reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Dave Rubin discusses the reinstatement of the indoor mask mandate in LA due to the Delta variant, expressing skepticism and demanding data on its necessity. He highlights concerns over potential lockdowns and the shifting narrative from authorities. Rubin then addresses claims that the NSA is spying on Tucker Carlson, asserting that such actions are illegal and politically motivated. He contrasts this with past accusations against Trump regarding government overreach. The conversation shifts to Jake Tapper's plummeting ratings at CNN, attributing it to the network's reliance on Trump for viewership. Rubin criticizes Joy Behar for labeling journalist Andy Ngo as a far-right pundit, defending Ngo's credibility and reporting on Antifa. Lastly, he critiques Al Gore's recent statements, calling them misleading and disconnected from reality, particularly regarding Biden's performance and the state of democracy. Rubin emphasizes the need for bravery in standing against government overreach and media misinformation.

George Galloway recounts a dramatic episode at Gatwick Airport where anti-terror police detained him and his wife for hours, seizing materials tied to his podcasts and political work. He argues the incident illustrates a broader shift in Britain toward policing speech under the Terrorism Act, even for a prominent, long-serving public figure who has opposed government policy. He describes himself as a veteran Labour MP with a history of campaign leadership, including Brexit advocacy, and he emphasizes the personal toll of the ordeal: reputational scrutiny, a new cardiology diagnosis, and the sense that his political voice is a target because it challenges the prevailing orthodoxy on Ukraine and foreign policy. The conversation expands to his sense of exile from Britain, his wife’s distress, and his reluctance to return until he is assured such policing of his speech will end. Carlson presses Galloway on the state of free speech, media accountability, and the political climate in the UK and Europe, while Galloway contends that mainstream parties and media have moved toward censorship and “cross-dressing” left-right dynamics, especially over Russia policy and Ukraine aid. He critiques Starmer’s leadership, predicts a tumultuous near-future British parliament, and speculates about potential political realignments including his Workers Party of Britain and possible reforms under new leaders. The exchange blends sharp critique of elites with a personal narrative about resilience, loyalty to family, and a commitment to speaking truth as he sees it.

In this episode of the Rubin Report, the host dives into a tangled discussion sparked by a televised clip in which Tucker Carlson hints at a CIA- or DOJ-related referral. Rubin traces the reactions around Carlson’s supposed legal exposure and the broader implications for how journalists and pundits navigate allegations of foreign influence, surveillance, and national security. The conversation moves through Carlson’s public stance on talking to Iran and his portrayal of the intelligence community, with Rubin weighing what constitutes legitimate journalistic activity versus potentially harmful disinformation or espionage. Throughout, the host contends that the relationship between mainstream media and online media has shifted dramatically, eroding some of the guardrails that previously constrained public discourse, while also highlighting the increased vulnerability of online personalities to powerful institutions, leaks, and political manipulation. Rubin acknowledges that he does not know all the facts about Carlson’s situation but suggests that the dynamic raises questions about accountability, truth-telling, and the role of private citizens who engage in foreign policy debates. Reading between the lines, the discussion circles back to a wider critique of how information is curated and spread in the current media ecosystem, with Rubin emphasizing that principled disagreement should be possible without crossing into collaboration with foreign actors or promoting harm. The episode then pivots to related themes: how political and media elites frame national security decisions, the way audiences perceive shifts in leadership and strategy, and the interplay between domestic politics and foreign policy narratives. Rubin also uses this moment to reflect on the integrity of conversations around Iran, Israel, and allied security concerns, arguing for clear, truthful communication from leaders and pundits alike. In closing, the host notes the ongoing “influencer wars” as a symptom of a larger transformation in public discourse, while promising to maintain a focus on substantive news and responsible analysis rather than sensationalism. He teases future coverage that aims to balance critique with constructive dialogue about national policy and media accountability.

