TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @GlockfordFiles
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Bad Bunny lyrics translated to English are quite sick and disturbing. The spiritual warfare continues in plain sight. Good vs evil. https://t.co/XQEeiSON9s
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 says her post about translating Bad Bunny’s songs for the Super Bowl went viral, and, at the moment, she translates another song called Vatican, noting that he spelled Vatican with a “b” for some reason. The excerpt begins with: “Perhaps my music isn't clean but I didn't invent sex and marijuana wanna. Where is the horny one? Raise your hands. A grinding and we go.” Then: “To the Vatican, call your mom to ask for your hand.” She notes, “I was in hell when I stumbled upon a she demon. She was selling her soul and I bought it. She was yummy but her friend was even yummier.” Then there’s: “Let's go, the three of us. Let's go, the three of us. Yes. Where are we? I don't know. Who are you? I don't know.” She says: “God forgive me because I have sinned. You are horny. I know.” Then: “I'm going to skip this paragraph because it's irrelevant.” The discussion moves to a part about being in the club and the club being lit, followed by: “Everybody fornicates here, the waiter and the preacher.” Then: “Hey mommy, you're so fine. Send me a picture of the young Mika. I don't know who young Mika is.” She continues: “They got me over thinking the night got kinky. And in her ass the pinky. Her hair purple like inky winky. I slap her ass and I leave her like po. I give it to her where she goes pee pee and where she goes po po.” She adds: “You already know what that means. God is watching. God is listening.” She says: “That is what we're teaching our children. Eight.” She notes: “To believe in God, you don't have to be a minister.” Then: “No man on earth has the right to judge in the name of Christ. And again, this is coming from a guy that takes pictures dressed as Baphomet. I mean, if you don't see it, you're blind, but he also portrays himself as Jesus in his music videos. In All San Juan they even have a mural of him as Jesus.” She says: “I'm not the best Christian out there but back in the day they used to call that blasphemy. And honestly, in my opinion it's plain disrespectful.” She concludes: “So there you have it, that's another Bad Bunny song so that you know what you're listening to. I know that some of his songs have a great beat, I'm not gonna lie, some have a catchy beat. And it's hard not to like it, honestly.” She adds: “But I don't know. I feel like it's important to know the words that come out of our mouths, even if it's in another language and we don't understand it, because you could be singing and selling your soul to the devil.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay, so my post about translating Bad Bunny's songs so that you know what you're listening to at the Super Bowl went viral. I didn't expect that but since we're at it, let's translate another song. This one is called Vatican and this is a clip from that music video. So you know where that's going. He spelled Vatican with a b for some reason.
But here we go, let's start up there. Perhaps my music isn't clean but I didn't invent sex and marijuana wanna. Where is the horny one? Raise your hands. A grinding and we go.
To the Vatican, call your mom to ask for your hand. A. I was in hell when I stumbled upon a she demon. She was selling her soul and I bought it. She was yummy but her friend was even yummier.
Let's go, the three of us. Let's go, the three of us. Yes. Where are we? I don't know.
Who are you? I don't know. God forgive me because I have sinned. You are horny. I know.
Let's go. I know. God forgive me. AA. I'm going to skip this paragraph because it's irrelevant.
He's talking about being in the club and the club being lit, but let's go to this paragraph here. It says, everybody fornicates here, the waiter and the preacher. Hey mommy, you're so fine. Send me a picture of the young Mika. I don't know who young Mika is.
They got me over thinking the night got kinky. And in her ass the pinky. Her hair purple like inky winky. I slap her ass and I leave her like po. I give it to her where she goes pee pee and where she goes po po.
You already know what that means. God is watching. God is listening. That is what we're teaching our children. Eight.
To believe in God, you don't have to be a minister. No man on earth has the right to judge in the name of Christ. And again, this is coming from a guy that takes pictures dressed as Baphomet. I mean, if you don't see it, you're blind, but he also portrays himself as Jesus in his music videos. In All San Juan they even have a mural of him as Jesus.
And look I'm not the best christian out there but back in the day they used to call that blasphemy. And honestly, in my opinion it's plain disrespectful. So there you have it, that's another Bad Bunny song so that you know what you're listening to. I know that some of his songs have a great beat, I'm not gonna lie, some have a catchy beat. And it's hard not to like it, honestly.
But I don't know. I feel like it's important to know the words that come out of our mouths, even if it's in another language and we don't understand it, because you could be singing and selling your soul to the devil.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
The top dogs at SDNY need to be removed and brought into Congress and put under oath immediately. We The People deserve answers. https://t.co/DLBjS2CNLz
Video Transcript AI Summary
James Dennehy heads the New York FBI field office and may be withholding Epstein documents from the attorney general. After Trump took office, Dennehy emailed his staff to dig in. James Comey's daughter, an assistant US attorney for the Southern District of New York, worked on the Epstein and Maxwell cases, so she may be involved.
The FBI has access to computers, videos, records, and photos from Epstein's properties. Seventeen years ago, the Justice Department gave Epstein a non-prosecution deal. Where are those files? Also, at the Bureau of Prisons, where are those files?
