reSee.it - Related Video Feed

You confirmed you were asked to obstruct justice? No, that’s not what I confirmed. The Mueller report clearly stated there was no collusion or obstruction. That’s not accurate. Did you read the report? No, I haven’t. Then how do you know? Congress members clarified it. I read the entire report, and it lists ten examples of obstruction. That’s not true. Here are the examples: asking Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, firing Comey, trying to remove Mueller, and influencing witnesses, among others. Legal experts agree these are obstruction. How can they determine that without knowing all the facts? The report outlines actions that would have led to charges for any citizen. Attorney General Barr and the deputy AG found no obstruction. A thousand former federal prosecutors, from both parties, stated there was evidence of obstruction that would have led to charges for a regular citizen.

The Chinese mafia is exploiting rural America to create a drug empire, purchasing churches and schools, stealing electricity, using foreign pesticides, and colluding with Mexican cartels. The speaker claims that opposition to his program as Secretary of Health and Human Services comes from the mainstream media and Democrats, who reflexively oppose anything associated with Trump. Trump dictates the Democratic Party platform; Democrats now support positions they previously opposed simply because Trump opposes them. The CDC's epidemiological studies on autism used fraudulent techniques and failed to compare outcomes in vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups. The speaker will conduct new studies, making the databases public for independent scientists. Initial answers should be available by September, with definitive answers in six months. People should not blindly trust experts but do their own research. The speaker will publish study protocols, peer reviews, and raw data, requiring replication of every study. Scientific journals have become propaganda vessels for pharmaceutical companies, incentivizing cheating. Doctors are pressured to prioritize revenue over patient care, creating a system where everyone profits from sickness. Pharmaceutical companies are the biggest source of revenue for media companies, buying protection. Pharmaceutical advertising should be more honest. The speaker is looking at ways to enlarge the vaccine injury compensation program so that COVID vaccine-injured people can be compensated. The recommendations now are children 18 are not recommended to get the vaccine, but they can get it if they want. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ASIP) was a sock puppet for the industry it was supposed to regulate, with members having undisclosed conflicts of interest. The speaker fired the board. Fauci was vulnerable and had a lot of liability on creating coronavirus. The speaker thinks there should be a truth commission. The speaker believes his uncle was killed by a conspiracy. The speaker is confident that Trump will release anything that he has access to. The speaker loves the people that he's working with at this agency. Trump's cabinet has put together an extraordinary cabinet. Trump knows how to pick talent.

General Flynn discusses the investigation against him, attributing it to his knowledge of various government sectors. He highlights his efforts to bring transparency through audits and reforms. The movie he mentions aims to reveal truth and warn against potential socialist influences in America. Flynn emphasizes the importance of the upcoming election in shaping the country's future.

Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of being a corrupt politician. Speaker 1 responds by mentioning that 50 former national intelligence officials and the heads of the CIA have dismissed the accusations as false. Speaker 0 dismisses this as another Russia hoax. Speaker 1 tries to steer the conversation back to the issue of race.

President Trump stated that a corrupt group within the American government weaponized intelligence and law enforcement agencies. One speaker argues that one doesn't have to be a member of MAGA to acknowledge legitimate grievances regarding Peter Strzok, Lisa Page texts, FISA abuse, and the Alvin Bragg case. Another speaker asserts that Merrick Garland followed the facts and law, and grand juries in Florida and DC believed there was enough evidence to indict Donald Trump on 44 counts. Jack Smith believes he would have been successful in two cases if Trump had not been elected president. The speaker claims the charges were dropped only because he was president. The first speaker clarifies that the initial concerns were about the Russiagate investigation and the Alvin Bragg case, while the second speaker addressed the Jack Smith investigation.

I sent a couple of FBI agents to the White House to interview Flynn. In a more organized administration, like Bush or Obama, you'd have to work through the White House counsel to get approvals. But I thought, let's just send them over. We called Flynn and said we were sending a couple of agents over and hoped he'd talk to them. He said sure. They interviewed him in a conference room at the White House situation room, and he lied to them, which he plead guilty to. I don't think he knew why they were coming over. We didn't tell him, just said we were sending a couple of agents to ask some questions and hoped he had a few minutes to talk. He said sure.

I sent a couple of FBI agents to the White House to interview Flynn, something I probably wouldn't have done in a more organized administration like Bush or Obama, where there was a process to go through the White House counsel for approvals. Instead, we called Flynn and said we were sending a couple of agents over and hoped he would talk to them. Nobody else was present during the interview, which took place in a conference room at the White House situation room. He lied to the agents during the interview, which is what he pled guilty to. We didn't tell him what the agents were coming over for, only that they wanted to ask him some questions and if he had a few minutes to sit down and talk to them. He said, sure.

