reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@KimDotcom - Kim Dotcom
The deep state media lies and lies and lies to the American people and when someone comes forward with the truth they want to help the Government to destroy them. The US has reached a new low and I feel sorry for Americans. The worst is yet to come. https://t.co/DLN3BjQLaZ
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the role of media corporations in hiding important information and punishing whistleblowers. They argue that true journalists should celebrate those who expose government lies, but instead, media corporations collaborate with the government to keep secrets and punish leakers. The speaker questions how journalists can hide the fact that the US is in a direct hot war with Russia, suggesting that their loyalty lies more with the government than with the American people. They emphasize the importance of defending truth tellers and not abetting lies in a country built on falsehoods.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Coming on. I I should say and I I don't know. Just be quiet and let you speak since you know this better than anyone. But we left out a lot of details that are being in the Washington Post and New York Times, etcetera, tonight about the leaker and where this all came from. Because, honestly, I don't believe anything.
And it's very hard to know what's true. We're all being spun. We're all being lied to. And we just didn't wanna repeat the lies. So with that, what do you make of this?
Speaker 1: I can't think of a incident, Tucker, that reveals more vividly the real function of our nation's largest media corporations than what just happened here. If you're a real journalist, somebody who's devoted to transparency, Bringing shining a light on the most powerful government actors when they lied to the American people and informing the public. You would be celebrating this person Who stepped forward and risked his security to show his fellow citizens that the government was lying about this incredibly important war with a nuclear armed power that we have actual troops deployed on the ground in Ukraine. There's gonna be no diplomatic resolution throughout least 2023. That Zelensky is planning on using our weapons to strike deep into Russia, which we were told would never happen, risking escalation.
He did the job of what journalists claim to do, which is show the public the truth. If you work for the intelligence agencies, you would be furious at this person. You would hate him imposed. All the people who were at that Pentagon briefing today think the way the CIA and the Pentagon thing. They hate this person.
It was the New York Times and the Washington Post That did the FBI's work and found the leaker and led the FBI to him. They're demanding that he be punished. They're demanding that the government clamp down And keep things more and more secret. What kind of journalist would ever do that? Would wanna seal, leak, or expose, and punish, and then demand that the government Keep even more secret.
But that is what this these these media corporations are there to do. They love leaks When the CIA and Homeland Security tell them to leak, that's when they disseminate propaganda to the public. Like they did during the Trump years when they leaked rep the transcript between Michael Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak, the most serious kind of leaking crime. The Washington Post did that. Nobody looked for that leaker.
Nobody cared. Everybody cheered. Because it served the interests of the security state. But when it comes to transparency that undermines the agenda of these agencies and that proves to the American people what the truth is, rep It's amazing that these journalists are on the side of the government and will actually hunt down the leaker and demand that he be punished even more.
Speaker 0: I just don't understand how any journalist could collaborate in hiding the fact that we're in a direct hot war with Russia. Maybe you support that, maybe you don't. But how could you hide something that's significant? The most significant fact of our generation from the public. How could you do that?
Speaker 1: It the only answer is that you don't actually have a journalistic mindset that you far more by with your with your job is working for the government, then working for the American people. If you look at the history of the most important journalism stories, it's exactly Insiders like Daniel Ellsberg sees that the government is lying to the American people about the war in Vietnam. Saying we're winning, when in reality privately, rep they're saying we're losing and he goes and he shows the the American people the truth. Or Edward Snowden who heard James Clapper falsely deny the NSA was spying on American
Speaker 0: you have to defend truth tellers. You cannot abet lying if you have an entire country based on lies.
@WatcherGuru - Watcher.Guru
JUST IN: US Congressman says Government is using "mafia tactics" to investigate Elon Musk because he exposed their censorship regime.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk, once a Democrat supporter, has become critical of the Biden administration and exposed their censorship regime. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has initiated two investigations into Musk, while Mark Zuckerberg spent $400 million secretly supporting Democrats during the 2020 elections without facing any investigations. These actions are perceived by the American public as mafia-like tactics, where those who pay are ignored, and those who obstruct are punished. The public is aware of these tactics and their implications.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: General Garland. Elon Musk was a Democrat who admittedly supported Biden, but then he became a critic of the administration and exposed the censorship regime. Now, per Republic reports, the DOJ has opened not 1 but 2 investigations of Elon Musk. Mark Zuckerberg, on the other hand, spent $400,000,000 in 2020 tilting the elections secretly for Democrats. No investigations whatsoever.
To the American public, these look like mafia tactics. You pay your money, we look the other way. You get in our way, we punish you. The American public sees what these tactics are.
@TaraBull808 - TaraBull
CNN calls 𝕏 a mess while simultaneously admitting the platform is "very very influential" Who else loves watching CNN fall apart over Elon Musk giving the power back to the people? https://t.co/I2OQg0hCAj https://t.co/I2OQg0hCAj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk conducted an unscientific poll on X, asking users if Alex Jones should be reinstated on the platform. 70% of users voted in favor of bringing Jones back. Musk and Jones then participated in an audio chat on X, along with other controversial figures. CNN correspondent Donnie O'Sullivan commented on the situation, stating that Twitter has become a platform for conspiracy theorists and extremists. He also highlighted Musk's journey down the rabbit hole and his association with concerning individuals. This development raises concerns about the future of platforms like X, as well as other platforms like YouTube and Meta that have allowed the spread of election lies. The pendulum seems to be swinging back towards a more extreme and divisive online environment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A lot
Speaker 1: of people attack Musk on Twitter. You know, I trend all the time. Hey. If you're if you're such an absolutist on free speech, bring back Alex Jones. I understand that if he did that, the ADL and others would really be able to you probably shut down Twitter.
So so I understand that he needs to, you know, go through a process before he does that.
Speaker 2: So that was right wing extremist, as. Jones days ago making the case to Tucker Carlson that users want him back on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. He was banned
Speaker 0: free For posts that were previously
Speaker 2: cited for violence, harassment, and hate speech, this morning, though, he's back on x, thanks to the new owner, Elon Musk. Musk did a very unscientific poll of asking people on X if Jones should be reinstated. 70% said yes.
Speaker 0: And overnight, Jones and Musk took free part in an audio chat on X, which included Vivek Ramaswami, Mike Flynn, and Andrew Tate, a self proclaimed misogynist influencer. I'm free. CNN correspondent Donnie O'Sullivan joins us now. I'm having a bit of a tough time keeping it go ahead, Donnie. Please tell us what we need to know before I start talking.
Speaker 3: Free Well, I well, I think if you bring back up that full screen there of that cast of characters, who are on that Twitter Twitter audio stream last night, I mean, that is free Twitter right now, to be honest with you. That's Elon Musk, Alex Jones, Flynn. I mean, the platform is is free Obviously, a mess. And, you know, people people don't have to use it, but they do use it. And it is still very, very very influential.
So it drives a lot of the news agenda. And what we're really seeing it become now, I think, is this you know, after the January 6th free Attack. A lot of these big conspiracy theorists, including Donald Trump, got kicked off the platform. And that drove a lot of people to These kind of alternative platforms, some places where extremism and hate can really fester. Now X, free One of the biggest platforms in the world, that is the platform.
That is the alternative platform, but it's it's mainstream. And I think, free. You know, we also have to stop thinking about this stuff, like somebody like Jones now
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 3: As a fringe character. Right. I mean, he's not. You you saw how big a role he played in the stop the steel movement that has an ear to the the former president, essentially.
Speaker 2: And that 70% of now qualifying this with that's what X is now, but 70% of users on XSED put him back on free After Elon Musk said just last November, quote, I have no mercy explaining why he wasn't reinstating, I'm free. Jones's account. I have no mercy for anyone who would use the deaths of children for gain, politics, or fame. So what changed?
Speaker 3: Free I mean, I think what we're seeing with Elon Musk is a very public journey Down the rabbit hole.
Speaker 2: Journey.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah. You know, I mean, I think he's gone deeper and deeper, and then you sort of see the cast of characters that he's, free hanging out with, I mean, quite concerning if, you know, one of the richest, most powerful men in the world is free is amplifying, these voices and choosing to amplify that. So I think that's what we're seeing here. And, look, I think just pulling this free back very broadly.
We can talk about how, you know, crazy some of the stuff Alex Jones says, but I really this paints a picture. It sets the stage, I think, as we go into 2024 for a platform like X, which is just gonna be totally off the rails. But also then we've seen YouTube and Meta, other platforms, allowing election lies. Meta recently, free It emerged that it's going to take money. We'll take money from candidates, to allow them to promote lies that say the 2020 election free That was stolen.
Right. All as we go in to next year.
Speaker 0: Yeah. The the pendulum swinging back. Yeah. It has been, something to watch. I don't know where the line be, but it has been very clearly shifting back the other way.
Don't
@lakemonstercl1 - 🇺🇸Steve2A🇺🇸God🇺🇸Family🇺🇸Country🇺🇸
Everyone is waking up to the fact that the MSM and others are lying about President Trump! Even Silicon Valley Billionaires! https://t.co/IcUz1uxsOv
Video Transcript AI Summary
A Silicon Valley billionaire, Chamath Palihapitiya, shared his positive experience meeting President Trump at a fundraiser. He mentioned that the media's portrayal of Trump is different from the person he met. Palihapitiya described Trump as charismatic, sharp, funny, polite, and kind, which was unexpected. He encouraged Democrats and Independents to interact with Trump in person to form their own opinions rather than relying on media narratives. Palihapitiya felt that his perception of Trump changed after their interaction.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's fascinating the number of people who are going to social media now and saying, you know what? I was wrong about this guy, and I wanna share with you a personal interaction I have. Never heard this guy's name before because I'm not big in Silicon Valley. I'm not big with tech billionaires, and I did not know who he was. Chamath Polypedia.
He's a Silicon Valley venture capitalist billionaire. He he hosted a a Trump fundraiser, right, in San Francisco. Trump comes. I saw some video. I saw some pictures of it.
It's a beautiful, elaborate event. It is lifestyles of the rich and famous, whatever. And this guy, Polyopedia, is sitting next to president Trump and has the occasion to just chat over a nice meal. And he went online and he and he very honestly said, you know what? The media lie about this guy.
This is not the guy I met. The man they want you to believe he is is not the man he is. And if more people would listen to me, maybe we could do away with this farcical depiction of Donald Trump. So here is here is this tech billionaire after sitting down and enjoying an evening with his wife, with president Trump. Listen.
Speaker 1: Give you two observations. The first is that I think that there is a huge gap between how the media tries to portray Donald Trump and what he's like when you meet him in person, and that gap is really wide. And so I would say specifically to Democrats and Independents, you really do need to sit in the room and feel what it's like. He David David is right. He is charismatic.
He's intellectually sharp, and he's funny. And when you put that together, he can engage an audience for a long time and be totally extemporaneous. The other thing I would say that is that he is very polite, and he's kind in a way that was disarming and was not what I expected. And so I felt that I had misjudged him many years in the past, and so I was very glad that I had an opportunity to sit beside him and to actually interact with him 1 on 1. It was really, really engaging.
Speaker 0: So that is just an esoteric vibe. This is what I got. I'm sitting with him. I talked to him. I break bread with him.
I hear what he talks about. Totally not what I had gotten in my mind, not what the media had portrayed. They lie about what this guy is.
reSee.it AI Summary
Channel 4 aired a critical segment on X and Elon Musk, suggesting his far-right views are causing issues. They featured Nina Jankowicz, known for her controversial take on disinformation, adding to the narrative.
@BGatesIsaPyscho - Concerned Citizen
Legacy Media Channel 4 in UK Just ran a hit piece on X & Elon Musk Presenter - “Musk has caused all this trouble with his Far Right views this side on the pond” They then cut to former US Disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz who was made famous for this ridiculous little number on the subject. 🤡🌎
Video Transcript AI Summary
Information laundering occurs when lies are made to sound credible by being repeated in Congress or mainstream outlets. This hides the lie and makes the information's origins seem less atrocious. Examples include Rudy Giuliani's statements on Ukraine and TikTok influencers claiming COVID can cause pain. People should take note of information laundering and not support lies with their wallet, voice, or vote.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Alluring is really quite ferocious. It's when a hopster takes some lies and makes them sound precocious by saying them in congress or a mainstream outfit. So this information's origins are slightly less atrocious. It's how you hide a little hide a lie. It's how you hide a little hide a lie.
It's how you hide a little hide a lie when Rudy Giuliani shared that in terms on Ukraine. Or when TikTok influences say COVID can cause pain. They're laundering to sinful when we really should take note and not support their lies with our wallet voice or vote. Oh, information laundering is really quite ferocious. It's when a Huxley takes some lies and makes them sound precocious by saying them in congress.
Remains remarket's notice. Information's origin seems likely less atrocious.
reSee.it AI Summary
I've been observing a concerning trend where governments and influential figures are pushing for mass censorship, particularly targeting platforms like Twitter. This has been a coordinated effort involving various political leaders and intelligence agencies, aiming for total control over information. The Twitter Files have exposed deep ties between these entities and censorship operations, revealing tactics borrowed from military strategies. The narrative suggests a looming totalitarianism, as legacy media and tech companies align to suppress dissent and manipulate public discourse.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
First Brazil and now the EU say they will seize the assets of @ElonMusk's companies. A President Harris would do the same. They know it's illegal. They know it looks bad. They don't care. They know they can't rule the world without mass censorship and total information control.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
They've been preparing us mentally for weeks, months, and years. Recently it was Gates, Clinton, and Kerry. Before that, it was Obama, Biden, and Harris. Before that it was Aspen, Harvard, Stanford, the UN, the WEF, the EU, and IC intermediaries.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
Around the world, legacy media are urging mass censorship. They want the government to transfer wealth from social media companies to them. Their journalist-employees are petty authoritarians filled with status anxiety & envy who are desperate to censor what we can say online.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
Their goal has always been total control. They had quietly put in place all the key pieces: mass censorship in EU, UK, Irish, Aus, CA, BR, et al, with DHS-led censorship in US. The purchase of Twitter by @elonmusk threw a wrench in their plans. But it also accelerated them.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
@elonmusk The Twitter Files revealed mass censorship operations by DHS and "former" CIA people to control its censorship ("content moderation") from inside the company
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
@elonmusk DHS used think tanks tied to the Intelligence Community for mass censorship. Its Cyber Threat Intelligence League created a handbook based on US military operations abroad. Then, Stanford's "Election Integrity Partnership" & "The Virality Project" did election & Covid censorship
Video Transcript AI Summary
Renee DiResta of the Stanford Internet Observatory gave a presentation at the Cybersecurity Summit about the "power of partnerships" in combating "mis and disinformation." She highlighted the collaboration between CISA, Stanford, University of Washington, Graphica, and the Atlantic Council's DFR Lab.
DiResta discussed the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which aimed to identify and respond to mis/disinformation targeting the 2020 election. The EIP involved students, government, and civil society organizations to flag concerns, analyze data, and track narratives. Social media platforms acted on 75% of flagged "tickets."
Following the election, SIO launched the Virality Project to combat COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, partnering with federal, state, and local stakeholders. DiResta emphasized the need for a "center of excellence" within the federal government to coordinate efforts, prebunk narratives, and promote "resilience products." She argued for narrowly focused interventions on matters of national security, such as delegitimizing institutions. DiResta advocated for multi-stakeholder partnerships to facilitate communication and enable situational awareness while respecting civil liberties.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Somebody who appears to be a marginal player in the censorship industrial complex displaying her intellectual leadership and her institutional leadership and really envisioning this complex coming to be. This is Renee D'Resta's Mona Lisa. This is her this is her this is her finest hour. This is, this is this is the most powerful that she's ever been, and let's hope ever will be. This is a video that she gave.
This is a video that Renee DiResta gives at the end of the 4th annual Cybersecurity Summit that's put on by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security. It was ostensibly around just physical infrastructure, including election infrastructure. And then as the head of the Department of Homeland Security under Obama was leaving in January 2017, they expanded its mission. They grew the mission so that it would then cover, the media coverage of elections. And so suddenly, its mandate significantly increased, and so that became the initial justification for basically this so called war on disinformation by this government agency working with proxies to do its dirty censorship business.
And so what this is about, this video is about creating a social norm that this is okay to do. That this is something that should be done. The US government agency should be working with Stanford University, which is where Renee DiResta works, University of Washington, Graphica, which is a think a research organization, and the DFR Lab, which is the disinformation forensics lab at the Atlantic Council, which is a big powerful think tank in both the United States and Europe. Sorry. Let's take a look.
Let's get into it. So you can see Renee Diresta, technical research manager, Stanford Internet Observatory. This is for the CSIS Cybersecurity Summit.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Renee DiResta, and I'm the research manager at Stanford Internet Observatory. Today, to kick off this session, I'm gonna be talking about the power of partnerships.
Speaker 0: Now I wanna stop with that. That's so this is about the power of partnerships. What she's referring to is the censorship industrial complex. That's what partnerships are. The partnership in this case is between the Department of Homeland Security Organization, CISA, the Cybersecurity Infrastructure, Security, Agency, and these particularly these four groups.
Stanford University of Washington, Atlantic Council's Disinformation Forensics Lab, and Graphica, which is a research organization, supposedly research organization. Those 4 groups are basically being subcontracted out by the US Department of Homeland Security to demand more censorship by social media platforms. That's what she's describing here, and I view this video as a way to sort of normalize this process of government censorship of social media platforms. There's an argument that's that's occurring right now where people say this is totally fine. Governments have a right to tell the platforms that they have an opinion about what they should have on the platforms.
And while that's technically true, when you have politicians, including the president of the United States, simultaneously threatening to take away their license to operate in the form of section 230, when Congress is actively, considering taking away section 230. And it's all happening behind closed doors, secretly, between these four groups and the social media platform executives. It's a secretive censorship process, and it has to be understood as that. This is not happening on the open. I think the videos, which, of course, nobody sees, nobody knows of, they don't publicize, they get creative to sort of say, hey.
Yeah. We were we were transparent about it, even though everything that they're describing in here that they were doing to pressure the social media platforms to censor more, was done secretly behind the scenes without any public transparency or visibility into what they were doing. So, again, it's the power of partnerships. Think of that as the power of the government to violate the First Amendment and censor private corporations without anybody knowing by using proxies, including organizations that are funded by the Department of Homeland Security, National Science Foundation, the Defense Department, and or other agencies.
Speaker 1: So our team at SIO and SIS's team have done some pioneering work in partnership thinking about how to respond to mis and disinformation in areas in which you can have significant harm.
Speaker 0: And just keep in mind, SIO is Stanford Internet Observatory. That's where their organization is based. I think it's also important to point out this point that Renee DiResta finally was forced to admit that she had been a CIA fellow, and that was something that she had not publicly disclosed in any event. And it came out it was discovered by Mike Benz going through many, many YouTubes where it sort of slipped out in some introduction that he made of her at Stanford a few years ago, but she was finally forced to admit that she has had the CIA tie for almost 2 decades.
Speaker 1: One of those areas is elections, and I'm gonna talk about some learnings from work that we did on that topic today. So in August 2020, students from the Stanford Internet Observatory were doing an internship with CISA, and they identified a massive gap in the capability of federal, state, and local governments to become aware of, to analyze, and to rapidly respond to mis and disinformation, both foreign and domestic, targeting the 2020 election.
