reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The discussion centers on whether a deep state or nefarious forces are maneuvering against President Trump, and whether Trump is being restricted by a gatekeeping inner circle that blocks information. Laura Logan is cited as saying, based on her sources in the intel community, that Trump is being set up to fail and there will be no coming back if he doesn’t act, a claim they discuss with urgency and detail. Key points raised: - There is a concern about how information reaches Trump, with examples cited such as the New York Times reporting on a person removing briefing papers from the president’s desk, described as an act of treason and sedition, and discussions of withholding information from him by intelligence agencies. - An “asteroid belt” around Trump’s inner circle is described as blocking entry for others who might report to him, with gatekeepers preventing action and limiting accountability. - The lack of action within the administration is presented as a major concern, with questions about personnel in critical departments. Specific issues include unfilled ambassadorial and deputy positions across the State, Defense, and other departments, and the presence of loyalists to the prior administration. - Names and potential targets of concern are discussed, though the speaker emphasizes not knowing all the names or proving definitively. Todd Blanche is repeatedly mentioned as a name that comes up in intel tracking, and there are claims about Maria? (likely Susie Wiles) and Susie Wiles as gatekeepers; Noel Frisch’s reporting on Susie Wiles is referenced; Sergio Gore is noted as removed from White House personnel and now ambassador to India; Scavino is mentioned as involved in personnel matters. - The conversation highlights the roles of various actors: Rubio’s connections to Cuba are discussed in the context of broader foreign influence; comparisons are drawn between actors connected to Cuba, the CCP, and Chevron, suggesting influence operations. - The Trump administration is accused of having eight deputy positions in intelligence and defense occupied by people not loyal to Trump, with similar loyalties issues in the DOJ and other departments; cited examples include the delay in implementing executive orders and foreign policy reforms, such as rewriting the foreign service manual and a supposed ninety-day review of foreign assistance. - There is skepticism about the ability to replace or reform agencies like TSA and FEMA while personnel are acting or non-loyal; concerns about ambassadors who resigned on day one still remaining in place are voiced. - The impeachment discussion centers on the belief that Trump will be impeached if Republicans lose the House or Senate, with claims that impeachment would hinge on charges like failure to hold people accountable; the claim is made that there has been extensive investigation into Russia collusion and January 6, and that treason and sedition have been carried out by others, which should prompt accountability but currently do not. - The broader political strategy is described as ongoing information warfare, with allegations that those in power would use impeachment or punitive measures against Trump supporters, while those currently in power have allegedly violated constitutional duties, including border policy and redress of grievances. - They reference the Seditious Six and assert that those individuals are encouraging military disobedience; the argument is that accountability is needed, and if not, those who supported Trump may feel betrayed. - Laura Logan promotes her forthcoming episode of Going Rogue, inviting viewers to see receipts and evidence, and thanks the host,予 noting Christmas wishes and closing remarks.

He had "a military mind" but around 2009, "Obama came in" and he was "beside himself that he had to say, yes, sir, to this guy," so he started "working immediately against him." He "built up this whole network of people" as the "Muslim threat was not being taken care of." "You know, he was black. He was this." After Obama left office, he "decided to use that network for his own self." "A lot of people in intelligence and the military" decided to work against them, and "they would code stuff and send it out." "That was a military takeover and eventual handover to foreign interests" and "He is very much a one world government, one world religion guy." They tried to promote Trump: "January 6 vice president, remove Trump, and then he'd be president," but "that didn't work. Huge backlash. So they stopped." "We know what your intentions are, and everybody's on to them now." "It's coming out."

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent in counterintelligence, motivated by my desire to catch foreign spies after the 2016 election. I have meetings with retired generals to discuss national security concerns regarding Trump's presidency, whom I view as a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own gain. Tomorrow, I have a significant meeting with military leaders in a secure location to discuss AI and the need for better information sharing. I believe Trump may attempt to extend his presidency beyond the constitutional limit, which raises concerns about the future.