Regarding Epstein's death, there were suspicious circumstances, such as a malfunctioning camera, a missing cellmate, and guards failing to check on him. An EMT source reported that upon arriving at the cell, seven people were already present, handling Epstein's body and moving items around.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So who's in charge at the New York FBI field office? Who's withholding Epstein docs from the attorney general? James Dennehy is running the show there. There he is. This is the guy who emailed his whole staff to dig in after Trump took office.
And don't forget that James Comey's daughter is an assistant US attorney for the Southern District Of New York. She worked on the Epstein and Maxwell cases. She's kinda knee deep in this. Epstein was facing sex trafficking charges in Lower Manhattan. Where's all that paperwork?
The FBI sees computers, surveillance videos, banking records, file cabinets, and photographs photographs from all of Epstein's properties in New Mexico, the Virgin Islands, Palm Beach, and in New York. The justice department also gave Epstein a sweetheart non prosecution deal seventeen years ago. Where are those files? The Bureau of Prisons. Where are those files?
Bureau of Prisons. Where are those files? You remember where Epstein killed himself? I asked Bill Barr about that, why everything seemed to go wrong that night.
Speaker 1: When I first heard all the information and all the coincidences here, I was suspicious.
Speaker 0: What were the coincidences? I mean, those were a lot of coincidences.
Speaker 1: Well, one of the cameras was out. Right. He was supposed to have a cellmate. Cellmate left. They didn't replace the cellmate.
And the guards who were supposed to check him every half hour didn't check him.
Speaker 0: My EMT source said he was on the scene immediately to pull Epstein's body out to the morgue. And when he got to the cell, he saw seven people there touching Epstein's body and moving stuff around.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Rep Burchett shows up on CNN (Communist News Network) and nukes Jim Acosta who pathetically tries to defend Liz Cheney. Liz broke the law and if she isn’t prosecuted, then there is no arguing that we have a two tier justice system in our country. It’s that simple. 👇🏽 https://t.co/O0hZXW8sKk
Video Transcript AI Summary
Should there be a criminal investigation into Liz Cheney? If she broke the law, she shouldn't be exempt. If she manipulated evidence or coached witnesses, then accountability is necessary. The ethics committee is considering a report recommending her investigation, but some argue there's no solid evidence against her.
If there are findings from the investigation, they should be revealed; if not, Cheney is in the clear. The focus should be on whether anyone, regardless of political affiliation, broke the law. There's a perception of a double standard in justice, with claims that the current administration is releasing criminals without consequence.
The January 6 committee's investigation is questioned, as some feel it was politically motivated and didn't include all relevant voices. Ultimately, the call for justice should apply equally to everyone involved.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Think there should be a criminal investigation into Liz Cheney, one of your former colleagues?
Speaker 1: If she broke the law, why should she be exempt? If if I I guarantee you, if Manu Raju or or or or you broke the law, law, y'all be they drag y'all into court in in chains. And why should she be So
Speaker 0: you don't think Liz Cheney broke the law, do you?
Speaker 1: If she manipulated this thing, if she met with people, if she coached them as they're saying, if she talked to them on a secret website, which they're saying she did, if she coached them, if she if she altered evidence, if she withheld evidence, then
Speaker 0: she What's the evidence? What's the evidence of that? I mean, the report came out just days after Donald Trump said that Liz Cheney and other members of the committee should go to jail. Aren't they just doing his bidding?
Speaker 1: What's the evidence that Matt Gaetz has other than a report? You've got a report. It's the same thing. That's why people do not trust the media. You have a double standard for 1 and not for the other.
If she if she didn't break the law, then she's fine. But if she did break the law, she should be held accountable. What is wrong with them asking questions? You say
Speaker 0: the the the the the ethics committee is is is voting to release this report presumably with some Republican help. This is a house Republican report on Jan. 6 recommending that Liz Cheney be criminally investigated.
Speaker 1: If she broke
Speaker 0: the law Isn't this Banana Republic stuff?
Speaker 1: Why is she being exempted from the law? Everybody who broke the law should be exempted. No. It's not Banana Republic. If she broke the law, I don't see why that's such a hard thing.
If she didn't break
Speaker 0: the law, they should be able
Speaker 1: to fine.
Speaker 0: There's no evidence she broke the law. She they just looked at what happened on Jan. 6, and Donald Trump's gonna overturn a free and fair election.
Speaker 1: Other than Barry Loudermick, who's a very respected member of congress, doing his very long investigation and very tiring investigation into this. And if they found it, I think it ought to be brought to light. If not, then she's fine. I don't see have a problem with them investigating that.
Speaker 0: You you want the government to go after Trump's, political enemies?
Speaker 1: If they broke the law, I don't care if they're my political enemies or they're my friends. If they broke the law bad government, they ought to be brought in, and they ought to be brought to justice. There there shouldn't be that's what we talk about all the time. That's why Trump's in the White House because there is 2 systems of justice in this country, and you can't have it both ways. You have got to it's gotta be straight and right down the middle.
You can go back and watch all the tapes that the conservatives put out of the Democrats saying there's not there's not 2 forms of justice or just 1. Well, there is 2 forms of justice. The Biden White House, obviously, they're releasing criminals. They're releasing pedophiles. They're releasing Chinese communist spies and at a record number, and nobody's paying attention.
