. Exactly.

(01:39:56):
Just in case you are wondering why I
think this would not be positive and why
I think Malay's proposals in that regard are
not positive either, both Facebook and Google, from
their origins to now, are deeply connected to
the US military and the CIA, which is
just like everybody else in Trump's cabinet.
And have shown time and time again everybody
else, but, you know, the point making a
lot the inner circle for sure,

(01:40:18):
have shown time and time again that they
are garbage when it comes to data protection
and privacy. I would argue that's by design.
And they have openly helped to create a
global panopticon for US empire. The people that
created or run those companies are not counter
elites as some now claim, which is lazy
argument. They are now they are long term
long time collaborators with the deep state and

(01:40:39):
advocates for building a hellish neocon futile surveillance
hellhole that most of you people were against
2 years ago.
I agree.
I think that's exactly the point.
This person says, because the current system hasn't
been absolutely terrible with data privacy and protection.
Always the snide response,
who's saying that? She says the current system

(01:40:59):
involves these same companies extensively.
I am saying giving them more power is
bad.
Spoon feeding. The point is clear, guys, that
just because you wanna see it in the
lens of these guys are on my side,
doesn't change the outcome.
And as I said before, even if it
ends up being positive for 4 years, what
happens when democrats win again?

(01:41:20):
Right? Or are you gonna create a world
where that's no longer possible, doing the exact
thing in reverse that they were just saying
the democrats are trying to do?
See, this is the point, guys. And I'm
gonna show you examples like this in a
second, where
we see the woke right just as bad
as the woke left or whatever you wanna
call it. They're just 2 different flavors of
the same ultimate thing.
Now Jason Basler points out, is it just

(01:41:41):
me? Or does Doge, Department of Government Efficiency,
look like it's shaping up to be yet
another Washington think tank?
I wanna see Elon and Vivek take a
chainsaw to government waste too. But how will
it be funded?
What authority will it have? Let's answer these
questions before celebrating. That seems like a very
logical thing to say. But, of course, you
get a lot of reflexive dismissal and outrage

(01:42:02):
and
black pill accusations
and whatever else seems to be trendy right
now. Recites the the, article that says, what
do you know about Trump's department of government
efficiency led by Elon Musk and Vivek?
Well, one point it says is Doge is
not an official government department raising questions about
its power and how it'll be operating. Now
that doesn't mean it could it could be
something new they create, and it could be
exactly what you think it is. But the

(01:42:23):
point he's making is we don't know yet.
That's always the point. We are the important
part of this is that we have to
make sure we understand what happens before we
start pushing people back from criticizing what may
happen or at least being skeptical of how
it rolls out.
Now this person says, this has been my
running theory, what Whitney said earlier. What if
the Doge play is really about forcing AI

(01:42:44):
into major aspects and functions of the government
under the guise of increasing efficiency.
One of the many possibilities,
when all these people are champions of their
good version of AI, what do you think
they're gonna use in a lot of these
ways to if it make it more efficient?
That's a no brainer for me. That's go
and then this is what will frustrate a
lot of us is that if it was

(01:43:04):
anybody other than Trump and Elon Elon Musk,
they people these very people would be screaming
about why that might be a problem.
Now here's what David Icke said, and I
shared this in the beginning.
He says, I really hope that Kennedy does
what he says he will. And here he
is next to rabbi Schmooly, which is just
a crazy overlap. But the theme continues. Here's

(01:43:24):
Ramaswami,
captures the moment, pass the sick bag.
Now this, remember,
was a very weird dynamic that happened out
of nowhere. And there were the Rabbi Shmueli
was basically
leading him around interviews,
standing up and answering for him on stage.
It was very, very weird. And he's been
different ever since as far as I can

(01:43:45):
see. At least in the context of Israel.
Very crazy to me.
Now, here's what Rama this is what Vivek
just said. Now this is very important because
you may agree with everything he's saying, but
let me be clear about this. If you
do, you're wrong.
What he's saying is fundamentally,
verifiably incorrect in every possible way. It's disconnected
from the evidence of history. It's disconnected from

(01:44:05):
the current international law dynamics. Everything about what
he's saying is completely,
blindly pro Israel counter to the facts at
hand.
For
but these are decisions
for
now is the moment for Israel to return
to its founding premise. The Jewish state

(01:44:27):
has an absolute
right
to exist. A divine gift gifted to a
divine nation charged with a Gifted for sure.
Handed to them by the you by
the British government, the Belfort declaration.
So we can could we get rid of
this notion about god land giving them the

(01:44:48):
territory?
This is a narrative, guys. They were given
it by a government, which had no right
to do so. Fine purpose. Israel has an
absolute
and unequivocal
right and responsibility
to defend itself to the fullest,
applying the only language that its adversaries
understand,
the language of force. Right. So, of course,

(01:45:09):
it's only about defending yourself. Let's ignore the
many different atrocities and Nakbas and ethnic cleansing
and open genocide they're carrying out. All defense.
K. Anybody making that argument right now according
to at most every
literally every position of influence, power, international law,
lawyers,
other than people invested in this or for
Israel for whatever reason

(01:45:30):
will be calling this person out. That is
a dishonest position. He's either that blind to
reality, which should be alarming for somebody in
any kind of position, let alone efficiency,
or is lying to you for whatever other
reason.
That's very concerning to me how many people,
everybody around his circle who are willing to
just directly ignore
every dynamic of international law that relates to

(01:45:51):
Israel, every fact of history, every provable example
of how they funded Hamas, how they allowed
one thing or other to happen or ignore
this or hurt their own people. It's so
crazy how obvious all this is. And he
wants you to believe that they're just defending
themselves and that the only thing that the
other side respects is violence.
You mean the women and children, the ones
currently starving, all the doctors from other countries

(01:46:14):
that are being killed, the World Central Kitchen,
the UN members, they just that that all
counts too?
Guys, there's no way you can make this
argument
and believe that you have the facts behind
you.
There's just no way. And so that, to
me,
completely shows you who this person is and
what side he's on. And it's not even
about Israel versus you. It's about the side
of the truth and and caring about people's

(01:46:36):
lives. You think that and so think about
this. If you're talking about the idea that
you think all the genocide that's happening, all
the murder, and the children starving, and all
the everything
is okay because that's what he's saying.
And this you want this person to be
involved with changing your what you deal with
or being involved with mRNA technology,
then I mean, my god.

(01:46:57):
Let's have some wherewithal. Let's recognize what we're
looking at.
So what would David Ben Gurion say today?
He No. Because because it matters what the
one of the
original prime minister of Israel who committed atrocities
and bragged about it. Well, that matters what
they think we would do today. Right? As
if there's some kind of noble origin to

(01:47:17):
this.
Herzl himself, the founder of Zionism, was open
about their hatred for Jewish people. He is
the founder of Zionism.
It's written in his there's many provable examples
written down on top of that that he
was an atheist.
And the origin point
from Israel itself, you can show some of
these people today, the ones that were still
discussing this, laughing about the torture, about the

(01:47:38):
rape. And today, we can still see that
happening.
There's just no missing what you're looking at,
which is why this is out of the
bag, guys. The world has largely already known
this, but people across the western world are
aware of this.
And here he is standing on stage just
straight up making things up to you. Would
say
don't depend

(01:47:59):
on anybody else's fleeting sympathies or permission
to do it. If Israel and Mossad want
to pull off Munich 2.0 and take out
every last leader of Hamas, which to them
means whatever they want it to mean, Even
your government is calling people Hamas who are
Americans protesting for Palestine.
Doesn't that seem concerning

(01:48:20):
that he's about to give them the green
light to go after you if they say
you're Hamas? Wherever they may be hiding from
Doha to Dresden.
Oh, great.
What about in Florida?
What about Spain?
Right? What about the UK?
Does that count too? Well, he just made
it clear. Yes.
Now you can argue he's speaking off the
cuff, but that matters, guys, because you have

(01:48:42):
to realize they are giving them a green
light. No conditions
no matter what. For a 1000 years, Trump
says, these people are showing you their true
colors.
There is no conversation where you don't consider
a group supporting genocide
and ignoring the law they claim they wanna
protect
or your safety and rights, however you wanna

(01:49:02):
look at this. Every single thing is on
the table, and they're proving to you that
they don't care as long as Israel's in
play.
Host a red wedding at the 4 seasons
in Qatar the next time Hanier and Michelle
show up. Okay. So reference to Game of
Thrones, and we're gonna kill everybody in the
room just to get them. Well, sure. They
did Djibili Djibili refugee camp.

(01:49:22):
There's 10 different examples of them killing 100
of people
to maybe get one.
There's never been a time where that was
legal. Not nothing they've been doing from day
1 has been legal, but these people are
okay with that
and passionately arguing they should continue it. They
should go ahead and do it.
If Israel
wants to, at long last, abandon the myth

(01:49:44):
of a 2 state solution, Israel should go
ahead and abandon a 2 state solution. The
myth. Okay? So let's be very clear what
he just admitted whether he meant to or
not. They've never been okay with that. They've
been lying to everybody the entire time to
make it seem like the boogeyman Palestinians that
they've had under their thumb for 76 years
are the ones that don't want it, even

(01:50:05):
though they've been actively fighting for most of
the things that they pretend they don't want
the entire time.
He just said it, the myth that they
don't they they this is the clear point
about the funding of Hamas.
So are you saying Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately boosted
Hamas to try to prevent a Palestinian state?
Yeah. Sure. He deliberately and systematically

(01:50:26):
even even told this on record
whoever wants to avoid
the threat
of a 2 state solution
has to support my policy of paying protection
money to the Hamas. So what we did,
with the permission of our prime minister is
to let

(01:50:47):
Qatar
to transfer
a huge amount of money in cash,
probably more than $1,400,000,000.
By doing it, we increase the power of
Hamas.
We
did everything in order to make sure that
Hamas will go on controlling Gaza,
and Palestinian authority

(01:51:09):
will control the West Bank so they will
fight each other.
the Palestinians
just as the Jews absorbed their people out
since 1948.
Just guys, these are provably false narratives.

(01:51:31):
Right? The idea that somehow like, let's the
reality of this that's even backed up by
Jewish communities that are honest about this, that
still point this out, is there is it
ultimately, Palestinians accepted them,
and they ultimately are the ones that ended
up turning around and hurting the Palestinians that
accepted them into their homes and into their
area.
On top of that
Out of 22 and abandon a 2 state

(01:51:52):
solution. Yeah. The idea that they can just
dump them in other places.
Who cares the fact that they have a
legal right to the land, which the UN
and even Israel have admitted to over the
years, and now we pretend that's not the
case.
Right? That they have a right to their
territory, which is illegal
illegally occupied according to every international legal dynamic
that we've talked about. This is what Francesca
Albanese has been harping on, well, we'll get
to at the end if we get to
it today,

(01:52:13):
very clearly that this is something that we
can prove.
So you can't pretend that you're gonna push
them into somewhere else and that's the fault
of them for being there. That means that
you don't care about anything you're discussing. Ethnic
cleansing, Internet,
genocide.
You are killing people to remove them from
their territory and acting like it's their fault.
You can't pretend like these are honest or

(01:52:35):
good people.
the Palestinians
just as the Jews absorbed their people out
since 1948.
The Islamic world cannot continue to condone
the slaughtering of Jews while continuing The slaughtering
of Jews. So right now, that's all that's

(01:52:57):
happening. Vivek, you're literally gonna brush over a
genocide of an entire people, tens of 1,000,
if not 100 of 1,000 according to The
Lancet.
And you're gonna say, the slaughtering of Jews?
You can't brush over the one day that
this happened on October 7th? Now I'm talking
about post October 7th.
Clearly, there's other examples in history, obviously. The

(01:53:18):
point is what we're saying is in this
context. On October 7th, yes, there were Jews
and other people who were not Jews, but
I guess we don't care about them, who
were killed.
And a lot of them were killed by
Israel, and he knows that. Doesn't care.
On top of the fact that what happened
was a legal act of armed resistance
international law. No matter what you wanna say,
the crimes around it were still crimes.

(01:53:41):
And then every single day since, Israel's been
murdering innocent people, including more of their own
people.
And he brushes over a year of genocide
by saying they can't stop they can't condone
the slaughtering of Jews. Where else are you
talking about, Vivek? Are you now trying to
reference this ongoing lie about a rise of
antisemitism?
There and even even within that, which are
mostly lies,

(01:54:01):
there's no death.
Think about pretending like a year of ongoing
murder of people is not part of the
conversation.
There's far there's few things that are less
offensive than that.
To disown the Palestinians.
That is the hard truth
that neither member of either political party is
willing to speak out loud to the Arab

(01:54:22):
world. I Right. Because there's only 2 people
and 2 parties. Right?
Of course. Left right paradigm, lesser of evil.
There's not a body on either of the
sides we allow you to look at agree.
Except there's a hell of a lot of
other people. Even Jill Stein disagrees to you,
but she doesn't count. Right? And I'm not
saying I support her. I'm just saying it's
embarrassing
how in lockstep they are with a very
clear these people

(01:54:43):
are being directed or have decided themselves that
this is where we're going. That's what I
see it as. It is very clear. He's
a very passionate he's like an Obama version,
a very, very passionate
and well delivered liar.
And it's like everybody else in his cabinet.
Now, again, here's Greg Rees, the religious zealots

(01:55:04):
like him, or at least pretending to be,
and the left right's cults will now fight
each other while their masters deploy the new
digital banking system.
Never has there been a more important time
to question what you're being told.
100%.
Here's another Republican out there who I've grabbed
plenty of gripes with over the years about
things that are provably false, that are shared,

(01:55:26):
and whatever else. The point nonetheless is he's
saying, so here's what's amazing to me.
After Trump loyalists just suffered through 8 years
of political persecution,
which is something I often point out,
being called a racist or anti semite for
wearing a red hat, and now you're turning
around and trying to tell people they should
be deported for having an opinion about Palestine
or censored, which is also happening.

(01:55:48):
He's saying
political persecution, weaponized government, total violation of civil
rights, and unlimited government tyranny turned against them.
They are now all lining up to support
Zionist Israel. A regime that carries out political
persecutions,
weaponized government, civil rights violations, unlimited government, tyranny
against Palestinian civilians, and you, by the way.

(01:56:10):
You would think
if anybody would have learned the human cost
of evil government regimes, it would be the
Trump loyalists.
Yet they are ready to unleash Netanyahu and
the IDF on innocent civilians in Gaza, Lebanon,
the West Bank, and in many ways, you,
guys.
Almost as if conservatives learned nothing in the
last 8 years. Now I would argue
it's not conservatives.

(01:56:31):
It's republicans. It is the team sport politics
of it all that are really driving the
bus. And a lot of the conservatives that
do see a lot of this just don't
know what else to do.
That's by design.
But that they've learned nothing over the last
8 years other than how to acquire power,
weaponize it, and deploy it against humanity. Or
as they might see it, against their adversary,

(01:56:53):
the Democrats,
which is just a cycle of never ending
aiming this at yourselves. You're aiming it at
the American people while the government is is
tricking you into doing so. It says not
a good sign. All the talk of making
America great again means nothing if America doesn't
have a moral standard as a guiding principle.
That's the whole might is right point that
I'm often making.
Is it about just being powerful and in

(01:57:14):
control? Well, to a lot of Republicans, that's
the case. But I argue most people are
fighting for something better than that and being
tricked.
This is all the talk. It says bombing
hospitals, apartment buildings, churches, mosques, refugee camps is
not a moral activity. It is it is
a war crime, and Trump is lining up
his legacy to be a war criminal regime
of the US history if he doesn't divorce

(01:57:34):
himself from the Zionist, which is far too
late for that. Now I will I'm I'm
glad he's pointing this out, and he deserves
credit for that.
I I've I just I just you know,
you might you know, I've just it's important
to be skeptical all the time. But I
I'm I'm finding this hard I find this
hard to to digest without seeing that he
has turned a corner. Either way, I agree
completely.

(01:57:55):
David Icke pointing out
Ben Averboek
saying 10 days after Trump's historic landslide,
Peter Thiel sat down with Barry Weiss for
his first post election interview.
Gee, I wonder how that happened.
The Silicon Valley legend revealed that he really
what really happened behind the scenes, and why
2024 wasn't just an election, it was a

(01:58:16):
revolution.
God, they're so desperate to get you to
think that these elitist deep state technocrats
having power is you winning just like Donald
Trump last time. Same point we made last
time, guys. They're just they can't it seems
like they can't make up something new. That
it was ultimately these people that were, like,
hardcore, like, anarchist, libertarian
were suddenly like, we won. Trump got elected.

(01:58:37):
It's all over, and they became statists.
And look what happened. You won, and the
democrats are in power. Oh, wait. So wait
a minute. How could you win? But because
it's not didn't change. Nothing changed. You were
under the illusion something changed. Same thing. And
this guy is leading that charge, it seems.
At least one of the main people involved.
The point is, very wise,

(01:58:57):
interesting. Right? Seeing how she came into Elon's
orbit during the during the
supposed Twitter files dynamic.
And then, boom, she writes an article about
how they're all on our side now. Peter
Thiel on the counter elites.
God, it's just so lazy to me. I
just don't know why people can't see through
this.
Here's what David Icke said. Oh, make sure
it wasn't oops.

