TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @KanekoaTheGreat

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - December 24, 2025 at 6:04 PM
Saved - December 25, 2025 at 8:55 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that Green Beret Valhallachannel claims Candace O’s latest witness, “Mitch Snow,” is alleged to be a serial abuser and con artist who fabricated his story. Candace supposedly raised $138,000 on GiveSendGo for him. Snow is billed as the key witness in claims about Erika Kirk, Brian Harpole, Rep. Amodei, and a Fort Huachuca murder plot. Valhallachannel promises to debunk and reveal victims and proof this Friday and Saturday.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BREAKING: Green Beret @Valhallachannel says he has uncovered that @RealCandaceO’s latest witness, "Mitch Snow," is allegedly a serial women abuser and con artist who fabricated his story. Candace encouraged her audience to raise $138,000 on GiveSendGo for him. “Mitch Snow” is the key witness in her latest baseless allegations claiming that Erika Kirk, Brian Harpole, Rep. Mark Amodei, and the U.S. military planned Charlie Kirk’s murder at a secret meeting at Fort Huachuca. Candace has produced no verifiable evidence that they were ever there. Harpole and Amodei have already provided alibis. According to @Valhallachannel: "Maybe one of the most horrific, appalling human beings I've ever come across. The amount of violence against women in his record. Kidnapping. Abuse. Fraud. I have the proof. It's really, really bad." "It's a thousand times worse than you could imagine. We're going to debunk the stolen valor and Fort Huachuca, but that is nothing to this story. I'm actually horrified." "I've talked to all of the victims, his entire family, and his children. His own son, who was an Army veteran, will come forward publicly to explain what a con artist his father is. That is coming Friday." "We're talking about a litany of abused women. Not one. Not two. Not three. Not four. It’s really bad." @Valhallachannel and @paramounttactcl will expose Candace’s witness, “Mitch Snow,” on Friday and Saturday. Follow their channels below.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 outlines a strongly negative portrayal of Mitch Snow, claiming “maybe one of the most horrific, appalling human beings” the speaker has encountered. The speaker asserts a record of “violence against women in his record, kidnapping, abuse, fraud,” and states, “Oh, I have the proof. I have it all. I have all the documents.” The speaker emphasizes a hardline stance on abuse, noting that “we’re fans of Candace,” and that both they and JD have “very staunch anti abuse against women and children stances.” The speaker declares, “I don’t care who you are. If you platform and raise a $130,000 for someone who has a visceral history of abuse against women that’s gonna blow your guys’ mind, I’m not gonna allow that to happen.” The speaker continues that the claims about Snow are “a thousand times worse than any of you guys could have ever imagined” and states that the “stolen dollar, the Fort Huachaca” story will be debunked, though adds that this particular matter “is nothing to this story.” The speaker reports having talked to all of the victims, to Snow’s entire family, and to Snow’s children, emphasizing that Snow’s own son—described as an army veteran—“will be coming out and speaking publicly with us to explain to you how his father what a con artist his father is.” There is a commitment to a forthcoming exposure, with the speaker saying, “It is insane who this man really is. That is coming Friday.” The speaker expresses emotional fatigue from listening to victims and conducting investigations, stating they will bring “every document, all the domestic filing files, all the court all the court documents, all the military documents.” The speaker says, “We’ve got it all.” The speaker then questions whether Candace knows about Snow, saying, “If Candace knew this about this guy and decided to still platform him, I’m gonna be horrified. I’m gonna be absolutely horrified if she did this knowingly.” The claim is reiterated that Snow is “a con artist.” The speaker notes that they have not yet addressed “the debunking the four Huachaka story,” but promises to do so “very easily, by the way.” The segment ends with the speaker reiterating the emotional impact of conversations with Snow’s family and the testimony about a “litany of women that have been abused,” emphasizing that the numbers are more than a few—“Not one, not two, not three, not four.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In my investigation into Mitch Snow, what I have found is maybe one of the most horrific, appalling human beings I've ever come across. The amount of violence against women in his record, kidnapping, abuse, fraud. Oh, I have the proof. I have it all. I have all the documents. It's really, really, really bad. And I'll tell you this. Regardless of how we feel about Candace, we're fans of Candace. I stand up for women as does JD. Me and JD both have very staunch anti abuse against women and children stances. Hardline for both of us. I don't care who you are. If you platform and raise a $130,000 for someone who has a visceral history of abuse against women that's gonna blow your guys' mind, I'm not gonna allow that to happen. It's a thousand times worse than any of you guys could have ever imagined. The stolen dollar, the the Fort Huachaca, well, we're gonna debunk that, but that is nothing to this story. I'm actually horrified. I've talked to all of the victims. I've talked to his entire family. I've talked to his children. His own son, by the way, who was an army veteran, will be coming out and speaking publicly with us to explain to you how his father what a con artist his father is. It is insane who this man really is. That is coming Friday. Now we don't need to and, again, I'm pretty I'm pretty emotional about it because listening to all of these victims, it's been it's been rough. It's been rough. And, again, I'm gonna bring you every document, all the domestic filing files, all the court all the court documents, all the military documents. We've got it all. All of it. Do you think that Candace knows about this? I hope not. I and guys, this is what's really making me uncomfortable. If Candace knew this about this guy and decided to still platform him, I'm gonna be I'm gonna be horrified. I'm gonna be absolutely horrified if she did this knowingly. It's bad. Okay? This is just who he is as a con artist. We haven't even got into debunking the four Huachaka story, which we're gonna do, very easily, by the way. But yeah. Sorry. And, again, it's making me emotional because I've sat on phone calls with hours with his family members, his kids. I mean, I and we're talking about a litany of women that have been abused. Not one, not two, not three, not four. It's really, really, really bad.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - November 8, 2025 at 4:50 PM
Saved - November 8, 2025 at 7:35 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I see the 94% gait match to Shauni Kerkhoff as damning: the FBI traced the pipe bomber to the house next door to hers days after January 6, with links to a Metro card and a pickup vehicle. Then agents like Kyle Seraphin were pulled off the lead. That reads as a cover up.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

The 94% gait match to Shauni Kerkhoff looks far more damning when you realize the FBI traced the pipe bomber to the house right next door to hers just within days of January 6. Investigators linked that address to both a Metro card used by the suspect and a vehicle that picked up the bomber on January 5. Then the FBI reportedly pulled agents, including @KyleSeraphin, off that lead. That looks like a cover up.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 26, 2025 at 10:17 PM
Saved - September 26, 2025 at 11:00 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

JUST IN — Footage shows attempted Trump assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks practicing dry-fire drills with a handgun in his room. https://t.co/DcNiFre4ai

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 18, 2025 at 7:14 PM
Saved - September 19, 2025 at 2:42 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Sinclair, Nexstar, and ABC have removed Jimmy Kimmel's show after he made false claims regarding Charlie Kirk's assassination, suggesting that MAGA was responsible, despite evidence pointing to a Leftist. This situation has sparked discussions about First Amendment rights, particularly in relation to FCC rules that prohibit broadcasting false information about crimes that could cause public harm. Kimmel's actions are seen as a violation of these regulations, especially given the immediate calls for violence against political opponents following Kirk's death.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Sinclair, Nexstar, and ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel's show after he spread false claims about Charlie Kirk’s assassination. Kimmel accused MAGA of murdering one of its own leaders, even though all the evidence shows the assassin was a Leftist. Why are people calling this a First Amendment issue? The FCC has strict rules against airing false information about crimes or catastrophes when it poses an immediate risk to the public, such as inciting violence or diverting law enforcement. "The FCC prohibits broadcasting false information about a crime or a catastrophe if the broadcaster knows the information is false and will cause substantial 'public harm' if aired." "FCC rules specifically say that the “public harm must begin immediately, and cause direct and actual damage to property or to the health or safety of the general public, or diversion of law enforcement or other public health and safety authorities from their duties." Kimmel blatantly violated FCC rules by knowingly spreading false claims about the most significant American assassination in half a century. Charlie hasn’t even been buried yet, and already online Leftists are calling for more assassinations of political opponents, while millions publicly and privately justify Charlie Kirk’s murder. H/T @jeffreyatucker

Video Transcript AI Summary
We hit new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it. In between the finger pointing, there was grieving. On Friday, the White House flew the flags at half staff, which got some criticism. But on a human level, you can see how hard the president is taking this. 'Maconditions on the loss of your friend Charlie Kirk. May I ask, sir, personally, how are you holding up over the last day and a half, sir? I think very good.' 'Yes. He's at the fourth stage of grief, construction. Demolition, construction. This is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he called a friend. This is how a four year old mourns a goldfish.'
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it. In between the finger pointing, there was grieving. On Friday, the White House flew the flags at half staff, which got some criticism. But on a human level, you can see how hard the president is taking this. Speaker 1: Maconditions on the loss of your friend Charlie Kirk. May I ask, sir, personally, how are you holding up over the last day and a half, sir? I think very good. And by the way, right there, you see all the trucks? They've just started construction of the new ballroom for the White House, which is something they've been trying to get, as you know, for about a hundred and fifty years, and it's gonna be a beauty. Speaker 0: Yes. He's at the fourth stage of grief, construction. Demolition, construction. This is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he called a friend. This is how a four year old mourns a goldfish. Okay?
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 13, 2025 at 6:15 PM
Saved - September 13, 2025 at 11:31 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I found out that the roommate of Charlie Kirk’s assassin is 22-year-old Lance Twiggs, as reported by the Daily Mail. Fox and the New York Post also mentioned that Tyler Robinson was living with a transgender partner. I've included links to Twiggs' social media accounts.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BREAKING: The roommate of Charlie Kirk’s assassin has been identified as 22-year-old Lance Twiggs, according to the Daily Mail. Fox and the New York Post report that Tyler Robinson was living with a “transgender partner.” Links to Lance Twiggs’ social media accounts are below.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Lance Twiggs' social media accounts: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61551546333659# https://www.instagram.com/sir._.lancelotte/ https://www.threads.com/@sir._.lancelotte https://www.tiktok.com/@lanclotl

Error facebook.com
Instagram instagram.com
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 13, 2025 at 8:56 PM
Saved - September 13, 2025 at 11:26 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I learned that Tyler Robinson, who is alleged to have attempted to assassinate Charlie Kirk, was in a romantic relationship with a transgender partner, according to FBI sources. Additionally, I discovered that Lance Twiggs changed his Steam name to "Luna" in December 2024 and was active in transgender Reddit communities discussing hormones and transitioning. My friend and I have been exploring this further, including finding the shooter's Venmo and Steam accounts, and we're working to archive as much information as possible.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BREAKING: Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson, was in a “romantic relationship” with a transgender partner, FBI sources tell FOX News. More info on Lance Twiggs below.

Video Transcript AI Summary
A FOX News alert. FBI sources tell FOX News Digital that the man charged with assassinating Charlie Kirk was living with a transgender partner. Bureau officials confirmed that Tyler Robinson was in a romantic relationship with someone transitioning from male to female. They say that individual is fully cooperating with their investigation, claims to have had no idea of Robinson's plans, and is not currently accused of any criminal activity.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A FOX News alert. FBI sources tell FOX News Digital that the man charged with assassinating Charlie Kirk was living with a transgender partner. Bureau officials confirmed that Tyler Robinson was in a romantic relationship with someone transitioning from male to female. They say that individual is fully cooperating with their investigation, claims to have had no idea of Robinson's plans, and is not currently accused of any criminal activity.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Lance Twiggs changed his Steam name from "Lance" to "Luna" in December 2024. He was also active in transgender reddit communities where he discussed hormones and transitioning. Lance Twiggs' social media accounts: https://www.reddit.com/user/lancelott3/ https://www.instagram.com/sir._.lancelotte/ https://www.threads.com/@sir._.lancelotte https://www.tiktok.com/@lanclotl https://steamhistory.net/id/76561198360177321 facebook.com/61551546333659/

[Mature Content] Check out lancelott3’s Reddit profile u/lancelott3: heavy is the shrimp reddit.com
Instagram instagram.com

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

@SomeBitchIIKnow Yeah Garrett and I've been looking at his stuff. The Reddit is wild. We found the shooter's Venmo and Steam too. Still trying to archive anything we can find.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 13, 2025 at 9:56 PM
Saved - September 13, 2025 at 11:25 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve located the social media accounts of Tyler Robinson, the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk, and his partner, Lance Twiggs. I’m seeking assistance in archiving their content and finding any additional relevant information. Tyler's Discord ID is 375687201121501195, while Lance, who recently changed his Steam name to "Luna," has been active in transgender communities discussing transitioning. Lance's Discord ID is 269985738475438081. All links are provided for further exploration.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

I’ve found the social media accounts of Charlie Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson. Please help me archive everything listed below and uncover any additional relevant content. All links provided below. H/T @MarcoPolo501c3 @GarrettZxcvi

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Tyler Robinson zealous_monkey_55095 Discord ID: 375687201121501195 https://account.venmo.com/u/craftin247 https://www.reddit.com/user/Craftin248/ https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198159427286 https://www.seaofthieves.com/community/forums/user/craftin248 https://worldofwarcraft.blizzard.com/en-us/character/eu/hyjal/bobbafet/ https://crafty.gg/@Craftin247 https://namemc.com/profile/Craftin247.1#google_vignette https://www.furaffinity.net/user/craftin247/

Venmo | Tyler Robinson Venmo is a digital wallet that lets you make and share payments with friends. You can easily split the bill, cab fare, or much more. Download the iOS or Android app or sign up on Venmo.com today. account.venmo.com
[Mature Content] Check out Craftin248’s Reddit profile u/Craftin248 reddit.com
Steam Community :: Craftin steamcommunity.com
Unauthorised You'll need to login to access this content. seaofthieves.com
Bobbafet - Character - WoW Bobbafet (Hyjal) ❮Always More❯ - 80 Human Frost Death Knight, 673 ilvl worldofwarcraft.blizzard.com
Craftin247 Minecraft Player Profile — Crafty Craftin247's Minecraft Player Profile on Crafty. Check Craftin247's Skins, Capes, Username History, UUID & More! crafty.gg
Userpage of Craftin247 -- Fur Affinity [dot] net Fur Affinity | For all things fluff, scaled, and feathered! furaffinity.net

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

I've also found the social media accounts of Tyler Robinson's alleged transgender partner, Lance Twiggs. Lance changed his Steam name from "Lance" to "Luna" in December 2024. He was active in transgender reddit communities where he discussed hormones and transitioning. Please help me archive everything listed below and uncover any additional relevant content. All links provided below.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Lance Twiggs Discord ID: 269985738475438081 https://www.instagram.com/sir._.lancelotte/ https://www.threads.com/@sir._.lancelotte https://www.tiktok.com/@lanclotl https://steamhistory.net/id/76561198360177321 facebook.com/61551546333659/ facebook.com/61551546333659/ https://steamcommunity.com/id/fluxalotl/ https://www.reddit.com/user/lancelott3/

Instagram instagram.com
Steam Community :: fluxalotl LETS GO GAMBLING!!!!!!!!ːmeowricːːDSTportalː steamcommunity.com
[Mature Content] Check out lancelott3’s Reddit profile u/lancelott3: heavy is the shrimp reddit.com

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

@schism @MarcoPolo501c3 @GarrettZxcvi ty

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - September 13, 2025 at 8:35 PM
Saved - September 13, 2025 at 11:19 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
In December 2024, I noticed that Lance Twiggs, the transgender roommate of Charlie Kirk’s shooter, changed his Steam name to "Luna," which aligns with his TikTok username and a Reddit profile discussing transgender topics. Additionally, I discovered the social media accounts of Tyler Robinson, the alleged killer, and I'm seeking assistance to archive the information and find more relevant content. I've included all necessary links for reference.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: In December 2024, Lance Twiggs—the transgender roommate of Charlie Kirk’s shooter—changed his Steam name from “Lance” to “Luna.” The account matches his TikTok username and links to a Reddit profile active in transgender forums discussing hormones and transitioning. https://t.co/q9ZNPkDFZ0

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Tyler Robinson's social media accounts: https://t.co/RLX4ShKj6W

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

I’ve found the social media accounts of Charlie Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson. Please help me archive everything listed below and uncover any additional relevant content. All links provided below. H/T @MarcoPolo501c3 @GarrettZxcvi https://t.co/48JWvoxH8K

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - June 19, 2025 at 11:35 PM
Saved - August 26, 2025 at 2:34 AM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Joe Biden wrote the 1994 Crime Bill that locked up millions of Americans for doing what his son is doing right here. @MarcoPolo501c3's Report on the Biden Laptop documents 459 crimes involving the Biden family and their associates. One set of laws for us. None for them.

Video Transcript AI Summary
If you have a piece of crack cocaine no bigger than this quarter that I'm holding in my hand, you’re caught with that, you go to jail for five years. You get no probation. You get nothing other than five years in jail. Under our forfeiture statutes, you can, the government can, take everything you own, every thing from your car to your house, your bank account, not merely what they confiscate in terms of the dollars from the transaction that you've just got caught engaging in. They can take everything. I don't care why they become a sociopath. We have an obligation to cordon them off from the rest of society. So I don't wanna ask, what made them do this? They must be taken off the street.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If you have a piece of crack cocaine no bigger than this quarter that I'm holding in my hand, 1 quarter of $1, we passed a law through the leadership of Senator Senator Thurman and myself and others, a law that says, you're caught with that, you go to jail for five years. You get no probation. You get nothing other than five years in jail. Judge doesn't have a choice. Under our forfeiture statutes, you can, the government can, take everything you own, every thing from your car to your house, your bank account, not merely what they confiscate in terms of the dollars from the transaction that you've just got caught engaging in. They can take everything. I don't care why they become a sociopath. We have an obligation to cordon them off from the rest of society. They are in jail away from my mother, your husband, our families. So I don't wanna ask, what made them do this? They must be taken off the street.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - June 2, 2025 at 3:23 PM
Saved - July 24, 2025 at 1:38 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve uncovered alarming evidence about the FBI's involvement in concealing the Chinese Communist Party's infiltration of U.S. election systems through Konnech, a Michigan-based software company. This company, linked to Chinese firms, has been managing critical election logistics while storing sensitive voter data on Chinese servers. Despite a serious investigation initiated by field agents, FBI headquarters intervened, flipping the narrative and targeting whistleblowers instead. After facing legal challenges, we exposed Konnech's ties to the CCP, revealing a troubling connection that threatens election integrity.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🚨EXCLUSIVE: @FBIDirectorKash & @FBIDDBongino: Expose the FBI and Gascón’s Konnech–CCP Election Software Cover-Up Strong evidence shows that corrupt FBI officials and former LADA George Gascón deliberately concealed CCP infiltration of U.S. election systems—because exposing it would have politically benefited @realDonaldTrump. @Kash_Patel & @dbongino now have a rare opportunity: expose how deeply politicized the FBI became, remove CCP-controlled software from America’s elections, and finish an investigation that was already 90% complete before it was sabotaged. At the center of the scandal is Konnech, a Michigan-based election software company secretly developed and financed by two Chinese firms—Jinhua Yulian Network and Jinhua Hongzheng Technology—under contract with China’s National People’s Congress and in partnership with state-owned giants like Huawei, China Telecom, China Unicom, China Mobile, and Lenovo. Konnech’s flagship product, PollChief, is used to manage poll worker scheduling, equipment deployment, and logistics in major U.S. cities including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Detroit, Washington D.C., Fairfax County, and St. Louis. In early 2021, @TrueTheVote's Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips discovered that Konnech was storing the personally identifiable information (PII) of U.S. election workers, judges, and voters on servers in China. Using open-source tools like Binary Edge, they traced PollChief to Chinese IP addresses—where they found unsecured databases containing names, Social Security numbers, addresses, bank information, voter roll data, polling location schematics, provisional ballot serial numbers, and even passwords for voting machines. They alerted FBI field offices in Detroit and San Antonio, where agents took the threat seriously and launched a 15-month counterintelligence investigation. But in April 2022—just before the release of Dinesh D’Souza’s 2000 Mules, a film on 2020 election fraud featuring True the Vote—FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. intervened and flipped the investigation on its head. Field agents warned Engelbrecht and Phillips that they, not Konnech, were now considered the threat. Two senior female FBI officials in Washington D.C. were reportedly preparing criminal charges against them rather than Konnech’s CEO Eugene Yu. Engelbrecht was warned she and Phillips might be prosecuted for accessing Konnech’s data on Chinese servers. The FBI even tipped off Konnech about the investigation—compromising the case—and began circulating internal accusations that Phillips had committed cybercrimes, referring those allegations to the CIA and NSA. Phillips said their goal was to “Roger Stone” him—publicly smear and criminalize him as they had done to Trump allies. In fear for their safety, a field agent advised Engelbrecht and Phillips to take the “nuclear option”—go public. On August 13, 2022, they did just that at The Pit, a closed-door briefing in Arizona with 200 cybersecurity experts, journalists, and election integrity investigators. Two weeks later, Konnech sued them. In a stunning series of courtroom actions, Engelbrecht and Phillips were jailed and held in solitary confinement—until the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered their immediate release. The FBI stood by and let it happen. After their release, they published thousands of documents exposing Konnech’s ties to China. Within days, Konnech dropped the lawsuit. Meanwhile, independent researchers quickly pieced together Eugene Yu’s background. Born in China, Jianwei Yu (于建伟) graduated from Zhejiang University in 1982 and worked for the CCP from 1983 to 1985 as a project manager in the Guangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone. He moved to the U.S. in 1986 to pursue an MBA at Wake Forest University. In 2002, Yu founded Konnech. By November 2005, he had launched a Chinese subsidiary—Jinhua Yulian Network—funded and overseen by the CCP. That same year, he was profiled as an “overseas scholar” in a Chinese-language publication by the China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) and the American Zhu Kezhen Education Foundation (AZKEF). CAST is a formal CCP arm linking Chinese leadership with overseas scientists and technologists. AZKEF, where Yu served on the finance committee, flew U.S. researchers—including Harvard’s Charles Lieber—to Chinese universities. Lieber was later arrested for failing to disclose his ties to China’s Thousand Talents Plan, one of the CCP’s many programs that recruit foreign experts to encourage the illicit transfer of intellectual property back to China. Konnech’s Chinese ties ran deep. It partnered with Michigan State University’s Confucius Institute, developed software in CCP-run tech parks, and directly served China’s National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). On January 25, 2006, Yu’s Chinese company was accepted into the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Jinhua Science and Technology Park—a CCP-controlled tech incubator. From that point on, Jinhua Yulian Network and Konnech, were financed, developed, and controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. Just a month later, on February 25, 2006, Yu registered the domain yu-lian .cn for Jinhua Yulian Network using his Konnech email address (eyu@konnech .com). Archived versions of the company’s Chinese-language website show Yu praising “Comrade Jiang Zemin” and the Chinese Communist Party, while promoting Konnech’s software products used by the National People’s Congress, the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Election Management Solutions Detroit, and U.S. Overseas Voters. In December 2006, Konnech partnered with the Confucius Institute to build a Chinese communication platform called ChineseBrief .com. Yu registered CNBrief LLC, launched www.cnbrief .com, and displayed a banner in Chinese that translated to: “Chinese Brief – Overseas Chinese Network.” Confucius Institutes are CCP-funded cultural centers embedded in Western universities that U.S. intelligence agencies and lawmakers have long warned operate under the direction of the CCP. On July 18, 2007, an archived Chinese government website showed Yu offering a 5 million yuan (~$700,000 USD) software development contract on behalf of Jinhua Yulian Network, again using his Konnech email address and website.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 21, 2023 at 1:26 AM
Saved - July 21, 2025 at 5:53 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
The Biden family allegedly committed numerous federal felonies, including FARA violations and money laundering, linked to over $31 million received from Chinese businessmen associated with intelligence. Hunter Biden reportedly represented convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho without proper registration and laundered funds to family members. A detailed report claims 459 crimes by the Bidens, including business, sex, and drug offenses. The conversation highlights perceived double standards in legal scrutiny between the Biden and Trump families regarding similar allegations.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🧵THREAD: The Biden family may have committed over two dozen federal felonies in connection with the millions they made from China, specifically FARA violations and money laundering charges, that would put the Trump family or any ordinary citizen behind bars for decades. For example, Hunter Biden illegally represented convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho for $1 million in clear violation of the Foreign Agent Registration Act and subsequently laundered that illegally obtained money to James and Sara Biden. The @MarcoPolo501c3 report meticulously documents these crimes with primary source evidence, including; Patrick Ho's "Attorney Engagement Letter" signed by Hunter Biden, Hunter's bank statements detailing the illegally obtained money transfers to himself, James, and Sara Biden, emails showing Hunter assisting Ho's criminal defense attorney identify FBI agents involved in the case, Hunter's voice message calling Ho the "spy chief of China," Hunter's text message calling Ho, "the chief of intelligence of the People's Republic of China," and Joe Biden's voice message acknowledging the President's awareness of his son's business relationship the "spy chief of China."

