How Epstein Blackmail & FBI Cover-Ups Are Fracturing MAGA w/ Ivan Raiklin

In this explosive interview, former intel officer Ivan Raiklin breaks down the hidden forces tearing the MAGA movement apart. From the Epstein blackmail network to ongoing FBI cover-ups, Ivan reveals how corruption, donor influence, and institutional betrayal are creating a fracture inside America First like we’ve never seen. We dig into the power players, the suppressed evidence, the political pressure campaigns, and why the truth about Epstein still terrifies Washington. If you want to understand what’s really happening behind the MAGA civil war — and why the base is losing trust — this is the conversation you can’t afford to miss.

 

Ivan on X: https://x.com/IvanRaiklin

 

Text SETH to 36912 to get 60% off the BAERSkin Hoodie today! Or click: https://baer.skin/seth

 

To learn more about investing in gold & silver, visit http://goldwithseth.com, or call 626-654-1906

 

Kimchi One from Brightcore – Improve your health, improve your life.

25% Off with code: MANINAMERICA at https://mybrightcore.com/maninamerica

Or dial [phone] for up to 50% OFF and Free Shipping – ONLY when you call!

 

To learn more about Red Light Therapy, visit http://myredlight.com and use promo code SETH to save.

 

Follow my Substack: https://maninamerica.substack.com/

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:15):
Welcome to Man in America, a voice of reason in a
world gone mad. I'm your host,Seth Holehouse. If we're looking
at what's happened since Trumptook office, there's been some
good things. There's been somewins. The fact that I can speak
to you and not be censored isone of them.
But if we're being sober andhonest, there's been a lot of

(00:38):
things that, I guess, you'd say,have not been wins. I think
there's a lot of gaslightinggoing on. We're being told that
the economy is in the best shapeit's ever been. We're being told
that they caught the shooter forCharlie Kirk as a lone gunner.
Don't look any further thanthat.
We're being told that the, youknow, Thomas Crooks, the guy who

(00:59):
shot at Trump at Butler, was alone gunner. Don't look any
further than that. We're beingtold that the Epstein files are
a hoax. Don't look there.There's a lot of very
significant things that arehappening that I would say are
quite concerning, veryconcerning to say the least.
Because if we're lookingforward, if we're looking

(01:19):
where's the country headed, whatdirection are we going, where
will we be in one year, fiveyears, or ten years, Unless
something drastic happens, whichI think some people were really
hoping for under thisadministration, the country is
still gonna be the samecontrolled by the deep state, by

(01:39):
the bankers, by the elites, youknow, pushing for depopulation
agendas and, you know, morevaccines and operation warp
speed and get your booster. Ifthere's no big change, it's hard
to imagine on the currenttrajectory as getting to a place
where you're looking around withjust such pride for being an
American, seeing how beautifulthe country is and that you're

(02:01):
living in the golden age. Sowhere do we go from here? My
guest today is Ivan Rakeland.You're probably familiar with
him.
He's quite a how would I put it?He is a disruptor, I guess, to
put it kind of lightly. He's aguy that speaks his mind, former
special forces. I think, youknow, he's a constitutional

(02:23):
attorney. I forget what hisbackground in law specifically
is, but he knows his stuff.
He lives in the you know, is isin the DC area, and he's from my
experience with him, someone whojust speaks his mind and is very
open and honest. And so today'sconversation is just with Ivan
and I talking about where's thecountry at? What's going on?
What's happened, you know, sinceJanuary 20 in this country? What

(02:46):
about the, department ofretribution, right, that Ivan
had been really kind of bringingforward and hoping to have
citizen arrests?
And what what's happening withthat? Where are we going from
here? What's happening with theEpstein files? So there's a lot
of discussions that I think wehave to have, and that's the
point of today's talk. It's justa sober discussion about where

(03:06):
is our country at right now,where is it headed, and what can
be done about it.
So I hope that you enjoy thisconversation before we jump in.
Just a reminder, if you'rewatching on Rumble, thank you
for support supporting a freespeech platform. Make sure you
hit that thumbs up. Make sureyou subscribe to the channel.
That's really important.
Hit that little subscribebutton. Leave a comment. I love
seeing those too. Just Andagain, thank you for being here

(03:27):
and supporting this platform,which allows me to reach an
audience without being censored.Most of my content, I can't even
put up on YouTube because Imentioned the vaccine or
election fraud, and we knowYouTube is, you know, they their
old tagline, don't be evil, isgone now.
And now the opposite'shappening. So thank you for
being here. Let's go ahead anddive into this discussion with
Ivan Rakeland. Ivan, man, it'sit's been a long time since we

(03:52):
did a show together, but there'sa lot to talk about. So thank
you for Mhmm.
Being here with us today, man.It's good to have you on.

Speaker 2 (03:59):
I always love being on your program because the
voice and the serenity and theof the the vibe of your show.
It's definitely a differenttempo and cadence than I
normally do. Yeah. Well, we'llother shows

Speaker 1 (04:15):
such as the out. One Right?

Speaker 2 (04:18):
No. I think I'm gonna try to keep it more calm because
as we talked before we went onair is, I think we need to keep
it somber so that the emotionsdon't start flying because this
is more of a message, I think,for those that are essentially
all on our side mostly. Right?And we're just trying to get to
better than where we currentlyare.

Speaker 1 (04:38):
Exactly. So framing today's discussion, there was a
lot of hype 2024. Trump wins. Hemagically has the the the
backing of big tech, a lot ofpeople that you would never

(04:58):
guess. Elon was was a big partof that, know, opening up x for
for free speech, which has beena great benefit.
You know? I mean, I think thatin the old x, you would have
been canceled in about sixseconds on there, or the old
Twitter per se, but you're still

Speaker 2 (05:13):
That was.

Speaker 1 (05:14):
Alive and kicking on there. But I I do well, let me
first take a look at just a fewkind of objective things. Right?
So I have a few different pollsto kinda bring up. So this was
a, poll from, Real ClearPolitics.
This was, you know, about a weekand a half ago or so of Trump's,

(05:36):
job approval. And you can see isthis guy, rams Paul over on x,
who says that he makes astatement. He says Trump's
approval rating is collapsing.And, yeah. I mean, you can see
that.
It's it's it's a very kind ofobjective statement, right,
based upon this data, this pollthat, yes, approval is if you
look at the black, which isapproved and versus disapproved,

(05:58):
yeah, I think collapsing. Helooks especially at that last
little kind of drop off there,which started happening October
heading into November. I alsowanna pull up this is from, Nick
Fuentes who says that this is,earlier this month. Says Trump's
approval is down 50% witheighteen to twenty nine year
olds since the 2025. And he heI'm not sure where

Speaker 2 (06:21):
he's sourcing that.

Speaker 1 (06:22):
Not sure.

Speaker 2 (06:23):
Interesting to know.

Speaker 1 (06:24):
So take it with a grain of salt, but I think he's
he's, you know, relatively like,he's well sourced, and and,
typically, he he doesn't makebecause he has so many
detractors, if if he's notproperly sourced, he'll get, you
know, people very quickly kindof poking holes and stuff. But

Speaker 2 (06:38):
I'd yeah. But what I'm getting at is I'd rather
stick to sourcing that I thinkmost people within, I guess, the
MAGA and the right circles wouldconsider as a legitimate source.
I'm not discrediting this sourceat all, but I think maybe
Erasmussen, if we would bringthat in. Yeah. That may overlap
with what Nick and whatRealClearPolitics also oh, you

(07:02):
have it right there.

Speaker 1 (07:03):
Yes. This this is the Rasmussen. This is the, the
daily presidential tracking pollhere.

Speaker 2 (07:10):
Yeah. Because I think this one, this pollster is
probably the one that's most

Speaker 1 (07:15):
Have you heard of the Bearskin hoodie? Well, the smart
people are locking in theirwinter gear now because this is
hands down the best time to prepfor the coming winter. So
Bearskin's running a 60% offdeal right now, but that's only
if you get your hoodie earlier.This hoodie is built like a
tank. 340 GSM micro fleece, 10pockets with a clean rugged

(07:37):
look.
This looks awesome. Plus, itzips right into the heavy storm
rain jacket to become a 100%waterproof when you need it. So
when it turns cold, wet, windy,you're not scrambling last
minute. You'll get free USshipping, fast delivery, and
you've locked in your wintergear already. That's a win win.
So do yourself a favor. Text theword Seth to 36912 to lock in

(08:00):
your 60% off. Again, text Seth,s e t h, to 36912. You'll get a
link sent straight to your phoneso you can check it out later if
you're busy right now. And onemore thing, when you support
Bearskin, you're also supportingthe fallen outdoors and the hope
for the warriors veteransprograms.
You're not just buying greatgear, you're backing a cause

(08:21):
that matters. So don't wait tillyou're freezing to realize that
your hoodie sucks. Get aBearskin now while it's 60% off.
Text Seth to 36912.