(01:59:19):
More below here.
Saying this wasn't just another election. The machine
threw everything at Trump. Now that's one of
the easy things that people point to. Right?
Yeah. It's not it's not invalid point. You
know, he they claim he tried to they're
assassinated him 4 times, and I question all
of it quite frankly.
Or
the idea that they tried to go after

(01:59:40):
him legally.
Right? Tried to do this, tried to do
that. Okay. Well, you know, it it's a
fair point. And I could just it could
be I could be wrong. But how did
it end up? That was my point while
it was happening. Did he go to jail?
Well, it's not that's that that it didn't
happen. Like he was saying before, it doesn't
prove anything.
But my argument was simply,
if they wanted to kill him, if they
wanted to get this done, the powerful people

(02:00:01):
could make that happen.
To me, it was seemingly
orchestrated to rationalize the idea that he was
the internal
spider the one fighting for you,
just like last time.
And I'd swear to you guys, hope that
I'm wrong.
To me, they didn't throw everything at Trump.
They threw a bunch of few agendas at
him that made it look like he was
fighting into power when he is literally immersed

(02:00:23):
with that.
Criminal charges, ballot changes, 3 more what's that
seems like a very few things. At the
end of the day,
ultimately, what happened was a bunch of narrative
and conversation. Now the one about the
the the ear situation.
I don't know what happened there, but I
know for sure that you would not have
no no mark on your ear no matter

(02:00:44):
what you wanna talk about.
Even Joe Rogan was weird about it. There's
clearly something off there. Now the easy answer
is that he just lied about how bad
it hit him
or in general, because he wanted to hype
the whole thing, but then they got the
blood to explain. Something about it just doesn't
add up, and anybody honest themselves definitely can
see that. Now but I'm not saying I
know the answer. But overall,

(02:01:05):
most of it seemed to be a bunch
of floated concepts, even the legal aspects of
it.
Yeah. There's a lot that happened.
Money was spent, but what hap what was
the outcome?
My point is these people are all provable
criminals.
So if they really wanted to go after
them, they could've.
Instead, they went after things that we all
know are flimsy and meant to fail, in
my opinion.

(02:01:26):
He says the signs were there, but most
missed them. Polls showed a blowout. Silicon Valley
leaders switching sides. Yeah. Guys, what you well,
that really shows you is that nobody have
any principles. They go along with power or
that they were the this was the choice
this time.
Anyway, you get the point. He's coming out.
He wants you to think, Trump's the year
he we we conducted a revolution. We won.
Now it's over. Right? Now we're in power

(02:01:48):
until they can possibly win next time, if
that's what you believe is happening. Well, it
doesn't sound much like some kind of success
to me. The point is it will be
a revolution, alright, for Silicon Valley billionaires like
him, and he's may has made Musk. Thiel's
revolution in quotes is not a people's revolution,
not when he's on the steering committee of
the Bilderberg group and with fingers in every
agenda pie. His Palantir technology served the military

(02:02:11):
and intelligence networks. How do you dis how
do you decouple that, guys?
At home and abroad, just like Musk, by
the way. And so how appropriate
that he sits at the center of the
Trump psyop.
He says, the old system is dying. That's
my point, by the way.
The only question is what replaces it. We
know what you want to replace it, an

(02:02:31):
AI dominated, digital dominated great reset that you
are selling as a people's revolution.
He says, I'm sure that Zionist journalist, Barry
Weiss, questioned him vigorously.
Now as always,
the point is because I know how people
are so quickly resistant to the idea that
we're just pooh poohy on everything good.
Nothing has happened yet.

(02:02:53):
So if and when this rolls out and
there's clear net positives and we're still going,
no. I hate him and I'm gonna poop
it. Well, that would be stupid. That's like
people that were angry that Trump had a
positive thing because they just hate Trump. Well,
if it's positive for Americans, then stop being
a child.
My point is that right now, we have
every reason in the world to doubt this,

(02:03:13):
and you're basing your thoughts on hope,
which maybe you're right, and I share that
hope. But that's like I said before, it's
like saying, okay. Well, we're stuck in mud,
and you're telling me not to point that
out.
I I think I might even have the
tweet pulled up, so I've written it twice.
But I think that's really frustrating that we
are being pushed back from pointing out obvious
criticism before we even see the outcome.

(02:03:34):
Decentive news says Donald Trump, Elon Musk, a
bunch of oddball outsiders ran against an insular
band of out of touch elites, and they
won. Peter Thiel was the vanguard of those
anti establishment counter elites is the premise here.
Again,
elites
inherently mean that they're better than you guys.
The definition of the word means they are
your betters.
So if we were gonna talk about this,

(02:03:55):
we'd be talking about elitists,
meaning they think they're better.
That's not what we're talking about. So she's
pointing to people that she wants you to
think are your betters, but they're the they're
your betters that we're supposed to trust.
Barry Weiss is part of this, and so
as she got pulled into the weird Twitter
files thing when that didn't seem to make
sense, there's bigger pictures behind the scenes here,
guys. And it very clearly overlaps with Zionist

(02:04:17):
Israel. There's no question there.
So I think we're watching this play in
front of us. Like, literally play out a
play in front of us.
Oh, and then don't forget Weinstein said the
same thing. Can't be certain, but I think
Elon's on our side.
Joe Rogan, yeah. We we know.
I hope so. I think everything else in

(02:04:37):
the world point to the opposite.
Again, same kind of thing. Peter Thiel reluctantly
agreed with Elon Musk's belief that if the
Democrat party won,
it could consolidate power into one party state,
which by the way is I can promise
you right now what the republic are trying
to accomplish because that's how this works. But
I said I didn't wanna believe Elon when
he said it, so I texted him. And
I told him I hadn't believed you when

(02:04:58):
you said this at first, but I think
it's because psychologically I don't wanna believe it.
The sense is that is in which I
felt that he was correct was if Trump,
with much better substance and much better on
so many things, could not win in 2024
against the machine, then the machine would always
win. How is that any different than any
other election before this?
Just because they they keep because they float

(02:05:19):
these ideas
tangibly,
on paper, it's the same damn thing.
So just, you know, don't question. Don't don't
man the mind behind the curtain. Right? I
just want you to keep following along with
whatever they're all high fiving about. David Icke
says this is bloody hilarious.
The bare faced cheek of it. AI mogul
Peter Thiel, who is part of the machine

(02:05:39):
through intelligence of Pentagon, through intelligence and Pentagon
serving CIA funded Palantir and the steering committee
of the globalist Bilderberg group says that democracy
was over if the machine had stopped Trump
winning the election.
They have no shame.
I I I agree. It seems pretty silly.
Elon gave,
gave people
a great deal of cover.

(02:06:01):
You know? Because I mean, I mean, it
it certainly
it certainly seemed incredibly dangerous to me what
he did, incredibly courageous, you know, what would
have happened to him if If what? If
under this weird guys that you pretend you're
fighting the deep state? You guys are literally
contracted with the government,
with intelligence, with the CIA. If we're pretending

(02:06:21):
like that's not part of the deep state,
please explain for me what you're pointing at
here. Is it just China, Russia, or the
Democrats alone even though we know who they
are and they're not unelected power structure?
Clearly, you guys are immersed with what would
be the threat.
So unless you explain how that makes sense,
these people are ridiculous.
If if Trump would have lost,
and then,

(02:06:42):
and then and then certainly,
it
it was well, you know, maybe all all
of the rest of us can be a
little bit more courageous than we otherwise were
going to be. But it God, that's just
bad. See, what's funny to me, these people
are terrible
about their presentation. Like, Elon Musk is the
same. They're horrible public speakers.
And that's why if they were ever interviewed,

(02:07:02):
like, that one person asked the one real
question about Israel, and and Peter Thiel basically
lost it, not, like, in an angry way,
but just, like, did blah blah blah, stuttered,
didn't know what to say. If Barry Weiss
was actually a real journalist, there would be
plenty of hard questions you could ask him
that he wouldn't be able to quietly stumble
along with a meaningless sentence that really goes
no. He's just he's giving a narrative control,

(02:07:22):
and she's nodding along because that's her job.
Don't forget, as Corbett wrote, the strange story
of Peter Thiel, again, the main point at
the beginning saying, what do you call someone
who identifies as a vegetarian, but consistently is
veal? Well, you don't call him a vegetarian.
That's the same point about being a libertarian,
guys. He is somebody, as he writes, who

(02:07:44):
spent his entire career actively collaborating with governments,
militaries, intelligence agencies in an effort to entrench
himself, enrich himself, and grow with the power
of the state.
Total libertarian. Right? That goes for Trump, for
Musk, for Vance, for every single one of
them. So all these libertarians pretending I I
I hope you're right, but there's no reason

(02:08:04):
to pretend they're on the same team you
think you're on.
Now here's my point about it in general
is you can argue that even all of
that there that he is suddenly fighting for
you.
So then why lie about what you are
if you're just an insider deciding to fight
against everything?
Because they want you to identify with them.
Most likely because what they're showing you has

(02:08:25):
nothing to do with who they actually are.
Now I'll include this as well, the conversation
of the Prospera City.
That now what's funny is there's somebody who
knows somebody that's in a part of this
who was in they were saying they might
be able to set up an interview, but
apparently, that's falling apart just like I thought
because the ultimate point being is that these
people would never I argue interview with somebody
who's gonna ask real questions because there's no

(02:08:47):
if you look at the information,
this is not a libertarian city. This is
the this is the illusion of this whole
freedom city in idea that they're conflating. That's
not me doing that. They're they're they're comparing
these two things.
That is really a technocratic takeover of this
location.
And don't forget, the reason they're able to
do this in Honduras is because the US
government conducted an illegal coup in 2009,

(02:09:08):
which then allowed and and on top of
that, they removed judges to put new ones
in order to make this pass to create
a special development zone, which is, like, right
out of the special the the develop sustainable
development goals.
And then, working with Prospera to create the
tech libertarian freedom city, which is now encroaching
on new territory within the area, which is

(02:09:30):
totally libertarian.
On top of that, they have now removed
the law and they don't care.
Sounds like a perfect libertarian city, doesn't it?
Guys, this is a technocratic takeover with the
US government support.
Hopefully, you can recognize how concerning that is.
Now, let's get into the Trump the pick
cabinet picks and so on. I wanted to

(02:09:50):
start with one thing that I thought was
really interesting.
Now, there's a lot of b s flying
around.
In particular, from a lot of these platforms
trying to hype up the internal
political divide.
Because the the game right now is to
get you just like always hating your neighbor.
So you're not looking anywhere else, but it's
being ramped up in really cartoonish ways.

(02:10:10):
Now this
is interesting to me because this is something
he publicly said,
but not the way that it highlights it
in the title, which is kinda the point.
But what's interesting is this kind of woke
left, woke right, or whatever the terms you
wanna use, how they're all ultimate like, my
point would be that the left is calling
for censorship and then the right calls for
the same thing, but but that one's a
justifiable one in your mind.

(02:10:31):
Well, you're both doing the same thing. You
both it both amounts to the government giving
itself power to suppress your speech, even though
they that's not something that they it's your
in your inherent rights are not something that
can be removed.
They can just choose to disregard them.
So in this case, same kind of thing.
Trump the as the title reads anyway from
the Black Information Network, Trump suggests reparations for

(02:10:53):
white victims of racial
discrimination.
Now what he actually says,
now, actually, I think I've got the clip
here.
No. I don't. I'll just read it for
you. It's exactly what it reads out. He
says, a portion of the seized funds will
be used and well, you know what? I
should just play it for you real quick
since it's more easier to see.
And this is pretty interesting to me

(02:11:15):
because what we're talking about is the college
dynamic again, and that overlaps with free speech.
So ultimately, he's saying that at these colleges,
they've been using as he writes,
you know, racial discrimination is what he says.
And he's not wrong.
In fact, as we'll point out in a
second that we've the the republicans in particular

(02:11:36):
have been calling out this negative the hate
and and act action against white people in
general. Weirdly, what he's not pointing to though.
Explain that for me, republicans.
Nonetheless,
he's talking about the Palestinian overlap,
Hamas supporters, and so on. But what he's
saying is that these colleges aren't going to
be allowed to do this
and ultimately

(02:11:57):
point to the idea that they're putting putting
out anti semitic propaganda and so on. But
either way, what he's talking about is victims
of this. He's gonna take the money he
seizes from them and give it to those
victims. Now I whatever you wanna think, however
justified
that you think it is,
tell me how that's different
than the same conversation. That you have people
that you feel were wronged, and they're gonna
government's gonna step in and take money from

(02:12:19):
them and give money to you because you
were wronged.
Is that not the same thing?
So what's crazy is that if you're over
here screaming, rightfully so, which I would agree
with, that the idea of reparations is something
that we should not be allowing,
And then you support this, it's it it
simply makes you a hypocrite. And that's, I
think, a larger problem with what's going on
in the partisan world is that that is
actually something they're almost like, it's almost like

(02:12:40):
an internal joke that we know we're doing
it and it's about getting them back, and
then you just don't acknowledge that publicly.
We all see that. It seems to be
popping up everywhere.
So here's the clip
of him sort of outlining,
proposing anyway what this will be. I'm still
grabbing it here.

(02:13:00):
Okay. I'll grab the video for you.
Where is it now?
There it is.
Furthermore, I will direct the Department of Justice
to pursue federal civil rights cases
against schools that continue to engage in racial

(02:13:22):
discrimination
and schools that persist in
explicit unlawful discrimination
under the guise of equity
will not only have their
endowments taxed, but through budget reconciliation,
I will advance a measure
to have them fined up to the entire
amount of their endowment.

(02:13:42):
A portion of the seized funds will then
be used as restitution for victims of these
illegal
and unjust policies,
policies that hurt our country so badly.

(02:14:03):
Oops. I my muted. So, ultimately, my point
is that's the same thing. Whatever mental gymnastics
you do to try to make that into
something different, which it is a different flavor,
but of the same exact problem.
So you have this.
The way they now what's interesting I guess
you could read it. I guess you could
argue that he is more so leaning towards
that conversation. But my point is that it

(02:14:24):
doesn't matter. It's the same idea.
And if you're okay with that while disagreeing
with other conversations or reparations, well, then you're
just a hypocrite. Simple as that.
My point is always is the same. The
government should not have this ability. We should
the government we should be wanting less, not
calling for more government intervention in our lives.
Even if you think it's about righting some

(02:14:45):
wrong and doing the same thing, it's simply
continuing to allow the problem to exist.
It's an easy way they trap partisans into
continuing to support exactly the same problem as
long as they benefit for 4 years.
Right? That's that's what people like Larkin Rose
always point out. That, really, it's about
demanding that the other side do what you
say they have to for 4 years.

(02:15:11):
Now, Donald, this is something Elon Musk here.
It's I've I've showed earlier, but saying Donald
Trump is back on x and showing all
the goosebumps.
And this person says about 27,000,000
Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferers heads just exploded.
This is this is old. This is from
August 12th.
And I just said you're right. The woke
left and the woke right are losing their
minds over this, over Trump in general. One
of them are outraged because he's in power.

(02:15:32):
The other one is, like, almost
like like girls at an Elvis concert screaming
about happy there are for because he got
in.
Neither side is capable of seeing their own
derangement or delusion,
yet can't stop pointing out the other side's
problems,
which are often embellished, if not outright fabricated.
Most people seem to be able to acknowledge
that, even those that support him.

(02:15:54):
So talking about this one, which is the
main point of the title today.
This is a very alarming and now kinda
those first points are similar. Right? The idea
of the the reparations point. It's about it's
about doing something that adds to the problem
that you were calling out before, but in
a different way.
And we've talked a lot about the immigration
discussion, how that's being used to convince you
to take steps just like this, creating the

(02:16:15):
I the justification for the digital ID, creating
the justification for biometric scans and the biometric
wall, creating the justification for whatever they wanna
use it for. In this case,
of course, the information we've shown before about
how I think that Israel is playing a
central role in creating that for other reasons
as well.
But now Trump has confirmed
plans to declare a national emergency, which I

(02:16:36):
can't believe Republicans in any context are okay
with that based on what we just came
from.
He's especially since he was the one that
initiated the first one for COVID.
Using specifically military
or as Fitton points out, military assets
for mass deportations.
There's so many things about this that are
unconstitutional,

(02:16:56):
that are oversteps,
that are just simply at a growth of
the power of the government that I just
don't understand why people who are calling for
less aren't screaming about.
All because we've been wrapped up in this
idea that these people are the only thing
we should care about. Look. I I'm the
I've pointed this out many times. If there
are people who are here illegally, yes. That's
a crime, and that should matter.
But, arguably, there's much more important things that

(02:17:19):
we should be focusing this time on, and
none of which should allow the government to
have more power.
Simple.
But, of course, in a central point, these
things do matter, especially when it comes to
the voting dynamic. But all the instead of
dealing with this in ways that we currently
have power for or currently have money going
toward,
we end up creating more funding,

(02:17:39):
less freedom,
more influence, more encroachment on your rights, more
restriction of your freedom in this country.
As much as you may not wanna believe
that with what's happening right now. Now going
in this article,
it says president Trump on Monday confirmed he
would declare a national emergency to carry out
his campaign promise of mass deportations of migrants

(02:18:00):
living in the US without legal permission.
Now even within that, there's an opaque aspect.
And just so you can see it right
here. Oh, that's right. I wanted to show
you this. I just isn't this strange?
This happened for me while I was on
truth social. For those of the podcast, the
entire website just blurred out for me. You
can see that I still can click on
things. Like, it still has the ability to
highlight, but it's fuzzed out. Now for me,

(02:18:20):
I couldn't get this to go away
until pretty much right before the show. And
I was able to re like, re refresh
this, and it came back right here.
No. That's who knows? Could just be a
glitch. But to me, how was that a
glitch? That seems like a feature or a
function of the website that was initiated.
You guys can decide. I find that to
be pretty weird. Any case, here he is.
Pitt and saying, good news. Reports coming in

(02:18:41):
that Trump will prepare to declare a national
emergency using military assets
to reverse
the Biden invasion
through mass deportation. Even though that's obviously inversion
of the reality in and of itself, which
I'll show you in a second. Coming from
people like
Rubio, who's apparently about to be part of
his administration, who were actively fighting for Venezuelan

(02:19:02):
immigrants to flood the country.
Funny how we blame all of it on
one thing. It's all about controlling the narrative,
guys. But my point is Trump says, true.
No. That's hits his account. That's endorsement.
So my point is even right here talking
about mass deportations of migrants here without permission.
Okay. Hypothetically.
Well, I don't even think that's necessary since

(02:19:22):
I think we already know that they've called
this out. What about the ones that were
given amnesty by Biden's administration?
Now I know they disagree with that because
they made that very clear. You can't just
wave a wand and give them well, technically,
even though I just agree that that shouldn't
happen, yes, they can. Because these people have
the power to do what I mean, look
at Trump executive order. They can they've shown
us already they can do whatever they want.

