reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @MJTruthUltra

MJTruthUltra
Posted - March 28, 2026 at 2:22 AM
Saved - March 28, 2026 at 12:22 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

OH. MY. GOD. There it is… from his mouth 🚨 Netanyahu Funded Hamas $35M a Month via Qatar, using U.S. Tax Dollars, and tells Investigators: “This is confidential and can’t be leaked, okay? We have neighbors here, sworn enemies. I’m constantly passing them messages. I confuse them, mislead them, lie to them, and then HIT them over their heads.” • Netanyahu worked to keep GAZA under the control of HAMAS. And keep the West Bank under the control of the Fatah with the goal of preventing them from ever being united. • Netanyahu arranged for Hamas to receive $35 Million Dollars every month from Qatar —— suitcases of $35M in American currency, every single month. “Because the Qatar knew him, they made him put the request in writing because they knew he was going to lie in the future.” 🤯 The result? $1+ BILLION went into the hands of Hamas… fast forward — October 7. Clip https://rumble.com/v77q23w-netanyahu-funded-hamas-35m-a-month-via-qatar-with-us-tax-dollars-and-tells-.html The Bibi Files https://tuckercarlson.com/the-bibi-files-film

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers present a narrative in which Netanyahu is portrayed as having knowingly enabled Hamas rather than created it, arguing that “he fed it” and that keeping Gaza under Hamas control and the West Bank under Fateh was a deliberate strategy to prevent Palestinian unity. They claim Netanyahu “dealt with Hamas for a long time as a strategic friend” and that he “was all the time helping Hamas to survive” in order to maintain a balance that served his aims. One speaker alleges that while Netanyahu was under investigation, he arranged for Hamas to receive “$35,000,000 every month from Qatar.” Another adds that “Israel will not give money to the Hamas,” and that “you cannot even transfer this money through banks because even the banks don't want to cooperate,” so Netanyahu was said to “beg this small and very rich country, Qatar, to give money to our enemy.” The claim is further sharpened by asserting that “this suitcases of money was given to Hamas under the request of Benjamin Netanyahu personally,” with the assertion that “the Qatarians knew him from the beginning” and “they were asking him to send them his requests in writing because they knew that he's going to lie in the future.” A speaker contends that Netanyahu “allowed more than 1,000,000,000 to be transferred to the hands of the Hamas because he believed that he can control the level of hatred,” labeling that belief as “nonsense” and arguing that “he cannot control the flames.” The allegation is that Netanyahu’s strategy was to “keep Hamas there, weaken the Palestinian authority on the West Bank, sustain the extremists, weaken the moderate,” a approach that, according to the speakers, “exploded in our faces in the most brutal way on October 7.” Finally, one speaker describes Netanyahu as repeatedly presenting himself as “the expert on terrorism” and “the protector of Israel,” and asserts that under his regime, the country has entered into “this incredible, unbelievable war.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The public blames Netanyahu for October 7 as the one who fed the beast. He did not create Hamas, but but he fed it. Speaker 1: Netanyahu, who is against peace and who is against having a Palestinian state, dealt with Hamas for a long time as a strategic friend. It was important for him to keep Gaza under the control of Hamas and keeping the West Bank under the control of Fateh and preventing them from being united in any way. In order to do so, Netanyahu was all the time helping Hamas to survive. Speaker 0: At the same time that he was under investigation, he arranged for Hamas to receive $35,000,000 every month from Qatar. Speaker 2: Netanyahu can't give the money by himself. Israel will not give money to the Hamas. You cannot even transfer this money through banks because even the banks don't want to cooperate. So you, the Israeli prime minister, needs to beg this small and very rich country, Qatar, to give money to our enemy. Speaker 1: This suitcases of money was given to Hamas under the request of Benjamin Netanyahu personally. And because the Qatarians knew him from the beginning, they were asking him to send them his requests in writing because they knew that he's going to lie in the future. Speaker 3: He allowed more than 1,000,000,000 to be transferred to the hands of the Hamas because he believed that he can control the level of hatred. It's nonsense. He cannot control the flames. Speaker 0: Your strategy was keep Hamas there, weaken the Palestinian authority on the West Bank, sustain the extremists, weaken the moderate. This exploded in our faces in the most brutal way on October 7. Speaker 4: Bibi tells the world again and again and again, I'm the expert on terrorism. I know how to fight terrorism. I'm the protector of Israel. And under his regime, we get into this incredible, unbelievable war.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

These pages of history are stuck together 🚨 Israel’s former Finance Minister ousted Bibi Netanyahu when he tried to Extend a Special Tax Haven Law for Hollywood Mogul Arnon Milchan — A Thank you for Arnon’s role in once Smuggling Nuclear Tech for Israel Yes… we are finally going there.. 🔻 Arnon Milchan is an Israeli billionaire (net worth ~$6.4B as of 2026), Hollywood film producer (over 130 films including Pretty Woman, Fight Club, L.A. Confidential), and literally a former Israeli intelligence operative. Milchan was benefiting from Israel's "Milchan Law" (Amendment 168, 2008), which gave new/returning residents a 10-year tax exemption on foreign income. As the exemption neared its end, he sought to extend it to 20 years. He pushed Netanyahu to extend this law to pay less in taxes… a tax law that benefits only few. Netanyahu went on to urge his Finance Minister to extend the tax law. He refused. In Netanyahu's ongoing corruption trial (Case 1000), prosecutors allege Milchan gave the Netanyahu family hundreds of thousands of dollars in luxury gifts (cigars and champagne) over years. In return, Netanyahu tried to push changes to extend or enhance the tax breaks for Milchan (and others). Milchan testified he discussed his tax issues with Netanyahu. Netanyahu denies any quid pro quo. 🔻THE MOTHER OF ALL ADMITTANCES ON NATIONAL TELEVISION In a 2013 interview on Israel's Channel 2 program Uvda, Milchan publicly admitted for the first time that he worked for ~20 years (1960s–1980s) as an operative for LAKAM (a secretive Israeli agency). He helped procure arms, technology, and materials—including krytrons (nuclear triggers)—to support Israel's nuclear weapons program. He said he did it "for my country and I'm proud of it," describing the risky work as serving Israel like a real-life James Bond. Clip https://rumble.com/v77ptwm-netanyahus-quid-pro-quo-with-arnon-milchan.html The Bibi Files https://tuckercarlson.com/the-bibi-files-film

Video Transcript AI Summary
Arnold Mitchen has an access to the prime minister where other people don't get this access. Anytime he needs something, he can pick up the phone and find it. There is some law in Israel that help Arnold Michel to pay less taxes. This law has a deadline, and Meacham wants to this deadline to be pushing far off. So Netanyahu is speaking with his finance minister, telling him, maybe we'll help Arnold. Well, we will do it with this law, extend it for few more years. Any law that relates to taxes needs to go through ALLP, the finance minister. He tried to help Arnold Mitchel in few other things. Arnold Mitchel helped Israel in some ways to get all kinds of equipment to our nuclear project to build nuclear bombs. This was forty or fifty years ago. Many people thought some of the things that he did was against the American laws. Years later, he decided to brag about it and to tell it out loud. Lieutenant Lord James Bond. Wow. They're ex very exciting. It made someone in the American administration furious. Not only he did it, but now he said it out loud. So they decided to cut his visa, and all his life is in The US.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Arnold Mitchen has an access to the prime minister where other people don't get this access. Anytime he needs something, he can pick up the phone and find it. There is some law in Israel that help Arnold Michel to pay less taxes. This law has a deadline, and Meacham wants to this deadline to be pushing far off. So Netanyahu is speaking with his finance minister, telling him, maybe we'll help Arnold. Well, we will do it with this law, extend it for few more years. Any law that relates to taxes needs to go through ALLP, the finance minister. He tried to help Arnold Mitchel in few other things. Arnold Mitchel helped Israel in some ways to get all kinds of equipment to our nuclear project to build nuclear bombs. This was forty or fifty years ago. Many people thought some of the things that he did was against the American laws. Years later, he decided to brag about it and to tell it out loud. Lieutenant Lord James Bond. Wow. They're ex very exciting. It made someone in the American administration furious. Not only he did it, but now he said it out loud. So they decided to cut his visa, and all his life is in The US.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHYT‼️ Is this what she meant when she said, “If this coms out, I’m dead?” 🚨 During her police interrogation, Israeli-American billionaire Miriam Adelson stated that Sara Netanyahu would subtly "hint" that she wanted expensive luxury gifts, such as high-end jewelry. https://t.co/YEbjGjPgAJ

MJTruthUltra
Posted - February 19, 2026 at 3:07 AM
Saved - February 19, 2026 at 4:55 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I read that Canada announced a new Express Entry category for skilled military recruits into the Canadian Armed Forces, allegedly inviting foreign nationals to join. Minister Lena Diab is quoted as saying it will defend sovereignty and keep Canadians safe. The post claims this could lead to Canadians being defended by non-Canadians and poses a threat to U.S. national security.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLY SHYT… 🚨 The Canadian Federal Government decided to FLUSH OUT their local talent and just announced New EXPRESSED ENTRY for immigrant categories of "skilled military recruits" into the Canadian Armed Forces You read that right… the want foreign nationals (Chinese soldiers) to join their ranks. The Minister Lena Diab who announced it states — “This will help defend our sovereignty and keep Canadians safe." It’s about to get a lot easier to use the Canadian military against Canadian citizens, when the soldiers aren't even Canadian. This is a threat to the National Security of the United States. https://rumble.com/v75ykfi-canada-announces-new-category-for-immigrants-to-join-the-canadian-armed-for.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The announcement introduces new immigration categories aimed at addressing critical labor needs and strengthening national capacity. First, a category is being added for candidates with work experience in transport occupations, specifically including pilots, aircraft mechanics, and inspectors. These sectors have been identified as areas in critical need. The intent behind strengthening these categories is to help move goods across the country and to new markets, thereby supporting trade, supply chains, and economic resilience. In addition, a new category is being created to attract highly skilled foreign military applicants by focusing on skilled military recruits. Eligible recruits who have a job offer from the Canadian Armed Forces, including doctors, nurses, pilots, can be invited to apply for permanent residence. These recruits will be subject to the same security and all military requirements as other applicants. The new category is framed as part of a broader effort to support the government’s commitment to strengthen the armed forces, defend sovereignty, and keep Canadians safe. This category, along with other priority categories, is said to support Canada’s defense industrial strategy. The defense industrial strategy was announced yesterday by Prime Minister Kearney.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're also adding categories for candidates with work experience in transport occupations, including pilots, aircraft mechanics, and inspectors. We've identified these sectors as areas in critical need. Strengthening strengthening those helps us move goods across the country and to new markets, supporting trade, supply chains, and economic resilience. And finally, we are creating a new category for skilled military recruits to attract highly skilled foreign military applicants. Eligible recruits with a job offer from the Canadian Armed Forces, including doctors, nurses, pilots, can be invited to apply for permanent residence. They will be subject to the same security and all military requirements. This new category will support our government's commitment to strengthen our armed forces, to defend our sovereignty, and to keep Canadians safe. This category and other priority categories supports Canada's defense industrial strategy, which Prime Minister Kearney announced yesterday.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - February 3, 2026 at 6:07 PM
Saved - February 3, 2026 at 9:55 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Holy crap, this is crazy.. 🚨 Jeffrey Epstein was collaborating with Bitcoin developer biohacker and transhumanist Bryan Bishop to create 'the first live birth of a human “designer baby” and human cloning within five years, and was conducting initial experiments in UKRAINE “Sounds like you could be the first investor as long as absolute anonymity is kept. I have always envisioned there would be anonymity requirements about babies-- we can't publicly identify who these are or their parents or benefactors, it would brand the child as (essentially, and sadly) a freak for life in the media. So I had always assumed the investor would need absolute anonymity, for these kinds of products. So the financial structure needs to be designed with these details in mind.” “This gets us out of our self-funded "garage biology" phase to the first live birth of a human designer baby, and possibly a human clone, within 5 years. Once we reach the first birth, everything changes and the world will never be the same again, much less the future of the human species”

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Jeffrey Epstein to Peter Thiel 👀 Epstein represented the Rothschilds? Epstein: “As you probably know I represent the Rothschilds — I’ll be in europe again 20-28 . then island, so if you want to come around the world going west. come to the island…” Peter Thiel: “Should be back on East Coast in late April/May — sometime in NYC or on island, then...”

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

I have a feeling they’re not talking about shrimp.. Jeffrey Epstein on my island in the caribbean , with an aquarium full of girls Later.. Jeffrey Epstein no , some are like shrimp , you throw away the head and keep the body Olivier Colom I like shrimp. But not so https://t.co/vg4lcVDUCm

MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 30, 2026 at 10:31 PM
Saved - January 31, 2026 at 8:30 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Epstein Files Unemployed Drug Addict Referred by True Pundit’s Michael Moore Alleges Bush Sr. & Bill Clinton Raped Him on Epstein Yacht While Trump & Melania Watched Baby Dismemberment & Feces-Eating Satanic Ritual Michael Moore should say it all.. meh. • The claimed he was raped by George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton on Epstein Yacht – Says Trump & Melania Were Present Watching Infant Sacrifice and Intestine Feces Consumption • Ultimately, The Tip was Dismissed by FBI/NYPD 🔻 But here's where it falls apart fast: —— No evidence whatsoever: Zero witnesses, documents, photos, flight logs, yacht records, or third-party corroboration. The man offered nothing the agents could follow up on. —— Heavy drug history: Past hallucinogenic mushrooms + other illicit substances; still smoking marijuana regularly at time of interview. Claims occurred during a self-described "heavy drug-induced state." —— Repressed memories recovered in therapy: Classic red flag for unreliable recall — especially extreme, graphic details surfacing years later without prior disclosure. —— Agents described him as "emotionally unbalanced" —— Trump/Melania, were reportedly dating on and off… married in 2005, makes their joint presence on a 2000 yacht trip already questionable. —— FBI/NYPD conclusion: Explicit recommendation — "not recommended that any additional investigative resources be expended." They closed it as non-credible within days. —— Finally, again, he was referred by Michael Moore. Yikes… The entire point I think was to get his allegations documented… it’s important to understand where these allegations come from.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Epstein Files Former Israeli PM Ehud Barak asks Epstein if he will be in London in 2018. Epstein replied — “Unfortunately Not… you should make clear that I don’t work for MOSSAD.” https://t.co/qWBPCuHkKQ

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Here you go.. a clearer view of the President Trump Allegations in the Epstein Files… and yes, the link now works. As I stated previously, these allegations came from random people, including from Australia, calling into the NTOC or SDNY Tip Line. Again, People are posting https://t.co/hHPPqMeC2x

MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 28, 2026 at 7:40 PM
Saved - January 29, 2026 at 12:01 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
A claim from a former TPUSA employee asserts Liz Harris says Mossad controls Turning Point USA, including Charlie Kirk, Alex Jones, and Steve Bannon, with transcript excerpts mentioning Jewish names and Mossad. The poster notes uncertainty about the call’s timing and urges caution, linking full interview and related clips. A responder mentions this had been exposed earlier.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk Former TPUSA Employee Matthew Tucciarone has AZ RNC Committeewoman Liz Harris on a Recording stating she believes TPUSA, Tyler Bowyer, Charlie Kirk, Alex Jones, and Steve Bannon were controlled by Mossad 🔻 Transcript of the Call: "The other very delicate thing we have going on is all this stuff with Israel. Now, Thaler is Jewish. Breger is Jewish. Like when I say Jewish, they're very Jewish meaning... Goldstein... that like there's so many names... there's so many names I can throw out that I do believe... When we look at Turning Point and we look at all of this, I do see Mossad… Again there's so many other things that I'm connecting dots. I think Alex Jones is controlled by them. Charlie Kirk's controlled by them. Steve Bannon. This is... I can’t believe nobody’s killed me. I really can’t… I had no idea why. 🔻 Other speaker. Because God is protecting right now, there's a lot of people that are surprised they're not dead but nobody gets to do anything unless God gives it permission. "And I'm with you Liz... I've already had people show up to my door from what I've exposed but I'm still alive. We're meant to be alive." 🔻My Thoughts: Liz Harris was one of the most vocal state legislators in AZ speaking out against the 2020 election fraud and was expelled. It’s important to find out when this call was made. Something feels off about this, but I dunno. I report, you judge for yourself. Overall, I’d take this with a huge grain of salt. Former Employee https://rumble.com/v74zc7k-former-tpusa-employee-says-he-has-recording-of-liz-harris-saying-she-believ.html Liz Harris https://rumble.com/v74zc9q-liz-harris-on-recorded-audio-saying-she-believes-tpusa-is-mossad.html Full Interview https://t.co/g4GlCQpJkP

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss alleged hidden dynamics within Turning Point and connections to international and ideological forces. Speaker 0 claims that Arizona has long investigated Turning Point, and that conversations within the state finally broke into the public sphere. He says he spoke with Liz Harris, a former Arizona House member, and asserts that Harris told him, “Turning Point's Mossad. Tyler Boyer is Mossad. They're all neocons. They're connected to Mossad.” He says he has the report and a recording of Harris saying this, emphasizing that many people warned him but he wanted to verify for himself. He states that "when Charlie died that was it for me" and that he decided it was time to come out and reveal what he witnessed and participated in, apologizing to the American people. Speaker 1 acknowledges familiarity with Liz Harris and then asks for details about internal communications leaking after Charlie’s death, which allegedly show that he was leaving the Zionist cause and that leadership faced questions about Israel policy. The question is whether Tyler Boyer was explicitly asked about this direction and what his answer was. Speaker 0 describes an incident in Boyer’s office where a female associate asked Boyer, “why are you so against Candace Owens. The Israel cause etcetera.” He says Boyer closed the door, pulled the speaker’s friend in, and told her, “listen, I’m a Zionist. Candace Owens is a black conservative who wants to be relevant in this movement. And she's doing whatever she can at all cause to stay relevant.” He presents this as proof, claiming it is in the text he sent to Stu and that the friend confirmed it in the office encounter. Across the exchange, the core assertions are that Liz Harris labeled Turning Point's leadership as connected to Mossad and neocon interests, specifically naming Tyler Boyer as Mossad; that after Charlie’s death there were internal, leaked communications about Zionist alignment and Israel policy; and that Boyer disclosed a Zionist stance and disparaged Candace Owens during a confrontation in his office, presenting Candace Owens as attempting to stay relevant in the movement.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Arizona, Sue, the stuff that's coming out now about Turning Point, it's always been there, well before 2024. During the inception of Turning Point, Arizonans have done a great job at investigating it just never got out of the boundaries of our state and never did until now. There was a conversation that I had with Liz Harris who used to be part of the Arizona House of Representatives. Speaker 1: Yeah, we know Liz. Speaker 0: Yep. I had a conversation with her. I have it recorded too because in Arizona you can record conversations. She literally said to me, Turning Point's Mossad. Tyler Boyer is Mossad. They're all neocons. Speaker 1: Liz Harris told you this? Speaker 0: Liz Harris told me this. I have the report. Speaker 1: She told you Tyler Boyer was Mossad? Speaker 0: Yep. Yep, and neo cons. They're the neo cons and they're connected to Mossad. I have it all on recording. So that's when I, this was, and these are the people that tried to warn me about turning point Liz tried to warn me my friend Luke tried to warn me a lot of people tried to warn me but I wanted to see for myself, I'm on that kind of person because I am here for the truth. And I wanted to see for myself and when Charlie died that was it for me of his time to come out was time to come clean and let everybody know what I witnessed participated in and I do apologize to the American people I really do. Speaker 1: So we have internal communications that have obviously been leaked since Charlie's death indicating that he was leaving the Zionist cause. He said he was gonna be forced to leave the pro Israel cause. It's completely understandable that employees at Turning Point would ask leadership, well, what direction are we gonna go in on this Israel issue? Was Tyler Boyer ever asked that explicitly and what was his answer? Speaker 0: Specifically, Boyer, I would say so my friend when she was in his office said to him, you know what is it that you have why why are you so against Candace Owens. The Israel cause etcetera. She specifically she's brave she's she's both show show asked Tyler Boyer right to his face because she wants to know what is the big deal about not supporting Israel. That's when he shut the door pulled her in and said, listen, I'm a Zionist. Candace Owens is a black conservative who wants to be relevant in this movement. And she's doing whatever she can at all cause to stay relevant. So that to me says a lot. That is proof. And it's in the text that I sent you to Stu of where she confirmed like, he pulled me into his office and said that to me.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: The other very delicate thing we have going on is all this stuff with Israel. Now, Thaler is Jewish, Breger is Jewish. Like, when I say Jewish, I mean, like, not they're very Jewish, meaning Bev Goldstein, like there's so many names I can throw out that I do believe when we look at Turning Point and we look at all of this, I do see Mossad, I see, again, there's so many other things where I'm connecting dots. I think Alex Jones is controlled by them, Charlie Kirk's controlled by them, Steve Bannon. This is I can't believe nobody's killed me. I really can't. I have no idea why. Because God is protecting right now. There's a lot of people that are surprised or not right now, but nobody gets to do anything unless God gives it permission. I'm with you, Liz. I mean, I've already had people show up to my door from what I've exposed, but I'm still alive. We're meant to be alive. So
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The other very delicate thing we have going on is all this stuff with Israel. Now, Thaler is Jewish, Breger is Jewish. Like, when I say Jewish, I mean, like, not they're very Jewish, meaning Bev Goldstein, like there's so many names I can throw out that I do believe when we look at Turning Point and we look at all of this, I do see Mossad, I see, again, there's so many other things where I'm connecting dots. I think Alex Jones is controlled by them, Charlie Kirk's controlled by them, Steve Bannon. This is I can't believe nobody's killed me. I really can't. I have no idea why. Because God is protecting right now. There's a lot of people that are surprised or not right now, but nobody gets to do anything unless God gives it permission. I'm with you, Liz. I mean, I've already had people show up to my door from what I've exposed, but I'm still alive. We're meant to be alive. So

@Redmrd1 - Redmd

@MJTruthUltra Hmmmm @DecentBackup exposed this months ago! Important to save @LovesKetty15762

MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 27, 2026 at 8:13 PM
Saved - January 27, 2026 at 9:24 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

The Florida Department of Health found 26 top Children Candy Brands contained Dangerous Elevated levels of Arsenic 🔻Ferrara Candy Company - Black Forest Gummy Bears: 370 ppb - Laffy Taffy Banana: 480 ppb - Nerds Grape: 380 ppb - Nerds Strawberry: 450 ppb - Nerds Gummy Cluster: 500 ppb - SweeTarts Original: 400 ppb - SweeTarts Rope: 390 ppb - Trolli Sour Brite Crawlers: 430 ppb 🔻The Hershey Company - Hershey’s Cookies ‘N’ Creme: 280 ppb - Jolly Rancher Hard Candy Sour Apple: 540 ppb - Jolly Rancher Hard Candy Strawberry: 320 ppb - Twizzlers Strawberry: 500 ppb - Twizzlers Cherry: 350 ppb - Twizzlers Watermelon: 510 ppb 🔻 Nestlé - Kit Kat: 230 ppb - Mars - 3 Musketeers: 240 ppb - Snickers: 350 ppb - Original Skittles: 370 ppb 🔻Mondelêz International - Sour Patch Kids: 470 ppb - Sour Patch Kids Tropical: 420 ppb - Sour Patch Kids Watermelon: 420 ppb - Swedish Fish: 220 ppb 🔻Tootsie Roll Industries - Dots: 430 ppb - Fruit Chew Lime: 570 ppb - Roll: 380 ppb - Roll Vanilla: 370 ppb • Smart Sweets (marketed as healthier) - Smart Sweets Caramel: 240 ppb - Sweet Fish: 180 ppb https://rumble.com/v74xnuk-florida-tests-candies-dangerous-elevator-levels-of-arsenic.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Florida Department of Health conducted independent laboratory testing of 46 candy brands from 10 companies. Of the 33 traditional candy brands tested (brands such as Three Musketeers, Snickers, Skittles, Nerds, KitKats, and Jolly Ranchers), arsenic was detected at elevated levels in 26 of the 33 traditional brands.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Promised the attention has turned to another category heavily consumed by children, and that is candy. Through independent testing conducted by certified laboratories, the Florida Department of Health tested 46 different candy brands from 10 different companies. Of those, 33 were traditional, well known candies, brands that we grew up with, things like Three Musketeers and Snickers and Skittles and Nerds and KitKats and Jolly Ranchers. In 26 of the 33 traditional candy brands tested, arsenic was detected at elevated levels. The

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Ron DeSantis: 🚨 We’re finding things in Baby Formula like LEAD “at levels that are not good for human consumption” • 16 out of 24 formulas contained elevated levels of one or more heavy metals exceeding federal benchmarks • The heavy metals tested for and detected included arsenic, mercury, lead, and cadmium. —— Mercury was noted as the most elevated Here is the list of the 16 infant formulas found to have elevated levels of heavy metals based on the Florida Department of Health's testing: - Bubs Goat Milk Based Formula - Enfamil AR Powder - Enfamil Gentlease Powder - Enfamil Gentlease NeuroPro Ready to Use - Enfamil Infant Concentrate - Enfamil Infant NeuroPro Ready to Use - Enfamil Infant Powder - Enfamil Prosobee - Similac Advance Concentrate Liquid - Similac Advance Powder - Similac Sensitive Powder - Similac Soy Isomil Ready to Feed - Similac Soy Isomil Concentrated Liquid - Similac Soy Isomil Powder - Similac Total Comfort Powder - Kendamil Goat Milk Based Formula (noted in some reports as exceeding for arsenic and cadmium) https://rumble.com/v74xmeq-were-finding-things-in-baby-formula-like-lead-at-levels-that-are-not-good-f.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Florida's healthy first initiative, part of the Make America Healthy Again Florida initiative launched a few months ago by the First Lady, Dr. Latapo, Lieutenant Governor Jay Collins, and the speaker, aims to address health issues families face, especially children. Over the last several months, testing has been conducted on key items used by families, including baby formula. Dr. Latapo oversaw the testing at the Department of Health, and the results were announced and posted on the department’s web page. The findings showed some formulas were very positive, while others were questionable due to concerns like lead and other potentially harmful levels. The dissemination of these results is intended to inform parents about what is happening with products they use. The speaker notes that the state views itself as serving an important role in this area and that the efforts are consistent with what is being pursued at the federal level. The implication is that the state may perform actions the FDA has not yet done, or may do in the future, in order to provide parents with information.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're here to talk about Florida's healthy first initiative. So a few months ago, the first lady, doctor Latapo, Lieutenant Governor Jay Collins, and I launched our Make America Healthy Again Florida initiative and we said there was gonna be a lot of different things that that we were gonna do. One of the things that they've done and now over the last several months is they've done testing on key things that families use, particularly with respect to children. So few weeks back, we did an announcement on testing of baby formula that that doctor Latapo had overseen at the Department of Health. And, you know, you had some of these baby formulas. You know, they've got things like lead and things in them in levels that are probably not good, for human consumption. And so they were able to do those test results, put out the results on the on the web page, and then let people, there were some formulas that were very positive but then there were others that that would be you know, questionable and so, that's really important to be able to to show folks, you what's going on. So we really view us as the state as serving an important role. I think a lot of what we're doing is consistent with what they're trying to do right now at the federal level, but we're showing we have a role to be able to do some of these things that maybe the FDA has not yet done. Maybe they will do in the future but to give parents information

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Ron DeSantis calls out the GOP “Congress can defund sanctuary cities, you know.. Republicans in the House just voted to continue funding Sanctuary Cities.. like why would you do that?” https://rumble.com/v74xlrg-ron-desantis-republicans-voted-to-fund-sanctuary-cities.-why.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that the federal government should address remittances sent by illegal workers, stating that stopping those remittances would be a huge disincentive for people to come and remain illegally. They advocate using federal tools to influence immigration behavior and enforcement. They also address sanctuary cities, noting that Congress can defund them. The speaker mentions that Republicans in the House had voted to continue funding sanctuary cities, and questions why that would be the case. They urge defunding sanctuary cities, implying that using available tools to create an environment that promotes the rule of law is important.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I mean, you know, I I think the federal government should should deal with these remittances that illegal workers are sending back home. If you stop that, that's gonna be a huge disincentive for people to come, and remain, illegally. Congress can defund sanctuary cities. Like, are cities that are being empowered. You know, the Republicans in the house, they just voted to continue funding sanctuary cities. Like, why would you do that? Defund that. So using the tools that you have to create, I think, an environment that's gonna promote the rule of law is really, really
MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 23, 2026 at 1:56 PM
Saved - January 26, 2026 at 4:07 AM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Everyone is reporting they had non stop chemtrails sprayed in their state this past week. Again, how much do they contribute to weather events? https://t.co/Ox7E6JVWFL

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

The east coast is due for a “major snow storm” this weekend… This is in Maryland and only one section of the sky. They have been spraying all week non stop. How much does this contribute to weather events? How has your chemtrails been this week? https://t.co/36BBJnXCY5

MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 20, 2026 at 9:16 PM
Saved - January 21, 2026 at 2:49 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report on Patricia Golder in Ohio, seen in undercover footage claiming to monetize asylum help for migrants. She explains taking one-third of earnings, coaching fabrications to meet legal thresholds, and boasting access to immigration judges willing to bend rules. She allegedly offered $50,000 to a judge to fast-track approvals, and to issue work permits, Social Security cards, and licenses after payoffs.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHYT‼️ 🚨Woman in Ohio Undercover Video Brags About $50K Bribes to Ohio Judges to Fast-Track Asylum for Migrants - At the center of the operation is Patricia Golder, who, according to the footage, has turned the alleged manipulation of the asylum process into her business. - The undercover reporter is introduced to Golder by one of Golder's friends, identified as Cindy Reis, who says Golder helps Mauritanian migrants get their papers. - Golder explains her business model, taking a cut of migrants' earnings: "I take one-third of what they make." If they get $10,000, 1/3 is mine.”!Concerning as it suggests exploitation or a form of indentured labor tied to immigration help. - Coaching on fabricating asylum claims: "You have to make the story... to meet the legal threshold." Golder discusses tailoring narratives (e.g., persecution claims) to increase approval chances, which could involve fraud. - she says she has access to judges, she goes out where they hang out and drink Golder brags about direct access to immigration judges who are willing to bend rules without fear - Explicit bribery of Judges: "Okay, $50,000 I send everybody to you... 50,000 going split between people." Golder describes approaching a judge, offering $50k (split among parties) to route cases for guaranteed approvals. - they Discusses fast-tracking work permits, Social Security cards, and driver's licenses after payoffs, implying rigged timelines. These segments are the most alarming, as they directly allege felony-level activities like bribery (18 U.S.C. § 201), immigration fraud, and exploitation. Sauce Article https://townhall.com/tipsheet/amy-curtis/2026/01/20/exclusive-bombshell-footage-claims-judges-can-be-bought-with-bribes-in-ohio-immigration-courts-n2669544#google_vignette Full 26 Minute Video Here https://rumble.com/v74lv8w-woman-in-undercover-video-brags-about-50k-bribes-to-ohio-judges-to-fast-tra.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes a scheme to influence a judge and secure favorable immigration outcomes by paying off various people. They discuss arranging payments for judges and lawyers to facilitate visas or residency for themselves and others. Key points include: - A plan to extract a share from whatever is earned, with mentions of “whatever I get you, give me a little something back” and a potential “third” of proceeds. - The concept of getting to the judge as the key person to contact, with the idea that “that’s the only person you want that is the judge.” - A detailed process to fund the operation: if they need, for example, $50,000 for a date with a judge, 40 men would contribute amounts to reach the total, with each person paying about $1,200. - The method of delivering money to the judge: using a system described as “lime” or “lime” app, which is claimed to be untraceable, and an online payment approach via green dot cards bought at CVS, allegedly to avoid tracking. - The claim that these cards can’t be spent for large sums all at once, labeling them as fraud and explaining they’re used for money laundering in Jamaica, with a plan to move money to the judge and the lawyer. - The notion of washing money through Jamaica, using a network of people and a strategy to bring Africans, Asians, Caucasians, Mexicans, and others to work in the country, with work permits opened for everyone. - An assertion that they operate within legality, insisting they “do legit” things and that there would be red flags if caught; they claim to avoid schemes that would land them jailed. - A scenario involving Al Pacino, his wife, and a divorce, used as an example of a legal entanglement that could be exploited to secure a judge’s assistance, with a suggestion to approach a lawyer for an in-country court to pressure a decision. - The use of a specific immigration attorney, Michael Weber in Cincinnati, described as the professional to handle cases, including a distinction between his appearance and perceived legitimacy, and a process of presenting envelopes containing names rather than cash to influence outcomes. - The discussion of identifying and contacting the lead immigration judge and the possibility of calling the judge directly, with the idea of assembling a list or “envelope” of names to present to the judge. - A broader claim that a judge’s cooperation could enable immigration outcomes, regardless of hierarchy, and the juxtaposition with a friend named Vernon, who had a 30-day deadline to leave the country, becoming a fugitive. - A subtext about personal relationships used to navigate leverage, such as a suggestion that Vernon marry someone for protection or status, and contemplation of how a “good old lady” might be compensated or cared for in exchange for support. Overall, the dialogue centers on bribery-like tactics, money movement schemes, and networks purportedly designed to influence immigration officials and secure favorable treatment.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If anything, they get me get dirty. I told her that she's your makeup on. Speaker 1: What happened? Speaker 0: I told her that everything you make is mine. Speaker 1: So you so you tell the the vet, hey. Whatever I get you, give me a little something back. Speaker 0: No. Third. Speaker 1: A third. Speaker 0: If you get $10,000, I'll tell this one. If I can get to the to the judge. You know, that's only person you want that is the judge. Speaker 1: Wait. Say it again. Speaker 0: If I can get to the judge. Yeah. It's okay. Sometimes it's some Speaker 1: people So they'll pay you. Speaker 0: Some place drink some big places where you don't even drink alcohol, but you're going to some big places. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: The big boys sit down and drink. Yeah. Those places. Right. Make a conversation with him. Yeah. Let me see. I have this boy there and that date up. He worked that day? You say, yeah. You say, okay. $50,000. I send everybody's. See all these names? Yeah. I have them in my book. Okay? I go to the bar like everybody should. Spot me, judge. That's it. You work on this date? You like? Let me see my aunt calling that you go in this phone. Yeah. What's your problem? I said, I got all these boys, man. Why don't you let them back here? Cut your boy from Hey. You better give me 50 j, baby. Speaker 1: The judge says that? Speaker 0: You scared a little bit. God, really. You don't wanna be a pay bill just like me. Yeah. Come on, man. Speaker 1: How does the judge get paid, though? Speaker 0: Because Oh, no. Maybe you've gotta help me. I'm a come back and say, watch out. We have this deadline. We need $50,000. And then they list me look, count them down. Calculate it. You give me this, you give me this, gotta make the money. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: We have 40 man. But a $50,000. So everybody gotta pay $1,200. Speaker 1: But then you have to do the dangerous part of getting it to the judge. Speaker 0: Right. Exactly. So I mean, like see something they call lime. When you cannot chase back. Speaker 1: What's it called? Lime? Speaker 0: Lime. Speaker 1: Uh-huh. Oh, it's an app. Speaker 0: You cannot chase back. Speaker 1: And you so you send Speaker 0: it through. Online. Speaker 1: You send it through lime. Pay online? Yeah. Okay. Pay? Speaker 0: Pay online. Speaker 1: Should I set up an account? Speaker 0: Green.com. Speaker 1: What is it called? Speaker 0: Greendot.com. You go CVS and buy a card. Just, like, dollar 25¢ to the card. You want to have money where you want to spend to pay people. Speaker 1: Mhmm. And it's not trackable? Speaker 0: You can't track. Speaker 1: And that's the same shit you use for the judges? Speaker 0: Nobody can nobody don't watch that. Speaker 1: But you trust that with to even use it for the judges? Yes. Okay. Speaker 0: You see, this card, they can't spend, like, $10,000,000 at the transport any amount of money. Those card those card is fraud. Speaker 1: It's what? Speaker 0: Fraud. God. That's why they sell them. The card, use if it's, like, me for money laundering at Jamaica, and you will be at Jamaica. They said, Theresa, it'd be $100,000. I need you to drop online. You drop your phone line. Gotcha. I'm gonna put in a few code number. You have only you have the code. Me. So you know how much we have. Gotcha. If you're going to push money, you have to have somebody who can wash the money. Mhmm. And that's what people get greedy and grab up for emissions. Speaker 1: Do you have somebody in Jamaica that can wash the money for you? Speaker 0: If we get it he come to my hand? Oh, hell yes. Somebody buy a property because of salary need. Buy building property, rent those shit out. If you get in a business here in America. Speaker 1: So you're able to wash the money through line to Jamaica? Speaker 0: $1,200. Every African will come in this country. Asian, Caucasian, Mexican, African, all this video coming to this country. Because you know why? Everybody coming here get to work in progress. Yeah. Everybody coming here. I'm giving them work permit. Work permits Mhmm. Open. Mhmm. To everybody. If you get caught by fire, there's a red flag on my name. Speaker 1: But you don't get nervous about that because it's you trust? Speaker 0: No. I do legit. Anything I'm doing is legit. Okay. I don't do nothing where I'm gonna look behind the back of I'm gonna get jailed. No. I do legit things. Right. So As long as Speaker 1: you don't get caught? Speaker 0: No. I do legit. Speaker 1: So when you send the money to, say, the judge, that's legit? Speaker 0: Yes. See, Al Pacino is a married man, and his wife doing bad income in this country. Yeah. Wife doing bad because his wife leave a house with another man here. Yeah. Have kid for the man here. Speaker 1: But but but but you had a good idea saying that he won't give her a divorce, so if he goes back to Africa, then her family would kill him. Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. One day, we we could go back to face the judge, but I get Malaya to go to court with him that day. Yeah. You have to have a lawyer. We can go to the judge. You know, that's the one who talk to the judge. He's the liar. You get the lawyer. And you say, okay. We have this sheet of paper. I need you to ask the judge how much to care these people three more year in this country for me to get this project done. And you say, okay. Give me $50,000. Speaker 1: You send 50,000 to the lawyer? Speaker 0: Yes. $50,000 going split up between everybody. Speaker 1: Between the lawyer and the judge? Speaker 0: Judge. He hold them and get money. Attorney, you walk up in the day office. Cash money. Have no trail. Here's a booster. Speaker 1: But you have one you've used. You would use Speaker 0: I got Weber. Weber? Who? Michael Weber. Speaker 1: Michael Weber? Yes. Where is he at? Lebanon? Speaker 0: No. He's in Cincinnati here. Speaker 1: What kind of attorney is immigration? Speaker 0: He is, like, immigration. He is like if I get injured, he's white. Speaker 1: He's white guy. Speaker 0: Yeah. Bald? Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah. Glasses? Yes. Speaker 0: This is what people don't understand. Just put on their pants and see you wear like us. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 0: And you don't go to them. We're gonna make them tights. They need to wear tights. Right. Leggings. They need their head and they need lifting and nail them. Yeah. Yeah. So when they had got to them, it's like, what's up? Speaker 1: This is what the hell You have an envelope for them? Speaker 0: There's four or five of them in there already. Maze, where you need to get help. And you're like, okay. Speaker 1: So then you talk to him. You got your envelope. You show him some names, whatever. Speaker 0: You put the name in the envelope, like a cash money. Speaker 1: No cash. Just the name. Speaker 0: Just the name. You see this judge right here? Speaker 1: Which one? Speaker 0: This one right here. I can't see You see if you wanna talk to them. And one of these judge, see if you wanna talk to another day, you're the one that one judge. Speaker 1: Which one do I wanna talk to? Speaker 0: One person. Anyone and then just get one judge. All of them talk. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Mhmm. Speaker 0: Mhmm. That's what you have. And I think everyone in the. Right. If you have to go talk to him, talk Speaker 1: to him. But have you ever talked Speaker 0: to him? Yeah. I talked to him. Call his number. Give me the number. I called. They asked me. Okay. Speaker 1: She's in charge of the entire the lead judge in Speaker 0: the yeah. You go back in her phone now. You know, say she she's do like this. What's phone number? I need the court paper where they have the see the I I the IDIP, that number. It's very important to me to look them up. If I found out who is the judge, then I can call here. You're free if you send it back to them. Is what we're getting put on the table for you. Alright. So you're with me or you're without Speaker 1: You're not afraid to go after the the the one on the top? Speaker 0: That's it. Listen. If you go we wanna start on the bottom. Speaker 1: If you would do that with the chief immigration judge in the country, man, you're fucking gangster. Speaker 0: Anybody. Speaker 1: How's Vernon? Vernon? Vernon. Vernon. Speaker 0: Friday was his thirty days. Speaker 1: What was it? Speaker 0: Friday was his thirty day in this country. Speaker 1: How many days? Speaker 0: Thirty days they gave him to leave the country. Speaker 1: Your brother? Mhmm. To kicking him out? So now he's like a fugitive. Speaker 0: He's a fugitive. He's not like. I said to him, said, before you go, marry that lady. I get the lady myself. I said, marry that lady. He said, why in Michigan I married that old 72 year old woman? I said, bitch, that lady said she marry you. You need a ticket or you fucking ghost. Speaker 1: What's the old lady get out of it? Speaker 0: She ain't getting nothing. Speaker 1: Don't need Speaker 0: to care him. She don't have the child. Speaker 1: She don't care. Speaker 0: She don't have the kids? Speaker 1: No. She's just old lady. She don't really want no money Speaker 0: or nothing. No. She just want you make sure if she's sick, you'll be got her Speaker 1: back. Gotcha. Speaker 0: She looking companion. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. Take care of her. Speaker 0: Right. That's all you have to do is take care of her.
Exclusive: Bombshell Footage Claims Judges Can Be Bought With Bribes in Ohio Immigration Courts Exclusive footage reveals potential corruption in Ohio immigration courts involving bribed judges. townhall.com
MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 14, 2026 at 3:16 AM
Saved - January 14, 2026 at 4:30 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I, following RFK Jr, trust the “science.” He says the chickenpox vaccine, while halting chickenpox, causes shingles epidemics later—20x deadlier—based on Gary Goldman’s long-term California study. Europe doesn’t mandate it, and the UK NHS supposedly notes it’s not recommended because of later shingles. He argues the system profits from sickness and cures. Clip and full videos are linked.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Trust the “Science” RFK JR - Many don’t realize, the Chickenpox Vaccine Causes shingles Epidemics “When the CDC was thinking about mandating the chickenpox vaccine for your children, they did a study. The person they hired to do that study was a scientist named Gary Goldman, who did a long-term study in California. What he found is that if you give the chickenpox vaccine, mass vaccinate, it stops chickenpox, but causes shingle epidemics later on; which is 20x deadlier. Despite those studies, we mandated for American children in this country, but in Europe they don’t. If you go to the British National Health Service website right now, you can read that it will say, “We do not recommend chickenpox vaccines because it causes shingles epidemics later on… and that’s the problem. 🔗 Yup, it’s there https://www.nhs.uk/vaccinations/chickenpox-vaccine/ You can’t say this product is going to prevent this particular disease, but you have to look at the long-term implications.” Round and round the cash cow goes. They get you sick to hand you the cure, which gets you sick again. 💰 Clip https://rumble.com/v3k6uf1-rfk-jr-the-chickenpox-vaccine-causes-shingles-epidemics-later-on.html Full https://rumble.com/v3k4zxs-rfk-jr-town-hall.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker states that when the CDC considered mandating the chickenpox vaccine for children, they hired Gary Goldman, a contract scientist, to conduct a long-term study in Antelope Valley, California. The study allegedly found that mass vaccination with the chickenpox vaccine stops chickenpox but causes shingles epidemics later on, which are 20 times as deadly as chickenpox. Despite these findings, the speaker claims the United States mandated the vaccine for American children, whereas in Europe they do not. The speaker points to the British National Health Service website, claiming it says they do not recommend chickenpox vaccines because it causes shingles epidemics later on, and emphasizes the need to consider long-term effects, not just the immediate prevention of a single disease.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When when CDC was thinking of recommending this chickenpox vaccine as mandating for children, the they did a study, and the scientists they hired to do that study was a scientist called Gary Goldman, a contract scientist. And he did the study in an isolated place in California called Antelope Valley, a long term study. And what they find is if you give the chickenpox vaccine, mass vaccinate with chickenpox, it stops chickenpox, but it causes shingles epidemics later on, which are 20 times as deadly as chickenpox. So if you go so nevertheless, despite those studies, we mandated for American children in this country. In Europe, they don't. If you go to the British National Health Service website right now, you can read on that where they say, we do not recommend chickenpox vaccines because it causes shingles epidemics later on. And that's the problem. You can't just look at you know, you can say that this product is gonna prevent this particular disease, but you have to look at the long term
Chickenpox vaccine Find out about the chickenpox vaccine, including who can get it on the NHS, how to get it and what the side effects are. nhs.uk