Chamira Gamage, currently with Amnesty International, discusses her background in human rights law and her journey to the organization. Amnesty International, founded in 1961, is the largest human rights organization globally, advocating for those whose rights are violated. Gamage highlights the case of Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, who published sensitive information, including the Iraq War Logs and Guantanamo Bay files, revealing government actions that shocked the public. Assange's work has sparked debate about press freedom and the role of journalists. Assange faced legal challenges after allegations of sexual misconduct in Sweden, which were later dropped. He sought asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for nearly seven years, fearing extradition to the U.S. for publishing classified information. In 2019, the Ecuadorian government revoked his asylum, leading to his arrest. He now faces extradition to the U.S. on espionage charges, which could result in severe penalties, raising concerns about press freedom. Gamage emphasizes the importance of public support for Assange, advocating for awareness and activism, particularly on social media, to influence political discourse and protect journalistic freedoms. She also discusses her work on a new app aimed at promoting critical thinking and quality information.

Inside the State Department's messaging operation, a whistleblower reveals how lines are drafted, cleared, and deployed on the Israel-Palestine controversy. Shahed Ghoreishi, who joined the Near Eastern Affairs Bureau in September 2024, explains that a press officer drafts lines, which then move from desk officers to the Seventh Floor for policy review before a spokesperson presents them at the podium. He explains the NEA’s broad remit as covering the Middle East from Morocco to Iran, with sub offices for Israeli-Palestinian affairs and the Arabian Peninsula. He notes that the Israeli-Palestinian desk attracts the most scrutiny because it generates the most questions and headlines. He says he was moved from Lebanon/Jordan coverage to ISA, and that his line work involved not just facts but how lines would influence outcomes, balancing clarity with defensibility if challenged. He recalls being asked to take on a heightened briefing role by the incoming administration, and describes the daily routine of preparing press guidance packets on Tuesdays and Thursdays two hours before a spokesperson’s podium appearance. He emphasizes that the official position often comes from quotes by principals like President Trump or Special Envoy Wittkopf, and that sometimes a line would be crafted to reflect those quotes rather than reproduce them verbatim. He recounts three concrete episodes that shaped his departure. The first involved a line on forced displacement presented as a possible policy prospect, cleared in July and routinely circulated in press guidance. When a reporter later asked about an alleged plan to move Gazans to South Sudan, the line was ultimately cut by the secretary’s office, even though the guidance had already been approved. The second episode concerned condolences for Anas, a journalist among those killed in Gaza. Ghoreishi says he drafted condolences, but senior officials objected that Anas’s conduct was unclear, and the line was dropped shortly before the briefing. The third issue centered on a West Bank reference. Milstein edited a line to praise Speaker Johnson for visiting Judea and Samaria, a term Ghoreishi argues is inflammatory and unhelpful, since it carries religious and territorial implications. He says Milstein’s edits were pushed up to the Seventh Floor and that, after this intervention, the pressure intensified on him and led to his firing a few days later.

During an Australia speech, Carlson addresses the release of Julian Assange, praising Australia for stability, resources, and independence. He describes meeting Assange and visiting Belmarsh prison, saying Assange was never charged with a crime in Britain and spent 12 years in custody for exposing crimes. He notes the U.S. and U.K. acted together to facilitate his release, and he predicts Assange may stay in Australia. He emphasizes the Five Eyes alignment and argues Australia could lead the world with its advantages. He argues the core duty of leadership is to prioritize native-born citizens, not international populations. He contends immigration, housing costs, and a growing refugee budget threaten stability, and he distinguishes his stance from racism, asserting that the right to express beliefs predates government. He cites free-speech protections and contrasts Western countries where dissent is criminalized with his First Amendment heritage. He rails against a dangerous alliance between media and government, arguing journalists should challenge power. He discusses his interview style with Putin, claiming the goal is to elicit information rather than moralize, and he rebuts claims of being Putin's ally. He challenges the conspiracy-theorist label as a CIA-origin term meant to shut down inquiry. He condemns voting changes he sees as undermining democracy, insisting voter ID and transparent processes are essential, and he defends nicotine as a life-enhancing product while criticizing government overreach. He weighs geopolitics, noting China's population and Australia's resources, and questions the assumption that a U.S. guarantee will protect Australia. He warns that relying on a distant superpower is risky and that Western leaders may bow to powerful interests, urging Australia to act in its own interests. Carlson critiques the Ukraine war as unwinnable and says Western pressure destabilizes the region, while praising Australia's defense of sovereignty. He also criticizes Boris Johnson and his diplomatic strategies. Concluding remarks stress the sacred right to speak and criticize leaders, even when labeled conspiratorial or racist. He recalls the CIA's origin of the phrase conspiracy theorist and warns against surrendering the ability to question authority. He laments media conformity and urges Australians to prioritize their citizens, defend institutions, and remain vigilant against policies that erode autonomy. He ends by acknowledging Assange's release again and praising the resilience of a free press.