"Mister president, I know you've urged people to move on, but I'm curious, why do you think your supporters in particular have been so interested in the Epstein story?" "He's dead for a long time." "I don't understand what the interest or what the fascination is." "It's pretty boring stuff. It's sorted, but it's boring." "Don't forget, we went through years of the Mueller witch hunt and all of the different things, the steel dossier, which was all fake." "All that information was fake." "But credible information, let them give it." "Anything that's credible, I would say, let them have it." "I I think, well, really only pretty bad people, including fake news, wanna keep something like like that going."

Speaker 0 states that the intelligence community assessment at the time contained no information about the election's impact and never mentioned collusion. According to Speaker 0, they are accused of a conspiracy by those who misrepresent the facts. Speaker 0 claims President Obama instructed them not to do anything that would affect the election's outcome or release reports naming American citizens. Speaker 0 says they carried out their responsibilities with integrity. Speaker 1 claims the report contains extensive information relating to collusion and obstruction. Speaker 1 believes anyone can identify interactions and meetings between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russians, and that it was enlightening.

In the video, Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has been found. Speaker 1 mentions that information can be found in the report prepared by director Mueller, but they are not aware of any collusion or conspiracy. Speaker 0 then interrupts and states that when the FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane, they did not have any information suggesting that anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with Russian intelligence officials.

General Michael Flynn, a highly respected former general and intelligence officer, recounts a lifelong connection to the ocean and service to the country, describing his career as a path that led him to become the deputy and later national security adviser to President Trump. He frames his experience as a stark contrast between his duty and a perceived betrayal by the U.S. government and its institutions. Key points and sequence of events: - Early career and worldview - Flynn describes growing up near the ocean, surfing, and a commitment to service. He says he loves the country and entered the service to defend it. - He recalls facing what he calls the “worst enemy” in America after returning from service and becoming a target of accusations of treason and being called a Russian spy. - War, policy, and intelligence critique - Flynn discusses the costs and consequences of war, praising sacrifice but arguing that war is a failure of policy, diplomacy, and leadership. - He portrays war as a constant state driven by money within the military-industrial complex and questions the necessity and management of ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. - He recounts the moment of taking command of a battalion and witnessing a helicopter crash, describing the grim realities of war and the reaction of coalition forces. - Intelligence reform and career advancement - Flynn emphasizes reforms to intelligence in Afghanistan, referencing a 2010 report titled a blueprint for making intelligence relevant in Afghanistan, which he authored as a senior intel officer. - He explains his appointment to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Senate confirmation process, highlighting the opposition from the existing intelligence establishment (SES) and the resistance within Washington. - He notes how his leadership and intelligence work were both celebrated by some allies and targeted by others who wanted to push him out. - Personal and family impact - Flynn’s wife, Laurie, is described as a stabilizing force; the couple recounts decades of marriage, raising a family, and the toll of public life on their private lives. - He discusses the stress and trauma inflicted on his family during investigations, including the impact on his son and grandchildren, and describes the emotional and financial burdens of legal battles. - Transition to politics and Trump - Flynn relates how his experience and reputation led him to work with Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, where he became a trusted adviser and ally. - He recounts meeting with Trump in 2015, the several-month collaboration, and his view of Trump as someone who could fundamentally change U.S. policy away from endless wars. - He describes the 2016 presidential transition, his offer to be national security adviser, and the initial endorsement by Trump, followed by a White House shake-up. - National security adviser role and the Russia narrative - Flynn explains the circumstances around his appointment as national security adviser and the opposing views within the White House about Russia and sanctions. - He recounts briefing the president and key figures in foreign policy, and the subsequent disputes and accusations that led to his resignation beneath a cloud of controversy, including claims that he had lied about sanctions. - Investigations, FARA, and prosecutorial conduct - Flynn details the scrutiny around his contacts with Russian officials and later the Flynn Intel Group’s work in Turkey, explaining that he was accused of violating FARA for actions tied to a private businessman rather than government-directed activity. - He discusses the narrative of being accused of being a Russian or Turkish spy, the portrayal of his son as a target, and the role of Covington & Burling in his legal defense. - He charges that the government used off-the-books deals and pressured plea agreements to pressure him into pleading guilty, including allegations of a “deal” that would protect his son from prosecution. - The courtroom and legal process - Flynn describes the high-profile court hearings led by Judge Emmet Sullivan, who publicly accused him of treason, stirred dramatic tensions, and threatened prison time for lying to the FBI. - He recalls the shock of the judge’s behavior, the break in proceedings, and the eventual decision to delay sentencing as he faced immense legal and financial strain. - Sidney Powell, exculpatory evidence, and defense strategy - Flynn’s legal team changes: Covington & Burling is replaced by Sidney Powell, who uncovers conflicts of interest and unveils Brady material and exculpatory evidence that had not been disclosed. - Powell’s involvement is described as a turning point that allowed Flynn to challenge government misconduct and pursue the truth rather than simply accepting a guilty plea. - Public support, family resilience, and the pardon - Flynn and family describe a groundswell of support from ordinary Americans through letters, gifts, and fundraising, including a legal defense fund that helped sustain them through financial hardship. - They describe the eventual decision by President Trump to issue a pardon of innocence in November 2020 after the government moved to dismiss the case, noting that Flynn did not seek the pardon initially and that Sidney Powell advised against accepting a plea in order to secure full vindication. - Flynn reflects on how the pardon, while welcome, carried mixed feelings given the years of damage and public misunderstanding. - Reflections on power, governance, and the future - The narrative frames a broader critique of entrenched agencies, media influence, and political storytelling, alleging the intelligence and justice systems have been weaponized and corrupted by political agendas. - The speakers emphasize the importance of truth, resilience, faith in family, and public accountability, arguing that Flynn’s story should illuminate issues of governance, the integrity of institutions, and the need for reform to restore trust in the republic. - The closing messages stress ongoing commitment to fight for reconciliation and reform, with Flynn characterized as a persistent presence who, despite wounds, remains engaged in public life and the defense of the republic. Throughout, the speakers present Flynn as a figure who faced relentless pressure from political and bureaucratic forces, endured personal and family hardship, and ultimately sought redress and vindication through a combination of legal advocacy, public support, and a historic presidential pardon. The narrative centers on themes of duty, betrayal, reform, and perseverance in the face of systemic challenges.