Speaker 2 (08:32):
Reputable and accurate in our circles.

Speaker 1 (08:34):
Oh, I agree. And I guess it's a is it Mike Mitchell
or Mark Mitchell? Forget.

Speaker 2 (08:40):
Yeah. It's Mitchell.

Speaker 1 (08:42):
Yeah. I've interviewed him before, and and
yeah, I I trust a lot of thegreat methodology. Yeah. And so,
you can see, right, going upfrom

Speaker 2 (08:49):
And so I guess before we go into this, I wanted to say
that just to begin with,remember, I used to teach
intelligence analysis, and Iwant people to, and they're
gonna ask the question, why areyou using polls now when we
didn't trust them earlier? Andthat's where I want to inject a
little bit of context, is thatpreviously, those polls measured
sentiment based on underlyingcensorship at scale, so it was

(09:14):
already skewed from the realityof the base and the voting
population. Now we have a muchmore robust First Amendment than
we did previously before theelection. Right? I think most
people would agree to that,especially like you said and
laid out.
That Elon Musk's opened up,Rumble is much more prominent
now. I mean, you had Nick'saccount up on Rumble. I mean, he

(09:38):
gets on average over a millionviews, it seems like lately. And
so you don't get that in otherplatforms, but still that is
accessible to the people, andthen those that are, they're
part of the class that's beingpolled. It's not just Fox News
people that are being polled.
It's not just Newsmax or others.I mean, these other platforms
are flourishing. So it's a moreaccurate, I would say that

(10:00):
nowadays, especially if you're apollster in our ecosystem,
you're probably gonna be evenmore accurate if your finger is
on those separate pulses ofstreams of information and
consciousness. Does that makesense? Oh, That's the assumption
that I'm in, why I put a littlebit more weight in polls
nowadays, because we're kind ofback to that open access to

(10:24):
information.

Speaker 1 (10:25):
Yeah. It's not like CNN running a poll in 2024 that
says, you know, that 87% ofAmericans prefer to have, you
know, Kamala Harris in office.Right? Right.

Speaker 2 (10:35):
Right. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (10:36):
Okay. Who who do you pay for that poll?

Speaker 2 (10:38):
It's CNN viewers that don't really have access to
other free speech platform ordoor you know, care to. So
Exactly. Going back to that pollthat you had, if we could

Speaker 1 (10:46):
The Rasmussen one or the clear yes.

Speaker 2 (10:48):
No. The

Speaker 1 (10:49):
Clear Policies?

Speaker 2 (10:50):
Yeah. The Rasmussen one.

Speaker 1 (10:51):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (10:53):
Let's dig into that a little bit, and let's I want
everyone to look to see not onlythe graph, but the times. So let
if you scroll all the way to thebottom.

Speaker 1 (11:05):
This is right here.

Speaker 2 (11:06):
Right? Yeah. Let's just stay on that one. So let's
just ballpark it looking at it.It's probably June.
Right? Beginning of the year allthe way to the left. So say
January 20, can see that justballpark on the left side. You
see that the green actually,yeah, it'll it'll actually show
the date. If you go all the wayto the left, that's probably

(11:27):
January 20 would be my guess.
So just about there. Right?

Speaker 1 (11:32):
Yep. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (11:32):
January 20. Move forward to the next peak that
you see in the March time frame.What date is that peak? March 20
So March 26, and let's keepgoing. What's that peak all the
way to the right?
Yeah, May. Let's go to about May31. What are we doing there?

(11:55):
That's a key date, I think, as Ipresent my analysis. So that's
pretty, you know, that's one ofthe peaks in there throughout
the administration.
Now I would say that I wouldgive the administration going up
to, say, May 31 a pretty goodgrade, because let's go back to

(12:15):
January, what happened? A lot ofexecutive orders that de
weaponized our government, thatde weaponized, and the
decensorship started to kindaoccur at scale. We had almost
all the J-sixers that werepardoned, although the promise
was all of them would bepardoned by President Trump, and

(12:37):
J. D. Vance said that all thenonviolent ones should be
pardoned.
That threshold was not met, andso a lot of folks still to this
day are concerned that if youcan't do the easy things, it's
gonna be very difficult to dothe harder things, right?

(12:58):
Because to do it on day one,it's a lot easier, and so then
it begs the question, who'sbehind the blocking, or is
President Trump himself makingthe calculus to not do things
that are well within hispurview? So I'm referring to,
there were 12 that are still notpardoned. Technically, would say
that there are 14 January thatI'm tracking for affiliates that

(13:23):
still have yet to be pardoned,and what I mean by that, devil's
in the details, but there areeight that were clearly not
violent, and then there wereanother category of four where
one arguably, possibly may havebeen violent, and I'm referring

(13:43):
to again, the Oath Keepers andProud Boys, right? And so only
one of the four Proud Boys waseven charged with a violent
crime, which was much less of acharge than about 200 plus other
ones that were pardoned, so itdoesn't make sense, right?
So if you're looking into thisvery closely, it doesn't make

(14:04):
sense. So I would say that thatsentiment analysis that you show
in the chart, you start to seeJ-sixers, their family members,
those aggrieved, those thatattended January 6, I mean,
they're probably in and outduring that twenty four hour
period. I would say that theremay be a million folks, right?
And those that were, and familymembers beyond, and those that

(14:27):
know someone that were destroyedbecause of the events of January
6, we're probably looking atfive to 10,000,000 people in
total, would be just a ballparkrough estimate when you're
looking at friends, family thatknow the circumstances of the
weaponization, that are nowlosing a little bit of trust in
a nascent second term. Does thatmake sense so far?

Speaker 1 (14:50):
It does, yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:54):
And then on top of that, you put, which most people
haven't heard of, but a lot ofpeople want the truth about
January 6 to be released as soonas possible, even though it's
already been four years, and wefinally struggled into getting
this new subcommittee underjudiciary headed up by Barry
Loudermilk. Well, one of the keywitnesses that Congressman

(15:15):
Loudermilk could debrief andinteract with and essentially
source is yet another individualthat was charged by the
Democrats because he was calledby the Proud Boys to be a
witness without his knowledge orpermission. It was just, he was
put on the list of witnesses inthe Proud Boys trial, and as

(15:36):
soon as that took place, theleft immediately charged him
with obstruction, him being theMetropolitan Police Department
officer that was head ofintelligence on January 6, and
head of intelligence for thefive, six years prior to that,
so he would know all the detailsand nuances of the BLM, the
Antifa activities, the networkanalysis. So like you literally,

(16:01):
we just literally lost the bestsource within Metropolitan
Police Department to start totear and take down Antifa, who's
now designated as a domesticterrorist organization, the best
MPD officer that could lay outany nefarious activity of DC
Metro Police on January 6related to supporting Nancy
Pelosi's fedsurrection, and thenthe subsequent cover up, and he

(16:24):
could list you the names of theindividuals, because he used to
work with them.
He knows them. So this person isstill in jail. His name is Shane
Lamond. So as somebody thatlooks closely at this, that's
another issue that has still notbeen addressed. I mean, that's a
federal charge.
That's an easy federal pardon.So why is it that those in the

(16:49):
DOJ, there you go, those, youknow, whether it's Ed Martin,
he's been, I would say, an Alevel player since the get go,
but he's been balanced aroundlike a punch, you know, what do
you call it, a punching dollbecause the deep state is trying
to neutralize him, and he'sstill surviving and still

(17:09):
punching back. But there needsto be folks at the higher levels
that in the DOJ, whether it'syour Todd Blanches of the world,
who's the deputy attorneygeneral, which many have
concerns with, and rightfullyso. The attorney general, does
she even live? I mean, I thinkshe mostly spends her time in