(02:19:43):
Even legally speaking, yes, the president can do
that. If they can just snap their fingers
and declare war criminals no longer war criminals,
yes, it's the same conversation. But I also
agree that neither should happen.
Doesn't mean it won't.
That's when people like me are fighting to
change, but see, people like this are fighting
to keep it going in their direction
while maintaining it is my point. But either
way, the point is what about those ones

(02:20:03):
who have technical legal status because they weighed
that one, but they don't like that so
they just disagree with it? Will they allow
that? Will they deport them?
Right? What about people? What about all sorts
of different dynamics that include people or even
getting into the idea of the foreign Jihad
supporters
or people that support Hezbollah?
None of which are crimes, guys.

(02:20:25):
You get where I'm going with this. Like,
I the thing is we love to pretend
like this is a it'll only be this,
but you don't know that. You don't know
who will run this and who will change
it and who has power next. It simply
creates a dynamic where they can do
the law won't apply. I mean, guys, you
know what I thought about the government, the
general.
My point is we don't know that just
because they say that that's what we'll be
restricted by. Now since overnight, Trump responded to

(02:20:46):
a social media post, which is displayed showed
for you, making sure you saw that it
was national emergency
and military assets.
Trump pledged to get started on these deportations
as soon as he enters office, which again,
just like any other promise, may not happen.
Quote, on day 1, I will launch the
largest deportation program in American history to get
rid to get the criminals out. So right

(02:21:07):
there is usually what gets pointed at, things
like that.
Some because meaning that we it'll only be
criminals, like he said.
Well, people say a lot of things in
government that don't end up being the reality.
He could mean it then and could be
change his mind later. He could be lying
right there and do something different.
I don't know why we always have to
go through this exercise. The point is clearly
that he just because he says criminal, well,

(02:21:27):
what if he think what if he already
called them criminals for supporting Palestine?
We are I mean, this is this is
what I bump up against in the conversation
online,
where I show the clips, which I'll go
to in a second, where they're saying, deport
the Jew haters
or the foreign supporters of terrorist groups, and
people respond going, but they're terrorists.
How do you know who they're talking about?

(02:21:49):
We've already proven to you they're referencing people
that are simply acting with legal aspects in
their own protest, and you say because they've
got that flag or said x, y, and
z that they're terrorists and we should deport
them.
Because there's no context in which a government
makes people out to be terrorists where they're
not. Right? Sort of like, I don't know,
people on January 6th, people wearing red hats
because that never happens. Trucker convoys.

(02:22:11):
That's what that's what Ranger Health Ranger is
saying. It's amazing that they can't look inward
and recognize how alarming this is or they
just don't want to.
But criminals out could mean whatever they decide
to make a criminal or whoever they feel
is 1. We all know that if we're
being honest. He says, I will rescue every
city and town that has been invaded
and conquered.
God, that's such lazy and alarming, irresponsible

(02:22:34):
verbiage.
Conquered, invaded. Again, are we this that language
makes them out to be a problem
or the enemy
when the truth is even based on your
narrative, they're just innocent people being used.
Why is it their fault? Shouldn't we care
they're human beings? This is about something much
darker than that. I think we all realize
it.

(02:22:56):
And kick them the hell out of our
country as fast as possible.
I mean, there's so many other dynamics to
get into, whether that's even physically possible, whether
they have enough resources, whether this will have
a dramatic effect on the economy in general,
which I can almost guarantee that it will.
Because the I also think this is more
hype than anything. We'll wait and see what
happens.
I think but unless this is a big

(02:23:16):
move for some different change. Using this to
collapse the economy, blaming the democrats, and rolling
us into a CBDC. I mean, all these
are very possible things.
Already, it says he's tapped several immigration hard
liners to serve in key cabinet positions. And
that's important because those are the people who
are saying the very, very radical things in
the past and even right now.
So whether he starts it or not, they

(02:23:37):
may do something different.
Now it's as Homan previously discussed his vision
for mass deportations,
saying they would first concentrate on expelling criminals
and national security threats. Okay. That means people
they decide, like in the UK, by the
way, as much as Elon's screaming about how
bad it is, that's what they're doing. Because
suddenly they say, you support Palestine. You have

(02:23:58):
a flag on your purse. You can't board
the plane. It's all happening right now.
So
you're a threat and we need to get
rid of you.
Now in let's just say this is also
massive. This is how it really happens. And
this is all mass mobilized. And they've got
people all around the country on day 1.
How many how much you wanna bet without
in my opinion, there's no everything in history

(02:24:19):
that has something like this or these kind
of McCarthyist type of actions
that you do get people caught up that
are innocent.
In any context, people going to prison. So
when they decide to go after national security
threats, let's even pretend they mean only certain
kinds of people and not innocent Americans.
I can promise you there will be people
that are just Palestinian supporters,

(02:24:39):
just people that are on the wrong side
of what they think. People that call out
Zionism that are suddenly national security threats.
And before we know it, they're in some
they're they've been deported, wrapped up, and moved,
and we don't even know what's going on
because it is happening so rapidly and all
over the country.
He didn't rule out deporting families together. Doesn't
that matter too?
What if they're not?

(02:25:00):
What if what if some of them have
citizenship? What happens then?
Guys, all these things matter. And I think
it's just that people are so wrapped up
in the emotional side of this that they
don't realize that these people are human beings.
And some of them are not here are
at basically, are in a position where they're
being played against by both sides of our
government.
And, yes, maybe they're here illegally. But maybe
they would happily go through that if the

(02:25:21):
position either way, the bottom line is, yes,
the law matters and that should be enforced.
Period.
But like this is not the way. This
is the day and, of course, the idea
that people get all wrapped up in is
this is the only way it's gonna you
know why you feel it's the only way
it's gonna happen? Because they play the left
right paradigm dynamic so well against you that
you ask for a irrational,
large scale,
government building concept to get rid of something

(02:25:42):
that you wouldn't need that for if they
actually cared about you from either side.
They chip it back and forth and point
at each other. It's always the same way.
Homan reiterated his plan to take the handcuffs
off of ice because that's what we all
want. Right?
I thought we were talking about government restriction,
but now you're talking about government removing government
restraints? Explain for me where the middle ground
is, guys.

(02:26:03):
Government of the Department of Government Efficiency, and
we're gonna be chopping things down, but we're
gonna in in
grow everything we're talking about.
Two times in major ways we've already discussed
now where they're talking about growing the government.
Even if you wanna pretend it's temporary,
that is not what we're talking about,
and ramp up arrests.
He says, though noted that he will need

(02:26:25):
more resources to carry it out and said
there is there are a lot of what
ifs.
So even there, he's floating the idea this
might not even be possible.
He says throughout the campaign, Trump vowed to
mobilize the National Guard to assist with the
deportation effort. Experts told ABC News such a
move would mark a fundamental shift for the
military, which does not normally engage with domestic
law enforcement issues. Now that would be a

(02:26:46):
massive shift because we've seen the national guard
used in smaller ways
in the context of a goal you know,
it sounded national thing
over the years.
But remember, my point the important point. I'll
I'll include this for you just so you
guys can read more about Posse Comitatus.
Like I said before, National Guard is usually
sort of basically, I guess the Navy doesn't
even apply to this. So there are different
caveats to it.

(02:27:07):
Overall, the point is
the national guard is
still technically bound by it unless they're in
their own location, their own territory, their own
state.
So arguably, you could just deploy national guard
from each individual state to do what they're
trying to accomplish.
But I argue that won't be enough. And
I argue it's going to bleed into something
else. Whether it's border patrol or suddenly, you're

(02:27:28):
dealing with things that are illegal, guys. Fundamentally,
without question, illegal under Posse Comitatus. But I
guarantee if they were gonna do this, that
that would start to expand, and that's a
problem.
But even then,
let's just even say they work through this
and allow the National Guard to only be
deployed in the states they're from, but do
it nationally. That would be unprecedented.

(02:27:49):
What happens if they never remove that?
I know you would pretend he would never
do that. You don't know that. Maybe he's
not in charge. Maybe he doesn't care what
you think.
The allowance of this would be alarming
and would not represent a reduction of government.
At times, Trump went further suggesting thousands of
troops from overseas
might be moved to the US, Mexico border.

(02:28:10):
Now he he I think he said that
very carefully.
Thousands of troops to the border is not
the same thing as re doing this whole
process.
But I think he's well aware that by
saying that overseas troops would not be National
Guard and to deploy them for this explicitly
would be a direct violation of Pasi Camosados.
And I still argue that even the border
is the same thing.

(02:28:30):
That there's a whole that and that's a
that's one way they skirt this by saying
it's border, it's not internal. That's still domestic,
guys. You're not operating only in Mexico. But
again, the point would be that this combined
it it is this would be a massive
overstep that I'm worried about.
Even if you argue you agree with the
ultimate point.
There are an estimated 11,000,000 unauthorized migrants living

(02:28:51):
in the United States without legal immigration status.
Removing them could cost 1,000,000,000 of dollars per
year according to estimates from the American Immigration
Council. Now, again, you guys can decide what
you think makes sense.
My main point is about the national emergency,
deploying of military domestically,
and the unconstitutional
violently in the in the growth of the

(02:29:11):
government while promising the opposite.
This was just a case you're right highlighting
Trump is apparently planning on using the national
emergency predicate for facilitation of deportation. He writes
the immigration predicate
is every bit as fraudulent as the COVID
one was. He's right. It's a it's the
same concept, guys. It amounts to a restriction.

(02:29:33):
I I
really, I think we all recognize the government
is not bound by damn near anything today,
let alone your influence. But this gives them
the the on paper, just unfed they they
do what they want. Like usual, but now
they even more like with COVID 19, the
emergency opened up all sorts of funding, all
sorts of manipulations, which we now can look
back and easily prove they were aware of

(02:29:53):
while it was happening. But who cares? Because
they didn't know. My point is that's what
they tell themselves. Because it wasn't Trump's fault
that they misappro Yeah. Yeah. It really was.
But that's what Brian the high impact Flix
was pointing out. But Salar Report asked a
good question, which is, what will
the question is, what will declaring an emergency
do?
And why do we need it?

(02:30:14):
Right? So the rope the the cut into
the quick of it all is that, okay.
Well, if you're declaring an emergency, why is
that necessary for what you wanna accomplish? It
may very well be. But walk me through.
Why do we need this? Does it unlock
certain funding? Right? Does it open certain doors
that you need to be able to carry
this out? Well, if that's the case, let's
talk about it. If not, then we need
to be very aware of the fact that
the emergency being declared

(02:30:35):
is on it it may not be necessary
to accomplish this. And then if it's not,
I think that shows you something that we
all need to address. It may be uncomfortable
that they're bringing us back into this position
like we've seen before.
And and Link says, exactly. The other than
another excuse to declare yet another state of
emergency so that people constantly live in states
of emergency as was explained well by TLF.

(02:31:00):
Now I wanna go through one more of
the things I've highlighted in all this. I'll
include this article, but there's plenty of others
on TLAB you could look up about weaponized
migration and experimentation.
Tools for subversion, division, and manufacturing
consent.
Many different examples other than Israel in this
conversation. But one of the obvious ones that's
going on today is it's it's right on
the surface of the conversation.

(02:31:21):
Israel is playing a role in all of
this. So I want you to consider that
with things like this. Right? Remember the whole
point? Biden did all of this. Right? Okay.
Well, here's one example, and there's plenty of
them.
This is from 5 days ago.
TBI says dangerous Venezuelan gang is in every
city in Tennessee. Right?

(02:31:41):
Now, yes, these gangs have been around these
locations for a long time. Same with Aurora.
There's plenty of truth to these stories, but
there's also a lot of partisan lie and
hype around it too. That's not what I'm
getting at right now. My point is that
what we are point they're pointing at this
and saying, see, that's what Trump that's what
Biden did. Even though they've been here for
many, many administrations.
But the argument is they let it happen.

(02:32:01):
We have to deport all the criminals. Right?
Okay. Well, is it just Biden's fault?
What about the fact that people like Marco
Rubio and Menendez
urged Biden's administration to extend TPS for Venezuela.
TPS being the temporary protected status for eligible
Venezuelans.
You know, the whole caravan that we kept

(02:32:22):
screaming about?
Funny that Rubio was
ultimately able to a lot accomplish more
Venezuelan refugees
or migrants into the United States. So then
I guess we could argue it's Biden and
Marco Rubio's fault? No. Just Biden, because that's
what works for the narrative.
Here is our, Anya Prampil saying, Mark Rubio

(02:32:44):
is complete contradiction of Donald Trump's supposed America
first agenda,
which includes hardening the border and building the
wall. Marco Rubio was the Republican author of
the TPS,
temporary protective status for Venezuelans while he was
seeking to destroy Venezuela's economy.
This is how this works, guys. So your
objective is one thing at the moment. You
caught you a byproduct of what you're destroying,

(02:33:06):
you then use somewhere else. So you roll
them into the United States, you turn around
and argue. And I remember, Marco Rubio was
a blind, blind Zionist supporter.
So I'm gonna show you next the point
that I've shown you before, that I believe
this is being engineered. And he has just
been unw
could be a winning part in this ploy
as an American who's actually working for serve
for somebody else. And the end of the

(02:33:28):
day,
creating,
driving, pushing, calling for more of them to
come into the country when then the next
narrative is that this is because of the
democrats, and that's why we have to do
x, y, and z even though you can
show just as many republicans involved. It's all
like that, guys.
It this clip from Adam Green I played

(02:33:48):
before. And this is simply about no. This
is just rabbi speaking, but I want you
to consider remember, these are the kind these
are the extreme Zionist perspective that is that
is what is shared by the leading elements
of the current Israeli government, not my opinion.
They're public about this. They call Donald Trump
a prophet.
The point is that they might the point
I'm making is they share this sentiment.

(02:34:09):
And with everything else we see, I don't
think it's up for debate. I think Israel
is and is a part of what's driving
this. And they're now using that to rationalize
growth of government while we can see that
all this government is funded by the same
foreign entity.
Whatever the justification, that should be pretty alarming.
Of days.
You're gonna need the

(02:34:29):
iron of
Hessav, which represents Edom, which is the West,
Europe, and the Americas,
to get intermixed
with
Ishmael, which is basically Arabs and Muslims.
How in the world was this ever gonna
happen if not for this refugee crisis? At
the end of days, you're gonna have this
intermixing between Esav,

(02:34:50):
Edom, which is the West, and the East,
which is the Muslims and the,
and and the Arabs,
making this through this influx into the world.
They're gonna have a far larger
birth rate than the indigenous people there, and
they're going to sort of conquer by number.
And there are many different sources for this
where there will be many, many people killed

(02:35:12):
and so on and so forth. So
the idea
of having these refugees come into Europe, it's
no longer a matter of whether it's right
or wrong. It's just simply a fulfillment of
what it was meant to be all wrong.
This is a fulfillment of, you know, the
rechazal and the prophecies.
This has to happen, and this is just
another sign that we are nearing, you know,
the completion of the stikhood of the entire

(02:35:33):
world. But we know one thing, right, that
when it comes to the classic womb,
you know, which is Europe,
they're finished.
And you don't have to be a prophet
or a great analysis for that. You have
to open the view, the the the the
TV or the Internet and see that exactly
what was prophesized then, that the sons of
Ishmael are gonna go and cause cause havoc
around the world. So France is completely barbecued,

(02:35:56):
England is next, now half of Europe is
completely
com
half did. Now look what's going on in
America.
So, you know, now in a country near
you. Asking what's gonna be with the Goyim
when Moshiach comes. Will they be destroyed and
annihilated?
Someone asked who cares.

(02:36:17):
Okay.
As a nation, they'll cease to exist even
as individuals. Every individual,
those survivors,
not only as a nation, they'll cease to
exist, even as individual. In modern terminology,
they call
it cultural genocide.
They'll be annihilated as a
they basically learn there's gonna be cultural genocide.

(02:36:38):
You know what? The Goyim is the Goyim
as they exist as Goyim,
from that's
done with.
Now, obviously, the point is the same. It's
just because rabbis are saying these things does
not mean that's the reality of the world,
but we have to recognize the influence of
the statement and they believe it. And you
could prove the Israeli government shares those sentiments.
So as we've talked about the idea of

(02:36:59):
the red the red the red heifer. Right?
The argument being that this was
we've talked about it. It's a prophetic conversation
that there will be a red heifer that
is born that signals the coming of the
end times. If I'm I'm I think that's
the the general's sentiment there. The point is
regardless within the prophetic idea that that's part
of it,
which is supposed to be something that happens
to god sent. It's a symbol.

(02:37:21):
And what they do? Well, they literally genetically
engineered a red calf.
It's not a joke. Wait. This was a
big conversation for a minute. So my point
is it's obvious that they are of the
mind that they can just make it happen.
That's Zionism for you. And that's why orthodox
Jews around the world call out the illusion
that Zionism is Judaism. They're it's a political
organization that has co opted this. That's important

(02:37:41):
to think about. But back to the idea
in general,
with what we're seeing,
you have to at least ask the question
with how much Israeli influence there is on
this administration
of whether this has been this is one
of the final steps in what they're ran
creating.
And now we have them discussing mass deportations,
the deploying of the military. Guys, there's a

(02:38:02):
lot to be concerned about here. Now you
I'm not saying blindly assume what I'm saying.
Hope for the best and and continue to
hold them accountable.
If we actually did that and we actually
embraced the power of the the the American
people as a whole if we weren't all
divided, you're damn right we could hold them
to it. The problem is that we're so

(02:38:22):
inter inter we're manipulated and divided and that
we do not have the ability to push
back.
So, obviously, deploying the military nationally should be
a huge red flag that we should go,
woah, woah, woah. That's not happening. Let's walk
through this step by but nope. You got
this screaming partisans that are driving this forward,
whether they even realize outside influence or not.