Speaker 0: So this is a I have to say, I don't believe this story that she's telling. So she's saying that these students at Stanford themselves just were like, hey, there's this missing role for some institution that should be involved in basically demanding social media censorship of information that we call disinformation or misinformation. I'm highly skeptical of that. It sounds like it came right from Renee Di Resto or one of her colleagues, but that they're sort of putting on the students to make it sound like it wasn't part of some broader plan, which I believe has been going on here to increase government censorship of social media platforms. So I'm skeptical of that claim that she just made.
Speaker 1: Now that gap had several components. The federal government wasn't prepared to identify and analyze election mis and disinfo.
Speaker 0: So the first thing she says is why do we need it? Because the government wasn't prepared to do it. They just didn't have the staff or the capability to do it. Okay? That's the first thing she says.
And of course, those that believe in free speech are like, that's a good thing. The government has no capability to put pressure on social media platforms to censor Americans for their speech.
Speaker 1: There was no clear federal lead to coordinate the work.
Speaker 0: So there's no clear federal lead. There wasn't somebody in government that you could call up and say, hey, we need to demand that Facebook take this post down.
Speaker 1: Because the IC, of course, is rightly limited to a foreign focus, and the FBI also has very specific designations limitations.
Speaker 0: So she's used a bit of jargon there. So, you know, IC, of course, is the is the intelligence community. And I think showing this is a video for a specialized audience, but she's saying, you know, the intelligence community is focused on foreign threats as it should be because the creators of our country did not want our police spying on us for the things that we said. That would be a violation of the first amendment. So she says, the intelligence community doesn't do it.
And then she kinda goes, the FBI also really doesn't do it either. It's like, well, yeah. However, of course, as we've also discovered in the Twitter files, there was this thing called the Foreign Influence Task Force that the FBI was part of that was involved in surveilling and monitoring and demanding the censorship of disfavored speech.
Speaker 1: CISA had created support, but had no real capability. There were unclear legal authorities, including very real first amendment questions.
Speaker 0: Oh, so there it is. There it is. There's sort of the key to the whole thing. Of course, there were some, I mean, there were some free speech questions, like, how would you actually get away with having the government empower, private organizations like Stanford to demand censorship by social media companies. So, yeah, there were some real concerns there.
To be she wants to seem like she's taking these First Amendment concerns seriously by just mentioning it. But as you realize when you watch this, she suggests nothing to protect against violation of the First Amendment. The whole enterprise is a violation of the first amendment and so just sort of talking about it is supposed to kind of reassure you. You have to think that some of the audience for this are the elected officials, other people in government, the people at Department of Homeland Security who might be like, hey, isn't this gonna violate the First Amendment? And her being like, well, of course, we're taking that totally seriously as we develop our partnerships even though the partnership itself is the violation of the First Amendment.
Speaker 1: There is no expertise resident within the federal government to analyze public content across platforms to identify trends and risks. There's a lack of reporting mechanisms for state and local partners to service activity that they saw building in their communities to help them understand it.
Speaker 0: In other words, there was nobody in government at the federal or the local level who was already spying on Americans for what they were saying on social media platforms. That's what she's saying. There wasn't somebody that was out there spying on all the social media platforms at the same time to see what they were saying. There was no government surveillance of speech in the United States, and we realized that was a real gap. Like, that's what she's saying here.
I mean, I just think it's kind of shocking when you really appreciate and she's doing it in this particular thing that you get out of a lot when people are often delivering super controversial hot things in politics, whatever. Just kind of kind of making it sound super normal. And we just some students just identified a gap and that there's no surveillance of Americans for what they're saying and no concerted effort to censor them. And we realized that that was a gap. It's like a gap.
That's like the benefit of living in a free country, a free free society.
Speaker 1: The federal government was building relationships with tech platforms, but there's a healthy distrust both ways for a good reason. So a trusted, nonpartisan partnership with expertise in the way that misinformation moved on public platforms, with analysts capable of understanding public conversations and a broad ability to explore publicly available data was needed.
Speaker 0: She just described the censorship industrial complex. That is the censorship industrial complex. She's saying we need organizations that are that are supposedly nonpartisan objective, ex full of experts who can evaluate what people are saying on different social media platforms, involve the government, and then demand censorship. That's what she's saying here. One of their responses to our reporting on them is to say that, hey.
We weren't doing any censorship. We were just doing research. But the research was all in service of demanding the censorship by the social media platforms of these disfavored voices and disfavored posts relating to disfavored narratives, like, namely vaccine hesitancy or election skepticism.
Speaker 1: So in response, SIO began to envision infrastructure capable of real time observation and reporting on election related misinformation.
Speaker 0: SIO is the Stanford Internet Observatory. So what she's saying is, so SIO started to envision this way to report in real time on what people are saying in social media platforms so that we can censor them. That's what she's saying right here, right now. And she's doing it in a way that I think is very sophisticated. It's designed to make you comfortable with this kind of surveillance of political speech in the United States.
Speaker 1: Targeted at disenfranchising voters and eroding public confidence in the legitimacy of our elections.
Speaker 0: So she wants to choose 2 things that she thinks they can actually legally justify. Now remember, it's important to remember the supreme court really protects a a broad amount of free speech. Really everything except for, you know, lying to commit fraud and immediate incitement of violence. Like, for example, some of the violence that we saw against Riley Gaines in San Francisco, where people are saying, hurt that person, beat up that person, and the person is right there. To expand it to then say, well, we're gonna go after speech that raises questions about the legitimacy of institutions or elections.
You've already gone way beyond what the First Amendment, that First Amendment allows that you've gone way beyond what the Supreme Court is willing to constrain and and prohibit under the constitution.
Speaker 1: We facilitated the formation of a highly impactful coalition Here you can see the combined skills of 4 leading research institutions, underpinned by the enthusiastic support of trained students researchers. And this became the Election Integrity Partnership, which interfaced with election officials, civil society orgs, platforms, and the public to share data driven analysis and real time observations around voting related misinformation circulating during the 2020 election. We had narrowly tailored scope
Speaker 0: Here, she says very clear. She says, this is a very narrow scope. She wants to emphasize that. This is very we're only gonna censor, you know, legitimate free speech very narrowly.
Speaker 1: Focused on false and misleading narratives specific to voting. And the project was built with the intent to plug the gaps for the 2020 election, but it became something else as well. A first prototype of a nonpartisan model for collaborative, multi stakeholder analysis of mis and disinformation.
Speaker 0: In other words, it became the first attempt, the first big project of the censorship industrial complex. And so they wanted to choose something that they felt was the least controversial, which would be censoring information, censoring false information about where people could go to be elected. I mean, the or to to vote, I should say. And censoring information as we saw about absentee ballots. And, you you know, you sort of go, well, that's it's kinda you well, that seems okay.
I mean, you don't want to have lies on these social media platforms about when the voting day is. But then it suddenly became, well, it's not safe to do vote by mail. Well, if you say it's not safe or it's not reliable, it's not getting into the realm of opinion, maybe that's your opinion that there's some risk that if the mailman takes your vote rather than you drop it off at the voting place, that it is less safe. So you you you see how quickly it's not a slippery slope. It's more like this thing that you might get everybody in the society to agree is legitimate to, put some pressure on the social media companies to to censor, very then quickly kinda goes, well, then we should also censor this idea that mail in balloting is not safe.
So it's a very it's not a slippery slope. It's like an immediate, move in either direction.
Speaker 1: The Election Integrity Partnership started in September 2020. We had stakeholder types who could surface instances of concern.
Speaker 0: Stakeholder types. So government, civil society platforms, media. So so so these are the people that are gonna be demanding the censorship.
Speaker 1: Civil society and government flagged things that were emerging in their communities.
Speaker 0: So they're spying on their neighbors.
Speaker 1: Our own analysts did proactive detection as well.
Speaker 0: We also spied on people.
Speaker 1: We created tickets and an NKQ to track the evolution of incidents over time to see if false or misleading claims were gaining in reach or velocity.
Speaker 0: That's the key here. So it's important to understand that these guys are really not out to censor every last thing. They don't need total control over the over the discourse, over the communications environment. They're looking specifically to stop things that go viral. They're looking to stop stuff that reaches a lot of people.
So that's her emphasis. That's what Renee is constantly emphasizing here. And in fact, it's such a main focus that the next version of this partnership is called the Virality Project, and it's specifically focused on stopping viral narratives that result in vaccine hesitancy.
Speaker 1: There were multiple tiers of analysis ensuring that any particular incident or piece of content had several pairs of eyes on it. And as analysis went on, we closed the loop with the reporting stakeholder to help ensure that they understood the dynamics of whatever had inspired their concern. Now sometimes these false and misleading narratives went nowhere. People are wrong on the internet regularly, and it's not a cause for concern.
Speaker 0: We don't worry about it when people when it doesn't go viral.
Speaker 1: But other times, however, things that are false or misleading do begin to go wildly viral, and local election officials and platform integrity teams alike needed a way to distinguish between the two to help them determine their response. Some of you may recall the dynamics of what came to be known as Sharpiegate, in which voters in Maricopa County, Arizona became deeply concerned about the pens they were given to mark their ballots. This situation progressed from what we call sense making, just communities of people trying to figure out what happened, to deep concern, to a conspiracy theory that supporters of president Trump specifically were being targeted. And these concerns later evolved into in person protest. This became something of a pattern in our analysis observations.
A first person photo or video documented a purported incident. Social media discussion elevated it to a narrative. And then at times, that progressed into a conspiracy theory. So we analyzed incidents and narratives both qualitatively, ascertaining the concern and ensuring that local officials who were attempting to respond understood the specifics. And we also assessed them quantitatively, looking at specific tweets and posts that precipitated massive virality and the widespread dissemination of false and misleading narratives.
We looked at network dynamics across the full political spectrum, at clusters of accounts that amplified messages, again because of genuine concern, but then also at what we called repeat spreaders, which were lynchpin accounts that regularly featured prominently in spreading demonstrably false or misleading claims.
Speaker 0: They literally call these folks super spreaders. It's amazing how much of the it's and what a what a funny coincidence is all being around later about the pandemic. But yeah. So these are the super spreaders of misinformation, which of course they now label people like me and other political opponents. Just people that you disagree with, they suddenly become super spreaders of misinformation.
Then you get them on blacklist of the social media companies, and voila. You've censored a whole group of people in your society, often without them knowing it.
Speaker 1: We assessed not only social media across all of these dynamics, but the interplay with media as well, recognizing the significant impact that kind of mid tier classes of transmitters, influencers, and hyper partisan media had on shaping the public discourse.
Speaker 0: This is really important to understand how they think about it. In other words, they're not just worried about getting censorship on social media platforms, they're also worried about controlling the media narrative, the broader news media narrative. So when you read Jacob Siegel's piece in tablet, that's what he's also talking about. He's saying the word censorship and the word propaganda aren't even enough to capture this complexity of just trying to control the entire information environment in a holistic way. So they're concerned about stuff going from the social media platforms into the news media.
And indeed, we saw that. So when these guys, the same folks, tried to stop the store the accurate story of Hunter Biden's laptop from spreading, they basically labeled it a not exactly a conspiracy theory, but Russian disinformation, which itself was, of course, disinformation. And then they wanted to they knew that the laptop story would get out. They just wanted to shape how it was interpreted by the national news media. And that's what they did.
And so that people thought, oh, the Honduran laptop sounds like Russian disinformation. It's probably not true. Of course, it was true. It wasn't Russian disinformation, but they were able to use, basically, what happened online as a reason to basically misdescribe a factual story as a potentially inaccurate one.
Speaker 1: We saw top down dynamics that came from media reporting a story and the public discussing it, but also increasingly things that came from the bottom up like Sharpiegate in which concerned members of the public would precipitate the narrative and it would ultimately be covered by these other types of participants leading to mass public awareness.
Speaker 0: You have to wonder, this was made in 2020 one. You have to wonder if they could have gotten if if like a national US government organization could have gotten away with putting the name of the president as a spreader of misinformation in one of its graphics a year earlier. I suspect not.
Speaker 1: Often before the claim had time to be fact checked or assessed in any way.
Speaker 0: It's also worth pointing out that Renee herself, you know, she she worked for the Democrats. She worked for the Democrats for the Senate Intelligence Committee. She gave the lead testimony. There's a very famous picture of her with Hillary Clinton. She's somebody who's been a Democratic party activist since since she lived in the Bay Area and really remains that today at Sanford.
Speaker 1: And while, unfortunately, the vast majority of voting related misinformation in the 2020 election was domestic, our team evaluated foreign activity as well, finding participation from Russia, Iran, and China in some unique and distinct ways.
Speaker 0: Of course, what's going on here is you see both with Peace Data, Proud Boys, these are these are both ostensibly real organizations. We now know that Proud Boys had a huge number of FBI infiltrators in it. We also know that people we think that, Peace Data also had a number of of real people following it and involved with it. So you're starting to get to a space of potentially, you know, being able to discredit and censor people that were actually involved in real politics, by by sort of smearing them as foreign disinformation.
Speaker 1: One of the key determinants in what goes viral across any topic is the policies that social media companies set. And so we additionally prioritized not only understanding and evaluating, but also constructively critiquing platform policies.
Speaker 0: So now they're saying we're gonna try to get in there and change the social the social media platform's policies. So now you have the US governments, you know, working with and funding, unaccountable private sector organizations to basically create new forms of censorship directly through the policies of these social media companies.
Speaker 1: At the start of EIP, not all platforms that we analyzed had election related policies. As we published our analyses publicly, most of those that did not added such policies.
Speaker 0: In other words, we got them to change their policies. That's kind of amazing. I mean, the ambition here and the success of it is pretty impressive when you consider it. They they actually did these things. They actually did this.
They actually engaged in the censorship and got policies changed at the platforms.
Speaker 1: Those that already had them often made them more comprehensive. We saw a real evolution over time. Several platforms, for example, implemented a repeat spreader strike system after the election and then have since applied it to other areas of misinformation that causes significant harm.
Speaker 0: So in other words, they tagged they put people on blacklists, and then they kept they kept adding, you know, they, flags or new new blacklists that they were on for other issues. So you're basically there's secret blacklists that that these US government partnered organizations created.
Speaker 1: The Election Integrity Partnership ended data collection on November 19, 2020. And during that time, the partnership processed 639 tickets on election related mis and disinformation.
Speaker 0: Now what are those tickets? These tickets are new I think most people hear them and they go, oh, a that's got a single post. It's not. It can contain thousands of tweets and Facebook posts in a single ticket. They can be the ticket is, like, gonna take can can involve thousands of people.
These are huge amounts. These tickets themselves are often connected to broader narratives that they're looking to censor.
Speaker 1: Of which 72% were related to delegitimizing the election results. Tech platform partners, Twitter, Google, Facebook, and TikTok responded directly to 75% or more of tickets in which they were tagged.
Speaker 0: So they got the social media companies to to basically act on 75% of the tickets, which is pretty amazing. It's a very high level of responsiveness.
Speaker 1: A testament to both the high quality of reporting and the value of constructive relationships with the platforms.
Speaker 0: I mean, that's the creepy part of it. They kinda go, oh, it's a testament to the fact that we kinda got all cozy with them. You have to remember, you know, that ordinary people, including myself, when I was censored by we had no way of appealing. I try I even knew people at the company and tried to reach out to them. That's the main way that people try to deal with this.
There's no there's like a star chamber. There's a completely undemocratic process of being censored, and there's no appeals. But what they were doing behind the scenes because of their cozy little partnerships, they were able to get action on 75% of the things that they flagged.
Speaker 1: And although EIP did not make specific enforcement recommendations because those are the platforms to determine in accordance with its policies
Speaker 0: That's her way of saying we were not censoring. We did not actually do the censorship or say specifically what they should do. They would walk right up to it. You'd be like, this person is spreading false information that's hurting people in the real world. You you decide what to do, but we're saying, jeez.
What are you doing here? And then the pressure was put on by the politicians, from senators, members of congress, people in the White House, all basically working in concert as a single censorship industrial complex.
Speaker 1: 35% of the URLs flagged were actioned under remove, reduce, or inform policies.
Speaker 0: So 30 1 third of all the URL of all the web links, of all the URLs, the social media companies took action on them to reduce their spread. In the case of Google, it would be to not be picked up in the searches, to not go viral on Twitter or Facebook. I mean, that's amazing and shocking and disturbing. She's saying it worked. The the the the 1 third of all the things that we wanted of all 1 third of all the URLs we wanted censored were censored by the social media platforms.
Speaker 1: Again, helping contextualize for the public the content that they were seeing.
Speaker 0: That sounds very innocent. We were and some of them, it was just putting little labels on it to contextualize the context. Well or to contextualize the you know, to provide some context for it. Well, we saw that this was actually used to discredit accurate information. This was used to discredit Marshall, Martin Kildorf at Harvard University for saying that kids do not necessarily need to be vaccinated.
They put a flag on that. She's saying, provided more context. Actually, it can also provide mis and disinformation from the government. That's part of what's going on.
Speaker 1: Following the success of EIP and the certification of the 2020 election, SIO ramped down its monitoring and analysis capability because we thought that we were done with that work.
Speaker 0: Oh, we thought we were all done. Sure. Sure. He did.
Speaker 1: However, almost immediately, we recognized the need to ramp back up Oh. This time to support government health officials' efforts to combat misinformation targeting the COVID 19 vaccines.
Speaker 0: We didn't wanna keep going and keep censoring them. Like, we thought we were done, and then it just became clear we were gonna have to do it on COVID vaccines. It just became our obligation.
Speaker 1: In February 2021, we formally established the Virality Project, drawing on the same partners from EIP and adding a few more.
Speaker 0: So 2 months later, we started up again.
Speaker 1: And much like EIP, it focused on real time observation, analysis, and understanding of cross platform vaccine related misinformation. Over spring and summer 2021, VP partnered with federal, state, and local stakeholders as well as civil society organizations and coalitions of medical professionals to support their efforts to understand and counter vaccine hesitancy. Again, we set a very narrowly tailored scope focused on harms for this project as well.
Speaker 0: That's very important. So, again, she says it's very narrowly focused. She wants to know, look. We're not gonna abuse this extraordinary power to censor that we have. We're gonna just censor very narrowly.
And then she also says, to prevent harm. This is very important because, of course, that is the predicate for censorship that the Supreme Court has allowed some rule some room for, both in the case of fraud and in the case of incitement to violence. You can't engage in speech that is very closely tied to some harm. You can lie to the your lover. You can lie if you're a politician.
You can lie about what you think you're gonna do, but you can't lie in a way that that cheats somebody out of their money. Similarly, you can say all sorts of terrible racist, prejudiced things, but you can't do it in a way that would then actually cause a mob to kill somebody or hurt somebody. The courts have been pretty clear about that. So she's already saying we gotta focus on harm. I think the other issue about the harm thing is that we know that that's the number one value for progressives.
And this audience is mostly for Democrats. It's for, you know, people that hate Trump. It's for the anti disinformation crowd. And for those folks, these are the, you know, you know, liberals and progressives who see the highest causes preventing harm, not, for example, free speech. Harm trumps free speech, I think that's why it has that focus here too for her.
Speaker 1: We looked at 4 core categories of claims related to vaccines that actually dated back to the era of concerns about smallpox inoculation, safety, efficacy, and necessity, distribution, and then the evolution of some of these things into conspiracy theories. We began to observe that same progression, incidents, narratives, conspiracy theories, and a real attempt by the public to make sense of what they were seeing.