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#2 @MarcoPolo501c3 released a 630-page report with 2,020 citations that thoroughly documents 459 crimes committed by the Biden family & their business associates. •140 business crimes •191 sex crimes •128 drug crimes https://marcopolousa.substack.com/p/report-on-the-biden-laptop

Report on the Biden Laptop There are, at the very least, 459 documented violations of state and federal laws regulations on the infamous device. marcopolousa.substack.com

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#3 Chuck Todd: "Do you have a crime that you think Hunter Biden committed?" Sen. Ron Johnson: "You should read the Marco Polo report." 630 pages, 2,020 citations, and 459 crimes committed by the Biden family & their business associates. http://bidenlaptopmatters.com

Report on the Biden Laptop There are, at the very least, 459 documented violations of state & federal laws & regulations on the infamous device. marcopolo501c3.substack.com

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#4 The Bidens received at least $31 million from Chinese businessmen linked to the highest levels of Chinese intelligence. Hunter even admitted in his own words that his business partners worked for Chinese intelligence. "My representation of the f*ckin spy chief of China." https://t.co/vDVo4pMzJT

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#5 On Nov. 18, 2017, FBI agents arrested Hunter Biden's business partner, Patrick Ho, the "spy chief of China," for bribing the President of Chad and Uganda's foreign minister. CEFC offered the African officials millions in cash in exchange for oil rights in their countries. https://t.co/4Vn4IkcPZA

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#6 When "the spy chief of China" was arrested, his first call was to President Joe Biden's brother, James Biden. In May 2018, a New York Times reporter asked Hunter why Patrick Ho's first call was to Joe Biden's brother? https://t.co/jPLAxexlTL

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#7 Hunter Biden illegally represented convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho for $1 million while not registering under the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Here's the "Attorney Engagement Letter" signed by Hunter Biden. @MarcoPolo501c3 https://t.co/t9dhc0jfoY

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#8 Hunter Biden accepted $1 million from Chinese spy Patrick Ho, sought the names of FBI agents on "behalf of Dr. Patrick Ho" in clear violation of FARA, and farmed the criminal defense work out to Attorney Ed Kim, who departed the SDNY two months before Ho was arrested. https://t.co/INajoV3yGa

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#9 One month after Xi detained Ye Jianming, an email from Wells Fargo confirmed that a $1,000,032 wire transfer hit Hunter's account after he requested his retainer from Patrick Ho via Kevin Dong. Hunter immediately asked how to access the illegally acquired funds (FARA) to send them to his shell company Skaneateles.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#10 James and Sara Biden also benefited from Hunter's illegal (unregistered) representation of convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho. James sent multiple fraudulent invoices for $82,500 as his "Monthly Retainer for International Business Development" to Hunter's shell company to access the funds received from the "spy chief of China."

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#11 In Dec. 2018, Joe Biden called Hunter to discuss the New York Times article detailing his son's business dealings with the "spy chief of China," — telling him: “I think you’re clear.” "Here you have the President's son, who is talking to his dad about his business deals with China, admitting the guy he is dealing with, is the Chinese government's spy chief. It's almost unbelievable." —@TuckerCarlson

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#12 In Dec. 2018, Hunter complained to Hallie that CEFC's Chairman was missing, he was involved in brokering "a deal with Vladimir Putin," and China had arrested "CIA operatives" after the DOJ arrested his "client the chief of intelligence of the people's republic of China." https://t.co/bCt5xBPoKF

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#13 On Jan. 3, 2019, Hunter Biden admitted to his daughter that the Biden family is a criminal organization that illegally funneled money to President Joe Biden for the last three decades: "But don’t worry unlike Pop I won’t make you give me half your salary.” https://t.co/x4QQavrbwR

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#14 The Bidens sold access to the highest levels of the US government to officials working for Chinese intelligence. In a 2017 email, Hunter wrote that CEFC's Ye Jianming had agreed to a "rate of $10M per year for a three-year guarantee total of $30M" for "introductions alone.” https://t.co/mNVUN3inoQ

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#15 If the Trump family received $1 million for illegally representing the "spy chief of China," documented themselves laundering that money, and said that they gave "half to pops," — it would be on the news 24/7 until the FBI arrested the entire Trump family for treason. https://t.co/4vY4D2jTya

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#16 Instead, 51 intelligence officials said the Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation," and CBS took 769 days to acknowledge it was real because we live in a two-tiered justice system that protects the political establishment while persecuting those who expose their crimes. https://t.co/QzrnhPoXSL

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

#17 If you are a Biden, you can collect $30 million from the Chinese government, work with the "spy chief of China," broker a $9 billion oil deal for Vladimir Putin, never register under FARA, and the FBI will label your laptop "Russian disinformation" to conceal your family's crimes. If you are a Trump, the FBI will fabricate a Russian collusion hoax to frame you, alter evidence in federal court to spy on you, raid your home, and when none of that works — they'll make up a bogus fraudulent "legal theory" to prosecute you.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 21, 2023 at 1:26 AM
Saved - July 21, 2025 at 5:49 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I discussed the Biden family's potential involvement in over two dozen federal felonies related to their financial dealings with China, including FARA violations and money laundering. A key example is Hunter Biden's illegal representation of convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho for $1 million, which violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act. The report from @MarcoPolo501c3 provides detailed evidence, including engagement letters, bank statements, and communications that suggest a significant connection between Hunter's actions and the Biden family's financial activities.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🧵THREAD: The Biden family may have committed over two dozen federal felonies in connection with the millions they made from China, specifically FARA violations and money laundering charges, that would put the Trump family or any ordinary citizen behind bars for decades. For example, Hunter Biden illegally represented convicted Chinese spy Patrick Ho for $1 million in clear violation of the Foreign Agent Registration Act and subsequently laundered that illegally obtained money to James and Sara Biden. The @MarcoPolo501c3 report meticulously documents these crimes with primary source evidence, including; Patrick Ho's "Attorney Engagement Letter" signed by Hunter Biden, Hunter's bank statements detailing the illegally obtained money transfers to himself, James, and Sara Biden, emails showing Hunter assisting Ho's criminal defense attorney identify FBI agents involved in the case, Hunter's voice message calling Ho the "spy chief of China," Hunter's text message calling Ho, "the chief of intelligence of the People's Republic of China," and Joe Biden's voice message acknowledging the President's awareness of his son's business relationship the "spy chief of China."

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - October 20, 2024 at 9:22 PM
Saved - July 1, 2025 at 5:22 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe the government needs to significantly reduce its spending, especially on wasteful programs. For instance, the $42 billion allocated for rural broadband has resulted in zero connections, despite SpaceX initially winning a portion of the funds. They had to rescind it due to political reasons, which could have had dire consequences in hurricane-affected areas of North Carolina. This kind of political maneuvering is unacceptable, and I argue that the program should be eliminated entirely since it provides no value for money.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

ELON MUSK: "Step number one is for the government to spend a lot less money. I know there are a lot of super wasteful things. Look at the $42 billion that was allocated for rural broadband. SpaceX won a quarter of it, but they rescinded it for political reasons. A bunch of those terminals would have been in the affected hurricane areas in North Carolina. So that could have cost lives. That kind of political lawfare is unconscionable. Do you know how many people have been connected by that $42 billion? Literally, ZERO. So, I would say that program should be zero because the value for money is zero." 🇺🇸🇺🇸 P.S. Kamala Harris led the $42 billion program as the designated "broadband czar."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The first step to improving resource allocation is to reduce spending. Any expenditure should be zero-based, starting from scratch, because reducing a wasteful expenditure by 10% is insufficient if it should be zero. Much is wasted, such as the $42 billion allocated for rural broadband. SpaceX won a quarter of it, but the contract was rescinded for political reasons, even though it would have placed terminals in hurricane-affected areas, potentially saving lives. This political warfare is unconscionable. The $42 billion connected literally zero people, so the program's value for money is zero, and it should be eliminated.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Number one is spend a lot less of it. So it's like, the first order of business is say any given expenditure, we should I think we we wanna zero budget the thing. Say, like, let's start from scratch. Not not because because it it doesn't make sense to reduce a a foolish expenditure by 10% if it should be zero. And I bet there's not a bet. I know there's a lot a lot of things that are super wasteful. I mean, look at the sort of $42,000,000,000 that's been been allocated for rural rural broadband. And, you know, SpaceX won, like, a quarter of it, and then they rescinded that contract for political reasons. And and in fact, it would have meant bunch of those terminals would have been in the affected hurricane areas. So that could have cost lives. That's so that that kind of political warfare is is unconscionable. And you know how much how how many people have been connected by that 42,000,000,000. Literally, zero. So I would say that program should be zero because value for money is zero.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - July 15, 2024 at 1:28 AM
Saved - June 10, 2025 at 1:44 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Another bystander attempted to warn law enforcement while Thomas Crooks crawled into position on the roof. https://t.co/TQMZOOQEim

Video Transcript AI Summary
Someone is on top of the roof. Gary is laying down and will be over the fighting. People are right here on the roof. He went right on the roof again.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He was doing his job. Wouldn't be doing this. Look. They're all pointing. Yeah. They made the Pacific. Yeah. Someone's on top of the roof. Look. Gary is right there. Yeah. Right there. You see him? He's laying down. You see him? Yeah. He's laying down. And he's gonna be over the fighting like hell to get a What's happening? We have people that Right here. Right on the roof. It's much tougher than it It happened. He went right on the roof again.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - July 14, 2024 at 5:05 PM
Saved - June 10, 2025 at 1:38 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Thomas Crooks was a registered Republican who donated to a Progressive PAC. His classmate says he was aggressively bullied in high school. He wore hunting gear and a facemask long after COVID. What radicalized him to attempt to assassinate President Trump? https://t.co/1ecPWFvEq7

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker knew the suspect and said he was bullied almost every day and was an outcast who sat alone at lunch. Kids would target him because they thought it was funny. The speaker didn't want to say this provoked the suspect, but stated that you never know. The speaker said the suspect was a loner because he was quiet, but he was bullied so much. He was made fun of for the way he dressed or his appearance. The suspect would regularly wear hunting gear and always have a mask, even well after COVID.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Want you to listen to a little bit of what he told us about what he knew about the suspect. Speaker 1: He was bullied almost every day. Speaker 2: In what way can you explain? Speaker 1: I mean, he would sit alone at lunch. I mean, he was just an outcast, and you know how kids are a days. So they're gonna see someone like that, and they're target him because they think it's funny or whatever. So it's the best way I can describe it. And it's honestly kinda sad. Like, I don't wanna say this is what provoked it, but you never know. Speaker 0: Yeah. You said he was a loner? Speaker 1: Yeah. I wanna say he was a loner more because he was just he was quiet, but, like, he was just bullied. Like, was bullied so much. So much. Speaker 2: It was high school. Yeah. Speaker 0: What did they do remember at all what they said to him or called him? Speaker 1: No. He was just made fun of, I guess, for the way he dressed or his appearance. Speaker 2: You hear him reference there. He was made fun of for the way that he dressed. He explained that you would see this suspect in school regularly wearing hunting gear that he would always have a mask. He said well on well after COVID. He didn't know the details or what exactly was said to him, but that just gives you a little bit more of the picture of this profile that is being gathered right now. We Speaker 0: do
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - April 16, 2025 at 9:26 PM
Saved - April 17, 2025 at 8:19 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The DOJ and DHS have released documents regarding Kilmer Abrego Garcia, who was arrested alongside known MS-13 gang members with marijuana and cash. A credible source identified him as an active MS-13 member with the rank of "Chequeo" and the nickname "Chele." In 2021, his wife filed a restraining order against him for domestic violence, detailing physical abuse. If this is the Democrats' best example of wrongful deportation by President Trump, it seems his administration is doing well. I believe they should expedite deportations.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🚨BREAKING: DOJ & DHS release Kilmer Abrego Garcia documents. He was arrested in the company of known MS-13 gang members carrying marijuana and cash. A credible source confirmed he's an active MS-13 member with the rank "Chequeo" and the nickname "Chele." In 2021, his wife filed a restraining order against him for domestic violence, alleging he punched her, scratched her, and tore off her shirt. Honestly, if this is the Democrats' best example of President @realDonaldTrump wrongfully deporting someone, his administration must be doing a solid job. They should speed up the deportations.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - April 2, 2025 at 8:40 PM
Saved - April 2, 2025 at 9:19 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I announced that reciprocal tariffs will be imposed at half the current rates charged by various countries against the U.S. The new tariff rates are as follows: China 34%, EU 20%, Vietnam 46%, Taiwan 32%, Japan 24%, India 26%, South Korea 25%, Thailand 36%, Switzerland 31%, Indonesia 32%, Malaysia 24%, Cambodia 49%, UK 10%, South Africa 30%, Brazil 10%, Bangladesh 37%, Singapore 10%, Israel 17%, Philippines 17%, and Chile 10%. I'm curious how many of these nations will respond by lowering their tariffs on the U.S.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🚨BREAKING: President @realDonaldTrump announces reciprocal tariffs will be imposed at half the rate that each country currently charges the United States. Tariff rates will be: China 34% European Union 20% Vietnam 46% Taiwan 32% Japan 24% India 26% South Korea 25% Thailand 36% Switzerland 31% Indonesia 32% Malaysia 24% Cambodia 49% United Kingdom 10% South Africa 30% Brazil 10% Bangladesh 37% Singapore 10% Israel 17% Philippines 17% Chile 10% In response, how many of these nations will lower their tariffs on the U.S.?

Video Transcript AI Summary
The US will be charging discounted reciprocal tariffs, approximately half of what other countries charge. China charges the US 67% in tariffs, including currency manipulation and trade barriers, so the US will charge them 34%. The European Union charges 39%, and the US will charge them 20%. Vietnam charges 90%, and the US will charge 46%. Taiwan charges 64%, and the US will charge 32%. Japan charges 46%, and the US will charge 24%. India charges 52%. Cambodia charges 97%, and the US will charge 49%. The United Kingdom charges 10%, and the US will charge 10%. South Africa charges 60%, and the US will charge 30%. Bangladesh charges 74%. Pakistan charges 58%. Sri Lanka charges 88%. The speaker claims that these countries have been "ripping off" the United States for years.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We will charge them approximately half of what they are and have been charging us. So the tariffs will be not a full reciprocal. I could have done that, I guess, but it would have been tough for a lot of countries who didn't wanna do that. I'd like to see the chart if you have it. Could you bring it up, Howard? This is our great secretary of commerce, Howard Lutnick. Thanks, Howard. So if you look at that, China, First row, China, Sixty Seven Percent. That's tariffs charged to The USA, including currency manipulation and trade barriers. So 67%, I think you can, for the most part, see it. Those with good eyes, with bad eyes. We didn't wanna bring the it's very windy out here. We didn't wanna bring out the big charts because it had no chance of standing. Fortunately, we came armed with a little smaller chart. So it's 67%. So we're gonna be charging a discounted reciprocal tariff of 34%, I think. In other words, they charge us. We charge them. We charge them less. So how can anybody be upset? They will be because we never charged anybody anything, but now we're gonna charge. European Union, they're very tough, very, very tough traders. You know, you think of European Union, very friendly. They rip us off. It's so sad to see. It's so pathetic. 39%, we're gonna charge them 20%. So we're charging them essentially half. Vietnam, great negotiators, great people. They like me. I like them. The problem is they charge us 90%. We're gonna charge them 46% tariff. Taiwan, where they make they took all of our computer chips and semiconductors. We used to be the king. Right? We we've everything. We had all of it. Now we have almost none of it except the biggest company is coming in. They're gonna have we're gonna end up with almost 40%. Lee Zeldin's working to get their approvals. And, it's an amazing company, mister Wei of one of the great companies of the world, actually. They're coming in from Taiwan, and they're gonna build one of the biggest plants in the world, maybe the biggest for that. But 64%, we're gonna charge them 32%. Japan, very, very tough, great people. And, again, I don't blame the people for doing it. It's I think they're very smart in doing it. I blame the people that sat right in that Oval Office right over there, right behind the resolute desk or whichever desk they chose. Japan, Forty Six Percent. They would charge us 46% and much higher for certain items like cars, you know, little items like cars. 46% were charging them 24%. India, very, very tough. Very, very tough. The prime minister just left, He's a great friend of mine, but I said, you're a friend of mine, but you're not be treating us right. They charge us 52%. You have to understand. We charge them almost nothing for years and years and decades, and it was only seven years ago when I came in, we started with China in Georgia. We took in hundreds of billions of dollars from China in tariffs, and they understood, honestly. President Xi understood. He said, look. I understand. And the other countries and they all understand that we're gonna have to go through a little tough love maybe, but they all understand. They're ripping us off, and they understood it. Prime minister of Japan, Shinzo, was Shinzo Abe. He was a fantastic man. He was, unfortunately, taken from us assassination. But I went to him and I said, Shinzo, we have to do something. A trade is not fair. And he said, I know that. I know that. And he was a great gentleman. He was a fantastic man. He but he understood immediately what I was talking about. I said, Shinzo, we have to do something. He said, I know that. And we've worked out a deal, and it would have been a much better deal. But, frankly, there were many years left in the deal that was made previous to my getting there, but it was it was something. If you look at Switzerland, Sixty One Percent to 31%. Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia. Oh, look at Cambodia, Ninety Seven Percent. We're gonna bring it down to 49. They made a fortune with The United States Of America. United Kingdom, Ten Percent, and we'll go 10%. So we'll do the same thing. South Africa, oh, 60%, thirty %, and they've got some bad things going on in South Africa. You know, we're paying them billions of dollars and we cut the funding because a lot of bad things are happening in South Africa. The fake news ought to be looking at it. They don't wanna report it. Brazil, Ten Percent, Ten Percent. Bangladesh is 74%. So you see what's going on. Pakistan, Fifty Eight Percent. Sri Lanka, Eighty Eight Percent. So what we're doing is we're taking not the full. We could take the full 88%. Thanks a lot. He's doing a very good job. How's he doing? Alright?
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 26, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Saved - March 27, 2025 at 4:49 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I highlighted concerns about media bias during a discussion with NPR and PBS CEOs. I pointed out that NPR had interviewed Adam Schiff 25 times regarding the Russia Collusion narrative but had not interviewed Chairman Comer at all about the Biden impeachment inquiry. I noted PBS's disproportionate use of "far-right" versus "far-left" terms and their negative coverage of the GOP convention compared to the positive coverage of the DNC. I emphasized that taxpayer funding has led to what I see as a propaganda role for these media outlets.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

REP FALLON: "In 2020, NPR branded Hunter Biden's laptop story a 'waste of time.' Do you know how many times NPR interviewed Adam Schiff about the Russia Collusion hoax?" NPR CEO: "Idk." REP FALLON: "25 times. How many times did NPR interview Chairman Comer about the Biden impeachment inquiry and the Biden family's illicit business dealings?" NPR CEO: "Idk." REP FALLON: "0 times. 25 to 0. Between June and November of 2023, PBS's News Hour used the term 'far-right' 162 times, and 'far-left' was only used 6 times. Do you find that troubling?" PBS CEO: "I want to see how they did that analysis." REP FALLON: "Media Research Center did the study. You either use the term 'far-right' or 'far-left.' That's a 96% to 4% skew. Did PBS cover the DNC and GOP conventions in 2024?" PBS CEO: "Yes, we did." REP FALLON: "72% of the coverage of the GOP convention was negative. 88% of the coverage of the DNC was positive. PBS's anchor described the Republican convention as 'outright racism' and 'echoing white supremacy.' Do you believe your reporters are non-biased at NPR?" NPR CEO: "I believe they work to be every day." REP FALLON: "The recent registration of your newsroom was 87 Democrats and 0 Republicans." NPR CEO: "I find that very concerning, sir." REP FALLON: "It shouldn't be surprising when their CEO says 'I'm so done with late-stage capitalism' or calls the POTUS a 'deranged racist sociopath' or says that 'America is addicted to white supremacy.'" REP FALLON: "Billions of taxpayer dollars have gone into both of your coffers over the last few decades, and I understand why Democrats are going to viciously and vehemently defend you all because you've become a propaganda wing of the Democratic Party."

Video Transcript AI Summary
In a congressional hearing, a representative questioned PBS and NPR representatives about alleged bias. They cited a "Washington Week" episode where a reporter defended President Biden's mental acuity, and claimed dissenting opinions were absent. The representative noted NPR's dismissal of the Hunter Biden laptop story as a "waste of time" while highlighting their coverage of the Russia collusion, including 25 interviews with Adam Schiff, compared to zero interviews with Jamie Comer regarding the Biden impeachment inquiry. The representative mentioned an analysis of PBS's NewsHour that found the term "far right" used 162 times versus "far left" used 6 times. They also claimed 72% of PBS's coverage of the GOP convention was negative, while 88% of the Democratic convention coverage was positive. The representative highlighted a disparity in NPR's voter registration, with 87 registered Democrats and zero registered Republicans. They criticized the organizations for allegedly becoming a "propaganda wing of the Democratic party."
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Miss Kerger, in 2023, when PBS had a program, Washington Week with The Atlantic. And when president Biden's mental acuity was questioned, one of the reporters claimed the GOP was lying. Another reporter, Jeffrey Goldberg, who's been in the news of late, described Biden as, quote, mentally acute. Were you aware if there were any dissenting opinions on that program that day? Speaker 1: I don't know from that day. No. Speaker 0: They were they were they were not. But, fortunately and there was a debate in, I believe, June of twenty twenty four where the American people in the world found out just who was lying, the Democrats, Jeffrey Goldberg, and PBS. Miss Marr, I'm sure you're aware that Hunter Biden had a laptop. Speaker 2: I am, sir. Yes. Speaker 0: Okay. And there were many stories written about said laptop. Speaker 2: Yes, sir. Speaker 0: And in 2020, unfortunately, NPR's managing editor for news refused to cover the story, and he branded it a, quote, waste of time, not a real story, and a distraction. And instead, unfortunately, of NPR investigating, they ran a puff piece that led with experts say attack on Hunter Biden addiction deepens stigma for millions. It's an in unfortunate that NPR ignored the Hunter Biden laptop story, but y'all did talk quite a bit about the debunked Russia collusion. Do you know how many times NPR interviewed Adam Schiff about Speaker 2: Congressman, I would love to say that we actually believe we made a mistake on the Hunter Biden laptop story. Speaker 0: And I appreciate that. Thank you. How many times did y'all interview, Adam Schiff about the Russia collusion? Speaker 2: I'm sorry. Sorry. I don't have that number. Speaker 0: It was 25 times. You know how many times, NPR interviewed chairman of this committee oversight committee, Jamie Comer, about the Biden impeachment inquiry for the Hunter Biden tax evasion and illicit business dealings in the Biden family? Speaker 2: I'm sorry, sir. I don't know. Speaker 0: I believe that's zero. So it's 25 to zero. Miss Kerger, you're aware there's a political spectrum. It goes all the way from the far right to the far left and everywhere in between. Would it trouble you to hear that for six months, there was an analysis done on PBS's NewsHour from June to November of twenty twenty three where they found that far right was that term was used 162 times, and far left was only used six times. Do you find that troubling? Speaker 1: I I don't know the study that you're referring to, and I'd love I'd be very interested in seeing it and understanding how they came up with those numbers. Speaker 0: Maybe a research center did a six month analysis, and it's not how do you find it? You say far right or use its terms. They use the term far right one hundred and sixty two times, far left six times. That's a 96 to 4% skew. You're also aware that you covered the GOP and Democratic National Conventions in 2024? Yes. We did. Okay. Interestingly, 72% of the coverage of the GOP convention was negative. 88% of the Democratic convention was positive. Shouldn't be surprising when you have anchors like Amna Nawat who described the Republican rhetoric as, quote, outright racism and, quote, echoing white supremacy. Miss mayor, NPR, you believe your reporters are fair? You said they're fair and they're working at it. Speaker 2: I believe that they work to be every day, sir. Speaker 0: They're non biased. And yet you have the voter registration issue. I mean, we're all human beings. We're all gonna see through the world through a certain lens. And do you are you aware of any Republicans any registered Republicans in your newsroom? Speaker 2: I couldn't say registered, but I know we have conservatives in our newsroom. Yes. Speaker 0: Okay. So the red the recent registration, when it was looked at, eighty seven eighty seven democrats and zero republicans registered. Speaker 2: I found that very concerning. Speaker 0: Yeah. I would. Not even 40 to 30 or 50 to 20. 80 seven to zero. But it shouldn't be surprising when their own CEO says things like, I'm so done with late stage capitalism or calls the president of The United States a deranged racist sociopath or that America's Addicted to white supremacy. So billions have gone into both of your coffers over the last, several decades. And I understand why Democrats on this committee are going to viciously and vehemently defend you all because you become a propaganda wing of the Democratic party. Sixty seven percent of your viewers and listeners identify as democrat with only 12% conservative, and you become a sandbox for leftist propagandists to frolic on taxpayer dime and no more. And when you said in the beginning, you're gonna promote a symphony of ideological viewpoints, yeah, you do. If you're left leaning left, far Speaker 1: left The gentleman Speaker 0: makes time. Remarkably Marxist, I yield back.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

In 2023, PBS used the term "far-right" 162 times compared to just 6 uses of "far-left" over six months of news coverage. In 2024, PBS coverage of the RNC convention was 72% negative, whereas their coverage of the DNC convention was 88% positive. Source: @newsbusters & @theMRC https://t.co/fiVS4JF94y

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 25, 2025 at 10:27 PM
Saved - March 27, 2025 at 4:48 AM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🚨BREAKING: Trump prosecutors Nathan Wade and Fani Willis spotted together at LAX despite claiming their relationship ended two years ago. https://t.co/RL8kWDWYrn

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 26, 2025 at 5:23 PM
Saved - March 27, 2025 at 4:48 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I engaged in a discussion about NPR's potential bias with its CEO. I pointed out that there are 87 registered Democrats and no Republicans in editorial positions at NPR. The CEO acknowledged the concern but maintained that they do not track voter registration. I challenged the CEO on a past decision regarding the Hunter Biden laptop story, referencing a comment from an editor dismissing it as a distraction. I asked if that story was indeed a distraction, highlighting the ongoing debate about NPR's impartiality.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

REP JORDAN: "Is NPR biased?" NPR CEO: "I have never seen any political bias." JORDAN: "In the DC area, editorial positions at NPR have 87 registered Democrats and 0 Republicans." NPR CEO: "We do not track the voter registration, but I find that concerning." JORDAN: "87-0 and you're not biased?" NPR CEO: "I think that is concerning if those numbers are accurate." JORDAN: "October 2020, the NYPost had the Hunter Biden laptop story, and one of those 87 Democrat editors said, 'We don't want to waste our readers and listeners' time on stories that are just pure distractions.' Was that story a pure distraction?"