(02:38:44):
Blindly going along with something that should be
very concerning.
Hi and backflix points something out. I don't
wanna make a point about this in general.
You guys have seen this clip, this thread
that I put together.
Twelve videos so far,
and this has been shared a lot.
It's all it's all clips of Donald Trump

(02:39:04):
saying
or this one specifically, Marion Adelson speaking about
him, but they're all talking about the same
conversation generally about influence of Israel over the
US government or the idea that we should
be censored if we say bad things about
Israel.
All of which are are unquote that's just
right on the surface. These are violations of
your rights.
Hyunpack Flix says, wanna understand who really calls

(02:39:26):
the shots? Let Trump tell you. Thanks, TLav.
Now, Hyatt Back Flix has 84,000
view followers.
Pretty low engagement, I would argue.
But what's crazy to me,
this person shared it, who is a kind
of a former MAGA person who's realized this
problem and started calling it out. He has
a
100,000 followers.

(02:39:47):
He tagged this thing and shared it. Even
less engagement.
Now, what I wanted to say to go
and I who you know, maybe maybe nobody
likes it, which I think is quite obviously.
No. This is a relevant thing.
What I think is really obvious,
this got shared. Look at all the quotes.
I mean,
many, many people with 100 of thousands of
followers. Because of what high impact because of

(02:40:08):
Brian sharing this, it got noticed by a
lot of larger people, which may begs the
question, why didn't they notice it when I
was sharing it? The point is that they
did share it. And I'm talking 100 200,000
followers, 100,000 followers, many of them. And I
was going, oh, here we go. This is
gonna go viral like it should have. And
even technically, you could argue that's partly what,
you know, the current where it currently is.
Well, guess what I noticed?

(02:40:31):
That never changed.
Now, it slowly goes up. But are you
telling me that that many people can share
this with I mean, I I don't buy
it. Just like I keep talking about, these
things are being artificially suppressed or hidden
on platforms like Twitter in particular, more than
others because of the Israel influence.

(02:40:51):
Think that's important. Now Ryan Mata says Trump
has a message for you, America. F the
constitution. Y'all MAGA TARs, he says, fell for
hook, line, and sinker. Now get back to
work and pay your taxes. Israel needs more
bombs for their Muslim Christian genocide taking place
in Gaza. All that that has to do
is say, f away with Israel, and he
will be president in 2028.

(02:41:12):
And we and and we and we even
have a country. So whatever you think of
his opinion, the point is that he's sharing
this and highlighting the truth of this in
my opinion. Because, really, to be honest, if
you if you're looking at these clips, all
12 of them, and in each one of
them, there is no there's nothing out of
context. It's very you can listen to the
entire speech, and it does not change what
he's saying in these clips. And what he's

(02:41:33):
saying is in many cases that if Israel
had the power they're supposed to, that this
wouldn't be the case, that these people wouldn't
be in congress. And in this case, he
says the the control the power that Israel
has over congress or used to have and
rightfully so. These are super damning statements
that I argue if most of his supporters
in the middle saw that they would be
freaked out.

(02:41:53):
My guess is just like these people didn't
say they've never even heard these things before.
Most of them are with Israeli flags behind
him even though he's on his own campaign
trail. But there were a lot of, Jewish
and Zionist events,
like the, the
the the Jew it was Jewish Defense League.
I forget which one it was. One of
these groups are out there that they Miriam

(02:42:14):
Adelson was basically in
in not in charge of, but sort of
putting on. And he and they were there
for the part of their campaign trail. That's
important to know. But then others were just
his campaign trail. And Miriam still introduced him,
and there's Israeli flags behind him. I pointed
out the time. There's no way that makes
sense to you, and you can go down
and look at these guys. Anyway,

(02:42:34):
the point is that this should have obviously
been getting a lot more reach because every
one of these are relevant. Every one of
them talking about things that are concerning. My
point I make about the one the recent
ones where he he just says point blank,
we'll remove the Jew haters from this country.
And I keep saying the same thing. Yes.
I'm with you. People who hate people based
on their religion are disgusting. They deserve to
be called out. But it's also protected by

(02:42:55):
your rights.
To have the opinion, to speak it out
loud.
None of those are crimes.
None of them are unconstitutional.
And here he is literally saying, if you
hate this kind of religion,
we're gonna get rid of you.
What about the Christian haters? You're not gonna
get rid of them? Nor should he, by
the way. My point is that it's obvious
if you're being honest with yourself that that's

(02:43:17):
just not some part that makes sense. That
you can't just go, well, those are gross
people. We don't well, then you're a hypocrite.
That means you don't agree with free speech.
And people that are denying this, it's it's
just scary to me. So thank you, Brian,
for getting this some reach, but nonetheless, it
seems it's being suppressed as we might expect.
This person says oh, wait. Make sure I

(02:43:37):
didn't miss one here.
Oh, yeah. So I'm glad I didn't miss
that. So here's this is Robin Martin saying,
save Israel for last.
If you haven't figured this out yet, first,
you put them in on blast everywhere
acting like somehow
the queue dynamic is what exposed Israel. No.
They did that to themselves. That's quite obvious.

(02:43:57):
He says, then watch as they get exposed,
which technically did happen to a large degree.
Then says, maybe calm down and have a
little faith. Everything's a psyop.
Otherwise, trust the plan
because that's always smart. Right? Sit back and
let it go. Let the government do its
thing. But the good government, doesn't that sound
like exactly what we're talking about? The good

(02:44:18):
AI, the good suppress the good censorship. Yep.
They're all doing this. This is a government
operation.
I we've been a lot of us been
saying that since the 1st year of this
conversation.
And look at how it's ended up. All
of the fake claims, all the unanswered unfulfilled
promises,
the military tribunals, and again, many of them
are still acting like now we're back on

(02:44:38):
track. It's gonna happen tomorrow. I'm telling you,
the cue underline, it it's very clear. There's
a thread, a vein through his entire thing.
Save Israel for last. The old see, this
is just like the first point. Trump's our
savior. Ignore the fact that he's responsible for
this and pretend that there was a worse
thing behind it. In this case, ignore the
genocide because they're gonna get to them last,
and that's part of the agenda to end

(02:44:59):
the deep state.
Now, look. Even if you think even if
it's true,
there is no world in which you go,
yes. Genocide okay to defeat defeat the deep
state. Guys, that's crazy.
But it it's it's meant to be because
there's it's a it's a dying grasp, but
it's trying to get you to ignore the
genocide.
This person says in regard okay. Again, Ryan

(02:45:20):
Mata
highlighting things that we should all care about.
These clips of Donald Trump saying that he
should be doing things that are unconstitutional
for Israel.
And this guy says, what happened to you,
dude? You were MAGA a few days ago.
Oh, I get it. So you're not MAGA
if you acknowledge the truth that we don't
like to see. Well, yeah. We already know
that. And that's the same thing for Democrats.

(02:45:40):
It's not making about one side.
But we know because with with Kyle Rittenhouse,
pointing out, as Brian's pointed out many times,
the red flag law issue. The him saying,
take the guns first, do process later. Guys,
these are objectively bad things. You do not
say that and pretend like he's following the
constitution.
But if you point those out, what they
do? They went after Kyle.

(02:46:02):
Cat turned freaked out and said, you're no
longer part of our group.
That's not what? Are we in 1st grade?
Apparently.
The problem is that you're not MAGA if
you push back on the community that's supporting
Trump blindly.
Who wants to be part of that?
And this person just he said just because
one is MAGA doesn't mean one has to
bow to Israel. It's called MAGA for a
reason.

(02:46:22):
He says, no one is bowing to Israel.
So a few of his pics are pro
Israel, but most of his pics are pro
America. Just saying there is a little overacting
here.
That says the guy who is ignoring
12 different videos that explicitly state things that
are unconstitutional.
My guess is they didn't even watch them,
guys. That's how this tends to work.

(02:46:43):
This person says, why do I follow this
moron?
See the point?
Now, yes, he could have framed it a
little bit less aggressive, but nonetheless, the point
is the evidence is very important. And he
goes, I just unfollowed him.
Willful ignorance.
Blinders because I've chosen to side. That's TeamSport
politics for you right there.

(02:47:03):
And this is the best one. So again,
same clip, same information. This guy says, libtards
are so adorable when they're indignant.
Okay. So here's a guy who's very pro
Trump, or at least was, very Republican,
and is now upset because of the Israel
side of it. You have me sharing it.
Neither of us are even remotely democrat. For
me, I'm just and I both of them

(02:47:25):
are dumb.
And I said, it's right there in 12
different videos, and all you can do is
lash out at some unknown libtard?
Well, I put that together, and I think
the left is just as ridiculous as the
right. But I'm sure you'll disregard this all
the same, exactly what happened.
My point is, Mohit before,
the only thing they can do to make

(02:47:45):
sense of what they're looking at is to
pretend it's some Libtard trick. Some democrat ruse.
Yeah. Certainly could be. Consider that. But to
ignore facts because you want that to be
the case without finding that to be the
case is lazy.
It's willful ignorance.
Talking about the picks, because this is continuing
to be problematic, guys. If you're actually paying

(02:48:07):
attention to these, it's not just a couple
of pro Israel. It's all shockingly pro Israel
so far,
and many of which are calling out things
already that are concerning.
Now, we'll now, I wanna point this out
first because this is this is something that
is also worthy of ridicule.
Rick Wilson,
who, I'm not even familiar necessarily. I've seen

(02:48:27):
him name float around, but the point is
he says, RFK junior is named Trump HHS
pick, which hasn't happened yet, which I do
argue seems to be going forward. But I'm
willing to bet you the senate confirmation is
how they the government stops that from happening.
Either way,
he says, expect a booming market
of tiny headstones and infant funeral clothes. I

(02:48:48):
mean, not only is that just disgusting,
like, in a way almost you know, I
guess you can't say he's pray you know,
wanting that or praising that. But it's like,
this is that whole my this is the
Trump derangement syndrome that both sides are suffering
from. Either way, it's more about RFK Jr
here.
I don't agree with that, and nobody should
because that's stupid. What he's actually pointing to
are the things that RFK is good at.

(02:49:10):
The conversation of his health record. The idea
of the evidence around the dangers of many
of these injections they're giving.
And even whether we're talking about autism or
whether we're talking about the obvious problems of
what the COVID 19 injection was doing, by
the way, that Trump is still praising, which
is just crazy to me. And what they
want you to think it's gonna cause children
deaths. You know what's causing children death? Injections

(02:49:31):
that are killing children, causing sudden infant death
syndrome, causing children to have heart attacks, but
Rick cares not about that.
It kills me because here, I'm I'm concerned
about r k junior for the reasons that
I think make sense.
That does not mean I'm blindly high fiving
about all the dumb stuff that either side
put out about anything that doesn't line up
with the facts. Like, for example, Tulsi Gabbard,

(02:49:54):
who I increasingly am more suspicious about for
obvious reasons, but they've made up a lot
of really stupid lies about her. And a
lot of what she said before joining Trump's
administration, I thought was very lucid and very
much made sense. But it's funny how you
can be all anti the forever wars and
then completely endorse a genocide.
Kinda doesn't make sense to me. Either way,
it's important to be accurate. All people out

(02:50:15):
there framing us as being one side or
the other,
the point is the same. It's about the
facts for me. And if you prove to
me and not give me hopium that these
people are doing the right thing,
of course, I'm gonna talk about that. Right
now, it's not looking good.
Weirdly enough, even Mike Pence came out, which
I know Mike Pence is not the Trump
ally necessarily.
But it it's not as simple as that,
especially recently. But he says says Mike Pence

(02:50:37):
defies Trump, comes out against RFK Junior in
bombshell statement.
I respectfully urge senate Republicans to reject him.
That's I guys, that's what I think is
happening a lot of this is gonna be.
You're gonna end up with the worst of
the worst, and a lot of them are
already there, it seems. But any indiv example
what I think is might might be a
positive thing,
that's where I see this going.

(02:50:57):
Now, even if you think it's just the
Democrats, it's the same point for me.
That's the outcome I see coming.
Now, I'm not I'm not blaming one side.
I mean, yes, there is a part of
that. But if I'm early in this going,
that's what I think will be the outcome,
and it ends up happening, I hope you
can ask whether that might have always been
the plan, which is kinda what I'm getting
at.
Now, Eric, in one side point about this,

(02:51:19):
there's a lot of misinformation too, but you
could argue this could come from either side.
But one of the things that already got
floated was,
Tucker Carlson being the press secretary. And that
went around. It looks like even Eric shared
this ultimately, and then came out and was
like, wait. Never mind. It's not it's real.
It's fake. Tucker Carlson is not the press
secretary.
And then this is what Collins simply highlight.

(02:51:40):
This is the fakest press release I've ever
seen. But, you know, it's there's a lot
of these that went around. And there's a
lot of fake information flying around. I'm only
showing you that just to be careful. Be
cautious.
Both sides are trying to convince you of
plenty of lies.
Now, into the pics. There's a lot of
very concerning pics here.
Hopefully you'll look at the previous discussion we

(02:52:01):
had, and actually
I forgot to grab this.
Oh, what's this one? This looks like an
old article.
It'll still give me what I need to
grab here.
Oh, that's right. Wait. Does this oh, I
forgot about this title. So this is what

(02:52:21):
we did in, July 23rd. Using Trump and
2 party politics to trick conservatives into supporting
a technocratic control grid. Well, look at that.
Seems like exactly where we are. But here's
the one I wanted to grab for you.
I'll I'll include both of these for you.
Oh, look, they censored the video. What a
shock.
It's weird that Odyssey doesn't show up.

(02:52:41):
This one. Conservatives begin to acknowledge Trump's cabinet
picks reveal Israel's first agenda.
That's really happening guys. There's a lot of
conservatives out there who are finding really uncomfortable
and starting to call it out.
Keep those for you in there.
Now here,
Kim Iverson points something out. And this is

(02:53:02):
not a Trump pick necessarily,
but this is about
center the senate majority leader, elect anyway, at
the moment. Thune has quote no choice, but
to push hard for Trump agenda despite concerns
they put out.
And this is senator John Thune,
says I spoke with prime minister Netanyahu

(02:53:23):
and reaffirmed the United States commitment to standing
with Israel, our closest ally.
Really?
That's what you do first?
That's what she points out. First thing senator
Thune does after becoming senate majority leader, calls
Netanyahu.
Is everybody awake yet?
But that's not a joke, by the way.
He posted this himself.
So you immediately call a foreign leader.

(02:53:46):
Now, yes, you could try to frame this
about the context of the ongoing
war.
In other words, Israel's genocide on a foreign
people. But
either way, that's a shocking thing when you
see the full context of what's going on
with APAC and the Israel influence, which we're
gonna go right now.
And and this is the one acting like
he's gonna push back on what happens next.

(02:54:08):
Now Trump War Room shares another one of
Trump's releases that talks about his White House
senior staff.
Now every single one of these,
you could I I went over them, and
some of them are just benign. My point
is every one of them have the same
statements you'd expect. I fully support Israel, and
I'm blind. You know, the what they're doing
is completely like, the same things you would
see,

(02:54:28):
which is very strange to me that every
single politician, regardless of any side they're on,
seemed by the way, even the AOC dynamic.
Now they're very critical of Israel a lot
of ways, but there's also examples where they
can seem they seem to bow to the
a certain power structure. Either way, I'm gonna
highlight Stephen Miller right now. But my point
is all of them

(02:54:48):
have very clear overlaps that they're blind in
supporting Israel. Most of them have APAC funding.
This one I think is most alarming though.
Now, this is just to give you the
search for Israel in his thread, and you
can scroll through this and find
all the I mean, many someone will show
you, but all of them are very clear
pro Israel and I mean, it's the kind
of stuff that is like

(02:55:09):
it shows you he has more of an
interest in fighting for Israel than American interest,
in my opinion.
Now here are just some of the different
posts that are talking about this from an
Israeli perspective, the Jewish telegraphic agency.
And this is Stephen Miller, hard line Jewish
Trump aid to become deputy chief of staff
as immigration becomes top issue. Yeah. Because he's
pretty radical about that. Now, you can read
this article and it's basically a gushing about

(02:55:30):
how great he will be for Israel. Same
thing here. Under the Jewish l virtual library,
going over his
in interest in supporting a foreign country, in
my opinion, over that's what a lot of
these I'll I'll kind of end with that
on this segment. A lot of these groups,
as he even frames it, Jewish group praises
Trump for pros your pics. What he's talking
about is the Zionist Organization of America,

(02:55:51):
which, yes, professes to be a Jewish group.
But in reality, it is something much different.
And I'm gonna go over all this in
a second.
So that's my point about them talking about
how this is a a
a very positive pick for the interest of
Israel, which we're talking about an election of
the United States.
Weird how it all seems to go in
that direction. Now here's an interesting clip. Now

(02:56:12):
shared by right wing watch, so it's very
slanted in a partisan way. But it the
context is there. You can listen to what
he's saying.
And he's speaking to a group of of
Republicans.
And what he's talking about
is like is what I said earlier, using
the power.
Now, what he says maybe sound like perfect
logic to you, and it may you may
even agree with the where he's coming from.

(02:56:32):
My point is we're aside from the the
narrative,
what does it amount to?
A call for more government power. At least
you being okay with the government using that
power to go after the people that they
think is wrong. Like, so the same context
is the left going after people that save
hate speech or which by the way is
what they're calling antisemitism.

(02:56:54):
Or from the right going after or the
left going either way. The point is they
both can use their own power to go
after their political opponents, which is what they
do.
So we should call for none of that.
We should be going, no. We want less
government because that's what we're pretending we're doing.
But here's a point of where he's saying
that we should be doing
the opposite.
There is something really broken in the conservative

(02:57:14):
brain.
They're afraid not only of conflict, we know
that. But eve there's an even deeper fear.
Afraid of conflict?
What world is he living in?
A deeper fear than all of that, which
is
having power and using power.
You you elect a state supreme court justice,
you elect an attorney general, and so on

(02:57:35):
and so forth
to have an office with specific powers, duties,
and responsibilities
with the expectation
that they will use that authority
to defeat evil, to protect the good, and
to accomplish positive change in society. No.
No. They'll use that power to uphold the
law

(02:57:56):
or more specifically, the constitutional
rights.
You see how quickly that gets deviated into
what they think is evil and upholding good?
Now, the last point about good in society,
well, it's a very broad and opaque idea.
Whatever he may think that is might differ
from what you think. And that's why we
air on things we could all agree on,
like constitutional law.