There is 2 systems of a justice in this country, and I'm tired of him.
Speaker 0: And he should be either. Congressman, I mean, you don't think that the Jan. 6 committee should have investigated what took place at the Capitol on Jan. 6?
Speaker 1: Well, I
Speaker 0: know you don't believe that.
Speaker 1: I know you don't think If they investigate it, why didn't they call me in? I volunteered. I was the last person to leave the house for the last house member, myself, Mark Wayne Mullen. Neither 1 of us was called in to see what we saw, to saw Doesn't it but doesn't it show leadership. All they did was investigate the political wherewithal.
It was a witch hunt from the start. That's why the final episode of that crazy thing, there was more people watching reruns of Spongebob on the on the Cartoon Network.
Speaker 0: Is this about clown shit. About getting revenge?
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
The only reason governments want to take guns is to get full control the people. With guns we are citizens. Without guns we are subjects. Listen to this 2 minutes of the history of countries who give up their guns and what happened next. 👇🏽 https://t.co/FuYtnNxYqg
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the first year after Australia mandated the surrender of 640,000 guns, homicides rose by 3.2%, assaults by 8.6%, and armed robberies by 44%, costing the government $500 million. Historical examples show that gun control often precedes mass exterminations: in Turkey (1911), 1.5 million Armenians were killed; in the Soviet Union (1929), 20 million dissidents perished; and in Nazi Germany (1938), 13 million Jews and others were exterminated. Similar patterns occurred in China (1935), Guatemala (1964), Uganda (1970), and Cambodia (1956-1977), leading to millions of defenseless victims. The message is clear: with guns, we are citizens; without them, we are subjects.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, in the 1st 12 months after gun owners in Australia were forced to surrender 640,000 guns to the government, they destroyed them. The program cost the government $500,000,000. Well, after that happened, in the 1st 12 months, homicides nationwide were up 3.2%. Assaults went up 8.6%. Armed robberies went up 44%.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. Later, 1 and a half 1000000 Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were slaughtered. In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. And for the next 30 years, 20,000,000 dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and slaughtered. 1938, Nazi gun control said Jews are prohibited from carrying firearms and ammunition.
They established gun control in 1938, and for the next 6 years, at least 13,000,000 Jews and others were rounded up and exterminated because they were because they were unable to defend themselves. Okay? China established gun control in 1935. And for the next 10 years, 20,000,000 political dissidents unable to defend themselves were exterminated. Guatemala established gun gun control 1964.
In the next 15 years, a 100,000 Maya Indians unable to defend themselves were exterminated, killed, murdered. Uganda established gun control 1970. For the next 8 years, 300,000 Christians were murdered because they were unable to defend themselves. Cambodia established gun control 1956. And from 75 to 77, 1,000,000 educated people, maybe more, unable to defend themselves, rounded up, and exterminated.
Defenseless people around the the world exterminated in the 20th century about 56,000,000. Next time someone talks in favor of gun control, ask them, who do you want to round up and exterminate? See, with guns, we are citizens. Without guns, we are subjects.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Biden once again humiliates himself and our country when he can’t remember how to exit the stage after reading the teleprompter for 5 minutes. How could anyone vote for someone who is clearly senile? https://t.co/uKfk9Qonk2
Video Transcript AI Summary
Thank you, Mr. President. The impact of this event is immense, saving millions of lives and transforming communities. Thank you.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mr. President, thank you. At the end of such a momentous event, the word thank you seems kind of inadequate but for all the millions whose lives will be saved, For the communities where life will be transformed. Thank you.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Nikki Haley is standing with Mitch McConnell, Liz Cheney, Joe Biden and all of the other uniparty cult members in favor of this America last “border security” bill. A vote for Nikki Haley is a vote for the uniparty cult. https://t.co/8L0X2mgQdG
Video Transcript AI Summary
This is a Democrat trap that would end a Republican's career. It's a foolish bill that should not be signed. It involves massive amounts of money, billions and billions of dollars, going out of town. The situation at the border is extremely bad, one of the worst I've seen. Overall, this bill is one of the dumbest I've ever seen.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's hard to believe because I think it probably would mean the end of their career. This is a, a democrat trap. It's a trap for republicans that would be so stupid, so foolish to sign a bill like this. This bill can't be signed. And it's not only that.
It's massive amounts of money going out of town, as we say. Going out of town. 1,000,000,000 and 1,000,000,000 and 1,000,000,000 of dollars. And, it's so bad on the border. I've never seen anything like it.
Actually, it's one of the worst one of the dumbest bills I've ever seen. I think it's
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Just like her Uniparty cult friends Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, Nikki Haley has no problem lying straight to people’s faces. Pass it on. https://t.co/DGE9Jb8CtK
Video Transcript AI Summary
I will not support raising the gas tax, but let's increase it by 10¢ over 3 years. I'm Nikki Haley and I'm running for president. Everyone on social media should be verified by their real names. I never said the government should force people to pay. The retirement age of 65 is too low and needs to be increased. I never claimed that Hillary Clinton was an inspiration. I attended a leadership program where she spoke and decided to pursue a political career.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And we will get them. But I will not, not now, not ever support raising the gas tax. Finally, let's increase the gas tax by 10¢ over the next 3 years. I would not run if president Trump ran. I'm Nikki Haley, and I'm running for president.