Video Transcript AI Summary
A former NPR senior business editor worked at NPR for over 25 years. A congressmen questioned whether NPR is biased. The witness stated she has never seen political bias determine editorial decisions. The congressman cited the former editor's claim of 87 registered Democrats and zero Republicans in DC editorial positions at NPR. The witness said they don't track voter registration but found the claim concerning if accurate. The congressman referenced the former editor's claim that NPR "hitched their wagon" to Adam Schiff on the Trump-Russia story, interviewing him 25 times, and that Russiagate faded after the Mueller report. The witness couldn't confirm this. Regarding the Hunter Biden laptop story, the congressman quoted an editor who dismissed it. The witness stated current editorial leadership believes that was a mistake. The congressman then stated that NPR became fervent members of the team natural origin even declaring that the lab leak was debunked by scientists. The congressman concluded NPR was "0 for 3" on big stories but the witness maintained NPR is nonpartisan.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Former senior business editor for NPR. Speaker 1: How long do you work at NPR? Speaker 0: I believe he was there just over twenty five years. Speaker 1: Twenty five years? Award winning journalist. Did he win any awards? Speaker 0: I our time to call. Speaker 1: That's pretty important, ain't it? That is. Speaker 0: That's Speaker 1: A pretty distinguished journalist. Right? Speaker 0: Certainly. Speaker 1: And he wrote a long story about what you do at NPR. Is NPR biased? Speaker 0: Congressman, I have never seen any instance of Never? Of political bias determining editorial decisions. No. Speaker 1: Well, miss Berliner, in his story a couple last year wrote, I've in the DC area, editorial positions at NPR, he said he found 87 registered Democrats, zero Republicans. Is that accurate? Speaker 0: We do not track the numbers or the voter registration, but I find that Speaker 1: Was award winning journalist who worked twenty five years at NPR, mister Berliner, was he lying when he wrote that? Speaker 0: I am not presuming such. I just don't have we don't track that information about our journalists. Speaker 1: Eighty seven to zero, and you're not biased? Speaker 0: I think that is concerning if those numbers are accurate. Speaker 1: It's concern I mean, it wasn't forty four, forty three. It wasn't sixty, twenty seven. It wasn't seventy, seventeen. It wasn't even 80 to seven. It was 87 Democrats, zero Republicans, and you say, NPR is not biased. How about the big stories over the last few years? According to mister Berliner, again, he wrote on the Trump Russia story, he wrote, at NPR, we hitched our wagon to Trump's most visible antagonist, representative Adam Schiff, and he said they interviewed him 25 times. Is that accurate? Speaker 0: I was not there at the time, but those numbers sound accurate. Speaker 1: Yeah. Those sound accurate. But then he said when the Mueller report came out and they said Mueller said Robert Mueller said he found no evidence of occlusion. He said, Russiagate faded from our programming. Is that accurate? Speaker 0: Again, I was not there at the time. I'm not I couldn't say. Speaker 1: You couldn't say? Speaker 0: I was not at NPR at Speaker 1: the time. You didn't prepare for that? You knew we were gonna ask you about this guy, didn't you? It's come up like 6,000 times already in the hearing. Speaker 0: I just couldn't say whether it faded from our coverage survey. Speaker 1: How about this story? October 2020, New York Post had the Hunter Biden laptop story, and one of those editors, I guess one of those 87 Democrat editors said this. We don't wanna waste our time on stories that are not really stories. We don't wanna waste the listeners and readers' times on stories that are just pure distractions. Was that a pure distraction story? Speaker 0: Our current editorial leadership believes that that was a mistake, as do I. Speaker 1: Yeah. The whole country knows that was a mistake. Definitely impacted the election, or I think it certainly impacted the election. How about the COVID origin story? That's a pretty big story too. Right? Mister Berliner said, we became fervent members of the team natural origin even declaring that the lab leak was debunked by scientists. Turns out, though, the lab leak is what most people think actually caused the COVID virus. Speaker 0: Sorry. Sorry. Is there a question there? Speaker 1: There is. You guys were o for three. On on the three the three of the biggest stories in the last five years, you guys were o for three, and yet you maintain that NPR is not biased? Speaker 0: Congressman, I do not believe we are politically biased. No. We are a nonpartisan organization. Nonpartisan organization.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 27, 2025 at 3:08 AM
Saved - March 27, 2025 at 4:48 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In 1986, the Childhood Vaccine Injury Act granted vaccine manufacturers immunity from lawsuits, eliminating class actions and liability attorneys. With 80 shots on the schedule and no accountability, I question what happens when an industry faces no consequences for harm. It's time to end the liability shield.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

In 1986, the Childhood Vaccine Injury Act gave vaccine makers total immunity from lawsuits. No class actions. No liability attorneys. No market forces keeping products safe. What happens when an industry can’t be sued—no matter the harm? 80 shots on the kid schedule. No accountability. End the liability shield.

@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊

Dr. Suzanne Humphries Breaks Down the Disturbing Reason Vaccine Makers Can’t Be Sued on Rogan What very few people know about the childhood vaccine schedule is that the entire system changed in 1986—and not for the better. Before that year, vaccine companies were facing massive lawsuits. Injuries were piling up, especially after the swine flu vaccine disaster in 1976. The Guillain-Barré cases were so bad, manufacturers couldn’t even get insurance. So what did they do? They ran to the government and basically said: “Bail us out, or we’re done making vaccines.” And that’s exactly what happened. First, the government covered the lawsuits. Then, in 1986, they made it official. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed—sold to the public as a way to help families get compensation faster. But behind the scenes, it was a legal shield. Companies like Wyeth (now Pfizer) admitted their vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe,” yet instead of making them safer, they were handed full liability protection. As Dr. Suzanne Humphries explained, this created a monster. Vaccine makers could now experiment with new ingredients—called adjuvants—without fear of being sued. Creativity exploded. Profits soared. And the childhood vaccine schedule? It grew and grew. Dr. Suzanne Humphries is a conventionally trained medical doctor and a former board-certified nephrologist (kidney specialist) who became widely known for her outspoken views on vaccines. She worked in hospitals for years and began to question vaccine safety and policy after observing what she believed were vaccine-related complications in her patients, particularly among those with kidney issues. Humphries co-authored the book Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History, which Joe Rogan has referenced on his show several times. The book presents historical data to argue that improvements in sanitation, nutrition, and living conditions—not vaccines—were largely responsible for the decline of many infectious diseases.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The National Child Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 followed the 1976 swine flu vaccine situation, where vaccine companies, facing numerous injury lawsuits, requested government indemnification after being unable to get insurance. The government absorbed the lawsuits resulting from Guillain Barre. Prior to 1986, vaccines contained microbes or live attenuated viruses with undisclosed harmful ingredients. Lawsuits related to the diphtheria pertussis tetanus vaccine led to the 1986 Act. This act promised to cover lawsuits with taxes, compensating those whose children were harmed. Over time, eligibility for compensation narrowed, benefiting vaccine companies by making them wealthy and indemnified. This indemnification allowed vaccine companies to expand their creativity, adding adjuvants to stimulate the immune system, ultimately leading to the development of messenger RNA vaccines.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And do you think it's the immunity to any legal consequences that has allowed them to sort of operate like this? Speaker 1: Well, we certainly saw an explosion of their creativity since 1986. So '19 actually 1986 you're referring to the National Child Vaccine Injury Act that was passed in 1986 but before 1986 we had 1976 which was the swine flu vaccine fiasco and that was that was a situation where there was so much injury that the vaccine producing companies were no longer able to get insurance and so they went to the government and they said we need you to indemnify us and they did And so the government absorbed all the lawsuit cases that happened as a result of the Guillain Barre that happened from then. And so that kind of set a precedent for 1986. So back then vaccines were just kind of, you know, pieces of microbe or maybe a live attenuated virus and then they would put a background of all kinds of hard things inside of it and tell you it was just a clear, beautiful, pure solution, but that's beside the point. So then 1986 comes along because there's so many lawsuits happening because of the diphtheria pertussis tetanus vaccine that, again, the vaccine companies couldn't continue to go on the way they were because they were being sued so much. So then this this horrible act was passed, which to some people seemed like a good idea, and this is always how it goes is we're gonna make you this promise. Yes. Yes. Yes. We're gonna we're gonna cover all the lawsuits now out of taxes, but it's gonna be okay because we're gonna we're gonna pay out these lawsuits, you're gonna be fine. If you if your kid takes one for the team, you're gonna be okay. And what happens is after time, after they get their foot in the door, they narrow down the they they basically have a kangaroo court that decides if you're eligible. And so the qualification tables got narrowed down because in the beginning they were paying out so much of this. So not only did it make the vaccine companies very very wealthy and indemnified but as you alluded to just a minute ago, the creativity of the vaccine companies expanded. So after that, they could add different, what we call, adjuvants, things that stimulate the immune system so the vaccine works better. Then they start that's why we're able to be in a messenger RNA vaccine situation today, which
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 14, 2025 at 2:37 AM
Saved - March 14, 2025 at 10:17 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Obama and Biden did DOGE before Trump and Musk 😂 No fake news manufactured outrage back then

@mazemoore - MAZE

OMG this is not AI, it's real. It's a must watch. 2011. Obama announces a DOGE department and puts Joe Biden in charge of it! 😂 "Nobody messes with Joe." 🤣 https://t.co/obGsYHzmMr

Video Transcript AI Summary
The government is initiating a campaign to cut waste, led by the Vice President, to eliminate misspent tax dollars across all agencies. This includes cutting back on billions of dollars in programs and eliminating pointless waste, even if there wasn't a deficit. Examples of waste include a website devoted to the "Fiddling Foresters" and thousands of unused buildings, such as a massive empty warehouse in Brooklyn. Red tape has prevented the sale of these buildings, but the government plans to get rid of them. The goal is to make government work for the people by pursuing every dime of waste. The administration aims to instill a new culture of transparency and accountability, eliminating fraud and waste, and ensuring future administrations do the same.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everyone knows that getting rid of the deficit will require some tough decisions and that includes cutting back on billions of dollars in programs that a lot of people care about. But what should be easy is getting rid of the pointless waste and stupid spending that doesn't benefit anybody. Waste we should be getting rid of even if we didn't have a deficit. Sure, some of these cuts aren't that big, but no amount of waste is acceptable. Not when it's your money. Not at the time when so many Americans are already cutting back. Just as families are living within their means, government should too. Did you know the federal government pays for a website devoted to a folk music ensemble made up of forest rangers? They're called the fiddling foresters. Foresters. I'll put their music on my iPod, but I'm not paying for their website. And there are hundreds of similar sites that we should consolidate or just get rid of. By the way, you're not only paying for websites no one needs, you're paying for thousands of buildings all across the country no one uses. For the last decade, the government's owned a massive and completely empty warehouse in the middle of Brooklyn, for example. Now, the government hadn't been able to sell this building and others like it because of red tape and Washington politics that held things up for years. But we're finally cutting through all that and plan to get rid of these buildings in the months ahead. We need to step up our game. We need to go after every dime. We need to make government work for you. That's why starting today, I've asked the vice president to lead a renewed effort to hunt down misspent tax dollars in every agency and department of this government. We're calling it the campaign to cut waste, and I know Joe's the right man to lead it because nobody messes with Joe. Speaker 1: There's a new standard by which the government is going to function from this point on. The American people are entitled to transparency. Look, A lot of this depends on new sophisticated methods, but it also it also, we know, depends on relentless focus on making this a priority, focus that can't be delegated. We're holding ourselves accountable, and we're deeply committed and focused on making government function better. We're not just eliminating fraud and waste. We hope to be instilling an entire new culture that not only our administration, but every succeeding administration will in fact pursue. We're gonna give you the government you expect and deserve.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 14, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Saved - March 14, 2025 at 10:17 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I discussed how Trump's tariffs aim to boost American manufacturing and create jobs for workers in the U.S. The president is clear about wanting to impose tariffs on foreign importers to encourage investment and job growth domestically. The focus is on building and investing in the USA, which can lead to higher wages without the burden of tariffs. I emphasized the need for businesses to prioritize American workers over overseas investments. Trump's policies are designed to reward those who invest in the U.S. while holding accountable those who choose to manufacture abroad.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: @JDVance explains how Trump's tariffs will reinvigorate American manufacturing and generate jobs for American workers. "The president's been very clear. He wants to impose tariffs on foreign importers because he wants to bring investment and jobs back to the United States Of America." "Build more in the USA, invest more in the USA, raise wages for workers in the USA, and you don't have to pay these tariffs at all." "We also have to force businesses to invest more, not overseas, not in Chinese workers, but in American workers." "What the President is doing is changing forty years of a failed bipartisan consensus in Washington DC that has sold out American workers and destroyed the underlying economic strength of the USA." "The basic thrust of President Trump's economic policies are, if you invest in the USA, you are going to be rewarded with lower taxes, lower regulations, and lower energy costs." "If you want to build a factory in China, that's your right, but you're going to pay when you try to bring that stuff back to the United States."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The president wants to impose tariffs on foreign importers to bring investment and jobs back to the U.S. Businesses can avoid tariffs by building and investing more in America and raising wages for American workers. The administration aims to lower inflation, ensure government services, and force businesses to invest in American workers. Inducing businesses to invest in American workers and reshoring supply chains will strengthen the economy long-term. The COVID crisis showed the U.S. can't rely on China for critical supplies. The president is changing a bipartisan consensus that has harmed American workers. Investing in the U.S. will be rewarded with lower taxes, regulations, and energy costs. The European Union has been tough on American workers by imposing tariffs. The president is defending the American worker and fighting back against unfairness. The U.S. has a $1 trillion trade deficit and will no longer allow Americans to go into debt to buy foreign-made goods.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: First of all, I think the president's been very clear. He wants to impose tariffs on foreign importers because he wants to bring investment and jobs back to The United States Of America. So what I'd say to those business leaders is I think the president has actually been quite clear about what he wants to accomplish, build more in The United States Of America, invest more in The United States Of America, raise wages for workers in The United States Of America, and you don't have to pay these tariffs at all. There is, as the president has said, a recognition that we have to accept, which is that, look, Joe Biden left this economy in a disaster. He ran the highest peacetime deficits we've ever had in this country. He left us with a significant debt crisis, and the president has come in and said, look. We have to accomplish a lot of things simultaneously. We have to bring down inflation, which I think we're making some good progress on. We have to actually ensure critical government services like Social Security and the military function for the American people, and we also have to force businesses to invest more, not overseas, not in Chinese workers, but in American workers. And I think we're doing all of those things. Rome wasn't built in a day, of course. This is not gonna happen overnight, but I think that both businesses and workers are ultimately gonna benefit from president Trump's policies. Speaker 1: But can you rule out the possibility as Reagan faced in his first term in office coming off a terrible economic calamity for the country. Can you rule out a recession, even a temporary one? Speaker 0: Well, look, I I think you you never can predict the future, but I think the economy the fundamentals of the economy are actually quite strong right now. And we'll see how this unfolds, Laura. But I think that by inducing more businesses to invest in American workers, by reshoring some of those critical supply chains, we are gonna make this economy stronger over the long haul, and that is the president's ultimate goal. We have to remember, Laura, people forget five years ago, of course, we had the COVID crisis. And and aside from the public health the public health element of it, what it should have taught us, Laura, is we can't rely on communist China to make all the critical stuff. You had hospitals that didn't have medical supplies. You had businesses, manufacturing businesses that couldn't get core raw materials because China was shut down. What the president is doing is changing forty years of a failed bipartisan consensus in Washington DC that has sold out American workers and destroyed the underlying economic strength of The United States Of America. We're gonna rebuild it. It's gonna take a little time, but we are gonna do it. Speaker 1: Does that include medical device manufacturing, which most of it really went to Canada? So all these great American companies from Minnesota, Midwest shot up there to Canada, lower prices. The companies like it, but American workers lost out. What so how long would this transition period be to bring those types of companies, if that's the ultimate goal, back here? Speaker 0: Well, look. I think it's gonna take time. Right? Some of the stuffs you're already seeing factories that are adding shifts for American workers. That happens immediately. Some factories, it takes eighteen months or two years to build a new facility. So it really depends industry by industry, but the basic thrust of president Trump's economic policies is if you reward excuse me. If you invest in The United States Of America, you're gonna be rewarded with lower taxes, lower regulations, lower energy costs. If you wanna build a factory in China, that's your right, but you're gonna pay Or Speaker 1: Canada or or stuff back in The United States. Italy. Speaker 0: Yeah. And and the president made this point actually in the visit with the prime minister of Ireland yesterday that the European Union has in some ways been the worst on American workers and American industries of anybody. They're imposing ridiculous tariffs. They say that they're our most important ally. And, of course, we care about European security, Laura, but they don't treat us like an ally when it comes to economics. They actually hammer American consumers and American workers in the process. The president you know, the the the thing that underlies all this, Laura, is, of course, a defense of the American worker, but a recognition that we're not going to take unfairness anymore. If Europeans do something to us, we're actually gonna fight back economically. For the first time in forty years, we have a president who's standing up for Americans. Speaker 1: I mean, your your hometown, your Ohio destroyed Akron. All these wonderful American cities totally just kicked to the dirt for decades. And all those people were told learn to code, do other things. And now it's it's gonna be a difficult period. How long do think that transition period will be? Speaker 0: Well, again, Laura, I think it really depends on what kind of industry, what kind of factory that we're talking about. I mean, you're already seeing instantly some factories, especially in the automobile sector who are announcing they were gonna move to Mexico under Joe Biden. Now they're actually building capacity here in The United States. Some factories that are idle part of the time, they're turning on additional shifts. So I think sometimes it's gonna take a while. Sometimes it's gonna happen immediately. It really is a case by case thing, but the underlying trend is invest in America, and you're gonna do well as a business. Speaker 1: But the whiskey manufacturers, come on. They they're they're screaming today because it looks like the president might slap some retaliatory tariffs on Europe. Europe came back to us and said, oh, no. No. No. No. We're gonna we're gonna hit your whiskey. Trump then says, we're gonna up you. It's like a game of chicken here, a trade chicken, 200% on champagnes and wines to France. Now that will destroy the French, winemaking business, but they've been really tough on our winemaking industry for years. Speaker 0: Well, that's exactly the point. Look. Europe doesn't have the cards here. As president Trump likes to say, when you have actually penalized American companies and American workers as the EU has for years, we're actually fighting back for the first time. But, Laura, we have a $1,000,000,000,000 trade deficit. We absorb Largest ever. Terrible economic policies from all over the world, and the world expects American consumers to foot the bill for their workers and their businesses, and Donald Trump is flipping that on its head. We are not gonna do this anymore. We cannot run an economy where Americans borrow, go into debt to buy things that other people make for us. We're gonna make it in America. We have to.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 14, 2025 at 6:34 PM
Saved - March 14, 2025 at 10:11 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
In 2011, I signed an Executive Order aimed at cutting waste and promoting efficiency, emphasizing that we shouldn't wait for Congress to address wasteful spending. We've identified numerous unnecessary government buildings, which have been empty for years, and we're eliminating them to save billions for taxpayers. This initiative is crucial given the deficits we've inherited. Unlike some leaders, my administration faced less divisive propaganda, allowing us to focus on these important steps for the American people.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

In 2011, Obama signed an Executive Order to Cut Waste and Promote Efficiency. You know, like @DOGE. 😂 "We don't need to wait for Congress in order to do something about wasteful spending." "We haven't seen as much action out of Congress as we'd like, and that's why we launched our own initiative to cut waste." "For example, we've identified thousands of government buildings that we don't need. Some have sat empty for years. So we are getting rid of those properties, saving the American people billions of dollars." "Obviously, this is even more important given the deficits that we have inherited." "These are important steps that can save taxpayers billions of dollars." Fortunately for @BarackObama, unlike @realDonaldTrump and @elonmusk, fake news propaganda didn't fabricate controversies and divide the nation over every decision he made.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker states a commitment to root out wasteful spending in government, given that families have had to cut back. This is important due to inherited deficits that have grown due to the recession. While cutting some worthy programs, the administration is launching its own initiative to cut waste and improve government, citing a lack of Congressional action. Thousands of unneeded government buildings are being eliminated, saving billions. Roger Rhodes at the Department of Commerce found a way to save almost $2,000,000 a year on cellphone bills. Celeste Steele at Homeland Security is saving tens of millions by changing how the department buys goods and services. The Vice President is working with agency secretaries to improve travel, transportation, and IT services, potentially saving billions. An executive order will direct agencies to slash spending in these areas by 20%, saving taxpayers billions over the next several years. The speaker is signing the bill and thanks officials for taking the project seriously.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One of the commitments that I made to the American people was that we would do a better job here in Washington in rooting out wasteful spending at a time when families have had to cut back, have had to make some tough decisions about getting rid of things that they don't need in order to make the investments that they do, we thought that it was entirely appropriate for our governments and our agencies try to root out waste, large and small, in a systematic way. Obviously, this is even more important given the deficits that we've inherited and that have grown as a consequence of this recession. This makes these efforts even more imperative. Now, does mean making some tough choices. It means cutting some programs that I think are worthy but we may not be able to afford right now. We don't need to wait for Congress in order to do something about wasteful spending that's out there. Cutting waste, making government more efficient is something that leaders in both parties have worked on, from Senator Tom Coburn, a Republican, to Democrat Claire McCaskill. We haven't seen as much action out of Congress as we'd like, and that's why we launched on our own initiative the campaign to cut waste, not just to cut spending but to make government work better for the American people. For example, we've identified thousands of government buildings that we don't need. Some of them sat empty for years. So we're getting rid of those properties, and that's going to save the American people billions of dollars. Roger Rhodes works at the Department of Commerce. Raise your hand, Roger. There's Roger. He found a way to save the department almost $2,000,000 a year on its cellphone bills. And I'm sure that there are probably some consumers out there that would like to talk to them and find out what they could save on their cellphone bills. Celeste Steele is here. Celeste, raise your hand. Celeste works at the Department of Homeland Security, and she's helping to save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars by changing the way the department buys goods and services. I've also tasked Vice President Biden to work with the secretaries of all our agencies to identify some systemic areas of potential improvement travel, transportation, IT services, all of which we know can save us potentially billions of dollars. And in September, Joe convened the Cabinet and has really pushed them hard in finding savings across all our agencies. So today, I'm signing an executive order that builds on their good work. It directs agencies to slash spending in each of these areas travel, printing, IT because we believe that we can get better results for less using technology. And overall, spending in the areas covered by this executive order will shrink by 20%. These are important steps that can save taxpayers billions of dollars over the next several years. There are things that we can do right now that will actually deliver better government, more efficiently, more consumer friendly, for less money. And we're going to keep on finding every possible way that we can do that even if Congress is not active. So with that, I'm going to sign the bill, but I want to thank all the officials who are behind me here today for taking this project so seriously. There you go.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 3, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Saved - March 3, 2025 at 9:38 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
In 2014, I noted the U.S. played a significant role in Ukraine's government change, highlighting our involvement through sanctions and support. I emphasized that the Obama administration's actions, including sanctions, were crucial in pushing Yanukovych from office. I expressed optimism that a peaceful transition would showcase the U.S. as a friend to Ukraine. Additionally, I pointed out our economic interests, particularly the potential benefits of Ukraine joining the EU and the new trade agreement, which could lead to substantial economic opportunities for the U.S.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

In 2014, Senator Chris Murphy bragged about the United States successfully overthrowing Ukraine's government: "I think it was our role, including sanctions and threats of sanctions, that forced, in part, Yanukovych from office." "We have not sat on the sidelines. We have been very much involved. Members of the Senate have been there. Members of the State Department have been on the Square." "The Obama administration passed sanctions. The Senate was prepared to pass its own set of sanctions, and as I've said, I think that the clear position of the United States has, in part, been what has helped lead to this change in regime." "If, ultimately, this is a peaceful transition to a new government in Ukraine, it will be the U.S. on the streets of Ukraine who will be seen as a great friend in helping make that transition happen." "There is a U.S. interest here. We are in the middle of negotiating a new trade agreement with Europe. To my state, it's enormously important. We do 40% of our trade in Connecticut with Europe." "If Ukraine is part of the EU and thus is part of this new trade agreement with the United States, that could result in billions of dollars in new economic opportunities for the U.S." "So, we do have an economic interest in Ukraine being a part of the EU, and we shouldn't be shy about making that interest clear."

Video Transcript AI Summary
We believe our sanctions and threats played a role in Yanukovych's removal. Now, we must support the new government. The US has been actively involved, with senators and State Department members present. Our clear stance has aided regime change. While some criticize our selective involvement, a peaceful transition in Ukraine will position the US as a key ally. This is about enabling Ukraine to determine its future. While it may seem like a US-Russia conflict, it's about supporting Ukraine's wishes. The US has an economic interest too as Ukraine potentially joining the EU could significantly benefit US trade. Yanukovych's use of force against peaceful protests is the reason we engaged. While radical elements exist within the opposition, the movement largely rejects them. We are confident the new government will be inclusive, and we'll ensure radical elements don't dominate.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I think it was our role, sanctions and threats of sanctions that forced, in part, Yanukovych from office. Now, the question is what can we do to support this new government? There's gonna be a lot of talk about an assistance package. With respect to Ukraine, we have not sat on the sidelines. We have been very much involved, members of the senate who have been there, members of the state department who have been on the square, the administration the Obama administration passed sanctions. The Senate was prepared to pass its own set of sanctions. And as I said, I really think that the clear position of The United States has in part been what has helped lead to this change in regimes. So I know that there is merit in the claim that The United States sort of has these principles, and then we selectively apply them. We get involved in certain places, then we don't get involved in other places. But I think if ultimately this is a peaceful transition to a new government in Ukraine, it'll be The United States on the streets of Ukraine who will be seen as a great friend in helping make that transition happen. This is really about supporting one of the biggest, most important countries in the Eurasian region, be able to determine for themselves what their future is. And it looks to people like this is The United States and Russia once again fighting, maybe not in military terms, but on economic terms, in a country that we both care about. But really, ultimately, I think this is about us supporting the wishes of Ukraine. And, you know, the there is a US interest here. We are in the middle of negotiating a new trade agreement with Europe. To my state, it's enormously important. We do 40% of our trade in Connecticut with Europe. If Ukraine is part of the European Union, and thus is part of this new trade agreement with The United States, that could result in billions of dollars in new economic opportunities for The US. So we do have an economic interest in the Ukraine being part of the European Union, and we shouldn't be shy about making clear that interest. Speaker 1: Isn't it true that Unikovich was elected for the first time in 02/2010 for January term, that elections were scheduled for 02/2015? The second point is, why is it okay for foreign ministers from other countries to show up during protest movements, let's say, Ukraine, like the foreign ministers of Poland and and Germany, and support the protesters against the the current government there? Wouldn't it be something similar to the foreign ministers of, let's say, Mexico and Canada showing up during the Occupy Wall Street movement and saying, yes. We agree that your government is corrupt. And the third point is, why isn't the West and America talking about the fact that a large or significant portion of the Ukrainian opposition right now is made up of far right politicians, including from the party, which openly is fascist and xenophobic. And they said that they don't wanna join the EU because they considered the EU to be a bunch of gays and Jews, just as well as they say that they don't want to join the imperialist Moscow regime. Speaker 0: Let me me take take all those very quickly one at a time. You're right. Yarukovich was elected, and I mentioned this before, I understand the difficult position here, which is that Yanukovych was elected, and we are not in the business of encouraging, rebellions and revolutions on the streets against elected leaders, because we ultimately think that elections, as you mentioned, are the place in which you should settle your differences. The the issue here is that Yanukovych lost his legitimacy to govern when he used force to try to break up these protests. And The United States didn't go on to that square in any meaningful way, until, the president tried to break up the peaceful protests. That's why Senator McCain and I went. And we certainly got a lot of grief from people asking why two US senators are going to the square to support a protest movement against an elected government. We did that because we think that there were human rights and civil rights that were violated there, we've always stood up for that, for that concept. And and again, think that answers your second question as to why you had foreign ministers and foreign leaders who were on that square. It was because we're standing up for the idea that people should be able to lodge protests against their government. You are right that there is an element of the opposition that has some real radical ideas, and there is an element of anti Semitism, that was present on that square. I will tell you from having been there, if there were 500,000 people there, maybe a couple thousand of them represented that viewpoint. And so by and large, this movement completely rejects those radical and prejudicial ideas, and I have confidence that this new government is going to be inclusive and going to be tolerant. And it will be part of our job, think, as members of the Foreign Relations Committee to make sure that those kind of more radical elements don't have a seat at the middle of the table as the coalition government goes forward.