(02:58:17):
Right? Or specifically laws that are not unconstitutional.
To say it more that the other word
could be
taken as something else.
So just listen to that again, guys, and
think about how alarming this may sound like
logic to you until you realize this person
has designs to do something much different than
you may envision, but you're giving them that
power. You've elected them to take this power
and go after evil. What if that turns

(02:58:38):
out to be your family?
You may not think that's possible until it
is.
Have an office with specific
elect a state supreme court justice, you elect
an attorney general, and so on and so
forth to Again, right even there, you could
point out, well, maybe we don't though, if
we fully understand the reality of what we're
living in, but that's a different conversation. Have
an office with specific powers, duties, and responsibilities

(02:59:02):
with the expectation
that they will use that authority
to defeat evil, to protect the good, and
to accomplish positive change in society. Now, again,
from the judge side of it, the attorney
general is quite different. But from the judge
side of it, no. They've got one job,
Uphold the constitution.
They're not supposed to be acting with an
agenda to change this or do that, or

(02:59:24):
they're supposed to uphold the constitution. That's it.
The moment we start acting like they have
some obligation to defeat evil, that's why you
get judges taking action against Donald Trump. Or
people that are because they're taking personal action
or slanting it for political
reasons. All they're supposed to do is uphold
the constitution, and he wants you to radicalize
this in a way that makes them feel
like they're supposed to be going after somebody.

(02:59:46):
These people are part of the problem. And
you wanna know where this is being funded
from? I think you get the picture.
And you have to use that power
fearlessly.
A number of states, for example,
have passed laws
saying that you can't have this in the
curriculum or you can't have that in the
curriculum and you can't teach DEI and so
on and so forth. See, they do this
for a reason. I don't think anybody with
a brain could recognize how alarming these things

(03:00:09):
are, I would argue.
Because not because you argue that they made
like, some people out there think that they're
trying to accomplish a better world.
Even if you agree with that, which I
don't, in the way that they're doing, the
point is that you can see that these
powers are being used just as a they're
trying to tap into what you may think
is good, to use it for other reasons.
The same thing he's doing right here. But
he says these things because he knows how

(03:00:29):
emotional you'll get about these ideas, the trans
conversation he mentions, because it gets you all
worked up for right for reasons that matter,
by the way, which I too am very
on guard about
in order to but, again, all of it
is amounting for you to to lean into
the idea that these people should be using
their power to go after things that you
don't like.
Again, just from the judge perspective, that's couldn't

(03:00:50):
be further from the truth. They're supposed to
sit there and uphold the constitution.
Now I'll I just for sake of time,
because we're I'm I'm already way I have
much I still wanna get to. I'm not
gonna be able to get to the major
foreign policy points today, but I I will
be very in the very next show. That's
my plan anyway.
But this is the concern about all this.
They're using things you care about to get

(03:01:10):
you to justify things that you would otherwise
be I would argue disagree with. Now whatever
you think about this, it's interesting to consider
because I think the overlap here is much
bigger and it's not just about racism.
Electron electronic intifada highlights emails from 2007 that
tie Stephen Miller to Richard Spencer.
Now I think there's more to that than
we realize that overlaps with the Zionist agenda,

(03:01:32):
but there's a whole conversation to get into
there.
Ben Rubinstein says, Elise Stefanik, Stephen Miller, Brian
Hook are the first major appointments to Trump's
team.
Trump knows what he's doing and is no
fool.
The new administration is decidedly
Israel first.
He's a Jewish anti Zionist.

(03:01:52):
The point is,
anybody who's honest with themselves can already see
that. This is a Jewish it's a Jewish
person. He's anti Zionist,
but to most Jew the to a Zionist,
that makes him no longer Jewish. Ben Shapiro
said that many times, not explicitly, but people
that are out there protesting, he calls them
trash.
And in many cases, even alluded to the
fact that they're not Jewish because they do

(03:02:13):
that. Not Ben specifically as far as I
could tell, but a lot of Zionists.
The point is that this is Israel first,
and it's not about Jewish anything. It's about
Zionism.
Here's Max Blumenthal highlighting
what's his name again?
Sebastian Gorka,
who who apparently is in in line to

(03:02:33):
be the national security adviser, which is crazy.
Watch how he responds to this. Now to
be clear,
going underground here, he asked a very, it's,
option, option,
who I've referenced many times before. I think
he does great work.
He asked a very pointed question,
completely justifiable. And in fact, entirely accurate to

(03:02:56):
a t, but he does it in a
way that I think is meant to sort
of draw a little bit of a reaction.
And he got it. But what's crazy is
the way Gorka responds.
Well, just ready to walk away from the
interview because he points to something that the
world has acknowledged.
This is what Trump's administration is already turning
out to be like.
Nobody America First should be like to be

(03:03:18):
leaning into anything like this. Shouldn't, October 7th.
You know that, Arab Americans in Michigan
swung it for you, and they didn't vote
for Israel.
All these different appointees
seem,
so,
even the supporters of Trump would say, more
make Israel great again than make America

(03:03:40):
great again.
Do you think when Trump said finish the
job to Netanyahu, he meant exterminate them all
under the Biden administration,
ahead of a exterminate all the Palestinians
ahead of a inauguration
so that he can start sorting out peace
in the Middle East? And before he answers,
the moment that he brought up
make Israel great again, you can see his

(03:04:02):
entire facial expression change.
Despite that being an obvious point to make.
But we'll just watch it again. Now listen
to the question and the way he you
can see him shift in his mind.
And, again, listen to the question about how
clearly it seems to be kind of meant
to draw you know, that he wants to
annihilate Palestinians, which, by the way, is obvious
that Israel's doing that. That mean, they've admitted
this now. In case you don't know that,

(03:04:22):
their own military has made it clear that
they're ethnically cleansing Northern Gaza. They're never allowed
to come back. Everything we've talked about.
Do you think he doesn't know that? I
can guarantee you he knows that. I can
prove he knows that. The point is the
way he responds almost makes that all the
more clear. Do you think when Trump said
finish the job to Netanyahu, he meant exterminate

(03:04:42):
them all Oh, here. Here's what I want.
Right? Of Trump would say, more make Israel
great again than make America
great again.
Do you think when Trump said finish the
job to Netanyahu, he meant exterminate them all
under the Biden administration,
ahead of a exterminate all the Palestinians
ahead of a,
inauguration so that he can start sorting out

(03:05:04):
peace in the Middle East?
Sorry. I I I I are you seriously
saying that members of the administration love Israel
more than America and that president Trump wants
a genocide?
Yep.
Yeah. Okay. Answer the question. Obviously,
you can literally show people like Brian Mast,
who's not part of the administration, but show
up in
IDF uniforms or his entire cabinet who are

(03:05:26):
absolutely
acting for Israel's interest. Like, you can't talk
about these and not highlight the undeniable reality
that they're calling for your suppression of speech
for a foreign country. What else do you
call that? Is that America first? There's no
way you could possibly call that America first.
You're acting for Israel at the expense of
American rights.
Again, I find it impossible to believe he

(03:05:47):
doesn't see that. This guy is acting for
team sport politics. This is his side. He's
not gonna allow them. And this is how
he tends to operate,
clutching his pearls. I've seen him do it
many times in conversations just like this.
And that he wants to what's the way
he framed it? American that president Trump wants
a genocide? The America the Trump wants a
genocide.
No. Yes. That's a that's a that's a
strong claim. Because I wouldn't say you could

(03:06:08):
prove that Trump wants that,
but it's a fair question when you are
failing to acknowledge that it's happening and arguing
you're going to help them finish the job,
which is exactly what he said. You see
how easy that is to make clear? So
there's anybody with an objective perspective could say
that's a fair question based on the fact
that Trump has said help them that you

(03:06:29):
need to finish the job. Well, when the
world concede there could be genocide, what else
in the world do you think that means?
Either Trump is unaware it's happening, which I
find hard to believe,
or he supports what's happening.
It's pretty simple, but you can, you can
act all about oh my god. How dare
you? And clutch your pearls and act like
it's offensive to hide the obvious.

(03:06:50):
That's what I think he's doing right here.
That members of the administration love Israel more
than America and that president Trump wants a
genocide? Did did I just hear you correctly?
Just a question.
And I guess I should point out as
well that obviously he heard him, so there's
no interest in having it repeated. You're just
trying to act aghast. Oh my god. Did
I just hear you? Well, yes. You obviously

(03:07:11):
did. Stop grandstanding and make your point. Well,
it's obscene. And if you wanna continue in
that vein, I will I will What did
he mean by finish the job? Okay. So
he you didn't hear that. He just said
he was gonna leave. Is that what you
normally do when given a hard question, you
just walk away?
I
mean, it is a fair and logical question
to I will end this interview now. Oh,
there. Sorry. Would you really did you really

(03:07:33):
impute genocidal intent tendencies to the mantras by
74,000,000 Americans? We call we call him Yeah,
man. I mean, this is what's so silly.
First of all, he's referencing both Joe Biden
and Donald Trump. The point,
why is it so hard to wrap your
mind around that a leader of a country
can be supporting genocide? Just because a bunch
of people vote for him, even if we
actually know that's not how it went down,

(03:07:53):
that that's historically something that's happened many times.
He's I guess the point I'm still getting
at is the fact that this guy wants
to act so ob on I'm just shocked.
How dare how you actually support. Well, yes,
it's not that big of a hard. It's
he may be offended by it. It may
be inconvenient for you, but it's not that
crazy of a thing to ask.
Genocide Joe and Holocaust Harris. That's how we

(03:08:15):
refer to,
the incarnate of the president's choice. About Biden
or president Trump? Well, no. I I want
to ask, well, what did he mean when
he's I mean, tell me about the relationship
between Netanyahu
and Donald Trump because some say they don't
get on. Alright. You're okay. I'll I'll do
it with one proviso.
I don't know who you are, and you're
walking on very thin ice. Wow. So if

(03:08:35):
you do one more thing of that, bro
is overwhelming.
You don't know who he is, but you
I mean, look. You know who he is.
He's not a small channel. He's got a
very large influence. You chose to go on
this show. He doesn't just go on random
people's shows. Somebody set this up. I guarantee
you we look. That is just like somebody
acting you're trying to downplay. You're trying to
belittle this person to make it seem for

(03:08:56):
the record now that you be look. The
way this played out is gonna make him
look bad no matter how you spin it.
And he's basically trying to run away. Now
he's setting terms. Don't talk about this or
I'm gonna walk away.
America first, guys. America first. Look. This interview
is terminated and your production team can delete
my cell phone and my email.
Right. You mean the team that you didn't

(03:09:18):
know because you don't know who this is?
It's pretty pathetic if you want my honest
opinion.
Here's what Max says. When asked
why so many Trump foreign policy picks seem
more to make Israel great again than to
make America great again, Sebastian Gorka melts down
and threatens to storm out of the interview.
Gorka is a front runner for Trump's national
security adviser. Should not be surprising. Here's the

(03:09:38):
full link if you'd like to watch it.
Now going back to March
of 2024,
Rand Paul makes a statement about somebody who's
about to seems to be about to be
chosen for Trump circle.
He says Donald Trump just endorsed us before
this point, March of 2024,
the worst deep state candidate this cycle.

(03:10:00):
Mike Rogers is a never Trumper,
which again, how many people do we need
to suddenly be in Trump's orbit who 30
seconds ago said he was a grifter, a
liar, a a fraud?
Every one of them, it seems.
And never Trumper,
and a card carrying member of the spy
state that seeks to destroy Trump.

(03:10:20):
You have to ask yourself, who gives Trump
this awful advice? Now see that, and even
in its own right, is sort of grand
Paul almost getting a pass. How about he
just makes decisions for himself?
Or if not, that he's that easily played
by somebody who's publicly anti Trump that he
just gets someone just tells him that he's
a good choice so he goes with it.
That's the most easily manipulated leader of all

(03:10:41):
time.
Or there's something bigger going on, and he's
choosing people for different reasons.
Largely because they're pro Israel, it seems. Either
way, this is what this guy was saying
before we get to the next part. I
don't believe today as I'm sitting here that
Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee in
2024. Don't believe it. I don't think it's
helpful for the president of the United States
to attack the media. It's petty, and it's

(03:11:02):
certainly below the statue of the office of
the president of the United States. It's beneath
the office in and of itself. Actions and
activities unbecoming of the office of the president
of the United States.
And now he's gonna pick him for his
administration because that totally lines up. One of
those clips is reason, by the way.
Mike Rogers in consideration for the FBI chief.
Now again, hasn't happened yet. Seems to be

(03:11:25):
the front runner as far as I could
tell from the sir. But until January post
past Jan, we will not know for sure.
Why is he even considered if that's the
case? Becomes the obvious question.
Glenn Greenwald says anyone who appoints Mike Rogers
to run the FBI
after he's arguably been the single most ardent,
blind, and extremist defender of the US security

(03:11:47):
state and its surveillance and police
politicized abuses,
everything they're calling out against Trump should forfeit
forever any claim to be interested in combating
those agencies.
Well, look at that.
Now it hasn't happened yet, obviously, but even
the consideration.
As they're literally talking about changing these these

(03:12:08):
institutions
I mean, guys, again, it's like every single
indication goes against what they tell you, and
we get shouted down for even pointing these
out considering that they could be lying or
they could be tricked.
Whatever you wanna think. At this point, I
don't even care what you rationale you use
to acknowledge these things. Just acknowledge them. And
I'm not over here saying we know for

(03:12:28):
sure either.
Every day, every time, we have to wait
until these things happen, but it right now
is important to call out. Like, I keep
saying about this what I sense is kind
of a part of the conservative side who
are pushing things in order to hope that
they end up choosing them, like, floating the
idea of certain people they want and pretending
like it's already happened. Like, maybe even Tucker,

(03:12:48):
for example. Maybe that was them hoping he
would get that choice.
My point is that do do whatever you
think you can do to influence what the
people actually want,
which I may disagree with, but not what
Israel wants or what the conservatives want or
the neocons want. Well, who are the deep
state who are actually clearly in charge here.
I would be I would rather it be
what the people want, obviously.

(03:13:10):
My point though is that that's not what's
happening, and so if you don't see that
happening, you should be calling it out.
Fox News, same thing.
Mike Benz calls us out. This is super
nasty stuff. This is a 6 minute clip
you can watch for yourself. Mike Rogers, who
may head Trump's FBI team, he writes, or
had Trump's FBI, was not only the head

(03:13:30):
of the intel committee behind the CIA's Russiagate
scam. Really?
He was in on the CIA cutouts, IRIs
Beacon Project.
He said, I told the story of the
Beacon Project on this week's stream for my
ex subscribers. You can watch it for yourself.
Bad kitty saying the same thing breaking. Not
only did Mike Rogers work for Alliance Security
Dem Democracy and Hamilton 68 fake Russia bot
folks, he worked for the Integrity Initiative partnered,

(03:13:53):
the Beacon Project. So these are all leading
entities in the conservative conversation, maybe even the
republican side, I would argue, screaming about how
this guy's a bad choice.
Maybe he won't pick it for that reason.
But if he does end up getting picked
by Trump's team,
just have the courage to call out how
crazy that is.
Here is the Jerusalem Post for Mark Rowan.

(03:14:13):
Who is Mark Rowan? The Jewish investor reportedly
in the running for Trump's treasury
secretary.
Again, you can read all this to see
how Israel perceives this and they're pretty damn
excited about all the pixies making.
Whitney points this out. Rowan,
like his fellow Apollo cofounder, Leon Black, heavily
linked to Epstein, seems like a running theme

(03:14:34):
here, was an alumnus of the deeply corrupt
bank, Drexel Burnham Lambert.
Rowan worked with Black at Drexel's m and
a department
for to help corporate raiders.
Several linked to organized crime that were essentially
sponsored by Drexel's junk bond scam to take
over major components of the corporate America.
Drexel was deeply tied to the intelligence organized

(03:14:56):
crime syndicate responsible for the SNL crisis of
the 19 eighties. See your book and also
the work of Pete Bruton.
One of the main masterminds of this scam,
Michael Milken, Drexel's king of the junk bonds,
was a convicted felon for his egregious financial
crimes until Trump pardoned him at the end
of his first term.
Like many other people that were I mean,

(03:15:16):
you know, like, Ross Albright or, or, or,
hold on.
God, just the names are slipping my way.
Anyway, there there's plenty of examples
of people I mean, Assange at that point
very clearly could have been pardoned. Instead, he
pardoned war criminals. He pardoned people that were

(03:15:36):
like this,
which shows you the direction we've always been
pointing out. Now it says also,
Apollo
brought one of the main 911 inside traders,
former top CIA official and Wall Street banker
Alvin Buzzy
Congrad,
in onto his board shortly after 911.
Fun fact, she says Congrad
guards, excuse me, Congard was also Eric Prince's

(03:15:58):
CIA handler
when Blackwater was a CIA contractor.
Pretty much every name that has been floated
for treasury thus far is a complete ghoul
and or flagrant
financial criminal.
And, Joe Heffer points out Apollo also owns
Castelli's, which was has academy,
formal Blackwater, in the consortium. So Rowan has

(03:16:20):
access to a private army for his personal
leanings,
which she was gonna mention.
Oh, that's what I had right there. So
the point is just it's it's
every example that gets floated right now. And
if you if your argument is that you
that's the best you're gonna get and you
gotta pick from it, then you don't then
you don't wanna go drain in the swamp.
He is literally picking from the swamp.

(03:16:42):
There's a whole country
of intelligent
and well versed people that are not blinded
by partisan politics or by lies about foreign
policy or fabrications about Israel's history, whatever.
Instead, he's literally plucking from the inside. Act
we're acting like this is an ins a
revolution against the bad guys.
Bennie Johnson

(03:17:03):
says the chairman of the FCC is an
absolutely critical position in the new Trump administration.
Bad policy at the FCC could cripple free
speech and independent media while destroying companies like
Twitter and Starlink in a regulatory death spiral.
Well, how about we get rid of it
then, which won't ever happen.
This is why I'm endorsing Brendan Carr for
chairman of the FCC.