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Heads need to roll.. 🚨The CDC Held a Secret Meeting, known as ‘Simpsonwood’, after a Study showed the Hepatitis B Vaccine was Causing Autism in Children • A study was conducted, comparing babies who got the Hepatitis B Vaccine (loaded with mercury, Thiomersal) within the first 30 days to babies who never got it at all.. ⬇️ 🔴 WHAT THEY FOUND WAS SHOCKING! • The CDC’s own data containing the medical records of 100,000+ children, showed that a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines known as, Thimerosal, was responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. —— speech delays —— attention-deficit disorder —— hyperactivity —— Autism ⬆️ For comparison, the relative risk of developing lung cancer from smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years, is 10…. But if your child was vaccinated with the Hepatitis B Vaccine, the likelihood of your child developing autism was 11.35! 🔴 THE CDC PUSHED THE PANIC BUTTON • The CDC held a secret meeting, later to be known as “Simpsonwood”, with top government public health officials, all major agencies (FDA, CDC, NIH, WHO, HHS), as well vaccine manufacturers, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. —— There were ZERO public announcements of the session, only private invitations. • The CDC was afraid the meeting would be subjected to Freedom of Information Requests (FOIA)… so In June 2000, they gathered everyone for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood Methodist retreat conference center in Norcross, Georgia, along Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. 🔴 BUT SOMEBODY RECORDED THAT MEETING… • RFK Jr got ahold of those transcripts in 2005 and says, —— “it’s horrific! It’s a nightmare! They looked at the science and said it’s 100% bulletproof, WE ARE CAUSING AUTISM!” • Instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry’s bottom line. 🔴 COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION • Despite clear evidence from their own mouths, a Senate Committee investigation found these claims to be “unsubstantiated”… from individuals who had clear financial ties to the industry. —— Dr. Sam Katz, the committee’s chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and was part of a team that developed the measles vaccine and brought it to licensure in 1963. —— Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine. —— The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisers who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine “had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.” • Rep. Dan Burton, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal and found there was a coverup and vaccines with Thimerosal caused autism —— “Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic,” his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. 🔴 FAST FORWARD Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants — in one case, within hours of birth. The estimated number of cases of autism has since increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 36 children. When President Trump took office, shortly thereafter appointing RFK JR, these vaccines no longer contain mercury — which is a victory from God. https://rumble.com/v65b7ma-cdc-secret-meeting-simpsonwood-hep-b-vaccines-cause-autism.html

MJTruthUltra
Posted - January 14, 2026 at 12:11 AM
Saved - January 14, 2026 at 4:21 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I read that the CDC held a secret Simpsonwood meeting to discuss a study claiming thimerosal in the hepatitis B vaccine caused autism and other neurodevelopmental issues. It allegedly showed a high autism risk (11.35x) and that officials hid the data to protect the vaccine industry. Later investigations allegedly found conflicts of interest and a cover-up, with vaccines later removing mercury.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Heads need to roll.. 🚨The CDC Held a Secret Meeting, known as ‘Simpsonwood’, after a Study showed the Hepatitis B Vaccine was Causing Autism in Children • A study was conducted, comparing babies who got the Hepatitis B Vaccine (loaded with mercury, Thiomersal) within the first 30 days to babies who never got it at all.. ⬇️ 🔴 WHAT THEY FOUND WAS SHOCKING! • The CDC’s own data containing the medical records of 100,000+ children, showed that a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines known as, Thimerosal, was responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. —— speech delays —— attention-deficit disorder —— hyperactivity —— Autism ⬆️ For comparison, the relative risk of developing lung cancer from smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years, is 10…. But if your child was vaccinated with the Hepatitis B Vaccine, the likelihood of your child developing autism was 11.35! 🔴 THE CDC PUSHED THE PANIC BUTTON • The CDC held a secret meeting, later to be known as “Simpsonwood”, with top government public health officials, all major agencies (FDA, CDC, NIH, WHO, HHS), as well vaccine manufacturers, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. —— There were ZERO public announcements of the session, only private invitations. • The CDC was afraid the meeting would be subjected to Freedom of Information Requests (FOIA)… so In June 2000, they gathered everyone for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood Methodist retreat conference center in Norcross, Georgia, along Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. 🔴 BUT SOMEBODY RECORDED THAT MEETING… • RFK Jr got ahold of those transcripts in 2005 and says, —— “it’s horrific! It’s a nightmare! They looked at the science and said it’s 100% bulletproof, WE ARE CAUSING AUTISM!” • Instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry’s bottom line. 🔴 COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION • Despite clear evidence from their own mouths, a Senate Committee investigation found these claims to be “unsubstantiated”… from individuals who had clear financial ties to the industry. —— Dr. Sam Katz, the committee’s chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and was part of a team that developed the measles vaccine and brought it to licensure in 1963. —— Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine. —— The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisers who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine “had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.” • Rep. Dan Burton, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal and found there was a coverup and vaccines with Thimerosal caused autism —— “Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic,” his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. 🔴 FAST FORWARD Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants — in one case, within hours of birth. The estimated number of cases of autism has since increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 36 children. When President Trump took office, shortly thereafter appointing RFK JR, these vaccines no longer contain mercury — which is a victory from God. https://rumble.com/v65b7ma-cdc-secret-meeting-simpsonwood-hep-b-vaccines-cause-autism.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes a study on the hepatitis B vaccine, stating it is loaded with mercury during the first thirty days of life and comparing infants who received it in that period to those who did not or who received it later. He claims that the relative risk of smoking a pack a day for twenty years leading to lung cancer is ten, with a figure of 11.35, and attributes this to Thimerosal. Speaker 1 asks if the claim is about Thimerosal, and Speaker 0 confirms, then recounts a story that motivated his involvement: a “secret meeting” held to avoid on-campus exposure to freedom of information requests. The meeting occurred at Simpson Wood, a remote Methodist retreat center on the Chattahoochee River in Norcross, Georgia. Over two days, 52 attendees included major vaccine companies, regulatory agencies (WHO, CDC, FDA, NIH, HHS), and leaders in academic vaccinology. Megan recorded the first day, and Speaker 0 says he obtained the transcripts in 2005, calling them horrific. He invites listeners to read them on the Children’s Health Events site to judge for themselves, arguing the transcripts reveal “panjarums of the American healthcare system” and that regulators claimed the science was bulletproof while suggesting vaccines cause autism. Speaker 1 notes that Speaker 0 has previously claimed the conference revealed that vaccines cause autism and that data should be buried, referencing a January 2011 Rolling Stone article and a Salon piece that later withdrew the article. He mentions an eighteen-month US Senate committee investigation that found allegations of CDC misconduct unsubstantiated and concluded there was no cover-up. Speaker 0 clarifies it was a two-year committee hearing led by Senator Burton at the Governmental Oversight Committee, and asserts that vaccines do cause autism, while encouraging listeners to research the science themselves rather than trust him or the organizations cited. Speaker 0 then attacks the credibility and funding of CDC, NIH, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, claiming they are “bought and paid for,” with statistics he cites: FDA is funded 45% by the pharmaceutical industry; the AAP allegedly gets 80% of its money from industry; and the CDC spends 4,900,000,000 of its 12,000,000,000 annual budget. Speaker 1 pushes back by noting that parents within these organizations vaccinate their own children against vaccines that include thimerosal, asking rhetorically whether they are willingly harming their children, and suggesting a broader government conspiracy. Speaker 0 then directs Speaker 1 to the movie Dopesick for further context, contrasting it with opioid prescriptions, and asserts that doctors treated patients and their own children with opioids because they believed FDA guidance. Overall, the dialogue centers on thimerosal in early vaccines, alleged hidden meetings and data suppression, controversial media coverage of vaccines-autism links, and critical claims about regulatory agency funding and conduct, culminating in comparisons to pharmaceutical and medical industry dynamics.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They looked at the hepatitis B vaccine, which is loaded with mercury during the first thirty days of life. Kids, they looked at kids who got it during the first thirty days. They compared them to kids who did not get it during the first thirty days, who got it later, who didn't get it at all. And here's what they found. The relative risk of smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for twenty years and lung cancer is ten. This was eleven point three five. That Is Speaker 1: that because of Thimerosal? Speaker 0: Causing yeah. From Thimerosal. This is what the story that got me involved because they pushed the panic button. They had a secret meeting. They didn't wanna do it on the CDC campus because they thought it would be susceptible to freedom of information requests. So they did it in a remote Methodist retreat center on the banks of the Chattahoochee River in Norcross, Georgia, and it was called Simpson Wood. They had a two day meeting with 52 individuals, including all the major vaccine companies, regulatory agencies that administer vaccines, WHO, CDC, FDA, NIH, HHS, and the leaders the leading academic vaccinators, so the people who basically conduct clinical trials and make hundreds of millions of dollars for medical schools around this country. And the first day, and somebody, Megan, recorded that meeting. We don't know why. We don't know if they knew they were being recorded, but I got ahold of the transcripts in 2005, and it is horrific. It's a nightmare. Any of your listeners can go to our website, see Children's Health Events and read those transcripts and make up your own mind about what happened. And you see the panjarums of the American healthcare system, these regulators who are supposed to be protecting us the first day, they are looking at the science, and they are saying it's bulletproof. It we are causing autism. Speaker 1: You've are you've made this claim before about this horrific conference in which they confessed, oh, you know, it's causing us autism. We gotta bury the the data. You wrote about it in January 2011 article, that was in Rolling Stone and Salon. It's since been withdrawn by Salon altogether. Rolling Stone had to offer a bunch of corrections. It removed it from its website as well. And your your allegations spurred an eighteen month investigation by a US senate committee that found allegations of CDC misconduct were unsubstantiated, and they concluded that there was no cover up. Speaker 0: It was a two year committee hearings by senator Burton at the government oversight committee, and he found that there was a and that vaccines do cause autism. So, you know, anybody can go, you know, don't trust me. Nothing. Listen. Anything I say about the science, you shouldn't trust me. You should go do your own research, and I'll tell you, you know, the research that I'm relying on, and you can go make up your own line. Mhmm. You also should not trust CDC, NIH, the American Association of Pediatrics, which gets 80% of its money from industry. FDA gets 45% of its budget from the pharmaceutical industry. CDC spends 4,900,000,000.0 of its $12,000,000,000 Speaker 1: budget. I'm not gonna argue with you that those organizations are bought and paid for. We've we've seen that, but but I gotta ask, but let me but let me ask But those Let me just No. No. But no. Let me ask you. No. Let me ask you. Because the same more the the the parents inside those organizations vaccinate their children. The parents who work for Pfizer stick the needle in their kids' arms. Like, are they willingly hurting their children? Like, why why would they all be giving the MMR and the vaccines that have thimerosal in it? You you're alleging sort of a vast government conspiracy to force these vaccines on us from these from these health, quote, unquote, officials who knew it was unsafe, but yet they gave it to their own kids? Speaker 0: Megan, go look at the movie Dopesick, and Speaker 1: you'll answer your question. Speaker 0: You'll answer your own question. The the the doctors in that movie Speaker 1: That's different. They weren't sticking their kids with with opioids. Speaker 0: Their patients and their children opioids because they believed what FDA told
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 19, 2025 at 2:58 AM
Saved - December 19, 2025 at 3:37 AM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

The “Donors” https://t.co/ZVK9Z9WeIl

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

DAMMMMM 🔥🔥🔥 Tucker Carlson called out the TPUSA Donors at AMFEST who didn’t want him speaking at this event tonight when Charlie Kirk did The last several months of Charlie’s life were devoted to defending me by donors who didn’t want me speaking here at this event tonight.. May God protect him.. https://rumble.com/v737c4k-tucker-carlson-called-out-the-tpusa-donors-at-amfest-who-didnt-want-him-spe.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 discusses the value of open debate and denouncing tactics used by some to shut down discussion. He references Charlie Kirk’s public life and the speech he asked him to deliver earlier this year, noting that Kirk died for the belief in the importance of debate. He explains that, in the months leading up to his final days, Kirk devoted effort to arguing about the event and the speech, and that he faced immense pressure from donors to remove him from Turning Point’s roster. The speaker asserts that Kirk stood firm in his belief that people should be able to debate, and that if you have something valid to say or are telling the truth, you should be able to explain it calmly and in detail to people who disagree, rather than resorting to silencing or questioning motives. He criticizes the tendency to label questions as indicative of evil or to accuse others of motives, noting how “shut up racist” has become a prevailing, harmful reaction. He states that this phrase was the number one reason he voted for Donald Trump. He emphasizes that if he were a racist or bigot, he would acknowledge it, noting that in America one is allowed to be whatever kind of person one wants, but he is opposed to racism and bigotry. He argues that the style of debate that obstructs the other side from talking by quickly appealing to motive is corrosive, and he questions the usefulness of such questioning practices. The speaker insists he’s grown tired of that approach and believes they’ve reached the end of it. He states clearly that he will not play by those rules, and he will express his views regardless of others’ disapproval, as long as he has the opportunity to speak. He reiterates that if someone doesn’t like his views, that’s fine, but he intends to express them openly. In closing, he reiterates his commitment to speaking his mind and not engaging in the silencing tactics he condemns.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: De platform and denounce. Why haven't you denounced somebody else the whole, like, red guard cultural revolution thing that we so hated and feared on the left that we did everything we could to usher in a new time where you could have an actual debate. I mean, this kind of was the whole point of Charlie Kirk's public life. And I think that he died for it. I really believe that. I know a lot about it because the last several months of Charlie's life were devoted in part to arguing about this event, in fact, this speech, in fact, my speech here, which he asked me to do earlier this year, this summer, and was immediately put under just immense pressure from people who give money to Turning Point, I would assume good people, but who wanted him to take me off the roster. And this has all become public, I the whole thing is so sad that I never talk about it, except to say Charlie stood firm in his often stated and deeply held belief that people should be able to debate. And that if you have something valid to say, if you're telling the truth, you ought to be able to explain it calmly and in detail to people who don't agree with you, and that you shouldn't immediately resort to shut up racist. You shouldn't immediately go to motive. By the way, shut up racist is the number one reason I voted for Donald Trump. And because I'm just sick of it. I mean, first of all, if I was a racist, if I was a bigot, I would just say so. Okay? It's America. You're allowed to be whatever kind of person you want. I'm not. I'm sincerely opposed to have always been and will always be. But the style of debate where you prevent the other side from talking or being heard because you immediately go to motive, well, I wonder why you're asking that question. I wonder why. Why are you asking that question? I detect in the question a certain evil in your soul. And everyone listening should know that listening to you implicates them. And that they someday may be asked to denounce you. And that friendship is not a reason to defend someone. Love is no defense. I kind of thought we'd reached the end of that. And as far as I'm concerned, we have. And I'm not going to play by those rules. I'm not going to engage in that. If someone doesn't like what I think, fine with me, as long as I get to express it. That's my view.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 4, 2025 at 2:05 AM
Saved - December 17, 2025 at 3:00 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I state that the Covid mRNA jabs are not vaccines but gene-altering therapies meant to destroy the body. They used modified mRNA in lipid nanoparticles that spread beyond the arm, causing cancer, death, myocarditis, and autoimmune issues. If you took the shot, you’re in denial about turbo-cancers and neurological issues, while officials push “Get that shot”—clips of the interview follow.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Senator Ron Johnson: 🚨 The Covid mRNA Jabs are NOT Vaccines, they are Gene-Altering Therapies designed to Destroy your Body “It wasn’t real mRNA, it was modified messenger RNA, so it doesn’t degrade, because true mRNA degrades very rapidly. It was put into a lipid nanoparticle which was designed to penetrate different barriers, like the blood-barrier — THEY KNEW it would never stay in the arm. They lied to us. So the body distributes it all over the body…” and GAME OVER. — cancer — death — myocarditis — autoimmune issues “If you got the shot, you’re in a state of denial. You don’t want to think you’ll get Turbo-Cancers or undetected myocarditis, or neurological issues— the medical establishment that pushed it, the health agencies, members of Congress, all saying “Get that shot”… nobody wants to admit they were wrong.” Clip https://rumble.com/v72ko16-the-covid-mrna-jabs-are-not-vaccines-they-are-gene-altering-therapies-to-de.html Full Interview https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4VqX_R5VPZw

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss a broad denial about vaccine injuries and the idea that, despite evidence, the medical establishment and political figures push the narrative that vaccines are safe and effective. They claim that many people who are vaccinated want to move on and avoid acknowledging serious side effects, including turbo cancers, undetected myocarditis, and neurological issues, and that autoimmune disease is being attributed to other causes. They argue that the medical establishment, federal health agencies, and some members of Congress who produce supportive content, such as segments like Steve Colbert’s, advocate for taking the shot. They question how many people were killed or died from the shot, asserting that Bayer’s data shows “close[ly]” to thirty-nine thousand worldwide, and that if only ten percent are reported, the true number would be in the hundreds of thousands. They claim there are millions of adverse events, but that this is denied and covered up. The speakers contend that the shot was not a real vaccine. They describe it as gene therapy rather than a traditional vaccine. They explain a sequence in which a vaccine is typically an attenuated or killed virus that requires adjuvants like aluminum or mercury to stimulate the immune system, because the attenuated or killed virus may not work well on its own. In contrast, they say this shot is mRNA, which is modified so it does not degrade. They describe how it is put into a lipid nanoparticle designed to permeate barriers like the blood-brain barrier, and they assert it would never stay in the arm, distributing all over the body. They claim the lipid nanoparticle allows the mRNA to enter cells, hijack cellular structures, and cause the cells to express spike protein, which the body then attacks as foreign. When asked who is responsible, they reference a “doctor Frankenstein” figure and name Francis Collins, head of the NIH, and Anthony Fauci as possible figures in question. The response indicates that while they consider all of them criminally liable, they would say it is primarily Fauci, with acknowledgment that people like Collins are implicated as well.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And, you know, we're at the state right now that everybody, almost everybody is in a state of denial. If you got the shot, you just want to move on. You don't want to think that there's things like turbo cancers or undetected myocarditis or, you know, that that neurological issue you have. Well, that's, you know, that's just again, people get, you know, autoimmune disease. So the medical establishment that pushed it, the federal health agencies that pushed it, members of Congress that cut videos like Steve Colbert, you know, get that shot. Yes. Nobody nobody wants to admit they're wrong. No. And so we're still in this this bizarre situation where the injection injuries are still being denied. Speaker 1: How many people do you think were were killed or died? Speaker 0: Well, I mean, Bayer shows I think we're close closing at thirty nine thousand worldwide. But if that's, let's say, ten percent are reported, you know, that's putting in count in the hundreds of thousands. And we know there are millions of adverse events. But again, all this is just being denied and covered up. You know, you've got to Speaker 1: And it wasn't a real vaccine. Speaker 0: No, it was a it's gene therapy. A vaccine is either attenuated virus or killed virus that, by the way, which don't work very well, which is why they had to put something called adjuvants, the aluminum, the mercury, to excite your immune system to get to activate, to recognize the attenuated or killed virus. Right? What this does is it is an mRNA. It's modified. It's not real messenger RNA. It's modified so it doesn't degrade. MRNA degrades very rapidly. Put into a lipid nano which is designed to permeate difficult, permeate barriers like the blood brain. They knew it would never stay in the arm and they lied to us. So it distributes all over the body. The lipid nano particle also then allows the mRNA to enter the cell. Enters the cell, hijacks the cell the cellular structure, and causes the cell to express the spike protein, which then the body attacks with something foreign to it. Speaker 1: And is the doctor Frankenstein here, is that Francis Collins, head of NIH, or is it his understudy, Anthony Fauci? Speaker 0: I think they're all criminally liable on this, but I would say it's primarily Fauci. He had a with people like

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Senator Ron Johnson says Tower 7 Had some very interesting Tenants — “There were Enron records there, and the Enron scandal bookmarks 9/11.” 🔻 Here is the list of Tenants: • Clandestine CIA Station: It was used for operations like spying on foreign diplomats at the UN. - Department of Defense (DoD): - Secret Service: Investigative files in their largest field office were lost. - IRS (Internal Revenue Service): - American Express: American Express Bank International was a major tenant, leasing around 106,117 square feet. Countless documents lost. - Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): The SEC occupied approximately 106,117 square feet. Files related to investigations, including the WorldCom scandal, were lost. - NYC Office of Emergency Management (OEM): Confirmed. The OEM, which served as Mayor Giuliani’s command center on 9/11, was a tenant. - Salomon Smith Barney: a subsidiary of Citigroup and a major investment bank, was the largest tenant, occupying 1,202,900 square feet (64% of the building) across floors 28–45. Countless financial documents lost. - Quite a few Banks & Financial Groups: ITT Hartford Insurance Group (122,590 square feet), Standard Chartered Bank (111,398 square feet), Federal Home Loan Bank of New York, and Provident Financial Management. - there were also floors that were reportedly “empty” @SenRonJohnson @mirandadevine Clip https://rumble.com/v72kmm0-tower-7-had-some-very-interesting-tenants-there-were-enron-records-there...html Full Interview https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4VqX_R5VPZw

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the possibility that there are offices in federal government facilities, including references to CIA presence and Enron records, noting that “there are many very interesting offices” and that “a lot of their Enron records is in there.” They mention Tucker as someone who does a pretty good job explaining the Enron scandal and “bookmarks nineeleven,” acknowledging they are not an expert themselves. They emphasize that the individuals investigating these issues—specifically the 9/11 families and firefighters—have been doggedly pursuing answers, have been vilified and dismissed for decades, and deserve the answers rather than having their questions automatically dismissed. The speaker supports calls for President Trump to appoint a totally nonpartisan, nonpolitical commission. They suggest what ought to happen is to bring in physicists and structural engineers—experts who can examine all the information and determine if there is a scientific explanation for the events, asserting that you don’t need politicians, you need people to look at the information.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Was the CIA, did they have an office in there? In I don't have the full list, but there were some there are many very interesting offices Right. In federal government, secret Different things. So could they have just Enron, I think, lot of their Enron records is in there, that, you know, Tucker does a pretty good job of kind of explaining the Enron scandal kind of bookmarks nineeleven. So again, I'm no expert in this. I'm not. I can spout enough. All I know is these individuals who've been looking at this, and again, I'm doing it because the nineeleven families, the firefighters, these are people who have been doggedly pursuing this. They've been vilified. They've been dismissed for decades. They deserve the answers. They deserve not to have their questions just automatically dismissed. So, again, I would like I know they're calling for President Trump to appoint a totally nonpartisan, non political commission. And as I've said, what ought to happen is bring in physicists and structural engineers. I mean, just experts. You don't need politicians. You need people to look at this all this information and go, Is there a scientific explanation for this?

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Uh oh…. 👀 🚨 Senator Ron Johnson says it looks to him like Tower 7 was taken down via Controlled Demolition He describes when it all went down, the only thing you had at the time was the MSM and he bought it hook, line, and sinker. He says he never even heard about Tower https://t.co/dRoJl26Bpv

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 discusses his involvement in 9/11-related inquiries after receiving concerns from families. He emphasizes the role of whistleblowers who fear disclosure of anonymity, noting that while his office is good at protecting identities, not every congressional office is. He credits investigative reporters for bringing information forward and explains that his involvement began when nine/eleven families approached him with a heavily redacted FBI report on Saudi involvement, asking for it to be unredacted. He mentions that Richard Blumenthal is the chairman of PSI in the last Congress and that the inquiry extended to topics like the PGA Tour’s deal with Live Golf and Saudi Arabia, but that those are private matters not to be intruded upon. He says, however, that due to the redacted FBI document about Saudi involvement, he started gathering information and is currently in a position to review it, with an invitation to the audience to share information, though with the expectation that information will be debunked by his staff. He notes his own background from Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and that he initially accepted the prevailing narrative about 9/11 but began receiving information from sources that challenged it, leading him to pursue a more open investigation. He stresses that his staff’s primary goal is to obtain information and debunk it, to poke holes in the claims, and that he does not want to avoid discussing the topic. He acknowledges there are many legitimate questions that he is willing to ask, starting with World Trade Center 7, a building he had not heard of before. He asks why it is so difficult to discuss these topics and why legitimate questions seem to be quashed, suggesting there is something unexplained that has not been disclosed. He mentions public reception, including hostile comments online, and notes that many Americans had never heard of World Trade Center 7. Speaker 1 describes the scene surrounding WTC7, including a BBC reporter on air describing its collapse while the building still appears to be standing behind her. He points to a video that appears to show a single perspective of the event and references a later interview with a controlled demolition expert who asserted it was controlled demolition, though this assertion predates the event. He emphasizes that the building collapsed on September 11, and there are unanswered questions. He recounts Graham McQueen’s investigation before his death, who compiled approximately 150 documented recordings from first responders and reporters on the morning of 9/11 who said they heard explosions. He states that the 9/11 Commission and NIST did not discuss these explosions. He mentions Barry Jennings, who was in Building 7, who had to evacuate, but could not gather because the stairwell between the 6th and 8th floors had been blown out.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, while we're on that topic, I mean, the World Trade Center, the Tower 7, there you've talked about it, and I know you're trying to investigate it. There's so many odd things about that building, the fact that it fell down at all. What have you learned from that, and what can you tell us about the mystery? Speaker 1: So this I I wanted to say this right away because you were giving me all this credit for, you know, providing information that you could use. You know, we rely on investigatory reporters like yourself and John Solomon. I mean, first of you get whistleblowers that have confidence that their identity is not going to be blown, right? Yes. We're very good in my office, but not every office in Congress is. No. And so people are highly reluctant to come forward to a congressional office and provide information because they think their anonymity will be broken. So again, you've done fabulous work when it comes to these things. When it comes to nineeleven, I got involved in that because Richard Blumenthal is chairman of PSI in the last Congress. You want to do investigation of the deal that PGA Tour is doing with with Live Golf and Saudi Arabia PIFF. Yeah. Which I think, yeah, it's private parties. That's you know, we shouldn't even be putting our nose under that tent. Speaker 0: Right? Just looking for dirt Speaker 1: on drugs. But because of that, all the nine 11 families came to me saying, hey. Listen. Look at this heavily redacted report from the FBI in terms of what we knew about Saudi involvement. Can you get this unredacted? So that began my involvement. Again, I'm from Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Obviously, saw nineeleven, knew it changed the world. But again, I didn't know anybody in the towers. Wasn't down the street from me or something. So I bought the narrative, you know, hook, line and sinker. Yeah. All of a sudden, have people starting to feed you information. And right now, that's I'm in a position where we're gathering information. And, you know, to your audience, if you've got information, we'll look at it. Okay. We're going take it all with a grain of salt. Okay. Actually, my staff's primary goal is get the information, debunk it. Right. Literally. I mean, it's like poke holes in it. Yeah. That's what we do. Yeah. I don't want to I don't want to be talking about anything Speaker 0: that's Okay. Speaker 1: But I mean, there are so many legitimate questions here that I don't mind asking. Like what? And it will start it starts with Beuling seven. Yeah. I had never heard of it. First of all, prescribing why is it so why is it so difficult to talk about these things? I mean, why are these legitimate questions just quashed? Know? And it's because there's something there. Okay. There's something that has not been explained. But we're also getting creamed in the comment sections like, how could you guys not know about this? Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 1: Again, I wasn't a nineeleven. Yeah. But it's because it's been suppressed. Yes. And that in and of itself is suspicious. It is. I mean, like most of America had never heard of World Trade Center seven. No. We know the Twin Towers, woah, you mean another 40 foot tall building collapsed? And a BBC reporter is on the air talking about how it collapsed, but it's still standing over her left shoulder. And you look at the video of it, and you got, you know, have kind of one view. It sure looks like a controlled demolition. You've got somebody expert in controlled demolition saying, interviewed years later going, well, it's controlled demolition, right? No, that building collapsed on November or on September 11. So again, there are so many unanswered I Speaker 0: think people heard explosions, didn't they? Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I mean, that was Graham McQueen. Before he died, he was doggedly looking for every bit of evidence. And he found something like 150 some documented recordings of first responders, reporters that morning of nineeleven saying they heard explosions. And yet the nineeleven Commission, they never talk about it. NIST never talks about it. Know, he had is I think Barry Jennings is the gentleman's name, went up. He was in Building 7. He'd already cleared out, told him to get out of the building, couldn't gather because the stairwell in between the 6th And 8th Floor blown out.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 15, 2025 at 2:59 PM
Saved - December 15, 2025 at 4:36 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

President Trump comments on Rob Riener’s death — saying he suffered from Trump derangement syndrome “He was know. To have driven people CRAZY by his raging obsession of President Donald J. Trump — May they rest in Peace.” A. Too soon B. Nah, justified statement https://t.co/WDC8YeylAB