(17:31):
Florida, and when she's in DC, apreponderance of that time is
advocating for ratings on FoxNews, and being a news like, an
anchor on Fox News.
People see that. I mean, youcan't hide it. You can put a
facade on and say, oh, she'sdoing great. People see it. I
mean, people aren't dumb.
We have access to information.We have x. We have rumble. We

(17:52):
have long form critical thinkerslike you and me that are
breaking down the analysis, andin some instances, we're getting
much more views than the legacymedia platforms of the Sunday
talk shows, right? For example,like today, we're probably gonna
get more than, I would say, atleast one, maybe a couple, not
combined, but possibly theindependent platforms get more

(18:17):
than ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Stateof the Union, right?
What are the other ones? FoxNews, Sunday combined. And so we
are the sentiment. And so thesentiment is you're kind of
missing a lot of key things. AndI haven't even hit the, probably
the most important one when itrelates to January 6, and I'm

(18:38):
gonna save it for now, is TinaPeters.
Tina Peters was downstreamweaponized, so it started off
with the Pelosi fedsurrection.Was then covered up by the Nancy
Pelosi committee, led by BennyThompson and Liz Cheney for that

(18:58):
Fedsurrection cover up to beginthe evidentiary manipulation to
then go after every J-sixerthrough the US Capitol Police
and legislative branch, sentover to the DOJ. And in some
instances, instead of going tothe DOJ, whether it was Jack
Smith, this weaponizationcontinued downstream to attack

(19:19):
the electors in Georgia,Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan,
Pennsylvania, Nevada, and inColorado, Tina Peters, because
she was trying to protect andsafeguard the twenty twenty
federal election. The only onecounty level or equivalent

(19:39):
officer of the 3,100 plus inAmerica that had the courage to
essentially retain the recordsof the federal election, the
electronic records, to then beable to prove that the election
was not done according to thelaw, illegitimately, illegally.
And for that, the very secretaryof state that benefited from

(20:03):
that illegal election was theone to criminalize Tina Peters
for that.
I'm not gonna go into details onthat, but I mean, these are
basics. I mean, these are justsimple lifts. I mean, this is
While you focus on foreignhostages, I'm talking to the

(20:24):
admin right now, you can't evenget Tina Peters out, and the
response is, Oh, it's a statecase. Yeah, but guess what?
She's a federal witness tofederal crimes being conducted
by Jenna Griswold, the secretaryof state.
I put out a tweet yesterday orthe day before, a couple days

(20:44):
ago, listing all the federalstatutes that Jenna Griswold,
the secretary of state inColorado, violated, and Tina
Peters would be the number onewitness to prove all of that. So
if I were the president, I wouldtell the attorney general, and
then if I were the attorneygeneral, I would tell the

(21:06):
director of the federal airmarshals, and if I were the
director of the federal airmarshals, I would go into
mission planning and order my4,000 federal marshals to
physically extract Tina Petersfrom the Colorado insurgent,
domestic terrorist controlledColorado prison at about two or

(21:31):
three in the morning when therearen't that many security
guards, okay? Physicalextraction, using all means
necessary to safely extract her.And if there is pushback, then
there may have to be collateraldamage, but that is up to the
officers that represent thebelligerent insurgent,

(21:56):
insurrectionist state ofColorado if they want to
escalate. That's really it.
I mean, are simple things. Thefirst ones I started off with
was simple, right, politically.This one requires courage, which
is lacking.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
And so-

Speaker 2 (22:15):
That's just one aspect of why the poles are
going down, because not even thesimple, betrayal, it's just
betrayal upon betrayal uponbetrayal. Depending on how far
we go, I mean, I got a laundrylist of more.

Speaker 1 (22:33):
Oh, I know you do. I know you do. And so, let's just
well, okay. I'll I'll jump backinto the, that pool because
we're kind of walking throughthe timeline, and I wanna you
then Yeah.

Speaker 2 (22:42):
We're still at January 20. Exactly. Twenty
first.

Speaker 1 (22:44):
You know? But then kinda taking easy. You know,
kinda stepping into the thebigger picture of what's really
going on because we haven't eventouched on

Speaker 2 (22:54):
The big pic yeah. May is when Elon Musk was, let's
just start with the facts. OnMay is when Elon Musk, depending
on how you want to view it andframe it, either left because he
was a special governmentemployee, and that was the date,

(23:14):
the one hundred and thirty daydate upon which he could perform
his duties as America's techsupport, right? But there's more
to it than that. When you startto peel the onion a little bit
and you look at the reporting onit, the primary reporting states
that it was the White Housepresidential personnel office

(23:37):
director, if you will, that wasinstrumental in the removal of
Elon Musk because of whateverego issue that took place.
Okay, that's when I would saythat we started to see a
significant, what's the word Iwanna use, rapprochement or, no,

(24:00):
like pulling back of significantwins, even though I just laid
out some of the negatives. Imean, at the end of the day,
those first six months, we hadsome significant wins from the
director of nationalintelligence, releasing and
declassifying and firing andpulling clearances. You know,
JFK, MLK, RFK files, the Russia,right, the Russia, Russia,

(24:25):
Russia hoax origins andinformation, and while I'll give
credit where credit is due, manyof those releases, or several of
them, were done inside of theWhite House, so that does not
occur without the chief ofstaff's approval. So while I am
and continue to be critical ofeverybody to include the chief

(24:46):
of staff, Susie Wiles, on thatoccasion, a couple times, I have
to say thank you for allowingTulsi Gabbard to actually expose
and showcase the findings thatshe had. Now you can argue that
there was no option.
At the end of the day, she couldhave stopped it, right? Susie

(25:06):
Walls, I'm saying. So there isthat. The Elon Musk push, I
mean, even though it may havebeen Sergio Gore, I mean, I
would say that Susie Wallacecould have easily said, you know
what? You guys make up.
I mean, this is a very importantalliance. But I think this this
is where my analysis kicks in,if I may. I think the

(25:28):
relationship that Susie Wileshas with the donor class is more
long term, and there's moreloyalty to the interests of
Miriam Adelson. Is that? So forthose that aren't aware, I would
say the top two biggest donorsand influencers into, from the

(25:48):
political financial perspectiveof any one individual, to ensure
Trump's reelection, and I getit.
I would say that January are thereason why Donald Trump is in
office. Without that, there's noway the political comeback takes
place without their zeal andsupport, but when it comes to
later on in the campaign afterthe primary, after the attempted

(26:09):
assassination, it's Elon Muskand then Miriam Adelson. And
when you start to dig and peelinto Miriam Adelson, there you
go on the right, you start tosee that she represents
establishment, globalist,Israeli, whatever you want,

(26:32):
these are all factual interests,and they're her interests,
right? And even using DonaldTrump's own words when he spoke
at an event a couple weeks agoin Israel, he even called her
out and said she has moreloyalty to Israel than The
United States, and that's whyyou're starting to see this

(26:55):
rift. You have those that arealigned with Israel, some you
could say they have dualloyalties or maybe even more
loyalties to Israel, and thenyou have those that have really
no international influence orinterests that are Trump
supporters, such as myself, thatwould rather that the president

(27:18):
focus on domestic issues that hecampaigned on.
So the angst and the civil waris, well, most people may not be
able to articulate it in eightks fidelity, like nerds like you
and me that are in this everyday, but I think the gut feeling
is, Nick's addressing it, right,from an emotional perspective,

(27:38):
and several others are, it'sessentially a divide between
most of those that are not in DCand in this political class.
They just want to do what's bestfor themselves, their family,
their community, their state,America, right?

Speaker 1 (27:56):
Ladies and gentlemen, our world is being poisoned.
Every day, we're exposed to morechemicals sprayed into our
skies, leaching into our food,and polluting our air and water.
From pesticides and heavy metalsto hormone disruptors and
synthetic additives, thesetoxins are bombarding our bodies
and silently destroying ourhealth. But there's something

(28:17):
you can do to fight back, and itstarts in your gut. Kimchi one
from Brightcore Nutritioncontains over 900 strains of
beneficial probiotics that willhelp flush toxins, restore gut
balance, and support your immunesystem.
Because when your gut is strong,your body can resist. You'll
feel the difference. Betterdigestion, more energy, clearer

(28:38):
thinking, stronger immunity, andeven improvements in your skin,
hair, and metabolism. And thisisn't just hype. Studies show
that fermented foods like kimchican reduce the risk of obesity,
improve blood sugar, and supporta whole body wellness.
Kimchi One is all natural, nonGMO, dairy free, gluten free,
and a 100% made in The USA by acompany that actually cares

(29:00):
about your health. And today,you can get an exclusive offer
just for my viewers, 25% offwith your code MAN IN AMERICA by
clicking the link below, or callmy friends at Brightcore for up
to 50% off your order and freeshipping. So give them a call
now at [phone], and theireducated staff will make sure

(29:22):
that Kimchi One is right foryou. Again, that's (888)
575-6488. All the links andinformation are in the
description below.