Every person on social media should be verified by their name. I never said government should go and require anyone to pay. But what we do know is 65 is way too low, And we need to increase that. To claim in the retirement age is, quote, way, way too low. I have never once said that.
I never said Hillary Clinton was an inspiration. I went with my friend Eleanor Kitsman to a firm and leadership program where Hillary Clinton was speaking, and I walked out of there and I said, I'm going to office.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Uniparty cult member Rep Dan Goldman says Trump needs to be “eliminated”. The Uniparty cult fears Trump. This should tell you to vote for him and send him back to DC. https://t.co/9BweTN8QZb
Video Transcript AI Summary
In a conversation with ABC's Jonathan Karl, Trump discussed his intentions for January 6th. He initially planned to go to the Capitol but was advised against it by the Secret Service. Trump expressed his desire to return and personally address the situation, but the Secret Service disagreed. He believed he would have been well received. As a prosecutor, this conversation could be useful in building a case against Trump, as it shows his knowledge of his supporters' actions. However, Trump's objective seems to be more political than legal. His rhetoric is becoming increasingly dangerous, as seen in his recent True Social post. It is clear that he is unfit for public office and poses a threat to democracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I want to also turn to Trump, of course, and just some of what the reporting has been around, some of his conversations also as we anticipate a year full of trials next year. I wanna take a listen to part of a conversation that he had with, ABC's Jonathan Karl about January 6th and get your thoughts on the other end.
Speaker 1: Week. You told them you were gonna go up
Speaker 2: to the capital. Were you just I was no. I was going to, and then secret service said you can't. And then by the time, I would have. And then when I get back, I saw week.
I wanted to go back. I was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem, doing it myself. Secret service didn't like that idea too much. So so what I could've done that? And you know what?
I would've been very well received.
Speaker 0: So there's been so much speculation, contemplation, discussion of what Trump wanted to do, what he knew or didn't know, I mean, do you think, as a prosecutor or a prosecutor, this is something that could be useful in the case against Trump? How will it be used?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I mean, look. He says, I would be well received because he knows that the people who were there are his supporters who he riled up and incited to Invade and riot at the capitol and try to disrupt the proper counting of the electoral college votes. So every time he talks, He's, putting himself into a bigger criminal hole. But the but he that's not his objective.
His objective is purely political at this point. Politics don't work in a courtroom as I think he's finding out in the New York attorney general's case in New York, a civil case, and and that's gonna continue in his criminal trials. But his rhetoric is really getting dangerous, more and more dangerous. And we saw what happened on January 6th When he uses inflammatory rhetoric now and his recent True Social post, is incredibly, incredibly scary for Anyone, that might be trying to work in government. And, it is just unquestionable at this point that that Man cannot see public office again.
He is not only unfit, He is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be, he has to be eliminated.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Joe Biden admits that the southern border is wide open on purpose to give businesses access to cheap labor. The marxist democrats and RINOs are both in on the open southern border which is why nothing has been done to shut it.
Video Transcript AI Summary
We have implemented policies to process people fairly and quickly. Additionally, we are expanding legal pathways for entry to meet the workforce demands of businesses and reduce the waiting time for families to be reunited. We are also increasing the number of refugees admitted from Latin America, particularly those escaping violence and persecution. Our goal is to provide a better life for children. In the coming week, we will discuss this plan with Congress. Furthermore, we are assisting states and cities that have experienced a rise in immigration by deploying federal experts to provide training and support.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I mean it. 1st, we put in place policies that process people in a fair and fast way. Second, we're significantly expanding legal pathways for entry so businesses can get the workers they need, family's gonna have to wait for a decade to be together. I've also directed my team to make historic increase in the number of refugees admitted from Latin America. A people fleeing violence and persecution.
We simply want the kids to have a better life. Next week, my team will consult with congress on this plan. 3rd, we're supporting states and cities that have seen a surge in immigrants. We've developed federal experts, deploy them to help train city
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
We are all witnessing a judicial assassination attempt on the most popular president in the history of our country. The fact that the communist democrats and RINOs don’t want you to be able to vote for him should tell you to vote for Trump.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker dismisses the grand jury indictment as meaningless, claiming that the cases against Donald Trump are designed for quick convictions in jurisdictions biased against him. They argue that weak cases like these open the door to prosecution of Democrats by Republicans and vice versa, which threatens democracy. Another speaker argues that challenging the integrity of voting systems is not a crime and that the racketeering charge against Trump is unfounded. They believe the prosecutor is motivated by political gain and wants to sideline Trump. A former US Attorney adds that RICO cases are difficult to prove and believes this case is an aggressive application of the law. They suggest that these cases lack legal structure and precedent and will likely collapse.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, first of all, nobody should take it all seriously, the fact that there was a grand jury indictment. It means nothing. It's the prosecutor who indicted. The best evidence to that is that it was on his website before the grand jury even voted. Now the whole strategy of all these 4 cases is to get a conviction before the election even if they're gonna lose on appeal.