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Rob Reiner certainly wasn’t a Trump fan… he hated Trump and fervently lied about him over the years — more recently, he says President Trump is trying to steal the 2026 midterms.. He says “There will be protests, they will be inciting violence” — Everything he said, he is literally foreshadowing what THEY were planning to do. https://rumble.com/v731puy-rob-reiner-hated-trump-and-lied-through-his-teeth.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker warns that democracy is being taken away from the public and that there is about a year left before this country becomes an autocracy, with the next significant milestone the 2026 election. The speaker asserts that Donald Trump knows he will lose in a free and fair election, predicting that the House will flip to Democratic control, leading to committee hearings. In response, the speaker claims Trump has mobilized ICE agents, the National Guard, and calls the military from around the world to advise them to surround polling booths in the name of ensuring fair elections and preventing tampering. The speaker predicts that there will be violence and protests, and that there will be forces preventing tampering, with voting machines and ballot boxes being commandeered to secure the election, which, in the speaker’s view, would amount to Trump commandeering the election itself. The speaker emphasizes the need to raise public awareness that democracy is being taken away, arguing that the public often views democracy as a vague term and may not grasp what it entails beyond constitutional references. The speaker notes that people care about pocketbook issues—such as the price of eggs and health care—which directly affect them, but stresses that losing democracy would jeopardize many rights. These rights include freedom of speech, the freedom to pray the way one wants, the freedom to protest without facing jail or deportation without due process. The speaker asserts that all these rights would be at risk if democracy is lost and calls for educating the public about what is happening in America.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People have to understand, our democracy is being taken away from us, and we only have about a year. You know, just to be clear about this. And people you know, you're doing a great job, and a lot of other people are doing a good job to tell people what is actually happening in this country. But make no mistake, we have a year before this country becomes a full on autocracy and democracy completely leaves us. And we're looking at the at the election in in in in 2026. And Donald Trump knows, he knows that in a free and fair election, he will lose. He will lose the house. The house will flip and will become into democratic hands. There'll be committee chairs that'll be able to hold hearings. And this is the last thing he wants. So this little, you know, these ICE agents and the National Guard, and now he's called the military in from all over the world to talk to them about don't be surprised when polling booths are surrounded by American military in the guise of making sure that the elections are fair and that nobody is tampering with anything. And when you see violence breaking out, which there will be protests, there will be inciting violence, there'll be some violence, and they'll keep back then they'll you'll see the commandeering of voting machines, ballot boxes to make sure that that election is secure. Well, what that means is that he will then commandeer the election. So we have to make the public absolutely aware that their democracy is being taken from them, and we have to do everything we can to make sure people understand that. People don't It's a vague term, democracy. It's like, what does that mean? The constitution, we don't know what that means. People care about their pocketbook issues, the price of eggs, they care about their health care, and they should. Those are the things that directly affect them. But if they lose their democracy, all of these rights, the freedom of speech, the freedom to pray the way you want, the freedom to protest and not go to jail, not be sent out of the country with no due process. All these things will be taken away from And we have to educate the public that this is what's happening right now in America.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Movie Director Rob Reiner and his wife found stabbed to death in Brentwood home in LA.. suspect(s) at large. This is one of wealthiest neighborhoods in LA… and I’m sure cameras out the wazoo…

MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 15, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Saved - December 15, 2025 at 4:31 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Well, ain’t that a coinkadink? Rob Reiner was a founder of Castle Rock Entertainment Remember castle rock Studios and all that crazy stuff we uncovered when Biden was “elected”? https://t.co/rHo0zm1PrH

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Rob Reiner's son arrested after Rob Reiner and Wife found stabbed to death in LA home https://t.co/xvVCLgkkHu

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Rob Reiner certainly wasn’t a Trump fan… he hated Trump and fervently lied about him over the years — more recently, he says President Trump is trying to steal the 2026 midterms.. He says “There will be protests, they will be inciting violence” — Everything he said, he is https://t.co/l0v1a1UWeH

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: People have to understand, our democracy is being taken away from us, and we only have about a year. You know, just to be clear about this. And people you know, you're doing a great job, and a lot of other people are doing a good job to tell people what is actually happening in this country. But make no mistake, we have a year before this country becomes a full on autocracy and democracy completely leaves us. And we're looking at the at the election in in in in 2026. And Donald Trump knows, he knows that in a free and fair election, he will lose. He will lose the house. The house will flip and will become into democratic hands. There'll be committee chairs that'll be able to hold hearings. And this is the last thing he wants. So this little, you know, these ICE agents and the National Guard, and now he's called the military in from all over the world to talk to them about don't be surprised when polling booths are surrounded by American military in the guise of making sure that the elections are fair and that nobody is tampering with anything. And when you see violence breaking out, which there will be protests, there will be inciting violence, there'll be some violence, and they'll keep back then they'll you'll see the commandeering of voting machines, ballot boxes to make sure that that election is secure. Well, what that means is that he will then commandeer the election. So we have to make the public absolutely aware that their democracy is being taken from them, and we have to do everything we can to make sure people understand that. People don't It's a vague term, democracy. It's like, what does that mean? The constitution, we don't know what that means. People care about their pocketbook issues, the price of eggs, they care about their health care, and they should. Those are the things that directly affect them. But if they lose their democracy, all of these rights, the freedom of speech, the freedom to pray the way you want, the freedom to protest and not go to jail, not be sent out of the country with no due process. All these things will be taken away from And we have to educate the public that this is what's happening right now in America.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People have to understand, our democracy is being taken away from us, and we only have about a year. You know, just to be clear about this. And people you know, you're doing a great job, and a lot of other people are doing a good job to tell people what is actually happening in this country. But make no mistake, we have a year before this country becomes a full on autocracy and democracy completely leaves us. And we're looking at the at the election in in in in 2026. And Donald Trump knows, he knows that in a free and fair election, he will lose. He will lose the house. The house will flip and will become into democratic hands. There'll be committee chairs that'll be able to hold hearings. And this is the last thing he wants. So this little, you know, these ICE agents and the National Guard, and now he's called the military in from all over the world to talk to them about don't be surprised when polling booths are surrounded by American military in the guise of making sure that the elections are fair and that nobody is tampering with anything. And when you see violence breaking out, which there will be protests, there will be inciting violence, there'll be some violence, and they'll keep back then they'll you'll see the commandeering of voting machines, ballot boxes to make sure that that election is secure. Well, what that means is that he will then commandeer the election. So we have to make the public absolutely aware that their democracy is being taken from them, and we have to do everything we can to make sure people understand that. People don't It's a vague term, democracy. It's like, what does that mean? The constitution, we don't know what that means. People care about their pocketbook issues, the price of eggs, they care about their health care, and they should. Those are the things that directly affect them. But if they lose their democracy, all of these rights, the freedom of speech, the freedom to pray the way you want, the freedom to protest and not go to jail, not be sent out of the country with no due process. All these things will be taken away from And we have to educate the public that this is what's happening right now in America.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 13, 2025 at 1:13 AM
Saved - December 13, 2025 at 2:42 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report Dan “One Eye McCain” Crenshaw’s passive-aggressive threat after Shawn Ryan asked how I got rich. Ryan said, “F that. Told the world.” Crenshaw vowed defamation suit. Ryan fired back, “F you. Bring it on. I’ll get discovery and expose you.” Stand firm.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Dan “One Eye McCain” Crenshaw made a passive aggressive threat against Shawn Ryan after Ryan asked how he got so rich… Ryan said F that. Told the world. Crenshaw said I’m gonna sue you for defamation. Ryan said F you. Bring it on. I’ll get discovery on your ass and expose you to the world. That about sums it up. Stand firm Shawn.

@ShawnRyan762 - Shawn Ryan

UPDATE: "I want to make something very clear. I hate drama. I hate influencer drama. I hate internet drama. I hate the theatrics of it. I can’t stand it. The only reason that I’m going up against Crenshaw is because I am sick and tired of watching government officials and people in high places try to silence and bully regular American citizens. I’m sick of seeing it. Somebody’s got to stand up to this. It might as well be me. Hopefully he never, ever gets the opportunity to do this again." @ShawnRyanShow

Video Transcript AI Summary
I hate drama. I hate influencer drama. I hate Internet drama. I hate the theatrics of it. And so I want to tell you something. The only reason that I'm going up against Crenshaw is I am sick and tired of watching government officials and people in high places try to silence and bully regular American citizens. I'm sick of saying it. Somebody's gotta stand up to this shit. It might as well be me. It might as well be me. On 12/09/2025, I received a legal demand letter from lawyers representing congressman Dan Crenshaw. They are threatening to sue me for defamation because of comments I made on my podcast about a message that he sent me. So this all transpired from a conversation that I had with Tulsi Gabbard. And I was concerned... Although I didn't mention his name in the interview... I wanted to know how a newer congressman can afford to hire a mainstream DJ, Steve Aoki, to spin at his fortieth birthday party. I didn't just make this up. Somebody sent me the invitation that he had sent out to everybody for his fortieth birthday. And so that's where I got this from. Anyways, here's the clip with Tulsi. Is there any direct money? I mean, know, you see all these people you see all these people show up in Congress, the Senate, the cabinet, whatever, and, you know, not wealthy. Yeah. Speaker 1: I don't have firsthand experience in this. I have often questioned the same thing. I know a big factor is the insider trading that goes on in Congress. And again, some people will say, well, like, hey, I didn't know anything about this. I'm just making investments for my family or my wife or my husband is making investments. I don't know anything about what's going on. Maybe they're being honest, maybe they're not. But the reality is you're in a position where you're making decisions, either in committee or on the House floor, that influence our markets, that influence the outcomes of certain industries, either causing some to tank or others to skyrocket. And the mere perception of insider trading shouldn't exist. This is legislation, again, I introduced in Congress years ago. No member of Congress should be allowed to do any trading of any stocks, neither should their spouse, neither should their senior staff. Period. These are the people who have access to proprietary private information that's not open to everybody in the public, or certainly before it becomes public. And the possibility of the abuse of power in trading on that information should not exist. It's interesting because as we're seeing there are some members of Congress who say that share my view on that, but who are continuing to trade stocks themselves. The Senate just passed, I think out of committee, first step legislation that would reflect similar to banning members and their spouses. We'll see where it goes. In the Senate we've heard a lot of talk coming from leaders from both parties, but no action has been taken. That to me is the most obvious way that people are going from being elected and having no money and you make, what, dollars $160 a year or whatever the salary is now to literally becoming multimillionaires. That is the most obvious way. There are kind of stringent requirements of financial reporting that every member has to do certainly at least once a year, more often if you are actively trading in stocks. But it I think it would be a little hard, not impossible, but a little hard if somebody's just coming and bringing you a sack of cash. Speaker 0: So after the conversation with Tulsi, that's when I got the text or the message on Instagram from congressman Crenshaw that I find threatening, telling me he spoke with his boys at six. Here's a screenshot. Hey, Sean. You have the ability to contact your fellow team guy if you've got a problem with me or have questions about how I'm getting rich. Some of my boys at six told me about your indirect swipe at me. Some of my beliefs are based on trendy narratives instead of facts. And just so you know, I mean, Dan does have a history of threatening people. Once again, here is Dan threatening to kill Tucker Carlson. And then, again, he reaffirms that he's not joking. Speaker 2: Have you ever met Tucker? Speaker 0: We've talked a lot. He's the worst person. Okay. So I get the message. I take it is extremely threatening. It is a tier one unit, the best, most effective tier one unit in the world, deadliest unit. But I don't do anything. I move on. And then a little over a year later, I'm interviewing, oh, a member from SEAL Team six. Maybe he's one of Dan's boys at six. So he brought up the fact that he had asked a congressman with an eye patch, didn't wanna mention his name, to help him with his book debacle. He received no aid. I filled in the blank. I said, oh, you must be talking about congressman Crenshaw. Let me share my experience with you, my interactions with congressman Crenshaw. So I shared him. I told him about the Instagram message, and I told him that I found that threatening. And then I asked Matt if he was one of Dan's boys at six, Maybe he was here to come beat me up. Matt assured me he wasn't. Here's the clip. Speaker 2: I'll give you another example. In the height of my my issues, I contacted a former SEAL. I won't name names, but he has an eye patch, And he's a congressman out of a state You Speaker 0: mean Dan Crenshaw? Speaker 2: I'm not naming names. Speaker 0: Another one of my Speaker 2: favorite Sir, here's my situation. You know, Dan? Speaker 0: Dan actually sent me a message. I should fucking read this to you. But, basically, he tells me I brought something up about him, and I never even met I gave him the courtesy of not even mentioning his fucking name. It was about his birthday party where he hired Steve Aoki to to DJ his birthday. I mean, that can't be fucking cheap. Right? Especially on a congressman's salary. And I brought that up. And Dan sends me a message that says his boys over at six are really upset with me that I brought that up, and they're gonna they might come beat me up. Speaker 2: Boys at six. Speaker 0: His boys over at six. Speaker 2: Well, to infer he's got I don't know why congressman would be Speaker 0: threatening me with seal team six, but I'm still fucking waiting. This is actually a couple years This Speaker 2: is threatened quite a Speaker 0: have not had my ass kicked by a couple of guys over at six. But Dan Crunchy he fits with all these fucking people you're talking about. Speaker 2: So I called him. Right? He's a sitting congressman. He's a former officer. And drum roll, please, he was getting ready to release his book. So I call him up. I get a conversation with him. I said, sir, here's my situation. I hired an attorney. The attorney gave me bad advice. Book was published. I've given up attorney client privilege, cooperated everything I can to to fix this. They've still come after me. We can get into all the the other stuff that I'm dealing with. I said, sir, can you help me out with this? He's like, well, you know, I'm I'm about ready to publish my book, and I'm I'm not getting it reviewed. I'm like, well, sir, same same letter of the law that they came after me for failure to seek prepublication review. I didn't get prepublication review because my lawyer told me I didn't have to, and he could do it. Like, in your case, you know you have to get reviewed. I'm here telling you, confirming you have to get reviewed or the government's gonna come after you. He's like, yeah. No. But I'm not gonna write anything classified in my book. I'm like, there's nothing classified in my book. They they said there was. They went through it. They said, nope. There's nothing classified in it. You just failed to seek review. I'm like, so if I only thing I failed to do was seek review, you're willingly going around that obligation, and you don't give a shit. He's like, yeah. But I'm not gonna write about anything classified in my book. That was his answer. Never talked to him again. So he published his book. No review. Nothing's happened. He's kept his money. He's a sitting congressman. I got a payment plan. So so to say I've been alone So Speaker 0: I guess I guess you're not one of Dan's boys over at six. Speaker 2: That's kinda Definitely not Dave Boys at six. That's a pretty ridiculous statement if I've ever heard one.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wanna make something very clear. I hate drama. I hate influencer drama. I hate Internet drama. I hate the theatrics of it. I can't stand it. And so I wanna tell you something. The only reason that I'm going up against Crenshaw is I am I am sick and tired of watching government officials and people in high places try to silence and bully regular American citizens. I'm sick of saying it. Somebody's gotta stand up to this shit. It might as well be me. It might as well be me. Hopefully, he never ever gets the opportunity to do this again. On 12/09/2025, I received a legal demand letter from lawyers representing congressman Dan Crenshaw. They are threatening to sue me for defamation because of comments I made on my podcast about a message that he sent me. So this all transpired from a conversation that I had with Tulsi Gabbard. And I was concerned, Although I didn't mention his name in the interview, which you'll see, I was concerned. I wanted to know how a newer congressman can afford to hire a mainstream DJ, Steve Aoki, to spin at his fortieth birthday party. I didn't just make this up. Somebody sent me the invitation that he had sent out to everybody for his fortieth birthday. And so that's where I got this from. Anyways, here's the clip with Tulsi. Is there any direct money? I mean, know, you see all these people you see all these people show up in Congress, the Senate, the cabinet, whatever, and, you know, not wealthy. Yeah. And then let's fast forward a couple of years and they got Steve Aoki DJing their fortieth birthday party. How does that happen? Speaker 1: I don't have firsthand experience in this. I have often questioned the same thing. I know a big factor is the insider trading that goes on in Congress. And again, some people will say, well, like, hey, I didn't know anything about this. I'm just making investments for my family or my wife or my husband is making investments. I don't know anything about what's going on. Maybe they're being honest, maybe they're not. But the reality is you're in a position where you're making decisions, either in committee or on the House floor, that influence our markets, that influence the outcomes of certain industries, either causing some to tank or others to skyrocket. And the mere perception of insider trading shouldn't exist. This is legislation, again, I introduced in Congress years ago. No member of Congress should be allowed to do any trading of any stocks, neither should their spouse, neither should their senior staff. Period. These are the people who have access to proprietary private information that's not open to everybody in the public, or certainly before it becomes public. And the possibility of the abuse of power in trading on that information should not exist. It's interesting because as we're seeing there are some members of Congress who say that share my view on that, but who are continuing to trade stocks themselves. The Senate just passed, I think out of committee, first step legislation that would reflect similar to banning members and their spouses. We'll see where it goes. In the Senate we've heard a lot of talk coming from leaders from both parties, but no action has been taken. That to me is the most obvious way that people are going from being elected and having no money and you make, what, dollars $160 a year or whatever the salary is now to literally becoming multimillionaires. That is the most obvious way. There are kind of stringent requirements of financial reporting that every member has to do certainly at least once a year, more often if you are actively trading in stocks. But it I think it would be a little hard, not impossible, but a little hard if somebody's just coming and bringing you a sack of cash. Speaker 0: So after the conversation with Tulsi, that's when I got the text or the message on Instagram from congressman Crenshaw that I find threatening, telling me he spoke with his boys at six. Here's a screenshot. Hey, Sean. You have the ability to contact your fellow team guy if you've got a problem with me or have questions about how I'm getting rich. Some of my boys at six told me about your indirect swipe at me. From the comment you made, it sounds like you have some beliefs that are based on trendy narratives instead of facts. And just so you know, I mean, Dan does have a history of threatening people. Once again, here is Dan threatening to kill Tucker Carlson. And then, again, he reaffirms that he's not joking. Speaker 2: Have you ever met Tucker? Speaker 0: We've talked a lot. He's the worst person. Okay. So I get the message. I take it is extremely threatening. It is a tier one unit, the best, most effective tier one unit in the world, deadliest unit. But I don't do anything. I move on. And then a little over a year later, I'm interviewing, oh, a member from SEAL Team six. Maybe he's one of Dan's boys at six. So he brought up the fact that he had asked a congressman with an eye patch, didn't wanna mention his name, to help him with his book debacle. He received no aid. I filled in the blank. I said, oh, you must be talking about congressman Crenshaw. Let me share my experience with you, my interactions with congressman Crenshaw. So I shared him. I told him about the Instagram message, and I told him that I found that threatening. And then I asked Matt if he was one of Dan's boys at six, Maybe he was here to come beat me up. Matt assured me he wasn't. Here's the clip. Speaker 2: I'll give you another example. In the height of my my issues, I contacted a former SEAL. I won't name names, but he has an eye patch, And he's a congressman out of a state You Speaker 0: mean Dan Crenshaw? Speaker 2: I'm not naming names. Speaker 0: Another one of my Speaker 2: favorite Sir, here's my situation. You know, Dan? Speaker 0: Dan actually sent me a message. I should fucking read this to you. But, basically, he tells me I brought something up about him, and I never even met I gave him the courtesy of not even mentioning his fucking name. It was about his birthday party where he hired Steve Aoki to to DJ his birthday. I mean, that can't be fucking cheap. Right? Especially on a congressman's salary. And I brought that up. And Dan sends me a message that says his boys over at six are really upset with me that I brought that up, and they're gonna they might come beat me up. Speaker 2: Boys at six. Speaker 0: His boys over at six. Speaker 2: Well, to infer he's got I don't know why congressman would be Speaker 0: threatening me with seal team six, but I'm still fucking waiting. This is actually a couple years This Speaker 2: is threatened quite a Speaker 0: have not had my ass kicked by a couple of guys over at six. But Dan Crunchy he fits with all these fucking people you're talking about. Speaker 2: So I called him. Right? He's a sitting congressman. He's a former officer. And drum roll, please, he was getting ready to release his book. So I call him up. I get a conversation with him. I said, sir, here's my situation. I hired an attorney. The attorney gave me bad advice. Book was published. I've given up attorney client privilege, cooperated everything I can to to fix this. They've still come after me. We can get into all the the other stuff that I'm dealing with. I said, sir, can you help me out with this? He's like, well, you know, I'm I'm about ready to publish my book, and I'm I'm not getting it reviewed. I'm like, well, sir, same same letter of the law that they came after me for failure to seek prepublication review. I didn't get prepublication review because my lawyer told me I didn't have to, and he could do it. Like, in your case, you know you have to get it reviewed. I'm here telling you, confirming you have to get reviewed or the government's gonna come after you. He's like, yeah. No. But I'm not gonna write anything classified in my book. I'm like, there's nothing classified in my book. They they said there was. They went through it. They said, nope. There's nothing classified in it. You just failed to seek review. I'm like, so if I only thing I failed to do was seek review, you're willingly going around that obligation, and you don't give a shit. He's like, yeah. But I'm not gonna write about anything classified in my book. That was his answer. Never talked to him again. So he published his book. No review. Nothing's happened. He's kept his money. He's a sitting congressman. I got a payment plan. So so to say I've been alone So Speaker 0: I guess I guess you're not one of Dan's boys over at six. Speaker 2: That's kinda Definitely not Dave Boys at six. That's a pretty ridiculous statement if I've ever heard one.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 11, 2025 at 11:18 PM
Saved - December 12, 2025 at 1:37 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe the Left apparatus under Obama never thought Trump would win; he did, and it shocked the system. They thought they defeated him in 2020 with lawfare and COVID, aided by Arabella Advisers and Soros-connected groups funding nonprofits for weaponization. They didn’t expect another loss, and he did.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Harmeet Dhilliom: The Left Apparatus of Obama NEVER thought Trump would Win. He did, and he beat the odds — There was an IMMEDIATE SHOCK to the System ⚡️⚡️⚡️ @HarmeetKDhillon Then they thought they defeated Trump for the 2nd time with LAWFARE and COVID in 2020. And they did. Part of why they did is because the conservative apparatus was weak and ineffective. The left via Arabella Advisers, and all of these groups tied to George Soros — they were very effective deploying money to non-profits for weaponization. Then they never thought he’d lose again. And he did… Clip https://rumble.com/v72wl9o-the-left-apparatus-of-obama-never-thought-trump-would-win..html @mirandadevine full episode https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JW3IIvt_bkI&pp=0gcJCSgKAYcqIYzv

MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 11, 2025 at 10:02 PM
Saved - December 12, 2025 at 1:31 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I recall Jan. 15, 2021, papers from a secret White House meeting with Trump allegedly show Mike Lindell outlining steps to “save” the Constitution, appoint an acting National Security official, and even threaten the Insurrection Act or martial law. The notes mention moving Kash Patel to CIA Acting, countering foreign interference (China/Iran), and names like Sidney Powell and Kurt Olsen, tied to Fort Meade cyber expertise.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Now that Mike Lindell has been activated… who remembers this? Jan. 15, 2021 — The My Pillow Guys’ mysterious papers coming out of a secret White House meeting with Donald Trump Was Mike holding the movie script? Kek 🔴 This is what Mike Lindell’s Paper Says — X’s= Unknown Top Header: steps to be “taken immediately to save” .xxx, xxx … “Constitution.” “xxx Colon NOW as Acting National Security xxx him with getting the evidence of ALL the cxx in the election and all information regarding xxx people he knows who already have security xxxx done massive research on These issues xxxx at Fort Mead. He is an attorney with cyber- xxxx expertise and is up to speed on election issues” “…Insurrection Act now as a result of the assault” … xxx, xxx … “martial law if necessary upon the first hint of any…” “Sidney Powell, Bill Olsen, Kurt Olsen, xxx move Kash Patel to CIA ACTING xxxxx” “xxx in foreign interference in the election. Trigger xxx powers. Make clear this is China/Iran.” “Domestic actors” “Instruct Frank” https://rumble.com/v2o67ht-mike-lindell-seen-coming-out-of-the-white-house-january-15-2021.html

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

It’s OFFICIAL! Mike Lindell is RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR of Minnesota 🎉🥳🥳 What should his first action be after winning? A. Deport all Somalians B. Get rid of voting machines C. Insert here https://t.co/z7sxEcMgw7

MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 12, 2025 at 12:16 AM
Saved - December 12, 2025 at 1:31 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I note Tina Peters faces state charges, so a presidential pardon would seem unavailable since the Constitution grants clemency only for federal offenses. If the case moves to federal jurisdiction—perhaps via a grand jury on election fraud—the President could pardon federal crimes. Days ago, Peter Ticktin described Peters as a critical witness against Dominion and its alleged foreign-linked operation. If federal, U.S. Marshals could assume custody.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

DEEP-STATE PANIC‼️ This is actually pretty freaking significant… Tina Peters charges were state, not Federal… so how can President Trump Pardon her? The U.S. Constitution grants the president pardon power only for federal offenses, not state crimes If Peters' case is escalated to say… federal jurisdiction, possibly through a grand jury probe into election fraud. Again… What happened a few days ago? Several Days ago, Attorney Peter Ticktin, representing Tina Peters, sent President Trump an urgent letter stating Tina Peters is a CRITICAL WITNESS against Dominion and its employees, who operated an ILLEGAL OPERATION, supported and controlled by foreign actors, to STEAL the 2020 Election. If she has become a federal witness in a federal case — the U.S. Marshalls could assume custody.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHIZZLES‼️ President Trump PARDONS TINA PETERS! TIMING — Several Days ago, Attorney Peter Ticktin, representing Tina Peters, sent President Trump an urgent letter stating Tina Peters is a CRITICAL WITNESS against Dominion and its employees, who operated an ILLEGAL OPERATION, supported and controlled by foreign actors, to STEAL the 2020 Election. These were state convictions… not federal. So the only way this works is if……?

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

This is a pretty big deal… 🚨 Attorney Peter Ticktin, representing Tina Peters, just sent President Trump an urgent letter stating Tina Peters is a CRITICAL MATERIAL WITNESS against Dominion and its employees, who operated an ILLEGAL OPERATION, supported and controlled by

MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 18, 2025 at 2:26 AM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 10:00 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A user claims Jeffrey Epstein was actively texting House Democrats during the Cohen hearing and says Democrat Stacey Plaskett was among those influenced in her questions to Trump’s attorneys, linking to a video. A second user replied with a brief response and another link.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHYT‼️ Jeffrey Epstein was ACTIVELY TEXTING House Democrats during the Cohen Hearing according to Document’s Democrat Stacey Plaskett was identified as one of those individuals. These communications appear to influenced her questions to Trump’s attorneys. Follow along at the bottom of the screen. https://rumble.com/v71uxks-jeffrey-epstein-was-actively-texting-house-democrats-during-the-cohen-heari.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The conversation covers a mix of topics centered on political connections and accountability. It begins with a reference to Barack Obama, noting he “was president of The United States,” followed by a remark about his time in Chicago and a comment attributed to him: “only black people could live that way.” Attorney Klein is brought into the discussion, and there is a transition to turnover of questions and answers. A committee issue is raised: Speaker 2 accuses the person addressed of misleading the committee, including a contradictory written submission. The person responds that they will review the matter “in our next break to correct the record,” answering “Yes” to whether they will review it. The dialogue then addresses political campaign involvement. Speaker 2 asks whether the person helped out the president’s campaign, acted as a representative or spokesman, and whether it was their idea for the campaign dating back to 2011; the response given is “Yes.” Speaker 3 asks for identification of individuals associated with the Trump organization. The person confirms several individuals: Alan Weisenberg as the Chief Financial Officer, and Miss Rona Graf as the executive assistant to Mr. Trump. The request is for as many names as possible so the committee can meet them. The person confirms Rona Graf’s position and explains that she is the executive assistant, with her office directly next to Mr. Trump’s, and notes that she has been involved in a lot of what went on. There is a reflective aside from Speaker 1 about the difficulty of following the proceedings in real time, and a critical observation regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement: questions are raised about why Epstein would have the contact information of the executive assistant and why she would feel comfortable texting him back during a congressional hearing. Speaker 4 adds commentary on hierarchy and motivation, suggesting that Epstein’s influence is reflected in the assistant’s actions: “Epstein's clearly paying her… she's just following her marching orders for her paycheck.” The exchange ends with the implication that the hierarchy and payoffs influence the responses and behavior of those connected to the Trump organization.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Obama was president of The United States. Speaker 1: And read along as well. Speaker 0: And while we were once striving through a struggling neighborhood in Chicago, he commented that only black people could live that way. Attorney Klein, privilege. Yes. I will turn it over. Speaker 2: You, as my friend mister Meadows pointed out, misled this committee even today in a written submission that contradicted your testimony. You have suggested you're going to review that. Did you review are you going to review it in our next break to correct the record? Yes or no? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 2: Question. You helped out the president's campaign or were involved in the campaign as a representative, as a spokesman, even in your words today. It was your idea for the campaign dating back to 2011. Is that accurate? Yes or no? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 3: Mister, Weisenberg and other individuals, miss Rona, who are those individuals? Are they with the Trump organization? Speaker 0: They are. Speaker 3: And are there other people that we should be meeting with? Speaker 0: So Alan Weisenberg is the Chief Financial Officer? Speaker 3: Uh-huh. You gotta quickly give us as many names as you can so we can get to them. Speaker 0: Yes ma'am. Speaker 3: Is miss Rona, what is miss Rona's Speaker 0: Rona Graf is the mister Trump's executive assistant. Speaker 3: And would she be able to corroborate many of the statements that you've made here? Speaker 0: Yes. She was her office is directly next to his, and she's Wow. Involved in a lot, that went on. Speaker 1: Yeah. So there there you have it. And, again, it's it's tough to to watch and follow along, but you kinda get the idea. It's basically it's being done in real time. And a real question is, why does Jeffrey Epstein even have her number to text her, and why is she so relaxed about having him as one of her contacts that she feels comfortable enough during a congressional hearing to text him right back. Yeah. I was chewing. Now I'm not chewing. And, you know, other it it really it really exposes. Speaker 4: Think about, like, what that says in the hierarchy of who's important. I don't want you chewing. Yes, sir. Epstein's clearly paying her. She's clearly paid off, so she's just following her marching orders for her paycheck. Speaker 1: Yeah.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Check this shit out… Michael Wolff — the journalist who we just learned was coaching Epstein on how to gain leverage over a presidential candidate — said in an interview that Epstein was growing suspicious that Donald Trump was the one who informed on him and set the stage for when his legal troubles truly began. Well… Epstein’s legal troubles truly began in March 2005. And Wolff was pointing to a 2004 real estate dispute over a Palm Beach mansion. 🔻 In these newly released emails, we get this line: “the dog that hasn’t barked is Trump…” That stuck with me… and then VOILA, it clicked! The phrase “the dog that hasn’t barked” comes from Sherlock Holmes’ story called Silver Blaze. In the story: —— “The stable had a guard dog. On the night of the crime, the dog did not bark. Which meant — the intruder must have been someone the dog knew. Otherwise, it would’ve barked.” So… who was redacted in that email? Virginia Giuffre. Whose name democrats redacted. Epstein wrote he was “75% there” — meaning 75% sure it was Trump as the silent informant, with Giuffre as the likely conduit for the tip-off knowledge. This email tells me Epstein was trying to find the leak after a British tabloid started exposing his network — and he was emailing associates to hunt down the source. 🔻 THEN, we have Attorney Bradley Edwards — who, in 2009, praised Donald Trump for being the ONLY subpoenaed person to willingly provide helpful information in the — “Donald Trump was the only person who would pick up the phone…” — “He gave very good information that checked out and was very helpful.” 🔻 THEN, just a few months ago, we heard Mike Johnson say Trump was an FBI informant trying to take Epstein down. Oopsie… 🔻 Epstein and Maxwell were finally arrested — under the Trump administration. 🔻 In summary… In Epstein’s own words, the timeline, the motive, the silence, the cooperation, the arrests — everything points to one conclusion: Donald Trump was the informant who helped take down one of the most prolific pedophile and blackmail operations in history. A lot of people are gonna owe him an apology when this is done. https://rumble.com/v71nl1u-all-signs-point-to-donald-trump-was-an-informant-to-take-down-epstein.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 explains that Epstein’s legal problems began with police investigations into allegations that underage women were coming to Epstein’s house. Epstein allegedly believed that Trump was the first to inform the police about what was happening at Epstein’s house, and from that point they became bitter enemies. Speaker 1 asks if this is what Epstein is telling him. Speaker 0 confirms that this is the version he is relaying, as presented by “Oh, the hoax yesterday.” Speaker 2 clarifies that “the hoax” refers to Democrats using a narrative to attack him. He says Epstein has never said or suggested or implied that the hoax is real; he has talked to Epstein many times. He states that the whole thing comes across as a hoax, not that Epstein’s actions are a hoax. He explains that Epstein believes himself innocent, and that when he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Maribago. He adds that Epstein was an FBI informant trying to take this matter down. The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who have suffered harms; it’s detestable to him. He and the speaker have spoken as recently as twenty-four hours ago. What he is talking about, according to Speaker 2, are the Democrats who are pursuing this with impure motives. If they truly cared, he asks, why didn’t they act during the four years of the Biden administration when the Biden DOJ had all the records? They didn’t say a word about it, and now they pursue it for political purposes. Speaker 3 notes that our current president has had relationships with Epstein in the past, and mentions Katie Johnson and possibly other victims who have accused Trump of involvement in similar matters. In the speaker’s experience, Trump supporters will not listen to such claims. He admits the court of law isn’t present here. He asks if there is anything that can be said about the validity of those claims or whether more is known. Speaker 1 responds that he can say nothing at all. He states that the only thing he can say about President Trump is that in 2009, when he served subpoenas and gave notice to connected people that he wanted to talk to them, Trump was the only person who picked up the phone and said, “let’s just talk.” Trump offered as much time as needed, provided information that checked out, and helped him so they didn’t have to depose him. He adds that this occurred in 2009. Speaker 3 asks if there is any truth to James Patterson’s claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago. Speaker 1 confirms that he definitely heard that.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: At that point, Epstein's legal problems began. The police began to investigate him over allegations that he was that there were underage women coming to his house. Epstein believed that it was Trump who first informed the police about what was going on at Epstein's house. And from that point on, they were they were nothing but bitter enemies. Speaker 1: And this is what he's telling you? This is one of the instances of what he's telling you? Speaker 0: That Yes. That the following happened. That that is the version of this related by Oh, the hoax yesterday. Speaker 2: What the hoax is referring to is the hoax that the Democrats are using to try to attack him. He has never said or suggested or implied. Speaker 0: I've talked to him Speaker 2: about this many times, many times. Speaker 0: It comes across the whole thing a hoax. Speaker 2: It's been misrepresented. He's not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. It's a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes himself. When he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Maribago. He was an FBI informant to try to take the this this stuff down. The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who have suffered these unspeakable harms. It's detestable to him. He and I have spoken about this as recently as twenty four hours ago. What he's talking about is the Democrats who are doing this with impure motives. If they cared so much about this, why didn't they do something during the four years of the Biden administration when the Biden DOJ had all the records? They didn't say a word about it. Now they're doing it for political purpose. Speaker 3: Our current president has had relationships with Epstein in the past, and there are those Katie Johnson and maybe other victims who have accused Trump of being involved in things like this. In my experience, Trump supporters will not listen to anything along those lines. Obviously, we're not a court of law here right now. But are those claims of the though that case was dropped, it was dropped before it went to to court. In your opinion as a lawyer and your experience, is there anything you can say as to the validity of those claims or whether or not there will be any, you know, any more about that? Speaker 1: Nothing at all. I the only thing that I can say about president Trump is that he is the only person who, in 2009, when I served a lot of subpoenas on a lot of people or at least gave notice to some pretty, connected people that I was going that I wanted to talk to them. He is the only person who picked up the phone and said, let's just talk. I'll give you as much time as you want. I'll tell you what you need to know and was very helpful in the information that he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information that checked out and that helped us and that we didn't have to take a a a deposition of him. Speaker 0: That was in Speaker 1: 2009? That was in 2009. Speaker 3: So Do you know if there's any truth to James Patterson's claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar A Speaker 1: Lago? I definitely heard that.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

OMG, I just realized something.. The real scandal in these emails isn’t Trump and Epstein—it’s Michael Wolff, a leading journalist, COACHING a convicted sex offender on how to manipulate a presidential candidate for personal and political gain. This is very serious actually… https://t.co/ZJXb1N9yuc

@someonesom47381 - someone somewhere

@MJTruthUltra https://t.co/a8WiTJQmwh

MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 4, 2025 at 11:07 PM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 9:35 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Oh my God… UPDATE: Louisville Kentucky Plane Crash Footage shows the exact moment the plane crashed. The plane continued down the runway engulfed in flames and then exploded upon impact. https://rumble.com/v718f6a-louisville-kentucky-plane-crash.html https://t.co/MdtRkU2Nh0

Video Transcript AI Summary
"Bro, get the fuck away from your lights. Turn around." "Bro, now hold on. Hold on. Hold on." "I think it's gonna crash, bro." "Holy shit. Holy shit. Holy shit." "Damn, they're dead." "They are dead, bro."
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Bro, get the fuck away from your lights. Turn around. Bro, now hold on. Hold on. Hold on. I think it's gonna crash, bro. Holy shit. Holy shit. Holy shit. Damn, they're dead. They are dead, bro.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