Speaker 2 (29:33):
And I mean, they could care less, you know, what
religion, what pigment you are.That's just inconsequential. But
there's like a US constitutionlast I checked, and it affords
more rights to a US citizen, andwe kind of want that to
continue. And just like we sawin the last belligerent,

(29:57):
illegitimate regime under theBiden criminal syndicate, we
weren't quite happy with theChinese control agent in the
White House and his family. Andsince Elon Musk left, there are
more and more indicators showingthat this White House is

(30:22):
steering away from the domesticissues that still have yet to be
addressed, the Tina Peters, theJ6ers, the Shane Lamans, the
truth of January 6, arrestingtraitors to the tune of, well,
let's just start with KashPatel's government gangster
list, which is only a few dozen.
That's nothing compared to mylist. Let's just start with

(30:46):
Kash's. But no, ten months in,squandered because the diversion
and focus has been on attainingthe Nobel Peace Prize through
conduits and surrogates such asMiriam Adelson, such as
son-in-law Jared Kushner, suchas Susie Wiles, who used to be,

(31:06):
very close with Miriam Edelson,and actually even was on BB
Netanyahu's twenty twentyreelection campaign in Israel.
When you peel the onion,especially now that we have the
AI chat tools that make it somuch more efficient, the scale
and quickness with which peoplethat just want to look at

(31:30):
something that can find thetruth, it surpasses their
ability to counter with a not sofactual narrative. You know what
I mean?
And so that's my long way ofsaying that in the big picture,
I would say that analytically,when Elon Musk was pushed out,

(31:52):
possibly with those forces, theMiriam Adelsons of the world,
obviously Sergio Agora's listedas one of the individuals that
pushed him out, but I think it'smore than that. It's that donor
class that's reasserting itsinfluence into the presidency
and into the policy makingprocess in order to protect

(32:14):
itself. So that's why DOGE is nolonger essentially alive,
because it exposes thatinternational interaction and
corruption where the blame restson the donor class as well,
right, both Democrat andRepublican. And so I view it as
that benchmark of June 1, andthen even more so the period

(32:38):
from June 1. So you lost Elon,but you still had Charlie Kirk
having his voice and an ear withthe president up through
September 10.
So he was kind of like that lastfirewall and voice that was
starting to note things. If youlook at his speeches, he was

(33:01):
starting to also notice thateffect that I'm articulating,
but he's much more in the mix,in the know from a personal
perspective with a lot of thesedifferent players, and he was
making that conscious choicebased on, you know, all the
things that I've read, listened,and watched to kind of call it
out publicly, and sometimes hedidn't call it out publicly. He

(33:22):
would use affiliates to make thestatement that he couldn't, such
as Tucker, right, at TurningPoint. You saw that video where
behind the scenes, him and Megand Kelly, or the three of them,
were like, hey. I can't rememberthe quote, but he was like, just
go score truth.
Just say what you need to say,which is like the task that you

(33:43):
know exactly, because I'm surethey, you know, they communicate
regularly, right? Because thoseare leaders in the movement. I
mean, I talk to a lot of people.Some of them on occasion I would
talk to, whether it's Tuckerinfrequently, and then Charlie
every once in a while atdifferent events. And so that

(34:05):
took us to September 10, andthen there was the
assassination.
Most of America still doesn'tbelieve the narrative of what
happened, would be my guess.Now, the official narrative may
be true, but most of Americadoesn't believe it. Would you
agree with that?

Speaker 1 (34:23):
Oh, I would say so. And maybe I can find a poll on
that too. But just sort oflooking I mean, you can

Speaker 2 (34:31):
Because that trust is not there. Institutionally,
there is no trust. It has to berebuilt, and so far, it hasn't
been rebuilt.

Speaker 1 (34:39):
I'd say it's being dismantled. Because if you look
at actually, I'll pull a quickpost up from, Emerald Robinson.
Right? Just just in kind of asentiment. This is, a couple
days ago.
She said the Trump admin is ahot mess. That's why his poll
numbers are tanking. MTG is bad.Mamdani is okay. It's just a

(35:00):
strange interaction with him andMamdani.
Massey is bad. Borla is okay.Meeting with convicted Israeli
spies, okay. Meeting with ISISterrorists to to run Syria,
okay. Dinners with Zuckerbergand Bill Gates, okay.
More CCP students, okay. LOL. Imean, this is this is it. I
mean, this this is these areonly these are the more recent
things. But if you take a stepback, looking from the big

(35:24):
picture, I mean, like, I similarto you, I think I I know a lot
of the people that are keyfigures in the administration.
I've interviewed them or metthem backstage at different
events, and I think there's thisexpectation The

Speaker 2 (35:37):
same with Emerald. The three of us, for example,
are, we're in the mix. I mean,we're not in the admin, but
we're in the mix. We talk tothese. We're essentially many
times in the same room.
So we but we also have a betterfinger on the pulse of what's
going on in the court of publicopinion.

Speaker 1 (35:54):
Well, and then that's it. And that's it. And so you're
asking about, you know, CharlieKirk and or even Butler. Right?
Like, what really happenedthere?
You know? And so what you'reseeing is that the
administration is kinda just, Imean, just kinda hunkering down
on the same things, I think, ina lot of ways that we're seeing
under Biden. Right? Just kind ofcovering things up, don't look

(36:16):
here. Whether it was, know, how,you know,

Speaker 2 (36:19):
Biden handles And it's not RJ's helpful, it's not
helpful those in our movementthat have big audiences, that
are blind sycophants, that itwould be better if they
articulated and defended theirposition kind of with evidence
on why we are wrong in ouranalysis, because then I could

(36:42):
see their point of view, and Iwould say, Okay, now we're just
debating on what's moreimportant in the hierarchy of
priority from your perspectiveversus mine. I mean, I think I
pretty clearly, from myperspective, identified what is
important to me. Life, liberty,pursuit of happiness is pretty
much up there. So if Tina Petersrots and dies in prison in

(37:04):
Colorado, this government justviolated her right to life.
They're complicit in allowingand enabling a terrorist
organization headed up by JaredPolis in Colorado to literally
enable the murder when you havethe capacity to extract her

(37:25):
legally, constitutionally, butit requires courage.
Liberty, same thing. She'srobbing. Same thing with Shane
Lemaughan. Pursuit of happiness.Well, J Sixers are still trying
to get their life in order.
Meanwhile, we all know that thiswas a total entrapment,

(37:46):
ensnarement, political hit jobby the other side. Sorry, you
give me too much air space totalk, so I'll just take it.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
Well, no, same thing with Charlie Kirk, right? It's
like, you you talk about the,you know, the government's
complicit, you know, beingcomplicit with Tina Peters. It's
like, is the government coveringup something significant with
Charlie Kirk? Like, you know,earlier on, they said, okay,
hey, we're seeing some signs offoreign interference that
quickly disappeared. And nowit's like what you mentioned

(38:16):
too.
There's a lot of people withwith very, very large audiences
that are just it was TylerRobinson, and if if you second
guess that, you're just antiAmerican, and you're insane.
It's like, well, like, yeah, Iagree with you. It's like, they
they'd be better off saying,look. I I most likely I do
believe the FBI story. I thinkthere are some holes in it,

(38:37):
which need to be investigated.

Speaker 2 (38:39):
Mhmm. And here's why. The story. But

Speaker 1 (38:42):
instead, it's like it's just like, this is exactly
how it happened. And if youdon't agree with this, you are
anti American, and you're notMAGA. And that that's what I'm
seeing kind of

Speaker 2 (38:52):
You know what's anti American? When you have loyalty
to another country.

Speaker 1 (38:56):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (38:56):
Yeah. That's Or dual. Right?