@ChrisMurphyCT - Chris Murphy 🟧

Trump's abandonment of Ukraine and affection for Russia is part of the bigger story. Trump is trying to end the rule of law in America so that the billionaire ruling class can get away with stealing from us. And normalizing dictatorships like Russia helps him get there. https://t.co/LAJoiM7I0K

Video Transcript AI Summary
When you sign up to work for Donald Trump, you're signing up to transition American democracy into a kleptocratic oligarchy. This is where billionaires rule and steal from regular Americans. To normalize this, you associate with similar governments abroad, like the Kremlin. The affection for dictatorships abroad is a means of transitioning our democracy into something very different, something we've never seen before in this country. It's one big domestic project.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everyone who signs up to work for Donald Trump is signing up for one single project, and that is the transition of American democracy to a kind of kleptocratic oligarchy in which the billionaires rule, in which they get to steal from regular Americans. And if that's the domestic project, then the way that you normalize that kind of government is to associate yourself with similar governments abroad like the Kremlin. So it's all part of one big domestic project. The foreign policy, the affection for dictatorships abroad is in effect, a means towards transitioning our democracy to something very, very different, something we've never ever seen before in this country.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 2, 2025 at 1:40 AM
Saved - March 2, 2025 at 3:07 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Donald Trump and JD Vance are the most favorably viewed politicians in the U.S., based on a reliable pollster from the last two presidential elections. I can only imagine how much higher their ratings would be if the legacy media hadn't been smearing them for years.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Donald Trump and JD Vance are currently the most favorably viewed politicians in the United States, according to the most accurate pollster from the last two presidential elections. Just imagine how much higher their favorability ratings would be if the legacy media weren’t relentlessly smearing them every day for years.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - March 1, 2025 at 6:11 PM
Saved - March 1, 2025 at 8:08 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Yesterday, I witnessed a disturbing scene where military recruiters in Ukraine forcibly drafted a young man off the street, leaving his dog behind. This is part of a broader trend, with many videos showing similar incidents. Additionally, I reflected on the long-standing warnings from U.S. officials about NATO's role in provoking conflict with Russia, dating back to the 2014 coup in Ukraine. A thread I came across highlights the insights of numerous experts who argue that these actions have escalated tensions and enriched the military-industrial complex, bringing us closer to nuclear danger.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Yesterday, Zelensky's military recruiters snatched another young man off the street, threw him into a black van as he screamed, and left behind his dog. Thousands of videos online show Ukraine forcibly drafting young men to fight in an unwinnable war. https://t.co/a0UJZQytWC

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

For decades, CIA Directors, Secretaries of Defense, Senators, and Ambassadors have warned that the U.S. and NATO were provoking war with Russia. In 2014, Obama/Biden backed the 2014 Ukrainian coup In 2016, the CIA began building 12 spy bases in Ukraine https://t.co/ZNn6i8xAxb https://t.co/Wzdri2AIhl

Video Transcript AI Summary
We've seen protests in Ukraine evolve into what some call a revolution, aiming to change the government and sign agreements with the EU, which could boost Ukraine's business environment. The free world and America support Ukraine. We've been actively engaged, but some think certain figures shouldn't be in government. Recent reports indicate Russian troops near a Ukrainian military base, raising tensions after Crimea voted to join Russia. Pro-Russian militants have seized buildings in eastern cities, with the Ukrainian interior minister promising a strong response, and an anti-terrorist operation is underway. Easter was violent, with deaths reported near Slavyansk. The US Vice President pledged aid to Ukraine, emphasizing the need for Ukrainians to determine their future without external interference. The CIA is working with Ukrainian partners to restore stability. Following airstrikes, the government aims to eliminate terrorists, but questions arise about attacks on separatist headquarters. The US supports Ukraine's defense of its territory.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: How did this suddenly morph from a protest into a revolution, as the protesters are calling, looking to topple an elected government? Speaker 1: It's not an easy job to topple the government, to change the president, to sign an association agreement, but this is our agenda. Speaker 2: We are waiting that president Kenukovic return back to Brussels and sign that agreement. Speaker 3: Good to see you. Speaker 4: We're here from America. Would you like some bread? Signing the association agreement with the EU would also put Ukraine on a path to strengthening the sort of stable and predictable business environment that investors require. Speaker 5: The free world is with you. America is with you. I am with you. Speaker 4: It would be a huge shame to see five years worth of work and preparation go to waste if it if the a a is not signed in the near future. So it is time to finish the job. Speaker 1: We have been actively engaged in what's been happening Speaker 6: in the Ukraine. Speaker 4: I don't think cleats should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary. I don't think it's a good idea. I think Yaz is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. Obviously not gonna comment on private diplomatic conversations. Speaker 7: These brave Ukrainians took to the streets in order Speaker 5: to stand peacefully against tyranny. Speaker 2: And we expect the Ukrainian government to show restraint, to not resort to violence in dealing with peaceful protesters. Speaker 8: And the latest is that several hundred Russian troops, Speaker 9: have arrived at a Ukrainian military base not far from here where there is now a confrontation. Speaker 5: You just don't invade another country on phony pretext, in order to assert your interests. Speaker 10: Pro Russian demonstrators came here, they swept their way in, they even raised the Russian flag, but they've now been kicked out. The deputy mayor of this city has told the BBC that he thinks a referendum may be Speaker 11: a chance to calm tensions here to give pro Russian population Speaker 10: a chance to decide its own status. Speaker 1: Crimeans voted overwhelmingly on Sunday to break away from Ukraine and join Russia in a referendum the West condemned as Speaker 2: In Ukraine, pro Russian militants have seized a second building in the eastern city of Slavyansk, the local headquarters of the state security service. Not just the police headquarters or an administration building that's occupied. Here in Slavyansk, the whole city is under control of pro Russia forces because they've got checkpoints on all the entrances and exits. On his Facebook page, the Ukrainian interior minister promised a very tough response. He said there's a difference between protesters and terrorists. Speaker 12: Various people have said that John Brennan, the head of the CIA, traveled possibly under another name to Kyiv. And I just wanted to know, did he travel there? Does it have anything to do with this action? Just to No. Speaker 6: It it happened to only in in the some commands from Moscow. I don't know. So Speaker 2: thank you. Speaker 9: Were you in Kyiv recently? Speaker 13: I was in Kyiv A Couple Weeks ago. Yes. Speaker 9: Mhmm. Could you tell us what your mission was? Speaker 13: I was out there to interact with our Ukrainian partners and friends. Speaker 9: Ukraine's Acting President has announced the start of an anti terrorist operation in the East of the country. Today Speaker 2: was the day Kyiv sent in troops to try to rest back control of the East. Speaker 1: These were not a grass movement, though, by Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine who are not happy with the current situation. We do have difference in my country. Speaker 2: That's true. Every country has differences, Speaker 1: but we are ready to bridge all these differences. Speaker 14: Easter Sunday was anything but peaceful in this corner of Eastern Ukraine. At least two people were killed in a gunfight near Slavyansk at the Snakeshift checkpoint manned by pro Russian separatists. They say they were attacked by a convoy of ultranationalists called the right sector whose power base is in the West. Speaker 2: It's not clear what happened here, but Speaker 1: this is exactly the kind of incident that could really blow this situation up into a civil war. US officials say the Speaker 2: vice president's in Kyiv to boost economic and political assistance to authorities there. Speaker 0: Speaking to its new pro Western leaders, US vice president Joe Biden pledged to help Ukraine through the crisis, including an aid package of $50,000,000. Speaker 6: We can help in stabilizing and strengthening Ukraine's economy by helping you withstand the unfair economic pressure being thrust upon you. We stand ready to do that, and I say the American people stand ready. Speaker 13: The Ukrainian people deserve to determine their future, again, free from outside interference, and that's what The United States is trying to do. And to the extent that we here at CIA can work with our partners in Ukraine and other areas to to give them the the information, the the capabilities that they need in order to bring stability and security back to the country, we will do that. Speaker 11: So if you can't get them to talk to the table, how are you going to take back those areas that they control without the first few months of your presidency being drenched in blood? Speaker 12: Yeah. Those are helicopters now moving in on the airport. Wow. Yeah. Look. It's a heightened attack helicopter. Speaker 4: A day after Ukrainian forces launched air strikes to drive separatists from the airport, the government says it will press on until, quote, not a single terrorist is left. Speaker 1: And we will defend and clean and bring the peace in the Donbas, including the fighting against terror. This is the one of the main function of the state, to defend the people. Speaker 0: The bloody aftermath of a strike on the separatist headquarters headquarters in the heart of Luhansk. Five women killed, three men, officials say. Speaker 12: Some people were saying there was kind of there was an air strike in Luhansk, that there was some bomb dropped on the administrative headquarters of the separatists. Is it true? No. Speaker 0: The Ukrainians claim that this had nothing to do with a military aircraft which was circling overhead at the time of the attack. But from what we can tell, this looks like very heavy cannon fire from an aircraft strafing through this square. Speaker 10: No bombing Speaker 6: either by from airplanes or artillery were permitted by the the, you know, leaders of the Ministry of Defense. Speaker 15: So everything that the Ukrainians are doing, I just want to understand your position correctly. Everything that they are doing is actually self defense. Correct? Speaker 4: They're I mean, look. I mean, I don't wanna use the term self defense, but this is Ukrainian territory that they are defending. Speaker 15: US president Barack Obama has offered Kyiv financial and security support during his first meeting with his newly elected Ukrainian counterpart. Speaker 3: I so was the gallium fighting the sun. And when I ask you why, you raise your sticks and cry,

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🚨THREAD: Russia's invasion of Ukraine was *PROVOKED* by NATO expansion and a U.S.-backed 2014 coup, according to three decades of leading U.S. military and foreign policy experts: •Ambassador George Kennan •Ambassador Jack Matlock •Senator Joe Biden •Senator Bill Bradley •Senator Sam Nunn •Senator Gary Hart •Senator Gordon Humphrey •Secretary of State Henry Kissinger •Defense Secretary Robert McNamara •Defense Secretary William Perry •Defense Secretary Robert Gates •CIA Director William Burns •CIA Director Stansfield Turner •Professor Edward Herman •Professor Noam Chomsky •Professor John Mearsheimer •Prime Minister Paul Keating •Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser In this thread, I’ll dive into their warnings, showing how this reckless policy enriched the U.S. military-industrial complex, reignited the Cold War, and pushed the world closer to nuclear catastrophe than ever before. Video: @ComicDaveSmith @joerogan

Video Transcript AI Summary
Many within the national security apparatus opposed NATO expansion, fearing it would provoke Russia. Even Cold War figures like George Kennan warned against antagonizing Russia, predicting a Russian reaction that would be used to justify further expansion. In 2008, current CIA Director Burns, then ambassador to Russia, sent a cable to Condoleezza Rice, titled "Nyet Means Nyet," relaying unanimous concerns from Russians across the political spectrum that Ukrainian entry into NATO was a red line. He warned of potential instability, violence, or even civil war. Despite this, NATO announced intentions to include Ukraine and Georgia, leading to the war in Georgia. The expansionist policy, driven by the same neocons who sought to remake the Middle East, has brought us closer to World War III and nuclear war.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Last time I was on the show, I talked a lot about this, the the, like, kind of the cause of this war in Ukraine. And I put a lot of blame on American foreign policy, and I, it went super viral. And I heard back from some people who disagreed. But the the funny thing about it is is that it's not like, when I was talking about, like, NATO expansion and how much of a provocation this was to the Russians, when you were talking about, like, the good people in government Mhmm. It's it's it's not like it's just kooks or, you know, crazy libertarians like me. It was not just like Ron Paul and and Noam Chomsky and Pat Buchanan, like the outsiders who were all against NATO expansion. But the list of people within the government, within the national security apparatus who completely opposed NATO expansion is really impressive and long. There's a lot of, like, really wise people within the government who were completely against NATO expansion in the nineties when it first started. At least three secretaries of defense, Robert McNamara, Robert Gates, George w Bush, and Barack Obama's secretary of defense, William Perry, was Bill Clinton's secretary of defense and and the secretary of defense at the time, they all opposed it in, like, the strongest possible language and all explicitly for the reason that this will provoke a conflict with Russia. And they were like, George Kennan, who was the founder of the containment strategy, the old school cold warrior. There's this great interview he gave with Thomas Friedman from the New York Times. You can find it online. And it's in the nineties when they're doing the first round of NATO expansion. And he is like furious. Like his anger comes through the page when you're reading it because he's like, what are you guys doing? We won the Cold War. We won. And now you're picking a fight with Russia and this isn't Vladimir Putin's Russia. This is Boris you know. And he's like, you the this these aren't the Soviets. These aren't the communists. These are the heroes who overthrew them. Why are we picking a fight with them? And he was a cold warrior. He was like, you're throwing away my life's work. And he said and and this was a really, you know, a a crazy prediction, really ominous. He said, the people who are advocating expanding NATO are gonna continue advocating expanding it and expanding it and expanding it, and then there will be a Russian reaction. And then when there's the Russian reaction, they're gonna say, see, that's proof that we have to keep expanding it. And, damn, if he wasn't right. If he wasn't right about that. And oh, but one more little detail on this because this is really interesting is so there's in 02/2008, in February, there was a private cable that the current CIA head, Burns, Bill Burns, who's currently the head of the CIA, at the time, he was the ambassador to Russia. And so he sent a private message to Condoleezza Rice who was the secretary of state at the time. This the only reason we know about this is because of the heroic Julian Assange who dumped this. So this was not for the public. This is like what they were saying to each other. And this memo was titled Nyet Means Nyet. And it was about Ukrainian entry into NATO because this had been floated out for a while. Yeah. There you go. Basically, the whole piece is this the current CIA director telling telling Condoleezza Rice that this and he's saying it in diplomatic language. Read it for you. Yeah. So he says Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement and efforts to undermine Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership with much of the ethnic Russian community against membership could lead to a major split involving violence or at worst civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene, a decision Russia does not want to have to face. So this is now there's another memo that comes out later that year where he says and it's really it's a really interesting thing where he goes he said, Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines. And Byrnes says to Condoleezza Rice, again, not to the American public, just to let the secretary of state know, like, is what I'm saying. He goes, I've spoken to everyone over here. He goes, from the craziest right wingers to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, and it is unanimous to a man. They all agree that Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of red lines, that this is a direct threat to Russia. You cannot do this. In the same way Jack Kennedy was saying, you cannot put missiles in Cuba. You cannot bring Ukraine into your military alliance. That was Putin's then this is what they were telling him. And three months after that memo that we were just reading, so this was in February, they had the Bucharest summit where NATO announced that Georgia and Ukraine were coming into NATO. And this is what's it's like our ambassador to Russia told our secretary of state, do not do this. And then they went, we're just announcing that we're gonna do it. And three months after that was the war in in Georgia because they announced Georgia and Ukraine were coming in. And then Georgia got ballsy because they felt like they had the backing of the West and they attacked a breakaway province, South Ossetia. And they had Russian peacekeepers there and Vladimir Putin responded. That was like the first, like, real response. And he went to war with Georgia over that. And then, you know, like the stuff we talked about last time is when in 02/2014 when there was the coup backed by the west in Ukraine. You know, it's what I like about these segments too is like people can argue with like this because I know there are people arguing with me. The last time I was here, if you remember, we played the video of Gideon Rose Mhmm. Just bragging about this. And he was like, dude, I'm it's not me. These are that's the CIA director's words. Yeah. That's Gideon that's the editor of Foreign Affairs Magazine saying this. Like, this is what people in the government were saying. And, like, one more note that I'll say is that Bill Clinton's secretary of defense, he wrote about this in 02/2015. So this is after the the coup in Ukraine, the Maidan revolution, and after, Putin took Crimea. And he basically said that, like, this is all my fault and that his biggest regret was that he didn't resign over NATO expansion. He said think he said his biggest regret was that he didn't, like, do everything he could to stop it and that he didn't ultimately resign over it because this was destined to be, like, the future. That it was like, you know, people will say I know people will argue with me on this and they'll say, like, but, like, you know, NATO is just a defensive alliance. So why should Vladimir Putin care if, you know, we expand this defensive alliance? And it's like, yeah. It's a defensive alliance except for all the times it's not. You know, except for all the times it fights aggressive wars like in Serbia or Libya or Afghanistan. Other than that, I guess, they claim it's a defensive alliance. But from Vladimir Putin's perspective, this isn't a defensive voluntary alliance. This is the European wing of the American empire, the most war hungry country in the world who started seven wars in the last twenty years and slaughtered millions of people. Like from his perspective, when you put dual use rocket launchers in Poland, that's not like we're just try the the official reason is we're just trying to make sure that Iran can't nuke Europe with the nukes that they don't have. But from Putin's perspective, he's like, no. You're trying to cut down on the time it would take for a nuclear weapon to hit Moscow. And so, like, again, it's not that Putin's a good guy because he's not. And it's not that he's justified in invading Ukraine. He's not. And all the stories of, horrible shit that he you've heard that he's done there, he's probably done a lot of them. But man, it's just that all these guys, these same dumb neocons who had this policy to remake the Middle East, they're the same ones who also had the policy to expand NATO all the way to Russia's border. And man, was just the this just the dumbest, most reckless policy ever. That's now put us in a position where we are closer to a risk of World War three and nuclear war than we've ever been in my life. And for what? For what? To make sure that the Donbas region is ruled by Kyiv rather than Moscow? Like, is that really worth it? Jesus Christ.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 28, 2025 at 8:47 PM
Saved - February 28, 2025 at 9:17 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently listened to Elon Musk and Joe Rogan discussing the controversial role of government-funded NGOs. They highlighted a case where a newly formed NGO received $1.9 billion despite having no prior activity. They argued that these organizations often operate as extensions of the government, enabling actions that would otherwise be illegal. Musk pointed out how individuals can amass wealth through these non-profits, with George Soros being particularly adept at leveraging small investments into large sums. They also mentioned a study revealing connections among numerous Democrat NGOs involved in campaign contributions and propaganda.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: Elon Musk and Joe Rogan discuss George Soros and the multi-billion dollar fraud of government-funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs). "We saw one person getting $1.9 billion sent to their NGO, which was formed a year ago and had no prior activity." "If you have a government-funded NGO, you're simply a government-funded organization. It's an oxymoron." "Government-funded NGOs are a way to do things that would be illegal if they were the government, but are somehow made legal if sent to a so-called non-profit." "People become very wealthy and pay themselves enormous sums through these non-profits." "George Soros is really good at this. He figured out how to hack the system, and he's a genius at arbitrage. He figured out you can use a small amount of money to create a non-profit, then lobby the politicians to send a ton of money to that non-profit so you can take what might be $10 million and leverage it into a billion-dollar NGO." "We were covering this article about 55,000 Democrat NGOs that were contributing to campaigns, moving money around, and pushing propaganda. They were all connected, and they found out through AI." "It's like 5 or 10% good, but 90 or 95% not."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The shocking part of investigating government-funded NGOs is that small decisions lead to massive, multi-billion dollar outcomes. I saw one instance of $1.9 billion being sent to an NGO that was formed a year prior and had no prior activity. Government-funded NGOs are essentially a loophole, allowing actions that would be illegal for the government directly but become permissible through nonprofits. These nonprofits are then used for personal enrichment, with individuals cashing out and paying themselves exorbitant sums. It's a giant scam where people can establish an NGO for a relatively small investment and then lobby politicians to funnel vast sums of money into it. There might be some good that comes from them, maybe 5 or 10%, but the rest is not.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The size of it Yeah. Was when you guys first started investigating it, when you first get in, how much of it was shocking? Like, this just the size of it all. Speaker 1: Well, the the size of it all the small decisions result in multibillion dollar outcomes. So, you know, we'd see you know, it was a case where we saw one person was getting $1,900,000,000 sent to their NGO, which basically got formed about a year ago and had no prior really, no no prior activity. So they just stand up a, you know, NGO. The the these the the whole NGO thing is a is a nightmare, and it's it's a misnomer because if you have a government funded nongovernmental organization, you you're you're simply a government funded organization. It it it's a it's an oxymoron. Speaker 0: Right. It's a loophole. Speaker 1: Yes. It it basically the government funded NGOs are a way to do things that that would be illegal if they were the government, but are somehow made legal if it's sent to a so called nonprofit. But these but these nonprofits are then used to people cash out these nonprofits. They become very wealthy through nonprofits. They pay themselves enormous sums through these nonprofits. Speaker 0: That's it's so insane that that's been going on for so long. Speaker 1: It's a gigantic scam. One of the biggest maybe the biggest scam ever. Speaker 0: And how many NGOs? Speaker 1: I think there's a total number of NGOs, probably millions. But in terms of large NGOs, tens of thousands. I mean, it's it's actually it's it's it's kind of a a hack to the system where, you know, someone can get an NGO stood up for for a fairly small amount of money. Like, George Soros was really good at this. Like, he really George Soros is like a a system hacker. Like, he he figured out how to hack the system. He's a genius at arbitrage. I mean, these days, he's he's pretty old, but a genius at arbitrage. So he he figured out that you could leverage a small amount of money to create a nonprofit, then lobby the for the politicians to send a ton of money to that nonprofit so you can take what might be, you know, a $10,000,000 donation to a nonprofit to create a nonprofit and leverage that into a billion dollar not not NGO. And nonprofit is a weird word. It's just a nongovernmental organization. And and then you can the government continues to fund that every year, and it'll have a nice sounding name, like the Institute for Peace or something like that. But, really, it's a graph machine. Speaker 0: And what are their requirements with that money? What do they have to do? Speaker 1: Just really no requirements at all. Speaker 0: So they just get grants, the government just assumes that they're doing good work? Speaker 1: I think a lot of people in the government know that they are not doing good work, but they it's a giant graph machine. I mean, it could be online are, like, unpacking this. Right. You know? It almost seems fake. Speaker 0: Like, when you're seeing how we we were Yeah. We're covering this article that said 55,000 Democrat NGOs were discovered that had been contributing to campaigns and moving things around and doing pushing propaganda, and they were all connected, and they found it through AI. That you have to go through steps and steps and steps to figure out where the money's coming from. Oh, it's all funneling down to this group and this group does that. And yeah. It's a giant propaganda machine, a giant regime change machine. Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: Yes. I mean But doesn't it does it Speaker 0: do some good as well? Speaker 1: It you know, it does some good. So it's like there's it's not like 0% good. If it was it's it's if it was like if it was really 0% good, it'd be much easier to attack. So they'll or there's gonna be some percent good that they they add in there, but it's like, it might be 5% or 10% good, but 95% not.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 27, 2025 at 6:29 PM
Saved - February 28, 2025 at 6:55 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I issued subpoenas to major U.S. tech companies to investigate censorship demands from the EU, UK, and Brazil. The House Judiciary Committee is looking into how these foreign laws are impacting the free speech of American citizens. I want to see the communications where these countries pressured companies to censor content. Censorship of citizens in their own countries is one thing, but when it affects the First Amendment rights of Americans, it's a serious issue. History shows that censorship is never championed by the good guys.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: Rep. Jim Jordan has issued subpoenas to major U.S. tech companies to probe censorship demands from the EU, UK, and Brazil. The House Judiciary Committee is investigating how the EU's Digital Services Act, the UK's Online Safety Act, and Brazil's Supreme Court are affecting the free speech of American citizens. "Give us the communications from the EU, UK, or Brazil where they have asked or pressured you to censor stuff." "It's one thing if you want to censor your citizens in your country. We think that's wrong, but when you are impacting the First Amendment liberties of Americans. That's a problem. And when you pressure companies to do that Americans, and when they don't, you fine them, that's a problem as well." "When you look at history, it is never the good guys who are for censorship; it is always the bad guys."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Foreign governments are using acts like the Digital Services Act to censor information globally, pressuring companies to take down content and threatening fines if they don't comply. We've requested communications between the EU, UK, and Brazil with these companies to see what pressure has been applied. We're sending letters to the UK, EU, and Brazilian Supreme Court, putting them on notice that we're monitoring their actions. It's one thing to censor their own citizens, but impacting the First Amendment rights of Americans is a problem, especially when companies are pressured with fines. We saw this when the Biden administration pressured companies to censor, which they later regretted. Free speech is essential, and we must protect it for Americans, especially against foreign interference.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Foreign governments censoring these companies or or telling them they gotta give you Americans censored information. How can they do that? Speaker 1: Well, it's their their digital services act says and they they they use the term global spillover. So if it's actually resolving, they they wanted you to take it down globally. In fact, it was it was officials in Australia said we wanted you to they wanna stop it globally with their act. So what we did is we we've sent the communications between the EU and you or The UK or even Brazil where they have asked you to take down stuff or threaten you or pressure you to take down stuff. And frankly, if they don't take information, then it's sort of like a shakedown. Then they get fined under the digital services act in the in the European Union or the online safety act in in The UK. So this sort of go back remember, Mark Zuckerberg said, we we need help from foreign censorship that impacts Americans. And so that's what we're trying to do is first get the information. And then we're also gonna follow it up with letters to The UK, to the EU, and to Brazil Supreme Court, which has been the the the main culprit there, and say, hey, we want you to know that we've asked these companies for this information to see what you've been pressuring them to do. And hopefully, we can help stop this. I mean, it's one thing that they wanna do it to their in their country, to their citizens. We think that's wrong. But when you're impacting the First Amendment liberties of Americans, that's a problem. And when you pressure companies to do that to Americans, and then if they don't, you're gonna fine them, that's a problem as well. Speaker 0: So you're really not looking for wrongdoing at the companies. You're trying to figure out what happened with foreign governments, and I'll bet you how they pressured the Biden administration to go along with some of the stuff that they that they were doing. I bet you that's involved. Yeah. Just so you know, you know, congressman, Speaker 1: we It's exactly the same game. Speaker 0: Right. We dodged the ministry of truth. I mean, can you believe we were talking about that a couple years ago, that individual that was gonna run what we were allowed to see with the blessing of Speaker 1: the Biden administration. Governance board. Speaker 0: Right. We dodged that. So so now we're getting it from the foreign governments with with the help of the of the previous administration. It. Speaker 1: Yeah. That's exactly what that's exactly what they're trying to do, and that was what was going on. Remember last congress, we got a letter from from Mark Zuckerberg to the committee where he said, the Biden administration pressured us to censor. We did it. We're sorry. We won't do it again. And they've subsequently now changed policy and got rid of the fact checker and went to what we call the First Amendment. The best way to combat crazy speech, wrong speech is more speech. That's the First Amendment. That's what the Supreme Court has always held that the First Amendment free speech is about. So we're trying to protect that right for Americans. I remember when RFK junior testified in front of our committee two years ago, he had a great line. He said, when you look at history, it is never the good guys who are for censorship. It is always the bad guys. And that is so true. So we want we want the first amendment. We we hope free speech happens everywhere, but we certainly wanna protect the rights of Americans, and that's why we're asking for this information. And then following it up today with letters to the The UK Prime Minister with the EU, president of the EU, and the head of the supreme court in Brazil saying, hey. Here's what we sent to these companies. You need to be on notice that we're watching what you're doing. Because remember, last summer, it was the commissioner at the EU who threatened Twitter, threatened x the day they were getting ready to interview president Trump. You gotta be careful. People might get this information around the world. We they were threatening him. They they wanted him to censor that that that interview. So that is our concern. Speaker 0: And we need I I would would hate to be lulled into a false sense of security. We have the first amendment in this country when you remember vice president Vance's reception in Germany? Just to to call out some of the things that are happening there or even in The UK. I I understand that we're the only place with with the First Amendment. I mean, I've often thought some of these countries that, you know, have 11 different ruling coalitions that we can lend them the constitution, but up to this point, we have not done that. So they don't have First Amendment protections there, and we see what what the worst case scenario is if you don't. Speaker 1: Yeah. They don't have the First Amendment like we do. God, you know, thank thank the good lord we have that here in our country. But one of the hallmarks of Western civilization is the this ability to debate, to have free debate. And, you know, you make your argument. I'll make argument. Well, let's have the debate. And when you start to to diminish that, that is scary. We had a witness. She was a Canadian journalist who covered the trucker strike up there. She's testified a couple times in front of our committee. And she talked about this. She says one of the core values of Western civilization is free speech, free debate. And if you don't have that, the alternatives to settling disputes is scary, and we never wanna get there, certainly in this country, but frankly in Western culture. So this is why it's so important. And we were so close a few years ago with where the Biden administration was taking us. Thank goodness we've stopped that, but we wanna have an impact here and frankly help American companies. These guys are are literally getting. It's a shakedown if they don't follow this law that they know doesn't comply with the rights that we enjoy as Americans under the constitution. Speaker 0: Okay. Great.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 27, 2025 at 9:09 PM
Saved - February 28, 2025 at 6:55 AM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: JD Vance calls out Keir Starmer on censorship. "I said what I said." "There have been infringements on free speech that actually affect not just the British… but also impact American tech companies and American citizens." https://t.co/5XB9otHBxu https://t.co/XVSShtXv5i