🚨 SITREP — A UPS cargo plane crashed near Muhammad Ali International Airport in Louisville, Kentucky, resulting in a massive explosion and fire visible across the city - The crash occurred close to the UPS Worldport facility, with witnesses reporting a loud explosion around 5:30 PM. - Multiple emergency agencies, including Louisville Metro Police and fire crews, are responding to the incident. - Authorities confirmed injuries (no numbers of deaths) and have issued road closures as the investigation continues. - The airport is currently closed to arriving and departing flights following the crash. Pray 🙏 https://rumble.com/v718esk-cargo-plane-crash-at-muhammad-ali-international-airport-in-louisville-kentu.html

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 31, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 9:04 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
As discussed, the 3I-Atlas is rumored to be a huge alien mothership in deep space. If I were aware of any evidence of aliens, you have my word I will come on your show and reveal it. And I’m never committing suicide, to be clear. Joe notes a report that the 3I-Atlas had changed its course, though it’s reportedly made almost entirely of nickel. Clip and full show links are provided.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Elon Musk discusses the 3I-Atlas, rumored to be a Huge Alien Mothership in deep Space — “If I was aware of any evidence of Aliens, you have my word, I will come on your show and I will reveal it. And I’m never committing suicide, to be clear.” Joe noted a recent report that the 3I-Atlas had changed its course… although it’s reportedly made almost entirely of nickel. Clip https://rumble.com/v711sg6-elon-musk-discusses-the-3i-atlas-rumored-to-be-a-huge-alien-mothership.html Full show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O4wBUysNe2k&pp=ygURam9lIHJvZ2FuIHBvZGNhc3TSBwkJAwoBhyohjO8%3D

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Whoa 👀 🚨 Elon Musk calls for a Thorough Investigation into the “Suicide” of Suchir Balaji, OpenAI Whistleblower — “He was murdered.. I don’t know if Sam Altman is guilty, but it’s not possibly to look more guilty.” - the camera wires were cut - there was blood in 2 rooms - someone else’s wig was found - he ordered door dash before he died Did OpenAI kill Suchir Balaji? Clip https://rumble.com/v711rpk-elon-musk-calls-for-an-investigation-into-the-suicide-of-suchir-balaji-open.html Full Show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O4wBUysNe2k&pp=ygURam9lIHJvZ2FuIHBvZGNhc3TSBwkJAwoBhyohjO8%3D

Video Transcript AI Summary
The conversation centers on a highly unusual interview in which Tucker discusses a whistleblower connected to a major AI company and his reported death. The participants note that the whistleblower, identified by name as Jamie, allegedly committed suicide, but there are strong indications that some people believe he was murdered. Sam Altman is specifically addressed in the exchange, with Tucker asking if Altman is being accused; Altman responds, and the discussion emphasizes that the speakers think someone killed him rather than it being a straightforward suicide. Key points raised include: - The case has striking inconsistencies: no suicide note has been found, and Jamie’s parents believe he was murdered. - Investigative details mentioned as evidence of foul play include blood in two rooms, wires to a security camera that were cut, and someone’s wig found in the room. - There is also mention that Jamie ordered DoorDash right before the alleged suicide, which the speakers view as unusual and suggestive of a rapid change in mindset. - The discussion notes that the parents have publicly stated their belief in homicide and have urged a proper investigation rather than a drop of the case. - The possibility of an investigation is framed as necessary, with questions about why a proper inquiry should not be pursued given the alleged signs. - The exchange questions Altman’s reaction to the murder accusation, suggesting his response appeared bizarre or unconvincing to some listeners; one speaker posits Altman might simply be socially awkward, while others feel he would be more plainly irate and insistent on a thorough investigation if he were not connected to the case. - It is stated that Jamie’s family has sued the building’s landlord, alleging a cover-up related to his death. Reported details include packages disappearing from the San Francisco building and claimed safeguarding failures by the landlord and management. - Additional context acknowledges the emotional toll on Jamie’s parents, noting their grief and the potential impact on their beliefs about what happened. Overall, the discussion presents a narrative of a whistleblower’s controversial death with multiple seemingly contradictory clues (no suicide note, blood in two rooms, a cut security camera wire, a wig, and a late-night DoorDash order) and a call for a proper investigation, while also touching on the emotional strain experienced by the family and the implications of the landlord-related lawsuit.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One of the craziest interviews I think I've ever seen in my life Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 0: Where Tucker starts bringing up this guy who was Yeah. Speaker 1: Whistleblower or whatever. Speaker 0: A whistleblower Yeah. Who, you know, committed suicide but doesn't look like it. And Yeah. And he's talking to Sam Altman about this, and Sam Altman was like, are you accusing me? He's like, no. No. No. I'm not. I'm just saying. I I think someone killed him. Speaker 1: Yeah. And, like and should be investigated. Yeah. Not just drop the case. No. It seems like That they just dropped the case. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. His parents think he was murdered. Yeah. The wires to a security camera were cut. Blood in two rooms. Blood in two rooms. Someone else's wig was in the room. Speaker 0: Someone else's wig. Wig. Wig. Yes. Not Not normal. Wig. Not normal to have a wig laying around. Speaker 1: Yes. And he ordered DoorDash right before allegedly committing suicide Yeah. Which is it seems unusual. You know? Yeah. It's like, you know, let's I'm gonna order pizza on second thoughts. I'll kill myself. It's it seems like that's a very rapid change in mindset. Speaker 0: It's very weird, and especially the parents have they they don't believe he committed suicide at all. Speaker 1: Has no note or anything? Speaker 0: No. Yep. It seems pretty fucked up. And, you know, the idea that a whistleblower for an enormous AI company that's worth billions of dollars might get whacked, that's not outside the pale. Speaker 1: I mean, it's straight out of a movie. Speaker 0: Right out of a movie, but right out of a movie is real sometimes. Speaker 1: Yeah. Right. Exactly. Right? It's a little weird that I think I think they should do a proper investigation. Like, what's the downside on that proper investigation? Speaker 0: Right. No. Yeah. For sure. Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 0: But the whole exchange is so bizarre. Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. It it is. Speaker 0: Sam Altman's reaction to being accused of murder is bizarre. Speaker 1: Look. I don't know if he is guilty, but it's not possible to look more guilty. So I'm like Speaker 0: Or look more weird. Yeah. You know, maybe it's just his social thing. Like, maybe he's just odd with confrontation, and it just goes blank. You know? But if I if somebody was accusing me of killing Jamie, like, if Jamie was a whistleblower and Jamie got whacked, and then I'd be like, wait. What do you what do you are you accusing me of killing my friend? Like, what the fuck are you talking about? I would I would be a little bit more irate. Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. You know? It'd be I would Speaker 0: be a little upset. Speaker 1: Yeah. Or you're it'd be like well, you'd be like, you'd certainly insist on a thorough investigation Yeah. As opposed to trying to sweep it under the rug. Speaker 0: Yeah. I wouldn't assume that he got that he committed suicide. I would be suspicious. If Tucker was telling me that aspect of the story, I'd be like, that does seem like a murder. Fuck. We should look into this. Speaker 1: I mean, all signs point to it being a murder. Not not saying, you know, had anything to do with the murder, but Blood in two rooms. It's blood in two rooms. Like, yeah. There's there's the wires, the security camera, and the DoorDash being ordered right before suicide. No suicide note. His parents think he was murdered, and the people that I know who knew him said he was not suicidal. So I'm like, this why would you be jump to the conclusion? Speaker 2: Parents just sued Speaker 0: the landlord? They sued the son's landlord, Alleged the owners and the managers of their son's San Francisco apartment building were part of a widespread cover up of his death. Speaker 1: The landlord? Speaker 2: Yeah. There's a bunch of weird they said there was like packages missing from the building. Some people said they saw packages still being delivered and all a sudden they all disappeared. Speaker 0: But that could reasons why. People steal people's packages all the time. Speaker 1: The porch pirate situation. Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. It says they failed to safeguard. Speaker 0: Also, I mean, the amount of trauma those poor parents have gone through with their son dying like that. I mean, it must God bless them. And how could they stay sane after something like that? They're probably they're so grief stricken. Who knows what they believe at this point? Speaker 1: Yeah.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 27, 2025 at 1:35 AM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 9:04 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m trying to be respectful, but it appears Pastor Rob McCoy lied. He said his son Mikey, TPUSA Chief of Staff, called him right after it happened and he was “covered in blood.” Clips 2 & 3 suggest otherwise, as he walked away. I’m not demonizing them; maybe something’s missing, but it doesn’t look good. I hope they have a logical explanation. @BasedSamParker https://rumble.com/v70u0vk-pastor-rob-mccoy-says-his-son-called-him-and-he-was-covered-in-blood.html

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk I’m trying really hard to be respectful towards everything that has happened, but it appears Pastor Rob McCoy is caught in a lie.. 🔻 Pastor McCoy weeks ago said his son Mikey McCoy, TPUSA Chief of Staff, called him right after it happened, and he was “covered in blood” 🔻 Clips 2 & 3 it appears that did not happen and he casually walked away as it unfolded. One could say that’s very odd behavior. I really don’t know what to say.. I’m not willing to demonize Pastor McCoy, nor his son, that’s not my job… maybe there’s something missing from this story, but it doesn’t look good. I hope he and his son have a logical explanation for this.. I really do. 🧢 @BasedSamParker https://rumble.com/v70u0vk-pastor-rob-mccoy-says-his-son-called-him-and-he-was-covered-in-blood.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker identifies family roles: Justin is the chief CFO and Mikey is the chief of staff. He recalls a moment when Charlie was shot and immediately says, “Charlie’s been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray.” He notes that Charlie was directing and had blood all over him, while Frank Turic was giving Charlie CPR and was covered in blood. The speaker then addresses online misinformation, calling it “the stupidity of the Internet” and dismissing claims that hand signals were being used. He states that it was Frank Turic, a Christian apologist, who was providing CPR, and that Frank’s children were on the phone when he was videotaping it and saw the bullet. He says, “Signals, really?” and rejects the conspiracy surrounding Dan, the security guard, who is said to be connected to the conspiracy. He emphasizes that Dan is a believer and expresses affection for him, asking why he didn’t check the roof, while acknowledging that Dan, and the team, have limited detail. The speaker then shifts to broader context, noting that President Trump was shot, Kennedy was shot, and RFK was shot, implying questions about where people were during such moments. He reflects on the challenges Turning Point faces as it grows exponentially, and the difficulty of determining “the dimensions of what to do” in evolving crises. He questions how they would have access to a roof when campus police have the keys to it, and urges people to calm down. In sum, the speaker recounts the incident involving Charlie’s shooting and Frank Turic’s CPR, rejects online conspiracy theories about hand signals and Dan’s supposed involvement, defends Dan as a believer, and references past presidential shootings to illustrate the difficulty of proactive response as Turning Point expands, concluding with a call to remain calm.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm looking at my son who's 24 years old. Justin is the chief CFO, chief financial officer, and and Mikey is the chief of staff. And and I'm watching the minute Charlie was shot, called me, says, dad, Charlie's been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray. I said, okay, son. He has wits about him. He was just directing. He had blood all over him and Frank Turic. I just wanna address something. The stupidity of the Internet. Oh, signals? Really? You're gonna put that garbage out that they were giving hand signals? That was Frank Turic. He was covered in blood because he was giving Charlie CPR. He's an apologist for the Christian faith. His children were on the phone when he was videotaping it and they saw the bullet. His heart's ripped out. Signals, really? And the other guy, Dan, the security guard, he somehow tied in with this conspiracy? Get over yourself. Dan is a believer. I love that man. Why didn't he check the roof? I don't know. I do know that they do. I know they have a limited detail. President Trump was shot. Kennedy was shot. RFK was shot. Where were they? There's some things no matter how hard you try and especially with Turning Point growing exponentially in trying to figure out the dimensions of what to do. And how are they supposed to get on a roof when the campus police have the keys to all that? Just calm down.
Video Transcript AI Summary
New footage shows Turning Point’s chief of staff Mikey McCoy immediately plugging his ears, turning around, and walking away slowly right after Charlie Kirk was shot. While others around him run for cover, Mikey appears to be on a cell phone, prompting questions about whom he was talking to. Pastor Rob McCoy, Mikey’s father, claims Mikey called him right after Charlie Kirk was shot. He says, “son, Charlie's been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray,” and notes Mikey had blood on him but “had wits about him” and was directing people as he walked away. Pastor Rob McCoy also claims Mikey is covered in blood, which he says contrasts with Mikey quickly turning and walking away without looking underneath the tent to see if Charlie was okay. According to James Lee’s investigation, citing the New York Times, Mikey McCoy called Erica Kirk. The Times reports that Erica Kirk was in her mother's hospital room at 11:23 AM local time in Phoenix when she saw the number of Michael McCoy appear on her phone, and she recalled hearing the words “he's been shot” before Mister McCoy screamed them. Official records indicate Charlie Kirk was shot at 12:23 PM Mountain Time, which is 11:23 in Phoenix. If the New York Times is accurate, the only person Mikey could have been on the phone with is Erica Kirk. The transcript frames the question: Who was Mikey McCoy really talking to, and why did he walk away so calmly immediately after his friend was shot?
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So it seems like somebody's lying. New footage has been circulating showing Turning Point's chief of staff, Mikey McCoy's, odd reaction right after Charlie Kirk got shot. Right after Charlie Kirk got shot, Mikey McCoy can be seen plugging his ears and instantly turning around and walking away slowly. People are noticing that he's on a cell phone talking to somebody. And this is kind of odd because everybody else around there is running and ducking for cover. And so it begs the question, who was Mikey talking to on the cell phone? Mikey's father, pastor Rob McCoy, claims that Mikey called him right after Charlie got shot. Take a listen. Speaker 1: I'm looking at my son who's 24 years old. Justin's the chief CFO, chief financial officer, and Mikey's the chief of staff. And I'm watching the minute Charlie was shot, he called me, says, dad, Charlie's been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray. I said, okay, son. He's he has wits about him. He was just directing. He had blood all over him and Speaker 0: Pastor Rob McCoy also claims that Mikey is covered in blood. But that's odd because Mikey quickly turned and walked away without even looking underneath the tent to see if Charlie was okay. According to James Lee's investigation, Mikey McCoy called Erica Kirk, and this is per the New York Times. Speaker 2: Check this out. Who was he calling? Well, I did some digging, and according to the New York Times, it was one Erica Kirk. Quote, miss Kirk was sitting in her mother's hospital room at 11:23AM local time in Phoenix when she saw the number of her husband's longtime assistant, Michael McCoy, appear on her phone. In retrospect, she said she knew the words he's been shot before mister McCoy screamed them. According to official records, Charlie Kirk was shot at 12:23PM mountain time, which is 11:23 in Phoenix. So if the New York Times is being a 100% accurate, the only person that Mikey could have been on the phone with is Erica. Speaker 0: So who was Mikey McCoy really talking to? And why did he just walk away so calmly right after his friend got Speaker 1: shot?
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 repeats mentions of "in-game violence" and "in-game finals," emphasizing the finals repeatedly. Speaker 1 observes that someone is on the phone while Charlie is evacuated behind him, notes that the person doesn't actually know anything yet, and adds that the person walked away without seeing what happened to Charlie, asking, "Who's he talking to?"
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In game violence. Great. In game finals. Great. In game finals. Great. In game finals. Great. Speaker 1: He's still on the phone as Charlie is evacuated behind him. But what's he talking about? He doesn't actually know anything yet. He walked away without seeing what happened to Charlie. Who's he talking to?
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 24, 2025 at 3:07 AM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 8:19 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m noting Netanyahu doesn’t give a shit anymore. Israel voted to annex the West Bank against Trump’s promise. JD called it a very stupid political stunt and I take insult... The Trump Admin’s policy is that the West Bank will not be annexed by Israel.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Netanyahu just doesn’t give a shit anymore… Israel just voted to Annex the West Bank (against Trump’s Promise) and JD went off: “If it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and I personally take some insult... The policy of the Trump Admin is that the West Bank will not be annexed by Israel. That will continue to be our policy." https://rumble.com/v70phde-israel-voted-to-annex-the-west-bank-it-was-a-very-stupid-political-stunt.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker recounts that someone told them a move was a political stunt and purely symbolic. They say, if it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and they take some insult from it. The West Bank is not going to be annexed by Israel, and that will continue to be the policy of the Trump administration. If people want to take symbolic votes, they can do that, but they weren’t happy about it.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When I asked about it, somebody told me that it was a political stunt, that it had no practical significance. It was purely symbolic. I mean, look, if it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and I personally take some insult to it. The West Bank is not gonna be annexed by Israel. The policy of the Trump administration is that the West Bank will not be annexed by Israel. That will continue to be our policy. And if people wanna take symbolic votes, they can do that. But but we certainly weren't happy about it.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 25, 2025 at 3:17 PM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 7:49 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that a Nicaraguan undocumented immigrant allegedly assaulted a woman; when asked if ICE should deport him, Johnson said, “Alright, let’s move on…” and added, “They don’t care about Americans anymore. They just don’t.”

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson: 🔻Reporter: “An illegal alien from Nicaragua grabbed a woman on the North Side last week, bashed her head into the sidewalk and raped her. If that had been your wife, would you want ICE to deport him?” 🔻 Johnson: “Alright, let’s move on…” They don’t care about Americans anymore. They just don’t. https://rumble.com/v70rqom-chicago-mayor-illegal-brutally-raped-woman-lets-move-on.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
In the exchange, Speaker 0 recounts feedback from “real Chicagoans,” describing them as mostly Black and Brown, and claims they tell him that the other person does not seem to know the difference between illegal aliens and real Chicago citizens. He asserts that these individuals feel the other person is siding with illegal aliens over their communities. He then pivots to a direct line of questioning. The real question, as Speaker 0 presents it, concerns a violent incident: “An illegal alien from Nicaragua grabbed a woman on the North Side, bashed her head into the sidewalk, knocked her unconscious, and raped her.” He presses for a direct response about what would have happened “if that had been your wife, Stacy.” He stages the hypothetical to elicit a clear stance from Speaker 1 on how to respond to such a crime and its immigration context. Speaker 1, however, interrupts to steer the conversation away from the loaded scenario. He repeatedly signals a move on, indicating a preference not to engage with the hypothetical or to answer the pointed ethical dilemma on the spot. The back-and-forth centers on the tactic of addressing the question versus avoiding it, with Speaker 0 insisting on a straightforward answer “as a man, not as mayor, but as a man.” The exchange escalates as Speaker 0 urges Speaker 1 to provide a simple yes or no and to address the issue directly, effectively challenging Speaker 1 to commit to a position regarding ICE and deportation in light of the described crime. Speaker 1 responds by again stating to move on, resisting the direct yes/no framework. Throughout, Speaker 0 persists in pressing for a candid, personal response to the hypothetical crime and its immigration implications, while Speaker 1 maintains a boundary about continuing the discussion in that moment. Ultimately, Speaker 1 declines to answer the specific deportation question in the moment, and Speaker 0 reaffirms the demand for a direct personal answer. The segment ends with Speaker 1 thanking the audience and moving on, leaving the explicit yes-or-no question unresolved in this exchange.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, the real Chicagoans that I talk to, that I communicate with, mostly black and brown, actually, tell me that you don't seem to know the difference between illegal aliens and real Chicago citizens. They feel that you are siding with the illegal aliens over them in their communities. And sadly William, let's get to the question. Let's yeah. Let's get to the question. The real question is simply this. I don't know how to make it any more direct. An illegal alien from Nicaragua grabbed a woman on the North Side Is it a question? Bashed her head into the sidewalk, knocked her unconscious, and raped her. If that had been your wife, Stacy Okay. Alright. We're not gonna answer it. Thank you. Thanks, man. Alright. Would you want ICE to would you want ICE to deport her Alright. Speaker 1: To Let's let's let's move on. Speaker 0: Yes or no? Speaker 1: Let's move on. Speaker 0: Answer the question as a man. Not as mayor, but as a man. Speaker 1: Would you k. Thanks. Speaker 0: Thank you.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 31, 2025 at 7:16 PM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 7:04 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I note Elon Musk says the new Tesla Roadster, due end of year, will be “unforgettable” and may be able to fly. He echoes Peter Thiel’s idea that flying cars should be purchasable, promising the most memorable product reveal ever. He compares it to being crazier than all James Bond cars combined. Clip and full show linked.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Is the world ready for flying cars? 🚨 Elon Musk shares the new Tesla Roadster coming out (end of year) will be “unforgettable” and hints that it may be able to Fly “Peter Thiel once said the future was supposed to have flying cars, but we don’t have flying cars… if we want a flying car, we should be able to buy one… it will be the most memorable product unveil ever.. Like this is some crazy crazy technology we got in this car. I mean, it looks like a car, but let’s put it this way — if you took all the James Bond cars, and combined them, it’s crazier than that.” Clip https://rumble.com/v711tio-elon-musk-new-tesla-roadster-may-be-able-to-fly.html Full Show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O4wBUysNe2k&pp=ygURam9lIHJvZ2FuIHBvZGNhc3TSBwkJAwoBhyohjO8%3D

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the Roadster project, with Speaker 0 noting they are “getting close to demonstrating the prototype” and promising that the product demo will be unforgettable, whether good or bad. They consider the possibility of a flying car, referencing Peter Thiel’s remark that the future was supposed to have flying cars but we don’t have them yet. Speaker 1 asks if Speaker 0 means they will be able to fly, and Speaker 0 says they have to see in the demo, and if Peter wants a flying car, “we should be able to buy one.” They talk about the demo specifics, with Speaker 1 asking if there will be a retractable wing and what the underlying idea is. Speaker 0 declines to reveal details before the unveil but hints that there will be more information off the record. Speaker 0 maintains that the reveal could be “the most memorable product unveil ever” and that it has a shot, whether the outcome is good or bad. The target timing for the unveiling is “before the end of the year,” ideally “in a couple months,” contingent on ensuring the technology works, describing it as “crazy crazy technology” in the car. Speaker 1 notes that this is different from what was previously announced and asks if that is why it hasn’t been released yet, suggesting that the project keeps changing. Speaker 0 confirms the presence of “crazy technology” and questions whether it is even a car, though it looks like a car. Speaker 1 emphasizes that the device is “crazier than anything James Bond” if one combined all of Bond’s cars, to which Speaker 0 agrees that it is very exciting. The conversation moves to anticipation and secrecy, with Speaker 1 expressing suspicion but interest, and Speaker 0 offering to give a preview before the official unveiling. Speaker 1 responds affirmatively, and they agree to show it off before the reveal. The exchange ends with Speaker 1 confirming interest and both sides suggesting a pre-unveil viewing, stating, “Let’s go” and “100%.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hi, Tony Raiders. Speaker 1: Yeah. Pretty sick. Yeah. Are you still doing the Roadster? Speaker 0: Yes. Eventually? We're getting close to demonstrating the prototype. And I think this will be I I I one thing I can guarantee is that this product demo will be unforgettable. Unforgettable. Speaker 1: How so? Speaker 0: Whether it's good or bad, it will be unforgettable. Speaker 1: Can you say more? What do you mean? Speaker 0: Well, you know, my friend Peter Thiel, you know, once reflected that the spook the future was supposed to have flying cars, but we don't have flying cars. Speaker 1: So you're be able to fly? Speaker 0: Well, I I mean, I think if Peter wants a flying car, we should we should be able to buy one. Speaker 1: So you're are you actively considering making an electric flying car? Is this, like, a real thing? Speaker 0: Well, we have to see in the Speaker 1: In the demo. So when you do this, like, are are you gonna have a retractable wing? Like, what is the idea behind this? Don't be sly. Come on. Speaker 0: Well, I I I can't I can't do the unveil before the unveil. But Speaker 1: Tell me off air then. Speaker 0: I I I it look. I I think it has a shot at being the most memorable product unveil ever. It has a shot. Speaker 1: And when do you plan on doing this? What's the goal? Speaker 0: Hopefully, before the end of the year. Speaker 1: Really? Before the end of this year? This is I mean, we're Yes. Speaker 0: Know, cover months. Hopefully, in a couple months, you know, we we need to make sure that it works. Like, this is some crazy crazy technology we got in this car. Crazy technology. Crazy crazy. Speaker 1: So different than what was previously announced and Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: And is that why you haven't released it yet? Because you keep fucking with it? Speaker 0: It has crazy technology. Okay. Like, is it even a car? I'm not sure Speaker 1: it's Speaker 0: like, it looks like a car. Speaker 1: Let's just put it this way. Speaker 0: It it's it's crazier than anything James Bond if you took all the James Bond cars and combined them, it's crazier than that. Speaker 1: Very exciting. Speaker 0: Yeah. I Speaker 1: don't know what to think of I that don't know. Limited amount of information I'm drawing from here. Jamie's very suspicious over there. Look at him. Excited. I'm interested. It's still gonna be the same. Well, you know what? I mean, if if you wanna if you wanna come a little Speaker 0: before the the unveil, can show it to you. Speaker 1: 100%. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. Let's go.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Elon Musk discusses the 3I-Atlas, rumored to be a Huge Alien Mothership in deep Space — “If I was aware of any evidence of Aliens, you have my word, I will come on your show and I will reveal it. And I’m never committing suicide, to be clear.” Joe noted a recent report that the 3I-Atlas had changed its course… although it’s reportedly made almost entirely of nickel. Clip https://rumble.com/v711sg6-elon-musk-discusses-the-3i-atlas-rumored-to-be-a-huge-alien-mothership.html Full show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O4wBUysNe2k&pp=ygURam9lIHJvZ2FuIHBvZGNhc3TSBwkJAwoBhyohjO8%3D

Video Transcript AI Summary
The conversation opens with the sense that reality feels like it’s accelerating and that things happening every day feel increasingly wild, as if the simulation is becoming undeniable. Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss paying attention to “three eye Atlas” and a comet or interstellar object, with Speaker 0 promising that if they were aware of any evidence of aliens, they would reveal it on the show, a commitment Speaker 1 says they’ll hold them to. They joke about never committing suicide on camera and promise to fight anyone who claims otherwise. They mention Avi Loeb recently appearing on a podcast and reference a claim that the “three eye atlas” is a common name, sounding like “three eye” suggests “third eye.” They note that it’s the third interstellar object detected. There is a report that today the object has changed course, and Speaker 1 plans to send Jamie a link from Reddit about this. The object is described as being made almost entirely of nickel, with the suggestion that the only places this exists on Earth are industrial alloys. They discuss the possibility of nickel-rich asteroids or comets, and that nickel deposits on Earth trace back to asteroid or comet impacts. Speaker 0 counters that there are comets or asteroids that are made primarily of nickel, and notes that mining nickel on Earth corresponds to zones where a nickel-rich asteroid or meteorite impacted, creating nickel-rich deposits. This leads to the assertion that the object’s nickel content is substantial enough to raise questions about its nature as a heavy spaceship, though it’s acknowledged that constructing a spaceship entirely of nickel would be extremely heavy. The discussion shifts to the potential consequences of such an object colliding with Earth, with the possibility of obliterating a continent mentioned as a worst-case outcome. They acknowledge the size implications of a nickel-rich object the size of Manhattan and the drastic impact such a collision could have. They then pivot to geological history, noting that the fossil record shows major extinction events, including the Permian extinction, which occurred over several million years and wiped out almost all life. They also reference the Jurassic extinction as likely caused by an asteroid, but note that there were five major extinction events, and that there are additional events that merely affect continents. The implication is that only widespread, planet-wide events show up clearly in the fossil record.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Before coming into the studio with you know? Like, every day, there's some crazy, wild new thing that's happening. It's like feels like reality is accelerating. Speaker 1: It's every day, and every day, it's, like, more and more ridiculous to the point where the simulation is more and more undeniable. Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. It really feels like simulation. You know? It's like, come on. What are the odds that this could be the case? Are you paying attention at Speaker 1: all to three eye Atlas? Are you watching Speaker 0: the comet? Whatever it is. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I mean, one thing I can say is, like, look, I if if I was aware of any evidence of aliens, you Joe, you have my word. I will come on your show, and I will reveal it on the show. Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah. That's a good deal. Speaker 0: Yeah. It's pretty good I believe you. Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate that. I'll I'll stick I I keep my, know, keep my promises. So Alright. Speaker 1: Yeah. I'll hold you Speaker 0: to that. Yeah. Yeah. I don't And I'm never committing suicide, to be clear. I don't think you will either. On camera, guys, I am never committing suicide ever. Speaker 1: If someone says you committed suicide, I will fight tooth and nail. Speaker 0: Thank you. I will fight tooth and nail. I will I will not believe it. Speaker 1: I will not believe it. The thing about the three eye atlas is it's That's a common Speaker 0: name, actually. Speaker 1: Yeah. It's a third sounds like it sounds like Speaker 0: third eye or something. Speaker 1: Yeah. It does. Three eye is the third it's only the third interstellar object that's detected. Okay. Yeah. Speaker 0: Yeah. Avi Speaker 1: Loeb was on the podcast a couple days ago talking about it. Speaker 0: Yeah. And It could be only. I don't know. Speaker 1: But I apparently, today, they're saying that it's changed course. Do you see that, Jamie? Avi Loeb said something today. I'll send it to you. I know it's on Reddit. Rapper that brightens in his floor. Here you go, Jamie. I'll send it to you right now. It's fascinating. It's fascinating also because it's made almost entirely of nickel, whatever it is. And the only way that exists here is industrial alloys, apparently. Speaker 0: There must no. There are there are there are definitely comets that and asteroids that are made primarily of nickel. Speaker 1: Oh, really? Speaker 0: Yeah. So the the the places where you mine nickel on Earth is actually where there was an asteroid or comet that hit Earth that was a nickel rich, you know, aspect. Oh, wow. Nickel rich rich deposit? Yeah. That's the that's that's it's coming. Those are from impacts. Definitely didn't wanna be there at the time because anything would have been obliterated. Right. But that's that's where the the sources of nickel and cobalt are these days. Speaker 1: So this is Avi Loeb. A few hours ago, the first hint of non gravitational acceleration that something other than gravity is affecting its acceleration, meaning something is affecting its trajectory beyond gravity was indicated. Interesting. Dun dun dun. So it's mostly nickel, very little iron, which he was saying is on Earth, It only exists in alloys, but whatever, you know, you're dealing with another planet. Speaker 0: There's there's there are there are there are cases where there's, like, very nickel rich asteroids meteorite that that has that has it for Speaker 1: something from space. Speaker 0: Yeah. This is something Yeah. Yeah. It doesn't mean it's it'll be it'll be very sort of heavy spaceship to be make it all out of nickel. Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. And fucking huge. The size of Manhattan and all nickel, that's kinda nuts. Speaker 0: Yeah. That's a heavy space ship. Speaker 1: That's a real problem if it hits. Speaker 0: Yes. No. No. We would like obliterate a continent type of thing. Yeah. Maybe maybe it was. Speaker 1: Well, that'll probably kill most of human life, if not all of us. Speaker 0: I haven't looked at depends on what the the total mass is, but there's I mean, the thing is, like, in the fossil record, there are, you know, there's, like, arguably arguably five major extinction events, like the biggest one of which is the Permian extinction where almost all life was eliminated. That that occurs to occur over several million several million years. The there's the Jurassic. I think Jurassic is I think that one's pretty definitively an asteroid. And but there's but there's a five major extinction events, but but what they don't count are really the ones that merely take out a continent. So the Merely? Yeah. Because that that because those don't really show up on the fossil record. You Speaker 1: know? Right. Speaker 0: So unless it's enough to cause a a, you know, mass extinction event throughout Earth, it it doesn't show up, you know, in a fossil record that's
MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 20, 2025 at 6:07 AM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 6:34 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that Charlie Kirk’s head of security urged violence, saying people should “have their lip split” for questioning the “hand signals,” Frank Turek microphones, etc., asserting free speech as a weapon. He claims nobody was using hand signals that day. I’m troubled that a good man died horribly and publicly while under their protection, and that, without full truth, speculation fills the vacuum. Clip: https://rumble.com/v71zfjc-those-questioning-things-need-to-have-their-lip-split.html Full Show: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0fmq1zffGw

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Charlie Kirk’s head of security says people need to “have their lip split” for questioning the “hand signals,” Frank Turek microphones, etc. saying people are using their free speech as a Weapon He says nobody was using hand signals that day. Sorry, but a good man died horribly and very publicly while under your protection, and that death was due to serious negligence. When the full truth isn’t provided, speculation fills the vacuum. You’ll have to deal with that. Clip https://rumble.com/v71zfjc-those-questioning-things-need-to-have-their-lip-split.html Full Show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0fmq1zffGw

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker asserts that certain actions were deliberate and denies using hand signals on that day, noting that no hand signals were used except the general ones, and that while some people, like Frank Turk, were “messing with him because he adjusted his hat,” such incidents were part of a broader pattern where “everybody’s subject to that.” The point is that there is manipulation and opposition, and the speaker acknowledges that there are things larger than individuals that are in operations, even if he is not a conspiracy theorist. A central theme is the First Amendment and its intended purpose. The speaker explains that the First Amendment is important because “a voice is in arms for people that don't have arms,” allowing a collective or single voice to challenge a powerful hierarchy. It should be used as a shield to protect speech. However, with modern media and social media, the right has, in his view, been weaponized as a sword of public opinion. People can put out “a bunch of lies” and claim the First Amendment, asserting whatever they want, and it no longer functions solely as protection but can be a tool to push false narratives. He criticizes the proliferation of misinformation—examples like “Palm gun, exploding microphone, hand signals” are cited as items that may be false or sensationalized—and emphasizes that truth is not required for public opinion to take hold. The speaker suggests a return to consequences for false statements, advocating a more immediate response similar to the past: “put those people in the way back machine” to 1985, when if someone said something untrue about you or your family and others heard it, there would be an immediate consequence (a split lip), not a lawsuit several years later. This, he implies, would instill a level of respect and deter repeat offenses. He argues that sometimes people need to be punished in the moment to maintain accountability, even as he acknowledges the desire to balance free speech with consequences. Overall, the speaker weaves together a defense of the First Amendment, a critique of today’s information environment, and a provocative call for a return to quicker, tangible consequences for false or harmful statements, framed within a belief that larger forces operate beyond individual actions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yep. You're right. Absolutely. Yeah. And what you're doing there is deliberate. Yeah. These are deliberate. You know? Yeah. So no, we don't use hand signals on that one. We didn't use hand signals that day. We've never used hand signals other than the general ones. Come here. Here. Two people. Here. None of that was done. None of that was done. You had Frank Turk and people messing with him because he adjusted his hat. It's like, okay. Substantiate. All right. So he touched his hat. There were a line of people in the front and all other people that also did all kinds of things before that. It's like everybody's subject to that. I get it. Man, I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, but I do believe that there are things out there bigger than you and I that are in operations. It's a fact. I also am a huge believer in the First Amendment. So these people that are out there saying all this Back up. Why is the First Amendment so important? Because back in the day when our founding fathers said, Men, why do we need this amendment first? Because a voice is in arms for people that don't have arms. That's what it was for. A collective or a single voice could be powerful to a hierarchy of people that can't be conquered with an arm. So we have to have this voice and we have to protect this voice at all costs. And they said, and they wanted us to have that. That's why they put it first. And it should be used as a shield. Well, nowadays with the media and now social media, that right has been used as a sword and the sword of public opinion. It's like, hey, well, let's just put a bunch of lies out there and claim First Amendment and we can say whatever we want. And it's like, when's that stop? And literally whatever you want. You've seen some of the idiocy out there. Palm gun, exploding microphone, hand signals. It doesn't even have to be true, and it doesn't matter. And so you're just using that First Amendment as a sword and not a shield. We've got to step back at that and look at it. I was talking to your guys earlier, I was like, at some point, you put those people in the way back machine. And the way back machine is you take them to 1985. And when people said something that was untrue about you or your family, and they said something bad about you that other people heard, you split their lip. There's a consequence. An immediate consequence. Not a consequence that comes through a lawsuit three and a half years later, an immediate consequence, so that a level of respect is gained. And then also, hey, if you do this again, I'll see you next time as well. At some point, some people need to be put in the way back machine.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Charlie Kirk’s Head of Security shows a never before seen photo of the line of sight from Charlie to the roof — questioning whether or not the shooter ran into an already known pre-established position? Clip https://rumble.com/v71zf32-line-of-sight-how-did-tyler-robinson-know.html Full Show https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0fmq1zffGw https://t.co/SUaFG9jq1B