(03:17:24):
This guy right here.
Now the interesting part of all of this
is that we're highlighting all of this as
somehow pro free speech, supporting your rights when
every single one of these individuals so far
have represented a different threat to those
things. Eric Lipton points out Trump to name
Brendan Carr,

(03:17:45):
listed at the Trump release,
a massive champion for Elon Musk and his
Starlink system.
As chairman of the FCC, which controls orbital
access by space communication companies in the United
States.
Well, it's interesting. So clearly, there's more going
on here than just what's best for American
interests.
Mainly, what seems to be best for Elon's
interests. But that's just one part of this.
Oops.

(03:18:06):
Triple point or what that was oh, this
this is specifically
Karr.
I found this to be interesting.
Project 2025 author.
Now, it's funny to me is I I
didn't talk about this in regard to the
recent statements that, like, banning others
openly came out and said, now we could
admit this was our agenda.

(03:18:26):
I took those as jokes, but I couldn't
tell whether they were meant to be sort
of, like, trolling the left or whatever.
Like, now we can pretend we admit it
or whatever. But what's interesting to me is
there's always been a thread here.
And I I I most of that's a
blow because I don't think you can definitively
prove that this was now, ultimately, even the
fact check-in one of these says, where was
that? I think I included it. Then ultimately,
it says that it's the heritage foundation and

(03:18:47):
not Trump. But either way, they came out
and kinda said they do this was theirs,
and it could have been a joke. But
now you have him appointing the author
to a position.
So you really just can't pretend like it
if that's the case, then clearly in some
way, they feel this is alignment. So I
just find it interesting how much overlap there
is to these things and what ultimately amounts
to growth
in government, restriction of your rights despite how

(03:19:09):
they wanna frame these things.
Doug Burham says, I'm deeply grateful to president
Trump for this amazing opportunity. That's his endorsement,
Trump's statement.
Now here, Michael Tracey points out, Trump just
announced,
Doug, right here, Burgum will be both secretary
of interior
and have a newly created seat on the

(03:19:30):
National Security Council.
While running for president, Bergham said the the
US is, quote, at war with Russia and
call for Ukraine funding to defeat Putin. So
that seems to be at least then different
than what we were they are saying now
about what's coming next, which, again, I don't
think is what's actually gonna happen unless the
interest is rolling back that agenda in Ukraine
for the larger agenda, which is how I
see it, but you can make your own

(03:19:51):
mind up.
Doug Berkem, if you wanna look through his
look through his account. Search for the word
Israel. Here's just 2 of what stood out
to me. My point is they're all, every
one of them, in the same
positions. Here he is in 2024.
Why?
Why is he I this doesn't make why
is he doing this? Honored to meet Netanyahu
to discuss vital importance of US Israel relationship.

(03:20:12):
His courage, strength, and will leading Israel against
Iran's
7 front war. So we already know where
he stands.
He stands in falsehood. He stands in a
lie that rationalizes
Israel's genocide. Iran is not the one conducting
this war. Neither are these 7 fronts in
Iran at all other than them supporting them
because they're fighting against an illegal institute, an
entity that's occupying damn near all of them

(03:20:34):
and is conducting illegal actions against every one
of them.
Now he, as a governor of North Dakota,
is meeting with Netanyahu.
Why?
Because they blindly support him, and they're all
bowing to the interest of Israel. That's not
my opinion. It's very obvious.
And that is incorrect. That's not my opinion.

(03:20:54):
That's based on the facts that we can
prove.
The idea that this is you know, Israel
is not leading a 7 front war. Israel's
committing a genocide that the world can see,
and that will come to pass.
I mean, there's too much awareness of this
to not have some consequences, but the US
and the United States and Britain and plenty
of others, the UK, are clearly
willing to stand against the world in support

(03:21:16):
of a genocide.
You have to consider what kind of force
or effort or influence or
compromise, blackmail
they have on these people for them to
do that.
Or in like, influence from the Zionist agenda.
Maybe they're all just Zionist that have been
placed there. That makes sense too. He all
here he is saying the more voters learn
about Kamala, the more they wanna vote for

(03:21:37):
Trump, which is kinda my point. And and
most of this was
cartoonish at this point, but the point is
here. She's resorting to extremist name calling to
distract from her failed record. And the fact
that she and I by the way, I
think she's ridiculous and she doesn't have a
failed record. That's not the point though. She
recently slandered Israel with a false claim of
genocide.
You know, and what's funny about this is,

(03:21:58):
like, you can argue you don't agree with
that, but you can't call it a false
claim when every institution responsible for making these
arguments has said that's a genocide. ICC, ICJ,
International Group, United Nations.
So you're the one pretending it's not the
case. You can argue you don't think that.
But you can't say that she's lying or
misrepresenting it when

(03:22:18):
everywhere we tech technically look in the past
to make these assessments have already said that.
So he is blindly in support of Israel
while they commit genocide. That has to be
clear.
Now a couple of other follow ups on
this, and there's more picks that are still
kind of up in the air. The New
Republic wrote this. Another fiasco for Trump as
his pick to run the Pentagon suddenly implodes.
Now this could be by design. I've heard

(03:22:40):
many things I've floated.
My idea originally, like I already said, is
about how some of these may be picks
that are designed to make you rationalize the
one that they already wanted that you wouldn't
have accepted without floating somebody worse. Sort of
the, I the logic of Pompeo Nikki Haley.
Right?
Or so that's one of the reason you
could consider this may be happening. Knowing that
they will push back on these people.

(03:23:00):
The other argument, and this I think is
sort of a reactionary argument to what we're
saying,
is that they're saying people in in the
Trump circle are saying that this was a,
like, a 4 d chess move. Right? That
they're intentionally putting them forward,
so they push back on them, so they
ultimately get the ones they want afterward.
Same argument really, but from a different
agenda. My point is saying that this is

(03:23:20):
about
nothing. It's not a left right paradigm thing.
It's about the government agenda.
They're saying it from a Trump forty chess
move kind of way. Either way,
you have to realize that we're being manipulated.
I think these people are picks that Trump
would endorse and ultimately could end up with
either way.
But it says, I knew revelations threatened Trump's

(03:23:41):
choice. The thought this was, hegath or hegath.
How do you say it?
Pete hegs hegseth.
We'll talk about Matt Gaetz and a couple
of others. The point is that ultimately, people
are starting to recognize issues there, and I
think that might might be by design.
Trump transition team concerned about
Hegseth who wasn't vetted properly. So these are

(03:24:01):
people from inside his own team who are
making these statements, which which is interesting, which
usually causes blowback from Trump publicly. We'll see
what happens.
Now here is Michael Tracey pointing out Mike
Huckabee, one that has already been acknowledged and
has already accepted whether that happens or not.
One like this though, I find really hard
to believe they'll find reason to push back
on.
Because most of congress is blindly supportive of

(03:24:22):
everything he's talking about here. But listen to
what he says here. This is what I
am more concerned about now than anything with
what is coming.
Mike Huckabee, after being named ambassador by to
Israel by Trump,
declares, quote, there is no occupation.
We already heard him say this in the
past. Rather, Israel has had the rightful deed
to the territory

(03:24:43):
since the days of Abraham.
He says we'll be abusing biblical term biblical
terms like promised land.
This is what I keep talking about. Whether
we're talking about journalists overlapping their religion with
what they're doing. We're talking about people who
are leading with in from powerful positions or
rather ruling
and are being guided by biblical prophecy.

(03:25:04):
I don't care whether you believe it or
not. That's crazy.
That's dangerous because what you're guiding yourself by
is not what's happening in the world right
now. Even if you end up believing you're
right, even if you are right. You're you're
like, for example,
the lie that they've had the rightful deed
of the area is provably false, but you
believe it because there's a the word Israel
is in the bible.

(03:25:25):
Well, that's they've used that word so you
would be played by that. Here's what he's
saying.
Well, no. I've never,
been willing to use the term West Bank.
There is no such thing. I I speak
of Judea and Samaria. Yeah. But there is
though. And that's acknowledged by the UN, even
by Israel with the past when they made
agreements to allow them to have a Tuesday
solution that never never intended to follow through

(03:25:47):
with.
And here we are today where people like
this are arguing it never existed. There are
no Palestinians. There is no occupation. Who cares
about the law? So that's my point. If
you care about the law
and how it may bind people like this,
and they're the ones disregarding it in general
because of what they believe religiously,
how do you not see a problem there?

(03:26:08):
I tell people there is no occupation.
It is, a land that is
occupied by the people who have had a
rightful,
deed to the place for 35100 years since
the time of Abraham.
So so what's the difference of me picking
out some I mean, I could I mean,
you
it just it's so frustrating how obvious you

(03:26:29):
can make this point. I'm sure I don't
even need to argue this. But the idea
of coming from the bible and saying that
we can like, so you're saying your belief
supersedes
everything else.
Well, that's exactly why Zionism has framed it
like this over the last 100 years or
more than that actually, but post the occupation.
Because they know that people like you can

(03:26:50):
be played by this.
It's very simple.
And they're they're simply saying, the law doesn't
apply because god said. Well, how do you
argue against that? And how does that make
what if I don't believe in the same
god? You see, the point is, we have
to acknowledge that what they're doing does violate
the law. No matter what you think religiously,
but people are actually buying this. There are
people in our government that are willing to

(03:27:10):
go along with this like him and people
on the left as well because
they have been taken by this or many
of the which are being funded, who are
being blackmailed. All that's happening.
A lot of the terms that maybe the
media would use are even people against Israel
would use are not terms that I employ
because I wanna use terms that live from
time immemorial.

(03:27:31):
And those are the terms like promised land
and Judea, Samaria. These are biblical terms,
and those were important to me. And so
so you understand what I said earlier.
Israel was a place referenced in the bible.
There's a reason that Zionism chose to use
that word. Now just because they pick that
word when the u then Britain hands them

(03:27:51):
an illegal occupation
does not mean that it is the thing
that the bible references.
It means that they used it so you
would connect those dots.
And so I will continue to,
follow that nomenclature unless I'm instructed otherwise, but
I don't think that'll happen. Oh, well, that's
interesting. Okay. So otherwise, but I don't think
that'll happen. Oh, well, that's interesting. Okay. So
now if if Donald Trump says no longer
believe the your beliefs, you're gonna ignore your
religious beliefs in in lieu of a political

(03:28:12):
directive?
Well, that makes you a hypocrite then, quite
frankly. I think obviously the point is that
the the you should not be overlapping these
things. But it's funny that you can make
a stance that you're you're literally ignoring international
law because of your beliefs, but then go,
but I'll ignore them if Trump asked me
to or whatever he referenced right there. That

(03:28:33):
just seems
not worthy. I mean, that seems like you
should be losing respect for things like that.
But
what I find interesting,
and this is how lazy all this is
today. Donald Trump junior comes out and says,
push back against these cabinet picks, the cabinet
picks they're you they're showing right now,
proves
they're the disruptors voters wanted.
Oh, does it? How simple that is. See?

(03:28:56):
They don't like them. Therefore, they're the ones
you should want. Yay.
Lowest common denominator, and people fall for this,
guys.
Good people who want good things fall for
this.
It kills me. It's certainly, in some cases,
could be the truth, but this is as
stupid as saying if the media says that
the opposite is true. That's not always the
reality, and they use it against you clearly.

(03:29:18):
They're picking a bunch of people that are
acting in the interest of not America First
and saying just because the Democrats don't like
them, which by and large is not what's
happening.
It's it's people all over the map,
but this is how this is the best
they can do.
Now Michael Tracey makes a point that I'm
gonna pretty much
well, I'll go over the free speech part
too, and then we're gonna wrap right there.

(03:29:39):
Zionist Organization of America, he writes, which used
to be considered somewhat extreme. It's still very
much is, even by the more mainstream pro
Israel organizations,
is absolutely ecstatic
ecstatic of with Trump's appointments.
In 2022, Trump received their highest honor.
The z o a strongly praises Trump for

(03:30:00):
appointing superb friends of Israel.
Rubio,
Huckabee,
Stefanik,
Zeldin,
Nome, Waltz, Hegseth, Ratcliffe, all the ones we've
shown you already.
Here they are posing with an Israeli oligarch.
Because that makes sense. Right?
Guys, it's crazy how obvious this is. Absolutely

(03:30:21):
crazy. Here's them getting them an award in
the past, 2022.
Now, here's what's most important. Oh, again, and
I showed you this a second ago. As
they wanna overlap this as a Jewish organization,
which it's I mean, there are Jewish there
are Zionists who are not Jewish. There are
Christian Zionists. There are atheist Zionists. Many of
which live in Israel today. And they're they're

(03:30:41):
public about it.
So is it just a Jewish group? How
does that work then?
No. It's a Zionist group, which includes Jews
and Christians and other. That's the point. It's
very easy to prove. But there's a reason
they frame it this way. But it's the
Zionist Organization of America. So let's talk about
that. What exactly is the Zionist Organization of
America? Well, let me walk you through something
I found really fascinating. Now, I've talked about

(03:31:02):
this before.
Zionist Organization of America
or
specifically,
the point that I wanna overlap this with
is this is one of many of these
groups that are political
but are actively
fighting or or acting in the interest of
an Israeli government at the expense of American
interests.

(03:31:23):
But they frame themselves as fighting for
American interests
that just happened to overlap with Israel.
And there's another group, the exact same conversation
called the American Zionist Council.
Now both of these groups, you can look
back through and see the overlap
of how clear of what they were
and what they still are.
My point is to show you how they

(03:31:44):
at least in this case, that I meant
to overlap that I overlap in a second
with APAC, which is the main point here,
goes back to the origin of the the
it isn't Israeli entity, which in my opinion,
all of these are.
Zionist entities, but specifically for
being controlled by a foreign government,
not just in America for American interest that

(03:32:05):
happened to align with Israel. So here's what
this this goes back to 20 2013 or
2013. The American Zionist Council,
another Zionist group separate, on paper anyway, from
the Zionist
Organization of America. My point is these are
all the same objectives.
Now this is simply this is a very
simple overview. Saying it was a group formed
in 49,

(03:32:26):
represented 9,
nationwide Zionist organizations
following the independence of Israel. Funny way to
frame that, which they change in later versions.
Not the independence, it was the occupation, the
establishment.
But it says it was founded as a
tax exempt umbrella for American Jewish groups,
which focused on Israel and included Zionist Organization
of America. So there's that. That's what that's

(03:32:47):
the overlap for you. So in the origin
point,
Zionist Organization of America
was part of this. And it broke out.
Okay. So recognize why that's important as we
go through this. Because the American Zionist Council
later becomes APAC.
And it's very clear this is an Israeli
organization as it makes clear as we go
through it.

(03:33:08):
And today, they really want you to think
APAC is just an American group that overlapped.
It's it's American Israeli interest. Nope. It is
an Israeli founded entity fighting for an Israeli
government agenda. That means it should be registered
at FARA, the foreign registration act. We'll we'll
go through this.
Now, Mike, it's important to remember the Zionist
Organization of America, which was

(03:33:29):
supporting Trump right there and is clearly ecstatic
about all the picks is part of this.
So you I'm trying to draw a line
for you back to where it comes from.
It's obvious.
Now it says,
it acted as an umbrella group for public
relations outreach and lobbying on Capitol Hill
between 51
53. Its Washington representative, Isaiah l Keenan,
organized and the unincorporated

(03:33:50):
American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs, which was
AZCPA
in 1953.
And it's primarily a public relations organization, emitting
numerous
news releases.
Then it says, early years were characterized with
bureaucratic struggle within Jewish and pro Israeli movements.
In 63,
John Kennedy John f Kennedy and his brother

(03:34:12):
Bobby
forced AZC.
It's important because this changes as it goes
forward to register as a foreign agent.
Interesting.
Then it says this took away their legal
ability to give contributions to public officials.
Totally unconnected.
The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee was found
formed later that year.

(03:34:32):
That's APAC. Now, as we go further down
the line,
you see the information develop. It shows you
that they're the same thing. They later became
that.
But what's interesting is simply to point out
that this was a group that was registered.
Now, remember,
John f Kennedy
was trying to get AIPAC to register the
year he died.

(03:34:53):
And just before that so the point is
the AZC was forced to register as a
foreign agent. They shifted into something else. They
recognized that. They called him out. Now, whether
you think it's connected to his death, I
do, at least in part.
He died that year as he was trying
to force that. Now going forward, this is
2019.
You can see that things have got it
it removed some. It actually got small. All
this is the same, it seems.

(03:35:14):
Down here, they removed the part about John
f Kennedy.
I wonder why.
It says the 62, the Department of Justice
started a process of forcing ACC to register
as foreign agent. They also removed the part
about APAC.
It's interesting.
It ultimately ends up where this stuff is
there, but I find it fascinating that this
they were people removing this stuff even though
it's approvable.

(03:35:34):
Wikipedia is notorious for exactly what we're showing
right now.
Then 2019
So I think this one's the same. Oh,
no. They 2019, they added back the part
about f John f Kennedy and his brother.
Not all these are relevant. I'm just going
through the line. It's interesting to see how
much it changes from moment to moment. Jumping
to 2021,
they added that it is an Israeli lobby

(03:35:56):
group,
which it
is, which is important because when it later
gets shown that it is simply what became
APAC, it's important to recognize that it's not
an American group. It's an Israeli government entity.
Now the rest of this was the same.
Now here it says, after, John, f Kennedy,
and Bobby forced AZC to register, it says

(03:36:16):
in doing so, they were barred from making
monetary contributions to US officials.
Shortly after president Kenny was assassinated
and a new lobby group was formed, APAC.
To this day, no government entity has attempted
to make APAC register as a foreign agent.
Now the point is this is conflating the
timeline here because we can show that this
was part of the conversation.