The speaker defends himself against allegations and claims to have nothing to hide. He offers to release all evidence to prove his innocence. The interviewer brings up the association with Jeffrey Epstein, to which the speaker explains that he and his wife had massages at Epstein's house but denies any wrongdoing. He mentions that many prominent individuals also had massages there and that his friendship with Epstein was purely academic. The speaker argues that having a massage does not make him guilty and that the person making the allegations has admitted to possible mistaken identification. He concludes by stating that he and his wife are innocent.

Speaker 0: "I don't understand why it's a hostile act. I talked to president Clinton... I'm sorry, president, Trump back in 2009 and several times after that. He didn't think that it was a hoax then. In fact, he helped me. He got on the phone. He told me things that were helping our investigation." Speaker 1: "The only thing... Trump is the only person who, in 02/2009, picked up the phone and said, let's just talk. I'll give you as much time as you want. I'll tell you what you need to know and was very helpful in the information that he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information that checked out and that helped us. And then we didn't have to take a deposition of him." "So Do you know if there's any truth to James Patterson's claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar A Lago?" Speaker 0: "I've definitely heard that." Speaker 2: "Epstein was inappropriate with the member's daughter. I went to mister Trump and he threw him right out." Speaker 3: "So it's your understanding then that president Trump didn't know what Jeffrey Epstein was up to?" Speaker 0: "That is correct." Speaker 2: "Epstein liked stars... He loaned Clinton his plane at least on four occasions and it was, it had to do with the foundation." Speaker 4: "The pilot said Trump was on the plane; it was actually a trip from Mar A Lago to New York, not to the island." Speaker 0: "And our investigation wasn't looking into him, but he was helping us then. He didn't treat this as a hoax. I want transparency." Speaker 3: "Did anybody see or hear of the president himself doing anything inappropriate as it related to Jeffrey Epstein? No."

General Flynn refused to answer whether he believed the violence on January 6th was justified morally, invoking the 5th Amendment. However, he stated that he believed it was justified legally. When asked about the peaceful transition of power in the United States, he confirmed his belief in it.

The speaker defends himself against allegations and claims to have nothing to hide. He offers to release all evidence to prove his innocence. The interviewer brings up the association with Jeffrey Epstein, to which the speaker explains that he and his wife had massages at Epstein's house, but denies any wrongdoing. He mentions that many prominent individuals also had massages there and that his friendship with Epstein was purely academic. The speaker argues that having a massage does not make him guilty and that the person accusing him has admitted to possible mistaken identification. He asserts his innocence and states that neither he nor his wife are guilty.

I've never talked to my son about George Jackson. But what I do know is that Trump deserves investigation for violating presidential norms. He's been on the phone with a foreign leader, possibly trying to intimidate them. Trump is doing this because he's afraid I'll beat him in the election, and he's using his power to smear me. However, everyone who has looked into it has found nothing. The focus should be on asking the right questions about Trump's actions.

Speaker 0 pressed: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?' Speaker 1 responded: 'I have never spoken to president Trump about the Epstein files.' Speaker 1: 'The attorney general and I have had numerous discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team.' Speaker 1: 'And we have released where president Trump's name is the files.' Speaker 1: 'During many conversations that the attorney general and I have had on the matter of Epstein, we have reviewed' Speaker 0: 'Question is simple.' Speaker 0: 'Who' Speaker 0: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'Why don't you try spelling it out' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no? Use' Speaker 0: 'the alphabet.' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'No. A b c.' Speaker 0: 'Question has been asked and answered.' Speaker 0: 'You've not answered it, and we will take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt.'