I used to teach my students, many of them future prosecutors. If you bring a RICO case, that increases your chances of winning a trial and losing on appeal. The same thing is true with conspiracy and other cases involving mental states. And so all 4 of these cases are designed to get quick quick convictions in jurisdictions that are heavily loaded against Donald Trump. And these prosecutors don't care as much as prosecutors generally do about having the convictions reversed on appeal because that will happen after the election, which only goes to prove what I've been arguing now for for months.
If you're going after the man who's running against your incumbent president, you would darn well better have the strongest case Possible. And these are among the 4, at least 3 of them, 3 weakest cases I've ever seen against any candidate. We don't know about 4th, but it Seems like it's very much like the DC case. And if you're going after the man running for president against your person, You have to have the strongest case. Otherwise, it becomes a banana republic.
Anybody can prosecute anybody. And we're opening the door to prosecution of Democrats by Republicans, Republicans by Democrats. It's what Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist is the most dangerous threat to democracy, and we're seeing it unfold in front of our eyes very, very tragically. I'm not a Republican. I'm not a Trump supporter, But I care deeply about the constitution.
I care deeply about preserving the rule of law, and we're seeing it being frittered away for partisan political purposes.
Speaker 1: Let me get your reaction, Greg Jarrett.
Speaker 2: You know, exercising your legal rights, Sean, to challenge the Integrity of voting systems is not criminal. It's not a crime to complain, which is what the Trump telephone call with the secretary of State in Georgia was all about it. He was complaining about ballot irregularities, violations of election laws, a failure of the court to address his petition. It's not defrauding the government if you believe you're acting lawfully. And this idea of bringing racketeering charge, Seems par fetch.
I mean, racketeering, as the professor Turley pointed out, requires proof of an organized criminal enterprise Coupled with a repeated pattern of systematic illegal behavior. It normally involves things like Extortion for monetary profit, control of property on a recurring basis. That doesn't fit here, does it? I mean, this was a singular alleged episode of a brief duration where Trump and his counsel were asking for a reconsideration of votes cast. At worse, this kind of a RICO case is simply guilt by association.
But I agree with Professor Jurishewitz, The prosecutor in this case doesn't care. She wants a guilty verdict to sideline, Donald Trump And interfere in the upcoming presidential election, which is in my judgment, the definition of a corrupt act.
Speaker 1: Alright. Let me, get Matt Whitaker's take same topic, Matt, because I think this is very, very crucial here. In other words, The fact that we're talking about things that I don't think most Americans know a whole lot of and that's you know why is this a Rico case, why is this a racketeering case, why did they post this earlier on the website? What what is in your mind and having been an an AG, what do you think, What is the thinking behind this?
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah. Two primary thoughts. First of all, what Greg just said is important, but this is also being done To catapult the prosecutor's political career. Don't forget that.
And then second, you know for five and a half years I was a US Attorney. I signed indictments personally. Whatever the grand jury returned, true bills, you know, I made sure I signed those presentments, to the grand jury and those indictments. And that being said, I can tell you RICO cases are by far the hardest cases. You want to bring them, and we we tried to especially go after Mexican drug cartels.
It's a real problem here in Des Moines, Iowa, as you can imagine, especially with the meth and the fentanyl. And so, You know, I would look at those cases and and work with the AUSAs on those, on trying to make RICO cases. But to the, you know, earlier panelist point and to Jonathan Turley's point, Those cases are tough because there's there's predicate offenses. You have to show a pattern and you have to show the organization. These, I mean, these are criminal groups.
And I just don't think this case rises to that level. I think this is a very aggressive application of that. And really, It's a pattern that I mentioned earlier when we were talking. It's just, it's these prosecutors that are solely trying to get out And get Trump and try to hang in it, not only indictment, but, you know, they hope a conviction. And it's just not most of these cases just don't have the legal structure and the legal, precedent to support them and they're going to collapse, you know, after they get past these juries that are planted against president Trump.
Speaker 1: Alright. Guys, stand by. We are again we're still waiting for as we were immediately have said, we We have reports now, 10 indictments handed down by the Fulton County grand jury working late into the night tonight's time by the judge Now being filed by the clerk, the clerk has said over an hour ago that the maximum time would take would be a few hours. So we are expecting all of that information tonight. We turn now to somebody that would that knows firsthand what it's like to be on the wrong side of what we often talk about on this program And what the House Judiciary Committee is investigating, whether or not Joe Biden's
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
The corrupt Uniparty controlled media didn’t want you to see this yesterday.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
This speech was given in 1958 and it describes perfectly what has been going on in the United States especially since Covid was released and Biden was installed. It’s the great reset. It’s communism.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a plan to gradually surrender American sovereignty to international organizations like the United Nations. The aims for the United States include increased government spending, higher taxes, an unbalanced budget, currency inflation, government controls over prices and wages, increased socialist controls over the economy and daily life, centralization of power in Washington, elimination of state lines, federal control over education, constant promotion of peace on communist terms, and appeasement leading to surrender. The speaker urges listeners to question why the United States shouldn't just mind its own business.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A part of that plan, of course, is to induce the gradual surrender of American sovereignty piece by piece and step by step to various international organizations of which the United Nations is the outstanding, but far from the only example. Here are the aims for the United States. One, greatly expanded government spending for every conceivable means of getting rid of ever larger sums of American money as wastefully as possible. 2, higher and then much higher taxes. 3, and increasingly unbalanced budget despite the higher taxes.