Video Transcript AI Summary
We have special relationships with our friends in the UK and some European allies. However, there have been infringements on free speech that affect not just the British, which is their business, but also American tech companies and citizens, so that is something we will be discussing. We've had free speech for a very long time in the United Kingdom, and it will last for a very long time. We wouldn't want to reach across US citizens, and we don't, that's absolutely right. Speaking of free speech in the UK, I'm very proud of our history. We discussed what is so.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I I said what I said, which is that we do have a, of course, a special relationship with our friends in The UK and also with some of our European allies. But we also know that there have been infringements on free speech that actually affect not just the British. Of course, what the British do in their own country is up to them, but also affect American technology companies and by extension American citizens. So that is something that we'll talk about today at lunch. Speaker 1: We've had free speech for a very, very long time in in The United Kingdom and and it will last for a very, very long time. Speaker 0: I agree Speaker 1: with that. Well, no. I mean, I well, certainly, we wouldn't wanna reach across US citizens, and and we don't, and that's absolutely right. But in relation to free speech in The UK, I'm very proud of our our history there. Speaker 0: We discussed what is so

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: Rep. Jim Jordan has issued subpoenas to major U.S. tech companies to probe censorship demands from the EU, UK, and Brazil. The House Judiciary Committee is investigating how the EU's Digital Services Act, the UK's Online Safety Act, and Brazil's Supreme Court are affecting the free speech of American citizens. "Give us the communications from the EU, UK, or Brazil where they have asked or pressured you to censor stuff." "It's one thing if you want to censor your citizens in your country. We think that's wrong, but when you are impacting the First Amendment liberties of Americans. That's a problem. And when you pressure companies to do that Americans, and when they don't, you fine them, that's a problem as well." "When you look at history, it is never the good guys who are for censorship; it is always the bad guys."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Foreign governments are using their digital services acts to censor information for Americans, threatening fines if companies don't comply. We've requested communications between the EU, UK, and Brazil with these companies to expose this pressure. We're also sending letters to the UK, EU, and Brazil Supreme Court to put them on notice. It's one thing to censor their own citizens, but impacting American First Amendment rights is unacceptable. This echoes when Mark Zuckerberg admitted the Biden administration pressured them to censor, leading to policy changes. Free speech is essential to Western civilization. We dodged the Ministry of Truth domestically, but foreign governments are now trying to control what Americans see. We must protect the First Amendment and prevent this shakedown of American companies.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Foreign governments censoring these companies or or telling them they gotta give you Americans censored information. How can they do that? Speaker 1: Well, it's their their digital services act says and they they they use the term global spillover. So if it's actually resolving, they they wanted you to take it down globally. In fact, it was it was officials in Australia said we wanted you to they wanna stop it globally with their act. So what we did is we we've sent the communications between the EU and you or The UK or even Brazil where they have asked you to take down stuff or threaten you or pressure you to take down stuff. And frankly, if they don't take information, then it's sort of like a shakedown. Then they get fined under the digital services act in the in the European Union or the online safety act in in The UK. So this sort of go back remember, Mark Zuckerberg said, we we need help from foreign censorship that impacts Americans. And so that's what we're trying to do is first get the information. And then we're also gonna follow it up with letters to The UK, to the EU, and to Brazil Supreme Court, which has been the the the main culprit there, and say, hey, we want you to know that we've asked these companies for this information to see what you've been pressuring them to do. And hopefully, we can help stop this. I mean, it's one thing that they wanna do it to their in their country, to their citizens. We think that's wrong. But when you're impacting the First Amendment liberties of Americans, that's a problem. And when you pressure companies to do that to Americans, and then if they don't, you're gonna fine them, that's a problem as well. Speaker 0: So you're really not looking for wrongdoing at the companies. You're trying to figure out what happened with foreign governments, and I'll bet you how they pressured the Biden administration to go along with some of the stuff that they that they were doing. I bet you that's involved. Yeah. Just so you know, you know, congressman, Speaker 1: we It's exactly the same game. Speaker 0: Right. We dodged the ministry of truth. I mean, can you believe we were talking about that a couple years ago, that individual that was gonna run what we were allowed to see with the blessing of Speaker 1: the Biden administration. Governance board. Speaker 0: Right. We dodged that. So so now we're getting it from the foreign governments with with the help of the of the previous administration. It. Speaker 1: Yeah. That's exactly what that's exactly what they're trying to do, and that was what was going on. Remember last congress, we got a letter from from Mark Zuckerberg to the committee where he said, the Biden administration pressured us to censor. We did it. We're sorry. We won't do it again. And they've subsequently now changed policy and got rid of the fact checker and went to what we call the First Amendment. The best way to combat crazy speech, wrong speech is more speech. That's the First Amendment. That's what the Supreme Court has always held that the First Amendment free speech is about. So we're trying to protect that right for Americans. I remember when RFK junior testified in front of our committee two years ago, he had a great line. He said, when you look at history, it is never the good guys who are for censorship. It is always the bad guys. And that is so true. So we want we want the first amendment. We we hope free speech happens everywhere, but we certainly wanna protect the rights of Americans, and that's why we're asking for this information. And then following it up today with letters to the The UK Prime Minister with the EU, president of the EU, and the head of the supreme court in Brazil saying, hey. Here's what we sent to these companies. You need to be on notice that we're watching what you're doing. Because remember, last summer, it was the commissioner at the EU who threatened Twitter, threatened x the day they were getting ready to interview president Trump. You gotta be careful. People might get this information around the world. We they were threatening him. They they wanted him to censor that that that interview. So that is our concern. Speaker 0: And we need I I would would hate to be lulled into a false sense of security. We have the first amendment in this country when you remember vice president Vance's reception in Germany? Just to to call out some of the things that are happening there or even in The UK. I I understand that we're the only place with with the First Amendment. I mean, I've often thought some of these countries that, you know, have 11 different ruling coalitions that we can lend them the constitution, but up to this point, we have not done that. So they don't have First Amendment protections there, and we see what what the worst case scenario is if you don't. Speaker 1: Yeah. They don't have the First Amendment like we do. God, you know, thank thank the good lord we have that here in our country. But one of the hallmarks of Western civilization is the this ability to debate, to have free debate. And, you know, you make your argument. I'll make argument. Well, let's have the debate. And when you start to to diminish that, that is scary. We had a witness. She was a Canadian journalist who covered the trucker strike up there. She's testified a couple times in front of our committee. And she talked about this. She says one of the core values of Western civilization is free speech, free debate. And if you don't have that, the alternatives to settling disputes is scary, and we never wanna get there, certainly in this country, but frankly in Western culture. So this is why it's so important. And we were so close a few years ago with where the Biden administration was taking us. Thank goodness we've stopped that, but we wanna have an impact here and frankly help American companies. These guys are are literally getting. It's a shakedown if they don't follow this law that they know doesn't comply with the rights that we enjoy as Americans under the constitution. Speaker 0: Okay. Great.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 27, 2025 at 9:04 PM
Saved - February 28, 2025 at 6:55 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In March 1998, reports emerged about federal bureaucrats creatively swapping job titles to avoid layoffs from President Clinton's plan to cut 50% of supervisors. Many rebranded themselves as "team leaders" or "management support specialists," often securing pay raises in the process. Even supportive press outlets criticized this maneuvering. Today, I see a similar pattern, with legacy media launching a campaign against President Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE for attempting to reduce bureaucratic excess.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

In March 1998, reports surfaced that federal bureaucrats were swapping job titles to dodge President Clinton’s mass layoffs. "You are asking the same bureaucracy that created itself to turn around and reduce itself. They have become very creative in protecting their own skins." Clinton and Gore aimed to cut 50% of the 700,000 supervisors in the federal government. To avoid layoffs, many supervisors rebranded themselves as "team leaders," "staff assistants," or "management support specialists," all while giving themselves pay raises. Even the press, which supported Clinton’s push to cut the deficit and shrink government, called them out. Fast forward to today, and the legacy press is running an all-out propaganda campaign to malign President Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE for daring to slash bureaucratic bloat.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 14, 2025 at 11:12 PM
Saved - February 15, 2025 at 9:41 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a 40-minute compilation highlighting President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore's efforts to cut the federal workforce, eliminate agencies, and reduce spending, which ultimately erased the deficit and led to a budget surplus. Clinton's administration saw a reduction of 380,000 federal jobs through the Reinventing Government Initiative. Today, the national debt stands at $36 trillion, with interest payments soaring. I question whether the current Democratic Party can prioritize the country over party, suggesting that figures like Trump, Musk, and DOGE could lead similar reforms.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

EXCLUSIVE: A 40-minute compilation of President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore cutting the federal workforce, eliminating agencies, slashing wasteful spending and regulations, and reducing the deficit. You know, like Trump, Musk, and DOGE. 🔹 In his first weeks, Clinton ordered a 100,000-job reduction in government. 🔹 Over eight years, he cut 380,000 federal jobs—a 16% decrease. 🔹 This was largely driven by the Reinventing Government Initiative (RIGO), spearheaded by Gore to streamline operations and reduce bureaucracy. 🔹 The result? The deficit was erased, and the U.S. ran a budget surplus for the first time in decades. Today, annual interest payments on the national debt have doubled in four years, reaching $1.17 trillion—now exceeding the entire U.S. defense budget. America is $36 trillion in debt. History proves it can be done. The real question: Will D.C. Democrats and activists judges get out of the way so @realDonaldTrump, @elonmusk, and @DOGE can do it again? Can the modern Democratic Party put country over party? Because let’s be honest—DOGE is saving America from financial collapse. 🇺🇸