The conversation centers on a so-called “rear guard” and how it operates inside the U.S. government, as described by the speakers. - Speaker 0 asks about the identity and role of the “rear god/rear guard.” - Speaker 1 defines the rear guard as a group ideologically driven to a particular point of view not shared by the current administration, and asserts that it is organized. - The mechanism of influence is explained: in a large, geographically dispersed organization, if one doesn’t have a loyal team, the team can undermine leadership. The claim is that even with good intentions, without a loyal crew, the organization won’t respond to the boss, leading to actions that bypass or undermine higher authority. - The discussion claims a current case where the president signs a presidential policy directive stating that corruption will not be tolerated, and the attorney general issues a memorandum declaring alignment with the boss to fix corruption inside the department. The attorney general allegedly helps set up a weaponization working group, and an assistant U.S. attorney asserts representation of The United States of America while saying they do not want an investigation into corruption involving the DOJ. The speakers label this as illegal and a violation of jurisprudence and canons for a government attorney. - The question is asked: who directed the assistant attorney general to act this way? Speaker 1 suggests that, as an investigator, one would subpoena the assistant to determine who directed them and who told them to do what, implying chain-of-command exposure—but cannot provide the name in this moment. - They insist that the actions are not random but come from the rear guard. The whistleblower disclosure is mentioned: before Pam Bondi’s appointment, a disclosure claimed that all assistant U.S. attorneys who had worked for Jack Smith should be investigated, but nothing was done to hold anyone accountable, and those involved were let go. The disclosure’s author is not named in the moment, but Speaker 1 says they will provide it. - The rear guard is further described as an organized group; the organization named is the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (SIGI). The discussion covers SIGI’s creation in 2008, in conjunction with legislation and Senator Grassley, as a bipartisan effort to establish an independent entity inside the executive branch to oversee, train, educate, and provide counsel for all inspectors general. - The speakers explain that SIGI operates within the executive branch but is independent; the implied tension is whether an entity can be independent while being “inside” the executive branch, challenging the unitary executive view that the president controls the entire executive branch. - They discuss the concept of the administrative state: unelected officials who operate with their own power, suggesting a two-tiered system in America between “them and us.” They note that this view affects multiple agencies, including the Department of Justice and the EPA. - The president’s belief in leading the country by the majority is noted, along with the tension between the executive branch and the administrative state, which allegedly believes it serves its own interests rather than those of elected leaders. The dialogue hints at a broader narrative where the president is not always perceived as fully in charge, and a cultural portrayal—via media—that suggests the president is not the sole driver of policy.

Jamie Mannarino, a consultant embedded in the Pentagon who works with the Joint Staff, is a former FBI special agent and "spy hunter." He assesses Trump as a sociopathic narcissist and is in talks with retired generals about potential actions. Mannarino anticipates a meeting with military leaders in a secure room called the Tank to discuss artificial intelligence and emerging technologies like quantum computing, which he says doesn't exist yet but will change everything. Mannarino met Hillary Clinton in college and worked for her at the State Department. He became an FBI agent after she lost in 2016, aiming to catch Russian and Chinese spies. He criticizes Secretary of Defense Peg Seth for alleged infidelity, sexual assault allegations, and alcoholism. Mannarino claims Trump is only interested in advancing his name, wealth, and fame, and questions his loyalty. He predicts Trump will entertain staying in office beyond his term to avoid jail. Mannarino also admits to working with retired generals and ambassadors to highlight the national security consequences of another Trump presidency, including ghostwriting op-eds for them.

Jamie Mannarino, who met Hillary Clinton while pursuing his master's at George Washington University, followed her to the State Department and later became an FBI special agent focused on counterintelligence. After her 2016 loss, he transitioned to a consulting role at the Pentagon, working with senior officials on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. During a covert meeting, he revealed plans for a significant discussion with military leaders about overcoming bureaucratic obstacles and enhancing international cooperation. Mannarino expressed concerns about Donald Trump's presidency, describing him as a "sociopathic narcissist" and shared his efforts with retired generals to counter Trump's influence. He also predicted Trump might attempt to extend his term beyond four years, highlighting the potential for political maneuvering to avoid legal consequences.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent in counterintelligence. My assessment of Trump is that he is a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own wealth and reputation. I'm in discussions with retired generals about how to protect American interests. I have a significant meeting with military leaders tomorrow to address AI and the need for better information sharing. I also worked with a nonprofit to highlight the national security risks of another Trump presidency, writing numerous op-eds. I believe Trump may entertain the idea of extending his term, which would create considerable political pressure.