Speaker 0: I I think she's another trend we've seen is the abuse of this conspiracy theory stuff. They were censoring people complain about real vaccine side effects to then go and suggest that all those people, and she's not necessarily, she's just consistently emphasizing the conspiracy theory part of it, you start to conflate people raising genuine concerns about vaccine side effects with with the microchips being implanted in your arms type people or the or that it was all planned or whatever. So I do think that the conspiracy theory is one way that we've seen them really abuse their powers by overly labeling people that are raising genuine issues as conspiracies. Very similar to the way in which legitimate questions about COVID origin start to be conflated with with China creating a bioweapon on purpose. Exactly.
Speaker 1: Once again, our focus was on enabling situational awareness for a new set of outside partners, particularly civil society and health organizations that had very few other options for understanding the social media conversation.
Speaker 0: That means we're trying to expand the surveillance technologies of America's free speech online, expand those surveillance technologies to other government agencies. That's a very important trend we've seen here. They don't wanna just keep it all for themselves. They want a whole bunch of government agencies spying. So there's a lot of spying going on.
Speaker 1: One was the team behind the hashtag this is our shot. A collection of doctors and health care workers who really wanted to reach the public as trusted figures to show themselves receiving their vaccines. They wanted to know what narratives they, as doctors, could help counter, what misinformation they could help correct. But to do that, they needed to understand what was really trending or surfacing versus something that one of them might happen to see on social media. So once again, we worked with government stakeholders not only in facilitating that situational awareness and that that understanding of dynamics, but also in thinking about what role government should play here.
How could we constructively define misinformation, particularly in an environment like COVID with rapidly evolving scientific consensus?
Speaker 0: What gover what role government should play here? So you've already assumed the government should play a role. Why is government suddenly why do you assume that government should play a role at all? I mean, maybe it should. You just have a first amendment you need to worry about.
She hasn't established at all that the government is the best is would be best to do this. Why not just allow a free open discussion in the society like we have for 250 years? Why does the government have to be involved in surveilling people's speech online? And why would the government be involved in demanding that social media companies censor it? That's not a particularly American attitude.
She hasn't really made the case for it at all. She's just assuming that it needs to be done.
Speaker 1: How could we prioritize the preservation of freedom of expression while minimizing the most harmful rumors and conspiracy theories, which were impacting not only individuals but public health and communities as well.
Speaker 0: Again harm.
Speaker 1: The problem that confronts us in terms of harmful mis and disinformation is structural. The information infrastructure has changed, and we as a society are adapting. We are never going to live in a world free of mis and disinformation. Such a world has never existed. And the government is not going to snap its fingers and regulate the problem away because misinformation is ultimately speech.
And so while there are plenty of conversations now happening about regulation, most have not yet arrived at a solution space that protects civil liberties while reducing harms.
Speaker 0: Because there isn't one.
Speaker 1: And yet, that said, the current situation is also untenable.
Speaker 0: The decision just asserts it. We can't have all this misinformation out there. It's obviously obviously we have to do something about it.
Speaker 1: So we need something in the short term to help create situational awareness for those equipped to counterspeak, equipped to correct false and misleading claims, to help ensure that the public has access to reliable, accurately contextualized information and not only from official government sources. And we believe that the power of partnerships holds the key. So here are some learnings from our first two attempts at creating this potential solution. It's labor intensive work. It requires a division of responsibilities.
But I want to flag one thing in particular, and that's the 5th bullet point. Between EIP and VP, we bolstered and expanded our partnerships. We built new technology. We brought on more collaborators. But the
Speaker 0: She's just describing the creation of a censorship industrial complex. I mean, this should send chills down all of your spines. She's talking about all these organizations, all these individual people. All the people have to be involved in this. You need new relationships between government.
We have to get a bunch of people involved in it. I mean, it's crazy. It's crazy. And she's suggesting that this this kind of positive, you know, beat of energy, we're building this kind of momentum and fighting this enemy of disinformation. She's talking about censoring her fellow Americans.
This is just profoundly messed up.
Speaker 1: Government partnerships were not quite there. There was no one obviously in charge. An entity called EI Ice.
Speaker 0: There's nobody obviously in charge. I mean, just sit with that for a minute. There's nobody obviously in charge of taking control of the censorship of disinformation. Yeah. That's right.
There's nobody in charge of censoring. There's there should be nobody in charge. That's, like, kind of, you know she's describing democracy and freedom of speech as a problem
Speaker 1: An entity called EI ISAC had been profoundly impactful during the election, the Election Integrity ISAC, serving as a single point of contact for state and local officials and the EIP. And there was no such parallel organization that existed for Virality Project. So there was a lot of effort spent trying to figure out who was in charge and who did what in any given state or locale as localized false and misleading claims related to vaccines popped up. This meant that when a crisis came that needed those partnerships, they weren't already in place. Civil society relationships are also critical to establish and advance, particularly because these groups have such unique power and impact as counterspeakers.
They reach communities that they understand and are members of. So there are 2 potential recommendations I'd make to CISA today. Our joint objective is to mitigate the impact of harmful misinformation, particularly that which is aimed at weakening our national security through efforts aimed at delegitimizing our institutions, including democratic elections.
Speaker 0: That is amazing. She just said we need to focus on stopping speech that delegitimizes institutions. You kinda go, well, okay. That seems fair. We wanna, you know, we don't wanna, like, have people out there overthrowing the government.
But, I mean, you define it like that, that's, like, basically censoring anybody who says, we should, you know, we need a different president. We should, abolish the Department of Energy. The Pentagon or war mongers. The Pentagon or war mongers. You know, abolish the police.
All of those things can be perceived as pretty easily and defined pretty easily as delegitimizing of institutions. So she wants to censor that. That's where the focus needs to be. The other creepy thing of what she just said is that it has to be national security. Our focus should be on national security.
Okay. So we're gonna censor for national security, pandemic related vaccine hesitancy, and delegitimizing institutions. At that point, it's like, what's left? Like, what haven't you created a predicate to censor for at that point?
Speaker 1: This type of partnership is not a fact checking endeavor to debunk misinformation more generally. Our work must always remain focused narrowly on matters of national security that explicitly undercut American institutions.
Speaker 0: Well, that might include NATO. That might include the Pentagon.
Speaker 1: For instance, for EIP, we focused on content intended to suppress voting, reduce participation, confuse voters as to the election process, or delegitimize election results without evidence.
Speaker 0: Like in every case, you can think of an example of legitimate free speech. Like I might say like she says, suppress voting. Well, maybe I say, hey, there's no point in voting. You know? The system is rigged.
You don't have a good candidate. Don't vote. Why can't I say that? Third party. That could be a disgrace Vote.
Yeah. Vote third party. Don't vote for a Democrat or Republican. You know? Do a write in candidate.
Oh, you've disrupted the you've just delegitimize institutions. Just wrote you wrote in Ronald McDonald. How dare you say that you should write in Ronald McDonald. I mean, this is this is insane.
Speaker 1: And that targeted narrow scoping is critical to the success of a partnership.
Speaker 0: So that's Orwellian. She just she just we just find this huge area that they can censor on, elections, pandemic, vaccines, delegitimize institutions, and then she goes, that narrow targeting, that's not narrow. That's, I mean, that's everything.
Speaker 1: Creation of the center of excellence within the federal government, for example, could tie in a federal lead.
Speaker 0: There it is. That's Renee de Resta surfacing as far as I know, the first time publicly, the creation of governance board, which the Department of Homeland Security, which this agency is a part of, ended up introducing in the spring of 2022. And it was everybody immediately saw it as a terrifying, un American, fascist, censorship, fucking bullshit, and they pushed back against it, and they destroyed it. And where does it come from? It comes from Renee de Resta in this little talk.
Speaker 1: Platforms, academics, and nonprofits to stay ahead of these emerging narratives and trends.
Speaker 0: To stay ahead of them. Now here we are in precrime. This is the pre bunking. So we can anticipate that there could be speech that we disagree with. And so we're gonna work together to prevent that speech from occurring.
I mean, it's just gets you can see when you go down this path of of we actually have to censor speech we disagree with as opposed to just talking back to it, as opposed to just arguing with it, as opposed to just getting out there on the social media platforms, on the newspapers, writing your piece of it, recording your videos, arguing about it, whatever, having public debates. Instead, they're trying to create a censorship complex to surveil all of your fellow Americans, identify a huge amount of topics, and then demanding that the social media platforms censor them in creating tools, including artificial intelligence, to help with that censorship. It's in this sort of calming, turquoise blue, relaxing little video. You can see the entire sinister proposal to undermine our free speech, to undermine the first amendment, and somebody who appears to be a marginal player in the censorship industrial complex displaying her intellectual leadership and her institutional leadership in really envisioning this complex come into being.
Speaker 1: Or as narratives emerge, the center of excellence could deploy experts to relevant federal agencies.
Speaker 0: So this disinformation governance board, which she's calling a center for excellence, would then send out censors, you know, spies and censors to different government agencies to help them to work on the censorship.
Speaker 1: To help prepare prebunking and messaging, to identify trusted voices and communities, and to build coalitions to respond.
Speaker 0: So go find 3rd party allies to do the dirty work for you that you can't do as a government agent.
Speaker 1: It could also create and promote ongoing resilience products and techniques geared towards the American public.
Speaker 0: Resilience products means propaganda. That's all that means. We're gonna do propaganda to tell you that something is not a problem when it might be or when people have speech that we disagree with. We're gonna be out there just issuing propaganda.
Speaker 1: Because education is really key to us not being perpetually reactive.
Speaker 0: Constant propaganda is essential for us maintaining our legitimacy against our critics.
Speaker 1: We can establish nongovernment capability to support research and analysis. Institutionalized capabilities, like EIP or VP, are needed on an ongoing basis outside of government. And this will also help identify emerging issues for possible prebunking and community or civil society coordination to deliver those messages to audiences that really trust what they have to say.
Speaker 0: I mean, it's a holistic, you once could say, totalizing agenda. Look at that. I mean, she wants to get everybody on the same page. Civil society organizations, NGOs, government officials, multiple agencies. I mean, it's bonkers.
It's just not it's not how we do free speech in America.
Speaker 1: So in closing, we need multi stakeholder partnerships
Speaker 0: To get around the first supposedly to get around the first amendment, but not actually
Speaker 1: that facilitate effective communication
Speaker 0: To spread propaganda.
Speaker 1: To enable situational awareness
Speaker 0: Through spying on your fellow Americans.
Speaker 1: For government tech platforms and community leaders.
Speaker 0: Through a totalizing whole of society information war.
Speaker 1: While respecting civil liberties and prioritizing free expression.
Speaker 0: Oh, without violating the First Amendment. Simple.
Speaker 1: Simple. Right? So I look forward to the rest of the sessions in this important event focusing on the power of partnerships, and thank you so much for having me speak today.
Speaker 0: No. We're not gonna do it, lady. We don't want it.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
@elonmusk A whistleblower last year provided us with a trove of documents proving that US and UK military & Intelligence employees and contractors adapted counter-terrorism tactics developed abroad, including censorship, debanking, and cross-platform bans.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
People say the government wasn't involved in censorship, but it was. And now, new documents prove that US military contractors urged & used a wide range of counter-terrorism tactics against civilians, including psyops, debanking, and changing Big Tech's Terms of Service.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
So forget "1984," "Black Mirror," "Brave New World," "Fahrenheit 451," "V for Vendetta," "Children of Men," and historical accounts of fascism and Communism. It's far more important to understand the real-world and present-day totalitarianism happening before our very eyes.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
Death, bankruptcy, and, apparently, totalitarianism happen gradually and then all at once. The totalitarians controlled Google and Meta for years. Zuckerberg effectively admitted it. Now they're desperate to control X
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
The reason the media are all running with the same "testy" framing in their headlines today is because they were programmed to do so. The Twitter Files revealed how think tanks like the US government-funded Aspen Institute control and program the media.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
30. Efforts continued to influence Twitter's Yoel Roth. In Sept 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
The idea the Internet would guarantee our freedom was idiotic. The Internet is made up of machines and corporations that governments can control. Global totalitarianism wasn't possible before the Internet. Now that it is, governments are turning the nightmare into reality. /END
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
Watch @Paul_B_Coleman explain here how the global war on X, free speech, and @ElonMusk was years in the making and includes a UN effort to impose Islamic blasphemy laws on the West.
@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger
This just in: after years of warning of AI deep fakes threatening democracy and thus necessitating censorship, the US government is now saying it will be using them for intelligence gathering. Left unsaid is that it may also use them for disinformation:
@samfbiddle - Sam Biddle
NEW: U.S. Special Operations Command is seeking the ability to create AI-generated social media users that "Appear to be a unique individual that is recognizable as human but does not exist in the real world" for intelligence-gathering purposes https://theintercept.com/2024/10/17/pentagon-ai-deepfake-internet-users/
The Pentagon Wants to Use AI to Create Deepfake Internet Users
The Department of Defense wants technology so it can fabricate online personas that are indistinguishable from real people.
theintercept.com
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
The legacy media is pure left-wing propaganda
@EvaVlaar - Eva Vlaardingerbroek
This is 100% the result of mass brainwashing by the legacy media in Europe. Although that's terrible, it also means that if we succeed to break their stronghold, these results can easily be changed. The EU knows that we can do that with @X and that's why they're attacking Elon. https://t.co/SuBfvzIEf1
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
The legacy media lied to you https://t.co/TuylN2IqYi
Video Transcript AI Summary
Are there states where women face prosecution for having an abortion? No. Do any states criminalize miscarriage or the care related to it? No. Are there states that criminalize removing an ectopic pregnancy or prohibit life-saving care for mothers? No. Women do not need to be actively dying for doctors to provide necessary care. There is concerning rhetoric that may deter women from seeking healthcare. Recently, Vice President Harris claimed women are being arrested for miscarriages. However, there is no evidence of any woman being arrested for this or for receiving healthcare related to it. Misleading examples can scare women away from necessary treatment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: On this. Are there any states where women face prosecution for having an
Speaker 1: abortion? No.
Speaker 0: Are there any states that criminalize miscarriage? No. Or they care for any, for a miscarriage? No. Are there any states that criminalize removing an ectopic pregnancy?
No. Are there any states that prohibit life saving care for the mother? No. Are there any states where women have to be actively dying for for a doctor to be able to act for her care? No.
There's been a lot of rhetoric in this that I'm concerned pushes people away from getting access to health care. Vice president Harris in a speech recently said that women were being arrested in facing prosecution for experiencing miscarriages. Miss Sackler, do you know of a single instance where a woman has been arrested for having a miscarriage or getting health care for that?
Speaker 1: No. Treatment for miscarriage is allowed under the law, and there have been instances where, I think that one example of that that's been pointed to is misleading because the woman I think she was in Ohio. The charges against her were not abortion related, and so it it's misleading to use as an example.
Speaker 0: It's not only misleading, but it scares women away from getting access to health care, And it leads women to not go get health care treatment when they desperately need it.
@Linda82982011 - Ms. Jazz
@_wake_up_USA They had state run media since Operation Mockingbird. Then Elon bought Twitter and we can finally hear the truth. https://t.co/7NkOdU73Dh
@ImMeme0 - I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸
HAHAHA… Don Lemon’s attempt to spread propaganda about @elonmusk instantly backfires on him. “We are the ones that own the news.” https://t.co/ls6f8bj6ms
Video Transcript AI Summary
Who do you think is the real president-elect?
I believe it's Donald Trump.
Democratic lawmakers are calling Elon Musk "President Musk" and suggesting Trump is the vice president or head of communications.
Wait, no one said that.
Have you checked?
No, I'm focused on my life.
Look it up.
That's a loaded question.
Sources like Axios and the Washington Post? I don’t trust them.
People don’t trust the government or mainstream news anymore. They trust independent news and individuals who relate to them.
I can’t disagree with you.
Many say they only watch independent media now.
Right.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Who is the real president-elect? Do you think?
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, 1, I believe.
Speaker 0: Democratic lawmakers in Washington are calling Elon Musk president Musk now, and they're saying Donald Trump is the vice president or the head of communications.
Speaker 1: What's what's what's what's wait a second. No. No one said that.
Speaker 0: Really? Have you not watched and paid attention to the
Speaker 1: Absolutely not. I'm paying attention to what I'm doing during my day so I can try and get a better life and get ahead.
Speaker 0: Okay. Do you have your phone with you? I do. Why don't you Google right now
Speaker 1: Yes. Tell me.
Speaker 0: President Musk and see what comes up with it.
Speaker 1: But that's already a loaded question, you realize.
Speaker 0: Tell me give me the sources.
Speaker 1: Axios, Business Insider. No. We don't trust any of these. The common man doesn't trust any of this. Keep going.
ABC News, Washington Post, New York Times Oh, keep going. The Atlantic. Oh. I don't trust any of these. Oh.
I don't trust any of them. Okay. I don't trust any of these. We're the common man. We don't trust any of these.
No one trusts the government. No one trusts the common news. We don't trust any of that anymore. Independent news, we are the ones that own the news now. People trust me.
They don't trust MSNBC because I care and I'm actually one of them.
Speaker 0: I can't disagree with you. Okay.
Speaker 1: Because I'll ask you. Well, then
Speaker 0: I get a lot of
Speaker 1: people coming to me saying,
Speaker 0: I I only watch
Speaker 1: That's fair.
Speaker 0: I don't watch
Speaker 1: corporate
Speaker 0: media anymore.
Speaker 1: Right.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
This is the same media that hid the fact that a quarter million little girls were – still are – being systematically raped by migrant gangs in Britain. They are beneath contempt. Despicable human beings.