Tucker Carlson interviews Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram, about his unexpected arrest in France last August. Durov arrived in Paris for a short visit and was met by police who detained him for four days, citing alleged non-compliance with judicial requests related to criminal activity on Telegram. Durov expressed confusion, stating that Telegram had never received any legal requests from France and had a process in place for responding to such inquiries. During his detention, Durov was held in a solitary cell with minimal accommodations and no contact with the outside world, which he found shocking, especially as a French citizen. He emphasized that Telegram is committed to user privacy and does not disclose private messages, only complying with legal requests for user identification when properly served. Durov noted that the French authorities seemed to misunderstand Telegram's operations and that the situation could have been resolved through normal channels. He highlighted the irony of being arrested in France, a country he viewed as a safe haven for freedoms, especially after fleeing Russia due to government pressures. Durov criticized a recent French law aimed at banning encryption, arguing it would endanger citizens' privacy without effectively combating crime. He remains under judicial control in France, unable to travel freely, while managing a billion-user platform remotely. Durov hopes to resolve the investigation soon and return to Dubai, where his family resides.

Tucker Carlson discusses Brazil's political situation following the election of President Lula, who is linked to China and accused of undermining democracy. Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, claims Brazil is no longer free, citing censorship and the exile of journalists like Rodrigo Constantino and Paulo Figueiredo. He highlights the role of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes in persecuting conservatives and mentions the January 8 protests, which led to severe punishments for participants. Bolsonaro asserts that the election was rigged and that criticism of the government can lead to imprisonment. Figueiredo, now in exile, shares his experience of being stripped of his passport and silenced by the government, emphasizing the lack of media coverage in the U.S. and the parallels between Brazil's situation and potential threats to democracy in the U.S. due to judicial overreach.

Roger Ver discusses his extradition from Spain to the U.S. for tax evasion, claiming the charges are politically motivated rather than about taxes. He argues that the U.S. government is threatened by his promotion of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, which empower individuals to control their finances without government oversight. Ver, a pioneer in the Bitcoin ecosystem, renounced his U.S. citizenship in 2014 to avoid persecution and has since advocated for Bitcoin as a means of economic freedom. He believes that the original promise of Bitcoin as a peer-to-peer cash system has been hijacked by interests that promote it as a speculative asset instead. Ver highlights the censorship of discussions around Bitcoin's use as money, particularly on platforms like Reddit and Bitcointalk, where dissenting voices were banned. He expresses concern over the lack of privacy in current cryptocurrency transactions and promotes alternatives like Monero and Xano for greater anonymity. Ver emphasizes the need for public support to combat what he sees as a politically motivated attack on his advocacy for cryptocurrency, urging people to recognize the potential of cryptocurrencies to enhance individual freedom and economic growth.

On a spring day ten years ago, Julian Assange disguised himself to seek asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, fearing extradition to the U.S. for publishing classified documents. Assange, an Australian hacker, founded WikiLeaks in 2006 to expose government secrets. The 2010 leak by Chelsea Manning revealed extensive U.S. military misconduct in Iraq, leading to Assange becoming a polarizing figure. The U.S. government now seeks to charge him under the Espionage Act for publishing these documents, raising concerns about press freedom. Assange remains in Belmarsh Prison, facing severe psychological trauma, as his case could set a precedent affecting journalism worldwide.