Amjad Fassisi, a CIA contractor, reveals that high-ranking officials, including CIA directors Mike Pompeo and Gina Haspel, colluded to withhold information from President Trump. He claims Trump was under constant surveillance and suggests that intelligence agencies used FISA to monitor him and his team. Fassisi describes a culture within the CIA that views Trump as incompetent, stating they deliberately kept information from him to prevent leaks. He also mentions that the CIA does not trust the NSA, leading to a lack of information sharing. The conversation raises serious concerns about potential illegal activities within intelligence agencies, including election interference and obstruction of justice. Fassisi's comments highlight the ongoing corruption and political manipulation within the intelligence community.

Following Trump's significant victory in the 2024 election, General Flynn issued a stark warning about potential threats to Trump’s safety and the necessity for immediate action against entrenched officials from the previous administration. He emphasized the importance of appointing loyal and capable individuals to key positions to prevent sabotage. Flynn expressed concern over ongoing plots against Trump, suggesting that if Trump had lost, he would have faced severe repercussions. He identified John Brennan as a key adversary and stressed the need for heightened security around Trump. Flynn called for a reform of government departments and urged vigilance against the ongoing threats posed by those opposed to conservatism. The discussion concluded with a reminder to stay alert and informed about the actions of political adversaries.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I have meetings with military leaders about these topics, emphasizing the need for better information sharing and collaboration. I also express concerns about Trump, describing him as a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own gain. I’ve been working with retired generals to address potential threats from his presidency. My past experience includes being an FBI special agent focused on counterintelligence, particularly against Russian and Chinese spies. I was involved in efforts to defeat Trump during the election, writing extensively under various names. I predict he may attempt to extend his term, despite constitutional limits.

Mike Benz outlines a conspiracy tied to the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) and a June 2020 war game that purportedly sought “a way to use riots, nationwide riots, and do favors to the Black Lives Matter movement so that they would owe them favors back to take to the streets against Trump if Trump won the election fair and square,” while also needing “a robust, intentional, and specific strategy to go after the networks that enabled Trump's rise to power” so they could be jailed after Trump left office. Bubba Boyd, who has written about the event since August 2020, explains that the discussion will cover the key players in TIP, the plan to subvert the 2020 election, how rigging the election and four prosecutions of Trump flow from the June 2020 conspirators’ meeting, and excerpts from a January 2020 Donald Trump speech to the World Economic Forum that allegedly signals why Trump and Trumpism had to be eliminated. The publicly named sponsors of the war game are Rosa Brooks and Niles Gilman of the Berggruen Institute in Los Angeles, described as the “globalist home of Silicon Valley’s anti-Trump billionaires,” with branches in Venice and Beijing and a China branch in direct dialogue with Xi Jinping. Michael Anton is cited as the author of a Trump national security document who criticized TIP’s war game, stating they were planning a coup against the election and publicizing the war game to normalize the idea. Brooks’s background is summarized as a lawyer for George Shullis at the Open Society Institute, then a State Department attorney for regime change, then a Pentagon policy lawyer under Obama, while teaching at Georgetown Law. The narrative asserts she advocated impeaching Trump and a potential 25th Amendment move, and even a military coup, in a 2017 Foreign Policy piece titled “three ways to get rid of president Trump before 2020,” including the sentence: “For the first time in my life, I can imagine plausible scenarios in which senior military officers might simply tell the president, no, sir. We’re not doing that.” The claim is that she “couldn’t wait to launch a coup against Trump,” a portrayal attributed to a New York Times editorial response. In June 2020, Brooks and Gilman allegedly convened TIP’s war game about the 2020 election and its possible aftermath, with over 100 participants and 76 role players drawn from former Pentagon officials, the intelligence community, Silicon Valley, Wall Street, the media, and Republican and Democratic institutions. Names publicly associated with anti-Trump activity are listed, including John Podesta, Donna Brazile, Bill Kristol, Michael Steele, Jennifer Granholm, and other unnamed figures, all described as major players in attempts to nullify the 2016 election and overthrow the government. Benz is said to detail the TIP war games and concludes that to prevent a second Trump term, Biden would need a large victory margin to overcome fraud perceptions, with the insurrectionist scenario calling for control of the military, Black Lives Matter, and other street rioters. The narrative asserts that BLM raised about 90 million in 2020 with donors like the Democracy Alliance and the Ford Foundation, and that Mark Elias led financial filings associated with the effort. The discussion further cites Defense One articles from August 2020 that reportedly called for a military coup and a subsequent open debate within the military about accepting orders, and claims that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley “was not about to obey any order from the president.” The appendix to TIP’s report allegedly debated criminally proceeding against Trump after leaving office and wiping out his “white supremacist and extremist base,” with a quote describing the need for a strategy to challenge networks that enabled Trump’s rise and remained “imbecible to the kind of pluralist democracy the founders intended,” implying a path toward removing Trump’s influence even after his presidency. The transcript also notes contemporary references to Arctic Frost, an FBI investigation linked to 2022 midterms, and alleged targeting of Republican election operations and other figures by the FBI. Excerpts from Trump’s World Economic Forum address and a January 2020 speech are presented to illustrate a moral and strategic framing against globalism and “radical socialists.” The presentation ends by inviting audience support and promoting further engagement, including a free newsletter.