(03:36:38):
It's interesting to see how much they're trying
to waffle back and forth in all this.
Now 2022,
same.
Shifted a little bit, but they removed
that part they just added.
That secondary part.
Now here is where it gets interesting. June
2024,
American Zionist Council, still highlighting Zionist Organization of
America.
It reads, Keenan organized the unincorporated American Zionist

(03:37:01):
Committee for Public Affairs, AZCPA in 1951.
In 54,
even the dates are changing, by the way,
AZC divested itself from AZCPA,
quote,
because its leaders did not want to use
tax exempt funding for lobbying.
Following the independence,
its independence,
ACCPA, began involving American Jewish Organizations

(03:37:23):
not formally committed to Zionism in order to
increase its credibility
and separate itself from AZC's role as a
middle man for the Israeli government.
Now if you think for one second as
we can prove to this day that these
are not this was a game of car.
This was a shell game. This was disconnecting
itself from where its origin point was in

(03:37:44):
order to hide that. Now it says these
efforts met with success
because AZCPA was able to organize multiple meetings
between Jewish leaders and Eisenhower's administration,
specifically during the Suez crisis, which is a
hugely important point. We're not gonna get you
now because of what happened after. The point
is, although they did not substantially change Eisenhower's
approach to the crisis,

(03:38:05):
AZCPA was renamed
to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, APAC,
in 1959,
reflecting its position that a commitment to defending
Israel now extended beyond American Zionist Organizations to
all
Jewish Organizations,
which again is one of the huge points
here.

(03:38:25):
Because the point is about Zionism, but they
made it appear as if it was about
just simply Jewish people, and that is what
plenty of Orthodox Jews call out today.
Going forward,
it says AZC
sent monthly newsletters entitled Niri's report and Israel

(03:38:46):
Digest to every member of congress.
That seems pretty weird.
These newsletters were found to be funded and
in in an indirect circular manner by the
Israeli government.
Now you won't be surprised to find that
this gets removed. Right? The point is obvious
that these things are highlighting something very problematic.
Why they ended up there in the 1st

(03:39:07):
place? I don't know.
Interesting, though, isn't it?
Now here's well, the point before
that I was referencing on here, it's now
remember we showed you earlier they tried to
conflate the idea that APAC was
created afterward? Well, here you can see right
there
hold on one sec. Make sure I didn't

(03:39:28):
lose this tab.
Oh, right. Okay. Good. It's in the back.
So the point is it says here, a
they that this group was renamed to APAC
in 59.
Well, he was assassinated years later. Right? The
point is clearly that there was a weird
disconnect. They I think it was about trying
to hide these things and whatever reason that's
being shown in the Wikipedia now. The bottom
line

(03:39:49):
is the timeline makes it very clear that
they they registered
AZ, the American Zionist Council, as a foreign
agent. They simply shifted into becoming APAC and
clearly stated it before so they could disconnect
from being Israeli connected. And we already know
on the record they were trying to get
APAC registered as well,
and that was well before. Then it says
reflecting on his position that a commitment to

(03:40:10):
defending Israel now extended beyond
Zionist organizations to all Jewish organizations.
And it says AZC sent oh, I already
read that. In 1966,
3 years after this
JFK assassination,
AZC was dissolved after regulatory changes revoked tax
exemptions for foreign agents. Its former subsidiary, APAC,
continues to operate.

(03:40:31):
So you see how this works? So they
were even overlapped for a minute. The point
is that they shifted. They shifted away from
it's like it's like a l l it's
like a,
LLC type shell game.
They just closed up shop here, opened a
new company over here, and acted like it
was all different. All this is easy to
prove.
Now this one goes to the July 13,

(03:40:52):
2024. They just simply changed this to in
back to independence of Israel, I find interesting.
And now it says, following the establishment of
Israel in the version that was published. This
is the one that's public right now.
So this is what publicly is shown on
on Wikipedia.
Now it says, was an Israeli lobby group?
Making that clear, though you already know that.

(03:41:15):
We know they shifted into becoming AIPAC. Down
here, it says he organized the unincorporated American
Zionist Committee for Book Affairs in 51.
Previously, instead, I think it's in 53.
Now it says following its independence,
the AZCPA
began involving Jewish American organizations not formally Quinn
and Zionists, when I said that earlier, in
order, it adds, to increase its credibility

(03:41:35):
and separate itself from the AZC's role as
a middleman for the Israeli government.
So they connected the 2 parts that were
separate before into the I don't know why,
but that's easy to prove today.
And it's very explicit. They're telling you they
did not want to be seen as part
of the Israeli government.
So they changed their name. They conflated these

(03:41:57):
things to get more credibility
and to make you think it was about
Jewish groups instead of just Zionism.
AZCPA
was renamed
see how these heats keep shifting? To AIPAC
in 59.
And and it with the port the point
the last one we showed you is more
the reality of this overlap between the 2.
That's what that's one of the most important
parts that they just took out.

(03:42:18):
Because I think that's the part they really
don't want you to recognize.
Now it says that in 62,
Robert f Kennedy, the United States attorney general,
forced the AZC to register as a foreign
agent. So even right there
think about this.
So the the transition from this to to
the from the
AZC

(03:42:39):
to
the
AZCPA
to from there then to APAC,
all before 1959.
But down here, it's simply saying that they
forced AZC,
which apparently, well before that, had already transitioned
all the way to APAC
into a foreign agent. But my point is
they've already shell gained themselves out of that.
So they're like, yeah. Fine. That one's that's
Israeli.

(03:43:00):
But right there, shouldn't that bother you that
there was already an entity that was doing
that? They just simply played it into something
else.
And it says in doing so, they were
barred from making monetary contributions to US officials.
Exactly why they tried to do it to
APAC as well. But continued
to send out newsletters and hold offense. Think
how crazy that is. In 1966,

(03:43:20):
AZC was dissolved after regulatory changes revoked tax
exemptions for agents. Its former subsidiary,
APAC, continues to operate. So in in backward
ways, it still shows you the information. But
realize how clear that is. 1, it's an
Israeli entity.
2, it has already been registered before this.
They shifted to something else. And JFK was
trying to get them registered, APAC, before he
died.

(03:43:40):
That all seems wildly relevant to me based
on what we just came off. And the
AZ rather specifically, the Zionist Organization of America,
which is part of this,
was praising Trump, getting him awards,
was literally saying your picks are fantastic.
You starting to see the point?
Hopefully.
Councilwoman

(03:44:01):
Ina Vertikoff,
apparently, is the New York City Council minority
whip in 48th district. She writes this and,
again, to be very clear and, again, but
to be clear, I was thinking about it
earlier. I am now in no way, as
I think was clear by now, defending AOC
or anybody in the government. In fact, I
think she's just as manipulative
manipulative as pretty much everybody else. But

(03:44:22):
what she says here
is what she's doing is dishonest.
Not AOC, but the one framing her. So
Jeremy says, we are to have a whole
discourse about special interest groups that completely leaves
out corporate and industry lobbies,
such as APAC.
By far, the most influential groups in Democratic

(03:44:42):
party.
Okay? She then says, if people wanted to
talk about members of congress being overtly influenced
by a special interest group, pushing a wildly
unpopular agenda that pushes voters away from democrats,
then they should be discussing APAC.
Think about taking that statement and making it
about Jewish people.
What she said is very clear.

(03:45:05):
Even if you think that they're at what
APAC is doing is framed as Jewish interest.
She did not it's it's about a lobbying
group fighting for an unpopular agenda, whatever that
may be.
This is how desperate this is. This woman,
you think this is all of her own
accord? You think she's just that ready to
attack anybody that goes after a Israeli lobbying

(03:45:26):
group?
Something's driving politicians in the United States to
do this. She says, your little obsession with
singling out Jews
is called antisemitic,
antisemitism.
How in the world do you fold that
into? This is like her coming out earlier
and saying, AIPAC
is
lobbying a politician for Israeli interests,

(03:45:47):
which, by the way, is the definition of
lobbying.
And they've lost their minds. They called her
racist for saying that. So it's apparently racist
to point out that an Israeli lobby group
lobbies for Israel
as long as it's in the conversation of
anything relating to Israel. That's lunacy.
So here's what I said.
Are you suggesting APAC isn't an American lobbying

(03:46:08):
group for Israeli interest? As we're told, in
parenthesis, I say, which obviously includes more than
just Jews. Right, Ina? Which that's not what
she clearly not in her mind. There's more
than just Jews in Israel. There's more than
just Jews in any of these parts of
the conversation.
But to them, it only matters about that's
the point. They're inadvertently showing you that what
they are think is only Jewish people.

(03:46:29):
What about the American interest that support Israel
that aren't Jewish?
What about the 8 you get the point.
It's lazy, and it shows you the truth
of it all. But I said, are are
you suggesting APAC isn't the American lock lobbying
group
for Israeli interests as we're told?
In and instead, a group that is, in
fact, only advocating for the interest of 1
select religious group alone?

(03:46:49):
Isn't that bigotry?
Yes. It is. And here's APAC's lobbying focus,
which you could look up anywhere. Here's what
they want you to think.
APAC's lobbying efforts are not exclusively focused on
representing Jewish interests or advocating solely for Jewish
Americans. Instead, its mission is to strengthen US
Israeli relationship.
Well, maybe you should tell Ina that,

(03:47:11):
because she doesn't know that. Or the truth
is that's not what it actually does. And
even more so, the truth is this. For
those who get the point here, it's also
important to point out that its real focus
is lobbying for Zionism,
not Jewish or Israeli interests. And in fact,
doing so at the expense of both. Nonetheless,
important to highlight either the ignorance or dishonesty

(03:47:32):
of these politicians.
Here is what Avi Shlaim says about Zionism.
It's important to hear because this is the
truth of it.
Zionism
is racism.
Israel cannot be both. Israel is either

(03:47:52):
a racist Jewish state or it's a democratic
state for everybody, and that's what I would
like Israel to be. I'd like
a democratic solution, one state with equal rights
for,
all its inhabitants.
Your organization,
Human Rights Watch, issued
a report last year,

(03:48:14):
about
Israel Mhmm. And the conclusion was it is
an apartheid state.
And there are 4 major
human rights groups in the last 2 years
who issued similar reports,
which the same conclusion,
Israel is an apartheid state. So
apartheid is racism.

(03:48:35):
Apartheid is discrimination.
But
Israel is the only member
of the United Nations that I know
which is officially racist,
And I say this because of the,
July
2018
nation state law, which says That's right. The

(03:48:56):
Jews
have
a unique unique right to self determination
in Israel.
Unique means exclusive. Yes. It means Arabs have
no right to serve the termination. Mhmm. It
means even if Arabs became a majority
Mhmm. They would still have no right to
serve the termination. Mhmm. So most certainly,

(03:49:17):
Zionism
is a,
is a racist ideology,
and it is largely responsible
for the Anakba
that has unfolded throughout the last century and
continues today.
It's it's worth looking into other things he's
talked about. He's a very, very intelligent, highly
respected Israeli academic

(03:49:38):
who's talking about this. And he's he's a
Jew himself, and he's talking about the reality
of what they're doing. And it's not about
Jewish people, it's about Zionism.
Anybody honest is be is capable of pointing
that out. And even somebody that I don't
support,
the facts are still on. The re the
reality is this person is trying to attack
her for highlighting what we're showing you, that
APAC is shockingly influential,

(03:49:59):
in fact, completely overtaken US policy, and that
means Israel.
That's what I'm trying to show you. And
that's why people like this from the US
government
slash out and make it about Jews, even
though that's not what she said.
If you're confused by it, recognize the elephant
in the room and see what's really going
on.

(03:50:20):
Now Jake Shields points to sat over a
lot of people did. I just find this
interesting. This is a a, Japanese,
show, basically, where I think it was a
Japanese politically influential entity that spoke on their
public channels and simply pointed out that they
think that the US is controlled by
APAC and the Jewish lobby, I think is
what he pointed out, which is what they
call it, by the way, so we're clear

(03:50:40):
about that. But you can look at this
and they highlight it all. It's it's very
it's interesting.
This and this is pretty prominently discussed, by
the way.
Now here is a clip that I think
I'll play to end, really,
but important to show how APAC's influence even
pointed out by MSNBC, which I know most
of you are regular viewers have seen many
times. I'll play it towards the end. I
think it's important to highlight just to show

(03:51:01):
you coming off what we just talked about.
How even MSNBC is capable of highlighting the
unnerving growth of what APAC is doing and
how it's different than any other lobbying group.
It's very important to consider.
But here's another clip shared by Jake as
well, but also very prominently shared, and this
is actually pretty crazy. So we're talking about
APAC and influence of his of government entities.

(03:51:23):
Here is Mossad openly admitting that they're tracking
every US politician,
which I'm sure other governments doing the same,
but realize publicly stating this, the impunity, the
hubris.
This is what we're talking about. Just just
for you and everybody to know, who's watching.
After October 7th, we did implement

(03:51:44):
what internally I kind of call it an
iron dome for Israel here in the US
where we're monitoring every elected official at every
level of government,
every school board,
mission,
from social media to press releases to, official
documents. We're monitoring all of it. So,
all of these city councils and,

(03:52:05):
the the members who voted, we know who
voted where, we know who voted what, and
we'll be watching them as they, move along
their career and and hopefully working working to
stop them. That's that's that's crazy.
Absolutely terrifying.
Now just so it's clear, here doctor Shiva
pointed this out, and this is Eli David
who has me blocked, but I it is
these days, it does pop up when you

(03:52:26):
look at it. So here's the actual tweet.
It says breaking, Donald Trump told Israeli prime
minister Netanyahu that on his first day in
office, he will remove all arms export restrictions
and delays imposed by Biden.
That's and that's this is from November 14th.
And as he says, to all the anti
Zionist grifter scumbags continually coddling Trump with hopium,

(03:52:48):
go after yourselves. History will remember your posts.
I said, Trump was never, quote, ending the
war, at least not at least in the
way that many pretended he meant that.
I hope I'm wrong, and I think the
evidence is already there.
Now this is just a funny point that,
you know, saw that same thread with all
the clips that I didn't even play today.
If there's all the 12 of them there,
if you care to know the facts about

(03:53:09):
how he really thinks
and this per citing that point, the influence
of Israel over this country,
Moloch says, so the crazy people telling you
to take down the Fed instead of going
to vote
were in fact right.
Just now, I'm not saying that as a
blanket statement. The point is that a lot
of people who are conservative that were

(03:53:29):
they're starting to see the the bigger point
right now. Now, rapidly to end, Elon Musk
comes out and says, the people want their
free speech. Even the way he says that,
it's like Trump saying, have fun playing with
your bitcoin. I mean, the people want their
free speech like it's some kind of an
icon, like a toy, like some kind of
a possession. It is an inherent god given
right. It's not something you could dole out
or take away. It is clearly

(03:53:52):
something that you wanna suppress
despite what you guys keep thinking. He loves
to nod to it so you all screech
and go, yay.
The reality is he's censoring people while making
that point on the platform he's making that
point on. How much more can you be
embarrassed?
The bottom line is it's about saying we
want free speech, or 63 Americans indicate free
speech is important. What are you talking about?

(03:54:13):
This is something that is inherent.
Either we disregard the constitution or we regard
that it's in the weather of 1%. It's
something that you're
it's it is. It is not pro or
con. It simply is. And that's why it
was created this way in the context of
outlining it. Now, again, if you wanna have
a conversation why the constitution or the in
the acknowledgement of inherent rights should be removed

(03:54:36):
and we should vote on it like this
and say we can decide whether we have
these right. Well, this is that's the world
they're trying to push you into without you
noticing it.
This is Americans listed free speech among their
top concerns when deciding who to vote for.
That means they don't understand this. Well, I
guess you could still argue that they are
worried who will choose to ignore those rights.
Well
but my point is when you read into

(03:54:56):
the even click this tweet and read the
comments. People are talking about whether they can
just vote away your free speech because people
like Elon have convinced them that that's what
this is.
You're being played.
And the reality is the group that he's
supporting are the ones leading the charge to
take your free speech away. If you wanna
look at it like that, continually, the point
is to not respect your inherent rights.

(03:55:20):
Hotspot points out this is from,
Twitch, by the way, which has already been
censoring us. Turns out the word Zionist or
Zionism are now considered, quote, hateful conduct on
Twitch.
You know how stupid that is?
What if you're a Zionist?
You know for you know they won't it's
it's contextual, and you know that. They will

(03:55:41):
censor you based on whether you're using it
in the way that they deem to be
a tweet. That's subjective. That means they can
apply it however they want.
When I'm saying, this Zionist policy is against
the law. Am I being a racist?
You'll make it out to be. But if
you're out there in a z if you're
a Zionist going, Zionism should control everything. Or
even just saying Zionism is great. Well, is

(03:56:01):
that a hateful statement? Well, not if you
frame it the right way. Not if it's
a Zionist saying it. If I come out
and say Zionists shouldn't exist, will you call
me a racist even though it's a political
organization?
That's how ridiculous this is, and this is
being driven by current policies Trump is rolling
out. Now here is Simone Zimmerman,
a former Zionist,
simply showing you, telling you why she changed
your mind.