4, wild inflation of our currency. Five, government controls of prices, wages, and materials supposedly to combat inflation. 6, greatly increased socialistic controls over every operation of our economy and every activity of our daily lives. This is to be accompanied naturally and automatically by a correspondingly huge increase in the size of our bureaucracy and in both the cost and reach of our domestic government. 7, far more centralization of power in Washington and the practical elimination of our state lines.
There is a many faceted drive at work to have our state lines eventually mean no more within the nation than our county lines do now within the states. 8, the steady advance of federal aid to and control over our educational system leading to complete federalization of our public education. Nine, a constant hammering into the American consciousness of the horror of modern warfare. The beauties, and the absolute necessity of peace. Peace always on communist terms, of course.
And 10, the consequent willingness of the American people to allow the steps of appeasement by our government which amount to a piecemeal surrender of the rest of the free world and of the United States itself. So brush the insider's dust out of your eyes, my friends, and the communist soap suds out of your brain. And ask yourselves in all honesty, what on earth is wrong with the United States simply minding its own business.
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
Most of us already know this but the intelligence agencies control a majority of the media. It’s state run propaganda and it protects their puppet China Joe Biden and attacks any politician that they don’t control. #Trump2024
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 wishes for Joe Biden to be interviewed in the same manner as them. They mention seeing Biden walking out of a store with ice cream and being asked about the flavor instead of important matters. Speaker 0 believes Biden is not being held accountable for his actions and suggests ending the interview.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wish you would interview Joe Biden like you interview me. It would be so good. You know what? But when I watch him walk out of a store and he's walking with a ice cream. And the question the media asked him Mister president, what are you doing?
Choco choco chip. No. What kind of ice cream? What flavor ice cream do you have? And he's in the midst of a scandal.
He's not. And he's taking pussy, Josh. Come on. I think we have enough of an interview here, Hope. Okay.
That's enough. Let's go. A
@GlockfordFiles - Glockford Files
The marxist democrats, RiNOs, and their controlled media don’t want you to hear the testimony of the FBI whistleblowers. This should tell you that you need to search it out and listen to it. https://t.co/3NHKndTFDR
Video Transcript AI Summary
The FBI is accused of working against the American people and needing reform. Whistleblowers spoke out about the bureau's corruption and retaliation tactics during a congressional hearing. They detailed instances of being suspended, losing financial support, and facing humiliation and intimidation. Democrats attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, but they followed proper protocols and made protected disclosures. The FBI's role in the January 6th events was also questioned, with allegations of withholding video footage and the possibility of undercover agents being present. Protecting whistleblowers and holding those who retaliate against them accountable is crucial. Financial support is being provided to the whistleblowers through a crowdfunding campaign.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The FBI is incentivized to work against the American people and in dire need of drastic reform. The FBI weaponizes process crimes and reinterprets laws to initiate prosecute its political enemies. Bureau intelligence analysis capability increasingly dictates operations, turning the FBI into an intelligence agency with a law enforcement capability.
Speaker 1: All I wanted to do was serve my country by stopping bad guys and protecting the innocent. To my chagrin, bad guys have begun running parts of the government, making it difficult to continue to serve this nation and protect the innocent. But I, for 1, will never stop trying.
Speaker 2: Because I forwarded information to my superiors and others that questioned the official narrative of the events of January 6th. As a result, I was accused of promoting conspiratorial views and unreliable information. Because I did this, The FBI questioned my allegiance to the United States.
Speaker 1: But the FBI will crush you. This government will crush you and your family If you try to expose the truth about things that they are doing that are wrong, and we are all examples of that.
Speaker 3: I can't think of a more sobering way to end the hearing. I yield back.
Speaker 4: Three brave FBI whistleblowers called out The bureau's corruption and sleazy retaliation tactics yesterday. It all happened in front of the congressional federal government weaponization subcommittee. That's when members of congress heard from agents Garrett O'Boyle, Marcus Allen, and the indispensable contributor to the absolute truth, Steve Friend. Now even though The panel of highly credible whistleblowers detailed their claims against the bureau. Democrats worked aggressively hard on behalf of the agency to try and discredit them.
New York congressman Dan Goldman, who just happens to be the Levi Strauss heir, tried embarrassing Steve Friend For taking in donations to support his family after the FBI stopped paying him.
Speaker 2: Mister Friend, what about you? Are you do you know Kash Patel as well? Are you a charitable organization?
Speaker 0: I was an unpaid, indefinitely suspended man trying to feed his family, and he's reached out to me and said he wanted to give me, a donation.
Speaker 4: Now it's worth noting Goodman was born into money and reportedly has a net worth of $253,000,000, meaning congressman Goldman has no idea what it's like to work for a living. But Goldman wasn't the only Democrat attempting to Said Lande Punch. Once the camera panned over to the congresswoman with purple hair, you knew things were just about to get really, really stupid.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Mister Allen, have you ever used Twitter? Yes or no?
Speaker 2: I have utilized Twitter. Yes, sir.
Speaker 5: Okay. And is your account At Marcus a 97050645.
Speaker 2: That is absolutely not my account.