Video Transcript AI Summary
The American people want effective government without wasted money. To deliver this, we're overhauling how government operates, beginning with a 25% reduction in White House staff and $10 million in savings. These steps will save taxpayers $9 billion. We're reducing the federal bureaucracy by at least 100,000 positions through attrition and cutting administrative costs by 12%. We're also eliminating unproductive advisory commissions. We aim to cut inessential spending and tackle the growing deficit and debt. Government programs should be efficient, and overhead must be reduced. These changes are crucial because debt consumes tax dollars and hinders private sector growth. We're also working to cut waste, streamline processes, improve customer service, and reform procurement and personnel systems. We need a government that works better, costs less, and treats taxpayers like customers.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The people demand and deserve an active government on their side, but they don't want a government that waste money, a government that costs more and does less. They voted for change. They wanted a little a literal revolution in the way government operates, and now you and I must deliver. Yesterday, I announced the reorganization of the White House staff that will reduce our staff by 25% and cut cost by $10,000,000 per year. Today, I have called you, the members of the cabinet, together to take the next step, to begin the overhaul of government as a whole. The steps we're taking today will save the American taxpayers $9,000,000,000 They won't be easy, but they will make a difference. We have an obligation and an opportunity to change the way government works and to show that government can do more with less. Our government needs change. For the last dozen years, I've heard our leaders call loudly for less government while giving people more government and, perhaps more importantly, while giving almost no attention to better or different government, to new ways in which partnerships could be made with people in the private sector and in the state and local governments. First, I am ordering a reduction of the federal bureaucracy by at least 100,000 positions over the next four years. At least 10% of these cuts must come from senior management. The cuts must come can come from attrition. I see no need for layoffs. These cuts will make our government more efficient and more effective. The government is full of dedicated people whose hard work is being choked off by our own bureaucracy. Second, I'm ordering each federal department and agency to reduce its administrative as opposed to its program cost by 12% over the next four years. With better planning and innovation, we can make better use of the money we already have. In many agencies, overhead is too high, red tape is too thick, and the day to day operations of the agencies have not been reexamined in a very long time. I believe government can both care about people and be careful with their money. Third, I am today ordering the elimination of hundreds of unproductive and duplicative advisory commissions that have spread across this government like Kudzu. I'm asking the Office of Management and Budget to eliminate at least one third of the 700 advisory boards and commissions that were not created by Congress. From now on, agencies and departments will not be allowed to create new commissions without permissions from OMB. We simply cannot allow the federal bureaucracy to beget more bureaucracy. Change must begin at the top. That's why I cut the White House staff by 25% and ordered federal agencies to cut billions of dollars in administrative costs and to trim 100,000 federal positions by attrition. And in my budget, there'll be more than a 50 specific cuts in government spending programs. The government is the problem here. It causes inflation. It causes middle class people to have trouble. What we need is a very restricted role for government. We have run a horrendous government deficit. The deficit is now four times as big as it was in 1980. We have seen spending go up in areas that the government would have to move to control, mostly health care and then interest on the debt because when the deficit gets bigger and bigger and bigger, you spend more money on the debt. So we have reduced investment, increased the debt, moved money upward so that there's been much more inequality of income distribution. It means that we must reduce the government's debt. Why? Why? Because if the debt gets bigger and bigger and bigger, two bad things happen. Bad thing number one is that Congress spends more of your tax money every year paying interest on the debt than investing in your future. It's now up to 15¢ on the dollar if we do not change present spending patterns. When you hear people oppose the program I outlined, ask them what the cost of the status quo is. If we behave for four years if we behave for four more years like we have for the last twelve, here's what'll happen. By the end of the decade the deficit will be $650,000,000,000 a year and we'll be spending about 22¢ of every one of your tax dollars just paying interest on the debt. We'll be spending by then, because of the growth of health care costs, about 65¢ of your tax dollars on entitlements and being in Congress will be a matter of how you spend 5 or 6¢ on every dollar. The rest of it will just be rubber stamped. You just have a computer instead of Congress. I know what you're thinking. Please don't say that. It's squeezing the life out of the money you're giving up in taxes. Second reason, even more important, is the more money the government borrows every year, the less money there is for people to borrow in the private sector and the higher the cost of the money is. Just since the election, since we made it clear that there was going to be a determined effort to lower the deficit, interest rates long term have dropped considerably. I'll come back to this in a moment, but if you think about it, this year, if we pass this budget, everybody in America who borrows long term to finance a business, to finance a car, to finance a home, to finance credit card purchases. Everybody that has access to variable interest rates will have those interest rates go down. And in my judgment, virtually everybody who has credit will save more money in lower interest costs than they will pay in higher taxes. Now, that's very, very important. Now, how are we going to do this? First thing we have to do, and I mean the first, is to cut inessential government spending. I've been president four weeks and I've been president four weeks and I've found things that I wouldn't have believed. The White House, when I became president, was running on Jimmy Carter's telephone system and Lyndon Johnson's switchboard in this high true and high wage this high technology era with a procurement system that would have broken Einstein's brain. There are a lot of things that needed to be changed in the federal government. There still are. But in four weeks, we have cut the White House staff by 25% starting at the beginning of the next fiscal year and reorganized the White House so it will work more efficiently, not just cut, but serve better. We have authorized in this budget administrative cuts in every government department totaling 14% over the next four years for savings of $9,000,000,000 and there have been 150 specific cuts in government programs including programs that help a lot of good people, but I don't think we can afford at the present level anymore. All these things have constituencies, but I can tell you we are gonna have to prove that we can cut things. That when when Roosevelt talked about bold, persistent experimentation, you know what an experiment is in science. It is trying out a new thesis. If it works, you incorporate it, you build on it, you go on to the next experiment. If it doesn't work, you quit. Government has a one way experiment. Right? We're very good at starting things and absolutely terrible at stopping them. Speaker 1: If you wanna know why government doesn't work, look behind you. The answer is at least partly on those forklifts. Those forklifts hold copies of budget rules, procurement rules, and the personnel code. The personnel code alone weighs in at over 1,000 pounds. That code and the regulations stacked up there no longer help government work. They hurt it. They hurt it badly and we recommend getting rid of it. And that's one reason I'm so pleased today to give you the report of our national performance review. The report contains hundreds of suggestions just like that one, totaling a 8,000,000,000 in savings over the next five years if these recommendations are enacted. It is inspired by your vision of a government that works for people, cleared of useless bureaucracy and freed of red tape and senseless rules. This report tells us how to cut waste, cut red tape, streamline the bureaucracy, change procurement rules, change the personnel rules, and create a government that works better and costs less. Let me tell you a little bit about what we found. First, some bad news. We found that government really does not work very well in ways that will take a long time to fix. We've accomplished a lot in the last six months, but we still have a government that writes 10 pages of regulations on how to make an ashtray. We have a government that for the last twelve years has managed to spend $4 for every $3 that it takes in. That personnel code on those truck lift pallets behind us, we hire 40,000 people just to enforce that personnel code and let's not forget, much of what is wrong with government doesn't lend itself to amusing anecdotes. It's the kind of unnecessary red tape that means somebody who calls the IRS with a question gets put on on hold forever or a small business owner has to spend hours and hours filling out a completely useless form or a division head buys equipment he doesn't need because it's the end of the budget year. It's old fashioned, outdated government. It's government using a quill pen in the age of word perfect, cut wasteful spending. We can get rid of those outdated subsidies not just for mohair sweaters but in every area. We'll consolidate departments. We'll get rid of duplicate departments. We'll allow competition to bring bring about better service at lower cost. Second, it tells us how to streamline the bureaucracy and we can cut it dramatically. We can downsize government by 12%, reducing the bureaucracy by 252,000 positions. We can also change the structure of government by getting rid of the layer upon layer of management that prevents us from getting things done for the American people. Third, it tells us how to improve customer service. We can set customer service standards equal to the best in business. We can require agencies to survey customer satisfaction and measure performance based on customer satisfaction. Fourth, it tells us how to overhaul federal procurement. We can simplify it, give managers buying authority, streamline the process so they can buy more like businesses buy and save money in the process. And finally, it tells us how to overhaul the personnel system. We recommend scrapping that 10,000 page personnel code by next September, replacing it with guiding principles. We want managers to be able to hire and to fire, to promote, to reassign, and to reward excellence. If we make these changes, we can create a government that works better and costs less. We can treat taxpayers like customers. We can provide a quality product. We can hold government employees accountable and reward excellence. The National Performance Review is about change. It will get us moving a the hard work that earned them. For too long, government has been an obstacle to change but if government is powerful enough to block change, then it is powerful enough to bring change. Speaker 2: The Reinventing Government or RIGO report aims to save $108,000,000,000 over five years through eliminating scores of wasteful programs and regulations. Among the 800 recommendations, eliminating 12% of the federal workforce, merging some government agencies like the FBI, the DEA, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, closing hundreds of government offices outside Washington. Today, Speaker 1: we're releasing a formal status report on the first year of the national performance review. Here's the report in CD ROM version. It's also available on the Internet, and for some of us, there is also a book. Speaker 0: Since I became president, the size of the federal workforce has been reduced by 71,000 positions. In three years, we'll have the smallest federal workforce since president Kennedy was here to go with three years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since president Truman was here. I'm proud to announce some more good news today. At the General Services Administration, administrator Johnson saved $1,200,000,000 by carefully reviewing construction projects that had been approved and not yet built. In other words, buildings we really didn't need. And just today, the GSA is announcing its saved $23,000,000 simply by managing the government's motor pools more efficiently. Today, the secretary of defense set a goal to cut in half the time it takes to complete internal business processes from hiring workers to building new weapon systems. This is very important. Senator Glenn has worked for years on procurement reform. If we're going to maintain the national security at a time when we have to impose budget discipline, we must find ways to make these dollars go further. We can't simply abandon our technological lead, our readiness, our preparedness, all the things that have been so carefully build up over the last sixteen or seventeen years. At the office of management and budget, director designate Rildon tells me the federal government will offer buyouts to another 40,000 employees at the beginning of the new fiscal year next month. I am more convinced now than ever that we have to keep doing this, that we have to make this reinventing government a permanent process, and that there are serious structural issues which still have to be addressed. Washington needs to work for ordinary middle class Americans, and in order to do that, we have got to find a way to open this process up so that the public interest can always overwhelm particular interest in matters of great importance. We have worked very hard to cut government spending and to bring the deficit under control. The government debt increased by four times during the twelve years before I took office. I wanna remind you what that burden means. It means that this April, when people make out their checks to the government, 28¢ of every dollar of federal income tax will be necessary to pay interest on the debt accumulated between 1981 and the day I was inaugurated. It is our responsibility to turn that around, and we have been working to fulfill it. We have already passed budgets that cut the deficit by $700,000,000,000, eliminate 100 government programs, and cut over 300 others. A major part of this endeavor has been the reinventing government initiative led by the vice president. I have worked hard to reduce and to redirect governments for many years since my early days as governor of my state when we were one of the first states in the country to adopt a statewide total quality management program which resulted in cutting regulation and paperwork, eliminating agencies and departments and programs that were unnecessary. Now we are cutting things that can be cut. We propose to stop doing things that government doesn't do very well and that don't need to be done by government, and we believe we should increase our efforts where government can make a real positive difference in the lives of ordinary Americans. We have to change yesterday's government and make it work for the America of today and tomorrow. In the last two years, we have made a good beginning. We have begun to shrink the federal government's bureaucracy to its smallest size in thirty years. The workforce of the federal government is already almost 100,000 below where it was on the day we were inaugurated. We are on the way to reduction of 272,000 positions, cuts that are freeing up money to invest in our people. For example, every dollar that goes to fund the crime bill, which is a direct transfer of investment to our local communities at the grassroots level, comes from the cuts we are making. Our administration has just completed a review in which we have identified $24,000,000,000 in cuts in bureaucracy, red tape and outmoded programs to help to do this. And we are committed to continuing the freeze on discretionary spending which will save another $52,000,000,000 in the next five year budget cycle. We will do even more to shrink yesterday's government. I have called on the vice president to review every single government program and department for further possible reductions. He's also going to review the federal regulatory process, and we have spent a good deal of time on that already so that we can get better results for the public with less interference in their lives. Put customers first, Speaker 1: cut red tape, delegate authority, and cut back to basics. That is how we will decide what government should stop doing. We'll put customers first in this review by getting them involved at every stage of the process and listening carefully to their opinions and ideas. We will stop producing red tape and start paying more attention to results than we do to processes. And as you have asked, mister president, we're going to also see about in reinventing the government's approach, to regulatory issues and the regulatory process. That's well underway also. We will stop making so many decisions in Washington that would be better made by state government, local government, or individual citizens, and we will replace Washington interference with local opportunity. By next week, there will have been 98,000, positions eliminated. We are we were previously committed before today's announcements to an additional, 175,000 for a total of 273,000. There will the the FTE, savings, associated with, today's announcements will be over and above or under, the limits already announced. But, but the specifics will flow from the detailed plans in each agency and department. Speaker 3: Mister Vice President, could you spell out the $52,000,000,000 freeze in discretionary spending in 1999 and February? Where will those cuts be made? Specifically, which departments will be frozen? Speaker 1: That is closely related to, the president's, other announcement today, which is that he is directing me to look at every single department and agency and program and take the same approach that we have been taking, to reinvent the entire process and to eliminate programs and commissions agencies that are not needed. The the 52,000,000 that comes from the freeze on domestic spending is, in essence the bogey that we, will have to hit for the remainder of the the, the reinvention process. Now there are other related efforts at cutting and saving that, will also enable us to hit that, 52 bogey. Speaker 0: How did he come up? I ran for president promising to put the American economy back on track and to cut the federal deficit in half. In 1993, without a single Republican vote, the Democratic congress adopted our deficit reduction plan. It was a plan that shrunk the deficit while investing in our people, their education, and the technological future of America. We took firm steps toward a balanced budget, but we did it in a way that honors our values of responsibility and opportunity, work and family, a strong American community, and a strong America around the world. We did deficit reduction consistent with our values, and it was very good economic policy. Today, America is on the move. The economy is growing. The American people have produced seven and a half million new jobs, two and a half million new homeowners, over 2,000,000 new small businesses, and the lowest combined rates of unemployment and inflation in twenty five years. And I am pleased to announce today that the deficit in fiscal year ninety five is $164,000,000,000 cut almost in half in just three years. The deficit was projected to be $3.00 $2,000,000,000 as you can see here before our plan was adopted. It was $290,000,000,000 in 1992. We began immediately to bring it down. It came down to $2.55, to $2.00 3, now to $1.64 in these three years. This is the first time since Harry Truman was president that the deficit has actually dropped three years in a row. The plan has worked better than we projected that it would, and as the chart shows, the deficit reduction is for real. Now it is time to finish this job, to take that red line down to zero. We must balance the budget to take the burden of debt off of our children and to free up more funds for investing in our future. The most important thing about this, folks, is that America is moving in the right direction. The deficit is coming down. The jobs are going up. The crime rate is down. The welfare rolls are down. The food stamp rolls are down. The faults in child support are down. The poverty rate is down. The teen pregnancy rate is down. Small businesses are up. Business failures are down. We are moving in the right direction. We know what strategy works. The strategy that works is to reduce the deficit and invest in people, invest in technology, and grow the economy. Why would we abandon a proven strategy that works and it will take us all the way to a balanced budget? Look. We have proven what works. Cut and invest works. Reduce the deficit, but invest in our future works. It's quite conceivable that if my budget were adopted, just as I proposed it, that economic growth could take the deficit down even more quickly. But I didn't estimate that is that my budget is premised on, the economy growing at about the same rate it has for the last twenty five years with the profits of of our business enterprises at about the same level. If the same thing happens in the next three to five years has happened in the last three, we would have quicker growth and a quicker resolution of this. But that's why I think we should not be pessimistic about the future. But if the the more we can get this deficit down, the lower our the lower interest rates will be for people in the private sector. That means they'll borrow more money. They'll build more houses. They'll have more home mortgages. They'll they'll invest in more plant and equipment. The economy will grow quicker. Also, the lower our interest payments on our own debt will be, which means we'll have more funds to invest in education, health care, and the environment. The annual deficit and the total national debt had quadrupled in the twelve years before I took office. In two years, we have turned that around. In 1993, we passed the single largest deficit reduction package in American history, reducing the deficit over five years by $5.00 $5,000,000,000 When you take into account improved performance of the economy and reduced interest rates in 1993, the deficit reduction will exceed $600,000,000,000 over this five year period. We did it by returning something to Washington that had been missing for too long, real discipline and honest numbers in the budgeting process. We did it unfortunately last year and the year before without any votes from members of the other party and I hope now we will be working together to keep the deficit under control and keep the economic growth going. We cut the federal government by more than 100,000 positions in the last two years. We're on the way to reducing it with laws already passed by 272,000 positions, making us the smallest it's been in more than thirty years. We cut taxes for 15,000,000 working families with 40,000,000 Americans in it, about an average of 1,000 apiece for families of four with incomes under $26,000 this year. We made nine of 10 of our small businesses eligible for tax reductions. We invested in the tools our people need in education and training and technology. We did more to open markets in the last two years than in any previous period in a generation. The results are clear. The deficit that two years ago was projected to be over $400,000,000,000 a year by the end of the decade is now under $200,000,000,000 It's going down for three years in a row for the first time since Truman was president. The economic plan we have already passed will cut the deficit in half as a percentage of our economy. We have almost 6,000,000 new jobs, the biggest year in economic growth in 1994 in a decade with 93% of those jobs in the private sector. That's the largest percentage of private sector job growth in fifty years. We have the lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation in twenty five years. I am proud of this record and the budget we send today builds on that foundation. In the third year of our strategy, we are adding $81,000,000,000 more to deficit reduction. That's nearly $600,000,000,000 in real deficit cuts and in addition to that, of course, there is more, as I said, coming as a result of the economic growth of the last two years. This budget provides more than a dollar in deficit reduction for every dollar that goes into the tax cuts I will discuss in a moment. If congress gives me the line item veto, I will find even more cuts. The budget already provides a hundred and $44,000,000,000 in hard budget savings. Behind me, you can see in black and white the 400 programs that this budget will eliminate or consolidate. The terminations of about a 30 programs here. And over here, the consolidation of 270 more. Those 271 programs will be distilled down into 27. We are also restructuring five major agencies as a part of the second round of reinventing government, the vice president will discuss in a moment, to save $23,000,000,000 And our reinventing government effort is looking at all the other agencies for further opportunities that might emerge in the course of the budget debate this year. Speaker 1: One of the ways this has been possible is through reinvention. In the first phase of the national performance review, we set out to make government work better and cost less. And this budget reflects continuing progress toward the goals outlined in the first national performance review. That work is ongoing. In addition to the federal workforce reductions that the present president mentioned a moment ago and that are reflected on the graph behind Bob and Laura there, we are also seeing and incidentally, we're gonna we're we're now on a track to do that even more rapidly, and a 2,000 reductions already, another 70,000 already locked in, quite a few more on the way. For example, the 40,000 alone with the privatization or the incorporation of the air traffic control operations. This budget also reflects significant streamlining in a number of agencies that have cut headquarters and obsolete field offices. For example, the custom service is cutting its headquarters by one third and abolishing seven regional offices. The agriculture department is cutting over 1,200 field offices. The interior department will cut its headquarters staff by nearly 50% as part of its overall restructuring, and the labor department will close many regional and field offices as it streamlines for the 20 century. We've also made changes to make the federal government more results oriented. More than a hundred agencies and departments have set for themselves more than 1,500 customer service standards by which they can be held accountable and with which they pledge what they will each do, to serve the public according to measurable standards. Agencies are measuring their results and reporting on their progress. To date, the administration has designated 75 pilots covering more than 400,000 employees. In the future, we will use performance information in the development of budget priorities. The administration is also committed to using technology to make government work better. One quick example, currently 38 states are working to implement electronic benefits transfer, which will help deliver nearly $500,000,000,000 in benefits with great savings in monetary terms and also large reductions in the rate, of fraud. In the second phase of the National Performance Review, which started, in December, we actually announced it back in September, but the formal beginning was in December. We plan to continue our efforts to improve how government works and add a second focus by asking what should government be doing. The second phase of the Performance Review has, three elements. It is examining every agency and program with an eye toward whether they should continue to exist, and if they can be privatized or consolidated or if they can be streamlined significantly so they can provide better service at lower costs. We have some early results and they are reflected in the budget being unveiled today. For example, this budget proposes to terminate the Interstate Commerce Commission, cancel highway demonstration projects, privatize portions of the National Weather Service, privatize the Helium program, rely on the private sector for NASA communication with spacecraft, expand lease authority in our national parks so they're run-in a more entrepreneurial way, and privatize the Naval Petroleum Reserve. Several agencies such as HUD, Transportation, and Energy have radically restructured their operations. At HUD, sixty programs have been collapsed into three flexible performance based funds. At the Department of Energy, significant efficiencies efficiencies have been outlined in the areas of nuclear waste cleanup and management. And at the Department of Transportation, the old rigid structure based on modes of transportation has been replaced by a more modern and efficient organization. Finally, this budget takes a big step in providing more flexibility to state and local governments by consolidating more than 270 programs into 27 performance partnerships that are based on trust and accountability, trust and the ability of state and local governments to get the job done without federal micromanagement, and accountability to the federal government for the spending of federal dollars. They will tie federal aid to performance, not to compliance with an administrative process. The largest of these new partnerships will combine 70 job training programs into one system, combine 108 public health and human services programs into 16, and combined 12 specific environmental grants into one. Together, the changes from the second phase of reinventing government total over $26,000,000,000 and there is much more on the way. In the next few months, we will continue to improve and streamline and reinvent the federal government. Now let me say in closing that reinventing government is not all about cutting. It's also about making the government, we must have, work better. Anybody can propose to cut departments or to take a certain percentage out of the government. But as, some of our, adversaries on Capitol Hill are finding, doing the actual review and separating out what can be cut from what must not be cut is a delicate and difficult business. And I don't think they've put any cuts on the table yet. President Clinton has done just that and will continue to do just that. This budget is a statement of his courage in taking on the tough job of creating a government that works better and costs less. Now who goes next? Speaker 0: A special word now to those who work for our federal government. Today, the federal workforce is 200,000 employees smaller than it was the day I took office as president. Our federal government today is the smallest it has been in thirty years, and it's getting smaller every day. Most of our fellow Americans probably don't know that. There's a good reason. A good reason. The remaining federal workforce is composed of hardworking Americans who are now working harder and working smarter than ever before to make sure the quality of our services does not decline. We know big government does not have all the answers. We know there's not a program for every problem. We know and we have worked to give the American people a smaller, less bureaucratic government in Washington. And we have to give the American people one that lives within its means. The era of big government is over. America has balanced the budget. In fact, as the chart shows, the achievement of the American people will not stop there. OMB projects that the budget surplus will be $39,000,000,000 this year, the largest dollar surplus in our history. The largest surplus as a share of the economy in more than forty years. America can now turn off the deficit clock and plug in the surplus clock. Given the speed with which our nation has reached this remarkable milestone, it is perhaps all too easy to forget how hard it was and how far we've come. Just six years ago, because of the drag of deficits, our people were running in place. Our nation was falling behind. Interest rates were high and so was unemployment. On the day I took office, the deficit was projected this year to be $350,000,000,000. How did this greatest projected deficit in history turn into the greatest projected surplus? The old fashioned way, we earned it. Our nation earned it as a result of hard work by the American people. And as the vice president said, we earned it here in Washington with the help of two visionary actions in congress. First, the courageous vote by the Democrats in 1993 in the midst of withering, extreme criticism that led to a cut in the deficit of 90%. And then the truly historic bipartisan balanced budget agreement passed by congress last year that finished the job. I think it would also be wrong if I didn't mention as mister Liu did that the reinventing government efforts headed by the vice president played a major role. We not only have the smallest government since the Kennedy administration with more than 300,000 fewer people. We also have savings in excess of a hundred and $30,000,000,000, during the budget period as a result of those efforts. And mister vice president, I am very grateful for what you have done. Now that we're about to have the first surplus since Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, we face a crucial decision about what to do with it. We can use these good times to honor those who've put in a lifetime of work and prepare for the future retirement of the baby boomers by saving the Social Security system for generations to come, or we can give in to the temptation in this election year to squander our surpluses the moment they start coming in. I think the choice is clear. We got to where we are today with 4.3% unemployment, more than 15,000,000 new jobs, the lowest inflation in over 30, low interest rates, high growth, the highest homeownership in history by doing what was right for the American economy over the long run. That is what we should do now.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 14, 2025 at 4:50 PM
Saved - February 15, 2025 at 9:37 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
During the Munich Security Conference, I expressed concern about the rising censorship in Europe. I highlighted the EU's plans to shut down social media during civil unrest and police raids on citizens for anti-feminist comments. I noted Sweden's conviction of a Christian activist for Koran burnings, emphasizing that free expression is increasingly restricted. Additionally, I pointed out the UK's alarming trend of limiting conscience rights, where even private prayer could be deemed illegal. Overall, I fear that free speech is under serious threat across Europe.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

JD Vance warns Europe against censorship during Munich Security Conference "I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warned citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be ‘hateful content.’ Or to this very country, where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of ‘combating misogyny on the internet: a day of action.’ I look to Sweden, where two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Koran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. As the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression 'do not, in fact, grant, and I’m quoting a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.' And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britain’s, in particular, in the crosshairs. Just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called ‘safe access zones,’ warning them that even private prayer within their homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime. In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Innovation and creativity cannot be forced, much like thoughts and beliefs. Looking at Europe, it's concerning to see actions like EU commissars threatening to shut down social media for "hateful content," police raids for "anti-feminist" comments, and the conviction of a Christian activist for Quran burnings. Even more alarming is the UK, where a man was charged for silently praying near an abortion clinic, and Scotland warned citizens that private prayer within their homes could be illegal. Free speech is retreating across Europe. Ironically, the loudest voices for censorship sometimes come from my own country. The prior administration bullied social media companies to censor "misinformation," like the lab leak theory of the coronavirus. In Washington, under Donald Trump's leadership, we will defend your right to speak freely, even if we disagree with your views.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build. As it turns out you can't mandate innovation or creativity just as you can't force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe and we believe those things are certainly connected. And unfortunately when I look at Europe today it's sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the cold wars winners. I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warn citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest. The moment they spot what they've judged to be quote, hateful content. Or to this very country where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti feminist comments online as part of quote, combating misogyny on the Internet, a day of action. I look to Sweden where two weeks ago the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Quran burnings that resulted in his friend's murder. And as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden's laws to supposedly protect free expression do not in fact grant, and I'm quoting, a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief. And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends The United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons in particular in the crosshairs. A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Connor, a 51 year old physiotherapist and an army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes. Not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied simply, it was on behalf of the unborn son he and his former girlfriend had aborted years before. Now the officers were not moved, Adam was found guilty of breaking the government's new buffer zones law which criminalizes silent prayer and other actions that could influence a person's decision within 200 meters of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution. Now I wish I could say that this was a fluke, a one off crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person. But no. This last October just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so called safe access zones. Warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime. In Britain and across Europe, free speech I fear is in retreat. And in the interest of comedy my friends, but also in the interest of truth, I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe, but from within my own country. Where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so called misinformation. Misinformation like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaked from leaked from a laboratory in China, our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth. So I come here today not just with an observation, but with an offer. And just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that. In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 10, 2025 at 12:26 AM
Saved - February 11, 2025 at 3:10 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I explored archived USAID-funded Internews Annual Reports, revealing how this nonprofit influenced regime change in Eastern Europe to support NATO expansion while later advocating for censorship in the West. Initially, Internews focused on promoting free speech and independent media in post-Soviet states, playing a key role in events like the Rose Revolution and Ukraine's Orange Revolution. However, after 2016, it shifted to calling for online censorship, raising questions about its legitimacy and the true beneficiaries of its efforts—NATO, defense contractors, or the American public.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

🧵THREAD: I dug up archived USAID-funded Internews Annual Reports. Here’s how this nonprofit played a crucial role in regime change across Eastern Europe in service of NATO expansion—then turned its tactics inward, calling for censorship in the West. A deep dive👇 https://t.co/kyATSAFabg

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

1/ Internews, heavily funded by USAID ($470M), spent decades building media networks, training journalists, and promoting “free speech” in former Soviet states. But their mission wasn’t neutral. It was about shaping narratives to support NATO expansion. https://t.co/mDx6h2kJs2

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Let’s start in 2001. ⬇️ 2/ The 2001 Internews Annual Report states: "Internews is one of the more successful agents of change in the former Soviet Union." - The Washington Post They worked to establish independent media in Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia, and beyond—fueling the decline of Moscow’s influence.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

3/ Internews wasn’t just promoting “free press.” Their own documents admit: "INTERNEWS does not just produce television and radio shows... it is more interested in using broadcast media as a lever to effect social and political transformation." Translation: Regime change.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

4/ In the 1990s, Internews partnered with the Soros Foundation to fund media organizations in post-Soviet nations, playing a pivotal role in the color revolutions of the 2000s in Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine. Their goal? To steer these countries toward NATO and Western control. https://t.co/mtCtkBaZKZ

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

5/ During Georgia’s Rose Revolution, Internews funded and trained journalists at Rustavi-2 TV, the leading channel driving the uprising. "Media was very good at informing the public about what was going on, and it had a huge role in calling people onto the streets." – Marc Behrendt, former Internews director for Georgia Internews Annual Report 2004: "A NON-VIOLENT uprising in November of 2003 led to the resignation of the president of Georgia in what became known as the “Rose Revolution.” One of the star players in this historic event was the gutsy, independent television station Rustavi2. As the only broadcaster willing to stand up to the government and inform the public about vote fraud and the protests that followed, Rustavi2 helped catalyze the mass mobilization of the population." "Since starting work in Georgia in 1994, Internews has provided extensive support to Rustavi-2, including training staff in investigative journalism and news reporting skills, and providing management, technical, and legal advice. When the government unsuccessfully tried to shut down the station in 1995 and again in 1996, Internews Georgia organized local and international campaigns in support of the station." "In July of 2004, Rustavi-2 became an associate member of Internews International."

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

6/ By 2003, in Ukraine, Internews had: ▪️ Conducted 220 media training programs ▪️ Trained over 2,800 journalists ▪️ Produced 220+ TV programs & 1,000+ radio programs ▪️ Funded Telekritika, an online outlet central to the 2004 Orange Revolution The result? A Western-aligned Ukraine.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

7/ By 2005, Internews proudly stated they produced Proyav Chasu, one of Ukraine’s most popular TV programs, which "highlighted popular demonstrations against election fraud" during the Orange Revolution. They weren’t just reporting the revolution. They were fueling it. https://t.co/i0M3KrW6Bq

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

8/ By 2007, Internews had: ▪️ Trained 60,000 journalists worldwide ▪️ Established 2,500+ independent media outlets ▪️ Reached an audience of nearly 1 BILLION people ▪️ Advocated for media laws in 21 countries ▪️ Operated in 70 countries with offices in 42 cities This was media influence at an unprecedented scale.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

9/ The Washington Post described them as: "One of the more successful agents of change in the former Soviet Union." But was this really about “democracy”? Or about advancing U.S. and NATO geopolitical goals through information warfare? https://t.co/5TCedKtajy

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

10/ Let’s step back to their origins: 🔹 In the 1980s, Internews helped facilitate U.S.-Soviet spacebridges—live, uncensored TV dialogues during the Cold War. 🔹 By the 1990s, they pivoted to supporting U.S. funded media in post-Soviet states to counter Moscow’s narrative. https://t.co/SwdzDX6Kbb

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

11/ Internews even admitted its role in paving the way for NATO: In May 1990, Internews co-sponsored a meeting to discuss “the future architecture of Europe, including the question of allowing a unified Germany into NATO.” This meeting, held at Crottorf Castle, was organized with the Soros-funded Institute for East-West Studies.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

12/ Fast forward to 2016. 🔹 After Trump’s election & Brexit, Internews pivoted. 🔹 The same NGO that once championed free speech as a weapon against foreign governments began calling free speech online dangerous and pushed for censorship in the West. 🔹 Internews CEO Jeanne Bourgault pushed for a global advertising "exclusion list" to censor "disinformation" at the World Economic Forum. This coincided with the 𝕏 advertising boycott, targeting Elon Musk's platform, which had been at the forefront of defending free speech online.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Disinformation is profitable, so we must trace the money. A significant portion of the funding for harmful content comes from the global advertising industry. We need to collaborate with this industry to redirect ad dollars. This can involve creating exclusion and inclusion lists to target funding towards accurate and reliable news and information. We must challenge the global advertising industry worldwide to prioritize funding for truthful and relevant content.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Disinformation makes money, and it's that's one of the we need to follow that money, and we need to work with the and particularly the global advertising industry that a lot of those dollars go to pretty bad, bad content. And so you can work really hard on exclusion lists or inclusion lists to sort of really try to focus ad dollars and challenge the global advertising industry all around the world to focus their ad dollars towards the good news and information, the good the accurate and relevant news and information.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

13/ Internews—now collaborating with the USAID-funded World Economic Forum—shifted its focus to advertising boycotts to control online discourse. What was once used to overthrow foreign governments was now turned against American citizens. Their new narrative? The internet must be policed to stop “misinformation” and “disinformation.” The same information warfare they used abroad was now turned inward—targeting political dissidents, alternative media, and anyone challenging establishment narratives. They didn’t stop with media manipulation abroad. They brought those tactics home.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

14/ This raises critical questions: ▪️ Did USAID-Internews’ regime change efforts actually help the people in these countries or the American people? ▪️ Or did they serve NATO expansion, lucrative defense contracts, and Western corporate interests at the expense of the people? Because when you look at the results, it’s clear: ▪️ Russia and China grew closer, accelerating a multipolar world. ▪️ Ukraine became a battleground between Western interests and Russia, devastating the country, and risking a nuclear war. ▪️ Eastern European nations were pulled into NATO and EU structures, often at the cost of their own sovereignty. ▪️ American taxpayers funded this, but never saw any direct benefit—only endless wars and skyrocketing military spending.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

16/ The irony is staggering. Internews was founded during the Cold War to foster open dialogue between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. It was meant to reduce hostilities between East and West. Instead, USAID and Western elites transformed it into a propaganda machine for NATO expansion, which ignited the second Cold War.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

17/ But here’s where it gets worse. It’s bad enough that USAID-funded media manipulation helped expand NATO, escalate global tensions, and contribute to war. But after Trump and Brexit, when this same public-private partnership turned inward—censoring political opposition and online free speech in the West—it lost all legitimacy. ▪️ Why should American taxpayers fund organizations calling for the censorship of American taxpayers? ▪️ Why is a foreign-focused regime change machine now deciding what Americans can and cannot say online?

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

18/ The reality is, USAID didn’t just fund foreign interventions. They helped create a global information control apparatus—one that can be turned on any population at any time. What started in Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine came home to target Brexit supporters, MAGA voters, and dissenting voices on 𝕏. First, they “protected democracy” abroad. Then, they “protected democracy” by censoring you.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

19/ The final question: Who has really benefited from USAID funding Internews across Eastern Europe? ▪️ The people in these countries? ▪️ American taxpayers? ▪️ Or NATO, the defense contractors, and Western elites? At what point do Americans start questioning why they’re funding this? Because the USAID bill? It exceeds $40 billion per year—funding not just foreign regime change and domestic censorship, but also the Wuhan lab, the World Economic Forum, and the reignition of the Cold War. And the costs keep rising.