Speaker 1 (38:58):
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so and this is why I think that
kinda looking at just, like,what's really going on here.
Because I know that, you know,for you because, you know, one
of the interviews that we didwas shortly after you had a a
very viral interview.
You're kinda talking about yourbanner behind you, the
Department of Retribution, and,you know, getting into, okay, if
Elon can release some of thesereceipts, and, you know, we can

(39:19):
see justice.

Speaker 2 (39:20):
He still hasn't moved, unfortunately.

Speaker 1 (39:22):
And it's and it's not just No

Speaker 2 (39:24):
Fauci files. He still considers Twitter one point o a
crime scene, which means there'sevidence of a crime scene. It
would be nice for Elon Musk,maybe. At any point in time, he
can do it. I mean, think aboutall the direct messages that
Jack Smith used of Trump, theelectors.
I mean, I was just listening,finished listening to Christina

(39:44):
Bob's book, who was an attorneyfor the campaign, and she was
essentially laying out how thegovernor and the a excuse me,
the AG of Arizona, the Democrat,was essentially unlawfully
piercing into all of her directmessages on Twitter and was
asking her specifics. Who do youwhat do know about this

(40:05):
individual? And she's like, Imean, that guy is I went to,
elementary school with him, andtwenty five years later, he hits
me up after seeing me on someinterview, and they thought
there was some nefarious intent.What I'm getting at is that they
looked in the DMs. So imagineElon Musk produces to America
since he can't produce it to theinstitutions because they've

(40:27):
shown that they they're notgonna do the right thing with
it.
It's almost at the point wherehe releases the criminal
evidence of the crime scene toAmerica on Twitter or on X, of
every member of the House, ofevery member of the Senate, of
every staffer of both, of everymember of the executive branch
and their staff that haspreviously or currently engaged

(40:51):
in what, if he wants to lead atask force to sift through all
this so that we can take thatand then essentially produce
criminal referrals that we thenpublish online, and then say,
Hey, this needs to be filed inthis federal district, and this
is the US attorney that shouldfile it, and literally using

(41:14):
Grock to draft the entire chargesheet and all the necessary
documents, right, the referral,and just await the signature of
the competent authority of thatjurisdiction, whether it's here
in my backyard, Eastern DistrictOf Virginia, Lindsey Halligan,
etcetera, etcetera. But thathasn't been done. One other

(41:35):
point I wanted to make when yousaid Charlie Kirk's murder. I
mean, you have Kash Patel. Let'sjust say my sources tell me that
either Kash Patel, Todd Blanche,or somebody at the DOJ, but with
those top two, effectivelyleaked to The New York Times

(42:00):
that Tulsi and her team weretrying to look at foreign
interference, and that was a badthing.
That was an own goal, I think,when everybody read that,
meaning, yeah, we're not takingyour side on that, Kash. You're
trying to do your little, you'rebeing handled by James Comey and

(42:20):
Christopher Wray employees thatyou still haven't fired cash.
You're being owned andcontrolled by them because you
haven't done anything. They'restill there, and so what they're
telling you to do is focus onthings that, the mandate for
Donald Trump, like we didn't askthe director of the FBI to blink

(42:42):
and breathe, right? And what Imean by blink and breathe, oh
yeah, we're gonna go afterviolent criminals that have a
federal nexus.
I mean, that's like blinking andbreathing level of expectations.
It's like having a pulse. Hey,we voted to make sure you have a
pulse, Kash. No, we voted foryou to go scorched earth and

(43:02):
create accountability againstthose that weaponized against
you, that those against,weaponized against us, all of
us, at scale, because they'restill out there flapping. James
Comey is still freelytreasoning, with impunity,
without any speed bump.
Okay, every few months he has togo to a courtroom, but other

(43:22):
than that, he doesn't even haveto go to the courtroom, but he
chooses to, and he can continue,99.9% of his day, communicate
and coordinate email, phonecall, meetings with John Brennan
who's still walking the streets,with Rod Rosenstein, with Sally
Yates, with Bill Barr, with EricHolder, who are still

(43:45):
controlling the DOJ. So rightnow we're in a spot where we
have to push so that we have asuccess, or we talk about civil
war. There's a civil war in ourgovernment, and there's only a
few people that are on our side,but they have barely enough
influence and courage to rejectthe 99% that are on the other

(44:09):
side. And so that's why theyknow this, and they're forcing
this conversational division. Sowe have to quickly subsume those
that are the sycophants to knowexactly what's going on, take
our side so that we can lockarms against the very deep state
that is undermining Trump'sobjectives during his campaign.

(44:33):
Kash Patel's objectives wentbefore he became the director,
Dan Bongino's objectives when hewas a podcaster, and so on and
so forth. And it's frustratingto me that they don't leverage,
like the only way we succeed isif us, the base, is working hand

(44:54):
in glove with the leadership inthis administration to go
scorched against the deep state.If they want to do it by
themselves, they will getcompletely subsumed by the FBI
employees that are still loyalto Chris Wray and James Comey
and the DOJ employees stillloyal to Rod Rosenstein, Bill
Barr, Eric Holder, Sally Yates.

Speaker 1 (45:16):
And so then we come to Epstein, which which was

Speaker 2 (45:22):
So September yeah. That this is key. I think we hit
September 10. Yeah. Which one?
And that's when, to close thatside out, is that from May to
September, it was really CharlieKirk that had that voice,
independent voice to inject thesentiment of the non foreign
influence base, because yougotta remember, Donald Trump is

(45:44):
significantly influenced by theconversations and activities of
Jared Kushner, who's the pointman for all Middle East and
Israeli interaction, right?Let's just be honest with
ourselves. Good or bad,indifferent. It just is, and
that interaction covers andspans interactions with Benjamin

(46:05):
Netanyahu and Miriam Adelson,okay? But Charlie Kirk up until
September 10, what did headvocate for?
Please don't bomb Iran on behalfof Israel. Well, that still
happened, right? And otherthings. So September 10 is when
we had a massive void inconveying anything really,

(46:29):
right, from the base to thepresident. You could argue that
there's some folks tangentially,but not like on a daily basis
sort of access, right?
And so when did we start seeingMark Levin and Ben Shapiro's of
the world start to come outswinging against Tucker Carlson,

(46:55):
against Nick Fuentes. I mean,this is before the interview
that Tucker and Nick did, right?I would say it's within a couple
weeks right after that, right?So they're trying to consolidate
their influence to focus onmaintaining the established
order, protecting themselvesfrom making sure that nothing

(47:18):
happens on January 6, forexample, until 01/06/2026,
because then the statute oflimitations on many things
expires. So the deep state canbe like, oh yeah, this is all
that happened, and we're gonnarelease it on January 7.
Just like the Brennan fifty oneSpies Who Lied crew allowed John
Ratcliffe to release on01/07/2021 the assessment that

(47:45):
China interfered in the twentytwenty election. It happened the
day after the certification orhours after the certification
when it was released, after theystole it. So they're doing now.
It's cover up after cover upafter escalatory cover up. I've
covered it numerous times overthe years, but in this instance,
you have I mean, they're veryshrewd.

(48:06):
They have the money, theinfluence, and I think the way
they sell it to Donald Trump, tothe president, is that the only
thing he does not have that heneeds others to achieve and
obtain, this is my analysis, isthat coveted Nobel Peace Prize,

(48:27):
and in order to get that, theyhave to work with Jared, Yahoo,
Miriam Adelson, who has that.She's essentially the Soros of
the right, if you will, right?So she has that global reach and
influence, and at the end of theday, if you also have that

(48:50):
influence and leverage intoIsraeli institutions, I would
venture to say, correct me ifI'm wrong, you also have
different data points, Seth. Ithink at this point, most people
would agree that the Epstein opwas an Israeli Mossad led op,

(49:11):
and probably a joint op with MI6and the CIA. I don't have a full
100% evidence to say that, butall the indicators lead me to
believe that that is a more thaneven chance likelihood.
And I'm using very specificlanguage of analytic thought and

(49:32):
process based on my multidisciplines of sourcing that I
use to come to that conclusion.Everybody else can use their
own, but if you agree with that,so Miriam Adelson has the
downstream dirt on many peoplethat are in that Epstein list,

(49:58):
and so while I don't believethat Donald Trump is in there in
any way that would implicate himin any nefarious activity, I
can't say the same about thosein his cabinet that he's
appointed, those big donors thatgot him into office, and so he

(50:19):
has to walk this fine line. Do Iget the truth out, which will
destroy the reputations of atleast one, maybe more than one
of my cabinet, and the massivedonor base, which will then move
to make sure that the House isDemocrat in 2026 to then impeach

(50:41):
and destroy my family, right,which is a legitimate concern,
or do I delay it as long aspossible so that I can finish
off the second term without toomuch of a pain, and if I do
that, in return, they'll give methe Nobel Peace Prize. It's kind

(51:04):
of craving, but that's the onlylogical conclusion that I can
make of what this, the bigpicture civil war that's going
on, and I think a lot of thefolks that are interacting, I do
a lot of interacting on X,there's one side that's being
funded.