Speaker 5: Okay. That's not your account. Well, on December 5, 2022, an account under the name Marcus Allen retweeted a tweet that said
Speaker 2: That is not my account, ma'am.
Speaker 5: You haven't let me finish the question, sir.
Speaker 6: I'm a football player.
Speaker 5: You haven't let me finish the question. On and the time is mine. On December 5, 2022, an account under the name of Marcus Allen retweeted a tweet that said quote, Nancy Pelosi staged January 6th. Retweet if you agree, end quote. Do you agree with that statement?
Yes or no?
Speaker 2: That that is I don't no, ma'am. That's not my account at all. I have a question.
Speaker 5: Whether you agree with that statement.
Speaker 4: Again, a little note here. This was the actual Twitter account congresswoman Sanchez was looking to pin on the FBI agent. A Twitter account with no photo and no legitimacy and with a handle followed by all those numbers, which is a red flag anyway. And joining us to discuss Us all of this as our panel of FBI experts. Please welcome in FBI whistleblower Kyle Sarafin, FBI whistleblower George Hill and retired special agent Mark Kreider.
Thank you all for being here. We really appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thanks.
Speaker 4: There were there were lots of important moments, from Yesterday's hearing, and we're gonna play some more soundbites in a moment. But first off, Democrats went after these agents, their integrity. They tried Discrediting them. We even saw several members of congress claim they're not FBI whistleblowers because the bureau doesn't acknowledge them as such. Kyle, I'm gonna start with you.
Speaker 5: What
Speaker 4: makes these men FBI whistleblowers?
Speaker 3: It's defined by statute. The statute is 5 USC 2303, that's the FBI Whistleblower Protection Act and it is defined by the people who engage in protected disclosures which these men all did. And And there's a number of different routes that you can go to do such a thing. You can go to your FBI chain of management because there is actually no command in the FBI. But you can also go to members Congress.
There's a couple of other things you can do. Office of the Inspector General, the Office of Professional Responsibility. There's a whole list. It's all listed in the federal statute. Nobody gets to tell you whether you're a whistleblower or not.
You engage in whistleblowing activities and therefore you are a whistleblower. There's no adjudication process despite what these members Of the subcommittee said because they obviously don't read the laws that they pass.
Speaker 4: And they were asked about the protocols they followed in order to blow the whistle. And it sounds to me, Kyle, that all All of them did it by the book. Correct?
Speaker 3: A 100%. Yeah. And we've gone over this a a number of times. I'm not a 100% familiar with the way, mister Allen's situation went, we're just recently in contact. However, everything that's been reported about him and including the stuff that's gone through judicial watch, It all says that he did exactly what he's supposed to do.
Speaker 4: Now, George, you called the attention of a lot of Americans when you blew the whistle on Bank of America working with the FBI. You detail those allegations that Bank of America provided its customers transactions to the agency in order to track their participation on January 6th. Now when you spoke with members of Congress regarding the FBI's role on j six, a piece of that clip Was played during yesterday's hearing, and it's been explosive. Take a listen.
Speaker 7: The SSA for CT 2 said, happy protect Show us where they were inside the capital and we'll look into it to which WFO said, we can't show you those videos unless you can tell us the exact time and place those individuals were inside the Capitol to which the Responded back and I was privy to these conversations firsthand. Why can't you show us why can't you just send us give us access to the 11,000 hours of video of this exam that's bail because there may be, may be UC's undercover or CHS's confidential human sources on those videos whose identity we need to protect.
Speaker 4: That was very telling to me. But, George, do you believe the FBI
Speaker 7: I've been in intelligence for almost 40 years. I I really don't Embrace the term believe. I will say this, I have planned and executed, civilian evacuation operations with the Navy. I was responsible for multiple threat assessments in Boston over my 10 years Involving state, local law enforcement partners. So based on that and based on the decades of experience and thousands of years of experience if you go on an individual basis with the park police, the Capitol Hill police And, Metro DC police.
It is unbelievable That they could have failed in such an epic fashion. Does that make sense?
Speaker 4: Meaning that, yes, if they're if they weren't prepared for it because there was all kinds of indications, Then why? And it probably points to coordination.
Speaker 7: 1 could make that assumption. Therefore, it would then require further investigation, which the j six committee elected not to do.
Speaker 4: There's such a hold on the remaining footage that Kevin McCarthy promised to release.
Speaker 7: Right. So I am regurgitating a conversation that took place over 3 years ago now That what was conveyed to me was that there, and I've been misquoted in so many outlets, good outlets as well, That there may not, you know, like Elon Musk said, misquoted me, said there are many. There may, What was told to me there were AB CHS's or UC's in those videos. They use they they floated WFO floated the Possibility of UCs and if you look at Jill Sanborn's testimony and Director Wray's testimony, they kind of danced around it, as well. So I'm not going to assert that there were UCs or CHSs there because I don't know.
But what I am supremely confident is in is that It was such an epic failure from such a group of highly experienced law enforcement professionals that it's just Defies credulity that this could have happened by a bunch of, you know, in some cases idiots breaking the law and misbehaving, protect against such a well trained, highly experienced multiple law enforcement entities. It just it it makes no sense.