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 10, 2025 at 8:13 PM
Saved - February 11, 2025 at 1:38 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe that Elon Musk and DOGE are exposing significant waste and corruption within USAID. It's concerning how beliefs can be manipulated through media, with USAID acting as a powerful entity shaping public perception. They're using taxpayer dollars to fund NGOs that attack differing ideologies. The revelations so far highlight not just financial mismanagement but also manipulation of public opinion on critical issues like COVID and immigration. The focus should be on the corruption being uncovered, especially given the alarming government spending and deficit.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Joe Rogan: Elon Musk and DOGE Are Uncovering Unbelievable Waste and Corruption at USAID "Beliefs—and this is where USAID comes into play—can be manipulated. They can be manipulated by a mass psyop conducted through the media. USAID is the coffin where the vampire sleeps. Maybe that coffin hands out sandwiches in Guatemala occasionally, but for the most part, what they are doing is controlling the federal government and shaping the mindset, the zeitgeist, of the population." "They're funding all this wacky sh*t, openly attacking and trying to censor people who go against it, and they're spending your tax dollars to do so. Your tax dollars get funneled to NGOs, which then start attacking people with differing ideologies." "You have to rip the Band-Aid off, and the only way to do that is for someone to get into those books. What they've found so far is very enlightening—but it's not good at all. They're not just saying he's uncovering unbelievable waste and corruption or exposing a circular loop of funding." "He's revealing manipulation of public perception on a wide variety of issues, including COVID vaccines, the border, and many other topics. They were actively involved in mind-fcking the entire country, and no one on the left is addressing that. So, they're losing more and more credibility." "The only thing they can cling to is the claim that he has access to people's Social Security numbers and private information. Well, so does the entire government. The real question is: Is he going to do something bad with it?" "No—what he's doing is uncovering insane corruption. That should be the primary concern for everyone. OMG, we have this enormous deficit, spending is completely out of control, and look at what it's being spent on. This is the first time we're ever getting a peek inside the coffin."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Dissenting opinions are immediately labeled as "Nazi," revealing a focus on ideological conformity over genuine beliefs. Organizations like USAID, while seemingly providing aid, manipulate core standards and beliefs through media manipulation—controlling the government and public mindset. Taxpayer dollars fund this, enabling attacks on those with differing views. The current situation reveals massive waste, corruption, and manipulation on issues like COVID and the border. This manipulation is largely ignored by the left, leaving them clinging to weak counterarguments. The focus should be on the uncovered corruption and uncontrolled spending, rather than baseless accusations. We're finally seeing the extent of the problem, and it necessitates a complete eradication of the corrupt ideology and its institutional presence.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If you say something against them, you're a Nazi. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 0: So it's fucking through the looking glass Yeah. Like, completely. But it just shows you how it's really just about con conforming to an ideology. It's not about a real core set of standards and beliefs. Because the core set of standards and beliefs, and this is where, like, things like USAID come into play, they can be manipulated. They can be manipulated by a mass psyop that you do through the media. Mhmm. And that is the core thing of this what we're getting to is essentially the fucking coffin where the vampire sleeps. And that's what USAID is. They found the coffin. You know? And maybe that coffin does hand out sandwiches in Guatemala or some occasionally. But for the most part, what they're doing is they're controlling the entire federal government, and they're controlling the mindset, the zeitgeist, of the population. And they're funding all these people that go along with this wacky shit. And they're attacking. They're openly attacking and trying to censor people who go against it. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 0: And they're spending your tax dollars to do so. Yeah. Your tax dollars get funneled to NGOs. NGOs start attacking people that have differing ideologies. Speaker 1: Yeah. Usually and and but they did become so disconnected from the average person that that my advice would be to you know, they say, like, oh, normies did this is one of the things I'm hearing online. Like, normies did didn't vote for this, what Elon's doing with those six. Like, I need a a movie about what these kids are doing, by the way. They they didn't vote for this. I'm like, yes. They did. Nor normies didn't vote for. You're saying normies wanted normalcy, so they voted for Trump? Like, that doesn't even people knew what they were getting. They want something to happen. Speaker 0: You have to rip the Band Aid off. And the only way to rip the Band Aid off, someone's gotta get into those fucking books and find out what's going on. And what they found so far is very enlightening, and it's not good. It's not good at all. So anybody that's not commenting on the, hey. You know what? They are finding a lot of unbelievable waste and corruption. Yeah. But also, he shouldn't be able to do that. Like, you're you're they're not even saying he's finding insane waste and corruption. Yeah. And he's finding this circular loop of funding, and he's finding this manipulation of public perception on a wide variety of issues, including COVID, vaccines, and Yeah. The border, all these different things. They they were vaccines, and Yeah. The border, all these different things. They they were actively involved in mind fucking the entire country, and no one's addressing that from the left. So they're losing more and more credibility. So all they can cling to is he has access to people's Social Security numbers and private information. Like, really? Is that it? Speaker 1: Who doesn't, by the way? Speaker 0: The whole government does, by the way. But he's saying that he's is he gonna do something bad with it? Like, what is he doing? What what he's doing is uncovering insane corruption. That should be the primary thought Yeah. That everybody has is, oh my god. We have this enormous deficit, but spending is completely out of control. And look what it's being spent on because this is the first time we're ever getting a fucking peek into the coffin. Yeah. We didn't we didn't know. We're like, we see it, it's in the dark room, we hear the the fucking organ. We didn't know what was in the coffin. Now, we do. Speaker 1: And I do it is I do think you have to like salt the earth to where all the DEI stuff is. They're like, oh, they're getting they're going too far and blah. I'm like, no, you gotta root this shit out. It needs to be gone. Like, it's too much. Like you said, it is an ideology. So it's harder to kind of change the minds of people who have been indoctrinated with this in colleges and schools, but get it out of the institution.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 2, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 10:32 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I questioned Samantha Power about whether USAID funded coronavirus research in Wuhan, specifically at the Academy of Military Medical Research. I highlighted a 2018 proposal from the Wuhan Institute of Virology that aimed to create a SARS-like coronavirus with a furin cleavage site, which resembles COVID-19. I asked for transparency regarding any similar research proposals that were granted or denied, expressing frustration over the lack of information and noting that 25 Senators have reached out without receiving a response.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

.@RandPaul Asks Samantha Power: 'Did USAID Fund Coronavirus Research In Wuhan China?' "Should we be funding the Academy of Military Medical Research in China? ...Some of the research proposals in 2018 were the Wuhan Insitute of Virology asking for money to create a virus with a furin cleavage site. A SARS-like coronavirus with a furin cleavage site. That's exactly what COVID-19 turned out to be. So we want to know if there were other research proposals you either granted or denied that were in the same vain as creating viruses that could have become COVID-19. We can't tell because you won't give us information... I now have 25 Senators that have sent you a letter, and you aren't responding... You are being dishonest."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Did USAID fund coronavirus research in Wuhan, China? We did not fund gain of function research. However, the PREDICT program, which ended in 2019, did involve funding that may have reached the Wuhan Institute of Virology. There are concerns about transparency regarding grants and funding, especially related to the Academy of Military Medical Sciences in China. Despite requests for records on the PREDICT program, USAID has not provided the necessary documents. The lack of information raises suspicions about what research was conducted, particularly proposals related to creating viruses similar to COVID-19. There is frustration over the perceived stonewalling by the agency, as senators seek clarity on funding and research proposals linked to coronaviruses in China.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Ms. Powers, did USAID fund coronavirus research in Wuhan, China? Speaker 1: We did not fund gain of function research Speaker 0: as you know. Speaker 1: That's not the question. Speaker 0: The question is, did you fund coronavirus research in Wuhan, China? Speaker 1: Before my time, there was the PREDICT program with which you're familiar, which ended in China in 2019. Speaker 0: This is a $200,000,000 program and the GAO has also identified that some of these grants went directly to the Wuhan Institute of Virology where there is a suspicion that the lab leak began that began the pandemic. Has USAID awarded funds to the Academy of Military Medical Sciences in China? Speaker 1: Not to my knowledge, but I'd have to give I Speaker 0: think the answer is, once again, yes. GAO has found that there have been sub awards of NIH money, probably as well as USAID money, that went to the Academy of not just medical research, military medical research in China. Now part of the unknowns here is we can't get the records to look at this. So I've been asking for months months for records. In September of last year, I wrote Ms. Powers USAID a request asking for records from the PREDICT program. These are not classified. These are simply records of scientific research and we want to read the grants to find out what they were doing and whether the research was dangerous or not. The response I got from your agency was USAID will not be providing any documents at this time. They're just unwilling to give documents on scientific grant proposal. We're paying for it. They're asking for $745,000,000 more in money and we get no response. So 2 weeks ago, the ranking member, Rish, myself and 25 other Republican senators, unfortunately, so far, signed a letter once again. There's still no response. We're not asking for classified information. We're not asking for anything unusual. 20,000,000 people died around the world. You're supposed to be an agency that cares about the death of people around the world. We, you know, talk about starvation and famine, and 20,000,000 people died from a virus, and you won't give us the basic information about what grants you're funding around the world and who you're funding. Should we be funding the Academy of Military Medical Research in China? They're now off limits. But did we fund them? And who was making the decision? You know who ran the PREDICT program? UC Davis. Have you had any conversations with UC Davis about research in China and whether it was advisable? Speaker 1: So again, to set the record straight, first of all, the PREDICT program ended in 2019. We have people Speaker 0: And yet it goes on in other forms, in other names. Speaker 1: That's certainly not USAID program. Speaker 0: Well, you have a program called emergency pandemic threats program still, don't you? Speaker 1: If I could just finish in response to the first set of allegations, we have provided hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents related to the PREDICT program for the very reason that you say because we are involved Not Speaker 0: to us. Speaker 1: We are, again, as I know you had an exchange with Secretary Blinken as well, consistent with longstanding practice. Speaker 0: Not going to give them to us. Speaker 1: Responsive to the committees of jurisdiction. Speaker 0: Not going to you've been consistent in not giving us any information. That's true. Speaker 1: But what you're saying is we've provided hundreds of pages in response to the current ranking. Speaker 0: To how? Speaker 1: To the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, for example. We've had extensive meetings. Speaker 0: We've been requesting this and gotten none of it. I'm on that committee as well. The thing is is what we get from you and from the State Department at large is that if Senator Menendez signs it, you'll give it, documents. Until then, you'll give us nothing. And we have gotten nothing, 0. You said, we'll not be providing any documents. I now have 25 senators have sent you a letter and you aren't responding. Speaker 1: And we don't we want Speaker 0: we wanna see the scientific grants. We give you the money. The tax payers give you the money. We deserve to know where the money went, whether it happened look, you're right. It had it ended in 2019. When did the virus come about? In about 2019. Some of the research proposals that came about in 2018 were Wuhan Institute of Virology asking for money to create a virus with a furin cleavage site in it, a coronavirus, a SARS like virus with a furin cleavage site. That's exactly what COVID turned out to be. They wanted money to create such a virus. So we wanna know, are there other research proposals that you either granted or denied that were on the same veins of creating viruses that could have become COVID 19? We can't tell because you won't give us the information. Speaker 1: Again, we consistent with long standing practice, we are providing extensive documentation. We have a whole human Speaker 0: human human who has Speaker 1: nothing other than the fact to predict. Speaker 0: That is not true. Speaker 1: It is factually accurate. Speaker 0: That is not true. Everything we have asked, we have not gotten. I have not seen one document on the predict program. Speaker 1: I understand that again. Consistent with common practices process that Speaker 0: you're not gonna give it to any senators. Speaker 1: No. No. No. We're providing, all of the kinds of documentation that you're describing. Speaker 0: Not. You're being dishonest. You're being dishonest. God. I understand. One scrap of paper from you. Not one scrap of paper. Speaker 1: Of jurisdiction. We are providing all of the paperwork that you requested by the chair. Speaker 0: Right? Committee. I'm the ranking member on the other committee, and I haven't seen a scrap of paper from that committee either. Speaker 1: Well, that is See, here's what the American people Speaker 0: the American Speaker 1: people Actually, I can't tell you what happened to the committee. Speaker 0: Think this, that because you won't respond and because you respond with a non response, that you have something to hide. I don't know if you have anything to hide or not. I wanna see every grant proposal that had to do with coronaviruses that went to China from the US government, from all facets of the US government, and every bit of the Biden administration is stonewalling us and will not give us the information. It makes us think and makes us suspicious that you're hiding something. And it wasn't even you. This was the previous administration. We go back 2 or 3 administrations. We just wanna see the information, and yet you sit there and you say we will do something. We are doing something, which is absolutely the opposite of the truth. You are not being honest.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 5, 2025 at 1:35 AM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 10:32 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I discussed the controversial activities of USAID, highlighting various expenditures like $20 million for Iraqi Sesame Street and millions for projects in Afghanistan that remain unused. I pointed out issues such as misallocated humanitarian aid to al Qaeda and funding for bat research in Wuhan. I argued that USAID operates as a deep state entity, involved in subversive activities and linked to political figures like Hunter Biden and the Clinton Foundation. I concluded that it appears to function as a financial support system for open borders initiatives.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Jesse Watters: USAID Is A $40 Billion Deep State Social Justice Slush Fund -$20M for Iraqi Sesame Street -$2M for Moroccan pottery classes -$11M to tell Vietnam stop burning trash -$27M to give gift bags to illegals -$330M to help Afghanis grow crops -$300M on unused Afghani power plant -$200M on unused Afghani dam -$250M on unused Afghani road "We gave Syrians nine mil for humanitarian aid, but someone messed up and it went to al Qaeda. We gave millions for bat research in Wuhan. USAID was funding fashion week in Paris. USAID is a $40 billion deep state social justice slush fund." "USAID is an American intelligence cutout. They've been caught staging coup after coup across Latin America, funding paramilitary groups, and getting kicked out of countries for subversive activities. The deeper we investigated USA ID, the more it looks like a dark money Democrat super PAC." "Burisma got a contract with USAID through Hunter. The Clinton Foundation worked arm in arm with USAID in Haiti, and a billion dollars disappeared. USAID was pouring billions into the hands of open borders groups. We were literally funding the invasion and buying them gift bags as they left."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Democrats are defending questionable spending priorities, including $1.5 million for DEI initiatives in Serbia, $20 million for Iraqi Sesame Street, and millions on projects in Afghanistan that failed, like a dam that was never used. USAID has been criticized for funding programs that seem wasteful or ineffective, such as a million dollars for bat research in Wuhan and support for Fashion Week in Paris. Allegations suggest that USAID operates like a dark money entity, with ties to various foundations and questionable contracts, including one involving Hunter Biden. Billions have been funneled into open borders groups, effectively funding illegal immigration.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is what Democrats are fighting to save. Speaker 1: These are some of the insane priorities that that organization has been spending money on. $1,500,000 to advance d I DEI in Serbia's workplaces, 70,000 DEI musical in Ireland, Forty Seven Thousand for a transgender opera in Colombia, Thirty Two Thousand for a transgender comic book in Peru. I don't know about you, but as an American taxpayer, I don't want my dollars going towards this crap, and I know the American people don't either. And that's exactly what Elon Musk has been tasked by president Trump to do, to get the fraud, waste, and abuse out of our federal government. Speaker 0: We can keep going. $20,000,000 for Iraqi Sesame Street, $2,000,000 for Moroccan pottery classes. 11,000,000 to tell Vietnam to stop burning trash. 27,000,000 to give gift bags to illegals before we deport them. Millions to help Afghanis grow crops instead of opium. That program was such a success that opium production doubled. We also gave Afghanistan Three Hundred Million to build diesel fuel power plants, but they couldn't use them because diesel was too expensive. 200,000,000 on a dam that was too unsafe to ever be used. We could've used that dam in California. Two hundred and fifty million on a road that was never used. We literally built a road to nowhere. Oh, and we gave Syrians nine mil for humanitarian aid, but someone messed up and it went to Al Qaeda. A million for bat research in Wuhan. That equates to a million dollars for each dead American. USAID was funding Fashion Week in Paris. France isn't even paying its NATO dues, and we're paying for their Fashion Week. USAID's a $40,000,000,000 deep state social justice slush fund, and the president says it's a little fishy. Speaker 2: Elon Musk, how often are you talking to him? And have there been ideas ideas that he's brought to you that you said, oh, no. Wait a minute. This is going a little too far. Speaker 3: Well, many ideas, but look, he's done a great job. Look at all the fraud that he's found in this, USAID. It's a disaster what the people radical left lunatics. They have things that nobody would have even believed that the whole thing with a hundred million spent on you know what? With money going to all sorts of groups that shouldn't deserve to get any money with the money. I'd like to see what the kickbacks are. How much money has been kicked back? Who would spend that kind of money? Speaker 0: USAID is an American intelligence cutout. They've been caught staging coup after crew across Latin America, funding paramilitary groups, and getting kicked out of countries for subversive activities. The deeper we investigated USAID, the more it looks like a dark money Democrat Super PAC. And if you take all of the executives from USAID, the Clinton Foundation, the Gates Foundation, the World Bank, the WHO, you get a Venn diagram that would tickle Kamala Harris. Burisma got a contract with USAID through Hunter. It was so shady that the Obama White House was like, nice try, and canceled it. Hunter's firm was repping clients who were trying to cash in on USAID disaster relief in Haiti. And by the way, the Clinton Foundation worked arm and arm with USAID in Haiti, and a billion dollars disappeared and Haiti is still Haiti. USAID was pouring billions into the hands of open borders groups. We were literally funding the invasion and buying them gift bags as they left.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 7, 2025 at 9:38 PM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 10:20 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I see my Democratic colleagues upset about Elon Musk and DOGE, but they’re missing the bigger picture. Musk has uncovered significant issues, like the massive spending at USAID, which amounts to hundreds of millions, possibly billions, that they should be addressing instead.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Sen. John Kennedy: Democrats Critical of DOGE Are Not Talking About What Elon Musk Is ‘Finding’ "A lot of my Democratic colleagues and members of the tofu crowd are very upset and screaming like Musk stole their dog. But they are not talking about what Mr. Musk is finding. Just at the USAID, he found hundreds of millions, maybe billions of dollars of spending p*rn."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Senator John Kennedy expressed his appreciation for the current president's willingness to engage with the press, contrasting it with the previous administration. He emphasized the importance of reviewing government spending, highlighting concerns over waste in Medicaid. Kennedy noted that while Medicaid spending is around a trillion dollars annually, many able-bodied individuals are on the program. He proposed a bill requiring those aged 18 to 55, who are not disabled and have no minor children, to work at least 20 hours a week, which could save about $100 billion over ten years. He argued that work is not only financially beneficial but also morally important, as these programs should help individuals transition back to self-sufficiency.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: With that, we bring in Louisiana Republican senator John Kennedy. Senator, always good to have you with us. What was your reaction as you watch this sort of longer than usual freewheeling, press conference with these two foreign leaders? Speaker 1: Well, not number one. I find it refreshing after four years, where our president wouldn't wouldn't talk to anyone. Number two, I was paying especially close attention to what the president had to say about reviewing spending. I think it would be fair to say that president Trump has dug in like a tick. He's gonna continue. He ran on this issue. He said if if you elect me president, I'm gonna review the spending. Now I don't know how you review the spending without reviewing the spending. No no no fair minded person can doubt that the president of The United States has the authority to review the spending in the Executive Branch. He's, he's delegated that authority to Elon Musk. A lot of my Democratic colleagues and most of the members of the tofu crowd are very upset. They're screaming like Musk stole their dog or something. But one thing they're not talking about is, is what Mr. Musk is finding. I mean, just at the USAID, he found hundreds of millions, maybe billions of dollars worth of of spending porn. Speaker 0: Senator, let me ask you something. That If I may, you wrote a piece about Medicaid saying that there is a ton of waste in Medicaid. And you heard president Trump just moments ago. He said we're not gonna touch Social Security, but he said that there are a lot of, bad people who shouldn't be on the list, something to that effect when it comes to Medicaid. What did you find and write about this week with regard to Speaker 1: that? The American people are the most generous people in the world. If you're If you're hungry, we'll feed you. If you're homeless, we'll house you. If you're too poor to be sick, we'll pay for your doctor. But all of it costs money. We're spending about a trillion dollars a year on Medicaid. President Biden increased it by about 40%. We estimate that there are between ten and thirty million people on Medicaid who are perfectly able to work. I've got a bill that says if you're between 18 and 55, five, you're not disabled, you don't have any minor kids at home, so we're not talking about a mother with a sick child in her arms. You you've gotta work twenty hours a week. That'll save us, according to the CBO, about a hundred billion dollars over ten years. Speaker 0: That yeah. Right there. Speaker 1: It's not just about the money. It's not just about the money. There's a moral principle. If you can work, you should work. These programs were not meant to be parking lots. They were meant to be bridges. And for some people, not everybody on Medicaid, but for some people, the best way to to get back on your feet is to get off your ass. Speaker 0: Well, well put. And, the the piece that you were was very interesting, and the idea is that if you are able-bodied and you're accepting Medicaid, you should be working as well, gainfully employed. Yep. And, it's an idea that I think would be common sense to a lot of people. You also pointed out the psychological benefits of of going to work and having a job and that that is what pulls people out of situations where they need this kind of aid. Interesting piece and senator, thank you very much. It's always good to have you with us. Thank you, sir. Speaker 1: Thank you, Mark.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 8, 2025 at 12:24 AM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 10:19 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently criticized USAID for using taxpayer money to support left-wing organizations globally. With our national debt nearing $40 trillion, it's alarming that cutting spending provokes such outrage. It's clear where the funds are going: major media outlets and political figures, including those in Ukraine and Hungary, are receiving financial backing. USAID distributes $50 billion annually, which raises questions about the grassroots nature of left-wing movements. This funding seems to come from the top down, challenging the idea of genuine local support for these policies.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: @DavidSacks blasts USAID for using American taxpayers to fund left-wing organizations and policies around the world. "We're in debt almost $40 trillion, and anytime anyone tries to cut anything in Washington, the whole city screams bloody murder. The question is, why? Well, now we know. The money is all going to them." "New York Times, getting paid. Politico, getting paid. Bill Kristol, perennial warmonger, getting paid. Ukraine, like 11 out of 12 publications, getting paid. Viktor Orban, the Prime Minister of Hungary, was saying his political opposition is funded by USAID." "In Poland, the left-wing political opposition is funded by USAID. BBC in the U.K. Every left-wing organization in the world seems to be getting paid by this slush fund at USAID, which distributes $50 billion a year. That's a billion dollars a week. That's a lot of money." "It makes you wonder. The left, in general, tries to portray itself as a movement of the people. That it's grassroots, this is the exact opposite. This is astroturf. This money is coming from the top down out of Washington to fund all these groups all over the world. So it makes you wonder, what is the real level of local support for these left-wing policies all over the world?"

Video Transcript AI Summary
Jacob, it's surprising you haven't gotten involved with Doge. If I had known, I would have started an NGO. The U.S. government runs a massive deficit, and cutting spending in Washington is met with outrage. The money is flowing to various entities, including media outlets and foreign governments. For instance, Viktor Orban noted that his opposition in Hungary is funded by USAID, and similar patterns exist in Poland. The BBC and many left-wing organizations globally receive substantial funding from USAID, which disperses about $50 billion annually. This raises questions about the grassroots nature of left-wing movements, suggesting they may be more top-down than they claim.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Was just listening on your your conversation about Doge. Jacob, I'm surprised that you never figured out a way to get involved in this USA. I mean, everybody's on the take except you. What's going on? Speaker 1: If I had known, I would have started an NGO. Where's my NGO? You had everything except the money laundering. You had the grit. You had the virtue signaling. You had it all except the actual money. Speaker 0: Let me up level this for a second. Okay? So we knew the US government runs a $2,000,000,000,000 deficit every year. We're in debt almost $40,000,000,000,000 and we also knew that anytime anyone tries to cut anything in Washington, the whole city screams bloody murder. Okay? So the question is just why? Well, now we know. The money is all going to them. It's like round tripping to them. New York Times Crazy. Getting paid. Politico, getting paid. Bill Kristol, perennial warmonger, getting paid. Ukraine, getting paid. Like, 11 out of 12 publications Ukraine, getting paid. Incredible. Viktor Orban, who's the prime minister of Hungary, was saying that he's very popular in Hungary. His political opposition funded by USAID. In Poland, the left wing political opposition funded by USAID, and on and on and on it goes. Speaker 1: BBC. BBC. You wonder why everyone in The UK is so yeah. Yeah. Speaker 0: Like, every left wing believe the BBC is Speaker 1: getting paid. Speaker 0: Every left wing organization in the world seems to be getting paid by this slush fund at USAID, which disperses about 50,000,000,000 a year. That's a billion dollars a week. That's actually a lot of money. And so it it just it makes you wonder, you know, the left in general tries to portray itself as a movement of the people, that it's grassroots. This is the exact opposite. This is astroturf. This is basically money coming from the top down out of Washington to fund all these groups, maybe not even in The United States, like all over the world. So it makes you wonder what is the real level of local support for these left wing policies all over the world? Speaker 1: Yeah. Crazy.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 7, 2025 at 9:47 PM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 10:13 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve directed Elon Musk’s DOGE to investigate the Departments of Education and Defense. He has a capable team that’s uncovering significant fraud, abuse, and waste. They'll start with education and then move to the military and other areas as needed.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BREAKING: President Trump has directed Elon Musk’s DOGE to investigate the Departments of Education and Defense. "He’s got a very capable group of people. They know what they’re doing. I’ve instructed him to go into education, go into the military, and go into other things as we go along. And they’re finding massive amounts of fraud, abuse, waste... He will be looking at education pretty quickly, and he will be looking at the military, too."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Mister President, what do you think about the Democrats' criticism of the staff reductions by Elon Musk and Doge, claiming it's an unlawful power grab? Have you restricted Musk in any way? We haven't discussed much. He has a capable team that knows what they're doing. They ask questions and can quickly identify issues. I've directed him to explore areas like education and military, where they're uncovering significant fraud and waste. I identify targets for investigation, and while there may be areas we won't touch, I believe everything is worth examining. As a government, we need to be transparent, and I'm willing to take action if necessary.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mister president, I wonder what you make of the criticism from Democrats that these staff reductions, the cuts that Elon Musk and Doge are doing are an unlawful power grab. Is there anything you've told Elon Musk he cannot touch? Speaker 1: Well, we haven't discussed that much. I'll tell him to go here, go there. He does it. He's got a very capable group of people. Very, very, very, very capable. They know what they're doing. They'll ask questions, and they'll see immediately as somebody gets tongue tied that they're either crooked or don't know what they're doing. We have very smart people going in. So, I've instructed him go into education, go into military, go into other things as we go along, and they're finding massive amounts of fraud, abuse, waste, all of these things. So, but I I will pick out a target, and I say go in. There could be areas that we won't, but I I I think everything's fertile. You know, we're a government. We have to be open. And as an open government, I don't know. I guess you could say maybe some high intelligence or something, and I'll do that myself if I have to. But, generally
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 2, 2025 at 12:43 AM
Saved - February 2, 2025 at 4:47 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I addressed @Kash_Patel, @KristiNoem, and @PamBondi about the corruption involving senior officials at the FBI, DHS, and DOJ who protected Konnech CEO Eugene Yu. Yu, who runs an election software company, stored U.S. election data on Chinese servers, allowing CCP access. Despite his arrest in 2022, the case was buried due to political bias. I plan to spotlight this issue as Trump’s team takes over in 2025, emphasizing the need for accountability for those involved in this cover-up. Catherine Engelbrecht's efforts deserve recognition.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Dear @Kash_Patel, @KristiNoem, and @PamBondi, As President @realDonaldTrump removes corrupt and politicized officials, remember that senior executives at the FBI, DHS, and DOJ protected Konnech CEO Eugene Yu. Yu runs an American election software company while also overseeing two CCP-funded shadow subsidiaries partnered with Huawei, China Telecom, Lenovo, and China Unicom. He stored U.S. election data on Chinese servers for some of America’s largest counties—including Los Angeles, Detroit, San Francisco, St. Louis, Denver, and Washington, D.C.—where CCP-backed engineers had access to and control over his American software. This massive breach of American election data was exposed in 2022, leading to Yu’s arrest. However, corrupt government officials and Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon buried the case simply because the investigation was initiated by the Trump supporter behind 2000 Mules. If you’re skeptical of these claims, check the domain registration history of hongzhengtech[.]cn, which provides election software to over 430 National People's Congresses across 20 Chinese provinces and is partnered with China’s largest state-owned tech companies. That domain was originally registered to admin@konnech[.]com—Yu’s email address at his Michigan-based election software company. As President Trump’s team assumes control of the federal government in 2025, one of my top priorities is to bring this story back into the national spotlight. Catherine Engelbrecht (@TrueTheVote) was right about Konnech and deserves recognition for her dedication to protecting our country. Gascon and the senior government officials who covered this up must be held accountable. The thread below provides extraordinary details. President Trump’s admin has an explosive case of corrupt FBI, DHS, and DOJ officials betraying U.S. national security to stop President Trump—gift-wrapped on a silver platter. The American people must understand just how deep this corruption goes, and there may be no better case to expose it.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

KONNECH #1🚨: Evidence shockingly suggests that the FBI is shielding two firms closely tied to the Chinese government, which have financed and developed an American election software company for the past 15 years, all while transferring confidential election data back to China. https://t.co/4yN3XJ9TKf

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 22, 2025 at 6:40 PM
Saved - January 23, 2025 at 6:51 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I was asked about President Trump's executive order on recognizing two genders. I questioned if there are other genders to consider, as I'm only aware of men and women. The reporter mentioned being a man, and I agreed, stating that I am also a man.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

REPORTER: "How do you feel about President Trump's executive order recognizing two genders?" PIERRE POLIEVRE: "Do you have any other genders you'd like to name?" REPORTER: "Do you agree with what he's saying?" POLIEVRE: "I'm not aware of genders other than men and women. If you have any other you want me to consider, you're welcome to tell me right now." REPORTER: "Personally, I am a man." POLIEVRE: "Me too! I am a man as well..."