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the tactical sequence surrounding a man who approached a roof and the purported loophole used to take a shot. They note a distinction between “a guy walking up and getting on a roof” and “getting on a roof” in a way that suggests exploiting a loophole. They describe a tactic of banging a hole through one side, stepping back, and shooting through that hole, creating an opportunity they characterize as a loophole. They ask for a quick description of that loophole again. They reference a site: the Lucy Center behind the Sorensen Center, and explain that from their position they cannot see that area because it is not their area of responsibility; their focus is threats directly in front of them. They estimate about 3,000 threats in front of them, with a larger backdrop described as “an 18,000 foot mountain” in front and a “36,000 foot mountain” behind, suggesting limited visibility of the broader area. They note that if the shooter had stopped slightly to the right, the Sorensen Center would have been in the way and would block the view. Speaker 1 emphasizes that it is a very specific point, not just climbing onto the roof to gain a vantage point. Speaker 0 suggests there was “blind luck” involved—no crawling, no secondary shooter stuck in the weeds; instead a “boom on, boom run to, boom take the shot.” They ask whether the event had to have been rehearsed, and Speaker 1 indicates the vantage point was roughly seven feet high, a small area that would require search for that vantage point if one didn’t know where to look. They discuss the possibility of footage existing to show how the shooter reached the point or whether he searched for it. Speaker 0 suggests that a drone could have provided footage, lamenting its absence, and jokes about wanting to deploy a drone to examine the scene. They frame these as tactical questions: their team drills include rapid movement—running 300 yards, jumping a wall, taking a shot—with an example of a 35-foot declination at 200 yards. They acknowledge that even trained shooters sometimes miss under duress, noting it’s not merely the shot itself but the broader conditions. They also compare the current shooter to “old men that shoot stuff on sandbags,” underscoring the pressure of real-world conditions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here's my question, and hopefully it'll come out in timeline. We've all seen the pictures of the guy when he came on through the staircase. It's like, okay, there's a difference between a guy walking up and getting on a roof and a guy walking up and getting on a roof. And did he run over to a known position? What you're doing there tactically is you're working a loophole. You guys did that on a roof. You bang a hole through one side, and then you step back and you put another hole and you shoot through that hole and that opportunity comes through. This is a big loophole. And so you tell me you just ran up onto a roof, pop yourself down in a position that was in a loophole. Can describe that loophole again real quick? Speaker 1: Just now that we have the visual up so that you So you can see Speaker 0: get up on this Sorensen Center, I mean, not Sorensen Center, Lucy Center, that's behind the Sorensen Center. And so from where we're sitting, where we're standing, we can't see it. One, it's not our area of responsibility, so that's why we're not looking there. First one, we're looking at threats right in front of us. You see how many threats do you have in front of me right here? About 3,000. 3,000. Right. And so that's what we're looking at. And then it's kind of like you could be in front of an 18,000 foot mountain and there's a 36,000 foot mountain behind it, you're not going to see it. And so we have to be cognizant of that. And then if he would have stopped just a little bit to the right, he wouldn't have been able to see it because the source and center would have been in the way. Speaker 1: I mean, it's a very specific point. It's not just, which is what I thought. I thought it was just climb on the roof and you've got the vantage point Speaker 0: So you're very telling much me there's like enough blind ass luck that you ran up there, didn't crawl, didn't get up He didn't get up there like the secondary guy that tried to shoot Trump, where he was bugged down in the weeds for a while. This was a boom on, boom run to, boom take the shot. And it's like, did you get all that off the bat? Speaker 1: It had to have been rehearsed. To that, which I believe you said is basically a, did you say seven foot vantage point basically head? Speaker 0: Oh, I'd have to. It's small, whatever. Speaker 1: Not big. There's the visual, who gives a fuck? It's a Speaker 0: small area. It's not something You would have to search for that. Speaker 1: You would have to search for that vantage point if you didn't know. So it would be great to see the footage. Maybe it's out there of him running straight to the point or did he Speaker 0: search around looking for it? Wanna know. Do we have It'd Speaker 1: be great if that chief of police would've Speaker 0: put that fucking drone up. We'd had it. Or I'd have flown that drone up his ass if we could've had one. Those are questions I have. Those are tactical questions. I mean, we make our guys do that kind of stuff all the time. Yep, nope, you're gonna run 300 yards, you're gonna jump over this wall, you're gonna come home and you're gonna take this shot with ours is about 35 foot declination at 200 yards, and you see guys that are even trained, miff it every once in a while. And people are like, Oh, that's an easy whip at 142. I'm like, Yeah, the shot itself, but you're talking about old men that shoot stuff on sandbags. You and I both know under duress accurate shots are different.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 11, 2025 at 3:01 AM
Saved - December 11, 2025 at 1:12 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHYT‼️How is this ok? 🚨 The President of the World Jewish Congress just sent a warning to every Potential AMERICA FIRST Candidate wishing to run for U.S. Congress If you do not support Israel, if you platform or say anything we deem “antisemitic”, we will “TARGET THEM” and start a fund for their opponent. Christians need to call this out. This is outrageous! I am so sick of the government of Israel interfering in on OUR politics. This is not ok and if you think this is ok, my God…. Clip https://rumble.com/v72vas2-if-you-if-you-dont-support-israel-as-a-u.s.-politician-we-will-target-you.html Full Remarks https://rumble.com/v72v934-world-jewish-president-compares-tucker-carlson-to-hitler.html

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Not good… The President of the World Jewish Congress, Ron Lauder says Israel must recapture social media, and reinvent Education for America’s Children Clip https://rumble.com/v72va4a-world-jewish-president-we-must-recapture-social-media-and-reeducate-america.html Full Remarks https://rumble.com/v72v934-world-jewish-president-compares-tucker-carlson-to-hitler.html https://t.co/Yl1E9AdEVY

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Absolutely insane… The President of the World Jewish Congress, Ron Lauder, just said Nazism is Rising Again in the United States, and now Tucker Carlson is leading the effort, just like Father Coughlin did during Nazi Germany Clip https://rumble.com/v72v942-world-jewish-president-compares-tucker-carlson-to-father-coughlin.html Full Remarks

MJTruthUltra
Posted - December 5, 2025 at 2:44 AM
Saved - December 5, 2025 at 6:48 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I claim California elections are rigged. The online voter registration is an “Honor System”—you just click a box and say you’re truthful, then you get a confirmation email. Once on the rolls, you’re mailed a ballot for every election.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

California Sheriff describes how Gavin Newsom Steals Elections by allowing Illegal aliens to vote "The online voter registration system seems to be an “Honor System” — all you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying. And then you'll get an email from the Secretary State in the mail saying thank you for registering to vote. And there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, any time an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot, right?“ https://rumble.com/v714vec-trump-shares-video-of-ca-sheriff-stating-elections-are-rigged.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker describes a situation in which registration and voting can occur even when a person does not live in the country, citing an example involving a brother in Pakistan to illustrate the point. According to the speaker, there is evidence of two or three other people who are outside the country voting, as well as people residing outside of the district. This is presented as a factual observation about who has voted, including individuals located abroad and not within the local district boundaries. The speaker then critiques the online voter registration system by characterizing it as an honor system. The claim is that anybody can enter information into the online system to register and vote, relying on the promise of truthfulness. The process alleged by the speaker is described as follows: a person would place information into the system and then simply click a box stating that they are not lying about the information provided. After doing so, the person would receive an email from the secretary of state or a similar official channel in the mail, indicating acknowledgment or thanks for registering to vote, effectively confirming their registration. Following this registration, the speaker notes a procedural consequence: once an individual is on the voter rolls, they are mailed a ballot for each election. In other words, the pattern described is that being on the voter rolls automatically leads to receiving a mailed ballot for every election that occurs, according to the speaker’s account of how the system operates. The speaker emphasizes a continuity of this process across elections, implying that the mailed ballot would be a recurring consequence of enrollment on the voter rolls. Throughout the account, there is an emphasis on what the speaker views as the potential vulnerability or problematic nature of the system. The speaker asserts that the combination of an online registration process that relies on an honor system, the possibility of registering with false or unverified information, and the automatic mailing of ballots to those on the rolls creates a situation that the speaker finds problematic. The overall narrative connects the initial observations about individuals voting from abroad and outside the district to a broader critique of the online registration and ballot distribution processes, underscoring concerns about eligibility verification and the integrity of the voting system as described by the speaker.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You're able to register even if and cast a vote if you don't live in the in the country as evident of his brother in Pakistan. I think we have some evidence of two or three other people out of the country that voted. Is that correct? Yeah. Approximately two or three other people out of the country as well as people residing outside of the district. Okay. The online voter registration system, it seems to be an honor system. Anybody can put information in there to to register and vote. All you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying, and then you'll get an email from the secretary of state or something in the mail saying thank you for registering to vote, and there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot. Right? You get mailed something to vote. So we found that a little bit problematic.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 18, 2025 at 4:22 PM
Saved - November 18, 2025 at 7:06 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
HOLEE SHYT! It’s happening… I see Abbott designates the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR as FOREIGN TERRORIST and Transnational Criminal Organizations, bans them from buying land in Texas, and lets the AG sue to shut them down.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHYT! It’s happening… 👀 Texas Governor Greg Abbott designates the Muslim Brotherhood and Council on American-Islamic Relations as FOREIGN TERRORIST and Transnational Criminal Organizations. “This bans them from buying or acquiring land in Texas and authorizes the Attorney General to sue to shut them down.”

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

https://t.co/JSsyVzlEwh

MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 12, 2025 at 6:34 PM
Saved - November 13, 2025 at 4:54 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I point out what I see as sick and twisted: Democrats and mainstream media redacted the victim’s name to shield their narrative. They even hid Virginia Giuffre’s name because, in her depositions and memoir, she says Trump never did anything wrong and was a perfect gentleman. Don’t let Trump suffer from these lies—digital soldiers, do your thing.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Rob Schmitt, Newsmax: This shows how sick and twisted the Democrats and mainstream media are: They redacted the victim's name because they knew that releasing it would destroy their entire narrative. They redacted Virginia Giuffre's name because—in her own depositions and memoir—she stated that Donald Trump never did anything wrong and was a perfect gentleman. Don't let Trump suffer from these lies. Digital soldiers, do your thing. https://rumble.com/v71m0mw-the-democrat-epstein-scam-explained.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a major media story asserting that Donald Trump spent hours at his house with one of Epstein’s underage victims. They claim the coverage is ubiquitous across the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and cable news, portraying the incident as a damning revelation. They argue the story’s impact is amplified by redacting the victim’s name, which they say would undermine the narrative, and claim Republicans quickly exposed the redaction. The name given is Virginia Dufry, and the speaker asserts that in depositions and in her own memoir she stated that Donald Trump never did anything wrong and was a perfect gentleman the entire time. They claim the media concealed this information and are now portraying the situation as a smoking gun that proves Trump is a pedophile, calling the media and those involved “vile” and “disgusting” for their actions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hey, guys. Big headline this morning about Epstein and and Trump and this underage victim that Trump reportedly spent hours with. If anything proves to you just how vile the people that we're dealing with are, how disgusting the media is, and how aligned the democratic agenda is with the broader mainstream media. It's it's the story is everywhere. New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, every cable channel. This is the front page. This is the big top story. And it alleges something absolutely heinous that Trump spent hours at his house with one of the victims of Epstein, and it just leaves it right there because they just want you to see that headline. Trump spent hours with a victim. Oh, what what comes into your head when you think about that headline? That's exactly what they want you to do. Here's the problem, and this is how disgusting these people are. They redact the name of the alleged victim and they did that for a reason because the name of that victim would blow up their whole story. So they redact that part, Republicans were quick to unmatch that redaction. The name is Virginia Dufry, a young lady who in depositions and also in her own memoir, a book that she wrote said that Donald Trump never did anything wrong and was a perfect gentleman the entire time. They concealed that and now your entire XP and the media are all just out there alleging, oh, this is the smoking gun. See, he's a pedophile. This is how sick and twisted these people are. They are vile creatures. This is what we're up against.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

OMG, I just realized something.. The real scandal in these emails isn’t Trump and Epstein—it’s Michael Wolff, a leading journalist, COACHING a convicted sex offender on how to manipulate a presidential candidate for personal and political gain. This is very serious actually… Take Wolff’s books for example— Fire and Fury, Siege, Landslide — which he profited off of Trump’s presidency for millions. Now we know that Wolff was advising Epstein during the campaign… Every explosive claim in those books is now under a cloud of conflict of interest. Why isn’t anyone talking about this? Why was a “journalist” coaching a pedophile??? 👀

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

People are not understanding just how dirty democrats are.. let me break this down. The Democrats' released a redacted version with "VICTIM", knowing full well the original estate documents included "Virginia Giuffre. She is “VICTIM”.. This is from Virginia Giuffre herself in https://t.co/xom600GU90

MJTruthUltra
Posted - November 9, 2025 at 4:56 PM
Saved - November 9, 2025 at 9:59 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I note Devin Nunes says JP Morgan debanked Trump Media & Technology Group in summer 2024 without explanation, disrupting operations. He links it to the Arctic Frost operation led by Jack Smith, which allegedly targeted TMTG with subpoenas even though the company didn’t exist on Jan 6. He also claims JPMorgan closed Trump family accounts and coordinated with federal agencies to weaponize banking against opponents, inviting lawsuits and investigations.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

It sounds like JP Morgan is in Deep Shit.. 💩 🚨 Devin Nunes explains how JP Morgan was Caught in Massive Scandal debanking Trump Media Over FBI's Bogus 'Arctic Frost' Witch Hunt — Only one problem, TMTG DID NOT EXIST During Jan 6 • JP Morgan suddenly debanked Trump Media & Technology Group in summer 2024 without providing any explanation, disrupting the company's operations. • The debanking turns out was linked to the Arctic Frost operation, led by Jack Smith which targeted TMTG with subpoenaed officials' cellphones, even though the company DID NOT EXIST during January 6 events - Claims extend to JP Morgan closing accounts for the entire Trump family, including Melania and Barron Trump, as part of conservative debanking. - Nunes implies coordination between JP Morgan and federal agencies under the Biden administration, weaponizing banking against political opponents, which could lead to lawsuits, congressional investigations, and maybe prison. https://rumble.com/v71gj3k-jp-morgan-busted-in-massive-debanking-scandal-part-of-arctic-frost.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Devin and Maria discuss the Arctic Frost investigation and its impact on Trump Media and Technology Group and Truth Social. - Devin asserts that Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG) would not have been involved in Arctic Frost, since TMTG became a public company in 2024 and “we were nowhere around in 2021 on January 6,” questioning why Trump Media was subpoenaed during the investigation. - He questions JPMorgan Chase’s actions, asking why the bank would comply with Arctic Frost targeting TMTG’s bank records if the company did not exist in January 2021, noting that TMTG was never notified. - Devin explains that when Arctic Frost targeted their bank records, TMTG did not exist as a public or private entity at that time. He asks what reason JPMorgan had to pursue them, and he questions whether JPMorgan targeted TMTG and did not inform them, suggesting potential Florida law implications and possible federal law implications. - He recounts that during the period when they were private and preparing to go public, JPMorgan “debanked” TMTG at a critical moment in early 2024, during the campaign, even though they were seeking to deposit $250,000,000. Devin notes they had other banks in line (Citizens), but JPMorgan acted at that time. - Devin claims JPMorgan later indicated they do not close accounts for political reasons, citing a statement they gave to Fox News in August that they do not debank for political reasons and that regulatory change is needed, but he questions whether that policy held true at the time TMTG was debanked. - He states that now it is clear TMTG was caught up in Arctic Frost and emphasizes that they were a company going public with hundreds of thousands of shareholders worldwide and no debt, with an SEC approval, and therefore questions why JPMorgan would debank a company entering the market. - Devin says they will pursue all legal avenues under Florida and federal law to determine what JPMorgan knew, when they knew it, and whether there was coordination with anyone within the administration or the Justice Department, insisting that all communications JPMorgan had regarding their account be disclosed. - He adds that the Department of Justice and the dragnet affected hundreds of Americans, noting the broader scope of people wrapped up in these investigations. - The conversation highlights the overarching concern about potential political influence on financial institutions and the transparency of actions taken by JPMorgan during the Arctic Frost investigation.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Devin, it is great to see you. Thank you so much for being here today. You are also the the chairman of the president's outside advisory intelligence committee, and we appreciate you being here. Can you talk to us a bit about what happened to truth social and Trump Trump Media and Technology Group during this Arctic Frost investigation? Speaker 1: Yeah, Maria. Thanks for having me. And one would think that Trump Media would not have been caught up into Arctic Us at all, largely because, Maria, we just became a public company in 2024, and we were nowhere around in 2021 on January 6. So why would Trump media be subpoenaed at that time during this investigation? It doesn't make any sense. And, you know, furthermore, when you look at this, JPMorgan, should they have complied with this knowing that we weren't around? They had to know that our company wasn't around on January 6. We were never notified. Trump media company wasn't notified. Speaker 0: Now what do you mean about tell me about JPMorgan. What are you saying about JPMorgan? What are you saying about JPMorgan? Speaker 1: Well, when they Arctic Frost went after our bank records at Trump media, That's inexplicable because we didn't exist. So what reason did they have to go after us? But I think furthermore, why did JPMorgan target us as and not tell us? We're a Florida company. I mean, I don't I can't believe this is not against Florida law, that it wouldn't be against federal law. But furthermore, during that time period, Maria, when we were a private company just going public, JPMorgan then debanked us at that time. Now, luckily enough, we had other banks in line for Citizens, but right at the time that we were going public in early twenty twenty four, in the 2024, right at the height of the campaign, we were trying to get our company that saved free speech, True Social, saving free speech, making sure that we all had a voice. At that time, JPMorgan inexplicably debanked us. And we need to know why that happened. You know, after discussing this with them for several months going back and forth, it looked political at the time, but now we know that they were under subpoenas that they didn't tell us about as they were cooperating with the Biden Department of Speaker 0: Wow. So wait. So you're alleging It's different American. That Jack Smith called JPMorgan and sent a subpoena to send Jack Smith's office your bank records from Trump meeting. Now JPMorgan gave us a statement back in August when president Trump attacked the banks to say that they were debanking. And JPMorgan told Fox, we do not close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with president Trump that regulatory change is knee desperately needed. That is what JPMorgan Chase told us. What are you saying? Speaker 1: Well, that may be their policy now, but I can't imagine that was their policy at the time Because we know now, we didn't know. Now what's new here is that we were caught up in Arctic Frost. We Trump media company. Now look, we're owned by hundreds of thousands of shareholders all around the world. You know, we had nothing to do with January 6 at all. There was no reason to go after us and subpoena our records. So the back and forth that happened between the Department of Justice, what was the reason for the subpoena? Who did they talk to at JPMorgan, because we know at that time we were going back at JPMorgan saying, look, this sure looks political. And then after this going on for months, then right when the damage could be maximized against our company, right when we were going public, what does JPMorgan do? They debank us. And I've seen Jamie Dimon and others at JPMorgan say this over and over again that they don't debank people for political reasons. Well, then why the hell did you debank Trump media? We didn't have anything to do with January 6. So look, we're going to do everything under the law, Florida law and federal law, to figure out what JP Morgan knew, when did they do it, did they coordinate with anybody within administration or the Justice Department? This is easily knowable. All we need is all the communications that JPMorgan had as it relates to our account. But we know that what they did and at the time, I think it's pretty clear they were trying to maximize damage on behalf of someone. We don't know who, but there was no reason for Jack Smith, Atwitch Hunt, the Department of Justice to ever target Trump media. We were a company, Maria, the time, by the way, that was just going public with $250,000,000 and no debt. You know, we had a clean bill of health. We just got approval by the SEC. Why would you debank somebody that wants to deposit $250,000,000 into your bank, supposedly one of the largest banks in the world with high integrity? These are questions that will be answered, and we will make sure as a company that they are answered. And look, we're one of don't forget, we're one of hundreds and hundreds. You you you were just talking to the senators that got their phone records wrapped up in this. Yeah. There's hundreds of Americans that were wrapped up in this dragnet.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 31, 2025 at 5:42 PM
Saved - November 1, 2025 at 12:27 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that Texas AG Ken Paxton won a $1.375B settlement against Google—the largest ever with a single state. It alleges unlawful location tracking even after users disabled location history; Chrome Incognito allegedly still collected data; unauthorized biometric data collection of voiceprints and facial geometry without consent. I note data is valuable. The question remains: is Google allowed to keep the biometric data they illegally collected?

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHIZZLES‼️ Texas AG Ken Paxton just won a $1.375 BILLION Settlement against GOOGLE — the largest ever, with a single state. What Google did should Shock Everyone… - Unlawful Location Tracking: Even after users disabled location history features on their Android or iOS devices, Google continued to collect and store geolocation data WITHOUT CONSENT. - Google's "Incognito" or private browsing feature in Chrome was marketed as not tracking search history or location activity. Google STILL collected and used this data for advertising and other purposes. - Unauthorized Biometric Data Collection: Google captured and STORED sensitive biometric identifiers—such as voiceprints (from voice searches or Assistant interactions) and facial geometry (from photo analysis in services like Google Photos)— WITHOUT obtaining informed consent. Like I’ve always said, data is more valuable than gold. Thank you @KenPaxtonTX! Is Google still allowed to keep the biometric data they ILLEGALLY collected?

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 23, 2025 at 9:04 PM
Saved - October 24, 2025 at 4:36 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Oh boy… Sounds like 2026 is gonna be lit. A memo online claims a National Guard Response Force will train for crowd control and civil unrest, deployed in all 50 states by April 2026. Pete Hegseth: I’m not going to answer anything on the particulars of something that may be in the planning process.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Oh boy… Sounds like 2026 is gonna be lit 👀 A Memo circulating on Social Media details a National Guard Response Force that’s going to be trained in crowd control and civil unrest, and will be deployed in all 50 states by April of 2026. Pete Hegseth: “I’m not going to answer anything on the particulars of something that may be in the planning process.” https://rumble.com/v70p01g-national-guard-response-force-april-of-2026..html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 asked Secretary Hagsteth about a memo circulating on social media detailing the establishment of a National Guard Response Force trained in crowd control and civil unrest and deployed in all 50 states by April 2026, requesting verification of authenticity and more information on operations. Speaker 1 responded that they will not answer particulars on something that may be in the planning process, but noted that there are multiple layers of National Guard Response Forces, including in each state, regionally, and across Title 10 active duty and Washington DC. He stated there are a lot of different ways constitutionally and legally to employ Title X and Title 32 forces, and they will do so when necessary.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Question for secretary Hagsteth. Sir, a memo circulating on social media, details the establishment of a National Guard Response Force that's gonna be trained in crowd control and civil unrest and deployed in all 50 states by April 2026. Can you verify the authenticity of that memo? And do you have any more information on the operations? Speaker 1: I'm not going to answer particulars on something that may be in the planning process, but we definitely do have multiple layers of National Guard Response Forces, whether it's in each state, whether it's regionally, whether it's Title 10 active duty, whether it's Washington DC. We've got a lot of different ways that constitutionally and legally we can employ Title X and Title 32 forces, and we will do so when necessary.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHIZZLES‼️ President Trump says he will keep his Promise to EXPOSE the Politicians and Billionaires involved with Financing Domestic Terrorism “We have a lot of information about who they are. You’re going to be VERY surprised when you find out.” https://rumble.com/v70ozns-trump-will-expose-the-politicians-and-billionaires-involved-with-financing-.html https://t.co/J7FHAcYPrE

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 asks about a 2024 reelection video in which the speaker promised to show no mercy on the cartels and to employ every military asset to combat them, and to expose all bribes and corruptions involving politicians and the cartels. Speaker 0 confirms, saying they are pursuing that course. They mention investigating where money comes from, noting a recent weekend “garbage deal” as embarrassing to the opposition and that the crowds were not large. They observe that the signs for the protests—yellow and blue—appear professionally made, as if produced in a printing shop, suggesting someone is paying for them. They acknowledge they do not mind protest and sometimes protest themselves, but claim some protesters are “professional agitators” being paid, implying there is a source behind them. Speaker 0 states they have a lot of information about who these agitators are and that the public will be very surprised when they find out who is paying them.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Go ahead. Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. When when you were running for reelection in 2024, you released a video statement where you did this you made this exact promise to show no mercy on the cartels and employ every military asset necessary to combat them. In that same video, you also said that you plan to expose all the bribes and corruptions with politicians and the cartels. Speaker 0: I'm doing that. That's your kind to do that. Speaker 1: Looking into that in American politicians. Speaker 0: Yeah. Where the money's coming from. Because you see it. Like, even that garbage deal they had this weekend, which was embarrassing to them, and the crowds were much more the crowds were not big. Those crowds were not big at all. But when you look at signs, and they're all made beautifully, the yellow signs, I saw the yellows, the blues, but they're all made professionally in a printing shop, looks like on Madison Avenue someplace. Some guy is paying for all that stuff, and we don't mind protest. Protest is a good thing. I protest. I'm always protesting. Right? But but when you see some of these people, these people are going crazy. They're they're going crazy because they're getting paid because there's no reason for them to be going crazy. But you watch some of them, and they're professional agitators, and we are finding out who's paying them. Yeah. We we have a lot of information about who they are. You're gonna be very surprised when you find out.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

HOLEE SHIZZLES! NO KINGS Financials Released! The Financers: - Arabella: $79M - Warren Buffet: $16M - Ford: $51M - Rockefeller: $26M - Soros: $72M - Tides: $45M $294,487,641 MILLION Source @realannapaulina

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 22, 2025 at 2:31 AM
Saved - October 23, 2025 at 2:36 AM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Dammmmmmmm… Leftist: You’re worth $50 million dollars Tucker: I’m not worth $50 million dollars… get off the F*CKING Internet son. Leftist: You’re getting defensive…. Jesus Christ, calm down. Tucker: Don’t use that phrase.. stop, no, you’re done. Leave! https://t.co/I93rSZtblN

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 confronts someone over a claim about their net worth, reacting with disbelief and frustration. The sequence centers on the assertion that the person is “worth 50” or “worth $50,000,000,” which Speaker 0 treats as unbelievable and insists that they should stop believing such stuff. The phrases escalate: “You're worth 50 I'm million not worth $50,000,000. 30 to 50,000,000 the fucking Internet, son.” Speaker 0 urges the other person to “Just stop believing that stuff,” expressing irritation at the claim and at the surrounding debate. As the exchange continues, Speaker 0 attempts to disengage from the conversation, saying, “Go back to cable news. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry,” then veers back to the core tension: “But I'm just look. Okay. You're too annoy you're too annoying.” They reference a prior interaction with “the last chick who, like, disagreed with me,” noting that such a person could have “a normal conversation,” implying that the current back-and-forth is derailed by the insistence on the wealth claim. The dialogue emphasizes the incredulity and defensive reaction to the wealth assertion. Speaker 0 repeats the accusation that the other person is stating they are worth “$50,000,000,” and presses, “Stop. You got real defensive there.” They describe the situation as reading “a number that's like a lot of money” and admonish, “Jesus Christ, calm down. Don't don't use that phrase.” The pattern of insistence followed by outbursts continues: “You're worth I I we're done. Well, look Just just stop. I say one Don't no. You can't. Not after you say that. Leave. Alright.” Overall, the exchange centers on Speaker 0 challenging what they perceive as an inflated claim about wealth, expressing frustration with the other person’s defensiveness and view that the claim is inappropriate for a calm discussion, and ultimately signaling a desire to end the conversation if the claim persists.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Understand it because it makes no sense. Like, you're worth 50 I'm million not worth $50,000,000. 30 to 50,000,000 the fucking Internet, son. Just stop believing that stuff. Oh. $50,000,000? I'm Go back to cable news. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. No. But I'm just look. Okay. You're too annoy you're too annoying. So I like the last chick who, like, disagreed with me, and then we could have, like, a normal conversation. Alright. But you're, like, telling me you're worth $50,000,000. What? Stop. You got real defensive there. I I just read a number that's like a lot of money. Jesus Christ, calm down. Don't don't use that phrase. You're worth I I I we're done. Well, look Just just stop. I say one Don't no. You can't. Not after you say that. Leave. Alright.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

🚨 EXPLOSIVE‼️In a heated clash regarding Tuckers 2021 text messages saying he “Hated Donald Trump”, Tucker Carlson threatened to punch a man and abruptly cut him off for taking the Lord's name in vain. During the exchange, Tucker addressed why he once texted that he “hated Trump.” After Trump’s 2020 election loss, someone from his administration sent Tucker a list of supposed dead voters. Tucker aired the names, only for CNN to have those same individuals call in, confirming they were alive. Infuriated, Tucker vented his frustration at Trump. https://rumble.com/v70m9l8-tucker-v-student-on-his-text-message-he-hated-donald-trump.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 emphasizes transparency and discusses a resentful exchange, then trails into a confession about past political positions. He says he tries to be as transparent as possible and offers to share what the text in court filings was. He explains that the text involved a producer and him, in January after the election, when Trump claimed the election was stolen. He says he told the White House he would believe that claim if there were verifiable evidence, and cites a specific example the White House gave: seven or eight dead people who voted, with death certificates and obituaries to prove it. He recounts that he publicly stated there was talk about election theft and that dead voters were on the rolls, naming individuals like Wanda Johnson of Sioux City, Iowa, and Jack Klein of Corpus Christi, Texas, and promising to show their obituaries. He notes that within about twenty-five minutes, CNN confirmed the deceased were not dead, exposing that he had made a colossal error on air. He emphasizes he hates being wrong and humiliated and acknowledges he did not verify the information independently and should have checked. He states he was enraged by the incident and his stance was that if someone claimed the election was stolen, they should prove it; he is an adult and does not take anyone’s word for anything, especially from campaign consultants whom he distrusts, though he still thought the claim could be verifiable. Speaker 1 asks why he did not say these things on Fox News, and he asserts he did the next day on Fox News. The conversation becomes tense as Speaker 1 challenges the sincerity and ownership of the views and statements. Speaker 0 contends there is a conversation about honesty and ownership, and asks what is being claimed. The dialogue shifts to questions about his influence and wealth. Speaker 1 questions the magnitude of his influence, implying a large net worth, suggesting he is worth around $50,000,000, which Speaker 0 rebuts with a defensive outburst. Speaker 0 denies the monetary figure and accuses Speaker 1 of being overly fixated on it, telling him to get off the internet and stop believing such numbers. The exchange grows heated and ends abruptly with Speaker 0 telling Speaker 1 to leave, and Speaker 1 attempting to interject one more time before Speaker 0 cuts off the conversation. Overall, the transcript covers: a claim of transparency; a January discussion about alleged dead-voter evidence and its on-air fallout; an apology and admission of not verifying the information; subsequent on-air correction; tensions over sincerity and ownership of views; and a confrontational exchange about influence and wealth.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I would answer your second question first. I really try to be as transparent as I possibly can. I think you just scoffed in the microphone. Speaker 1: Mean, there was text that came out in court filings. Speaker 0: Would you like to know what that was? Because I'll tell you. Speaker 1: I would I'm sure everyone would love to know. Yeah. When the the demeanor lost it. Speaker 0: Fuck it. Oh, you're one of the most annoying people I've ever dealt with. This is why I don't oh, no. But but hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold I'm gonna no. No. No. Hold on. I'm gonna apologize. I just wanna apologize for saying that. Okay. So Speaker 1: That's such an honor. Speaker 0: Yeah. I know. My views are like on the Internet, and I don't work for anybody but me. I'm in business with my college roommate. I have no like incentive to ever lie at all, and I really try not to. I supported the Iraq War pretty vehemently. I supported the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice, Amy Coney Barrett, that was like a huge mistake. Sorry. I think it's not what I thought she was. I support John Roberts. I support what's the list of dumb things I've supported in my life is very long. I think I've learned something from those mistakes. I'm happy to admit how dumb they were. I've spent the last twenty two years trying to atone for my support for the Iraq war. Speaker 1: I appreciate that. And like Speaker 0: Hold on. I'm not okay. Now you're annoying me again. Not here for your affirmation. So I would say as to the text specifically, you want to actually know, I mean, you even willing to hear it? Tell you exactly what that was. Are between me and a producer of mine who I really love and I still am close to. And that was about it was right it was in January after the election. And Trump was saying they stole it from me. And I called the White House and I said, I'm totally willing to believe that. I mean Zuckerberg puts $400,000,000 into the mechanics of elections. I don't think he's doing that because he believes in good government. Like what is this? It's clearly their stuff. And I say to the White House, someone specifically at the White House, give me examples. And he says, I have got a great example for you. I've got seven or eight dead people who voted. And the beauty of that claim was it's provable because they're death certificates. And we've got the death certificates and we've got the obits and they voted and they're on the voter rolls. We know they voted. Well, I don't talk about slam dunk. I'm not repeating anything I can't prove. I don't trust any campaign, period. I never have on either side. I just don't trust campaign consultants. They're disgusting. I still think that. But this seemed like a verifiable hit. So I go out there and I say, there's a lot of talk and you can pull up the tape. There's a lot of talk about election theft. We haven't we're working on it. And I'm working at Fox News. So there's like a lot of like let's get find out what happened. But we know that seven or 10 dead people voted and here are their names, Ms. Wanda Johnson of Sioux City, Iowa and Jack Klein of Corpus Christi, Texas, and I'll go through the whole name and we'll put the obits up. Well, within like twenty five minutes, a couple of the dead people call CNN to say, we're not dead. And CNN runs this whole thing exposing that I have just like made this colossal error on the air. There's nothing I hate more than being wrong and humiliated like that because like I have a staff. We should get this right. And I didn't get it right because it's so easy to check whether or not someone has died that I didn't check. And I was enraged. And I was just enraged by the whole thing. And my position was, at the time, if you're going to claim it was stolen, prove it to me. I'm an adult man. Don't, I'm not taking anybody's word for anything. Speaker 1: How come you weren't saying these things during, like, on Fox News? Speaker 0: I did the next day. Speaker 1: I you know, and I'm not here to just try to argue with you. Like, I really do think this country is going through some, like, deeply troubling times Speaker 0: Wait. Wait. What do mean argue with me? You just said wait. Stop. You just wait. Stop. No. Wait. No. Wait. Let me Hold on. No. No. I didn't You said why didn't you say these things? And I said, I did the next day on the air live on Fox News. You're like, oh, Okay. Whatever. No. But you Speaker 1: didn't though. Like the the Check Speaker 0: the tape, dude. Speaker 1: Emphasis of your show. The emphasis Speaker 0: of What are you this talking about? I went immediately on the Speaker 1: cop out. Okay. Fine. Speaker 0: What do mean it's a cop out? I was completely wrong. Do you I blamed the Trump campaign for being wrong when it was partly my fault for taking their word for it, which I shouldn't have done. And the guy who gave me that information, I just ran into him. I'm still mad at him. He's still around. Speaker 1: It's it's just, so you don't take any ownership for, like, devices? Speaker 0: What do mean any ownership? Like, Speaker 1: you you had the number one rated show in America. Speaker 0: What specifically are you talking about? Speaker 1: You had the number one rated cable Speaker 0: I'm aware of that. I hosted it. Speaker 1: Yeah. I know. So you had I know. So So so the amount of influence that you carry Speaker 0: So you don't agree look. You don't agree with my views on No. Speaker 1: That's not what I'm Whatever. Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. So are you saying my views are insincere? Speaker 1: No. We disagree. Yes. I I truly doubt your sincerity and I think Speaker 0: it's worth your career. Then that's your problem. Speaker 1: I'm trying to understand it because it makes no sense. Like, you're worth 50 I'm Speaker 0: not worth $50,000,000. 30 to 50 Get off the fucking Internet, son. Don't stop believing that stuff. Oh. $50,000,000? I'm Speaker 1: Go back to cable news. Speaker 0: Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Speaker 1: No. But I'm just look. Okay. Speaker 0: You're too annoy you're too annoying. So I like the last chick who, like, disagreed with me, and then we could have, like, a normal conversation. Alright. But you're, like, telling me you're worth $50,000,000 what? Speaker 1: Stop. You got real defensive there. I I just read a number that's, like, a lot Speaker 0: of money. Jesus Christ. Calm down. Don't don't use that phrase. Speaker 1: You're worth Speaker 0: I I I we're done. Well, look Just just stop. Speaker 1: Can I say one Speaker 0: Don't no? You can't. Not after you say that. Leave. Alright.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 22, 2025 at 6:14 PM
Saved - October 23, 2025 at 2:22 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In this shocking exposé, OMG captures Anish Abraham of ATI describing a pass-through scheme tied to an IRS contract nearing $100 million. ATI keeps 65% and subcontracts 35% to Accenture, exploiting ATI’s 8(a) Native-Owned certification for preferential bidding. Abraham boasts that Native status acts as a shield against audits, saying, "I don’t think they will dare to touch the Native Americans." This reveals abuse of SBA 8(a) for large firms.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

https://t.co/LZrbNZLmSM He lost the funky wig and did it again! How do they not recognize him? 🤣 🚨 In another SHOCKING EXPOSÉ: Federal Contractor Brags About $100M IRS Fraud – Our Native-American ownership status acts as a "SHEILD" against government audits or penalties, "I don’t think they will dare to touch the Native Americans," • James O'Keefe's O'Keefe Media Group (OMG) released hidden camera footage capturing Anish Abraham, Senior Director at ATI Government Solutions, openly discussing a fraudulent pass-through scheme during a casual meeting at a restaurant. • Abraham reveals ATI's new contract with the IRS is worth nearly $100 million, where ATI keeps 65% of the funds as profit while subcontracting 35% of the actual work to global consulting giant Accenture, exploiting ATI's 8(a) "Native-Owned" certification for preferential treatment in federal bidding. • Abraham boasts that the Native-American ownership status acts as a "SHEILD" against government audits or penalties, stating, "I don’t think they will dare to touch the Native Americans," highlighting how minority-preference programs are abused to funnel taxpayer money with minimal oversight. • This is part of a systemic issue in federal contracting, referencing the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) program intended for disadvantaged businesses but often used as a front for large corporations like Accenture to secure no-bid deals indirectly.