I sent a couple of FBI agents to the White House to interview Flynn. In a more organized administration, like Bush or Obama, you'd have to work through the White House counsel to get approvals. But I thought it was early enough in the administration to just send them over. We called Flynn and said we were sending a couple of guys over and hoped he'd talk to them. He said, sure. Nobody else was there. They interviewed him in a conference room in the White House situation room, and he lied to them. That's what he pled guilty to. I don't think he knew why they were coming over. We just told him we were sending a couple of agents over to ask some questions and hoped he had a few minutes to sit down and talk to them. And he said, sure.

An individual accuses another of repeatedly presenting unnamed FBI agents' words as truth on their network, leading viewers to believe Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin conspired in 2016, which they claim is false. The other individual denies the accusation. They then state that President Trump went to extraordinary lengths to keep specifics about his meetings with Vladimir Putin secret, even from his own administration. They play a clip of President Trump responding to a question about whether he ever worked for Russia, where he calls it insulting but does not directly answer. The individual then asks if the president of the United States ever worked on behalf of the Russians against American interests.

Speaker 0 asks if the speakers support Trump being indicted. Speaker 1 strongly opposes it, calling Trump the greatest of all time and claiming he was set up. Speaker 2 also opposes it, believing Trump can bring positive change. Speaker 3 sees it as political persecution and predicts it will increase Trump's support. When asked if their lives were better under Trump or Biden, Speaker 1 and Speaker 4 both express support for Trump, citing foreign policy, inflation, and border security as reasons. They want to "make America great again."

Speaker 0 explains that Epstein’s legal problems began with police investigations into allegations that underage women were coming to Epstein’s house. Epstein allegedly believed that Trump was the first to inform the police about what was happening at Epstein’s house, and from that point they became bitter enemies. Speaker 1 asks if this is what Epstein is telling him. Speaker 0 confirms that this is the version he is relaying, as presented by “Oh, the hoax yesterday.” Speaker 2 clarifies that “the hoax” refers to Democrats using a narrative to attack him. He says Epstein has never said or suggested or implied that the hoax is real; he has talked to Epstein many times. He states that the whole thing comes across as a hoax, not that Epstein’s actions are a hoax. He explains that Epstein believes himself innocent, and that when he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Maribago. He adds that Epstein was an FBI informant trying to take this matter down. The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who have suffered harms; it’s detestable to him. He and the speaker have spoken as recently as twenty-four hours ago. What he is talking about, according to Speaker 2, are the Democrats who are pursuing this with impure motives. If they truly cared, he asks, why didn’t they act during the four years of the Biden administration when the Biden DOJ had all the records? They didn’t say a word about it, and now they pursue it for political purposes. Speaker 3 notes that our current president has had relationships with Epstein in the past, and mentions Katie Johnson and possibly other victims who have accused Trump of involvement in similar matters. In the speaker’s experience, Trump supporters will not listen to such claims. He admits the court of law isn’t present here. He asks if there is anything that can be said about the validity of those claims or whether more is known. Speaker 1 responds that he can say nothing at all. He states that the only thing he can say about President Trump is that in 2009, when he served subpoenas and gave notice to connected people that he wanted to talk to them, Trump was the only person who picked up the phone and said, “let’s just talk.” Trump offered as much time as needed, provided information that checked out, and helped him so they didn’t have to depose him. He adds that this occurred in 2009. Speaker 3 asks if there is any truth to James Patterson’s claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago. Speaker 1 confirms that he definitely heard that.

The speaker is asked about polling data that suggests a majority of Americans, including Democrats, believe they acted illegally or unethically regarding their family's business interests. The speaker denies these allegations, stating that they did not interact with their son and brother's foreign business associates. They dismiss the claims as lies.

I sent a couple of FBI agents to the White House to interview Flynn. This is something I probably wouldn't have done in a more organized administration, like under George W. Bush or Obama, where there was more process. Usually, the FBI would work through the White House counsel to get approvals. But I thought, let's just send them over. We called Flynn and said we were sending a couple of guys over and hoped he'd talk to them. He agreed, and they interviewed him in the White House situation room with no one else present. He lied to them during the interview, which is what he pled guilty to. We didn't tell him why they were coming, just that they wanted to ask some questions.

If you believe what the media says, you've gained a valuable ally who essentially works for you without charge. I want to be clear, I admire President Trump. I genuinely believe he's a good person. There's something admirable about him. The president has faced relentless and unfair attacks in the media, which is truly outrageous. In my experience, having spent considerable time with him, I have never once witnessed him acting in a mean, cruel, or unethical manner.