Video Transcript AI Summary
On the first day of his presidency, Trump signed an executive order recognizing only two genders: male and female. If elected as prime minister, would you align with this view? I'm not aware of any other genders beyond men and women. If you have other genders to discuss, feel free to share. Personally, I identify as a man, and I know some identify as gender-neutral or transgender. I only recognize two genders, but if you have a different perspective, I'm open to hearing it. Ultimately, I believe the government should focus on its own responsibilities and allow people to live their lives without interference.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 1st day on the job president Trump signed an executive order, you know, the US government only recognizing 2 genders, male, female. They're unchangeable. You know, if elected as prime minister, is that something that you're gonna kinda walk in line with? Or or what are your feelings on that executive order? Speaker 1: Well, I don't know. Do you have any other genders Speaker 0: that Speaker 1: you'd like to Speaker 0: name? Me personally? I'm I'm I'm just asking more so if if you're in line with what he is saying. Do do you agree with what he's saying? Is that something that you would be locked up with if elected as prime minister? Speaker 1: Well, I I'm not aware of any other genders than men and women. I mean, if you have any other that you want me to consider, you you're welcome to tell me right now. Speaker 0: Well, there's well, there's, personally, I am a man. I am a Okay. People say cis man. That's good. There are people there who, you know, they say they're Me too. I'm a man. You are a man. Yes. There are people there who say they're gender neutral. They're, you know, they're they're a trans person. Is that something that you would recognize here? Or whereas in the states at least with with their US government, the way they're seeing it, there's only 2. Speaker 1: I'm only aware of 2, but I mean, if you have, like, if you come up with another list, then, you're welcome to do that. But I I'm aware of 2. And, as far as I'm concerned, we should have a government that just minds its own damn business and leaves people alone.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 21, 2025 at 1:22 AM
Saved - January 21, 2025 at 4:04 AM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BREAKING: President Trump signs executive order pardoning approximately 1,500 January 6th protestors. https://t.co/sHO8PbDSGc

Video Transcript AI Summary
We have a list of pardons and commutations related to the events of January 6, 2021, affecting approximately 1,500 individuals. This includes around six commutations that require further research. The focus is on full pardons, and we hope to see these individuals released soon. The order mandates that the Bureau of Prisons act immediately upon receiving the pardons and commutation orders.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay. Sir? This is here. Speaker 1: Yes, sir. First, we have a list of, of pardons and commutations relating to events that occurred on January 6, 2021. Speaker 0: Okay. And how many people is this? Speaker 1: I think this order will apply to approximately 1500 people, sir. Speaker 0: So this is January 6th. These are the hostages. Approximately 1500 for a pardon? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: Full pardon? Full Speaker 1: pardon or commutation? Speaker 0: Full pardon. We have about 6 commutations in there where we're doing further research. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 0: Nice to see you again. So this is a big one. Anything you wanna explain about this? We we hope they get them we hope they come out tonight, frankly. We're expecting it. Approximately 1500 people. Six six commutations. Looking at different things, but, the commutations would be the ones that we'll take a look and maybe it'll stay that way or it'll go to in a full pardon. Speaker 1: And the order does require the Bureau of Prisons to act immediately on receipt of the pardons and commutation orders? Sir, this is
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 20, 2025 at 8:13 PM
Saved - January 20, 2025 at 8:50 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I'm feeling incredibly optimistic about America's future! This victory is monumental, marking a pivotal moment for humanity. I’m grateful to everyone who made this happen; your efforts ensure a bright future. We're on the brink of safe cities, secure borders, and sensible spending. The thought of American astronauts planting our flag on another planet is thrilling! It's essential to have inspiring goals that motivate us each day. I'm committed to working hard for all of you—exciting times are ahead, and I believe we're entering a Golden Age.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Elon Musk is fired up about America's future! 🔥🇺🇸 "This is what victory feels like!" "This was no ordinary victory. This was a fork in the road of human civilization." "This one really mattered. Thank you for making it happen! My heart goes out to you. It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured." "We're going to finally have safe cities. Secure borders. Sensible spending. Basic stuff. And we're going to take DOGE to Mars!" "Can you imagine how awesome it will be to have American astronauts plant the flag on another planet for the first time?!" "There need to be things that inspire you. There need to be things that make you glad to wake up in the morning and say I'm looking forward to the future." "And let me tell you, I'm going to work my ass off for you guys. I really will. I'm super fired up for the future. It's going to be very exciting. As the President said, we're going to have a Golden Age."

Video Transcript AI Summary
This victory marks a pivotal moment for humanity. Unlike other elections, this one truly matters, and I appreciate your support. Together, we will ensure safe cities, secure borders, and sensible spending. Imagine American astronauts planting our flag on Mars—what an inspiring achievement! Life is full of challenges, but we need sources of inspiration to look forward to the future. I am committed to working hard for you, and I am excited about what lies ahead. As the president said, we are entering a golden age filled with optimism. Let's make the future bright together. Thank you all for your support!
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yes. This this is what victory feels like. Yeah. And this was no ordinary victory. This was a fork in the road of human civilization. Okay. This this you know, there there are elections that that elections that come and go. Some some elections are, you know, important, some are not. But but this one this one this one really matters. And I just wanna say thank you for making it happen. Thank you. My heart goes out to you. It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured. Thanks to you. We're gonna have safe cities, finally safe cities, secure borders, sensible spending, basic stuff. And we're gonna take those to Mars. I mean, can you imagine how awesome it will be to have American astronauts plant the flag on another planet for the first time? Bam. Bam. Yeah. How inspiring would that be? You know, there's always there's there's always problems in problems in life. You know, there's this problem, solve that problem, solve that problem. But you know, there there need to be things that inspire you. There needs to be things that make you glad to wake up in the morning and say I'm looking forward to the future. Yeah. I love you guys. So And and and and let me tell you, I'm gonna work my asshole for you guys. So I really will. I really will. So and, yeah. But I'm I'm super fired up, for the for the for the future. It's gonna be very exciting. As the president said, we're gonna have a golden age. It's gonna be fantastic. And one of the fundamental things that one of the most American values that that I love is optimism. And and and the feeling like we're gonna we're gonna make the future good. We're gonna make it good. So, man, I can't wait. This is gonna be fantastic. So thanks and thank you thank you again. And, yeah. It's I'm just so excited about the future. Thank you, guys. Thank you.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 20, 2025 at 1:40 PM
Saved - January 20, 2025 at 8:04 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe Dr. Anthony Fauci funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab and misled Congress about it. Both the FBI and the Department of Energy have indicated that the coronavirus likely originated there. With his recent pardon, I think Congress should compel him to testify under oath. Evidence points to Fauci's funding supporting research that led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2, which has a unique furin cleavage site that enhances its infectivity. Despite the pandemic's duration, no links to animal sources have been established, raising concerns about his advocacy for high-risk research.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Dr. Anthony Fauci funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, lied to Congress about it, and both the FBI and the Department of Energy have concluded that the coronavirus likely originated there. Now that he has been pardoned, Congress should again force Dr. Fauci to testify under oath. Evidence strongly suggests that Fauci's funding supported research leading to the creation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 is unique among betacoronaviruses for having a furin cleavage site, a feature that enhances its ability to infect humans and spread rapidly. In 2018, Fauci-funded scientists proposed adding a furin cleavage site to a betacoronavirus at the Wuhan lab, which reportedly had inadequate biosafety standards. One year later, SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan with this exact feature. Unlike prior outbreaks such as SARS and MERS, where links between infected humans and animals were quickly established, no such evidence has surfaced for SARS-CoV-2 more than five years after it first appeared. Dr. Fauci has been a consistent advocate for gain-of-function research, funding high-risk experiments and facilitating technology transfers to questionable labs worldwide. After a 2014 U.S. pause on such research due to safety concerns, Fauci continued these experiments abroad, including at the Wuhan lab. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that Fauci's funding and actions played a critical role in the creation of SARS-CoV-2.

Video Transcript AI Summary
We did not fund gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The NIH has acknowledged funding research on a bat coronavirus that was enhanced in a lab, making it more contagious. Senator Paul questioned whether I wish to retract my statement from May 11, asserting that the NIH never funded gain of function research in Wuhan. I stand by my statement and have never lied before Congress. The NIH provided grants to the EcoHealth Alliance for experiments with bat coronaviruses in Wuhan. If anyone is lying, it is you, Senator. Evidence suggests the virus may have originated from the lab, and those who funded it will be held responsible. The NIH admitted to funding controversial gain of function research, contradicting my earlier claims. I maintain that I have not lied before Congress. Case closed.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We I I don't know how many times I can say it, madam chair. We did not fund gain of function research to be conducted in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Speaker 1: In our health lead, we now know that a bat coronavirus was enhanced in a lab. Speaker 0: NIH and NIAID categorically has not funded gain of function research to be conducted in the Wuhan Institute. Speaker 1: The National Institutes of Health acknowledged that it funded research of a virus that was studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The experiment unexpectedly, we're told, made a bat coronavirus more contagious than the original naturally occurring one. Speaker 0: Doctor Fauci, knowing that it is Speaker 1: a crime Speaker 2: knowing that it is a crime to lie to congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11th where you claimed that the NIH never funded gain of function research in Wuhan? Speaker 0: Senator Paul, I have never lied before the congress, and I do not retract that statement. Speaker 3: A new letter raising questions about experiments in a Wuhan lab. Speaker 0: What was let me finish. Speaker 2: You shake an animal virus and you increase the transability to humans Right. You're saying that's not gain the funding? Speaker 0: That is correct. And and, senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly, and I wanna say that officially. You do not know what you are talking about. Speaker 3: 3 years, the National Institutes of Health are providing grant money to the EcoHealth Alliance Research Group, which conducted experiments with bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China. Speaker 0: And if anybody is lying here, senator, it is you. That's where you are getting. Let me finish. We don't know. We don't know. Wait a minute. Speaker 2: It didn't come to the lab, but all the evidence is pointing that it came from the lab. You And there will be responsibility for those that funded the lab, including yourself. Speaker 3: National Institute of Health admitted Speaker 4: this week that it funded controversial gain of function research using coronaviruses at a lab in China at the epicenter of the pandemic, contradicting claims from doctor Anthony Fauci that American tax dollars never feed for that kind of research. Speaker 0: I have not lied before Congress. I have never lied, certainly not before Congress. Case closed.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 18, 2025 at 6:05 PM
Saved - January 19, 2025 at 3:52 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently had a "Red Pill" moment that changed my perspective. It all started with reading Mike Solana's articles on Pirate Wires, where I initially thought he was exaggerating. However, I found his claims, like the swastikas on Ukrainian soldiers' helmets, later confirmed in mainstream media. The turning point came when I revisited Trump's Charlottesville speech, realizing it was misrepresented. This revelation made me question the integrity of mainstream media and pushed me to seek original sources for information. I'm curious about others' Red Pill moments.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: Tech billionaire and lifelong Democrat Mark Pincus reveals his "Red Pill" moment, sparked by Mike Solana's Pirate Wires and the "very fine people" hoax, culminating in him voting for Donald Trump. "I started reading @PirateWires and @micsolana, and I thought he was a little crazy at first because he would write these articles, and one he wrote was about how the Ukrainian soldiers had swastikas on their helmets, and the NYT photographers would ask them to take the swastikas off for photos." "I said that can't be true, and then four months later, it was in the NYT buried in the middle of the paper, and I kept seeing stories like that that he would be early on. So, I started feeling more uncomfortable and queasy with what was going on with mainstream media." "Then, in May 2024, I read an article that talked about Trump's speech in Charlottesville, where he said there are good people on both sides, and the article said it was completely propaganda and didn't actually reflect what he said. That he denounced the Nazis a bunch of times in his speech, so then I went and watched that video, and that was my red pill moment." "I think it was for a lot of people because it wasn't just the media or politicians spinning it. That speech was one of the pillars of why you were supposed to hate Trump. Then you see Biden say that's why he had to run a second time, and Obama says it, and Biden brings it up again at the DNC." "They clearly know they are misrepresenting things, so for me, that was beyond uncomfortable. Now, I have to go back to first principles and look at the primary data, listen to only original speeches by people, and I just realized I couldn't trust the mainstream media." What was your Red Pill moment? Drop your story in the comments.👇

Video Transcript AI Summary
Reid and I began our journey into national politics together, meeting Biden and making significant donations. However, I experienced a "red pill moment" that shifted my perspective. It started with reading articles that challenged mainstream narratives, particularly regarding the portrayal of Trump’s Charlottesville speech. I realized the media was misrepresenting facts, which led me to question the Democrats. After my chief of staff left, I began expressing my thoughts freely on Twitter, connecting with a new audience of techno optimists. Just before the election, I publicly supported Trump, encouraged by my daughters. My announcement made the front page of the New York Post, but my New York friends were unfazed, maintaining their pro-Kamala stance.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's interesting because Reid and I really started the whole kind of journey into bigger national politics together. We both sat down and had lunch with Biden and made wrote big checks a little over a year ago, December of 23. And and then, you know, won't bother you, but I I had my red pill moment, and I went very different direction, which started off just questioning the democrats. Hold on. Hold on. Can you actually just double click into that? What was your red pill moment? Was there one specific thing, or was it more of a trickle of things? It was both. Right? It's like it starts the wall starts crumbling, and then it comes down all at once. So for me, it really started early in 23. I started reading Pirate Wires and Mike Solana, and I thought he was a little crazy at first because he would write these articles. One he wrote was about how the Ukrainian soldiers had swastikas on their helmets, and the New York Times photographers would ask them to take the swastikas off for photos. And I said, that can't be right. That can't be true. And then 4 months later, it was in the New York Times buried in the middle of the paper. And I kept seeing stories like that that that he would be early on. And so I just started feeling uncomfortable and queasy about what was going on with mainstream media. And then in May of last year of 24, I read some article that talked about Trump's speech in Charlottesville, and this has been well covered. But but where he said there was good people on both sides, and the article said it was completely, you know, propaganda and not what he actually not accurately reflecting what he said that, that he denounced the Nazis a bunch of times in his speech. And so then I went and watched that video, and that was my red pill moment. I think it was for a lot of people. Because it wasn't just the media spinning it or politicians spinning it. That was, like, one of the pillars of why you were supposed to hate Trump was Mhmm. That speech. And and then you see Biden say that's why he had to run a second time, and you see Obama go to you even see Biden bring it up again in the beginning of the DNC. And it's one of their pillars, and they clearly know that they're misrepresenting things. So for me, that was just that was beyond uncomfortable. I was just like, okay. Now I gotta go back to first principles and look at the primary data and listen only to original speeches by people, and I just realized I couldn't trust mainstream media. So I was I became I started questioning the democrats. As soon as I started questioning the democrats, I started getting a lot of shame and anger and hatred. Oh, the other thing that happened that was part of this journey is that my chief of staff parted ways with me after 9 years in April of last year, and he was the main person protecting me from myself on Twitter. And he was the one who would say, stay in your lane. Nobody wants to hear what you think about politics or San Francisco or anything other than, you know, your area of products and investing. And with him gone, I just started tweeting whatever I felt and thought. And sometimes I got it wrong or it was a little too emotional. But first of all, it was really fun. And then second of all, I found I got connected to this whole new audience of people who are these kind of techno optimists. I think you guys probably talked about it. And that just brought me down this path that eventually, I came out 2 days before the election publicly for Trump. It was only because that's when I completely got there. And I was trying to just be completely honest and authentic with myself and on Twitter at the same time. And my daughters turned to me that Sunday, and they said, you're you're gonna vote for Trump. We know it. And I said, yeah. You're probably right. And they said, well, then you have to go say it on Twitter. And my daughter's, like, really in this with me. Yeah. So, anyway, and then it was on the front page of the New York Post on the day of the election that I was, this not that I'm such news, but maybe it just was their news peg, that I was coming out for Trump. And but and I'll get back to your Reid question. But what I love about my New York Times about my New York friends is that they did not give a They were all pro Kamala, and they texted me. And they're just like, oh, that's kinda funny. But it's one thing I kinda love about New York. They didn't care.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 17, 2025 at 4:58 PM
Saved - January 18, 2025 at 11:36 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I reached out to Kristi Noem, asking for her help in reuniting children separated from their parents due to Trump's policy. She expressed concern over the 300,000 missing children during the Biden administration. I emphasized the urgency of reuniting the 1,000 children still separated, seeking her commitment to this cause. Noem responded by stressing the importance of family unity and shared her worries about specific cases, while also highlighting the need to uphold laws to protect children from trafficking and drug issues.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: "Will you help me reunite children with their parents who were separated by Trump's family separation policy?" KRISTI NOEM: "What I'm alarmed by is the over 300,000 children that went missing during the Biden administration." BLUMENTHAL: "Let's put aside the labels and what happened in the past. There are still 1,000 children who were separated and waiting to be reunited. I'd like your commitment to continuing the effort to reunite them with their parents." NOEM: "Well, I can't put aside 300,000 children. Keeping families together is critically important to me and to this country. I'm concerned about Laken Riley's family and that they no longer have her... We will uphold our laws and make sure we are doing everything we can to keep children safe from the trafficking and drug epidemics."

Video Transcript AI Summary
I led an effort to reunite children separated from their parents due to the family separation policy. I've introduced measures like the Keep Families Together Act to limit separations and help reunite affected children. The Trump administration had a zero tolerance policy, not a separation policy. I'm concerned about over 300,000 missing children during the Biden administration and the potential victimization they face. While I acknowledge the importance of keeping families together, I also emphasize the need to find these missing children. My focus will be on reuniting families while upholding the law and ensuring children's safety from trafficking and drug issues. I appreciate your commitment to this effort. Thank you.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Want to call your attention to an effort that I've led to help reunite children with their parents, children who were separated as a result of the so called family separation policy. In the last administration, I have introduced a measure called keep families together, not only to limit separation of families at or near ports of entry, but also the Families Belong Together Act for several Congresses to help bring the children, the kids who were victims of this policy and who still are not big back with their parents. I hope that you will support that kind of effort. Speaker 1: Senator, the Trump administration never had a family separation policy. They had a zero tolerance policy, which said that our laws would be followed. What I'm alarmed by is the over 300,000 children that went missing during the Biden administration. And when we talk about children and and what they're, potentially facing as far as victimization in this country and the trafficking trafficking that's going on, this administration's lack of desire to find out where those children are or what they may be going through is alarming to me. So I want Speaker 0: to stop that. My time is expiring. I'm just gonna interrupt again with apologies to say, let's put aside. Speaker 1: Well, I can't put aside 340,000 children. Speaker 0: Let's put aside what happened in the past. There are still a 1,000 children who are separated and waiting to be reunited. I'd like your commitment that you're gonna continue the effort to reunite them with their parents. Speaker 1: Senator, keeping families together is critically important to me and to this country. I'm concerned about Lake and Riley's family that they no longer have her. I'm concerned about the fact that that we have people in this country that, don't know where their children are or people in other countries who sent their children here and they've been lost by this administration. So, yes, my focus will be to keep families together. We will uphold our law and we'll make sure that we're doing everything we can to keep our children safe from the trafficking and the drug epidemic that's hit this country. Speaker 0: I'm gonna end on an optimistic note and say I take that as a yes. Yeah. Thank you, mister.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 16, 2025 at 4:54 PM
Saved - January 17, 2025 at 6:54 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

RON WYDEN: "We're in a clean energy arms race with China. Which side are you on?" SCOTT BESSENT: "China will build 100 new coal plants this year. There is not a clean energy race. There is an energy race. China will build 10 nuclear plants this year. I'm in favor of more nuclear plants."

Video Transcript AI Summary
There is a significant effort by the Trump administration to reverse current energy policies, which could negatively impact the economy but benefit China in the clean energy competition. China plans to build 100 new coal plants and 10 nuclear plants this year, indicating that the focus is not solely on clean energy. I support the construction of more nuclear plants, but it's important to note that the Inflation Reduction Act's projected spending is excessively high according to the CBO.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now there is a big effort in the Trump administration to reverse it. I think that's gonna be bad for the economy, but it is gonna be damn good for China because we are in an arms race on clean energy with them. Are you gonna be on the side of people who wanna unravel this? Speaker 1: Senator the senator Wyden, just so we can frame this for everyone in the room, China will build a 100 new coal plants this year. There is not a clean energy race. There is an energy race. China will build 10 nuclear plants this year. That is not solar. I I am in favor the of more nuclear plants. And I would note that the IRA as scored by the CBO is wildly out of control in terms of spending on the upside.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 16, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Saved - January 17, 2025 at 3:34 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I questioned whether Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg are too wealthy and powerful, echoing President Biden's concerns about an oligarchy. Scott Bessent responded by highlighting that these billionaires built their wealth themselves, mentioning Musk's immigrant background. I emphasized that the focus should be on the existence of an oligarchy. Bessent countered by pointing out that President Biden awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to individuals he considers oligarchs.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

BERNIE SANDERS: "Are Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg too wealthy and powerful? Do you agree with President Biden about an oligarchy?" SCOTT BESSENT: "Those three billionaires all made their money themselves. Mr. Musk came to the country as an immigrant. Jeff Bezos..." SANDERS: "Forget how they made their money... Do you believe it's an oligarchy?" BESSENT: "Well, I would note that President Biden gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to two people who I think would qualify for his oligarchs."

Video Transcript AI Summary
When a small number of multibillionaires hold vast economic, media, and political power, does this not resemble an oligarchy, as President Biden suggested? With three individuals possessing more wealth than the bottom half of Americans and exerting significant influence over politics and media, is this a threat to democracy? The response acknowledges that wealth concentration raises concerns but shifts focus to the ability for social mobility. However, the core question remains: does such wealth and power distribution indicate an oligarchic society?
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When you have a small number of multibillionaires who have enormous economic, media, and political power, would you agree, with president Biden who last night stated, and I quote, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights, and freedoms. End of quote. That's what president Biden said last night. I agree with him. Do you? Speaker 1: Senator Sanders, I enjoyed her visit. You talk Speaker 0: a little bit closer into the mic. Speaker 1: I I enjoyed her visit, and I hope you got my my follow-up materials that we've on the discussions. My previous sightings on the, tariffs and China. And look, the the 3 billionaires who you listed that all made the money themselves. The miss mister Musk came to the country as an immigrant. Speaker 0: I understand that, but what I'm asking you is when you have a handful of people like Musk, who will soon be part of the Trump administration and others, when you have 3 people owning more wealth than the bottom half of American society, when these people have enormous influence over the media, when they spend huge amounts of money in both political parties to elect candidates. What Biden said last night is we're moving toward an oligarchy. I'm asking you that question. Do you think forget how they made their money. Do you think that when so few people have so much wealth and so much economic and political power that that is an oligarchic form of society? Speaker 1: Well, I I I would note that the president Biden gave the presidential medal of freedom to 2 people who I think would qualify for his oligarchs. So, Speaker 0: I This is not a condemnation of any one individual. I'm just asking you, would so few people have so much wealth and power? But but Do you think that that is an oligarch of former society? Speaker 1: Senator, I I think it depends on the the the ability to move up and down the Speaker 0: No. That's not really the answer. I mean, even if you had that mobility, no matter who those individuals might be. Alright. But let me ask you another question.
KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - January 12, 2025 at 7:38 PM
Saved - January 13, 2025 at 3:36 PM

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

NEW: Gavin Newsom accuses Trump of spreading "mis- and disinformation" about empty reservoirs during the Los Angeles wildfires. Reporter: "Well, that one reservoir that serves the Palisades was not full." Newsom: "That's exactly what we're going to investigate." Incredible. https://t.co/Vx8tFsa8jT

Video Transcript AI Summary
President-elect Trump has criticized me, calling me incompetent. I invited him to see the situation firsthand. I respect the presidency and appreciate President Biden's swift disaster declaration and support. I’m unclear about Trump's comments regarding the Delta smelt and reservoirs, as our state reservoirs in Southern California are full. Misinformation doesn’t help us. Responding to Trump's insults would be a waste of time; many elected officials are familiar with them. Local reports indicate that a specific reservoir serving the Palisades wasn't full, which prompted my call for an investigation. However, that reservoir is not part of the state system, and linking it to the Delta smelt in this context is both inaccurate and confusing for those who understand California's water policy.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: President-elect Trump has blamed you for this crisis. He called you incompetent. What's your response? Speaker 1: Well, I called for him to come out, take a look for himself. We wanna do in the spirit of an open hand, not a closed fist. He's the president-elect. I respect the office. We have a president of the United States that within 36 hours provided a major disaster declaration over a text. We had support from the president of the United States, Joe Biden with a 100% reimbursement. All the resources you could hope for or imagine, constant communication. I'd like to extend that to the president-elect. I don't know what he's referring to when he talks about the Delta smelt, and reservoirs. The reservoirs are completely full. The state reservoirs here in Southern California. That mis and disinformation, I don't think advantages or aids any of us. Responding to Donald Trump's insults, we would spend another month. I'm very familiar with them. Every elected official that he disagrees with is very familiar with them. Speaker 0: We do know though from reporting here locally that that one reservoir that serves the Palisades was not full. Speaker 1: And that's exactly what triggered my desire to get the investigation, to understand what was happening with that local reservoir. That was not a state system reservoir, which the president-elect was referring to as it relates to the Delta and somehow connecting the Delta smelt to this fire, which is, inexcusable because it's inaccurate, also incomprehensible to anyone that understands water policy in the state.
View Full Interactive Feed