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 22, 2025 at 3:03 AM
Saved - October 22, 2025 at 7:36 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I confront a Student Advocate who claims a baby in the womb isn’t a person. The student says abortion isn’t ritualistic; I fire back that there’s an abortion truck outside the DNC, asking if you have the right to murder your own kids and that nothing else matters but having children. The student insists abortion is done out of necessity and not a person. These kids are so lost.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Tucker Carlson battles Student Advocate for abortion who thinks a baby in the womb isn’t a person Student: Abortion isn’t ritualistic… Tucker: Are you joking? They had an abortion truck outside the Democratic National Convention! You have the right to murder your own kids? Listen to yourself, that’s dark dude. Killing your children? The only thing in life that matters is not your stupid job at Citibank… all that matters is having children and your children are all that matter to you. I don’t care what you say! Student: It’s done out of necessity… it’s not a person. These kids are so lost. https://rumble.com/v70mb4k-tucker-carlson-battles-abortion-student-advocate-who-thinks-a-baby-in-the-w.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 argues that abortion is murder and frames it as a ritual akin to human sacrifice, claiming civilizations like the Incas and Vikings killed people to appease gods and gain power. They insist abortion isn’t ritualistic, reference an abortion truck outside the Democratic convention, and challenge the idea that abortion is a right, suggesting that abortion is the only right people have. They express empathy for individuals who might face pregnancy decisions, recounting childhood conversations about a 12-year-old farmworker who might be pregnant from rape, and acknowledge sadness about abortion, but insist that now abortion is “the only right you have.” Speaker 1 pushes back by denying that abortion is a ritual and emphasizes that people do not have the right to keep someone from taking a medical injection or consuming unknown products, arguing that the only right claimed is to murder one’s own children. They describe the statement as dark and urge Speaker 0 to reconsider their stance. Speaker 0 responds with a personal perspective as a father, asserting that the most important thing in life is having children and that one’s children are what will matter most. They reject the notion that jobs or material concerns are paramount and criticize the idea of just killing one’s children. They apologize to Brookie for the upset but maintain their view that abortion is grotesque and sad, noting that many people who have abortions are not happy about it. Speaker 1 contends they don’t care about what Speaker 0 says and asserts a lack of interest in further discussion. Speaker 0 elaborates on the idea that the issue is highly ideological and that the reality of abortion is often hidden behind abstractions. They argue that a human being is beheaded with a knife inside a woman, insisting that if beheading didn’t take place, that person could have led a different life, and that it is not for us to kill people simply because they are “in the way.” They warn that if it is permissible to kill children who are in the way, then the elderly or even others could be killed as well, concluding with the assertion that you can’t do that. Speaker 1 reiterates that abortion is a matter of human rights, while Speaker 0 maintains that there is no human right to kill people, insisting that killing people is the enemy of human rights and that the human right is to live. The conversation ends with an unresolved tension between preserving life and recognizing individual rights, framed by extreme positions about abortion and its moral implications.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: No. I totally agree with you. But abortion is murder, obviously, and everyone knows that. And people are so into it because it's the same ritual that every civilization, every civilization ever been studied has engaged in, which is human sacrifice. Obviously, why did the Incas, and it wasn't just the Incas, it was my ancestors, the Vikings, all of them killed people in order to appease the gods and give themselves more power. Abortion isn't ritualistic. Are you joking? They had an abortion truck outside the democratic convention. While you're here, maybe you could get an abortion. No. It's the most crazed It's the level of fanaticism I've ever seen. Like when I was a kid, they would say, you know, there's probably some 12 year old farm worker child who got raped and she's pregnant. Like, would you say to her she has to carry the baby? And I'd be like, oh, that's so sad. I can't ugh. It makes me really sad and like I don't think she has an abortion, but I get it. Now it's just like, no, abortion is the only right you have. It's all you have. Speaker 1: You don't have the right to keep him Speaker 0: from jabbing a needle in your arm with some unknown poison made by Pfizer. You don't have that right. You don't have the right to see what you really think. The only right you have is to murder your own kids. Speaker 1: That's dark, dude. Listen to yourself. Listen to Speaker 0: your that's the saddest thing that could ever happen. Killing your children? The only thing in life, and I'm telling you this as a young person with the greatest sincerity, I mean this as a father for the only thing that matters is not your stupid job at Citibank. Trust me. It doesn't matter. All that matters is having children, and your children are all that will matter to you. Speaker 1: I don't care what you say. Speaker 0: I've lived it. I know that's true. And so anyone who's like, oh, just kill your children. I really I feel like a lot of the problems, this is I'm sorry, Brookie, to upset you. Sorry. It's my dog. I don't yell at home. But no, I think it's just grotesque. It's shocking that this happens. And everyone's like, sorry. There's nothing more entitled than a female Springer Spaniel. Sorry. Anyway, it's just it's the saddest thing and to hear people like, I've never I know a million people have had abortions. I don't know one who's happy about it, you know, and they're really sad about it and it's awful. Speaker 1: Because it's not something that people take joy and it's something that people do out of necessity. I think you're out of touch if you think it's a ritualistic thing. Of course, it's Speaker 0: a ritual. How many abortions are there in this country every year? Speaker 1: And it's a matter of human rights, as you said, and it's a matter Speaker 0: It's no human right to kill people, dude. Sorry. In fact, killing people is the enemy of human rights. The human right is to live. Speaker 1: Not a person. Speaker 0: It's not a person. Okay. It's not a Speaker 1: per but everybody knows it is. It's just so dumb. Speaker 0: It's not a person. It's like they won't. Why don't we show a video of an abortion? And let's see if let's see Speaker 1: you can sit through it. And you would feel sick to your stuff. You have. Oh, okay. Speaker 0: Maybe you liked it. Speaker 1: Church that thought it would be No. Speaker 0: I don't I'm sorry I said that. No. I'm I'm sorry. No one wants to talk about the details ever. And the most horrific things in life, including a lot that happens in war, including transgender surgeries, definitely including abortion, it's all couched in abstract ideological terms which are designed to prevent you from facing what's actually happening. A human being is being beheaded with a knife inside a woman. And that, if that beheading didn't take place, that would be a person, a human being who maybe would go on to lead some screwed up life, maybe wouldn't, but it's not up to us. We don't get to kill people simply because they're in the way. Period. And if you can kill children who are in the way, you can kill the elderly who are in the way, and in the end, they'll be killing us who are in the way. You can't do that.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Dammmmmmmm… Leftist: You’re worth $50 million dollars Tucker: I’m not worth $50 million dollars… get off the F*CKING Internet son. Leftist: You’re getting defensive…. Jesus Christ, calm down. Tucker: Don’t use that phrase.. stop, no, you’re done. Leave! https://t.co/I93rSZtblN

Video Transcript AI Summary
Two people are in a tense exchange dominated by a dispute over a claimed net worth. One person pushes back against what they perceive as an inflated figure, repeatedly noting disbelief at the other’s assertion of being worth 50,000,000 dollars. The conversation oscillates between confrontation and attempts to de-escalate, with the first speaker insisting the other’s claim is unrealistic and frustrating, and the other person reacting defensively when confronted with the large number. The dialogue includes interruptions and a rapid shift in tone. The person challenging the claim expresses exasperation at the insistence on such a high valuation, saying things like, “Stop believing that stuff,” and calling the claim unrealistic, emphasizing how odd it feels to hear someone assert such wealth. The other speaker responds defensively, insisting on the number and reacting strongly to the critique. There are moments where the thwarted speaker tries to steer the conversation toward a more normal exchange, referencing “the last chick who, like, disagreed with me” as a preferred pattern for a constructive discussion. Despite this bid for civility, the exchange quickly devolves again into tension, with the claimant continuing to defend the figure and the other person pushing back, urging them to stop and to cease using the phrase about the large net worth. At one point, the defender advocates ending the interaction by suggesting they are done with the discussion, saying, “We’re done. Leave.” The other person reiterates the directive to stop, and the conversation ends with a firm boundary being set, as the other speaker refuses to continue after the defended claim is repeated. The exchange centers on the disparity between perceived credibility and the asserted wealth, the difficulty of having a constructive conversation under such conditions, and the emotional intensity generated by refusing to back down on a controversial claim. The overall mood is strained, with interruptions, defensiveness, and a desire to disengage after the contentious assertion about net worth.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Understand it because it makes no sense. Like, you're worth 50 I'm million not worth $50,000,000. 30 to 50,000,000 the fucking Internet, son. Just stop believing that stuff. Oh. $50,000,000? I'm Go back to cable news. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. No. But I'm just look. Okay. You're too annoy you're too annoying. So I like the last chick who, like, disagreed with me, and then we could have, like, a normal conversation. Alright. But you're, like, telling me you're worth $50,000,000. What? Stop. You got real defensive there. I I just read a number that's like a lot of money. Jesus Christ, calm down. Don't don't use that phrase. You're worth I I I we're done. Well, look Just just stop. I say one Don't no. You can't. Not after you say that. Leave. Alright.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

🚨 EXPLOSIVE‼️In a heated clash regarding Tuckers 2021 text messages saying he “Hated Donald Trump”, Tucker Carlson threatened to punch a man and abruptly cut him off for taking the Lord's name in vain. During the exchange, Tucker addressed why he once texted that he “hated https://t.co/99ArV20Y6c

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 opens by saying he tries to be as transparent as possible and offers to share what the text in court filings was about. Speaker 1 asks to know, and Speaker 0 begins to explain. Speaker 0 reflects on his past views: he has no incentive to lie, he runs a business with his college roommate, and he supported the Iraq War vehemently, supported the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett (calling it a huge mistake and that it wasn’t what he thought), and he supports John Roberts. He says the list of “dumb things” he supported is long, and he has spent the last twenty-two years trying to atone for his support for the Iraq War. Speaker 1 acknowledges appreciation for that, and Speaker 0 continues. He says he isn’t seeking affirmation but explains the text in question concerns a discussion with a producer about election integrity. He describes a January post-election conversation with someone at the White House after Trump claimed the election was stolen. He says he was willing to believe allegations and asked for examples. The White House regional contact offered seven or eight dead people who voted, asserting they could be proven because death certificates and obituaries showed they voted and were on voter rolls. He states he did not claim “slam dunk” proof and insists he does not trust campaigns or campaign consultants, but he believed the claim was verifiable. Speaker 0 recounts going on air with the claim that “seven or ten dead people voted” and listing the names to show the evidence. He says, within about twenty-five minutes, some of the deceased people contacted CNN to say they were not dead, and CNN exposed that he had made a colossal error. He emphasizes that there is nothing he hates more than being wrong and humiliated, and that he should have checked whether someone had died; he acknowledges not checking carefully. Speaker 1 asks why he didn’t say these things on Fox News earlier. Speaker 0 says he did the next day. Speaker 1 contends he did not, and asks for the tape. Speaker 0 asserts he went on air the next day and admits he was completely wrong, blaming the Trump campaign for taking their word and also blaming the staffer who provided the information; he says he is still mad at that person. Speaker 1 challenges ownership of the situation and asks about the influence and the value of his career, implying he holds substantial influence with a top-rated show. They clash over sincerity and the magnitude of his earnings. Speaker 0 denies alignment with the accusation of insincerity, but Speaker 1 remains skeptical and asserts a belief that his sincerity is in question and that his views may be financially motivated. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 telling Speaker 1 to stop and declaring they’re done, as Speaker 1 pushes back about the immense wealth and status, prompting Speaker 0 to end the exchange abruptly.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I would answer your second question first. I really try to be as transparent as I possibly can. I think you just scoffed in the microphone. Speaker 1: Mean, there was text that came out in court filings. Speaker 0: Would you like to know what that was? Because I'll tell you. Speaker 1: I would I'm sure everyone would love to know. Yeah. When the the demeanor lost it. Speaker 0: Fuck it. Oh, you're one of the most annoying people I've ever dealt with. This is why I don't oh, no. But but hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold I'm gonna no. No. No. Hold on. I'm gonna apologize. I just wanna apologize for saying that. Okay. So Speaker 1: That's such an honor. Speaker 0: Yeah. I know. My views are like on the Internet, and I don't work for anybody but me. I'm in business with my college roommate. I have no like incentive to ever lie at all, and I really try not to. I supported the Iraq War pretty vehemently. I supported the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice, Amy Coney Barrett, that was like a huge mistake. Sorry. I think it's not what I thought she was. I support John Roberts. I support what's the list of dumb things I've supported in my life is very long. I think I've learned something from those mistakes. I'm happy to admit how dumb they were. I've spent the last twenty two years trying to atone for my support for the Iraq war. Speaker 1: I appreciate that. And like Speaker 0: Hold on. I'm not okay. Now you're annoying me again. Not here for your affirmation. So I would say as to the text specifically, you want to actually know, I mean, you even willing to hear it? Tell you exactly what that was. Are between me and a producer of mine who I really love and I still am close to. And that was about it was right it was in January after the election. And Trump was saying they stole it from me. And I called the White House and I said, I'm totally willing to believe that. I mean Zuckerberg puts $400,000,000 into the mechanics of elections. I don't think he's doing that because he believes in good government. Like what is this? It's clearly their stuff. And I say to the White House, someone specifically at the White House, give me examples. And he says, I have got a great example for you. I've got seven or eight dead people who voted. And the beauty of that claim was it's provable because they're death certificates. And we've got the death certificates and we've got the obits and they voted and they're on the voter rolls. We know they voted. Well, I don't talk about slam dunk. I'm not repeating anything I can't prove. I don't trust any campaign, period. I never have on either side. I just don't trust campaign consultants. They're disgusting. I still think that. But this seemed like a verifiable hit. So I go out there and I say, there's a lot of talk and you can pull up the tape. There's a lot of talk about election theft. We haven't we're working on it. And I'm working at Fox News. So there's like a lot of like let's get find out what happened. But we know that seven or 10 dead people voted and here are their names, Ms. Wanda Johnson of Sioux City, Iowa and Jack Klein of Corpus Christi, Texas, and I'll go through the whole name and we'll put the obits up. Well, within like twenty five minutes, a couple of the dead people call CNN to say, we're not dead. And CNN runs this whole thing exposing that I have just like made this colossal error on the air. There's nothing I hate more than being wrong and humiliated like that because like I have a staff. We should get this right. And I didn't get it right because it's so easy to check whether or not someone has died that I didn't check. And I was enraged. And I was just enraged by the whole thing. And my position was, at the time, if you're going to claim it was stolen, prove it to me. I'm an adult man. Don't, I'm not taking anybody's word for anything. Speaker 1: How come you weren't saying these things during, like, on Fox News? Speaker 0: I did the next day. Speaker 1: I you know, and I'm not here to just try to argue with you. Like, I really do think this country is going through some, like, deeply troubling times Speaker 0: Wait. Wait. What do mean argue with me? You just said wait. Stop. You just wait. Stop. No. Wait. No. Wait. Let me Hold on. No. No. I didn't You said why didn't you say these things? And I said, I did the next day on the air live on Fox News. You're like, oh, Okay. Whatever. No. But you Speaker 1: didn't though. Like the the Check Speaker 0: the tape, dude. Speaker 1: Emphasis of your show. The emphasis Speaker 0: of What are you this talking about? I went immediately on the Speaker 1: cop out. Okay. Fine. Speaker 0: What do mean it's a cop out? I was completely wrong. Do you I blamed the Trump campaign for being wrong when it was partly my fault for taking their word for it, which I shouldn't have done. And the guy who gave me that information, I just ran into him. I'm still mad at him. He's still around. Speaker 1: It's it's just, so you don't take any ownership for, like, devices? Speaker 0: What do mean any ownership? Like, Speaker 1: you you had the number one rated show in America. Speaker 0: What specifically are you talking about? Speaker 1: You had the number one rated cable Speaker 0: I'm aware of that. I hosted it. Speaker 1: Yeah. I know. So you had I know. So So so the amount of influence that you carry Speaker 0: So you don't agree look. You don't agree with my views on No. Speaker 1: That's not what I'm Whatever. Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. So are you saying my views are insincere? Speaker 1: No. We disagree. Yes. I I truly doubt your sincerity and I think Speaker 0: it's worth your career. Then that's your problem. Speaker 1: I'm trying to understand it because it makes no sense. Like, you're worth 50 I'm Speaker 0: not worth $50,000,000. 30 to 50 Get off the fucking Internet, son. Don't stop believing that stuff. Oh. $50,000,000? I'm Speaker 1: Go back to cable news. Speaker 0: Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Speaker 1: No. But I'm just look. Okay. Speaker 0: You're too annoy you're too annoying. So I like the last chick who, like, disagreed with me, and then we could have, like, a normal conversation. Alright. But you're, like, telling me you're worth $50,000,000 what? Speaker 1: Stop. You got real defensive there. I I just read a number that's, like, a lot Speaker 0: of money. Jesus Christ. Calm down. Don't don't use that phrase. Speaker 1: You're worth Speaker 0: I I I we're done. Well, look Just just stop. Speaker 1: Can I say one Speaker 0: Don't no? You can't. Not after you say that. Leave. Alright.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 20, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Saved - October 21, 2025 at 8:12 AM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

This is absolutely crazy,,, US Attorney Pirro announced she’ll be bringing FEDERAL CHARGES against the individuals involved with the Beating of the Doge Employee known as “Big Balls” Listen to how many times these CORRUPT Leftist judges let these criminals out… over and over again. https://rumble.com/v70kfwm-federal-charges-against-the-individuals-involved-with-the-beating-of-big-ba.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Lawrence Cotton Powell, 19, and Anthony Taylor, 18, are now charged with assaulting Levine. Powell was stomping on Levine’s head; Levine got up briefly, but the crowd chased him down again, and they continued to attack him on the ground and then robbed him of his sneakers and his watch. The group then walked toward the location of another crime within minutes. Edward Corristine, a 19-year-old Doge employee working in administration, was walking a young woman to her car in the 1400 Block Of Swan Street Northwest when approximately 10 suspects approached. He pushed the young woman into the car to protect her, then was attacked by multiple suspects who punched him repeatedly, causing significant injuries. They got him to the ground, and while they did so, they demanded the car from the woman inside the car who had already locked the car. They were banging on the car and pulling at the car door, trying to open it and telling the woman to hand over the keys. The woman was able to lock the car door, preventing entry. A Metropolitan Police Department officer on patrol witnessed the suspects assaulting Corristine as he lay on the ground next to the car. The juveniles fled, but within a short period, two 15-year-olds were arrested and taken into the family court by the attorney general’s office. Significant about this case is Lawrence Cotton Powell’s history. Powell is charged with robbery, first-degree robbery, for which he faces 15 years in prison, and assault with intent to commit robbery for another 15 years. He is also charged with robbery for Edward Corristine for 15 years, assault with intent to commit robbery for another 15 years, and attempted carjacking for 5 years. Powell’s background: on April 3, Powell was sentenced for a felony attempted robbery. The office asked for jail time, but Judge McClain, a judge in the criminal part of Superior Court with no criminal background, granted probation despite the felony attempted robbery conviction. Within 31 days, by May 4, Powell reoffends and is rearrested while on probation, charged with simple assault and possession of a prohibited weapon. On May 4, the office again asked that probation be revoked. On May 16, Judge McClain released Powell, telling him to be a good boy. On July 24, he is sentenced on one of the two misdemeanors he is charged with, and again the office asked for jail time after victimizing yet another person. On July 25, another judge suspended his sentence and decided he should be on probation. After a felony attempted robbery conviction, after a violation of probation, after a second crime and a second conviction, after no compliance with CSOSA, the judges say do better, and they let him go. And within ten days, he is involved again with Ethan Levine and Edward Corristine. The co-defendant in this case is Anthony Taylor. He is charged with the same crimes. He is from Maryland, 18 years old. We are unaware of any history as it relates to him.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Today, we are announcing that Lawrence Cotton Powell, who is 19 years of age, along with Anthony Taylor, who is 18 years of age, are now charged with assaulting Levine. Cotton Powell was stomping on Levine's head, as you can see in this poster to my left. Levine was able to get up momentarily, but the crowd chased him and got him down again. They continued to attack Levine while he was on the ground and then proceeded to rob him of his sneakers and his watch. The group then, after the robbery and assault of Ethan Levine, they walked in the direction of where another crime occurred within minutes. You have heard of this crime. Edward Corristine, a 19 year old Doge person who was working in the administration, was walking a young woman to her car when he was approached in the 1400 Block Of Swan Street Northwest. Approximately 10 suspects approached him, and as they did, he pushed the young woman into the car that and he was protecting her from the group before he was then attacked by multiple suspects who then punched him repeatedly causing significant injuries to him. They got him on the ground. And as they were doing so, they demanded the car from the woman who was inside the car and had already locked the car. They were banging on the car. They were pulling the car door, trying to get the car open, and were telling the woman in the car to hand over the keys. And the woman was, as I said, able to lock the car door so they were unable to gain entry. And it was fortuitous that someone from the Metropolitan Police Department was on patrol. He happened to pull onto the block, and he witnessed the suspects actually assaulting Coracine who was on the ground lying next to the car. The juveniles fled, but within a short period of time, two 15 year olds were arrested, and they were taken into the family court by the attorney general's office. That is the local attorney general's office. Now I think what's significant about this case is a history of Lawrence Cotton Powell. I want you to I want you to follow me on this. Lawrence Cotton Powell is 19 years of age. He's now charged with robbery, first degree robbery, for which he faces 15 in prison. He also faces a charge of assault with intent to commit robbery in another fifteen years. And robbery for Edward Corstein, fifteen years, assault with intent to commit robbery, another fifteen years, and attempted carjacking, five years. Now let me tell you his background. On April 3, Lawrence Cotton Powell was sentenced for a felony attempted robbery. My office asked for jail time. Judge McClain, a judge sitting in the criminal part in Superior Court with no criminal background, made a decision to give Cotton Powell probation in spite of his conviction on a felony attempted robbery. Within thirty one days, by May 4, Powell reoffends. He's rearrested while he's on probation from the felony, and he's charged with simple assault and possession of a prohibited weapon b. On May 4, my office asked that probation be revoked. But on May 16, that same judge McClain comes back and releases Cotton Powell and tells him, basically, be a good boy. On July 24, he is sentenced to one of the two misdemeanors that he's charged with. Again, my office asked for jail time after he victimized yet another person. And on July 25, another judge suspends his sentence and decides that he should be on probation. So after a felony of attempted robbery conviction, after a violation of probation, after a second crime, after a second conviction, after no compliance with c Sosa, the judges say do better, and they let him go. And guess what? Within ten days, he's at it again with Ethan Levine and Edward Corstein. Now the codefendant in this case is is an individual by the name of Anthony Taylor. He charged also with the same arrest. He is from with the same crimes. He is from Maryland. He is 18 years old. We are unaware of any any history as it relates to him.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 21, 2025 at 12:34 AM
Saved - October 21, 2025 at 6:19 AM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Man in ridiculous wig saves taxpayers $100 Billion per year.. This cant be reality right now. 🤣 https://t.co/WcjgJbFugh

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

https://t.co/q5azlmV4co Dude wore the shittiest disguise in history and still got the story 🤣 🚨 BOMBSHELL EXPOSÉ: James O'Keefe exposes a $100B federal contracting scam where a minority-owned firm wins no-bid govt contracts but outsources 80% of work ILLEGALLY as a "pass-through" scheme, one of the Biggest Scams in History! - ATI's Contract Manager Melayne Cromwell spills the beans in undercover vid: Company only does 20% of the work, subs handle 80%—straight-up violating federal rules requiring 8(a) firms to perform at least 50%. - Over $100M in govt contracts scored with zero competition, part of a wider $100B scam ripping off the system. - Scheme lets small "disadvantaged" firms act as middlemen, funneling work (and profits) to giants while skirting bids. - O'Keefe confronts execs, shows docs proving fraud—SBA certs, Supreme Court rulings, and more. 🔻Direct Quotes: - "I tell you pass throughs are a great thing!" – Melayne Cromwell - "We only do 20%… The rest goes to subs..." – Cromwell on the illegal split - "And remember, there's no competition…" Well done @JamesOKeefeIII

Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript documents an undercover investigation into alleged abuses of the SBA’s 8(a) program and related “pass-through” schemes used to obtain federal contracts. The participants discuss a pattern in which a prime contractor, such as ATI Government Solutions, leverages Native American tribal status to win contracts, then largely subcontract the work to others while keeping the majority of the payment. Key points raised: - ATI’s claimed structure: ATI Government Solutions is described as a technology services company that secures hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for federal contracts by exploiting a supposed Native American 8(a) tribal ownership. The program is presented as heavily favoring firms with Native American status, enabling ATI to win contracts with little or no bidding. - Pass-throughs and ownership: A recurring claim is that ATI uses pass-through arrangements to funnel contracts to subcontractors, with the majority of the actual work performed by those subcontractors and ATI taking a large share of the profits. The conversation indicates ATI does about 20% of the work itself, with 80% subcontracted, and that “pass-throughs” enable non-Native contractors to win through ATI’s Native status. - On-paper 51% ownership: The group cites the 51% rule (the prime contractor must perform at least 51% of the work), yet asserts that ATI is 51% tribal-owned on paper while performing little actual work, raising questions about the true ownership and control of the company. - Suspected real ownership and control: The investigation uncovers that ATI’s leadership is not Native American, and that two Caucasian executives, Furmidge Crutchfield (CEO) and Scott Deutschman (CDO), with associates, allegedly manage operations. The conversation suggests the Susanville Indian Rancheria’s ownership is largely on paper, with the tribe appearing to own the entity for show while the executives run the day-to-day business. - Drama of the “secret”: The participants emphasize that the Native ownership is treated as a secret and a supposed competitive advantage that should remain undisclosed, highlighting a culture of secrecy around the arrangements. - Specific individuals and roles: Malayne Cromwell (ATI’s director of contracts) is presented as confirming many of these practices, including the reliance on pass-throughs and that the stake held by the tribe is 51% on paper. Arian Hart (head of the Susanville Indian Rancheria) discusses how a tribal ownership appearance could be arranged to facilitate contract access, including potentially relinquishing 51% ownership. - Real-world implications: The dialogue frames these schemes as defrauding taxpayers and undermining the communities the programs are meant to uplift, with the 51% rule being exploited to obtain contracts while the workforce bears the bulk of the labor costs. - Legal context and examples: The report references the federal regulations (FAR 52.219-14, the limitations of subcontracting) and cites a related case (Cusisis v. US) to illustrate consequences of deceptive practices in similar contexts. - Growth and lifecycle: The investigation notes ATI’s profits rising from about $2,000,000 in 2019 to $100,000,000 in the current year, suggesting mechanisms to evade size standards by creating new entities to re-enter the 8(a) program when nearing small-business thresholds. - Call to accountability: The reporters reveal themselves as investigative journalists and promise to publish part two, asserting the need for Department of Justice action and accountability for the practices described. They urge donors to support Citizen Journalism Foundation and announce related events. Overall, the transcript portrays an undercover exposé alleging that ATI and connected entities exploit 8(a) and pass-through mechanisms to win contracts, avoid full competition, and divert most work to subcontractors while the owning tribe and executive leaders benefit financially, with the supposed tribal ownership maintained primarily on paper.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So ATI would do 20%, and the subcontractor would Speaker 1: do, like, 80% of I don't Speaker 2: the share that they do all the work. No. Yeah. Speaker 1: So we we do about 20% of the work. Speaker 0: 20%? Speaker 3: These government contractors like ATI taking advantage of their special minority owned status. Speaker 1: And and I tell you, pass throughs are a great thing as well. So a lot of our subcontractors bid on contracts that were perfect in their industry, but because they weren't American, they wouldn't win it. So we've been on it for them. They became our sub, and it's an automatic win because of your Native American status. Isn't that exciting? Right? Because a lot of people don't know that. I don't think anybody knows that. Right? And I'm talking Well, I keep it that way. That's right. Speaker 3: That's a thing. Speaker 1: Exactly. Secret. Yeah. You know what I mean? Exactly. Speaker 3: Taking the money in, subcontracting much of the work out. Speaker 4: I sit back, collect my percentage, and they do the work. Speaker 1: Correct. Yeah. They're doing most of work. Speaker 3: They get the contracts, get the money, act as a pass through, and it's the taxpayer who gets screwed over. Speaker 0: Is there some rules or something that you were telling me that you have to report 5151%. Speaker 1: 51%. On paper. Correct. Right. As long as it's on paper. As long as it's on paper. 51%, we're good to go. And remember, there's no competition because you're Native American. Speaker 4: Ding ding. That's a that's a best Speaker 0: kept secret. Speaker 1: It is indeed. It is. It is. Speaker 4: Go ahead. Speaker 0: And here's to here's to pastors. Speaker 2: There you go. I love that. Yeah. Exactly. Speaker 3: Exactly. In in Vino in Vino Veritas. My name is James O'Keefe. I'm sure. Party like a Jim Keith party. What you're about to see is a microcosm of one of the biggest scams in American history, a scheme that could be costing taxpayers up to $100,000,000,000 every year. It's a system long described as an open secret in Washington, one that dwarfs the USAID fraud scandals in both scale and scope. At its center lies a government program created to empower minority owned small businesses. But behind the facade, our investigation uncovers a network of so called eight a pass through schemes, shell companies exploiting those very programs for profit. According to the SBA, the Biden Harris administration awarded more than $630,000,000,000 in federal contracts to these companies with over $183,000,000,000 in 2024 alone. Our undercover investigation reveals how these firms secured no bid federal contracts Speaker 1: No bidding because of your native status. Speaker 3: Skim over half of the money off the top 65% of the money. And subcontract nearly all the work Speaker 1: So we we do about 20% of the work. Speaker 3: Defrauding taxpayers like you and betraying the very communities these programs were meant to uplift. ATI Government Solutions is a technology services company that acquires contracts to provide federal departments with next generation computing solutions. ATI acquires hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for these contracts and have been particularly successful in this due to their supposed native American eight a tribal status, meaning they're a native American owned small business which is heavily favored by federal contracts. Speaker 1: That's that's very fair. Try the other one. Speaker 3: We went undercover and arranged meetings with multiple employees to dig deeper into the truth behind ownership, their small business status, and their excessive use of subcontractors. Speaker 1: Yeah. Oh my gosh. Yes. That's better. Yes. Speaker 3: And what we found was more damning which was attempting to procure government contracts through minority owned status similar to ATI. The ploy was to approach the employee for ATI not for a meeting about contracts, but about obtaining catering for a corporate event. You see, Malayne Cromwell at ATI, also on the side, runs a catering business called Ragin Cajun Catering. Speaker 1: So I got into government contracting. I love what I did. I helped large and small companies win win contracts with the government. I wanted you to talk Speaker 0: about gumbo. Speaker 1: Yes. I wanna get to the good stuff. Speaker 0: I mean, this is interesting. Speaker 1: No way. It's it's a little bit boring Speaker 3: for me. Speaker 0: Absolutely. So I'm excited to Speaker 1: talk to you about the occasion for your Absolutely. Speaker 3: We were shocked that almost immediately in the meeting, less than two minutes in, Milaam Cromwell at ATI told us all about her position as the director of contracts for ATI. Speaker 5: And what was your in that job? What was your title or your role there? I'm the director of contracts. Speaker 3: You're the director? Uh-huh. The director? The director. So there's no Speaker 0: one above you in the contracts? Speaker 1: There's no one above me. Speaker 3: Elaine Cromwell goes on to explain that because ATI is supposedly native American owned, they are heavily favored by government contracts and often acquire $100,000,000 contracts with no bidding war. This enables them to, quote, pass through the majority of the work to companies that wouldn't usually be eligible while keeping the majority of the compensation for themselves. Speaker 1: And and I tell you, pass throughs are a great thing as well. Tell me about those. Well, so with pass throughs, because you're Native American, right, if you have, there's a big bid out and there's a company that wants to bid on it that's not Native American, all they do is partner with you. They use their people. They you subcontract to them. Right? They're your subs. So a lot of our subcontractors bid on contracts that were perfect in their industry. But because they weren't Native American, they wouldn't win it. We bid on it for them. They became our sub, and it's an automatic win because of the government set aside. You automatically will win that contract because of your native American status. Speaker 4: There's no bid there's no bidding war. Speaker 1: I put no bidding war because of your native status. You get it. You get it. A Speaker 3: pass through scheme is when an eight a small business acts as a front to win government contracts meant for disadvantaged firms. Instead of actually doing the work, it passes the contract to a larger ineligible company, violating SBA rules and defrauding the government and defrauding you, the taxpayers. Speaker 1: Isn't that exciting? Right? A lot of people don't know that. I don't think anybody knows that. Yeah. And I'm I'm gonna keep it that way. Speaker 2: That's right. Speaker 3: That's I wanna keep Speaker 1: it a That's secret. Yeah. Exactly. Speaker 3: Subcontracting out some of the development work isn't necessarily a crime. It's actually quite common. However, things appear to take a criminal turn. When Malayne Cromwell confesses to us that ATI, the prime contractor here, will often do as little as 20% of the actual software development work and offload 80% of the work to their subcontractors. Speaker 4: I sit back, collect my percent, and they do the work. Speaker 1: Correct. Yeah. They're doing most of work. The the people you're subbing to do the majority of the work. So we we do about 20% of the work. Speaker 0: So ATI would do 20%, Speaker 1: and the subcontractor would do 80% of the 80% of Speaker 2: the work. Alright. Share that they do all the work. No. Yeah. No. No. I don't wanna share. So Speaker 3: we're here outside ATI Government Solutions. This is the building in Frederick, Maryland where I'm standing that ATI Government Solutions is housed out of. Now according to the federal acquisition regulations, specifically the limitations of subcontracting clause FAR five two dot two one nine fourteen, The prime contractor in a government contract must do at least 51% of the work. This is more broadly referred to as the 51% rule, and this is what ATI Government Solutions appears to be violating. ATI has a special classification from the SBA that gives the company access to government contracts without competitive bidding. It's called an eight a, a small business that is at least 51% owned by, quote, US citizens that are socially and economically disadvantaged. On paper, ATI is owned by the Susanville Indian Rancheria, a federally recognized native American tribal entity in Northern California. So does the Susanville Indian Rancheria actually own ATI? And what role, if any, do they actually hold besides appearing as 51% owners on paper? Speaker 6: This is the web page for SFSI ATI. Speaker 4: Oh, ATI. I think I've heard of that. Speaker 6: Yeah. That's our technology department. Speaker 3: Well, order to answer that question, we went undercover to meet with the head of the Susanville Indian Rancheria, Arien Hart, and discussed exactly how the business arrangement would work if we wanted them to appear to be the owners of our imaginary company to help us gain government contracts, much like ATI does. Speaker 4: We just wanna get government contracts. So we need the Native Americans ownership to be able to obtain that. Speaker 6: It makes it easier to get into the eight Speaker 3: contracting for sure. Yes. Arian confirms that if they were to appear as the owners of our company, it would make it easier to obtain government contracts. Arian goes on to claim that we may need to relinquish 51% of the ownership to them. Speaker 4: So really, it's really just coming up with a number that you would want in order to appear to be the owner of my art company. Speaker 6: Right. And there and some of that will be determined by the eight a corporation. So we may have to be, like, 51% owners. Right? Speaker 3: Melaine Cromwell confirms that ATI is abiding by this 51% tribal ownership on paper. Speaker 0: Is there some rules or something that people were telling me about, like, that you have to report 5151%. Speaker 1: 51% on paper. Correct. Right. Yeah. But in reality, you know. Right. Exactly. Exactly. Yep. As long as it's on paper. As long as it's on paper, 51%, we're good to go. Speaker 3: ATI may be 51% tribally owned on paper, but Belane revealed to us that ATI was founded in collaboration with the Rancheria by two Caucasian DC executives, Furmidge Crutchfield and Scott Deutschman, and that they manage all of ATI's operations. According to a 2024 article featured on Washington Technology, Furmidge openly states, quote, we met with Susanville Indian Rancheria and formed ATI under their eight a umbrella, and we've never looked back. Furmage also states, quote, we have been around tribal organizations most of our careers, and they are very strong government contractors. So you're for the CEO? I did. What is his name? Speaker 1: Firm. It's Crutchfield. He's the head. He is the CEO. Of? Of ATI. Have you met him? I have. Yeah. He's my boss. Speaker 3: Now is he is he a Native American gentleman? Or Speaker 1: He's not. No. Look at my he was born and raised in Unique? Washington DC. Yeah. Very So yeah. What's the name again? Thermage. Thermage is his fiance. She looks super young. Oh my gosh. She's so look. But, of course, of course, during my interview, I'm talking to both of them. That's the Of both of is mentioning that to me, of course. Speaker 2: Or in some instances. Speaker 1: Awesome. On my first day at work, and she's, you don't know this, but Burmese and I are engaged. And I was like like, oh, congratulations. Right? But Oh, Speaker 2: you see it now. Right? Speaker 1: CFO and CEO. Speaker 0: That's that's Speaker 3: nice work if you can get it. Speaker 1: I get it. Nice work. Speaker 2: This is juicy. I said, I love it. Speaker 1: No. This is fact. Speaker 2: This is Speaker 1: not gossiping. Speaker 3: With Furmich Crutchfield as CEO, his fiancee, Olympic swimmer Marina Mogalyeva as CFO, and his business partner Scott Deutschman as CDO, it becomes clear the Susanville Indian Rancheria has almost no involvement in the actual operations of ATI. Arian Hart then confirms to us that in the case of ATI, they are sole proprietors and that anyone working for ATI works for the tribe, acknowledging that, quote, we are the owner. They do the work. Speaker 6: Furbage Crutchfield, he's our, CEO for that company. Speaker 4: And so what what is your role with them? Speaker 6: The tribe itself? So we are the owner of that company. Right? We're the owner of all those eight companies. We are the sole proprietor, I guess. Right? So the company does you know, they go out and get their contracts, do their business, develop that company, go out and get jobs, and Speaker 3: work for the tribe. Speaker 4: But you don't do any of the work. They do Speaker 6: it. They do the work. Speaker 3: Yes. The undercover journalist then proposes that we would like to make a similar arrangement with the tribe, and Arian reaffirms the tribe itself will not be doing any of the work. They would literally be taking 51% of the company for the sole purpose of allowing us to pose as Native American owned because it puts you to the front of the line for acquiring those government contracts. Speaker 4: We would do the work, and then you get a percentage of the profits. Speaker 1: Right. Yeah. K. Speaker 6: We have the ability to get the contracts, and that's probably the most important thing. Speaker 3: On the surface, this sounds like a well meaning endeavor by the federal government to bolster minority involvement in profitable industries like construction and software development. However, as you see here, it incentivizes a system which companies have to seek out a native American tribe, deposes 51% owners in order to obtain a sufficient amount of government contracts, surrendering 51% of the profits to a native American tribe that does 0% of the work, effectively doubling the cost of the contract for the American taxpayer and halving the financial compensation for the person doing the actual labor. Just this past May, in the case of Cusisis versus US, Stamatios Cusisis, an alpha painting and construction company secured Pennsylvania Department of Transportation contracts despite a satisfactory contract performance. They had deceived the government and their compliance with the disadvantaged business enterprise and were therefore convicted of wire fraud and conspiracy for fraudulent inducement. The Supreme Court, in an opinion by justice Amy Coney Barrett, clarified that the wire fraud statute focuses on a scheme to obtain money or property through deception. Justice Sotomayor's concurrence likened it to a fan deceived into buying Mets tickets when promised Yankees tickets, emphasizing deception over loss. As unsettling as all this sounds, there's actually another layer. According to usaspending.gov, ATI has exponentially grown their profits over the last six years from about $2,000,000 in 2019 to 100,000,000 this year. According to the SBA or Small Business Administration regulations, if an eight a company exceeds a personal net worth of 850,000, an adjusted gross income of 400,000 or assets totaling 6,500,000.0, then the SBA no longer considers it a small business. Blaine explained that that's when Crutchfield found a new, quote, small business and starts the process all over again. Speaker 1: Furman has just been very smart on my he never exceeds the small business threshold. Right? So once he gets gets closer to the threshold, he starts another company. Speaker 6: They give you so many years to make so much money to do so good. And then once you get to that point, they stop. Then you just have to develop another corporation to get that one going. Right? So you kinda always before one end, you start another one to get keep on going. So you just change the name, start a new company, and then you're back into the system. Speaker 3: We met up with Malayne a second and third time, and eventually revealed that we were undercover journalists doing a story on the potential corruption throughout ATI's operations. So we have some news for you here. Okay? We're actually investigative reporters. My name is James O'Keefe. I'm an invest Speaker 1: I don't wanna be Speaker 3: I'm an investigative reporter, and you you're on about Yeah. Speaker 1: Okay. We can Yeah. Can but but just asking. Speaker 3: And it's important to note that Melaine Cromwell, director of contracts, repeatedly stated that everything we secretly recorded her saying was just her opinion. She reiterated that many times after I took off my wig and identified myself as an investigative reporter. We'll be releasing that interaction with Malayne along with part two of this story featuring another employee at ATI later this week. Stay tuned for that. Speaker 0: And here's to here's to pass throughs. Speaker 2: There you go. How about that? Exactly. Exactly. In Speaker 3: Vino in Vino Veritas. I'm calling you like a Jim Keith party. Oh my gosh. I can't believe that. I can't believe that. This is this is unbelievable. She said 20%. They only do 20% of Speaker 1: the I heard that part. I was like, boom. Got it. Speaker 3: She said, don't tell anybody. Yeah. Yes. They come only on paper. She said, only on paper. Speaker 1: Only on amazing. Speaker 3: Only on She said pass throughs Yes. Except but we don't want that to leave this. She says loopholes, pass throughs, we only do 20% of the work. Yeah. Speaker 1: I think this is unbelievable. Speaker 3: This is unbelievable. Speaker 6: We got the story, man. Speaker 3: I'm very proud of my team. This story took us about six months to do, and I hear your comments that nothing ever happened to these people, that nothing will come of this, nobody will be arrested. I hear you loud and clear, and let me say that I am on your side, but this is kind of unprecedented here. This is a lot of bureaucracy. These fact patterns about eight As and super eight As and government subcontractors and 51% rules, it gets complicated real fast and people lose interest real fast. But what isn't complicated is this individual encouraging people to stay quiet about breaking the law, saying she does not want the public to know that they're taking advantage of you and fleecing the taxpayer. So we have now done our job. We have caught people on tape with indisputable, incontrovertible, videotaped evidence of fraud and corruption within the federal government, the sort of stuff that Doge talks about. And if this reporting, if this truth, if this videotape doesn't actually lead to our Department of Justice arresting people or holding anybody to account, then it's gotten to the point where we now have to investigate the Department of Justice itself. So we're calling on the people inside the Department of Justice to do the right thing. We actually have confidence and optimism that this report will actually lead to the results and the accountability that all of you so desperately seek. And stay tuned for part two because we are just getting started. If you've enjoyed this type of reporting, one of a kind, fearless, impartial, independent, nonprofit journalism which doesn't favor a commercial imperative over the pursuit of truth that takes six months to do, and an army of investigators, fact checkers, researchers, costume designers, attorneys. Well, if you support this and you want to continue to support this, please consider a donation to Citizen Journalism Foundation, Citizen Journalism Foundation, okeifmediagroup.com slash donate, where you'll find tax deductible giving instructions to our five one c three, and we look forward to seeing with the Citizen Journalism Awards November 13 at Mar A Lago. Tickets available at citizenjournalistgala.com.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 20, 2025 at 9:07 PM
Saved - October 21, 2025 at 5:49 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I find this interesting and puzzling. A gag order by Judge Tony Graf bans extrajudicial statements for attorneys, law enforcement, and 3,000+ attendees, citing Utah Rule 3.6(a). I question the scope—no known case uses such broad, ongoing restrictions for non-identifying attendees. Post 2 clarifies it only applies to witnesses as they become known, not a blanket order. Credit to @Brick_Suit.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk This is interesting and I’m not sure what to make of it… Over the weekend, it was discovered that Judge Tony Graf, a Gov Spencer Cox appointee, Issued a Gag Order, restricting attorneys, law enforcement, and the 3,000+ attendees I understand attorneys, law enforcement, and maybe key witnesses, but 3,000 attendees?? The order bans "extrajudicial statements" that have a "substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing" the trial, per Utah Rule of Professional Conduct 3.6(a). This includes any public comments—whether to media, on social media, or in other public forums—that could influence potential jurors or compromise a fair trial. For the 3,000 event witnesses attendees, this means they cannot discuss case-specific details like what they saw, heard, or know about the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Here’s the problem… There is no documented U.S. case that has applied a gag order to this magnitude.. with no direct role in the investigation or litigation. Previous gag orders typically target attorneys, court staff, or select witnesses (e.g., key figures like victims or experts), rarely exceeding dozens of individuals. So what is this really about?