@TRobinsonNewEra - Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧
ADMIN POST. The UK legacy media are having a meltdown. And of course it's all "far right" and "conspiracy theory" jibes. They just don't get it do they? Those buzzwords hold no meaning anymore. We are the media now. https://t.co/JET4tspRWk
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a series of posts highlighting shocking stories the media overlooked this week. One post discussed a potential government plot involving drones and aerosolized vaccines, raising concerns about public consent. Other topics included warnings about Al-Qaeda fighters in the U.S., a homeowner jailed for evicting a squatter, and a study revealing the decline in measles deaths predating the vaccine. I also touched on Elon Musk's criticism of the UK government regarding censorship and corruption. Stay tuned for more updates next week.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
10 Shocking Stories the Media Buried This Week #10 - Exposed: Secret Government Plot to Deploy Aerosolized ‘Vaccines’ Using Drones People on social media are reporting strange symptoms after exposure to a mysterious fog blanketing their areas. This is happening across the U.S. and, as our research shows, in multiple countries. The situation has garnered so much attention that even mainstream media outlets are offering their own explanations. Some witnesses even claim to have spotted drones hovering above the fog. What’s going on here? The similarities to COVID-era controversies might shock you. While Senators like Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, and Roger Marshall have popularized the idea that EcoHealth Alliance’s 2018 DEFUSE proposal to DARPA involved gain-of-function research to make the COVID virus more dangerous, less attention has been given to another alarming aspect of the plan. According to journalist @JonMFleetwood, the same DEFUSE plan talked about “aerosolizing COVID” and using “drones to release these particles.” One chilling excerpt from the DEFUSE proposal reads: “This technology has a potential application in large-area inoculation of animals/humans.” Fleetwood stressed, “That’s us!” He further explained: “There’s a picture that maybe what was actually intended was to outfit drones with spray technology... and use it to release a virus vaccine. The idea is that they created the virus through gain-of-function research and other experiments to make it a self-spreading vaccine that acts like a virus.” “Senators are saying there’s information in there that talks about gain of function on these viruses. And yes, that gain of function did happen,” Fleetwood continued. “If that happened from the DEFUSE proposal, then what else also happened that’s inside the DEFUSE proposal?” Have we been subject to another “Operation Sea Spray” without our consent? This is an eye-opening conversation well worth your time. (See 9 More Revealing Stories Below)
Video Transcript AI Summary
Welcome to the first episode of Media Blackout for 2025. The news cycle is chaotic, with reports of strange fog, drone activity, and warnings of a new pandemic. People are experiencing unusual symptoms after exposure to this fog, and drones have been spotted above it. A 2018 proposal from EcoHealth Alliance to DARPA discussed using drones for aerosolized vaccines, raising concerns about potential bioengineering and the origins of COVID-19. Whistleblower revelations suggest suppression of this information, and military drone funding surged before the pandemic. The FAA also prepared for complex drone operations over people. Historical precedents of the U.S. government conducting bio-experiments on citizens add to the alarm. Transparency is urgently needed regarding these developments and their implications for public health. For more details, visit John Fleetwood's Substack and website.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome back to our first episode of media blackout for 2025. So we are just days into the new year and the news cycle is already chaotic and relentless. From strange weather events in the form of what some are calling the Pfizer fog, the drone activity that came in late last year, the warnings of a new pandemic with California already declaring a state of emergency, 2 very strange attacks, and the angling for a continuity of government. Buckle up, folks. It is going to be a wild ride.
Now perhaps one of the strangest and potentially extremely sinister things occurring as we speak is the fog. People on social media are reporting strange symptoms after exposure to the fog in their area. This is happening all over the US, and our research shows across multiple countries. It's gotten so much attention that even the MSM is spinning their version of events. But the strange part is people are also reporting that above the thick fog, at times, they can see drones.
What is this all about? Well, the similarities to the COVID era may surprise you. The title of the substack is drone spray self spreading COVID 19 vaccine for large area inoculation of humans in diffuse ecohealth slash DARPA project. This is from John Fleetwood's substack. The summary is EcoHealth's diffuse proposal exposed.
In 2018, EcoHealth Alliance submitted a proposal to DARPA code named diffuse, outlining plans to deploy aerosolized immune modulators, chimeric spike proteins, and or self spreading vaccines via drones potentially over humans. Aerosolized vaccination on humans, diffuse documents explicitly describe large area aerosol delivery systems for inoculation of animals slash humans, raising the question of whether these plans were executed on unsuspecting populations, drone deployment, and pandemic origin. The diffuse proposal and DARPA's advanced drone program suggests a chilling possibility that drones may have played a role in the COVID 19 pandemic challenging the mainstream lab leak narrative, DARPA's connection to Moderna. By 2012, DARPA was already working with Moderna on RNA based spike protein vaccines. A 2016 Moderna patent contains a genetic sequence with 1 in 3 trillion match to the pandemic virus, igniting claims of bioengineering origins.
Suppression of diffuse details. Whistleblower revelations show attempts by DARPA and intelligence agencies to classify and censor diffuse related research. US senators have demanded investigations into these actions. On the self spreading vaccines and gain of function, diffuse documents reveal plans for self disseminating vaccines and host to host therapeutic distribution indicating the potential use of engineered viruses as vaccine delivery systems. Unprecedented drone finding surge, a 26% spike in military drone funding in 2019 aligns with Diffuser's timeline and its drone based aerosol delivery technologies hinting at pre pandemic preparations.
International drone use using COVID 19, governments worldwide deployed drones for, quote, unquote, disinfecting, but studies debunk the effectiveness of this practice raising suspicion about the true purpose of these operations. A coordinated bioengineering agenda, the alignment of diffuse DARPA and drone advancements reveal an unsettling intersection of gain of function research, bio weaponized delivery systems, and self spreading vaccines. And finally, the last highlight here is urgent transparency needed. The diffuse project raises alarming questions about the origins of COVID 19, the ethics of aerosolized bioengineering, and the US government's role in these developments. The public deserves truth and accountability, especially considering a potentially incoming bird flu pandemic.
This is an incredibly detailed and well researched article, and we encourage everyone to read it in full. Joining us now to discuss this further is the author, John Fleetwood. John Fleetwood, thank you so much for joining us today. I am very much looking forward to this conversation.
Speaker 1: Absolutely. Same here. Thank you so much for having me, John, Maria.
Speaker 0: Before we get into this madness, please tell people a little bit about yourself.
Speaker 1: Sure. So, I am originally from, California. I'm here in Tennessee now. Had to get out of, you know, Newsom country, as terrible as that was. Before the pandemic, I was running a a news website called occonservative.com.
And, while I was doing that, finishing up my degree at Liberty University. And, there was a church in Anaheim Hills still there, called Influence. And their head pastor, Phil Hotsonpiller, was putting together a a new conservative news agency. He was looking around and seeing that, Newsom was ordering all the churches to shut down. You couldn't worship, you know, social distancing, all that baloney.
But all the box stores could stay open. The liquor stores could stay open. Strip clubs could stay open. And he was seeing the suppression. This was at the beginning of the pandemic.
He was seeing the suppression of the, true news that was out there and that Americans wanted to get on the vaccines or about the truth about the origins of COVID. And they weren't being put out by even right wing mainstream sources like Fox News. Even some of the non mainstream sources just weren't reporting the information. So he saw what I was doing on OC conservative, asked me to come on and join, American faith.com. So I was the founding managing editor for American faith.com.
I was the the lead editor, the lead writer writing, you know, 12 stories a day plus the having a team of writers under me. We developed this proprietary news reporting. We tried to bring back what Associated Press used to be where they just reported the what, who, when, where, why Right. Without the commentary. So we developed this kind of proprietary style.
We gave just all the facts in a bullet form fashion, but we were delivering the information that, again, the mainstream and even non mainstream news sources weren't reporting. I helped bring that up to, I think we're at 3 and a half 1000000 content impressions per day. I was running the the the newsletter that we published Monday through Sunday, 7 days a week. And, we had about 350,000, monthly subscribers. And I cut my teeth going through this was at the beginning of the pandemic.
So I cut my teeth going through, PubMed, National Library of Medicine and just searching COVID and vaccine every single day.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: And I would take those peer reviewed publications that showed, you know, negative efficacy for the vaccine. That showed the the different, you know, health problems that were related to the vaccine and and trying to report it in a way that people could understand because that's my whole thing on my website right now johnfleitew.com is, I expose how health and political systems have been weaponized against, the American, people. So I left that, started doing my own thing, and now I really get to to drill down into topics that I'm really passionate about.
Speaker 0: Well, you've done an absolutely incredible drill down here. I'm encouraging everyone to read your Substack and Full and, in fact, subscribe to it. I think your research is incredible. Let's talk about this this problem because a lot of people have woken up to the, the the crimes of COVID, if you will, but it seems like we'll only go to a certain point. And, of course, there is a reason why they would want you to believe that it was, her lab leak.
If there is a a secret program going on, like the one that you've highlighted. So this is very, very interesting. Let's talk about this DARPA program diffuse.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So we've got senators like Rand Paul who've who've made popular this idea that there was gain of function research that was done, which you know and your audience will know it just made the COVID virus more deadly, more infectious than it would be in in nature, and that this accidentally leaked out of a lab. And that's sort of the the popular level because remember at first the mainstream was was forcing on us that this, virus came out of nature, this pathogen came out of nature. Well Rand Paul popularized this diffuse proposal from EcoHealth submitted to DARPA before the COVID pandemic. And in that proposal, it specifically outlines gain of function experiments being performed on the COVID virus before the pandemic.
But what is not being reported is what else the document says and it's it's it's pretty eye opening what it, what it talks about. And the first thing is that it talks about aerosols. So, yes, the document does talk about performing gain of function on on these COVID pathogens, but it also talks about aerosolizing certain aspects of, of of the, COVID, pathogen. It says in one section, we will trial inoculum delivery methods. I'm reading right from this this diffuse document.
On captive bats including a novel automated aerosolization system, transdermal nanoparticle application, and edible adhesive gels. Now this document angles the the the target of their studies as bats. So they say, okay. The these viruses or these aerosol, aerosolized aspects of the COVID components of of COVID. And we'll get to what I mean by that because we can't just say it's it was the virus.
They aerosolized the virus or they aerosolized, a vaccine. It's a little more complicated than that. But we know for certain that they were aerosolizing, and the term aerosol comes up multiple times in the document. But it's not just that they were aerosolizing components of COVID. It's that there were also drones.
So that first, sort of release batch of this information of the diffuse proposal from EECOHealth to DARPA came out from this, marine whistleblower. Well, after that came out and people started digging into it more, there was a group called US Right TO Know who filed a a FOIA, a Freedom of Information Act request, and they got almost 1500 pages, that gave us even more information about this diffuse project from EcoHealth to DARPA submitted just before the pandemic. And what that one showed is that there were actually drones involved. It's, the file revealed the diffuse plans to use, quote, remote controlled drone technology. Senators like Rand Paul, Senator Ron Johnson, Roger Marshall, they popularized the idea that, yes, the diffuse proposal did involve gain of function, making more dangerous the COVID virus.
But what they haven't been popularizing is that the same diffuse plan talked about aerosolizing COVID in some way. And what else they don't talk about and even non mainstream sources haven't talked about yet, is that they wanted to use drones to release these, particles. And, e and, what's even crazier, Maria, is it's not only that. This document also says that the technology would be used for wide large scale application inoculation of animals and humans. There's there's a page that was from Parc, which is a this deep tech company that's a subunit of Xerox.
And it it says right here in the the diffuse file, this technology has a potential application in large area inoculation of animals slash humans, that's us, with bioengineered formulations for preemptive reduction of disease transfer. So again, the the the the sort of popular level ideas that the diffuse proposal had as its targets bats. And then Rand Paul says, okay. Well, the main target was bats. They create they did gain a function on this virus and then it accidentally leaked.
But what we're we start to see here is that there's a picture that maybe what was actually intended was to outfit drones with spray technology from this park, Xerox company and use it to release, a virus vaccine. So the idea is that, the it's, they're they created the virus through gain of function and other experiments to make it a, self spreading vaccine that acts like a virus. So what what I'm trying to get attention on is that there's a document that senators are saying. There's information in there that talks about gain of function on these these viruses and yes that gain of function did happen. Well, if that happened from the diffuse proposal, then what else also happened that's inside the diffuse proposal?
Well, alarmingly, what else is in the diffuse proposal is that they would use a self spreading COVID-nineteen vaccine for large area inoculation namely, vaccination of humans. So what it looks like it could be, Maria, is that they've been using drones to spray a virus vaccine on human populations. And I thought to myself, well, if that's true, then you'd probably see, number 1, increased, like, drone spending for the military. And then you'd also see the use of drones, sort of a weird use of drones, during the pandemic. And that's exactly what you see.
The defense department requested almost $10,000,000,000 for unmanned systems and associated technologies for the fiscal year of 2019. And I get that information from drones, dronecenter.bard.edu. But this document says it was a significant inclusion of drone related procurement that the military was doing for research and development for construction funding. The big increase in spending represented a 26%. It was a 26% increase from the 2018 request.
And they said this is the greatest quantity of drones the Pentagon has purchased in the last 6 years. So if my if my we'll call it, like a drone theory. If that's true, then you would expect to see a large increase in military spending in drones. And what you get is exactly that, a 26 percent it's more than a quarter more spending than they did for fiscal year 2018 for 2019. So the military did increase its drone spending by an inordinate very significant amount just before the pandemic.
You also get the FAA integrating drones into the National Airspace. The FAA, of course, is the Federal Aviation Administration. When the COVID pandemic kicked off in December 2019, it was announced that the FAA had already undertaken actions to, quote, integrate unmanned aircraft systems, UAS or drones, into the National Airspace. This was according to a congressional report from the US Government Accountability Office, the GAO. The FAA, had also, quote, developed plans to allow for increasingly complex operations, including operations over people and beyond visual line of sight.
And then it says this GAO report is specified that some of these drone operations would take place over people at night. So the the the very agency in the US that governs all air control, the FAA, just before the pandemic, had created all these new rules for drones, for complex operations of drones that were over people at at night, over citizens at night, which again goes along with this sort of drone dispersal.
Speaker 0: And and just of of of late, John, after the whole drone gate nonsense in New Jersey predominantly, we saw an extension of some of these, drone laws plus a proposal to actually, reduce the amount of citizen drone use or regulate citizen drone use because when these and I don't I I think the drones are multipurpose on it, personally. It's not just for this reason, but, you know, once people start realizing these drones are not your friends, surely they'll want to try and counter that. But, oh, oh, we already have laws to stop you from doing that. That's the way that I see all of this. It's interesting, John.
I just wanna I wanna back up some of what you're saying. Biotech analyst and former Pfizer employee, Karen Kingston, joined me some time ago. And I was recently alerting people on on, my socials about this interview that we did where it was when when the whole monkeypox thing resurfaced, she came on to my, for an interview with me and she said, well, Maria, they're actually talking about spraying this stuff, and there are documents to prove it. And she's talking about all of the things that you are. She's spoken about the transdermal nanoparticle, you know, and and so what's fascinating about that in that interview, she actually described to us exactly how they have redefined biological warfare to make it so that they can, in fact, infect us with synthetic viruses under the guise of vaccinating populations, and drones happen to be one of those delivery systems.
And so this is extremely concerning, John, particularly because all of these people are reporting strange fog everywhere. I'm not saying the 2 are definitely linked, but it seems very odd because, apparently, some of these people are also saying there appear to be drones above the fog. So, quick we're almost out of time here today, but quick thoughts on that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So that that's dead on. And what people need to understand is that the United States has a history of releasing bio or chemical weapons on citizens. You can go back to the 19 fifties with operation LAC, large area coverage. They sprayed a zinc cadmium concoction over over people, and that got people sick.
Peep people died. You've got operation sea spray over in San Francisco. They released, bacteria like serratia marcescens in clouds. Yes. I mean, everybody knows San Francisco.
Very, you know, foggy, cloudy. Well, they
Speaker 0: This was back in the fifties. Right?
Speaker 1: This was back in the fifties. They've been doing this ever since the and you could go on. Operation Big Buzz, Operation Big Itch, Operation Big Apple. The United States has a long and deep and terrifying history of of releasing bio of doing bioweapons experimentations on people. There's no reason to think that we've stopped doing that.
And finally, Maria, there's there's law that allows them to do this. It's in the PREP Act I just published a couple days ago because I wanted people to understand the government has the power and the ability to, release, drugs or biological agents on people in secret. It's in the PREP Act. It actually gives, not it don't it gives the government and, manufacturers not only a liability protections in case anybody gets harmed by these, but it actually says judges can't dig into it. Congress can't investigate.
And when and it it's it's all actuated by them being able to declare these so called emergencies. And the government's given themselves to pa the power to be able to release these, these substances on citizens without them knowing.
Speaker 0: Absolutely terrifying, John. I think you and I definitely need to have a deeper conversation about all of this. We appreciate you raising the public's awareness to this on our broadcast. I've just brought up a couple of snapshots of your of your Substack article. People can go and read more about the PREP Act and how it empowers the government to administer drugs or more biological products or even synthetic biological products at this point, John.
So the Substack people can go to is johnfleetwood.substack.com. Please let people know where else they can follow your work.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Johnfleetwood, dot com. Just johnfleetwood.com. There's no h in John. That can also get people there.
They can go on, Twitter at johnmfleetwoodorinstagram@realjohnfleetwood. And, Maria, thank you again so much for having me on. I'm a big fan of your work. Thank you for all you're doing in exposing the truth.
Speaker 0: Appreciate you, John. Thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: As we welcome a new year, it's time to focus on what matters most, creating healthier habits, enjoying more moments with family, and spending less money on going out to eat. Goodranches.com/vnn is here to help you turn all your resolutions into solutions. When you buy your meat from Good Ranches, you are directly supporting local farms and ranches in the US while skipping imported meat and the hassle of grocery store shopping. During GoodRanch's New Year, New Meat Special, you can subscribe to any box of their high quality, 100% American meat and wild caught seafood. Use promo code v n n, and you'll get $25 off free express shipping and your choice of free ground beef, chicken, or salmon in every order delivered for an entire year.
Start 2025 with better choices, better meals, and better moments at home. Remember to visit goodranches.com/vnn and use promo code vnn today for American meat delivered.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#9 - Former CIA Officer Warns: 1,000 Al-Qaeda Fighters in U.S. for Next Homeland Attack
Video Transcript AI Summary
A former CIA officer warns that over 1,000 Al Qaeda fighters may be in the U.S., potentially planning attacks. In a recent interview, Sarah Adams discussed the threat posed by sleeper cells, especially following recent terrorist incidents. She noted that Al Qaeda has trained fighters who could execute coordinated attacks across multiple cities, utilizing tactics like suicide bombings and fighting to the death. The recent attack in New Orleans raises concerns about larger threats, with intelligence suggesting that some terrorists entered the U.S. through the southern border. Questions remain about the origins of these attacks and whether they could be used to justify increased surveillance and military action. The situation demands vigilance as more information unfolds.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A former CIA officer warns 1,000 Al Qaeda fighters are in the US for the next homeland attack. In a recent discussion on the Sean Ryan Show, former CIA targeting officer Sarah Adams warned of a potentially devastating attack planned by Al Qaeda terrorists on American soil. The interview offers significant insights into what may be unfolding as Al Qaeda sleeper cells could be activated in the wake of the New Orleans terrorist attack and a possible vehicle borne improvised explosive device in the rear of a rented Tesla Cybertruck that exploded outside Trump's hotel in Las Vegas just hours later. Ryan asked Adams, I just wanna clarify. You are 100% certain that there are 1,000 plus Al Qaeda trained fighters within the US borders.
Adams, currently a global threat adviser with extensive experience in Middle Eastern Affairs responded, well, Al Qaeda says they trained and deployed a 1,000 for this attack. First off, I think there are more than a 1000 Al Qaeda members in the United States, but for the homeland attack, that number is based on what Al Qaeda is saying so they could exaggerate it. However, they did have about 1400 in the Hamas attack, so the number is not off from what they did in the first round of attacks. Adams provided more details on a potential 2025 homeland attack. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1: We have not had a man walk up to a building with a suicide vest on the United States. Americans don't understand this. Al Qaeda knows this. Right? So So this is new and innovative, especially now.
You don't have to walk outside of the building. You can walk in the building because of the advancement of the vest. The other thing is in the United States, we haven't had fideian attackers. So the concept is the terrorist fights to the death. So he's not exactly a suicide bomber, but he will fight till either all of us are dead or all of his people are dead.
We think it's gonna be a swarming attack. Right? Multiple different attacks at one time across multiple cities. I think there will be suicide bombers just because some of the attackers went through suicide bomber training and they have these vests. And then we think there's these Fedayan attackers who will carry on until they're killed.
You just rephrase that. So these guys are trained, and they are going to fight until they're killed. Yes. And that matters. Right?