(51:24):
They may not know. They may justbe acquiescing to what they're
being asked, because I mean, itwould be disingenuous to say,
Oh, no way that I can give you alist of names that are being
directed in a Twitter group byprobably the White House comms
team on what the messagingshould be, because it's like
copy and paste for a lot ofthese accounts, right? And

(51:45):
they're some of the biggestaccounts on the right, and it's
the more independent ones thatare rejecting it in some way,
shape, or form. And so going tothe Epstein thing, I think that
that right there is the mostsignificant anti corruption move

(52:09):
by our institutions after whatElon was trying to do with Doge.
I mean, what happened with allthat?
We exposed corruption, not asingle arrest, right? No one's
been arrested. It's just, it'sevidence beyond any doubt, let
alone beyond a reasonable doubt,and yet our institutions aren't
gonna police themselves. Sowe're approaching that, I mean,

(52:35):
the only way this is resolved isthrough massive, I mean, the
truth's out there. I think goodSamaritans are gonna start to
take matters into their ownhands.
This is an assessment, by theway, just keep in mind. My
assessment that I would not besurprised if good Samaritans

(52:57):
start to address the currentstate of inaction and no justice
for those that require it. AndI'm not advocating for
vigilantism, but at some pointyou have to defend yourself from

(53:22):
foreign encroachment, and youhave to defend yourself from
domestic terrorists that aretied to those interests
encroachment, and there's theright to self defense. We'll see
where the limit to that is.

Speaker 1 (53:36):
And I think that a big part, which we've touched on
this a little bit with this, isjust the gaslighting of the
American public. And not justthe American public, you you
know, globally, but I think thatfor a lot of people in America,
especially you know, obviously,the majority voted Trump into
office. There were these hopesand aspirations. And, okay,

(53:59):
finally, right, after Obama andClinton and Biden and, you know,
Crossfire Hurricane and Spygateand j six, they people, I think,
are just they're begging forjustice. COVID.
Right? Operation Warp Speed,which is,

Speaker 2 (54:16):
you know, it's like No one buys into that. No.

Speaker 1 (54:18):
You know? So I think that the the this is a double
average person exactly inAmerica now is being told that
we've got the best economy we'veever had, which in my experience
is, like, far from the truth,that they're doing all these
great things. Of course, there'sthere there are some good
things. Right? There's obviouslythere's been a a pullback in
censorship.

(54:39):
There's been pulling men out ofwomen's sports. There's some
things. Okay. I I appreciatethose things. But the
fundamentals, it's like the thethe our our institutions, it's
like there's cancer in the bonesof these institutions.
That cancer's not even beinglooked at. In fact, it's being
covered up and hidden from thegeneral public. And so I think
that we're hitting a pointwhere, again, you go back to

(54:59):
these kind of this drop off,especially what we're seeing is
that we Can you

Speaker 2 (55:03):
put the poll up, and then on the side, I don't know
if you can do a dual image withthat Emerald Robinson post.

Speaker 1 (55:10):
Here's the hard truth. Every six years, your
dollar loses half its buyingpower. That means a $100,000
savings account today could feellike $50,000 by 2031. And you
see it every time you fill upyour tank, buy groceries, or pay
the bills. Prices are up.
Your dollar's down. But there'sa simple way to protect the
value of your savings withsomething real, something

(55:32):
proven, gold, an asset thatholds its value over time. And
that's why I trust Noble GoldInvestments. They make it simple
to protect your savings withphysical gold or silver. No high
pressure sales, no call centers,just honest guidance, one on one
support, and transparentpricing.
And right now, when you open aqualified account, Noble Gold

(55:54):
will send you a free 10 ouncesilver American flag bar as a
thank you. So head over togoldwithseth.com, or call (626)
654-1906 today to learn more.Again, that's goldwithseth.com
or [phone]. Don't justprotect your wealth. Preserve

(56:15):
its power.

Speaker 2 (56:17):
I think that would be key.

Speaker 1 (56:18):
Like, it's tough to do that. I'll I'll show this,
not like because I I had to doit ahead of time. But I think
that it's like for the averageperson okay. Let let's just look
at the few areas where the theword I think we're being gaslit.
It's like the average person, Ithink, right, the average
thinking person, maybe I'mwrong, I'm not a pollster,
thinks that they don't believethe they don't believe the

(56:39):
Butler that that the Butlershooter was a lone gunner.
They think that Secret Serviceor someone else was involved.
There's one thing. They don'tbelieve that Operation Warp
Speed was a good thing thatbenefited people. They're seeing
their friends and family diefrom the the vaccine. Right.

Speaker 2 (56:53):
And who was be who was at the epicenter of that?

Speaker 1 (56:55):
Trump.

Speaker 2 (56:55):
You know? Was Jared Kushner.

Speaker 1 (56:57):
Okay. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (56:58):
It was Mike Pence. It was Deborah Birx, Anthony Fauci.

Speaker 1 (57:03):
Fauci.

Speaker 2 (57:03):
But the first one that I mentioned, no one talks
about. Jared Kushner.

Speaker 1 (57:09):
So I'll finish my list real quick here. Right? So
we've got just and this is soquick. I didn't have it written
down, but people aren'tbelieving what what happened
with Butler. Now they're beingtold, okay, case closed.
They don't believe what happenedwith Charlie Kirk. They're being
told, sorry, case closed. Theythey know that something's up
with Epstein. They most peoplethink that they know that he was
trafficking children, etcetera.Now it's being called a Democrat

(57:30):
Right?
They are

Speaker 2 (57:32):
Now there's an attack on Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Speaker 1 (57:35):
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (57:37):
Thomas Massey. And I mean, what's that all about?
He's endorsing COVID Democratcriminal and nearly campaigning
for Andrew Cuomo, the guy thatadmitted to murdering thousands.
The day before on TV, live, hesaid, It was on my watch. I'm
sorry that I literallyslaughtered your grandparents.

Speaker 1 (58:00):
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (58:01):
And Donald Trump endorses this? To me, that's a
total betrayal. Yeah. That'sunacceptable.

Speaker 1 (58:07):
And to see him kind of, you know

Speaker 2 (58:10):
And go after

Speaker 1 (58:10):
market. Glasses with Bill Gates and and Zuckerberg,
the same people that werecensoring and and that ruined
people's lives. Borla. Right?It's just and that's just that's
just the beginning game.

Speaker 2 (58:23):
The biggest the CEO of the largest DNA mutilation
distribution platform on theplanet known as Pfizer. K? This
guy Burlow is invited not once,but twice, and then he's
hobnobbing with two seats awayfrom Elon Musk. Right? I mean,
it's good that Elon Musk's back,but to have Berle in the same

(58:43):
room there, I mean, is such abetrayal, and he still lauds the
shots.
Every time he says it at anyrally or event, he's just booed
off stage practically, and it'sthe same thing with Epstein. And
so it was good to see that anear unanimous vote essentially

(59:05):
called on the release, and guesswhat's going to happen? They're
going to fight tooth and nail toavoid the release, even though
December 19 is the deadline, andso the fight only begins. So in
the process, they're ejectingMarjorie Taylor Greene, who was
instrumental in pushing for thatas the biggest voice along with
Massey Chris Lasavita, who was acampaign co chair for Donald

(59:28):
Trump, whose daughter wasworking for the attorney general
here in Virginia, who wasinstrumental in removing the
only Patriot Deputy AttorneyGeneral that was hired for
Attorney General Jason Miyares.She was fired because she said
something to the effect thatJanuary 6 was some sort of
entrapment.