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Explained 👇👇

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: The Charlie Kirk Gag Order on the 3,000+ Witnesses State Attorneys said there are a number of witnesses that had yet been identified — The Judge ruled this only applies to “Witnesses as they Become KNOWN” In a nutshell, there will be no blanket Gag order everyone who was there— only the key witnesses that become identified. This makes more sense now… Credit to @Brick_Suit who made me aware. Thank you 🙏 https://rumble.com/v70kj4w-charlie-kirk-gag-order-the-judge-ruled-this-only-applies-to-witnesses-as-th.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
There is a substantial amount of discovery in this case; it is voluminous to say the least. The discussion touches on several intertwined aspects of pretrial proceedings and the management of information in a high-profile matter. Speaker 1 notes that his lawyers entered their formal appearance and declined to waive the right to a preliminary hearing. In connection with these procedural steps, Judge Tony Graff issued a gag order preventing anyone associated with the case from talking about it. The purpose of the gag order is to avoid pretrial publicity, which is already a significant problem given the case’s massive media exposure involving a high-profile figure such as Charlie Kirk. The judge’s objective, as stated, is to ensure a fairer trial for Robinson by limiting external commentary and potentially prejudicial publicity. The discussion then turns to the scope and identification of witnesses. There is a request for clarification regarding the phrase “all witnesses,” as there are a number of witnesses who have not yet been identified but would likely be used in the state’s case. This issue arose in the context of a large audience—specifically, an event in front of two to three thousand students at Utah Valley University—where the incident or relevant proceedings took place. The parties are in the process of identifying those witnesses, and those individuals are presently unknown. Speaker 2 responds by outlining how the court will handle this as the witnesses become known. The court will require that as each witness becomes known to either side, the information will be conveyed in a way that complies with the gag order. It is acknowledged that there may be many witnesses, and it is not expected that all witness identifications and related disclosures can be completed upfront before the process begins. The approach is to disclose witness information progressively as it becomes available, while maintaining compliance with the order. Speaker 1 reiterates that the judge wants to ensure the protection of Robinson’s constitutional rights as well as the rights of the victim. The exchange underscores a balance between managing a large, potentially unwieldy roster of witnesses and upholding the defendants’ and victims’ legal protections. The discussion closes with a brief, incomplete note from Counselor, indicating ongoing considerations and procedural safeguards as the case progresses.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There is a a substantial amount of discovery in this case, your honor. It's voluminous to say the least. Speaker 1: His lawyers entered their formal appearance and declined to waive his right to a preliminary hearing. Judge Tony Graff has issued a gag order preventing anyone associated with the case from talking about it. It's to avoid pretrial publicity, already a big problem in a case with massive media exposure involving a high profile figure like Charlie Kirk, but the judge wants to ensure a fairer trial for Robinson. It's also brought up a big issue involving thousands of people. Speaker 0: We're seeking some clarification with respect to the phrase all witnesses, your honor. There are a number of witnesses that have yet to be identified that would likely be used in the state's case. This occurred in front of two to 3,000 students at Utah Valley University. So we're in the process of identifying those witnesses. And so those individuals are presently unknown right now. Speaker 2: The court will rule that as the witnesses become known to each side that that information is conveyed to abide by this order. Obviously, there are potentially, many witnesses. And so it's not the expectation that you would be able to do that upfront, but as they become known. Speaker 1: The judge made it clear he wants to ensure Robinson's constitutional rights will be protected as well as the rights of the victim. Speaker 2: Counsel

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk This is interesting and I’m not sure what to make of it… Over the weekend, it was discovered that Judge Tony Graf, a Gov Spencer Cox appointee, Issued a Gag Order, restricting attorneys, law enforcement, and the 3,000+ attendees I understand attorneys,

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

@Brick_Suit Again, I get attorneys, law enforcement, and key witnesses… but not 3,000 people.

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 18, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Saved - October 19, 2025 at 5:48 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

THOUSANDS of Women are Suing Pfizer over their Popular Birth Control Shot, Depo-Provera, linked to BRAIN TUMORS EU added a warning in 2024 Canada has warned since 2006 The US has no such warning. Pfizer kills people. https://rumble.com/v70h5nu-thousands-of-women-are-suing-pfizer-over-birth-control-shot-linked-to-brain.html https://t.co/43LtsViQ6A

Video Transcript AI Summary
Robin Philip has undergone two surgeries and months of radiation for a tumor she now believes was caused by birth control injections. Depo Provera is a progestin shot injected every three months. One in four women in the United States use it, with black women taking the shot at nearly double the national rate. Philip used it for nearly thirty years. Multiple studies have found a potential link between Depo Provera and meningioma, including one that found women who took the drug for more than a year had five times the risk of developing the tumor. Philip is among more than a thousand women suing Pfizer, the maker of Depo Provera, alleging the company chose to ignore relevant safety concerns and deliberately not study the long-term safety of Depo Provera. All these women have meningiomas; many have surgery, some have radiation, and their lives have been greatly impacted. The European Union added a warning label for meningioma to the drug in 2024. Canada has listed it as an adverse reaction since February 2006. No such warning exists in the United States. In a motion seeking dismissal of the case, Pfizer says it became aware of the risks of meningiomas in 2023 and made an application to the FDA to change the drug’s warning label. The company says the FDA rejected their effort to warn patients. The FDA declined NBC News’s request for comment, but in a letter to Pfizer included in the motion, it wrote that the findings of the available observational studies alone do not support the addition of a warning. Pfizer told NBC News it stands behind the safety and efficacy of Depo Provera.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Robin Philip has been through two surgeries and months of radiation, all due to a tumor she now believes was caused by her birth control injections. If I would've knew from the giggle, a woman never took that shot. Depo Provera is a progestin shot injected every three months. One in four women in The United States use it with black women taking the shot at nearly double the national rate. Philip took it for nearly thirty years. Multiple studies have found a potential link between depot and meningioma, including one that found women who took the drug for more than a year had five times the risk of developing the tumor. Philip is now one of more than a thousand women suing Pfizer, the maker of Depo Provera, alleging the company chose to ignore relevant safety concerns and deliberately not study the long term safety of Depo. These women all have meningiomas. Many have surgery. Some have radiation, they've all had their lives greatly impacted. The European Union added a warning label for meningioma to the drug in 2024. Canada has listed it as an adverse reaction since 02/2006. No such warning exists in The United States. In a motion seeking dismissal of the case, Pfizer says it became aware of the risks of meningiomas in 2023 and made an application to the FDA to change the drug's warning label. The company says the FDA rejected their effort to warn patients. The FDA declined our request for comment, but in a letter to Pfizer included in the motion, it wrote, the findings of the available observational studies alone do not support the addition of a warning. Pfizer saying to NBC News it stands behind the safety and efficacy of Depo Provera.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 17, 2025 at 6:56 PM
Saved - October 18, 2025 at 9:24 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I read that new JFK files claim JFK and Khrushchev toyed with an intercontinental peace bridge between Russia and the U.S. before JFK’s assassination. Trump was asked about it. Zelenskiy said he doesn’t like it. ITS GOING TO HAPPEN! @KariLake https://rumble.com/v70frcs-a-tunnel-from-russia-to-alaska.html

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

News broke yesterday from newly released JFK Files that JFK and PM Khrushchev were entertaining the idea of an Intercontinental PEACE BRIDGE between Russia and the United States before JFK was assassinated…. Trump was asked about it. Zelensky said he don’t like it 🤣 ITS GOING TO HAPPEN! @KariLake https://rumble.com/v70frcs-a-tunnel-from-russia-to-alaska.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 introduces a tunnel to connect Russia and Alaska, saying they just heard about it and that it's an interesting idea. He notes Alaska has a new road that will lead to many minerals, and mentions having a piece of ownership because of making it possible. He adds that the idea of a tunnel from Russia to Alaska came up yesterday and asks, “What do you think of that, mister president? Do you have any ideas? How do you like that idea?” He asks President Trump for his thoughts, and remarks, “I’m not happy with this idea. I don’t think you’re gonna like it. I don’t think he liked it. President Trump, do you think that?” President Trump responds: “I’m not happy with this idea. I don’t think you’re gonna like it. I don’t think he liked it.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay. Mister president president president Trump tunnel to connect Russia and Alaska. Are you interested? I just heard about it. A tunnel from Russia to Alaska. I just heard about that one. That's an interesting one. We'll have to think about that. I hadn't heard that. We just did a nice road in Alaska. It's gonna get us to a lot of minerals, and we have a piece of it, a good piece of the ownership because of the fact we made it possible. But this came up yesterday, a tunnel from Russia to Alaska. That's an interesting what do you think of that, mister president? Do you have any ideas? How do you like that idea? I'm not happy with this idea. I don't think you're gonna like it. I don't think he liked it. I don't think he liked it. President Trump, do you think that?

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

This is pretty interesting… Apparently, JFK & PM Khrushchev were in possible talks, or entertaining the thought, of building an intercontinental PEACE BRIDGE between Alaska and Russia. We should definitely do this. https://t.co/NcgL5g9Uwm

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 17, 2025 at 1:04 AM
Saved - October 17, 2025 at 6:12 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m reporting that B-52 bombers were deployed off Venezuela, with about 10% of US naval power in the region. Some 10,000 US soldiers are in the Caribbean and ships near Puerto Rico, with special ops helicopters 90 miles off Venezuela, quick-insertion “little birds,” and the stealth ship Ghost in the Caribbean, plus subs, destroyers, and F-35s. Maduro offered a dominant stake in Venezuela’s resources and to cut ties with Russia/China, but Trump and Rubio said no.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Here we goooo… B-52 BOMBERS were just DEPLOYED and are now Flying off the coast of Venezuela and 10% of US Naval Power is now in the Region — “Trump’s not Bluffing” - 10,000 US Soldiers are in the Caribbean and on ships on Puerto Rico - Special Operations Helo’s were spotted 90 miles off of Venezuela’s coast - little birds spotted designed for quick insertion behind enemy lines - The “Ghost”, is also confirmed to be in The Caribbean, a ship designed for stealth and black ops operations - Subs, several destroyers, F-35 fighters Madura offered the US a dominant stake in Venezuela’s oils, gold, and mineral wealth, and promised to cut ties with Russia and China — Trump and Rubio said NO! https://rumble.com/v70enfs-b-52-bombers-were-just-deployed-and-are-now-flying-off-the-coast-of-venezue.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Fox News alert: B-52 bombers are flying off the coast of Venezuela. Trump says he’s not bluffing. Right now, more than 10,000 US soldiers are built up in the Caribbean on ships in Puerto Rico, locked and loaded. Special operations helicopters were seen 90 miles from Venezuela’s coast. The chopper units are used by Delta Force, Navy SEALs, and the Green Berets. The Black Ops were spotted off the coast of Trinidad. Also seen were little birds—smaller but faster aircraft designed for quick insertion of special operators behind enemy lines. The Ghost was also confirmed to be in the Caribbean. That’s the nickname for MV Ocean Trader, a ship designed for black ops and special missions because it’s dark and blends in with cargo. There’s more. 10% of US naval power is now in the region. It’s a major shift with submarines, several destroyers, and F-35 fighters in Puerto Rico, on top of the cocaine boats being smoked to pieces by the week. Kilos of cocaine are washing ashore. Don’t tell Hunter. Dozens of bad hombres are being described as shark bait. Maduro’s attention is captured. He’s the dictator of the narco state, and the US has doubled the bounty on his head to 50 million dollars. According to the New York Times, Maduro offered the United States a dominant stake in Venezuela’s oil, gold, and mineral wealth and promised to cut ties with Russia and China. Trump and Rubio said no. That suggests the gunboat diplomacy could end with Maduro removed and Venezuela aligned with the US, not Putin or China. American action in Latin America hasn’t always ended well; the Bay of Pigs is cited as a historical reference. It’s the US backyard, and Trump is reestablishing the Monroe Doctrine, referred to here as the Dunro Doctrine. Hopefully, a Venezuelan general does the right thing and collects the 50-million-dollar bounty. No one wants a messy conflict in South America. Maduro controls drug traffickers who are well-armed, and Biden allowed hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans into the United States, who could be activated. If Trump can pull this off and push China and Russia out of Venezuela after what he did with the Iranians, it will give him significant power to deter Russia and Ukraine and China and Taiwan.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Fox News alert b 52 bombers are flying off the coast of Venezuela. Trump's not bluffing. Right now, more than 10,000 US soldiers are built up in the Caribbean on ships in Puerto Rico locked and loaded. Special operations helicopters were just seen flying 90 miles from Venezuela's coast. The chopper units used by Delta Force, Navy SEALs, the Green Berets. The Black Ops were spotted off the coast of Trinidad. They're very important for search and rescue missions. Also spotted, little birds. They're smaller but faster, designed for quick insertion of special operators behind enemy lines. The Ghost was also confirmed to be in The Caribbean. That's the nickname for MV Ocean Trader. It's the kind of ship that doesn't want to be found. It's designed for black ops and special missions because it's dark and blends in with cargo. There's more. 10% of The US naval power is now in the region. It's a major shift. There's subs, several destroyers, and f 35 fighters in Puerto Rico. That's on top of all the coke boats getting smoked to pieces by the week. Kilos of cocaine are washing ashore. Don't tell Hunter. Dozens of bad hombres becoming shark bait. It's got Maduro's attention. He's the dictator of the narco state, a very bad hombre, and we just doubled the bounty on his head. It's now 50 mil. According to the New York Times, Maduro offered us a dominant stake in Venezuela's oil, gold, and mineral wealth and promised to cut ties with Russia and China. And Trump and Rubio said no. That tells me the gunboat diplomacy is gonna end up with no Maduro and a Venezuela aligned with us, not Putin or Chi. American action in Latin America hasn't always ended well. Look at the Bay Of Pigs. Other times, it's a piece of cake. It's our backyard. And Trump's just reestablishing the Monroe Doctrine, aka the Dunro Doctrine. Hopefully, a Venezuelan general does the right thing and collects the $50,000,000 bounty. No one wants a messy conflict in South America. Maduro controls drug traffickers who are pretty strapped. They have military grade weapons, and Biden let hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans into the country. They could be activated. But if Trump can pull this off and kick China and Russia out of Venezuela after what he did with the Iranians, it'll give him a lot of power to deter Russia and Ukraine and China and Taiwan.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 15, 2025 at 3:06 AM
Saved - October 15, 2025 at 5:48 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I just learned about a film called One Battle After Another with Leonardo DiCaprio and Sean Penn as suspected CIA assets. It foreshadows violent clashes with ICE and an “Immigrant Liberation” nationwide. DiCaprio plays a former explosives expert in a militant group (French 75/Antifa?), whose raid on an ICE detention center frees detained immigrants as guards beat detainees and agents kill unarmed suspects. The revolutionaries’ actions spur Bob to rescue his kidnapped daughter from a white nationalist officer played by Penn.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

I honestly didn’t know this just came out.. you? Leonardo DiCaprio and Sean Penn, suspected CIA Assets, had a new film out that Foreshadows a Future of Violent Clashes with ICE and an “Immigrant Liberation” Nationwide The film, One Battle After Another, follows DiCaprio, a former explosives expert in the militant group French 75 (Antifa?).. The film opens with the group raiding an ICE detention center to free “detained immigrants” who are brutally beating and mistreated and government agents are shown executing unarmed suspects. While the revolutionaries fight back with weapons and explosives, this sets off a larger story of Bob trying to rescue his kidnapped daughter from a white nationalist military officer (Sean Penn).

Video Transcript AI Summary
The scene centers on a tense, improvisational act that mixes technical danger with the formation of a rebellious mission. Speaker 0 is shown building a closed circuit, insisting on keeping a cap shunted “so you don’t accidentally detonate your charge,” and pressing to “create a show,” framing the moment as “an announcement of revolution. The message is clear.” Speaker 1 responds with a chilling promise: “I’ll be seeing you very soon.” The conversation then pivots to a ceremonial claim: “for bringing justice to the vigilante group known as the French seventy five, we are here to award Steven Lockjaw with the medal of honor.” The dialogue hints at love and loyalty with the line “You have to understand who will love you.” A personal vignette emerges: Speaker 0 recalls, “Me and mom used to run around and do some real bad / They got hurt. Now they're coming after us. I'm sorry.” The exchange reveals a sense of fatalism, as Speaker 0 asserts, “I didn't ask for this. That's just how the cards were rolled out for me,” only to be corrected by the other voice: “It's not cards. You don't roll cards. It's dice.” A moment of familial friction follows: “Dad, what is wrong with you? You're right.” They prepare to move on with “Let's go.” The scene shifts to a tunnel-like tension: “Tunnel. What? What's going on?” and a practical but desperate plea for weaponry: “I need a weapon, man. All you got is goddamn nunchucks here. You know where I can get a gun?” The dialogue then reflects a concern to protect “you from all your mom's stuff, from all my stuff, even though I know that's impossible.” A stark line marks a turning point: “This is the end of the line.” “Not for you.” A new character arrives: “Woah. Who's this?” They explain, “Oh, they're just my friends,” and dialogue turns to pronouns: “Now is that a he or a she or a they? It's not that hard. They, them. Okay.” A brief courtesy follows: “I just wanna be polite.” Then an intimate moment: “Yo. Say it. Say it, baby.” Endearments are exchanged: “Love you, Bob. Love you too.” The closing vibe asserts a philosophy of freedom: “You know what freedom is? No fear. Just like Tom Cruise.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And what I'm doing here is I'm creating a closed circuit. Oh. Very important to keep your cap shunted like this so you don't accidentally detonate your charge. Don't stop. I want you to create a show. This is an announcement of revolution. The message is clear. Speaker 1: I'll be seeing you very soon. Speaker 0: And how do I see you Speaker 1: first? For bringing justice to the vigilante group known as the French seventy five, we are here to award Steven Lockjaw with the medal of honor. Speaker 0: You have to understand who will love you. Speaker 1: Me and mom used to run around and do some real bad They got hurt. Now they're coming after us. I'm sorry. Speaker 0: I didn't ask for this. That's just how the cards were rolled out for me. It's not cards. You don't roll cards. It's dice. Dad, what is wrong with you? You're right. Speaker 1: Let's go. Speaker 0: Tunnel. What? What's going on? Speaker 1: I need a weapon, man. All you got is goddamn nunchucks here. You know where I can get a gun? Speaker 0: Protect you from all your mom's stuff, from all my stuff, even though I know that's impossible. Speaker 1: This is the end of the line. Speaker 0: Not for you. Speaker 1: Woah. Who's this? Speaker 0: Oh, they're just my friends. Now is that a he or a she or a they? It's not that hard. They, them. Okay. I just wanna be polite. Speaker 1: Yo. Say it. Say it, baby. Speaker 0: Love you, Bob. Love you too. You know what freedom is? No fear. Just like Tom Cruise.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 15, 2025 at 2:21 AM
Saved - October 15, 2025 at 5:42 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I say Hollywood is conditioning the US for a civil war after a triggering event tied to illegal aliens or Black people (as with George Floyd). Films like Civil War supposedly preprogram white masses to support massacres of brown people, with a Trump-like figure killed by a Black female sergeant. The plot allegedly has re-education and a Gavin Newsom-led takeover, part of the Podesta plan to demoralize, divide, and push globalist ends.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Alex Jones says Hollywood is Conditioning the US Population for a Civil War (The Podesta Plan) that will occur after a “Triggering Event” Related to Illegal Aliens or Black People (like George Floyd) - Jones claims Hollywood is preprogramming the public for a race-based civil war through films like "Civil War," where a Trump-like figure is killed in the White House by a black female sergeant. - He describes the movie's plot as depicting evil white people massacring brown people across the country, leading to the U.S. military reconvening under a leader like Gavin Newsom to overthrow the government. - The film portrays re-education of right-wingers and white people, serving as the final act in the Podesta plan to instigate civil unrest and division. - Jones argues this is part of a deliberate effort to demoralize and divide society, aligning with globalist agendas. https://rumble.com/v70bje0-alex-jones-says-hollywood-is-conditioning-the-us-population-for-a-civil-war.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Checklist for summary approach: - Identify and preserve the core claims and rhetoric without introducing new conclusions. - Focus on unique or surprising elements (e.g., Podesta plan, specific conspiratorial narratives, targeting lists). - Remove repetition, filler, and off-topic digressions while keeping essential context. - Translate only if needed; here, maintain English content and terminology exactly as stated. - Present quotes or exact phrases where they are central to the claims (Podesta plan, Antifa, etc.). - Do not evaluate the truth or validity of any claims; reflect them as described in the transcript. - Maintain a neutral, concise tone that mirrors the speakers’ emphasis and urgency. Summary: Speaker 0 urges Trump to address the nation about the Modesto plan and offers to send a reel of clips, suggesting he could assemble material like the five-minute video used when “they said no South African farmers are being killed.” He claims he could show a ten-minute clip sequence of hundreds of clips of top Democrats saying, “Trump's coming to kill the migrants. He's coming to kill the blacks,” and asserts there would be a call to rise up and a civil war. He references “the Podesta plan” as the official Democrat party battle plan with production budgets of hundreds of millions and claims it involves producing movies, including a new film described as “battle after battle” with DiCaprio, set in a fictional fantasy United States where people carry plastic explosives and dynamite machine guns, killing ICE officers across the country to free Hispanics from concentration camps. He asserts Hollywood is moving beyond World War II holocaust-themed films to a “new holocaust that isn't happening,” alleging prior depictions like Tom Homan machine-gunning Hispanic women and others; he says these are background cues for uprisings and ties them to the Podesta plan. He contends the Podesta plan is guiding events now, and Trump has declared anti-FUD against domestic and international terrorists. He claims the DOJ is targeting Resoros and asserts that the Democratic party is running the operation, arguing Antifa “doesn't exist” according to documents from Friends of Democracy and Alexander Soros that allegedly show they command Antifa in each city, giving orders on where to attack. He labels it racketeering and domestic terrorism and says the documents prove it and should result in imprisonment. Speaker 1 questions how violence can be stopped, noting that violence has its own logic, is generational, and is hard to pull back from once triggered. Speaker 0 then argues that the left is filled with “entitled illegal aliens,” pointing to videos of ICE waiting outside state courthouses or jails as criminals are released, while mobs attack ICE. He estimates ICE is the underdog with fewer than 10,000 agents against “20 plus million illegals” under Biden. He insists the left, Islamicists, Black Lives Matter, and the trained Antifa form a single coalition, all speaking in concert about a catalyzing event where many of their people are massacred, implying it’s embedded in media and the Podesta plan. He warns of a triggering event—“MSNBC said our constituents want blood”—and claims there are targeted lists of people to be reached, including Tucker Carlson and himself, with houses identified to be attacked. He says he and others have been seen at or near their houses, and that when this launches, it won’t be a door knock but a surge of meth-heads with Molotov cocktails, with undercover footage showing warehouses where NGOs supply money and weapons, ready to “pile in” when given the green light, describing a scenario like “Helter Skelter times 10,000.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Trump needs to address the nation on this, talk about the Modesto plan. Any of his crew, I can send it to him, can put a reel together like he did when they said no South African farmers are being killed. He just showed a five minute video. It devastated him. I can send them a ten minute clip, clip, clip of hundreds of clips of top Democrats saying, Trump's coming to kill the migrants. He's coming to kill the blacks. We gotta rise up. We gotta have a civil war. And then I can show the quotes from the Podesta plan laying this out. This is the official Democrat party battle plan with production production movies, movies, three $350,000,000 budgets, civil war, promoting it. Now the new movie, battle after battle with DiCaprio, where it it's it's set in a fictional fantasy land in The US where they have this hot sex, and it's so awesome. And they go around with plastic explosives and dynamite machine guns, killing ICE officers all over The US and freeing Hispanics from concentration camps. So Hollywood's not, you know, making its constant holocaust movies about World War two. They've moved on to the new holocaust that isn't happening. The first one did of, you know, just Tom Homan just machine gunning Hispanic women and then raping them in dungeons. I mean, you know, it it's like machete kills where there's Don Johnson shooting pregnant Hispanic women with the stomach with deer rifles. Didn't happen, folks, but Hollywood is providing this background right on time for these uprisings. There's planning because the globalists are losing. This is their last big move, and I'll say it again. The Podesta plan. The the Podesta plan. We've got to get the Podesta plan that we're now living in the launch of in front. So Trump's declared anti FUD, domestic terrorists, international terrorists. He said they're going at Resoros, which I know the DOJ is. That's great. But this this is the Democratic party running it. That's why they say ANTIVA doesn't exist because we got documents ten years ago through Friends of Democracy and Alexander Soros where they command them in each city, give them orders where to attack, what to do. It is all 100 specifically road mapped out, open and shut, racketeering, domestic terrorism, send them to prison with the documents we have. Speaker 1: I mean, since it's all happening out in the open, how do you so so once that starts, it's pretty hard to pull back from it. You know, violence has its own logic, and and it makes people totally unreasonable, and it does so generationally, and it's just like the worst thing ever. How do you stop that? Speaker 0: You have all these entitled illegal aliens. You see the videos every day where ICE has to wait outside the state courthouses or jails when they're releasing some guy with, you know, huge rap sheet, been deported before, and his wife and baby will be in the car. And then the ICE comes over, like, two or three of them and says, hey. Get out of the car. We know who you are. They go, no. No. No. Then a mob comes over and starts attacking ICE. We've seen these countless videos. The underdog is ICE. They've got less than 10,000 agents with 20 plus million illegals just under Biden here. And and to answer your question, the left is so entitled that these illegal aliens aren't illegal alien MS 13 people from El Salvador. No. They're Maryland man. And so Trump has to address it and explain to people that these illegal aliens, the Islamicists, the left, the Black Lives Matter, the the training antifa, they are all in one big coalition. They all communicate with their rhetoric and their attack plans, and they're all saying that as soon as they have the catalyzing event where a bunch of their people get massacred. It's in movies. It's in the Podesta plan. I've got countless videos. You see them all the time. We're out at the rally. They go, you just wait till Trump kills a bunch of us. And then once we have that pretext, even MSNBC said our constituents want blood. They want a triggering event. I mean, they're just like, once the triggering event comes, you're all dead. We're burning everything down, and we're coming to your houses. And Antifa and these other groups have targeted lists that have come out of whose houses they're going to. Governors, talk show host, everybody. Tucker is on the list. I'm on the list. We've caught them outside my house, folks. Okay? I'm just gonna leave it at that. I haven't stayed at my house in much. It's it's gotten that bad. I mean, I stay there Speaker 1: You haven't stayed at your house? Speaker 0: I don't stay at my house anymore, Mike. My my I say there's no my children don't. Because, I mean, they're there. It's targeted. And as soon as they kick this off, there are people that are first on the list that they're planning to come get. Because I'm not trying to you know this, Tucker. You're smart. When they really launch this, and it's not gonna be them knocking your door down in DC. It it's gonna be a, you know, a group of meth heads rolling up with Molotov cocktails. And and and they've got these undercover videos in Austin and Portland and everywhere, hours of them, and and it shows inside these warehouses where they give them drugs and money and food and the NGOs, and they're just all in there ramped up and ready with guns and weapons. And then just as soon as they give them the green light, they are gonna just pile in their vans and come to kill. Well, think of Helter Skelter times 10,000. Think