So I was watching this video, and it was a suicide bombing in Kabul years ago. The bomber blew up, and then everyone starts moving in. The first responders move in. Right? And then another guy walks in and blows up.
We know this is a tactic. But if Americans don't understand this is a tactic and don't understand these attackers are gonna fight to the death, think about that. Battle's going on. The attacker surrenders. He might have the suicide vest.
You know, we let our guard down. That man came to die. Right? He's gonna fight till he dies or you die. So we can't let our guards down, and they know our weakness.
So we have to be very careful that we don't have more people die in the second and third order effects of not knowing their intent.
Speaker 0: The terrorist attack on Bourbon Street along with the postponement of the Sugar Bowl at the Caesars Superdome in New Orleans suggests that something larger is unfolding. There's far too much of this happening, and when an attack on our homeland emanating from Afghanistan occurs, the resulting moral injury will be catastrophic, she says. Those who serve deserve far better than this. This is, what she wrote hours before the attack on Tuesday night. Meanwhile, general Mike Flynn, who served as national security adviser in the Trump administration 1 point o wrote on X, again, it is not what you call it in the end that matters.
What matters is if there was intelligence prior in some agency or department and it wasn't acted upon. A failure of decision makers is not a failure of intelligence. Prevention is what we shoot for. That is what the hard work of intelligence does. If you don't follow it and hunt down every lead, then you end up in a reactive after the fact mode.
This tragically is where we are for what should have been a very joyous occasion. Members of my family were walking along Bourbon Street last night at midnight. Another big question, what's next? And are the people with knowledge rapidly cross leveling intelligence to prevent the next attack? According to a federal source close to the counterterrorism community, some of the latest intelligence briefings have indicated that pre trained Al Qaeda terrorists have entered the US through the Biden Harris administration's open southern border.
The source warned that this raises the risk of further attacks. The Biden Harris administration's disastrous exit from Afghanistan gave rise to Al Qaeda's global jihad push. One wonders if these alleged terror cells operating within the US would still be active had Kamala Harris won the presidential election. Could the Bourbon Street massacre be Al Qaeda's opening act of the coordinated attack on the homeland described by Sarah, or are the public preemptive warnings an attempt to fearmonger more domestic, more aggressive domestic surveillance and ensure funding is maintained under Doge. And that is where my mind goes, ladies and gentlemen.
In the wake of the New Orleans attack, which was a tragedy and our hearts absolutely go out to all affected, the DA of New Orleans says we need UK and Europe style surveillance. We need more CCTV. Well, I'm not really sure what CCTV would have done to prevent this. If we hadn't let in a whole bunch of people over the border, then the risk would be less. But the fact of the matter remains that the New Orleans attacker and what happened in Vegas, both of these people were linked to Fort Bragg.
So there are many, many questions around the actual origins of these attacks, what the intended purpose is, and to be honest with you, it reeks of intelligence operations. We'll continue to dig into this, and it's certainly not to say that there aren't threats at the moment, but could this actually be considering that both these men came from Fort Brad? Could this be a way to orchestrate a narrative that there are terror threats in an excuse to go to war in the Middle East, which is certainly not the first time we've seen that. So I think that we should all remain very diligent, and we will, of course, continue to keep you updated as more details emerge.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#8 - Homeowner Ends Up in Jail After Calling Police to Evict Squatter From Her Own Home
Video Transcript AI Summary
A Clayton County homeowner, Lalitha Hale, was arrested after calling police to evict a squatter, Sekimaha Johnson, from her home. Despite a court ruling affirming Hale's ownership, she was charged with criminal trespass and making terroristic threats due to an alleged illegal eviction, as she lacked a signed writ of possession. Johnson claimed her presence was lawful, citing a connection to a previous tenant. The situation escalated when Hale returned to her property, believing it was vacated, only to find Johnson had re-entered. Hale expressed her frustration, noting she spent the night in poor conditions while Johnson remained in her home. Meanwhile, Johnson has not faced any criminal charges. The incident highlights significant issues within the eviction process and the treatment of homeowners versus squatters.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This story is absolutely outrageous. A homeowner has ended up in jail after calling police to evict a squatter from her own home. In a jaw dropping display of injustice, a homeowner in Clayton County, Georgia found herself behind bars after attempting to reclaim her own property from an alleged squatter. Lalitha Hale, the legal owner of the house, was arrested on charges of criminal trespass and making terroristic threats after a heated confrontation with the squatter, Sekameha Johnson, and her associates. Despite having secured a magistrate judge's ruling in her favor, Hale was accused of executing an illegal eviction because she lacked a signed writ of possession at the time, WSB TV Atlanta reported.
The ordeal began in August when Hale discovered Johnson living in her home. Johnson claimed her presence was lawful, citing a ruling by Clayton County magistrate judge, Latrevio Lates Johnson, who controversially stated that Johnson was not a squatter due to her connection with a previously evicted tenant's partner. After months of legal battles, including Johnson filing for bankruptcy to delay proceedings, Hale finally received a court judgment affirming her ownership. Believing the property to be vacated, Hale returned to clean and prepare the home for reoccupation. However, Johnson allegedly broke back in leading to the volatile encounter that landed Hale in jail.
Meanwhile, the alleged squatter has not been charged for any criminal activity. Quote, I spent the night on a mat on a concrete floor in deplorable conditions while this woman, this squatter, slept in my home, Hale told WSB TV Atlanta. This is just absolutely wild. Let's play this news report.
Speaker 1: A Clayton County attorney spent 2 nights in jail after police arrested her for trying to remove an alleged squatter from her home. Good evening. I'm George Estevez.
Speaker 0: Hello. I'm Wendy Corona in Verlinda Stover.
Speaker 1: That alleged squatter remains in the Clayton County house more than 3 months after an eviction battle began. Channel 2 consumer investigator Justin Gray is here now. And Justin, the homeowner is the one facing criminal charges here, not the squatters.
Speaker 2: George, the Clayton County homeowner says she showed up to the house because she thought the alleged squatter had finally moved out after losing a court judgment. Instead, the Clayton sheriff's department says that homeowner performed an illegal eviction.
Speaker 0: They've been squatting,
Speaker 3: and they disease really And if they have to get somebody killed, they'll come down.
Speaker 4: Calm down.
Speaker 2: Just tell From Clayton County Sheriff's body camera, you can see the homeowner, Lalitha Hale, taken away to jail, not the alleged squatter at this Livingston Drive home.
Speaker 4: She's gonna be charged with criminal damage of property Mhmm. For all of your belongings Okay. Criminal trespass as well for her coming in here.
Speaker 3: I spent the night on a mat, on a concrete floor, in deplorable conditions, while this woman, this squatter, slept in my home.
Speaker 2: Olita Hale says this all started back in August when she called police after finding Sekimia Johnson in the house.
Speaker 3: How can she not be a squatter when I don't know this person? I've never had any type of contract relationship with this person.
Speaker 2: But a Clayton County magistrate judge ruled under the new squatter reform act, reform act, Sekimia Johnson did not qualify as a squatter because she is related to a previous evicted tenant's partner.
Speaker 3: I was renting a citation. I'm about
Speaker 0: to walk to a squad.
Speaker 4: A order. Yeah. You
Speaker 2: gotta go nowhere.
Speaker 3: The judge on the order saying denying and saying that I wasn't a a squatter.
Speaker 2: That started a multi month court battle, filings and appeals. Johnson even filed for bankruptcy, listing Lolita Hale as her only creditor. But November 18th, a magistrate judge ordered a final judgment in Hale's favor. Hale says she thought Johnson moved out.
Speaker 3: We turned on Monday to start painting, and she had broken the locks and reentered my property. She just pulled up out of nowhere Mhmm. And she had this guy with him, and I locked the door. I locked the screen door, and he forced himself in, telling us to get out.
Speaker 2: Hale admits she is still waiting on a signed writ of possession, meaning she has no legal right to evict.
Speaker 4: We have to be notified of this. A writ has to be served, and we have to be involved in that for it to be a legitimate issue.
Speaker 2: Hi there. It's Justin Gray with channel 2. No one answered at the home when we knocked. The sheriff's deputy can be heard on body camera telling Hale to think of things from the alleged squatter's point of view.
Speaker 4: But just think of it from this perspective, though. Everybody isn't as fortunate as you to have a a bed. To her? No. No.
I'm just saying a bed, the little things.
Speaker 3: To see that woman walk into my mom's house while I was in the police car, something is wrong with this picture. Something is inherently wrong with this picture.
Speaker 0: Wow. That is just unbelievable.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#7 - Mosquitoes inject human test subjects with parasite in study at Bill Gates-linked center
Video Transcript AI Summary
Researchers at the Bill Gates Foundation-backed Leiden University Medical Center are developing genetically modified mosquitoes to deliver malaria vaccines. A recent study showed that 8 out of 9 participants who received bites from one type of modified mosquito were protected against malaria, while those in the placebo group received no protection. Despite safety concerns and ethical issues regarding informed consent, the research continues, with plans for larger trials and potential applications for other diseases. Meanwhile, an Australian regulatory body is reviewing an application to release genetically modified mosquitoes to combat dengue fever. The implications of using insects as vaccine carriers raise significant ethical questions, and there are ongoing calls for accountability regarding these experiments.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mosquitoes inject human test subjects with parasite in study at Bill Gates Linked Center. The mosquito research Gates has been funding since at least 2,008 appears to have paid off turning out flying syringes. Researchers at the Bill Gates Foundation backed, Leiden University Medical Center in the Netherlands have joined an international effort to transform mosquitoes into flying syringes. According to a study published late last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, they apparently now have an effective way of using mosquitoes to deliver some protection against malaria in unsuspecting humans and possibly other payloads in the future as well. Scientists have long toyed with the idea of transforming mosquitoes into flying vaccinators.
Shigeto Yoshida, the lead researcher in a 2010 study that modified mosquito saliva such that they would deliver Leishmania vaccines to mice when sucking their blood, noted that vaccination by insect was just like a conventional vaccination, but with no pain and no cost. What's more, continuous exposure to bites will maintain high levels of protective immunity through natural boosting for a lifetime. So the insect shifts from being a pest to being beneficial at a Yoshida. Despite the Japanese geneticist's optimism, his study acknowledged that medical safety issues and concerns about informed consent mitigates the use of the flying vaccinator as a method to deliver vaccines. Robert Sinden, professor emeritus of parasite Cell Biology at Imperial College London, told Science at the time that in addition to vaccinating people without their informed consent, no regulatory agency would sign off on the initiative.
More about that in a moment. The issue of informed consent apparently an ongoing issue for elements of the scientific community was evidently not enough to hinder the continued development of flying vaccinators. Hiroyuki Matsuoka Matsuoka of Jiji Medical University in Japan, for instance, announced that with the help of a 2008 Gates Foundation grant, he was preparing work on an engineered mosquito that could produce and secrete a malaria vaccine protein into a host's skin. In 2022, Sean Murphy and his team at the University of Washington demonstrated the workability of that idea testing mosquito borne malaria vaccines on humans, establishing what they called a proof of concept for the technology. Now if you read the rest of the article, they're trying to assure us that the parasite dies before it infects the blood cells and evolves into its deadly phase.
Despite the obvious and clear safety concerns here, the office of the gene technology regulator in Australia is reviewing an application. It's currently under evaluation from Oxitec Australia. The date the application was received was the 25th July 2024, and the notification of application states that the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator in Australia is reviewing an application to release genetically modified mosquitoes to, quote, unquote, help prevent, not a malaria, but a dengue outbreak in the state of Queensland. Now let me just show you this absolute nightmare scenario of locking human subjects in a room with blood sucking mosquitoes. I mean, just think about that.
Afforded a test group of 43 adults between the ages of 19 35 who previously had no record of malaria infection, the researchers subjected subjects to 50 bites from GA 2 infected mosquitoes, 50 bites from GA 1 infected mosquitoes, or 50 bites from uninfected mosquitoes or placebo in 3 vaccination sessions at 28 day intervals. 3 weeks following their 3rd devouring by mosquitoes, the human test subjects underwent malaria infection with 5 bites from infected mosquitoes. According to the study, 8 of the 9 participants in the GA 2 group received effective protection against the malaria infection. Let me remind everyone that Pfizer told us their injections were safe and effective and we know that was a lie. Only one of the 8 participants in the GA one group received protection and none of the participants in the placebo group received protection.
The Dutch researchers now seek to replicate their results in a larger human trial. So this would all suggest the program is also planned to expand beyond malaria, particularly with the Australian gross human experiment currently under consideration from the office of the Gene Technology Regulator. It's important to note applications only go to this office when they are genetically modified or modifying products. The complete inversion of our natural human instincts here is unfathomable to even attempt to condition mankind who once would be appalled and disgusted at the thought of an insect that can carry disease through its blood sucking existence to something that we could potentially find good through vaccinations, more commonly or correctly referred to as gene editing technology, is absolutely horrifying. With demands that Bill Gates stands trial for crimes against humanity worldwide, hopes remain that the Make America Healthy Again team is going to go after this criminal and stop this mangler style experimentation on human beings for good.
And we're in crunch time right now. The new administration will be sworn in soon, but as great as that is, that also means our enemies have days left to stir up trouble. That could mean a cyber attack, an invasion, or God forbid, a nuclear strike. So until the longtime bureaucrats are out of Washington, I'm not taking any chances. That's why I have an emergency food supply from My Patriot Supply.
Right now, they're offering $100 off their 3 month emergency food kit. It's got 2,000 calories per day for 3 whole months. Plenty to get you through even a prolonged emergency. All their food kits last for up to 25 years in storage, plus they come in rugged, weatherproof buckets. Go to prepare with vnn.com right now to order your 3 month emergency food kit.
I've got an emergency food supply in my home because my safety and security's worth it. Go to prepare with vnn.com to order your 3 month emergency food kit now.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#6 - CIA Whistleblower Reveals Biden Admin Covered Up Attacks on Officers Injured by Direct Energy Weapons
Video Transcript AI Summary
CIA whistleblower reveals a cover-up by the Biden administration regarding attacks from directed energy weapons by foreign adversaries. In an interview, the whistleblower confirms being attacked and states that the intelligence community has obstructed congressional investigations, calling it a terrifying cover-up. The whistleblower discusses experiencing gaslighting from the CIA, which aimed to make victims doubt their injuries. A recent congressional report suggests foreign involvement in these injuries. The whistleblower expresses gratitude for the report and criticizes the CIA for betraying its personnel. She urges for acknowledgment of the situation to prevent further harm and hopes for change under a potential Trump administration, emphasizing that those involved in the previous report should not be allowed to handle this issue.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Terrifying for all Americans, CIA whistleblower exposes shocking Biden administration cover up. Emmy winning investigative journalist Catherine Herridge has released a new bombshell interview with the CIA whistleblower who has claimed that the Biden administration has covered up officers inquiries from direct energy weapons from foreign adversaries. In the interview, Herridge asks a former intelligence officer, you were attacked, to which the officer responds, yes. Herridge continued, you were attacked by an energy weapon? To which the CIA whistleblower responded, yes, a direct energy weapon.
The Emmy winning investigative journalist further shared, the intelligence community has attempted to thwart congressional investigative efforts to uncover the truth at every turn, that sounds like a government cover up. The whistleblower responded, it's a cover up, and it's terrifying, and it should be terrifying for all Americans. I'd like to play you some of that now.
Speaker 1: You were attacked. Yes. You were attacked by an energy weapon.
Speaker 2: Yes. A directed energy weapon.
Speaker 1: The intelligence community has attempted to thwart congressional investigative efforts to uncover the truth at every turn. I mean, that sounds like a government cover up. It's a
Speaker 2: cover up, and that's terrifying. And it should be terrifying to all Americans.
Speaker 1: The new congressional report found it appears increasingly likely that a foreign adversary is behind these injuries. Vertigo. Yes. Eye tracking issues. Yes.
Traumatic brain injuries. Yes. Did the CIA gaslight you?
Speaker 2: Me and every other age I've done. It was designed to make us think ourselves are crazy and question our own injuries.
Speaker 1: Is it reasonable to think that the intelligence community doesn't want to acknowledge a foreign adversary? Yes. This defense department letter is significant. Yes. We believe your experiences are real.
What explains this disconnect? We have a defense department letter, and yet the intelligence community, the CIA, says there's nothing to see here. The brave people of
Speaker 2: the Department of Defense willing to stand up to the CIA. If they're politicizing this, what else are they not telling the president? And that's scary.
Speaker 1: The intelligence community has attempted to thwart congressional investigative efforts to uncover the truth at every turn. I mean, that sounds like a government cover up.
Speaker 2: It's a cover up, and that's terrifying. And it should be terrifying to all Americans.
Speaker 3: Now requiring the aid of a service dog, just a few years ago, this retired CIA officer handled national security missions, which remain classified to this day.
Speaker 1: At that time, what was your portfolio? I am not at liberty
Speaker 2: to assure that.
Speaker 3: Alice, an alias, is speaking out for the first time about debilitating injuries reported among 100 of US government personnel.
Speaker 1: The new congressional report found that it appears increasingly likely that a foreign adversary is behind these injuries. Your reaction?
Speaker 2: Thank god they're saying it. Thank god they were brave enough to stand up to the CIA.
Speaker 0: The whistleblower stated she decided to speak out now because, quote, the CIA is betraying and not just betraying, but making friends of mine and my life a living hell. I want them to stop denying what is happening to us, and so there can be opportunities to collect the information that we need so that we can prevent this from happening to more people. Later in the interview, Herridge asks the whistleblower, will a Trump Vance administration make a change? The whistleblower with hesitation answered, I really hope so. She added, you know, the phrase cleaning up the swamp is thrown around a lot in DC, but at bare minimum, I do not believe that those people that were involved in the earlier report should be allowed to touch this.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
While you’re here, remember to follow (@VigilantFox) and hit the bell 🔔 for more weekly news roundups.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#5 - House Uncovers FBI Coverup in January 6 Pipe Bomber Investigation
Video Transcript AI Summary
A recent House report on the January 6th pipe bomber claims the FBI has engaged in a cover-up, halting its investigation in 2021 and refusing to cooperate with Congress. A whistleblower indicated that law enforcement was instructed to stand down just two days after the bombs were discovered at the RNC and DNC. Despite initial investigative efforts, the FBI has not identified the bomber nearly four years later. Conflicting information has emerged regarding whether the FBI received corrupted cell data from major carriers, with a former FBI official suggesting it might contain the bomber's identity. However, the carriers denied providing any corrupted data. The report highlights ongoing concerns about the FBI's handling of the investigation, which remains unresolved.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: From the Gateway Pundit, surprise. House releases bombshell report on January 6th pipe bomber revealing the FBI engaged in a massive cover up and refuses to cooperate with investigators. A new report released by the committee on House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight into the January 6th pipe bomber showed the FBI stopped looking for the suspect in 2021 and covered up evidence. The FBI is now refusing to cooperate with congressional investigators. In September, former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino said according to a whistleblower, after the pipe bombs were found at the RNC and DNC headquarters, assets on the ground, including a whistleblower, was briefed about the pipe bombs the next day and show a picture of a guy in a hoodie.
However, according to the whistleblower, the law enforcement agents were told to stand down 2 days later. Quote, but 2 days later after the pipe bombs, he notes, emphasis his, without explanation, they were told to stand down. No need to look for the guy anymore, Bongino said. This directly contradicts previous statements by FBI director Christopher Wray. Loudermilk released more information to back up Bongino's whistleblower report.