(59:49):
It was factual. So you havethese deep entrenched political
class operatives that are makingmoney hand over fist that
Marjorie won't call out, but sheknows who they are. She won't
call them all by name. ThomasMassey has, on occasion on X,
called out that name, and whenthey had the press conference
last Monday at the Epstein pressconference, right afterwards, as

(01:00:14):
Thomas Massey exited, and Iposted this on my X, I said,
Congressman Massey, why do youthink Chris Lasavita is trying
to block you from releasing theEpstein files? And he looks up
and is like, you know exactlythe reason, and he appreciated
the question, although he didn'trespond.
And then this is the same guythat's fundraising to primary

(01:00:39):
Thomas Massey. Well, where isthe money coming from that Chris
Lasavita is obtaining to be ableto manage the primary Thomas
Massey? Use your favorite AIchat tool. It's pretty clear.
Mariam Adelson funds tens ofmillions of dollars to Chris
Lasavita's PACS so that he cango ahead and stop the Thomas

(01:01:05):
Massies of the world fromexposing the very leverage that
Miriam Adelson allegedly relieson through the Epstein
component, right, to then go andstop the exposure of that.
So again, this is allassessment, I'm not accusing
anybody of anything, but whenyou watch the money flows, it's

(01:01:28):
becoming more and more clear.

Speaker 1 (01:01:30):
Is there

Speaker 2 (01:01:31):
some noise in the background?

Speaker 1 (01:01:33):
I heard something very faintly, but think nothing
came through too I'll let youknow if I hear anything more.
I'm nothing I'm picking up onanymore. There. There we go. So,
but I guess

Speaker 2 (01:01:51):
in

Speaker 1 (01:01:51):
this, when I take a step back and look at this, I
just feel like, as much hope asthere was, it's kind of a
sobering thought to to look atand say, well, it's all one big
club, and you and AI you and I,we ain't in it. Right? We see

Speaker 2 (01:02:10):
Guess what? I don't wanna be in it.

Speaker 1 (01:02:12):
Oh, I agree with I don't want to be in

Speaker 2 (01:02:14):
I want to destroy the party so that no one's in it.

Speaker 1 (01:02:19):
Which would be great.

Speaker 2 (01:02:21):
That would be much better, because then guess what?
If we don't fund this party,then the party can't weaponize
against us, and we can roamfreely. That's freedom. And I
guess in essence, Mr. DelicateDan Bongino, couple days ago,
just blocked me on X out ofnowhere.
And so I'm gonna have to use theThomas Jefferson quote. When the

(01:02:44):
government fears me, Dan, that'scalled freedom. So apparently he
fears me. And then the otheraspect, the other kind of the
other side of the, or anothercoin to that, if you will, in
the pocket of change, would beprivate citizens are innocent
until proven guilty. And on theflip side of that coin, once you

(01:03:06):
become a government official,and even the ones that I voted
for, supported, campaigned for,donated to, fundraised for, as
well as supported for cabinetlevel positions, you are guilty
until you prove your innocence.
And right now, you're even goingthe other way. You're proving
more and more being guilty basedon your actions of blocking, of

(01:03:32):
not really giving anyconfidence, I'm talking about
right now the FBI and the DOJ,to those of us that demand, like
the number one thing wasaccountability for the previous
criminals. Nothing. Brennanwalks, Comey's walking, Bolton's
still walking. They're stillhaving, they're probably having

(01:03:53):
a meeting right now with JohnBrennan and the incoming
attorney general and governor inVirginia right now.
Guess what they're doing? If youcan pull up my last tweet, it
literally says what they'relikely doing coordinating. It's
coordinating the next escalatorycampaign against this right

(01:04:16):
there on January 17.Weaponization against the admin
will restart and escalate viaJohn Brennan's lackey, Abby
Spamburger. On January 17,that's when the swearing in is,
the inauguration, and theDemocrat attorney general, Jay
Jones.

(01:04:36):
Remember he was The textmessages between him and others
where he said, I hope to I can'tremember exactly what it was,
but he was basically advocatingfor the slaughter of his
political opponent and theirchildren. So think Jay Jones is
going take what Leticia Jameswas not able to do and put it on
steroids. The six NorthernVirginia counties that house a
good chunk of the federalgovernment, the national

(01:04:59):
security apparatus, etcetera,all six of them, Alexandria,
Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun,Prince William County, Stafford
County, those are Democrat DAsknown as Commonwealth's
attorneys in Virginia. Sothey're going to take what the
example of Fannie Wallace andAlvin Bragg and decimate this
administration, because most ofthem live or work in those

(01:05:23):
counties. Additionally, not onlyare you going to have a Democrat
governor in AG in Virginia, butalso a state house and state
Senate.
So you now have a trifecta forthem to pass laws to escalate
what they're going to do evenmore than what California is
doing. So you're going to startseeing more laws to facilitate

(01:05:46):
and enable the mutilation ofchildren, the mutilation of
adults, the promotion of all thepolicies that this
administration is trying toreverse. But guess what? They're
not only going to do it inVirginia, you have trifectas in
DC and Maryland now. Literallythe entirety of all the federal

(01:06:07):
government is inside of thosethree jurisdictions now that
they've taken over Virginia.
In fifty, what, four days, thisadministration is toast. The
only way out of it is if thisadministration says, Ugh, I
don't want the Epstein leverageto blackmail other people. Let

(01:06:31):
that all out. Ugh, I don't wantthe hundreds of millions of
dollars of Miriam Adelson. Ugh,I no longer want the Nobel Peace
Prize, Trump should say, orJared Kushner.
And then instead, rejectingthat, they say, you know what,
we're going to listen to thepeople that voted us in, and

(01:06:52):
we're going to go ahead andconduct mass arrests, working
with Glenn Youngkin, the currentRepublican governor, and the
current Republican attorneygeneral, who, by the way, is
leveraged by Chris Lasavita,right, through Miriam Adelson
money, and ask them to go aheadand do the right thing and work

(01:07:14):
with the federal DOJ, who'scontrolled by Rod Rosenstein,
Eric Holder. We didn't evenmention Jolene Ann Loria, the
person that controls all moneyat the DOJ and all HR decisions,
who comes in, who comes out interms of the mid and lower
level, high mid low levelemployees, right? And then you

(01:07:38):
work with them to conduct massarrests before Spamburger and
Jay Jones takes office, andmaybe even also swoop in Abby
Spamburger as part of thatseditious conspiracy with John
Brennan for the escalatoryRussia, Russia, Russia hoaxes
and all the cover up since then.

Speaker 1 (01:08:00):
Unfortunately, it's like those things you listed
off, like, maybe I'm wrong, butthat's just not gonna happen,
right? It's like-

Speaker 2 (01:08:07):
So now that I've laid it out like that, does it all
make sense now?

Speaker 1 (01:08:11):
So but where I mean

Speaker 2 (01:08:14):
You see why they hate

Speaker 1 (01:08:15):
me? Of course. But but, like, where do we go from
here? You know what I mean?Because it's like feel like that
we we we we have one window toto fix these things.
And and so far

Speaker 2 (01:08:27):
I'm not sure we fix it under, like, conventional
political posturing andmaneuvering.

Speaker 1 (01:08:33):
Right. It's impossible.

Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
It can be fixed.

Speaker 1 (01:08:35):
I mean, I I

Speaker 2 (01:08:36):
But not under normal conventional

Speaker 1 (01:08:39):
procedure. Because it's like, okay. Well, where's
the country at six years fromnow, three years from now, two
years from now? Right? It'sYeah.
Like

Speaker 2 (01:08:48):
But we also ask the question, how do they gain so
much leverage and influence tobe where they're at? Epstein,
Butler, Charlie Kirk, AshleyBabbitt, Roseanne Boylan,

(01:09:11):
minimum of tens of thousandsslaughtered by Albert Burla's
products, right? So at whatpoint do the men in this country
look in the mirror and say, Youknow what? Maybe it's time to be
a good Samaritan to extract TinaPeters. Maybe it's time to be a

(01:09:33):
good Samaritan to createaccountability.
Again, I'm not advocating foranything unlawful. It's always
legal, moral, and ethical, buthow do you fight an enemy that
is completely conducting itselfin an anarchy fashion with no

(01:09:59):
rules, nothing constraining it?And in fact, they just co opt
whoever's the current politicalforce in our country. But we did
get that win with the vote, Sonow the fight begins to release

(01:10:20):
the Epstein file, so morewhistleblowers have to I mean,
there's gotta be one person thathas access to something that's
willing to put it on the line torelease the info.