Speaker 4: That's a very good point. And I think a lot of American people feel that way as well. Now, Mark, you retired from the bureau in 2018. You understand though how the agency retaliates against anyone that comes forward. So I I wanna play this clip of whistle blowers detailing what the bureau has done to retaliate and get your reaction on that as a a former member of the bureau.
Speaker 2: It has been more than a year since the FBI took my paycheck from me, and we're getting financially crushed. My family and I have been surviving on early withdrawals from our retirement accounts while the FBI has ignored my request for approval to obtain outside employment during the review of my security clearance. We We've lost our federal health insurance coverage, and there's apparently no end in sight.
Speaker 1: Then the FBI allowed me to accept orders to a new position halfway across the country. They allowed us to sell my family's home. They ordered me to report to the new unit when our youngest daughter was 2 weeks old. Then on my 1st day on On the new assignment, they suspended me, rendering my family homeless.
Speaker 0: The FBI weaponized the security clearance processes to facilitate my removal from active duty within 1 month of my disclosures. In addition to an indefinite unpaid suspension, the FBI initiated a campaign of humiliation and intimidation to punish and pressure me to resign. In violation of HIPAA, individuals at the FBI leaked my private medical information to a reporter at the New York Times. In violation of the privacy act, the FBI refused to furnish my training records for several months. The date they only provide a portion of the records, which are essential to obtaining private investigator and firearms licenses in the state of Florida.
Even after releasing some term of the records. The FBI refuses to confirm their legitimacy to the Florida Department of Agriculture, rendering the few documents they have provided practically useless. The FBI denied my request to seek outside employment in an obvious attempt to deprive me of the ability to support my family. Finally, The FBI inspection division imposed an illegal gag order in an attempt to prevent me from communicating with my family and attorneys.
Speaker 4: Retaliate against whistleblowers? Does did the director lie, Or is he somehow unaware of what happened to these gentlemen?
Speaker 6: Well, I'd hesitate To guess at the motives of director Wray, but, he's he's, virulently misinformed if he thinks that whistleblowers, Are not retaliated against. I can tell you I'll disagree with Kyle on one thing. Even though we all know what the statute is, it took me, 3 heels to get official whistleblower status through the Department of Justice. If you read some of the books that are out there, Mary Du has a a compilation of whistleblowers, probably over 2 decades and it's like a playbook that the The bureau uses the same techniques against everybody. I can tell you during the course of my lawsuit against the FBI, They would use the security process to redact records that are unclassified.
They would they would mark them secret and redact the all documents so you couldn't tell what it was. Revoking security clearances is a tried and true method that the FBI has used for aids against people. It's just shameful what happens to you once you step forward and do the right thing.
Speaker 4: Yeah. We've known a a few whistleblowers over the years, especially as I covered Congress and the White House, and I heard this. This is way way predates January 6th and even going so far as to making sure it's hard to get another job A decade later. Real quick, we're almost out of time, but how can we protect our whistleblowers? It was so hard to listen to What their families and themselves have been through.
And I know that when there were whistle blowers that came out against Donald Trump, they had a lot of support. So what what can we do to protect whistleblowers? Because they're important for the health of our nation.
Speaker 3: So
Speaker 6: I'll jump in 1st. I can tell you that in in my, It was a civil trial. It was an EEO complaint. And I can tell you that, the only question once the, complainant? And out of that, the bureau paid over complainant.
And out of that, the bureau paid over $2,000,000 in attorney's fees to the complainant, And he was reinstated and he got some compensation. Not 1 single bureau employee That was involved in that case received so much as a verbal reprimand. So how can a federal jury that there was gross EEO violations and nobody inside the bureau was punished for their here. That's what's gotta change. You you have to start punishing people when they break the rules and they retaliate against these individuals.
The retaliation cannot be tolerated.
Speaker 4: George.
Speaker 7: So I think I think it was just been covered quite well. So I'll say one thing. Director Wray did not lie when he said whistleblowers were not targeted or abused because the FBI does not consider them whistleblowers. This is what they do. They murder the English language to their own benefit.
Speaker 4: That's a great point. And I'll let you finish this up, Kyle.
Speaker 3: Well, everything they've both said is correct. Obviously, the the case. The only thing that we can do is to make sure that these people are able to survive long enough to do those legal battles to get involved and and to stay public and and not sync with the millstone around their neck of The FBI trying to get rid of them in their their clearance process. So, the way that we have to do that is going to be, Supporting them financially. And we've got a GiveSendGo up.
People can go to giveSendGo.com/kileserafin. And if you do such a thing, you will see That we have a whistleblower, set up right now. All the money, a 100% of it, is going through 2 whistleblowers. And it's going to Gerardo Boyle's family and to Marcus Allens. We're gonna start with Marcus because he's been over 400 days without a paycheck.
We're gonna try to fill in some of that hole so that he doesn't have to lose his house, which is what he told me was on the on the possibility list for him, last night when we spoke.
Speaker 4: Heartbreaking. Heartbreaking. Yeah. They need that kind of support. And just as a reminder For our audience, Kyle does have a podcast.
He anchors, which he dives into this corruption deeply regularly. So You can find out even more. You can head over to Rumble, The Kyle Sarafin Show, and subscribe. Thank you all for what you did and your sacrifice protect and for joining us today. We appreciate it.