Nearly 4 years later, federal law enforcement has yet to identify the individual responsible for planting the pipe bombs, which remains one of the unanswered questions from that day. In the early weeks of the investigation, the FBI took significant investigative steps, identifying multiple persons of interest, issuing search warrants, reviewing hours of security camera footage, and analyzing the components of the pipe bombs. Despite the threat that the pipe bombs posed to the Congress and the public and the role they played in diverting resources away from the capital, federal law enforcement has refused to provide substantive updates to Congress about the status of the investigation, Loudermilk's report stated. The report also said there has been conflicting information whether the FBI received corrupted cellular data from cell carriers. Quote, there is conflicting information as to whether the FBI received con corrupted cellular data from the major cell carriers.
A former senior FBI official testified that the major cell carrier companies provided corrupted cell data to the FBI and suggested that that corrupted data may have contained the identity of the pipe bomber. However, in responses to letters from the subcommittee, the major cell carriers confirmed that they did not provide corrupted data to the FBI and that the FBI never notified them of any issues with assessing the cellular data, the house report stated. For years, we've been told an unidentified suspect planted pipe bombs at the RNC and DNC headquarters on January 5, the night before the Capitol riot. The FBI still can't find the person who planted the bombs. We encourage everyone to read the rest of this article.
It's very detailed and includes a lot of information that apparently the FBI can't collect, but journalists can.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#4 - Medical Freedom Attorney Drops Measles Vaccine Bombshell Did you know that the death rate from measles declined by 98% BEFORE the measles vaccine was introduced? “This is all on the CDC website… That decline had nothing to do with vaccines.” So, if vaccines didn’t do it, what caused that decline from 1900 to 1963? The answer is better nutrition, better sanitation, clean water, etc., according to Attorney @AaronSiriSG. He explains, “That declining rate of mortality—it was a trajectory that was ongoing even when the measles vaccine was introduced in ’63. So those 400 [measles] deaths [per year], which have now gone down, how much of that is attributable to the measles vaccine? How much of it is to the continued efforts of public health agencies? “That could be debated forever. We don’t need to. But the important point is… when you listen to public health authorities today, they will say to you, ‘Measles is what caused the decline.’ ‘Measles vaccine is what caused the decline in mortality.’ They never talk about those other things that they did.” Chart via Physicians for Informed Consent
Video Transcript AI Summary
The death rate from measles declined by over 98% in the U.S. from 1900 to 1963, before the introduction of the measles vaccine, according to data from the CDC. This decline is attributed to improvements in nutrition, sanitation, clean water, and public health initiatives, rather than the vaccine itself. Prior to the vaccine, around 400 Americans died from measles annually. While measles can still be deadly, especially in underdeveloped areas, the significant drop in mortality was already in progress before the vaccine's introduction. Public health authorities often credit the vaccine for this decline, overlooking the other contributing factors.
Additionally, it's important to protect your home from title theft, which can lead to severe financial consequences. Home Title Lock offers services to safeguard your property and provide alerts for any changes.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Medical Freedom Attorney drops measles vaccine bombshell. Did you know that the death rate from measles declined by 98% before the measles vaccine was introduced? It's all on the CDC website. That decline had nothing to do with vaccines. So if vaccines didn't do it, what caused that decline from 1900 to 1963?
The answer is better nutrition, better sanitation, clean water, etcetera, according to attorney Aaron Siri. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1: Public health authorities should take credit for the decline in measles deaths in America. They should. But they should take credit in the following way. Between the year 1900, this is all on the CDC website, what I'm about to tell you, and the year 1960, 61, 62, the year before the first measles vaccine in America, 1963, the mortality rate for measles declined by over 98%. Yes.
By over 98%. That is you can just go pull up the mortality data on the CDC website. This is uncontroversial. It's just data, what I just said. Some people get emotional about it, but it's just data, what I just said.
How do they get emotional? For the reasons we just discussed. That decline had nothing to do with vaccines. You know how I know? There was no measles vaccine.
That's how I know. What what what caused that decline? I I I think that in part, it's the public health, health authorities should take a lot of credit for that. Nutrition centers. Better sanitation, clean water, getting sewage running out of the streets.
Right. Right? All of these things, initiatives to make sure that there's natural light. Like, remember all the tenement buildings? Yes.
All these initiatives. Even basic things like quarantine. Oh, if you're sick, not that not to kind of force kind of stay at home stuff that we're talking about. Just if you're sick, hey, maybe you should stay at home in bed kind of stuff. And so that decline, 98 over 98%.
Know how many people died in the few years, on average, a year before there was the first measles vaccine in 1963 when pox of this country were still like the developed world? Around 400 Americans a year died. That's 1 in 500,000 Americans died of measles in the years before they were vaccine. Every death's a tragedy. And measles can still kill people just like any virus can in parts of the world that are really underdeveloped.
Any virus can kill children, adults. And there are still pockets of America in the early sixties that were like that. But that declining rate of mortality, it was a trajectory that was ongoing even when the measles vaccine was introduced in 63. So those 400 deaths which have now gone down, how much of that is attributable to measles vaccine? How much of it is to the continued efforts of public health agencies?
Right? We we that could be debated forever. We don't need to. But the important point is this. Long way to answer your question is this.
When you listen to public health authorities today, they will say to you measles is what caused the decline. Measles vaccine is what caused the decline in mortality. They never talk about those other things that they did.
Speaker 0: Amazing revelations there from Aaron Siri. Now the FBI calls it house stealing, and you've probably heard about this devastating crime on the news because it's a big problem. Scammers can transfer your home title, take out loans in your name, and leave you with nothing but a financial and emotional disaster. If you own a home or any real estate, it is crucial you protect your property and equity from these criminals. There's no better way I know of than home title lock dot com slash vnn.
If you haven't checked it out before, now is the time. We've arranged for our listeners to get a free title scan to check if your home is still in your name, plus 30 days of free home title locks, triple lock protection. That's 247 monitoring of your title, urgent alerts if anything has changed, and most importantly, restoration of your title. If there's ever any fraud, you will immediately be protected and will get 30 days free when you use the promo code VNN at sign up. Protect your home, your equity, and your peace of mind today at home title lock dot com slash vnn with promo code VNN.
There's no better time to secure your most valuable asset. Visit hometitlelock.com/vnn.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#3 - Joe Rogan podcast exposes the “miraculous” benefits of a natural compound banned by the US government.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Ibogaine, derived from the Iboga shrub in Central Africa, shows promise as a treatment for PTSD, opioid addiction, and traumatic brain injury. It resets brain pathways, potentially breaking addiction cycles in just one or two sessions, unlike traditional therapies that can take years. Despite its potential, Ibogaine is classified as a Schedule 1 substance in the U.S. A recent Stanford study found veterans treated with Ibogaine experienced significant reductions in PTSD, depression, and anxiety symptoms. Advocates like Rick Perry and W. Brian Hubbard share success stories, including a man with advanced Parkinson's who regained mobility after a low-dose Ibogaine treatment, which he sought as a last resort after invasive surgery failed. This outcome has been described as miraculous.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The miracle drug for PTSD that you've never heard of. The miracle drug that you've never heard of could be the cure for PTSD, opioid addiction, and traumatic brain injury and more. But the government doesn't want you to know about it because its use threatens multi $1,000,000,000 markets for antidepressants, opioids, and other therapies. The drug is Ibogaine, which comes from the root bark of the Iboga shrub native to Central Africa. Ibogaine works by resetting and rewiring the brain's neural path ways apparently.
This in turn addresses the root causes of addiction, breaking the cycle in just 1 or 2 sessions rather than requiring years of medication or therapy. However, despite its life saving potential, Ibogaine remains classified as a schedule 1 substance in the United States, a category reserved for drugs with no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. In January 24, Stanford Medical Medicine researchers published a groundbreaking study in Nature Medicine. They found veterans treated with Ibogaine experienced an average reduction of 88% in PTSD symptoms, 87% in depression symptoms, and 81% in anxiety symptoms. The functional improvements were also profound.
Disability ratings improved dramatically, dropping from an average of 30 point 2 mild to moderate disability before treatment to 5.1, no disability 1 month after treatment. Rick Perry, the former governor of Texas and W. Brian Hubbard, formerly the chairman and executive director of the Kentucky Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission, began their advocacy for Ibogaine in the early 20 twenties. Hubbard shared the story of a man whose advanced Parkinson's disease left him bed fast by age 51. After invasive brain surgery failed to restore movement, he turned to Ibogaine as a last resort.
Following a full week low dose treatment, the man regained his the ability to stand, walk, and function, an outcome Hubbard called nothing short of miraculous. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1: Just about 2 weeks ago, governor Perry and I had the privilege of spending some time with a researcher who is based out of the University of Zurich in Switzerland. This researcher has developed a protocol for the treatment of Parkinson's symptoms with Ibogaine. We had the privilege of visiting with one of his patients who wishes to remain anonymous as well as a family member of this patient. We were shown a video whereby this individual had developed Parkinson's disease at the age of 41. It had advanced so aggressively that by age 51, this gentleman was completely bedfast.
As a last resort, he underwent an invasive intracranial surgical procedure called deep brain stimulation, where they drilled holes through his skull and implanted electrodes, which were designed to stimulate the production of what is called glioneurotropic growth factor, which essentially stimulates the dopamine receptors to produce dopamine, the absence of which is implicated in the development of Parkinson's disease. And while this gentleman was no longer bedfast, he was not able to volitionally control his bodily movements. The video that we saw demonstrated his attempts to stand and walk, and the ability to walk was nonexistent. After, he had undergone the deep brain stimulation, he signed up for euthanasia services in the country in which he lives because it is legal, and he was at the end of his rope. He underwent a 4 week course of upward titration with low dose Ibogaine that did not produce a psychoactive experience.
And at the end of those 4 weeks, that gentleman was able to stand, walk, and function as a normal human being. The outcome is nothing short of miraculous.
Speaker 0: Certainly, a very controversial yet interesting story. We've linked the full episode of that Joe Rogan experience onto the vigilant news network article at the bottom. You can watch it there.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#2 - New Study Finds COVID-19 'Vaccination' Doubles Risk of Post-COVID Death
Video Transcript AI Summary
A new study published in Frontiers in Medicine reveals that COVID-19 vaccination may double the risk of post-COVID death after one year. The research analyzed over 15,000 severe acute respiratory syndrome cases in Brazil from 2020 to 2023, finding that while vaccination initially reduced mortality risk, this effect reversed long-term. The study recorded 5,157 deaths, with higher risks among older adults and those with less education. The authors suggest that the initial protective effect could be linked to healthier behaviors among vaccinated individuals, while long-term risks may arise from vaccine-related adverse effects. The findings call for further investigation into these trends, emphasizing the need for reevaluation of vaccination policies. The discussion also highlights the broader implications for public health and the urgent need for accountability regarding vaccine safety.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Breaking. New study finds COVID 19 vaccination doubles the risk of post COVID death. This is from Nicholas Hulscher. A few days ago, the study titled evaluation of post COVID mortality risk in cases classified as severe acute respiratory syndrome in Brazil, a longitudinal study for medium and long term, was published in Frontiers in Medicine. The background.
There are few studies in the literature evaluating post COVID mortality in Brazil along medium and long term, especially in those who presented severe clinical disease. The objective, this study aims to investigate the factors associated with post COVID mortality of severe acute respiratory syndrome cases or SARS from 2020 to 2023 in Brazil along medium and long term. The methods retrospective cohort study using notification data of SARS classified as COVID 19 from the Brazilian National Information System during the period 2020 to 2023. Data included demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, number of COVID 19 vaccine doses, city of residents, and survival outcomes. Classic COX, COX mixed effects, and COX fragility models were used to assess medium and long term risks of dying post COVID.
The results show in the medium and long term period studied, 5,157 deaths were recorded out of over 15,000 reported SARS COVID 19 cases. Of these deaths, 91.5% occurred within the 1st year, while 8.5% after the 1st year. People without formal education, the older adult, had higher percentages of deaths in both periods. In the medium term post COVID period, the risk of death was reduced by 8% for those who had been vaccinated, while in the long term post COVID period, the risk of death almost doubled for those who had been vaccinated. While in the medium term, there was a reduction in mortality risk for those who took 2 or 3 doses, in the long term, the risk of death was greater for those who took none or 2 doses.
1 or 2 doses rather. The conclusion, the protective effect of COVID 19 immunization was observed up to 1 year after the first symptoms. After 1 year, the effect was reversed showing an increased risk of death for those vaccinated. These results highlight the need for further research to elucidate the factors that contribute to these findings. As illustrated in the Kaplan Meier survival scores, over the long term, those that refused COVID 19 injections were less likely to die compared to vaccinated individuals.
While vaccination initially reduced post COVID mortality risk in the medium term, these protective this protective effect completely reversed in the long term, ultimately doubling the risk of death. The author said that the, quote, unquote, protective effect in the medium term could have been due to some of the following factors, including the fact that perhaps vaccination could be associated with healthier behaviors or greater health awareness or access to health care in general. The authors then gave possible reasons behind the complete reversal to doubling the risk of health in the long term, for example, adverse events, effects of the vaccines, and the COVID 19 vaccine may have an indirect effect on the immune system. This study corroborates Alessandria et al who found that COVID 19 vaccination reduced life expectancy by 37% and increased all cause death risks during the 2 year follow-up period. These data help explain why at least 17,000,000 people may have died from COVID 19, quote, unquote, vaccination as demonstrated by Rancour et al.
Life reducing injections should not be recommended for anyone and must be immediately removed from global markets to safeguard the public from further injury and death. In the United States, COVID 19 genetic injections are estimated to have caused more deaths than American casualties in World War 1 and World War 2 combined. The death toll even rivals the scale of the civil war. This is a profound national tragedy, and accountability is urgently warranted. Whilst we are appreciative and grateful for yet another study, evidencing what many, including yours truly in this platform and millions of others around the world have been saying since day dot.
How many more studies are required before the powers that be at bare minimum put an absolute direct moratorium on these injections, if not ban them altogether from worldwide use immediately? These psychopaths and government bureaucrats and current so called health experts have had us scrambling through the data for 4 years now. We're in the 5th year. In a recent interview with doctor Mary Talley Bowden and Kallie Means, Means alluded to the fact that we need more data and investigation. This is yet another example of just kicking the can down the road.
Meanwhile, millions of people are dead, likely more than those killed by food die, by the way. The elephant is in the room and he's crushing us all up against the wall. Enough is enough. America was promised better health. This can't happen with self spreading lethal injections floating around the country.
Ban them. Ban them now. It is a new day in America and a new incoming administration in Washington DC. There is a lot of excitement and optimism about the future, but the reality is there is a lot of work to do, especially when it comes to fixing our broken healthcare system. The truth is that the forces that are responsible for breaking our healthcare system, aren't going to simply go away.
The challenges our system faces won't disappear overnight. Now more than ever, you need to be prepared. That's where the wellness company comes in. Their doctors are medical professionals that you can trust, and their line of prescription medical kits are the gold standard when it comes to keeping you safe and healthy. Whether it is the medical emergency kit, the contagion kit, the first aid kit, or the travel kit, these prescription kits contain an assortment of life saving medications and guidebooks to assist in the proper use of these medications.
From the flu to strep throat, from COVID to the bird flu, from a trip to the beach to a trip overseas, the wellness company has a prescription kit designed to keep you and your family safe. Make America healthy again starts at home. Do your part and protect the health of you and your family. Go to twc.healthforward/blackout today in order. That's twc.healthforward/blackout, and use the promo code blackout to save 10%.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
#1 - Cybertruck bomber Matthew Livelsberger’s “manifesto” claims the U.S. faces a “checkmate” scenario from drone capabilities.
Video Transcript AI Summary
America is reeling from recent attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas, with connections emerging to Fort Bragg. The Las Vegas suspect, Matthew Livelsberger, linked to a military reality show, left behind manifesto letters in a burning Cybertruck, claiming his actions were a wake-up call, not terrorism. He warned about drones using gravitic propulsion systems, a technology only possessed by China and the U.S. Livelsberger's email detailed threats to national security and alleged war crimes during military operations. Questions remain about the authenticity of his emails and the circumstances surrounding the attack, as authorities continue their investigation. Vigilance is urged as more information develops. Stay informed and safe.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now America and the world has been rocked this week by the attack in New Orleans and in Las Vegas. We said at the outset of this program and we'd like to repeat again that our hearts go out to the victims and all affected by these tragic events And a lot has since come out about the Tesla Cybertruck, not so much about the New Orleans attacker, although we did have what appeared to be a very interesting staged allowance of, mainstream media journalists being able to go into a terrorist house with an active investigation just hours after the attack, which was really fascinating in my opinion. But the two connections that I've been able to find is that both of these men were linked to Fort Bragg as well as previous reporting from the Gateway Pundit suggested Ryan Ruth was also linked to Fort Bragg. So we're going to examine what we know so far, and, of course, as the story develops, we will continue to keep everyone abreast of that. Time to wake up.
Cybertruck bomber story takes a nightmarish turn. So the update is that the Las Vegas Cybertruck blast suspect, Matthew Livelsberger, took part in a military TV reality competition on the History Channel. It's very interesting much like we saw Thomas Crooks previously being featured in a BlackRock ad. Remember that everyone? Interesting.
So the details surrounding Cybertruck bomber Matthew Livelsberger continue to drip with 2 manifesto letters found in the Cybertruck itself and another manifesto he emailed to former Navy Seal, Sam Shumate. My immediate questions around this are, how did they find manifesto letters and his ID and a smartwatch and his phone in a Cybertruck that was burning and on fire with a body was pretty much unidentifiable except for a couple of tattoos, but I digress. In the letters found in the Cybertruck, Livelsberger described the USA as terminally ill and said his actions were meant as a wake up call and not a terrorist attack. This is according to the Las Vegas police who say they found 2 letters in the Cybertruck. The most intriguing, however, is the email he reportedly sent to Shoemate in which he warns that the drones seen around the United States over the last month are using gravatic propulsion systems, which only China and the United States possess.
Shumate shared the email on Sean Ryan's show writing on x, I knew taking this public would insert me into the glowy boy conspiracy cycle, especially since I'm an intelligence officer adding, I had no choice, dude dumped it in my inbox. When I saw his name in the news, I had little choice but to hand it over to the feds. I knew the FBI wouldn't release it or at least without an agenda attached, so I took it to Sean Ryan because he has the platform to handle the magnitude of this information and will do so as objectively as possible. According to Livelsberger's reported email, China has been launching them from the Atlantic first from submarines for years, but this activity recently has picked up. As of now, it is just a show of force as they are using it similar to how they use the balloon for SIGINT and ISR, which are also part of the integrated comms system, he writes.
They are the most dangerous threat to national security that has ever existed. They basically have an unlimited payload capacity and can park over the White House if they wanted. It's checkmate. Let's watch this excerpt from the interview together.
Speaker 1: Do you wanna read the man the the email? Yep. So this email came in on December 31st at 10:42 AM. That is Tuesday. He said, in case I do not make it to my decision point or onto the Mexico border, I am sending this now.
Please do not release this until 1 January and keep my identity private until then. First off, I'm not under duress or hostile influence or control. My first car was a 2006 black Ford Mustang V6 for verification. What we have been seeing with drones, he puts that in quotes, he says drones, is the operational use of gravitic propulsion systems powered aircraft by most recently China and the East Coast, but throughout history the US. Only we in China have this capability.