Speaker 1 (01:10:33):
Man, I I certainly hope so. I I hope so. I mean,
for me, it's like my It

Speaker 2 (01:10:39):
would be Elon. Elon is lit we have to have Elon on
our side to have any opportunityagainst the Miriam Adelson, Bibi
Netanyahu, Mossad Epsteinleverage?

Speaker 1 (01:10:53):
I I don't think that we're gonna see that, because I
think that he's you know, he hehe's a he's a technocrat. You
know what I mean? He's buildinghis his his robot armies, and
and it's like, to to think thathe's as the the on paper, the
richest

Speaker 2 (01:11:07):
man in the because he no longer needs human humanity

Speaker 1 (01:11:11):
Well, exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:11:11):
For his success.

Speaker 1 (01:11:12):
He needs robots and solar panels and and and data
centers, and he's getting them.Right? He's getting them now,
like, more so under Trump thanever before. Right?

Speaker 2 (01:11:23):
And his buddies What's the solution?

Speaker 1 (01:11:25):
I well, I mean, God, for one, that, you know, it's
like, okay, please, you know,we're waiting. It's like, you
know, this is Sodom andGomorrah. We're heading off a
cliff. I think that's part of, Ithink, focusing on building
community, know, strengtheningourselves locally, preparing.

Speaker 2 (01:11:44):
Well, maybe even this interaction of peeling the onion
maybe will awaken some folks tosay, You know what? There's
something here, and I don't wantto be a part of it. So then that
starts to chip away at theirinfluence and their control

Speaker 1 (01:11:59):
of the

Speaker 2 (01:11:59):
narrative, and it's a hard one. It is. But I like
action myself, so I think Iprobably need to focus my
attention on essentially, maybemy next broadcast is going to be
doing live in public a missionanalysis and verbalizing an

(01:12:26):
operations order of if I werethe director of the federal
marshals what resources andpeople I would need to
successfully extract TinaPeters. Just lay it out. Give
the answer sheet to America.

(01:12:47):
And then that answer sheet, whenthis administration doesn't
move, it will start to wakenthem up to understand that there
are other forces that need to beaddressed. And I think everybody
listening in needs to learn asmuch as you can about Miriam
Adelson and her influence overSusie Wiles, over Donald Trump,

(01:13:12):
over Jared Kushner, overBenjamin Netanyahu, the
relationships to the Epsteinstuff, and I think most people
will come to the sameconclusion. And so now with a
little bit of trillion lumens onher by another billion people,

(01:13:34):
maybe we get somewhere wherethey start to back off.

Speaker 1 (01:13:38):
We can hope.

Speaker 2 (01:13:39):
With the appropriate motivation.

Speaker 1 (01:13:41):
We can hope. So Ivan, as we're wrapping up here, we're
passing an hour so quickly here,as expected would happen,
where's the best place forpeople to follow you? Just your
Twitter? Is that where you kindof, you a sub stack?

Speaker 2 (01:13:59):
Yeah, as long as Elon allows me. I'm on X. I have a
Rumble content that I have. Ifyou want longer form analysis,
and I'll repost certaininterviews on Rumble, I'm on
Substack. We didn't even get toone of the things that I'm
doing.
We didn't even talk about, wegot a couple more minutes for
COVID?

Speaker 1 (01:14:18):
Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 2 (01:14:19):
We can address that.

Speaker 1 (01:14:19):
Jump into it. Okay. Right on, I'm all ears.

Speaker 2 (01:14:23):
So when you go back to the list from Emerald
Robinson, couple things I wantedto point out. So Operation Warp
Speed, and then next thing youknow, he's shilling for Burlow,
and next thing you know, he'sputting out a truth about how he
got a booster, and theneverybody else should. Next
thing you know is Thomas Masseydid not take the jab, neither

(01:14:45):
did Marjorie Taylor Greene. Sois there some overlap there as
well? It's like it's betrayalafter betrayal, right?
And then he brings in, like yousaid, ISIS terrorists. You got
the Zuckerberg, the Bill Gates,the students. But taking that,
and let's go back to that poll.I think this is what we should
close off on. When you look atthat poll, that poll doesn't

(01:15:09):
represent the Miriam Adelsondonor class of the world.
That represents me and you, andall the people listening in and
tuning in to Tucker, to NickFuentes, to the Fresh and Fit
podcast on Rumble, for example,to your podcast, like I said, to

(01:15:30):
Alex Jones, and those numbersare growing and growing daily.
So Alex just said a couple daysago that he's inches away from
dropping his support of DonaldTrump because he sees the same
thing, that Donald Trump isfocused more on that Nobel Peace
Prize and protecting the Epsteinsyndicate, okay? And those

(01:15:54):
shills, the sycophants that aretrying to carry water for that
failing narrative and objectiveare going to get decimated and
rejected by those that have beenthe most loyal to this movement,
and to include Donald Trump. Andwe have to go through this

(01:16:15):
process. We have to expose itall.
I don't know what to say. Yousaid the solution. We have to
take wins where we can. We haveto punish as many people as we
can for their transgressions,and it doesn't matter if you
have an R or D by your name. Aswe saw, Donald Trump decided to

(01:16:37):
betray us and the movement andhis campaign promises by going
after the most America firstindividuals in the Republican
Party.
Thomas Massey was the one thathas been focused the most about
the January 6 pipe bomber. Isthat why Donald Trump's going
after him? Oh, he's a pureblood.Is that why Donald Trump's going

(01:16:58):
after him? So is Marjorie TaylorGreene.
They were both instrumental atpushing back against Operation
Warp Speed, the COVID jabs, andall the tyrannical lockdowns.
Who benefited the most fromthat? His little buddy, Albert
Burlow. How close is he withMiriam Adelson, Mr. Albert

(01:17:19):
Burlow, and how much did MiriamAdelson fund and donate?
I don't know that answer yet,but I will probably later today
as we look into that. So bottomline here is the betrayal
continues, and more and morepeople are going to call it out,
because I'm available to do anyand all interviews, even with

(01:17:42):
those that are calling me out asbeing bad, even if you're
blocking me. I got thick skin.Call me whatever you want. But
once you're done calling menames, you know, for some it'll
take a minute to get it all outof the system.
For some it'll take a coupleweeks. After you're done calling
me names and you've exhaustedyour lexicon of name calling and

(01:18:04):
you come up with a few extras,then I'll say, okay, great.
Let's just assume thateverything you called me is
true. Now present the evidencewhy you come up with that
conclusion. Duh.
I don't need to. You'reirrelevant. Right? It's it's the
same techniques of running andhiding. Well, great.

(01:18:24):
We'll see how it plays out,because in a game of chicken,
when I play, either I win or youlose, So choose wisely.

Speaker 1 (01:18:38):
Some bold words for our conclusion. Ivan, thank you
for coming on. And I felt that,you know, we managed to have a
nice, gentlemanly not reallybeen attacking each other, but
we know this is a very calmanalysis, which I think I think
it's needed.

Speaker 2 (01:18:57):
Very sobering.

Speaker 1 (01:18:58):
It's needed. And I hope that more Americans,
especially heading intoThanksgiving and the times when
they can sit down with others,are having these kinds of
conversations and just saying,What's going on? Because that's
what we have to be askingourselves. What's what is the
direction our country is headedin? Where do where are we in ten
years from now?

(01:19:18):
Or when my little girls are,say, getting married in twenty
years, what's the world looklike for them? What's the
country look like? Because Ithink that we're not at a place
where you know, say it was,1980. You know, you look ahead
to the future, and the future'sforever. Right?
But now, I don't see thatanymore. I I see that we have to
make some pretty big changes orsome other pretty big changes

(01:19:40):
will be forced upon us that will

Speaker 2 (01:19:42):
And we haven't even touched upon the AI component,
how humanity is almost obsolete-

Speaker 1 (01:19:48):
Oh, I know, that's a whole

Speaker 2 (01:19:48):
new In the coming months, if not next year. I say
that next year AI takes over,surpasses human cognition. This
is the last year. So how do wedeal with that?

Speaker 1 (01:20:02):
Yeah. Big questions. Ivan, thank you again, man. It's
been good I speaking with

Speaker 2 (01:20:08):
appreciate you. Man in America.

Speaker 1 (01:20:11):
There we go. Always. Thank you, man. Take care, and
God bless.

Speaker 2 (01:20:14):
God bless. Absolutely.