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Alex Jones Warns of Globalist Plot to Collapse US Dollar and Calls for Resistance Against BlackRock and WEF The conversation began when Tucker said, “When Gold crosses $4,000.. the cumulative effect of all happening is to destroy the US Dollar” - Alex Jones argues that major financial institutions like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, IMF, and World Bank have intentionally chosen inflation to address global debt, leading to stagflation under leftist policies like the Great Reset and carbon taxes. - He claims this is part of a deliberate post-industrial plan to create a worldwide serf system, breaking down borders to lower living standards and establish compact city-states controlled by elites, as outlined in Agenda 21 and 2030. - Jones links this to restricting resources, causing collapse and depopulation through starvation and conflict, contrasting it with Trump's expansionary inflation approach to build a middle class. - He criticizes the UN and globalists for aiming to manage slaves via economic control, urging recognition of the plan as feudalism disguised as neo-capitalism. - he emphasizes researching the Great Reset and figures like Larry Fink (now head of WEF), noting the UN's partnership with WEF for governance, promoting anti-human policies like depopulation and transhumanism. - He advocates mobilizing for good legislators and governors through populism, citing successes like states pulling pension funds from BlackRock and winning court cases against its racketeering and ESG mandates. - Jones highlights resistance through attorney generals' lawsuits (e.g., Texas AG Ken Paxton), which forced BlackRock to retreat on DEI and ESG, viewing this as key to dismantling corporate governance control. - He warns of the need to identify the deliberate attack and remain "hardcore" in non-violent opposition, as globalists aim for a totalitarian dystopia, but populists are winning elections worldwide, like President Trump. https://rumble.com/v70bgwc-alex-jones-warns-of-globalist-plot-to-collapse-us-dollar.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Checklist for summary approach: - Identify the central thesis: a perceived globalist Great Reset vs a populist, pro-sovereignty counter-movement. - Extract and preserve the most consequential claims: monetary policy shifts, depopulation narratives, 15-minute cities, and feudalism versus 1776-style liberty. - Name key actors, organizations, and examples cited: UN, World Economic Forum, Larry Fink, John Kerry, BlackRock, Texas / Ken Paxton, Elon Musk, Trump, Saudi Arabia, Netherlands, Sri Lanka. - Track the throughline: inflation/allocation of resources, energy policy changes, and legal/political pushback at state level. - Highlight unique or provocative assertions that drive the argument (e.g., “post-industrial carbon tax plan,” “neo-feudalistic capitalism,” “AI gods”). - Exclude repetition and off-topic digressions, maintaining precise claims without evaluation. - Present content as the speakers’ arguments and counterpoints, with a clear, cohesive narrative. - Keep the final summary within 401–502 words, English translation if needed, and preserve the stance and claims as presented. Summary: The speakers frame a global struggle centered on opposing visions for the world’s economic and political future. They begin by noting that a rising price of gold signals to them the cumulative destruction of the US dollar, linking monetary weakness to the broader agenda discussed. They argue that major institutions—Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, the IMF, the World Bank, and other major players—have decided in recent years to address monetary debt worldwide through inflation, affecting corporations, governments, and individuals. They claim Trump recognizes this and supports inflation alongside expansion of goods, acknowledging that economists foresee some pain but overall benefits, whereas a “leftist UN, WEF, great reset” would yield stagflation: high inflation with persistent recession—a “perfect storm of hell on Earth.” The narrative then asserts that UN/globalists aim to create a post-industrial order and a worldwide system of restricted mobility and control: breaking borders, lowering living standards, forming small, compact city-states and agrarian rural states—akin to a Hunger Games scenario—where medicine and technology exist for elites, while the rest are governed under tight control. They describe June 2021 to June 2030 as the policy window for this plan, involving depopulation through slow starvation and resource restriction, with the ultimate objective of a new cashless society and social credit. In contrast, they present Trump as opposing this trajectory, boosting energy production domestically and collaborating with Saudi Arabia to increase global energy supply, reducing inflation and putting money in voters’ hands. They also highlight Trump’s economic measures—no tax on tips or overtime, trillions in commitments and investments—as part of uplifting the middle class and national morale. They assert the globalist project includes “carbon lockdowns” and the 15-minute city, aiming for totalitarian control, including demographic and cultural demoralization (drag queen story hours, kneeling during the national anthem), to unify policy across nations. They claim legal pushback is occurring: states pulling pension funds from BlackRock, AGs like Ken Paxton in Texas “racketeering” suits against BlackRock’s ESG agenda, and courts challenging the pressure to divest from fossil fuels. The speakers contrast two civilizations: 1984’s totalitarian world versus a 1776 revival of liberty, governance, and economic freedom. They argue modern liberalism has become anti-family, anti-speech, anti-private property, and that the West’s demoralization must be halted. They invoke Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson to emphasize that a republic requires informed, engaged citizens who understand practical skills and virtue. The call ends with a conviction that the West’s revival is achievable, urging audiences to stand up, plant a flag, and defend the hill they deem essential for liberty and prosperity.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You should be aware of that as we proceed. When gold crosses 4,000, I don't understand why that's not like front page like, because to me that may and you're better at this than I, but that means that the cumulative effect of everything we're discussing has been to destroy the US dollar. Speaker 1: When you read what even all Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, the IMF, the World Bank, the Ex I'm Bank, it's not even debated. They've decided in the last, really, three, four years that they're gonna deal with monetary debt worldwide, both corporate, governmental, individual with inflation. And Trump recognizes that and has said, fine. We'll have inflation with expansion and expansion of goods, all and the economists agree that that will have some pain, but overall, will be something that could actually be successful. If you have the leftist UN, WEF, great reset, post industrial carbon tax plan, you will have stagflation, which is high inflation, but a ongoing recession depression, which is the perfect storm of hell on Earth. And that is what the UN and the globalists directly want to create a worldwide surf system of more manageable slaves in their official policies, break down the borders with first world and third world, not to rise up the third world economically, but to lower everybody down to a level. Then the globalist said they'll have small compact city states and rural city states like the hunger games where they have medicine, technology, and everything, and then just basically fly above us, and we're gonna be put into a agrarian situation with a much reduced, world population. So that's the official great reset post industrial, June '21, June 2030 policy, and there's nothing more frustrating than than reading all their policy books and the legislation and the treaties, and and then and then seeing it carried out, which is the purposeful planned depopulation of the earth through slow starvation and and and resources being restricted and and the conflict that comes with when when resources are constricted. And then I see Trump massively increasing energy production, and then going to Saudi Arabia and having them increase energy production, which hurts US oil production, but helps the world in general lower inflation and get real money in the hands of people. That's the biggest benefit, and then no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. All the things he's doing, 10,000,000,000,000 committed in in investment, several trillion already here. All of that is exactly what you do if you wanna help the people and build a middle class and a sustainable thriving country and world, building back our morale and and and nationalism and the family and god. Trump gets an a plus on all of that, but he needs to get more on message and not say, oh, the left are idiots. They don't know how to manage things. No. The globalists admit that they want a post industrial world. That's John Kerry said last year, we gotta cut off half the farming or people will starve. That's what causes starvation, obviously. And they wanna cut their resources off so they can manage and control people. That's why in The Netherlands and in Ireland and in and in Sri Lanka, all over, they're cutting off massive amounts of the farming, taking some of the best farming land ever and saying, sorry. Your cows pass gas. It's bad for the earth. That is deliberate sabotage of the of the world economy to cause a collapse that the banksters can loan us more money, bring in a new cashless society, social credit score. That is the endgame plan. And they talk about carbon lockdowns for the earth where you'll be told when you can leave your house. During carbon lockdowns, you'll be told when you can leave your fifteen minute city. This is a very totalitarian hellscape, dystopia, sci fi vision they have, and Trump is 95%, I would say, in opposition to it even with his limited understanding. He and by limited, mean, he's smart about the economy. Doesn't understand it's deliberate. And he goes, oh, they're really dumb. These are the worst ideas I ever heard. Is that why they're all unified, decades getting them in place? Is that why the big banks and corporations are exempt? No. It's feudalism. We don't have resources. We don't have rights. They all have the rights. That is the purest form of economic control. It's the oldest form of government. It's been the most common form of government in world history, and the UN and globalists say we're bringing back feudalism. Neo feudalistic capitalism is what they call it. But, really, it's just slavery. And that's what we're opposing, and that's what the relaunch of the West is about. That's what Elon Musk understands. That's why this is a do or die existential threat to everybody. People should just get on board and get hardcore or, be absolute feudal slaves if you're lucky. Speaker 0: How do you get on board? Speaker 1: You understand, and you research the great reset, and you reset research Larry Fink, now the head of the World Economic Forum. You realize three years ago, the UN made the World Economic Forum coequal to its governing body and its councils. And you understand if you actually read their writings, the future isn't human. People are bad. Families are bad. We're gonna have these AI gods that take over. I mean, it is just the wildest thing that Lex Luthor in a in a in a comic book couldn't come up with. This is beyond supervillain stuff. This is real super demon stuff, and you have to identify the attack you're under and that it's deliberate. Then you have to mobilize and get good legislatures and governors and others elected. Populists are getting elected all over the world. People are really waking up to this, and we have, now these attorney generals winning court cases in Texas and other places, where BlackRock tried to come in and say, we're not gonna have any investment in your state if you don't get rid of fossil fuels. And we and and then Texas sued. Kim Paxson said this is racketeering. This is illegal. They've won the court cases it is. Because Larry Fink says this is about control, and we're gonna control you. And and they control us by managing our money. Well, now a bunch of states are pulling their pension funds from BlackRock. And now Larry Fink is singing a different tune at least publicly, and they pulled some of their DEI and some of the, ESG stuff, which is the corporate governance. When you wonder why, whether you're in Australia, Germany, or The US, or Canada, it's the same policies, the same programs, the same drag queen story times, the same take a knee during the national anthem. All of this comes out of them literally trying to demoralize us because if we have a free open society, people around the world are gonna want that, and you can't have a control group where there's some free prosperous Western nations, everybody else slaves under BlackRock and the globalist. That's why you've gotta take down the West so there's nowhere to run. Speaker 0: I think that's I think that's exactly right. You you can't have different systems, radically different systems, in a globalized world, can you? Speaker 1: No. And so exactly, so there's a fight between, do you want the 1984 civilization, or do you want the 1776 civilization? 1776 isn't going back. It's back to the future. It was the flower of the Renaissance and the greatest expression of hundreds and hundreds of years of the Great Awakening and of the of the enlightenment. And so it's a continuation of that. We have to get back to the future, back to the avant garde, back to what produces the most freedom, the most wealth, classical liberalism of Thomas Jefferson. Now modern liberalism is totalitarian, anti family, anti speech, anti self defense, anti private property. Modern liberalism is a totalitarian death cult transhumanist poison to sabotage human civilization. It's a depopulation program. 1776 is the is the ultimate most successful push of humans to produce the very best atmosphere of liberty and freedom and competition and empowerment. The problem is in the cycle, as you know, hard times make strong men strong men make good times. Good times make weak men. Weak men make bad times. The problem is is that are we good enough? It was Benjamin Franklin right after they finally, you know, years later after the Declaration of Independence and the bill constitution, you know, finally got the bill of rights done, and he was walking out. The newspaper reporter said, mister Franklin, you know, do we now finally have our nation? And he said, yes. You have your republic if you can keep it. And he said, and so did Jefferson. He said, you gotta have informed, involved, educated people. And and Jefferson wrote about this constantly. He said, not just informed about math or Latin, but you gotta have people that are farmers. You gotta have, you know, people that that that actually know how to skin a buck and run a trot line. He said if you get ever get people where they're not physically out there able to run and control their whole lives, the the so called education doesn't matter because they're just educated idiots. So you've gotta have that multifacetedness where, you know, people have to really and people think of that as work. No. It it's it's it's empowering to really try to be what Thomas Jefferson talked about. And then when you go through what Jefferson went through, some of us have gone through similar things now, not to that extent, but close, then you read Jefferson. You realize we're back in that same time of change and revolution again. It's our revolution. We have the ball. We're selling the best system. We have the proven track record. We're the good guys, and we've gotta stand up and make the choices clear, plant our flag, and say, this is the hill to die on, and we will win.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 15, 2025 at 1:21 AM
Saved - October 15, 2025 at 5:42 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that Alex Jones argues major banks and international institutions push inflation to address global debt, creating stagflation under leftist plans like the Great Reset, carbon taxes, and Agenda 21/2030 to establish a global serf system and compact city-states. He links UN-WEF depopulation, transhumanism, and feudalism masquerading as neo-capitalism, urging nonviolent resistance and citing state actions against BlackRock as key to dismantling control.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Alex Jones Warns of Globalist Plot to Collapse US Dollar and Calls for Resistance Against BlackRock and WEF The conversation began when Tucker said, “When Gold crosses $4,000.. the cumulative effect of all happening is to destroy the US Dollar” - Alex Jones argues that major financial institutions like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, IMF, and World Bank have intentionally chosen inflation to address global debt, leading to stagflation under leftist policies like the Great Reset and carbon taxes. - He claims this is part of a deliberate post-industrial plan to create a worldwide serf system, breaking down borders to lower living standards and establish compact city-states controlled by elites, as outlined in Agenda 21 and 2030. - Jones links this to restricting resources, causing collapse and depopulation through starvation and conflict, contrasting it with Trump's expansionary inflation approach to build a middle class. - He criticizes the UN and globalists for aiming to manage slaves via economic control, urging recognition of the plan as feudalism disguised as neo-capitalism. - he emphasizes researching the Great Reset and figures like Larry Fink (now head of WEF), noting the UN's partnership with WEF for governance, promoting anti-human policies like depopulation and transhumanism. - He advocates mobilizing for good legislators and governors through populism, citing successes like states pulling pension funds from BlackRock and winning court cases against its racketeering and ESG mandates. - Jones highlights resistance through attorney generals' lawsuits (e.g., Texas AG Ken Paxton), which forced BlackRock to retreat on DEI and ESG, viewing this as key to dismantling corporate governance control. - He warns of the need to identify the deliberate attack and remain "hardcore" in non-violent opposition, as globalists aim for a totalitarian dystopia, but populists are winning elections worldwide, like President Trump. https://rumble.com/v70bgwc-alex-jones-warns-of-globalist-plot-to-collapse-us-dollar.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript presents a high-stakes, ideologically charged debate about global power dynamics, economic policy, and the fate of Western liberty. The speakers outline a narrative in which global elites orchestrate a coordinated push toward a post-industrial, highly managed world order, framed as a depopulation and control scheme. They emphasize that this agenda is not speculative but embedded in official policy documents and actions. Key points asserted: - The globalist project, labeled as the “Great Reset,” is described as a plan to manage monetary debt worldwide through inflation, with governments, corporations, and individuals affected. The claim is that inflation coupled with expansion will cause short-term pain but long-term changes that favor control and reduced sovereignty. - The plan allegedly includes a transition to a “post industrial carbon tax” regime, with warnings of “stagflation” (high inflation and ongoing recession) and a “worldwide surf system of more manageable slaves” as outlined in policy books, treaties, and World Economic Forum documents. The aim is said to break down borders, lower living standards globally, and create “small compact city states” and rural city states akin to a Hunger Games scenario. - A depopulation objective is asserted: deliberate resource restriction and slow starvation to reduce world population, enabling debt-based control through a new cashless system and social credit mechanisms. - The 15-minute city concept and weaponized environmental policies are described as tools of totalitarian control, with carbon lockdowns envisaged to regulate movement and life choices. The Dutch and Irish farming reductions, and examples from Sri Lanka, are cited as evidence of deliberate sabotage to trigger economic collapse and centralized governance. - The opposition perspective credits Trump with countering these efforts by boosting energy production domestically and engaging with Saudi Arabia to lower global inflation, while creating economic gains for ordinary people. The narrative highlights policies such as “no tax on tips” and “no tax on overtime” and mentions trillions in investment aimed at rebuilding the middle class and national morale. - Legal resistance is presented as a growing reaction against ESG and DEI-driven corporate behavior, with states like Texas pursuing court actions against BlackRock for coercive climate-related investment strategies. The speaker notes that several states have moved to pull pension funds from BlackRock, and that leaders like Larry Fink have publicly shifted tone in response. - A civilizational dichotomy frames the choice as “1984 civilization” versus “1776 civilization.” The latter is portrayed as the enduring legacy of liberty, wealth, and classical liberalism championed by Jefferson and Franklin. Jefferson’s warning that “you have your republic if you can keep it” is invoked to stress the need for informed, capable, and prepared citizens who will defend freedom against encroaching totalitarianism. - The overarching call is for mobilization of supporters, the election of populist leaders, and a renewed commitment to the foundational principles of liberty, family, faith, and national sovereignty as the antidote to perceived globalist aggression.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You should be aware of that as we proceed. When gold crosses 4,000, I don't understand why that's not like front page like, because to me that may and you're better at this than I, but that means that the cumulative effect of everything we're discussing has been to destroy the US dollar. Speaker 1: When you read what even all Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, the IMF, the World Bank, the Ex I'm Bank, it's not even debated. They've decided in the last, really, three, four years that they're gonna deal with monetary debt worldwide, both corporate, governmental, individual with inflation. And Trump recognizes that and has said, fine. We'll have inflation with expansion and expansion of goods, all and the economists agree that that will have some pain, but overall, will be something that could actually be successful. If you have the leftist UN, WEF, great reset, post industrial carbon tax plan, you will have stagflation, which is high inflation, but a ongoing recession depression, which is the perfect storm of hell on Earth. And that is what the UN and the globalists directly want to create a worldwide surf system of more manageable slaves in their official policies, break down the borders with first world and third world, not to rise up the third world economically, but to lower everybody down to a level. Then the globalist said they'll have small compact city states and rural city states like the hunger games where they have medicine, technology, and everything, and then just basically fly above us, and we're gonna be put into a agrarian situation with a much reduced, world population. So that's the official great reset post industrial, June '21, June 2030 policy, and there's nothing more frustrating than than reading all their policy books and the legislation and the treaties, and and then and then seeing it carried out, which is the purposeful planned depopulation of the earth through slow starvation and and and resources being restricted and and the conflict that comes with when when resources are constricted. And then I see Trump massively increasing energy production, and then going to Saudi Arabia and having them increase energy production, which hurts US oil production, but helps the world in general lower inflation and get real money in the hands of people. That's the biggest benefit, and then no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. All the things he's doing, 10,000,000,000,000 committed in in investment, several trillion already here. All of that is exactly what you do if you wanna help the people and build a middle class and a sustainable thriving country and world, building back our morale and and and nationalism and the family and god. Trump gets an a plus on all of that, but he needs to get more on message and not say, oh, the left are idiots. They don't know how to manage things. No. The globalists admit that they want a post industrial world. That's John Kerry said last year, we gotta cut off half the farming or people will starve. That's what causes starvation, obviously. And they wanna cut their resources off so they can manage and control people. That's why in The Netherlands and in Ireland and in and in Sri Lanka, all over, they're cutting off massive amounts of the farming, taking some of the best farming land ever and saying, sorry. Your cows pass gas. It's bad for the earth. That is deliberate sabotage of the of the world economy to cause a collapse that the banksters can loan us more money, bring in a new cashless society, social credit score. That is the endgame plan. And they talk about carbon lockdowns for the earth where you'll be told when you can leave your house. During carbon lockdowns, you'll be told when you can leave your fifteen minute city. This is a very totalitarian hellscape, dystopia, sci fi vision they have, and Trump is 95%, I would say, in opposition to it even with his limited understanding. He and by limited, mean, he's smart about the economy. Doesn't understand it's deliberate. And he goes, oh, they're really dumb. These are the worst ideas I ever heard. Is that why they're all unified, decades getting them in place? Is that why the big banks and corporations are exempt? No. It's feudalism. We don't have resources. We don't have rights. They all have the rights. That is the purest form of economic control. It's the oldest form of government. It's been the most common form of government in world history, and the UN and globalists say we're bringing back feudalism. Neo feudalistic capitalism is what they call it. But, really, it's just slavery. And that's what we're opposing, and that's what the relaunch of the West is about. That's what Elon Musk understands. That's why this is a do or die existential threat to everybody. People should just get on board and get hardcore or, be absolute feudal slaves if you're lucky. Speaker 0: How do you get on board? Speaker 1: You understand, and you research the great reset, and you reset research Larry Fink, now the head of the World Economic Forum. You realize three years ago, the UN made the World Economic Forum coequal to its governing body and its councils. And you understand if you actually read their writings, the future isn't human. People are bad. Families are bad. We're gonna have these AI gods that take over. I mean, it is just the wildest thing that Lex Luthor in a in a in a comic book couldn't come up with. This is beyond supervillain stuff. This is real super demon stuff, and you have to identify the attack you're under and that it's deliberate. Then you have to mobilize and get good legislatures and governors and others elected. Populists are getting elected all over the world. People are really waking up to this, and we have, now these attorney generals winning court cases in Texas and other places, where BlackRock tried to come in and say, we're not gonna have any investment in your state if you don't get rid of fossil fuels. And we and and then Texas sued. Kim Paxson said this is racketeering. This is illegal. They've won the court cases it is. Because Larry Fink says this is about control, and we're gonna control you. And and they control us by managing our money. Well, now a bunch of states are pulling their pension funds from BlackRock. And now Larry Fink is singing a different tune at least publicly, and they pulled some of their DEI and some of the, ESG stuff, which is the corporate governance. When you wonder why, whether you're in Australia, Germany, or The US, or Canada, it's the same policies, the same programs, the same drag queen story times, the same take a knee during the national anthem. All of this comes out of them literally trying to demoralize us because if we have a free open society, people around the world are gonna want that, and you can't have a control group where there's some free prosperous Western nations, everybody else slaves under BlackRock and the globalist. That's why you've gotta take down the West so there's nowhere to run. Speaker 0: I think that's I think that's exactly right. You you can't have different systems, radically different systems, in a globalized world, can you? Speaker 1: No. And so exactly, so there's a fight between, do you want the 1984 civilization, or do you want the 1776 civilization? 1776 isn't going back. It's back to the future. It was the flower of the Renaissance and the greatest expression of hundreds and hundreds of years of the Great Awakening and of the of the enlightenment. And so it's a continuation of that. We have to get back to the future, back to the avant garde, back to what produces the most freedom, the most wealth, classical liberalism of Thomas Jefferson. Now modern liberalism is totalitarian, anti family, anti speech, anti self defense, anti private property. Modern liberalism is a totalitarian death cult transhumanist poison to sabotage human civilization. It's a depopulation program. 1776 is the is the ultimate most successful push of humans to produce the very best atmosphere of liberty and freedom and competition and empowerment. The problem is in the cycle, as you know, hard times make strong men strong men make good times. Good times make weak men. Weak men make bad times. The problem is is that are we good enough? It was Benjamin Franklin right after they finally, you know, years later after the Declaration of Independence and the bill constitution, you know, finally got the bill of rights done, and he was walking out. The newspaper reporter said, mister Franklin, you know, do we now finally have our nation? And he said, yes. You have your republic if you can keep it. And he said, and so did Jefferson. He said, you gotta have informed, involved, educated people. And and Jefferson wrote about this constantly. He said, not just informed about math or Latin, but you gotta have people that are farmers. You gotta have, you know, people that that that actually know how to skin a buck and run a trot line. He said if you get ever get people where they're not physically out there able to run and control their whole lives, the the so called education doesn't matter because they're just educated idiots. So you've gotta have that multifacetedness where, you know, people have to really and people think of that as work. No. It it's it's it's empowering to really try to be what Thomas Jefferson talked about. And then when you go through what Jefferson went through, some of us have gone through similar things now, not to that extent, but close, then you read Jefferson. You realize we're back in that same time of change and revolution again. It's our revolution. We have the ball. We're selling the best system. We have the proven track record. We're the good guys, and we've gotta stand up and make the choices clear, plant our flag, and say, this is the hill to die on, and we will win.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 15, 2025 at 2:35 AM
Saved - October 15, 2025 at 5:30 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
They killed Muammar Gaddafi... After researching, I know I've been lied to my whole life. The Military Industrial Complex creates “supervillains”—Osama bin Laden, Gaddafi, Castro, Putin, Hitler—for America to fight. Wikileaks distorts the truth; history is likely distorted.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

They killed Muammar Gaddafi.. Once I researched this man and what he was doing… I knew that I’ve been lied to my whole life. The Military Industrial Complex Creates ‘Supervillains’ every Couple of years for America to Fight Osama bin Laden….? Gaddafi….? Castro? Putin? Hitler??? We all know Wikileaks distorts the truth.. it Truly makes you wonder how distorted history is regarding everything. https://rumble.com/v70bjwi-they-killed-muammar-gaddafi...html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Summary: - The speakers present a conspiratorial framing of Libya’s recent history and its global repercussions. They assert, “It’s a Chinese colony at this point,” implying foreign influence over Libya and its trajectory. - They claim that “the West and Hillary blows up Gaddafi,” arguing that those who were aligned with the West retaliated against Muammar Gaddafi. They further state that Gaddafi had “invested everything with the West, came and apologized,” and describe NATO as “the defensive alliance” that “went and just murdered Gaddafi for no reason.” - Gaddafi is portrayed in softened, almost heroic terms: “One’s Gaddafi, you know, the crazy colonel,” but the speakers emphasize that “the point was he was for the people.” They describe him as “a statesman,” noting that “he literally lived in a tent.” - The economic and infrastructural claims are central to their narrative: they say “98% of the state money coming in and oil went to not just his people, Africa,” and that he was “building real infrastructure” with a “whole plan to link up” with Africa. They imply that his policies would have connected Africa regionally rather than remaining separate from the rest of the continent. - They allege that the killing of Gaddafi was part of a broader, destabilizing plan: “they came and killed him,” and as a result, “now all of Africa’s collapsing because they blew up the South Point and the North Point.” They attribute these upheavals to “the globalist deliberately blow[ing] that up for destabilization.” - The discussion turns to population movements: they claim that “the population will be moved here and to Europe as it already is being in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, of course.” The speaker asserts personal certainty about this trend: “I know I see it so, so clearly.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's a Chinese colony at this point. Speaker 1: Exactly. And then the West and Hillary blows up Gaddafi. As you know, invested everything with the West, came Speaker 0: and apologized. Yeah. NATO, the defensive alliance called NATO, defensive alliance went and just murdered Gaddafi for no reason. Speaker 1: And and those that don't, I Qaddafi is more of research team. A statesman, he literally lived in a tent. 98% of the state money coming in and oil went to not just his people, Africa. And he was building real infrastructure and had a whole plan to link up with and they then they came and killed him. And now all of Africa's collapsing because they blew up the South Point and the North Point. One's Gaddafi, you know, the crazy colonel. The point was he was for the people, and the and down here was this. And now the globalist deliberately blow that up for destabilization. Yeah. And the Speaker 0: population will be moved here and to Europe as it already is being in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, of course. I know I see it so, so clearly,
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 10, 2025 at 4:49 PM
Saved - October 10, 2025 at 11:42 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe Qatar’s training facility at Mountain Home is a hosted U.S. contingent, similar to Singapore’s F-15 training and Dutch pilots in New Mexico. Qatar’s $12B F-15QA purchase requires U.S.-based training, and Mountain Home fits. This is reciprocity—Al Udeid and CENTCOM bolster security, Gaza mediation advanced ties, and routine alliances boost Idaho’s economy and defense. President Trump knows what he’s doing.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

My thoughts Why Qatar is Building a Military Facility in Idaho: The U.S. Department of War has authorized Qatar to build a training facility at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, for its F-15QA pilots… is this a good idea? For starters, this isn’t a sovereign Qatari base but a hosted training contingent under U.S. control… which is VERY similar to Singapore’s F-15 training at the SAME BASE since 2009 or Dutch F-16 pilots in New Mexico. We also provide training to Qatari military personnel in Florida, notably at Tyndall Air Force Base Alliances matter in the Middle East, NOT JUST FROM ISRAEL (For Last) Qatar’s $12 billion F-15QA purchase requires U.S.-based training for compatibility. Mountain Home’s infrastructure suits this perfectly. Say it with me… “Reciprocity”… The U.S. operates Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, CENTCOM’s hub, extended in 2024 and critical for anti-ISIS missions. Also, Qatar played a KEY ROLE in the Gaza cease-fire mediation, which promoted prompted a U.S. security guarantee, with this facility cementing ties. And that was DESPITE the FACT that Netanyahu attacked inside Qatar potentially trying to sabotage the progress. The fact is… This is routine for U.S. alliances—think German pilots at Holloman AFB or NATO exercises in Texas. It enhances joint defense, boosts Idaho’s economy, and counters the radical proxies within Iran. The bottom line is, President Trump knows what he’s doing.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

Laura Loomer is gonna freak… The U.S. and Qatar signed an agreement to establish a Qatari Emiri Air Force training facility at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, for joint training with Qatari F-15 jets and pilots, leveraging Qatar's role in peace talks and prior defense deals. https://rumble.com/v704o1q-u.s.-qatar-deal-qatari-air-force-training-facility-at-idaho-base-for-joint-.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
We also value the close cooperation between Doha and Washington that led to the signing of the Gaza peace plan on October 8. This historic achievement underscore what can be accomplished when our nations work together with courage and trust amongst other partners such as Egypt and Turkey. We further welcome today's signing of the letter of acceptance establishing a Qatari Amir Air Force facility at Mountain Home Air Base in Idaho. This step strengthen interoperability, enhance joint readiness, and advance our shared defense goals. Mister secretary, together, we will continue to deepen the strategic partnership in pursuit of lasting peace and shared security. Thank you very much. Absolutely. Thank you. We wish you that Sign now. Signed trade. How about that? Yeah.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We also value the close cooperation between Doha and Washington that led to the signing of the Gaza peace plan on October 8. This historic achievement underscore what can be accomplished when our nations work together with courage and trust amongst other partners such as Egypt and Turkey. We further welcome today's signing of the letter of acceptance establishing a Qatari Amir Air Force facility at Mountain Home Air Base in Idaho. This step strengthen interoperability, enhance joint readiness, and advance our shared defense goals. Mister secretary, together, we will continue to deepen the strategic partnership in pursuit of lasting peace and shared security. Thank you very much. Absolutely. Thank you. We wish you that Sign now. Signed trade. How about that? Yeah.
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 10, 2025 at 3:44 PM
Saved - October 10, 2025 at 7:25 PM

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

👀 The First Lady, Melania Trump, says she’s had “BackChannel” Communications with President Putin for Months to reunite children displaced by the war in Ukraine Kiril Dmitriev, Putin’s special envoy, is all over this right now posting 🐇. https://rumble.com/v704n5u-melania-trump-backchannel-comms-with-putin-to-reunite-children.html https://t.co/s1Y8LXZJet

Video Transcript AI Summary
A Child Soul, no snow borders, no flags. Remast poster a future for our children. The transcript states that since August, “the president putin responded in writing signaling a willness to engaged we we me directly An outlining details reguarding the ucrainian children risiding in Russia,” and that “An open channel of communication reguarding the welfare of this children.” Putin and the speaker have maintained direct contact on the welfare of Ukrainian children in Russia, with a representative working with Putin’s team to share the safe reunification of children with their families between Russia and Ukraine. In the past 24 hours, eight Ukrainian children have been regimeined with families: three separated from parents due to front-line fighting; five across borders; one girl not yet reunited. The Russian Federation provided biographies and photographs, plus an overview of social, medical and psychological services; the US confirmed the facts. A joint verification was prepared by Ukraine’s human rights commissioner and the Russian presidential commissioner for children’s rights. A First Lady initiative is built on shared purpose; the mission is to facilitate transparent health-information exchange and reunification until home. Russia has agreed to rejoin the individuals.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A Child Soul, no snow borders, no flags. Remast poster a future for our children. Wich is rich with potential, security and complete with free wheel. O world were James will be realist reather than fated by war. Much has unfold it since president put and received my letter last august. He respondend in writing signaling a willness to engaged we we me directly An outlining details reguarding the ucrainian children risiding in Russia. In since then, president Putin and I have had hand open channel of communication reguarding the welfare of this children. For the pastry monds. Bow size have partecipated in several back channel meetings My rappresentative has been working directly with president Putin's team. Toen share the save reunification of children wither families, between Russia and Ucraina. Infact, a children have been regioined, beather families, during the pass, tweny four hours. It child has leave intermole because of the war in Ucraina. Three were separatid from the parents and displayd the russion federation because of front line fighting. The other five were separata from family members o crossborders Because of the conflict. Including one young girl who can't know been reunited from Ucraina to Russia. Situation. The russion federation provider biographes and photographes of it child in theast weeks reunification. Along with and overview of the social medical and psychological services a forded today ucrainian children. Forder. I've a provider ad Italy report, wich verified, the identities and circumstances of this eight individuals. The US Government conferm the fax, contain retin this document a acurate. It is important to note the original verification report was jointly prepared but the commissioner of the war call four na rada of Ucraina for human rights and office of the russian presidential commissioner for childrens rights. A first lady this season important initio defor me. Is built on shared purpose and lasting impact my on going mission is toolfall. To pre-ortes to optamize a transparent free flow exchange of health released information su running all children who have fail victim to this war and to facilitate the regular affumication of children with year families, antill each individual returns home. Additionally, I have race concernts reguarding dose cover miners, at the time, day were displayd by the war, but have since riched at Oldwood, encurrently reside in Russia. Give and the dangers of traversing this war torn regen. Their save return requires coordinated assistence. A cordenly, rush has agree to rejoin the inviduals
MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 9, 2025 at 11:30 PM
Saved - October 10, 2025 at 11:25 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m turning 41, but I don’t feel like celebrating. Our generation is losing the free Internet our fathers built. The promise of free information is becoming a tool of control, with countries implementing measures like digital IDs and mass scanning of messages. Dissent is being persecuted, and freedoms are vanishing while we remain unaware. We've been misled into believing our fight is against tradition and privacy, but in doing so, we risk our very existence. I refuse to celebrate; we are running out of time.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

🚨 BREAKING — The Owner of Telegram, Patel Durov, just posted a very concerning message about Free Speech.. I’m turning 41, but I don’t feel like celebrating. Our generation is running out of time to save the free Internet built for us by our fathers. What was once the promise of the free exchange of information is being turned into the ultimate tool of control. Once-free countries are introducing dystopian measures such as digital IDs (UK), online age checks (Australia), and mass scanning of private messages (EU). Germany is persecuting anyone who dares to criticize officials on the Internet. The UK is imprisoning thousands for their tweets. France is criminally investigating tech leaders who defend freedom and privacy. A dark, dystopian world is approaching fast — while we’re asleep. Our generation risks going down in history as the last one that had freedoms — and allowed them to be taken away. We’ve been fed a lie. We’ve been made to believe that the greatest fight of our generation is to destroy everything our forefathers left us: tradition, privacy, sovereignty, the free market, and free speech. By betraying the legacy of our ancestors, we’ve set ourselves on a path toward self-destruction — moral, intellectual, economic, and ultimately biological. So no, I’m not going to celebrate today. I’m running out of time. We are running out of time.

MJTruthUltra
Posted - October 9, 2025 at 10:46 PM
Saved - October 10, 2025 at 10:18 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared an update regarding Charlie Kirk, discussing Candace Owens' belief that there was no exit wound and that the bullet impacted his spine. She doubts it was a 30-06 bullet since it wasn't mentioned on his Death Certificate. After reviewing a video from the event, I noticed the back of Charlie's shirt moved upon impact, suggesting a bullet might have hit and separated his spine. I find this assessment plausible and have zoomed in on the footage to highlight the movement while removing the graphic content.

@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk Candace Owens believes 100% there was no exit wound and believes the bullet hit Charlie’s Spine, which stopped the bullet, but doesn’t believe it was a 30-06 bullet because it wasn’t listed on his Death Certificate 🔻 My Thoughts: I was sent a video from someone at the event, which after review, shows the back of Charlie Kirk’s shirt move back upon impact, then to the front, like a reverberation (Kinetic), and I too felt it seemed plausible a bullet possibly hit and separated his spine upon impact. So I am in somewhat agreement with @RealCandaceO assessment. I zoomed the footage in to show it better and cut out the graphic part. Clip https://rumble.com/v703lde-candace-believes-there-was-no-exit-wound-100.html Spine https://rumble.com/v6zh59o-a-new-angle-shows-the-back-of-charlie-kirks-shirt-move-back-upon-impact.html

Video Transcript AI Summary
Charlie Kirk was shot from the front, and the bullet did not exit. At least a fragment of the bullet was recovered from his neck. They did not recover a bullet from a 30 odd six. There is not one reflected onto Charlie Kirk's death certificate because they did not recover a bullet from a 30 od six. Andrew has claimed that he had a conversation with the surgeon who offered up the idea that it really was just your modern Christian miracle. What are we to make of that? What are we to make of the fact that Charlie did not do that, actually? It means that he was shot with a completely different kind of gun, obviously.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is better when you're younger, but this seemed a little bit too performative. Now I can tell you the part that he is telling the truth about is that Charlie's neck indeed did stop the bullet without question. Okay? And this is going to dispel a lot of theories that are out there, and I'm telling you this 100%. Charlie Kirk was shot from the front, and the bullet did not exit. And at least a fragment of the bullet was recovered from his neck. And I'm going to tell you exactly where it was recovered from. I have fact checked this information from multiple sources now. I've actually been sitting on this for a little bit over a week Right around here. So think about almost in line with your shoulder blade right in the center. Now why is that helpful? Because it gives us a bullet trajectory. Okay? Went in here where you saw that, and it was stopped and a fragment was pulled from think right if you're just touching your spine in line, with your shoulder blade. That leads us obviously to the part that he's maybe not being forthcoming about. They did not recover a bullet from a 30 odd six. They didn't recover a bullet from a 30 odd six. This didn't happen. Okay? They had found a 30 ott six bullets. Charlie's death certificate certainly would have reflected that. In suicide in suicide situations, that's just one example, medical examiners feel free to chime in. I've spoken to quite a few. But when the gun and the bullet are known, they are reflected onto the death certificate. Okay? There is not one reflected onto Charlie Kirk's death certificate because they did not recover a bullet from a 30 od six. Hunters and military men rejoice. It turns out that common sense still rules the roost. Okay? You guys were right. You were absolutely right. And this is why I hate politics because it requires us to submit to the idea that we were all somehow born yesterday. That it really can just life really can just be a Marvel comic with people that are, I guess, DC comic where there are men of steel that are able, because they're young, to stop 3,000 pounds of energy that is coming at them. That didn't happen. So where does that leave us guys? Well, the part that is now extraordinarily suspicious is that Andrew has claimed that he had a conversation with the surgeon who offered up the idea that it really was just your modern Christian miracle. That Charlie was just young and his bones had a lot of density, which made him stronger somehow than a cape buffalo. Enough push ups in asparagus, and you too can stop 3,000 pounds of energy coming at you. What are we to make of that? What are we to make of the fact that Charlie did not do that, actually? It means that he was shot with a completely different kind of gun, obviously. Okay?
View Full Interactive Feed