I caught a Pentagon advisor to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, specializing in AI, coordinating a secret war room to counter Trump. This guy, Jamie Mannarino, worked for Hillary Clinton, then the FBI as a "spy hunter," and now advises on AI technologies that "don't yet exist." Mannarino was caught on hidden camera discussing these secret meetings and expressing his negative opinions about Trump. He even mentioned consulting with retired generals about what actions they could take to prevent certain potential presidential actions. Following this exposure, the Pentagon spokesperson stated they were not involved and that Mannarino was out of control and had been stopped. This is an example of the deep state attempting a coup.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent specializing in counterintelligence. My assessment of Trump is that he is a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own wealth and reputation. I’m in discussions with retired generals about how to protect American interests. I have a significant meeting tomorrow with high-ranking military leaders to address AI and the need for better information sharing. I’ve also been involved in efforts to highlight the national security risks of another Trump presidency, writing extensively under various names. I believe Trump may attempt to extend his presidency beyond the constitutional limit, which could lead to significant political turmoil.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent, specializing in counterintelligence. I have concerns about Trump, viewing him as a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own gain. Tomorrow, I have a significant meeting with military leaders to discuss AI and the need for better information sharing. I've been collaborating with retired generals to address national security concerns related to Trump's presidency. We aimed to inform the public about the implications of another Trump term, and I contributed extensively to op-eds and articles. I predict Trump may publicly consider extending his term, which would create significant political tension.

Trump's presidency is questioned amid critical text exchanges between FBI officials. The peaceful transfer of power is vital for democracy, yet there are allegations of political spying and unmasking of American citizens by the Obama administration to undermine Trump. This includes the investigation into Michael Flynn, raising concerns about politicization within justice and intelligence systems. Obama dismissed Trump's claims as absurd. There are fears among former intelligence and law enforcement officials about the implications of a second Trump term, with discussions about the potential for illegal detentions. The anxiety reflects a serious concern for the integrity of democratic institutions.

Democratic senators and deep state operatives are reportedly preparing to remove President Trump's control of the military if he is reelected. They are concerned that Trump may use the military to suppress domestic protests, particularly those led by the Black Lives Matter movement. The plan involves introducing legislation to limit the president's power to call on the military and potentially invoking the 25th Amendment. Critics argue that this is a coup and a constitutional crisis. Trump's supporters argue that he is being unfairly targeted and that the real threat is the deep state's attempt to undermine his presidency.

A group of public interest organizations and lawmakers are quietly planning to prevent former President Trump from pressuring the US military to carry out his political agenda. The concern is that this could undermine civilian control of the government. The article specifically mentions Trump potentially using the military to suppress domestic protests, similar to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. The groups involved in this plan were also involved in previous protests against Trump. The fear is that if Trump were to win the election, these tactics would be used to destabilize his entire term and prevent him from stopping protests, even if they turned violent or occupied federal buildings. The speaker warns people to watch a movie about the Serbian revolution to understand how these tactics work.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent in counterintelligence. My assessment of Trump is that he's a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own wealth and reputation. I'm in discussions with retired generals about protecting American interests, especially regarding AI. I recently had a significant meeting with military leaders to address these issues. I also expressed concerns about incoming Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, citing his personal issues. Additionally, I worked with a nonprofit to highlight the national security risks of another Trump presidency, which I found disheartening after his election victory. I predict Trump may attempt to extend his term, despite constitutional limitations.