(03:56:24):
I had to face the Palestinian experience.
In my upbringing, Palestinians did not exist except
as this kind of, like,
scary negative shadow. Right? And I met Palestinian
students. I, you know, went to
Israel Palestine, saw the reality of the occupation
with my own eyes, began to read, began
to learn. And, like, once you actually have

(03:56:45):
to consider the Palestinian experience in its fullness,
the whole narrative just comes apart so quickly.
The Guardian published an article today by the
Israeli Holocaust scholar, Omar Bartov. He's
a very respected,
historian of the Holocaust,
and he wrote this really

(03:57:08):
devastating piece about his his last visit back
to Israel where he
sat with a group of young people
at an Israeli university who had served in
Gaza and were just, like, irate that he
had written publicly that Israel could be committing
a genocide, and they were banging on the
walls of the of the building, you know,
like screaming until he finally invited them in

(03:57:29):
for a dialogue. And he just writes about
how
startling it is to confront this society that
is so insular and is so,
so deeply steeped both in its own narrative
of victimhood, but also in the deep dehumanization
of Palestinians
that they just, like,
they first of all, they barely see, right,

(03:57:49):
what's happening in Gaza. This is part of
what we hear. Like, Israeli media does not
show,
any of the
realities of the destruction. They don't know about
the destroyed schools and hospitals. Right? Like, they
just think it's all propaganda.
And,
yeah, what do you do with a society
that is that deep
in its own

(03:58:10):
isolation from reality?
Good point.
Rational
as much as she'll be called a racist.
This is what I was referencing a while
ago in the show. This is a great
clip from high the interview I had with
Hireside Chats.
This person says you know, my basically, in
this conversation, I'm being very very, you know,
skeptical about where this goes while it it

(03:58:32):
in
repeatedly
pointing out that I hope that what you
bully what you think is going to happen
is the you know, I hope you're right.
I hope Trump saved
so clearly in in sharing your hope while
highlighting that I think the truth is the
opposite because that we have everything in our
past to point that out.
This person responds saying, truly sad. TLav is

(03:58:52):
perhaps the most cynical guy I've ever heard
recently. No. Not in every context. When it
comes to political dynamics, we have every right
to be. They've shown you that. History proves
that we have the the logical things to
realize that they're not gonna follow through. Well,
hoping they do would be the balanced perspective.
And I he says, I have a feeling
he's never met a hot honest politician.
True. There aren't many but Massey Gates, RFK

(03:59:14):
Tulsa, and my good friend Eric Burleson yeah.
Honest. Or honest. Just relax, Ryan. It's gonna
be okay. What a dumb thing to say
in this context. When you guys are the
ones telling us World War 3 is here
if we don't vote for Trump. Doesn't that
seem stupid? Here's what I said.
If you don't see why my view is
based on history and precedent while yours is
based on hope,
a hope I share and express repeatedly in

(03:59:36):
the interview, by the way, then I feel
you're not paying attention. That's my opinion. But
I said, it's like being stuck in the
mud while being told it's wrong to point
that out.
Now even if I'm wrong about that, why
would I be shying away from expressing what
I think because you think that I'm being
cynical?
It's just it's just and, again, the history
makes it obvious that this is exactly where
we should be,
being highly critical

(03:59:57):
while hoping they follow through. How in the
world is that a sin that's not even
cynical. That's based in reality.
Either way,
the point is that what she's talking about,
the Zionist influence is everywhere.
And I see it in all these people.
And I'm worried about what that
by pretending that we shouldn't acknowledge that, which
is what that's all about, that's what I'm

(04:00:18):
gay engaging with in that conversation,
is being willfully ignorant to facts. Even if
you're trying to be right, acknowledging the risk
of what that shows you is simply logical.
Same point here. Both of these clips are
Trump saying that you're either foolish or stupid
for worrying what he's doing is unconstitutional
even though it verifiably is, undeniably.

(04:00:38):
Burning of the flag has been roundly deemed
by the Supreme Court to be protected, inherent
right under free speech,
and this one is about simply shutting down
the Internet to stop you from seeing things
about ISIS.
Of course, that's unconstitutional, guys. It's obvious.
And in both cases, he says you're either
foolish or stupid for thinking that.
This person says he's right. There's a lot

(04:00:58):
of foolish people in the world.
I simply said, yes. There are. And in
this specific case, it's those pretending what he's
saying is correct. Those pointing out that his
suggestions are unconstitutional
are verifiably
correct. We can discuss altering that, but to
claim these suggestions are constitutional
is just dishonest.
That's the point about whether you if you
wanna believe if you wanna argue for limited

(04:01:19):
speech, make your argument.
But pretending that what he's saying is not
that is dishonest.
Simple.
Allison Weir simply highlights, and she's the founder
of If Americans Knew. It's a regard it's
a it's a com it's a basically, discussing
mostly about Israel and and the history. And
she's saying FBI agents suddenly showed up at
her home. They asked her about a person

(04:01:39):
whose name she didn't recognize,
asked and asked to have a family member
present. And but bottom line is ultimately, it's
she argues something to do with her work
with press TV, a group they reached out
to her for interview. They've reached out to
me in the past. I'm I'm I would
happily join them. The idea that suddenly you're
now a threat because you work with a
an a government a a
journalist outlet regardless of where you think the

(04:02:01):
point is every platform we point to in
the corporate media and most of the mainstream
alternative media are aggressively connected to the government.
It's only applied in their outward point. The
what she says is this is an Iranian
outlet that has interviewed her many times.
I said, I don't attempt to vet media
outlets and try to reach as many audience
as possible. That's what most of us do.
Because I have since found out that other
individuals who have a history of working for

(04:02:22):
a just peace for Palestinians and Israel and
Israelis have also been visited by the FBI.
I understand the agency has been weaponized in
the past to try to silence groups of
people that are
that some members of a government oppose.
It would appear
someone is now trying to set the stage
to silence dissidents on Israeli Palestine
in the United States by trumping up connections

(04:02:44):
with Iran.
Now, of course,
that's currently during the Biden administration.
Now, do you do you actually tell me
or could you actually tell me with a
straight face that you don't see all the
trappings already happening? Trump's focused on Iran, Vance
and Trump both screaming the
threatening actions against Iran.
Or the idea that they're all actively

(04:03:05):
calling for suppression of
true statements of Israel about Israel.
The point is that this is happening, and
if you wanna pretend it's only one way
and they're gonna change that or destroy these
institutions,
they're already playing the groundwork to make this
even worse. So my point showing you this
is to keep this in mind, and let's
see what happens next and make sure we're
being honest about what we see.

(04:03:31):
Now here's another example of this from the
same clips.
Yeah. I mean, I'm just it's at the
end here. But the point that we make
here is ultimately about the idea.
Well, it's just it's interesting. It's worth reading.
So the person says, I I'd love to
hear what he says after rightfully so in
that third video, which by the way, it's

(04:03:52):
there the interview is out there. You can
find it, which is what I say. But
the point is the context is very clear.
There it's not debatable.
He's and he said it more than once
in a couple different interviews. He says and
but I but I agree that be skeptical.
I like that. But just don't well, I'll
say it in the response. He goes, I'm
almost suspicious of such cuts, which we should
be. There are obviously words after that which
likely clarify, dismantle. No. It's you can listen

(04:04:14):
to It's pretty clear. But I said, I've
I've played the full video on my show
many times. If you do care,
do your due do your due diligence. I
do appreciate your skepticism. Always appropriate. As long
as you follow-up on it and look further.
I feel the 12 videos in the thread
are more than enough.
He says, I watched 6 or 7. Most
of it feels like hard hand ringing. Replace

(04:04:35):
Jewish lobby with auto workers, and the message
doesn't change. Yes. Israel had a powerful lobby.
Now they don't, which is not true. Promising
to create an environment where supporters have political
power is pretty vanilla. That's wild to me.
And I said, what? Of course, the message
changes, but the point does not. I don't
care if he's ignoring your rights in order
to protect against perceived

(04:04:57):
mean words towards auto workers
or towards Jews.
The outcome is the same.
You are trying really hard to see what
this is.
The point would be, you you could make
it about auto workers, but if you're using
that to suppress your rights,
that's what I'm worried about. I think people
can't see this without thinking it's about only
we we just hate Israel.
And I'm not saying that's what he thinks.

(04:05:18):
My point is that that seems to be
channeled the same way that it's I don't
care what the justification is. My concern is
not
acknowledging or respecting our inherent rights.
Jake Shields points out, and this is the
point from earlier. It says, Trump to universities
stamp out anti semitism or lose accreditation. Now
remember, that's why I think it's more about

(04:05:39):
that in the earlier crew because he pointed
to accreditation. He pointed to the funding. The
point is as Jake Shields point out, colleges
have been a breeding ground for anti white
hate for decades.
Why is the that ignored? Why you know,
the point I'm gonna make is that Trump
and the republican side of this have been
highlighting that for a long time. Whatever you
think the validity of is, it is.
And yet now it's shifted into fighting to

(04:06:00):
stop the adversaries of Israel.
Why that why why does that make sense
to people that support
Trump from a conservative perspective?
It's it's like you've been you it's you've
been tricked. You've been deviated from what you
thought you were fighting for and suddenly goes,
no. We're gonna fight for them first.
Doesn't even though what we're really talking about
is suppressing Palestinian awareness.

(04:06:20):
High impact flicks made the same point here.
What do you think he means by end
anti Semitic propaganda?
Is what I will do to defeat anti
Semitism and defend our Jewish citizens in America.
My first week back in the Oval Office,
my administration
will inform every college president that if you
do not end anti Semitic propaganda, they will
lose their accreditation and federal tax credits. Yeah.
I'm not gonna
Right.
So, obviously, free speech doesn't apply here. Right?

(04:06:42):
You're not allowed. So, yes, it does is
the point. Free speech is about being able
to express even very uncomfortable or insulting or
offensive conversation. So the point is whether or
not
Semitic
propaganda, well, of course, they have a right
to talk about it. Now, in the context
of the school teaching it, well, let's talk
let's break it down. What is it?

(04:07:06):
What is it? What is it? And can
you prove the point is what he is
referring to
is the truth about the history of Israel
or the reality of the occupation or the
truth about the I mean, any number of
things that they straight up call anti semitic
even though you can prove it.
Either way, the point is whatever you think
about what he's referencing,
you're talking about things that are protected, inherent

(04:07:29):
rights of speech.
I don't know why people can't acknowledge this.
I think it's because they're afraid of being
screamed at by this partisan maniacs that will
disown you from your party if you dare
to point out things that are obvious. But
my point in general is that every example
we have in front of us shows you
that this is the same thing from a
different angle that that left was doing.

(04:07:50):
Patrick Hennington says the same point. This will
backfire on Trump so badly. In the same
clip,
he says, my first week in same point,
the idea of suppressing this and, you know,
as he writes,
this he shouldn't be the first to point
this out. Firstly, using the federal government to
enforce a completely fake definition of antisemitism
to close down higher education institutions, deny access
to education based on political beliefs is against

(04:08:13):
the first amendment of the constitution. Guys, it's
so obvious.
If I have to point this out, then
you need to reread it right now. Secondly,
criticism of Israeli actions, Zionist ideology, which is
what he goes on to talk about,
or Israel's genocide of Palestine or mass murder
of Lebanese people is not anti Semitic.
And no supreme court justice will bring back

(04:08:34):
Trump and media's fanciful version of reality here.
He says supporting Palestinian human rights and the
right to life, liberty, and end to a
brutal apartheid is not anti Semitic,
nor is it pro Hamas or pro terrorism.
By and funny, we can use the same
thing that,
RFK just pointed out while he was trying

(04:08:54):
to remove Mercury from this. They didn't call
him anti fish.
Same kinda game here. Right? You can't keep
making this about pro hamah. We're talking very
clearly about the crimes of Israel. And just
because that makes you angry does not mean
you default support the bad guy you're trying
to highlight, even though that's also funded by
Israel. Oops.
It says clear, even your most conservative justice,

(04:09:16):
Clarence Thomas, will send this farce into Juris
oblivion, where it belongs. Note to free speech
for Elon Musk. By allowing a foreign lobby
to enact unconstitutional,
dare we say, un American disingenuous authoritarian moves
like these, the president is empowering a very
intelligent and highly motivated nonpartisan opposition
at home and abroad.

(04:09:36):
I agree with him.
Michael Tracey says simply such an embarrassment
And an indictment of the alternative media in
particular, I would actually make it more about
the mainstream alternative media, but there's both. That
Trump got away with being portrayed as a
champion of free speech when he literally championed,

(04:09:59):
campaigned on using the coercive power of the
state to punish political speech. Totally libertarian. Right,
guys?
Now this clip and we're we're gonna get
into this. I know I've said that a
few shows now, but why well, there's a
lot I'm gonna talk about. I just I
just I just technically don't have the time
at this point. We I didn't plan to
go past 4, but I wasn't really restricting
myself either. I thought that was important to

(04:10:20):
highlight.
But we're gonna get into more coming soon.
So I'm gonna end with this clip just
simply to continue to highlight the very dangerous
reality of what APAC or rather the Israeli
influence on US policy truly is
right on the surface.
So thank you for tuning in today, guys.
Truly honored that you continue to support and
we do look like we're having some growth
in the views in general. So if you're

(04:10:41):
new to this platform,
please take a look at the website, look
at the information.
Just go to go to the last American
vagabond.com,
search more, search for just anything going on.
Whatever topics on your mind today, I'm willing
to bet you that there's a body of
work that we've done over the last decade
plus that goes in a damn near everything
you wanna look into.
If you wanna support this platform for what
we're doing today or anything else, there's plenty

(04:11:03):
of ways in the show notes to support
us, to donate because we definitely need your
support. We're under attack like never before, like
pretty much everybody who's honestly covering what's going
on.
So thank you for tuning in.
Clip this out. Share it. Talk with your
friends. Make sure you're being critical of all
of it including what we're discussing here.
Thank you for being here. I love you
all. As always, question everything. Come to your

(04:11:25):
own conclusions.
Stay vigilant. American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It
was incorporated in 1963.
For 10 years prior to that, it was
known as the American Zionist Committee for Public
Affairs.
APAC calls itself America's pro Israel lobby. And
according to

(04:12:02):
website.
It has over 3,000,000 members across the country
in regional chapters working to, quote, expand and
strengthen the US Israel relationship, end quote. You
may know APAC as being one of the
biggest and most recognizable
donors to many of the members of congress
in your state, but contributing to campaigns is
a relatively new function of the organization.

(04:12:23):
Before 2021,
APAC
did not endorse candidates
nor give political contributions.
Its focus was on lobbying
elected officials, not actually
electing
officials. But in a dramatic shift in policy,
APAC began directly funding candidates and spending big
on races in 2021.

(04:12:44):
APAC political action committee, APAC PAC filed something
called a statement of organization
with the FEC
just in time for the 2022 election cycle
where it spent $50,000,000
including both direct contributions to candidates
and outside spending like TV advertisements.
According to APEC, it donated money to 365

(04:13:06):
candidates from both parties including
every single member of both democratic and republican
leadership in congress.
109
Republicans
who voted
against the certification of the 2020 presidential election
in America
received campaign contributions from APAC.
All in all, APAC gave money to 342

(04:13:28):
members of the 118th
congress. The 2022 elections were the most expensive
midterms in American history with a total cost
of $8,900,000,000
spent.
Now last year, APAC ranked 15th
in total expenditure by a political action committee
according to data collected by Open Seagert. But

(04:13:48):
take a look at the other funders that
APAC is competing against for that title. Act
blue and win red. They are democratic and
republican party machine. Save America
is Donald Trump's,
money raising operation. The conservative club for growth,
Emily's list focuses on electing
democratic women to office. All of the packs
on this list are massively

(04:14:10):
domestic focused ideological machines.
APAC is the only organization in the top
twenty whose interests are focused entirely on America's
relationship to a foreign government.
Now let's take a look at who benefits
from APEC's largest.
Here are the top 20 recipients in congress,
the house and the senate of APEC money
in the 2022

(04:14:31):
midterm cycle according to Open Secrets. They're members
of both parties. They come from every corner
of the country with varying levels of experience
in congress. The Democrat Glenn Ivy of Maryland
tops the list. He beat out fellow Democrat
Donna Edwards in Maryland's house primary
after APAC poured 1,000,000
into pro Ivy advertisements and mailers.

(04:14:51):
Edwards was running for a second stint in
congress after serving during the Obama administration
where she voted present,
not even a no on a number of
pro Israel resolutions.
So the money poured in against her, not
even an endorsement from Nancy Pelosi could save
her. Michigan Democrat, Haley Stevens unseated Democratic representative,

(04:15:13):
Andy Levin. Here's what Levin had to say
about that.
I'm really Jewish,
but,
APAC,
can't stand the idea
that I am the clearest strongest Jewish voice
in congress
standing for a simple proposition
that there's no way to have a secure

(04:15:34):
democratic homeland for the Jewish people unless we
achieve the political and human rights of the
Palestinian people.
APAC spent $4,000,000
against Levin. He lost by 20 points. When
Michigan congresswoman Mercedeh Talib, the only Palestinian American
in congress, was censured by the house in
early November over what some lawmakers called her

(04:15:55):
rhetoric around the Israeli Hamas war, 22 Democrats
joined Republicans
in that censure vote.
18 of those Democrats repay received campaign funds
from APAC in 2022,
totaling more than $1,100,000
By the way, for these 6 of them,
APAC was their top contributor.

(04:16:17):
A growing list of progressive lawmakers who are
vocal in their criticism of the government of
Israel and its policies
and their support for Palestinian self determination have
inspired APAC to spend even more.
As progressive lawmakers began calling for an immediate
ceasefire in Gaza, Slate reported that insiders expect
APAC's 2024
spending

(04:16:37):
to hit
$100,000,000. In fact, United Democracy Project, which is
a pro Israel Super PAC affiliated with APAC
is already spending money on attack ads against
democratic representatives Jamaal Bowman of New York and
Summer Lee of Pennsylvania.
Lee has already got a primary challenger as
do Cori Bush and Ilhan Omar. Pro Israel

(04:16:58):
donors have already signaled that they are eager
to primary Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.
Congresswoman Lee already overcame Apex financial influence against
her once. She tweeted criticisms of Israel's treatment
of Palestinians in 2021,
but as a candidate, she affirmed Israel's right
to exist,
but that's not good enough.
APEC spent nearly $3,000,000

(04:17:21):
in the primary alone to defeat Lee and
they almost did.
She beat Steven Irwin who is 3rd on
the list of money given to candidates by
APEC in 2022
by less than a 1000 votes. And if
congresswoman Lee wants to keep her seat in
2024,
she's going to have to do it all
over again. She joins me in studio after
this break.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

24/7 News: The Latest

Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Trump Confirms Plan To Declare National Emergency For “Mass Deportations” Using “Military Assets”

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

24/7 News: The Latest

Crime Junkie

All Episodes

Trump Confirms Plan To Declare National Emergency For “Mass Deportations” Using “Military Assets”

Stuff You Should Know