Our ops send, that's operation center, our ops send location for this activity in the in it is in the box below. China has been launching them from the Atlantic from submarines for years, but this activity recently has picked up. As of now, it is just a show of force and they are using it similar to how they use the balloon for SIGINT and ISR, which are also part of the integrated comm system. There are dozens of those balloons in the air at any given time. The so what is because of the speed and stealth of these unmanned aircraft.
They are the most dangerous threat to national security that has ever existed. They basically have an unlimited payload capacity and can park it over the White House if they wanted. It's Checkmate. US government needs to give the history of this. How we are employing it and weaponizing it.
How China is employing them and what they and what the way forward is. China is poised to attack anywhere in the East Coast. I've been followed for over a week now from likely Homeland or FBI, and they are looking to to move on me and are unlikely going to let me cross into Mexico, but won't because they know I am armed and I have a massive v bid. Let me pause right there for a second. So he says a massive VBID.
When I was talking to the FBI yesterday, they didn't know what a VBID was. I had to explain what that acronym meant literally. You fucking serious. Dead serious. I said it twice and he goes, you said that word VBID.
Can you tell me what that is? For your audience, a VBID. For your audience who has not been in the gua for the last 20 years, a VBID is a vehicle borne improvised explosive device. In layman's terms, a car bomb, what we saw at Trump Tower. So backing up, he says, I am armed and have a massive v bid.
I've been trying to maintain a very visible profile and have kept my phone and they are definitely digitally tracking me. Here's where it gets into the other stuff and this is where we had to redact the names. Well, your producer redact the names. I have knowledge of this program and also war crimes that were covered up during air strikes in Nemrut province, Afghanistan in 2019 by the admin, DOD, DEA, and CIA. I conducted targeting for these strikes of over 125 buildings, 65 were struck because of civ cast, that's civilian casualties, that killed 100 of civilians in a single day.
USFORA continued strikes after spotting civilians on initial ISR. It was supposed to take 6 minutes and scramble all aircraft in CENTCOM. The UN basically called these war crimes, but the administration made them disappear. I was part of that cover up with US USFORA, an agent redacted of the DEA. So I don't know if my abduction attempt is related to either.
I worked with redacted. I owe staff on this as well as the response to Balaamurghab redacted commander at the time redacted can validate this. You need to elevate this to the media so we avoid a world war because this is a mutually assured destruction situation. Then he says, for vetting, my LinkedIn is Matt Berg or Matthew Lippelsberger, an active duty 18 Zulu out of 110 of First Battalion 10 Special Forces Group. My profile is public.
I have an active TSSCI with UAP, USAP access. What is USAP? Do you know what that is? I don't know what that is. But I checked his credentials on LinkedIn.
So that was the first thing I did. I went to his LinkedIn page. First thing I noticed was all of his bonus feeds were in were in place. He has all the UAS training from USASOC and everything else. And so I said, okay.
At least the guy knows what he's talking about with drones. That was a very rough dig into the guy, but my issue was I couldn't validate or verify any of this information. And I told him that. And how I responded to him was in a subsequent email. I said I said, this is obviously a very big deal, but I don't have anything to verify this information with.
Talking about gravitic propulsion systems without evidence just makes me another UFO talking head. Like, I'm I'm not gonna go on my social media page and start talking about UFOs and Yeah. Anti gravity systems. You know, I don't I don't know what you're talking about. I can't and he said, can I get on Fox News contact on signal as well as Sean's show?
Hegseth would be good too. That was his last message to me. Wow. Yeah. You know, the thing is, what is a gravitic propulsion system?
Speaker 0: So Laura Loomis says, I can confirm the Cybertruck bomber's claim in his manifesto about having a Ford Mustang, which he shipped from Germany last year. I've obtained a copy of the port shipment from a source. Matthew had the car shipped from Germany to Galveston, Texas. As well as this, we have Littlesburger being allegedly recorded at a Tesla charging station on the way to Las Vegas. I say allegedly because at no point can you actually see his face, and the only time where it would be possible to see his face.
There's kind of a headlamp, covering his face. So that's why I I say that. You can read the entire email linked, below on the Vigilant News Network article. We've we've added all of it there for you to review yourself. So since its release or rather even before its release, Sean Ryan announced that he and his family are disappearing for a few days.
He said his account will be active, but it will not be him behind the wheel. And he said what we're about to release is mind boggling and will raise a lot of questions. Now the questions that some people have, and this is, by the way, acknowledged by Sam. I don't think people are doubting the emails exist. I think they're doubting whether they were sent by Matt or someone impersonating him.
For what it's worth, here's the chain though, so he's provided that chain. There are many questions I and many still have, including the one just posed by Sam. Are we certain this came from Matt? The authorities say it did. They don't have the best track record of telling us the truth.
Just look at the j 6 pipe bomber story on the FBI earlier in the broadcast. As well as this, his military ID, which we're told is made of plastic card stock, survived the flames apparently, even the heat, as well as his manifesto in his phone where they found a message that said, this was not a terrorist attack, but a wake up call and encourage the public to rally behind Trump, Elon, and Kennedy while blowing up Elon's vehicle in front of Trump's building. One thing is certain, there are more questions than answers, but what is absolutely clear is that it would appear that there is some sort of preparation in escalation for violence or attacks. And we ask everybody out there to think critically, ask questions, keep your head on a swivel, stay vigilant, and keep yourself and your families safe. We will, of course, keep you updated as more developments arise.
And that's all that we have time for this evening folks. Please make sure to go and follow us on free speech platform Rumble and let everyone know to do the same. Please also make sure to like, give us your thoughts in the comments and share this broadcast widely and remember to bookmark the post on X. It really helps your favorite accounts increase their visibility, so you can help them and us by bookmarking posts. Follow Vigilant News and Vigilant Fox on X.
Visit the Vigilant News Network website for regular updates, and find me on X also atz_media. That's ztriplee_media. We'll be back next Sunday at 6 PM with the truth the mainstream media desperately does not want you to hear, but you can be sure we will be here to tell you all about it. Until then, stay informed, stay vigilant. Good night, everyone.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
BONUS #1 - Natural Compounds that Target and Disrupt Bird Flu Infection https://vigilantnews.com/post/natural-compounds-that-target-and-disrupt-bird-flu-infection/
Natural Compounds that Target and Disrupt Bird Flu Infection
Getting ahead of unsafe and ineffective government countermeasures.
vigilantnews.com
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
BONUS #2 - Biden Quietly Bans Most Gas-Powered Tankless Water Heaters https://vigilantnews.com/post/biden-quietly-bans-most-gas-powered-tankless-water-heaters/
Biden Quietly Bans Most Gas-Powered Tankless Water Heaters
This is actually happening.
vigilantnews.com
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
BONUS #3 - Donald Trump’s COVID ‘Game-Changer’ Finds Surprising New Use https://vigilantnews.com/post/donald-trumps-covid-game-changer-finds-surprising-new-use/
Donald Trump’s COVID ‘Game-Changer’ Finds Surprising New Use
As Ivermectin emerges as a cancer treatment, Hydroxychloroquine shows effectiveness against another target disease.
vigilantnews.com
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
BONUS #4 - HORROR: Georgia Judge Kills Himself Inside in His Own Courtroom https://vigilantnews.com/post/horror-georgia-judge-kills-himself-inside-in-his-own-courtroom/
HORROR: Georgia Judge Kills Himself Inside in His Own Courtroom
Judge Stephen Yekel leaves behind four children.
vigilantnews.com
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
BONUS #5 - Jordan Peterson: ‘This is the Worst Scandal I’ve Ever Heard Of' https://vigilantnews.com/post/jordan-peterson-this-is-the-worst-scandal-ive-ever-heard-of-on-uk-child-abuse-cover-up/
Jordan Peterson: ‘This is the Worst Scandal I’ve Ever Heard Of’ on UK Child Abuse Cover-Up
The UK's response to Pakistani gang abuse faces criticism for victimizing whistleblowers and ignoring allegations.
vigilantnews.com
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Thanks for watching! We’ll be back next Sunday at 6 PM Eastern with another hard-hitting episode. In other news, Elon Musk is going OFF on the UK government—and for good reason. Discover what’s at stake and why Elon is speaking out here: https://t.co/cSNse0sGjD
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk vs. the UK Establishment: Exposing the Web of Censorship, Corruption, and Control Elon Musk’s outrage over the hypocrisy of the UK justice system is exposing a disturbing pattern they don’t want you to see. Not only is the govt covering up pedophile r*pe gangs, but they are interfering in elections, enabling CCDH’s dark agenda, and enforcing extreme censorship. The evidence of these crimes is becoming all too clear, and UK citizens are at their breaking point. Let’s dive into what’s at stake and why Elon is speaking out. 🧵 THREAD
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Side Note: Tell me serial Community Notes submitters Enterprising Desert Raven and Resplendent Cedar Osprey aren’t the same person without telling me they’re the same person. This wasn't even the claim made in the post. It was about the disturbing details within the 2018 DEFUSE proposal to DARPA. However, what are the chances that those two separate accounts would use the same exact three resources? This is just one example of many. These two (or should I say one) accounts submit notes on 80% of my posts and accounts similar to mine. @ElonMusk, I believe this is a clear abuse of Community Notes and undermines the spirit of the system. There should be weekly limits on how many notes a single account can submit against an individual to prevent this kind of harassment and manipulation.
reSee.it AI Summary
I just watched a CNN segment criticizing Elon Musk for his comments on the UK r*pe gang scandal. They framed it as Musk attacking a key ally, with clips suggesting he's targeting UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and influencing European politics negatively. The tone was harsh, labeling Musk's statements as sensationalist and questioning his motives. I find this coverage absolutely disgusting.
@WesternLensman - Western Lensman
CNN just ran a five-minute segment attacking @elonmusk for speaking out against the r*pe gang scandal in the UK. This is how they framed it: Tapper: "Musk is taking aim at a staunch U.S. ally." Chyron: "Elon Musk lashes out at UK Prime Minister." Robertson: "Elon Musk is dialing up attacks on European politicians." Chyron: "European leaders push back on Elon Musk’s influence." Robertson: "Musk is using his social media platform X to trash UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer." Starmer clip: “Poison of the far right." Robertson: “Musk's inaccurate and sensationalist accusations are catching UK politicians off guard." Robertson: "How far right does [Musk] want to take them?" ---- Absolutely disgusting. This is CNN.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk has intensified his criticism of European politicians, particularly targeting the UK government over a child abuse scandal involving gangs of British Pakistani men. He accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of failing to act during his tenure as chief prosecutor. In response, Starmer condemned Musk's attacks as dangerous and inaccurate. Musk also criticized Jess Phillips, a government official responsible for child safeguarding, calling her "plain evil." Meanwhile, Musk's relationship with Nigel Farage has soured over differing views on controversial figures like Tommy Robinson. As Musk aligns with far-right candidates in Europe, questions arise about his political ambitions and strategies, particularly regarding the Labour Party's dominance in the UK.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mayor Elon Musk decided to more assertively enter the American political discourse. He has not shied away from expressing strong opinions, already skirmishing with US politicians, and now he's attacking several European politicians. Musk's focus for the past few days has been over the UK, over a scandal that involved thousands of girls raped there for decades by what an independent inquiry confirmed for gangs of mostly British Pakistani men. Musk is taking aim at a staunch US ally, the UK, that Trump will need a strong relationship with, faulting, among others, the British prime minister for not doing more to stop those horrific crimes when he was director of public prosecutions for the UK's crime protective services. Musk today writing on, x, quote, America should liberate the people of Britain from their tyrannical government, unquote.
CNN's Nick Robertson has been following this and joins me now from London. And, Nick, obviously, the government of London is a democracy. It's not a it's not a tyranny, but what is the response there to these horrific scandals as well as, Musk attacking the prime minister?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I think, on the one hand, you had the British prime minister doing what a former prosecutor does, which is not get drawn into the other side's argument, if you will, and relitigate something that was very painful for the country, that the country went through, and that there were inquiries. And the they came out during the last conservative government who, over the course of 8 years, didn't do anything about it, but that wasn't wasn't mentioned by Elon Musk. Nevertheless, this is very dangerous stuff for this British government at the moment despite its massive majority, and it's got some of them worried. Elon Musk.
Elon Musk is dialing up attacks on European politicians. The barbs aimed at Britain coming thick, fast, and painful using his social media platform x to trash UK prime minister Keir Starmer for alleged failings in a child abuse scandal involving gangs of South Asian men in multiple UK cities grooming the vulnerable young girls. That was when Starmer was the UK's chief prosecutor more than a decade ago. Starmer is firing back.
Speaker 2: We've seen this playbook many times, whipping up of, intimidation and threats of violence.
Speaker 1: I I I said Musk's betrayal sharpest against Jess Phillips, the government official charged with safeguarding children, calling her plain evil and a wicked creature who should be in prison for not sanctioning a nationwide inquiry, but a local one instead.
Speaker 2: When the poison of the far right leads to serious threats to Jess Phillips and others, But in my book, a line has been crossed.
Speaker 1: Musk's inaccurate and sensationalist accusations are catching UK politicians off guard, and Musk is also attacking a staunch Trump ally, Nigel Farage, saying Farage doesn't have what it takes to lead his upstart reform UK party.
Speaker 3: We've got our country back.
Speaker 1: Farage, the British populist who pushed Brexit just hours before Musk's put down, had counted the tech titan a supporter who might finance his fledgling party.
Speaker 3: The fact that he supports me politically and supports reform doesn't mean I have to agree with every single statement he makes on x.
Speaker 1: Why the falling out? Possible differences over this man known as Tommy Robinson, a jailed anti Muslim campaigner who fanned the flames of racist riots last summer. Musk praises him. Farage doesn't. UK elections are years away, but Musk is now championing some of Europe's more extreme far right candidates even over some of the more well known right wing voices.
Speaker 3: 10 years ago, who would have imagined if we have been told that the owner of one of the largest social networks in the world would support a new international
Speaker 1: party ahead of elections there next month. But Italy is now rewarding Musk's rightward European tilt. The populist right wing PM Georgia Maloney just visited with president-elect Donald Trump seemingly nudging a $1,600,000,000 SpaceX deal with Italy closer to the world's richest man. So I think the the question that's being asked by a lot of people, politicians in particular in Europe, is how far right does Musk wanna go? Is he picking up the baton of Steve Bannon, who during Trump's last administration as adviser back then was really trying to rally the European far right, make them into a bigger political force?
Well, that's kind of happened and Musk seems to be pushing that forward. How far right does he wanna take them? And if you look at the example in the UK, that is worryingly apparently to the right. And I think the other question, you know, that that that ponders the mind of politicians in the UK specifically, if he is targeting the Labour Party that have a massive majority and are 4 to 5 years away from another election, this must be a long term strategy. How long will it last?
@ben_kew - Ben Kew
According to BBC Newsnight, Britain's socialist government are considering ending their security partnership with the U.S. unless Donald Trump distances himself from Elon Musk's views on grooming gangs. https://t.co/024Qbg1iaH
Video Transcript AI Summary
Concerns are rising about the implications of Elon Musk's incendiary language and whether it reflects the views of the incoming Trump administration. If it does, serious questions may arise regarding the UK-US security partnership. Defense Secretary John Healy emphasized the strength of the UK-US relationship, particularly within the Five Eyes alliance, which includes Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. The critical issue is whether such a partnership can endure if the next president endorses Musk's views. The stance of Trump on this matter remains uncertain.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Horror at the highest levels of the government, at the incendiary language we have seen from Elon Musk. And there's going to be, as I understand it, a hard headed assessment. Is this just the view of Elon Musk, or is it the view of the wider administration and the incoming president Donald Trump? If it's the latter, then there may well be some very, very serious questions about the nature of our ongoing security partnership with the United States. Wow.
John Healy, the defense secretary today, was saying that the UK US security relationship is the closest we've got in the world. We're members of the Five Eyes group with the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. Can you have that level of sharing everything if this sort of stuff is endorsed by the next president of the United States? The question the answer to that question, does Trump agree with this? Don't know that one yet.
No. What
@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters
This dude thinks the real threat is @ElonMusk. Not the mass coverup of the grooming gang story. Insane. https://t.co/ymhG6t5U4E
Video Transcript AI Summary
The real risk in the US isn't multiculturalism but rather a billionaire controlling a major social media platform that promotes a narrow ideology. Growing up in multicultural Birmingham, I can assure you that Muslims who genuinely read the Quran do not endorse violence.
In response, I find your personal attacks unconvincing. Young working-class girls from similar backgrounds might disagree with your views. I've read the Quran and recognize the issues surrounding child brides and sexual violence, which are not exclusive to the West. The phenomenon of grooming gangs seems primarily linked to Muslim men and has been exacerbated by mass migration.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And it's the
Speaker 1: real risk you have in the US isn't multiculturalism. It's a multi billionaire running the biggest social media planet, one of the biggest in the world, which has turned into an echo chamber of your ridiculous ideology. And the fact that you're telling us all and telling the British public, who we're proudly multicultural, and someone that was brought up in multicultural working class Birmingham, I can tell you for sure that there's not a you won't find a Muslim there who's read the Quran and went, oh, you know what? It didn't rule out sexual violence, so I might I might just crack on with that. You you I don't know what planet you're living on or what you're smoking, but I suggest that you do a course in religious studies before you start chatting.
Speaker 0: Well, thanks for the ad hominem attacks. I'm sure that means you have a really strong argument, but I think the young working class girls who probably grew up in the same areas that you did would beg to differ. I I don't understand what you're saying. I've read the Quran. I've seen what's in there.
Even if you don't think that my interpretation of the Quran is correct, I would point you to, I don't know, what countries have the most issues when it comes to child brides and raping of young girls and children is obviously a systemic cultural problem, with Islam. It's not a problem that is contained or unique to the west. And I don't know. Last time I checked, the sole grooming gang phenomenon is what contained primarily to Muslim men, and it really only started when you started seeing mass migrate.
@LozzaFox - Laurence Fox
Look at the desperation in the snakes eyes as their carefully crafted narrative crumbles. @SkyNews @BBCNews @GBNEWS all the @Ofcom regulated news channels are just regime mouthpieces whose licences depend on the ideological leanings of the regulator. https://t.co/dzrymmZg6Z
Video Transcript AI Summary
Had the necessary actions been taken regarding this individual in recent years, those girls would still be alive.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: No doubt in my mind. Had people done their job better in the last few years in relation to this man, those girls will still be alive.
@cb_doge - DogeDesigner
MAYE MUSK: "Since Elon showed the Twitter files where the FBI was paying millions to Twitter to stay Democratic and to get rid of the Republicans, I now don't trust the press and media at all." https://t.co/fRm8UA8hiX
Video Transcript AI Summary
Since the revelation of the Twitter files showing the FBI paid Twitter to suppress Republican voices, trust in the press has diminished. The situation has led to a decision to only engage with Fox News and avoid other media outlets.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Since Elon showed the Twitter files where the FBI was paying 1,000,000 to Twitter to stay democratic and get rid of the republicans, I mean, you you and I paid to have republicans removed from Twitter. I now don't trust the press at all, and, so right. Let's let's work. I'll only come to Fox News. I won't go anywhere else.