Cole notes that he purchased six galvanized pipes of this size on June 1, June 8, and November 16, and asks for receipts. The discussion shifts to what questions a point person in 2021 would face and to a theory of the case, with speculation about how individuals could be drawn into a plan to influence events, including the possibility of a “pipe bomb” plot and manipulation of associates. Speaker 1 explains that, as a federal investigator, one would use a speculative investigative lens to broaden the search to cover various permutations of the case, including the idea that there was a so-called Red Mirage Blue Shift scenario surrounding the 2020 election. They reference CNN’s 2020 reporting on deciphering red mirage and blue shift uncertainty, including pre censorship by DHS/CISA in June 2020 to suppress any social media criticism of mass mail-in ballots, so as to prevent questions about legitimacy of an upcoming Biden victory. The discussion asserts that the goal was to preempt perceptions of illegitimacy and manage the narrative around the election results. The conversation then turns to Rosa Brooks, a high-ranking Obama administration official who headed the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) and wrote about pathways to remove Trump from power. Speaker 1 cites Brooks’ article “Three ways to stop President Trump before the 2020 election” and notes an assertion, reportedly in a Diet of Lisa-like coverage, that she later discussed a fourth, insurrectionary possibility: a military coup. They claim TIP was a war game conducted in June 2020 and then in November 2020, involving senior military, intelligence, diplomatic, and political operatives, with participants from both parties including Michael Steele (former RNC head), Donna Brazile (former DNC head), John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager), Bill Kristol, and others. The summary asserts that TIP’s appendix, “Will Trumpism survive a Trump loss?” warned that Trumpism could persist even after a loss, necessitating a robust strategy to eliminate Trump supporters and networks that enabled Trump’s rise. It is claimed the document discusses how to mobilize mass street protests, especially via Black Lives Matter and allied groups, to pressure a Biden administration to act against Trump, including funding and resource provisioning of protest movements to ensure their alignment with Democratic objectives. The dialogue alleges that, in June 2020, TIP proposed measures to de- legitimize Trump, including not letting Trump use the National Guard or invoke the Insurrection Act to quell protests. It is asserted that the plan contemplated mass demonstrations, the use of “street protests” as decisive leverage, and the establishment of communications infrastructure to support mass mobilization for street action if Trump won, or to counter him if he did not. The participants allegedly favored aligning with groups like Soros-funded Indivisible and Hold the Line, and urged resourcing new racial justice leaders and major philanthropic/foundation channels to fund these movements, including a claimed $50 billion in funding to Black Lives Matter. The transcript claims that TIP’s War Game included explicit scenarios about alternate electors, secession moves, and the potential for mass prosecutions of Trump and his associates, as well as strategic recommendations on how to proceed if Trump refused to concede. It is further asserted that a June 2020 war game considered provoking an “January 6” breakdown in Congress as a central move to prevent a contested inauguration, with participants pondering agent provocateurs and avenues to postpone certification. Throughout, the speakers connect the pipe-bomb purchases in June 2020 to the TIP war games and the broader plan to undermine Trump through street mobilization, legal maneuvers, and potential mass arrests of Trump supporters and networks, while noting the January 6 events as a focal point of these discussions.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I previously served as an FBI special agent, specializing in counterintelligence. My assessment of Trump is that he is a sociopathic narcissist primarily interested in his own gain. I'm in discussions with retired generals about protecting American interests, especially regarding AI. Tomorrow, I have a significant meeting with military leaders to address these issues. We need to improve information sharing and collaboration among international partners. I also worked with a nonprofit to highlight the national security risks of another Trump presidency, which I found disheartening after his election victory. I predict Trump may attempt to stay in office beyond his term, despite constitutional limitations.