And, and x. That's that's the media. I I
@RealAlexJones - Alex Jones
BREAKING! USAID Was Secretly Funding The BBC To Run Anti-Trump/Musk Reporting Similar To The $300 Million Given By The Biden Administration To Reuters To Target Musk! MUST-WATCH https://t.co/GCUQKk5zmj
reSee.it AI Summary
I see the legacy media, like Sky News and the BBC, in a complete meltdown over Trump and Musk exposing government corruption. They’re trying to gaslight the public, claiming Americans don’t want transparency, but the truth is that millions are celebrating as the Deep State is being dismantled. These media elites believe they can control the narrative and dictate what we should believe. However, the truth is out, and they’re struggling to defend the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats they’ve shielded for so long. The people are awake, and their lies are failing.
@JimFergusonUK - Jim Ferguson
🚨 LEGACY MEDIA IN TOTAL MELTDOWN OVER MUSK & TRUMP EXPOSING GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION! 🚨 🔴 Sky News, the BBC, and the rest of the globalist media cartel are in full panic mode as Trump & Musk tear the mask off government fraud. 🔴 They’re openly gaslighting the public, pretending that Americans don’t want transparency. 🔴 The reality? Millions are cheering as the Deep State is finally being dismantled. These media elites think they can control the narrative. They think they can tell you what to believe. But the TRUTH is out, and they’re scrambling to cover for the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats they’ve protected for years. 🔥 The people are awake. The lies aren’t working anymore. The mainstream media is DONE. 🔥
Video Transcript AI Summary
Looking at these pictures, when the story of Donald Trump's second presidency is told, this image will be near the top. It shows a president justifying an assault on the Federal Government in the Oval Office with Elon Musk.
This individual was sent in to root out waste and abuse in government. Most of the country is for that, but we haven't seen accountability. Trump ran on disrupting and reforming government, but nobody saw Musk coming or the young people sent to sack thousands without justification.
If people can't vote and have their will decided by elected representatives, we don't have a democracy. Describing bureaucracy as an unconstitutional branch of government is a stretch. Trump opened the news conference talking about billions in waste and fraud and judges objecting to weeding out corruption. Team Trump is leaning on the judges, the legal system, and the public.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, looking at these pictures, when the story of Donald Trump, certainly the Donald Trump second presidency is told, I think that picture will be near the top. Quite a remarkable event. That's a president of The United States justifying a full scale assault on the Federal Government in the Oval Office with, with Elon Musk by his side. I mean, the most awkward news conference, starring the worst awkward man with his son picking his nose, and Musk, you know, talking as he does in slogans. And I think that's part of the problem, actually.
You know, this is an individual sent in to root out waste and abuse in government. I think most of the country is for that. What we haven't seen is accountability. That's the main criticism, and I'm not sure they got much of it there. But to your point about elected representatives, people voting for something and individuals to do their work, then no, we're not seeing that.
Yes, Donald Trump, ran on a platform of disrupting, of reforming Government and, indeed, rooting out waste, but nobody saw Elon Musk coming. Nobody saw the half dozen young men that have been sent into these federal agencies to sack people by the thousand. And, as I say, to this point, not justify it. Don't not deliver the kind of accountability and detailed justification that America probably wants to see. Certainly, the workers at the heart of this want to see.
I think, Yalda actually, just let me refer to one line he came away with. If people can't vote and have their will decided by elected representatives, a president and a senate. We don't have a democracy. He then said, we have this unconstitutional branch of government. The bureaucracy doesn't match the will of the people.
Well, the will of the people very much, over time has been to construct a layer of bureaucracy to deal with America's interests, the interests of the people, whether that's social security payments or high finance. So, you know, describing bureaucracy as an unconstitutional branch of government is a stretch, to say the least. But what I would say, Ialda, is that I think they've been bounced into this by the objections of more than one judge around the country. Trump opened this news conference by talking about billions of waste and fraud. Hard to believe, he said, that a judge could say, we don't want you to weed out corruption.
He called that a very serious violation. There is a debate going on here right now on the back of judges' objections on matters like sacking thousands at USAID, closing that down, the business of access to the Treasury central payment system. Separate judges have said you cannot do that, and we see this debate now. Certainly, team Trump are leaning on the judges, leaning on the legal system, leaning on pub.
@america - America
President Trump discusses how legacy media attempted and failed to drive he and Elon Musk apart. https://t.co/Qo1hP5wlxH
Video Transcript AI Summary
The media and punditry threw everything they had at me, but they didn't win. Now they want to drive a wedge between Elon and me, even suggesting I've ceded control of the presidency to him.
But it's so obvious what they're doing. They're not even good at it. If they were, I never would have become president. I get 98% bad publicity, but the people are smart. They see what's happening.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Aware, you have to be keenly aware that the media and and the punditry class, not that you know, I think you've proven they have no power anymore, because they threw everything they had at you, and they didn't win. And that was, you know, the New York Times, Washington Post, three networks, every late night comedy show, two cable channels. They they just threw they threw everything, lawfare, weaponization. And now I see they want you two to start they they want a divorce. They want you two to start hating each other, and they try oh, President Elon Musk, for example.
You do know that they're doing that to you.
Speaker 1: Oh, I see it all the time. They they tried it, then they stopped. That wasn't they have many different things, of hatred. Actually, Elon called me. He said, you know, they're trying to drive us apart.
I said, absolutely. No. They said, we have breaking news. Donald Trump has ceded control of the presidency to Elon Musk. President Musk will be attending a cabinet meeting tonight at 08:00.
And I say Yeah. It's just so obvious. They're so bad at it. I used to think they were good at it. They're actually bad at it because if they were good at it, I'd never be president.
Because I I think nobody in history has ever gotten more bad publicity than me. I could do the greatest things. I get 98% bad publicity. I could do outside of you
Speaker 0: and a
Speaker 1: few of your very good friends. Right. It's like the craziest thing. But you know what I have learned, Elon? The people are smart.
They get it.
Speaker 0: Yeah. They do actually.
Speaker 1: They get it. They really see what's happening. Yes.
reSee.it AI Summary
What I see from Elon Musk and Dogecoin is a major scandal unfolding. Real journalists should be eager to investigate, but instead, many seem to be acting as Deep State stenographers, focusing on attacking the messenger rather than exploring the corruption. Elon isn't the story; he’s revealing it.
@KariLake - Kari Lake
What @elonmusk & @DOGE are uncovering is the biggest scandal in history. Any journalist worth their salt would be salivating over covering this. But we don't have many real journalists anymore. We have Deep State stenographers. So, instead of looking into this corruption, they're targeting the messenger. Elon is NOT the story. He's the guy who handed you the story of a lifetime.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The media has reached a new low. Many are fake journalists who avoid talking about the corruption that Doge is uncovering. They'd rather attack Elon Musk. This is the biggest story ever, bigger than Watergate. Any decent journalist would be all over this.
It's disturbing to see groups like AP wanting to boycott the White House because they refuse to call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of Mexico. Now other outlets want to join them and boycott the press pool. The mainstream media keeps asking the same questions instead of asking about what we found when we dug into USAID, the Department of Education, or the Department of Defense. Instead, they're pushing a narrative by attacking Doge and Elon. I hope we start asking the questions that the American people want answered.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I really came down on my speech on the media. I you know, just when you think the media can't get worse, they call it the fake news, I'm calling it fake journalists out there. We are uncovering Doge has uncovered so much fraud, waste, abuse in this government. And the media, many members of the media are trying to avoid talking about the corruption that's being uncovered and instead go after the messenger, Elon Musk. It's outrageous.
Right now what is happening, we have the biggest story. It's bigger than Watergate and every other scandal combined rolled into one. Any decent journalist would be salivating to cover this moment in history and to see what's happening with, groups like AP where they're, you know, wanting to boycott the White House now because they're they're hurt that that they're losing some of their privileges because they're refused to, call the Gulf Of America the Gulf Of America. This is the hill they wanna die on? It is the Gulf Of America.
And and and now we're seeing other outlets saying they wanna join with AP and boycott the press pool. The thing that I that I'm really disturbed about what I'm seeing in the press pool is we we get the same mainstream media asking the same type of questions rather than saying, hey, tell us more about what you found when you dug into USAID or the the Department of Education or whatever department they're in. The Department of Defense. They're going to be, you know, looking at that and taking a look and and auditing that. Instead of asking pointed questions, they're, like I said, pushing the narrative through their line of questioning, is attacking the messenger, Doge, attacking Elon.
And we need to move into questions that the American people want asked. And so I'm hoping we'll see more of that.
reSee.it AI Summary
The media's attacks on Elon Musk and DOGE have reached a new low, resorting to racism and fabrications instead of engaging in factual debate. They question Musk's loyalty and citizenship while ignoring the influx of illegal migrants. Once admired, Musk is now targeted for helping Trump tackle government waste. The media's baseless smears, from calling him an antisemitic gangster to a national security threat, reflect their desperation as they lose grip on public opinion. It's time to expose their hypocrisy and lies as more people awaken to the truth.
@f_leclerc20037 - Francois Leclerc
🚨 The Left’s Meltdown Over DOGE & Elon Musk Hits a New Low 🚨 The Democrat media machine is spiraling out of control, now resorting to racism, smears, and outright fabrications to attack @elonmusk and @DOGE . Instead of debating facts, they question his citizenship, loyalty, and even throw out apartheid accusations—all because he dares to challenge their power and narrative. 🔴 @Gutfeldfox exposes the latest media insanity: ✔️ Democrats & media allies suddenly claim Musk is "not a real American"—yet have no problem letting millions of illegal migrants into the country. ✔️ The same liberals who once idolized Musk now smear him because he's helping Trump cut government waste and corruption through DOGE. ✔️ They have no real arguments, so they throw every baseless attack at the wall—first calling Musk an antisemitic gangster, then a pro-apartheid foreigner, and now a national security threat. Meanwhile, President Trump is standing with DOGE, pushing for real accountability and cutting the bloated, corrupt bureaucracy. The media's grip on public opinion is collapsing, and they know it. Their smears aren’t working anymore, and the American people see through the lies. Liberals want to deport Musk but keep MS-13? 🚨 They question his loyalty but never the thousands of unvetted migrants? 🤔 They protect George Soros but attack anyone who exposes corruption? The Democrat media complex is panicking because they’re losing control—and the people are waking up. Let’s keep exposing their hypocrisy, lies, and power-hungry agenda. 🔥 Watch the full video, share, and let’s keep the truth spreading! 🔥
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Democrats and the media are now resorting to racism to attack Doge, questioning Elon Musk's citizenship and loyalty to the United States, bringing up his South African background and falsely labeling him as pro-apartheid. They are also saying that he has "dual loyalties".
Despite this, Musk is working with President Trump to streamline the government and eliminate waste. Critics didn't express the same concerns about George Soros, who spent billions to undermine American strength.
Musk chose to build his companies and innovate in America, and is poised to solve rural broadband issues. Instead of attacking him, critics should engage with his policies. The American people support what Donald Trump is doing through Elon Musk, as he follows through on his promises.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Singing. They tried rallies, and now they're trying racism. The latest unhinged Democrat media attack on Doge has them questioning the citizenship of America's most prominent African American.
Speaker 1: Which country is he loyalty to? South Africa, Canada, or The United States?
Speaker 2: I don't want to rely upon the benevolence of an Elon Musk who grew up in in apartheid South Africa.
Speaker 3: Go back to South Africa. He's not a citizen. He came here illegally. Whose American citizenship is his third choice of citizenship.
Speaker 4: A pro apartheid South Africa billionaire. He was pro apartheid as I I understand it. This foreigner foreign agent, you know Right. An enemy of The United States. Now I'm getting some flack because I said that Musk was pro apartheid.
I don't really know for sure if he was.
Speaker 0: Sue the heck out of her. So they can whine all they want about Doge, but Musk is multiplying president Trump signing an EO directing all federal agencies to have a representative of Doge to oversee all spending. And forty seven is once again offering his seal of approval.
Speaker 5: We are having great success in slimming down our government. It's been really very successful, and some took payouts and buyouts and others, took other things, and some people were finding out don't even exist. We're finding that we have a lot of people that don't exist that people thought that did.
Speaker 0: Jesse, this is kind of amazing, not surprising Mhmm. But amazing. You know, you God forbid, say go back to Africa. Right? That's bad.
That's bad. But you can say
Speaker 3: say go back to Africa. No. You can't
Speaker 0: you shouldn't
Speaker 3: say it.
Speaker 0: You shouldn't say it.
Speaker 3: I would never say it.
Speaker 0: Neither would
Speaker 3: I. They keep moving the goalposts. I need to know what's racist and what not racist.
Speaker 0: You can say go back to South Africa. Just just one adjective.
Speaker 3: So I guess the democrats immigration policy is deport Elon Musk and keep MS 13. Mhmm. Liberals look like 16 year old girls here. Mhmm. They love Musk because of his cars, but now they hate him because of who he hangs out with.
Jessica, I have a feeling that when we do colonize Mars, Musk is not planting a South African flag. Okay? Everybody knows that. Questioning Elon's loyalty to this country after not questioning the thousands of unveiling Chinese, Muslims, Venezuelans who lay lead into the country is insane. They have no message.
First, Musk was an anti Semitic gangster. Then he was co president for a long time, then he's racist, and now he has dual loyalties. The Democrats used to have this awesome media machine where they could just destroy you with smears and lies, And that's broken, and it's not working anymore. So why don't they just say, you know what? His policies are bad.
This is not gonna be good for the American people, or maybe they can join the cause in getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse. It's silly because this dual loyalty thing's ridiculous since you guys are constantly America last. You're always sending billions of dollars to state sponsors of terror. You're working with the cartels to invade the country. Didn't the other day you guys were cheering for America to lose to Mexico and Canada?
I believe that was Crockett not to be confused with Davey.
Speaker 0: Or Sonny's partner on Miami Vice. Yeah. Or is it Sonny Crockett? I can't remember, Dana. I'm too young for that show.
I know. You know, what is interesting, too, is how they didn't feel this way about George Soros, spent billions and billions to undermine American strength. But if you criticized George Soros, you were playing into the tropes of anti Semitism.
Speaker 6: Not only that, but do you remember that Ilhan Omar caused a multi week kerfuffle, including a for being censored in the House because she suggested the Jewish people in America have dual loyalties. Mhmm. Remember that, she almost got censored, even by Nancy That was like that was a huge deal. Now they're doing the same. Also, I think that President Trump is blessed with the dumbest opposition.
Mhmm. Right? They cannot figure out what their get their footing and part of it is what Jesse said is that their media operation has collapsed. But the other thing is, Elon Musk was bullied terribly. He was abused terribly, and he was able to get himself out of that.
And guess what? This is the other thing that kills me. He could live anywhere in the world, and he chose us. He chose America, and this is where he has his companies. This is where the innovation is coming from, and he single handedly is going to solve rural broadband.
Because for years, going back for years, we're figure out how are we gonna connect rural America to the Internet. And the Biden administration don't had all this money pledged for it, spend a bunch, never even dropped a cable. Now Starlink is going to be able to solve that problem for a much less price. So, I think that he Trump has terrible opposition. I do feel what Jesse said.
Argue with him on the merits, but if you look at what he has accomplished and overcome in his life, any of them would be proud of that person if his name wasn't Elon Musk.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Rural broadband.
Speaker 6: Yes, that's big issue.
Speaker 0: Is that like the Dixie Chicks?
Speaker 6: Very good. I like it.
Speaker 0: Jessica, I think you might agree with me on this is that it's another example of how identity politics, if it's in your if you filter everything through it, you end up being a tribalist just like the people you condemn. So it's like they just see Musk as South African go back to South Africa.
Speaker 1: I'm not even sure they really do because this would have come up a lot earlier. I feel like it's a moment of grasping at straws to feel fill fill the TV time, and it would be much easier to stick to the merits of the criticisms. I think these are exactly the kinds of immigrants that we can all agree that we want to have here to come and build companies, etcetera. But you can draw the line at having an unelected billionaire spent, what, $290,000,000 on the election, playing a pretty significant role in the government. And you look at what Doge has done, a lot of it is the smoke and mirrors that he says that he's cutting that he's not actually.
But you know there are thousands of Americans who have lost their jobs, some of them by mistake that he then has to run and try to give them their jobs back. You can talk about the support that he's yanking from veterans, everything from, you know, staffing at VAs, crisis hotlines. You can talk about people who protect our parks. You can talk about people who run these clinical trials. I mean, we are going to be kneecapped in terms of medical innovation
Speaker 0: because of the Wait. You just said he doesn't cut. You just start up. He's not it's all smoke and mirrors. He's not cutting anything.
Saying all And then you say, oh, he's cutting all these jobs. It's so interesting. You didn't really care about all the people who lost their jobs during COVID, did you, Jessica?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I did. Think I did.
Speaker 0: Roll the tape of her not caring. No. It's not it's not
Speaker 1: it doesn't work that well with me because I do have moments of sanity, and I am being consistent here in all of this. But the the American people understand that whether they agree with the larger premise getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse, that that isn't what's happening here. They know what the nineteen nineties looked like. They know what happened when we actually worked with congress over the course of can you turn? Oh, Charlemagne.
Speaker 2: That just happened.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It did just happen.
Speaker 6: What are you
Speaker 1: looking at? Charlemagne? She's watching The Breakfast Club. Anyway, the nineteen nineties is how you do it, not what Elon Musk is doing.
Speaker 0: Well, you know what's interesting is that, judge, you hear from so many people who don't know how businesses work, that you have to make big cuts, and this happens in every company.
Speaker 2: Well, why didn't they say anything about the 400,000 people who lost their jobs when Bill Clinton was president? Why didn't they Yeah. That was in the ninth. And why
Speaker 1: But they actually went through agency by agency
Speaker 2: and made Oh, they did it better. I'm sorry. My turn. They did it better back then. Here's the thing.
You've got a congresswoman. I've never heard of her before. Marcy Capter. This is a woman who is questioning Elon Musk, a legal immigrant who followed the rules, but she supported 11,000,000 illegals not following the rules, disregarding the laws, and coming into the country so we can educate them, medicate them, house them, and make sure that they're happy here. Alright?
I don't know how this woman belongs in congress. And this whole idea, you you know, with Sonny Haston, he's from South Africa. What was he supposed to do? Come out of his mother's womb and say, ma, I don't like it here. We gotta leave South Africa.
I mean, this is so stupid. It really is. And in the end, you know, the American people you talk about the American people, they absolutely support what Donald Trump is doing through Elon Musk. Seventy percent of them say he's following through on
Speaker 1: his promise. Okay. And George Soros.
Speaker 0: But it's a
Speaker 2: real poll.
Speaker 0: Well, it's not AstroTurf like those town halls.
Speaker 2: That's George Soros.
Speaker 1: No. Don't wait home about those quote unquote ask. Watch the interview with Mike Johnson last night with Caitlin Collins about these astrotors
Speaker 2: Caitlin Collins, now there's a good one.
Speaker 1: Is this Michael. Of Daily Caller Jane.
Speaker 2: Notice that the liberals are so clueless that you've got the protesters and the congress people in unison saying the same thing. I mean, they just must meet at the end of a block somewhere in somebody's house and say, we all have to say the same thing and George will give us money and we can all protest, and then we'll make sure that Donald Trump never wins again. They are so clueless and
Speaker 1: It can't win again. It is done now.