Amjad Fassisi, a CIA contractor, reveals that the CIA withheld information from President Trump and colluded with other intelligence agencies to do so. He also claims that Trump is under constant surveillance and that they even spy on his ex-wife. Fassisi states that the directors of the CIA, including Gina Haspel and Mike Pompeo, purposely kept information from Trump and that they thought he was a "fucking dumbass." He also mentions that the intelligence agencies don't trust each other and don't share information. Fassisi's statements suggest potential illegal activities and corruption within the intelligence community.

The transcript covers a broad set of interwoven claims about global health security, intelligence operations, political conspiracies, and alleged CIA influence on U.S. leadership. Key points include: - Pandemic preparedness and global infrastructure: There is discussion that an airborne, deadly disease could emerge, and to deal with it effectively we must put in place infrastructure globally and domestically to see, isolate, and respond quickly. The investment is framed as a smart, long-term insurance against future flu strains like the Spanish flu, especially in a globalized world. - CIA and presidency dynamics: The day after an election, the CIA director allegedly authorizes a president-elect to begin receiving a President’s Daily Brief (PDB) and uses the briefing to “suck him in,” presenting impressive can-dos that shape the new president’s perceptions and questions. This is described as psychological profiling and manipulation, with the CIA using long-standing methods to influence a president and government direction. - Allegations of a covert cabal influencing U.S. institutions: The conversation suggests a cabal has aimed to destroy U.S. institutions from within, including defunding the military and ordering actions that undermine allies while aiding enemies. This cabal allegedly includes control over the FBI, DOJ, and the presidency, culminated in the appointment of James Comey to head the FBI, portrayed as a “cardinal” with ties to the Clinton Foundation and as part of broader cabal activity. - 2008–2011 FBI and political corruption narrative: An asset described as a high-level foreign agent allegedly influenced U.S. politics and was connected to multiple intelligence services, with claims about his role in internal U.S. political manipulation. The rise of a president referred to as “Renegade,” identified as Barry Sartaro (Barry Soetoro), is described as part of the cabal’s plan to destabilize the United States from within, including military demoralization and misdirection. - Barack Obama conspiracy theories: The dialogue asserts that Barack Obama’s origins and identity have been manipulated for political purposes, including claims about a forged birth certificate, ongoing questions about birth location, and various individuals connected to Hawaii’s health department and local authorities providing or denying birth certificate verification. References include Loretta Fuddy and investigations into Obama’s birth details, with assertions that Obama’s name and identity were manipulated in Indonesia (Barry Soetoro) and that his family connections tie to CIA-backed operations in Asia. - Indonesia coup and CIA involvement: The conversation links Obama’s family to CIA-backed activities in Indonesia, including the overthrow of Sukarno and the rise of Suharto, with relatives described as having roles in money channels and death squads. The narrative asserts that Lolo Soetoro acted in intelligence-adjacent roles and that Obama’s grandmother helped channel CIA funds in the region. - Claims about CIA media manipulation and “MK Ultra” style operations: The speakers reference Operation Mockingbird, MK Ultra, and other CIA operations as public knowledge used to undermine the American people. They suggest continued silencing and manipulation by those operations. - Kill lists and drone warfare under the Obama administration: The transcript alleges that John Brennan led “Tuesday morning kill list” meetings starting in 2009, with drones and targeted killings used to eliminate designated individuals, and asserts confidence that Obama’s administration excelled at deploying missile strikes and other covert actions, contrasted with the possibility of ongoing use by subsequent administrations. - Recurrent thread of distrust in institutions: Across pandemic planning, birth certificate controversy, foreign influence, CIA cabal theories, and drone warfare, the overarching theme is distrust of established institutions and assertion of deep, planned manipulation by covert actors.

I work at a top consulting firm embedded in the Pentagon, focusing on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. I’ve been in discussions with retired generals about protecting American interests, especially regarding the potential threats posed by Trump, whom I view as a sociopathic narcissist. Tomorrow, I have a significant meeting with military leaders in a secure room called "the tank" to discuss these critical issues. I’ve also been involved in efforts to explain the national security risks of another Trump presidency, contributing to numerous op-eds under the names of retired officials. I predict Trump may attempt to extend his term, despite constitutional limits, which could create significant political tension.