The conversation begins with Glenn Greenwald reflecting on the scarcity of whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange since 2013. He attributes this to the aggressive use of the Espionage Act by the Obama administration, which sought to destroy the lives of leakers like Chelsea Manning and Snowden, creating a climate of fear. Greenwald highlights Julian Assange's visionary understanding of digital leaks and the government's subsequent efforts to dismantle such journalism. He recounts Trump's near-pardon of Snowden, thwarted by establishment Republicans fearing declassification of sensitive files and conviction during impeachment proceedings. Greenwald then identifies five critical areas for future whistleblowers: the Epstein files (revealing global elite corruption), the allocation of billions in US aid to Ukraine, the US-Israel relationship, the CIA's activities, and the NSA's domestic spying. The discussion delves deeply into the US-Israel dynamic, with Greenwald arguing that US support is often detrimental to American interests, citing Israel's disregard for US policy on settlements and its extensive spying on the US. Patrick Bet-David offers a business analogy, suggesting Trump aims to diversify US alliances in the Middle East to gain leverage, treating Israel less like an "only child." The conversation shifts to interventionism versus non-interventionism. Greenwald advocates for non-interventionism, citing China's economic growth without constant foreign wars and arguing that US interventions primarily benefit the military-industrial complex, not the American people. He criticizes the US's historical overthrow of democratic governments and installation of dictatorships, using Venezuela as a current example where intervention is framed as liberation but serves other interests. Bet-David questions the feasibility of non-interventionism given global complexities and historical entanglements. Finally, the hosts discuss media consolidation, specifically Larry Ellison's acquisition of CBS News and Paramount, and his involvement in TikTok's ownership. Greenwald expresses concern over the centralization of media control in the hands of a pro-Israel billionaire, especially given declining public support for Israel among younger generations. He points to the appointment of a former IDF soldier to moderate TikTok content related to Israel and antisemitism. The podcast concludes with a brief discussion on Brazilian politics, Lula's relationship with Trump, and the ongoing political struggles involving former President Bolsonaro, highlighting US influence and transactional diplomacy in the region.

The speaker discusses a reported CIA referral over communications with Iranians before the war, insisting he is not a foreign agent and has nothing to hide. He asserts a right to speak, seeks to understand, and denies illicit funding or loyalty conflicts, calling the claim unlikely to advance and framing it as government overreach. Wartime, he says, widens authority and curbs freedoms; U.S. intelligence spies on Americans, and leaks accompany investigations. He recalls surveillance incidents and warns of restraint problems within intelligence communities.

Tucker Carlson discusses Donald Trump's arrest, framing it as a politically motivated act by the Biden administration. He argues that Trump's criticism of U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Iraq, marked him as a target for Washington's elite. Carlson asserts that Trump's prosecution is not only political but also ideological, aimed at silencing dissent against the established war agenda.

Tucker Carlson discusses the media's portrayal of Russell Brand as a sex criminal, highlighting the absence of named accusers and the overwhelming judgment against him. Carlson suggests this is part of a broader censorship campaign against Brand, who has diverging views on significant issues like economic policy and war. Brand reflects on being labeled a Chinese propagandist for his critiques of the Ukraine war, expressing confusion over the accusations and the connections made against him. He reveals that the British government and intelligence agencies have targeted him, indicating a coordinated effort to suppress dissenting voices in independent media. Brand emphasizes the alarming relationship between government and corporate interests, particularly during the pandemic, where dissenting voices were monitored and attacked. He critiques the lack of genuine investigative journalism regarding critical issues like the origins of COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine. Brand argues that authoritarianism is disguised under the guise of care and safety, warning that the public is being manipulated into compliance. He expresses hope for a collective awakening against this oppression, emphasizing the importance of individual sovereignty and connection to nature. Ultimately, he believes that crises can serve as invitations for transformation and awakening.

Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald discuss their shared perspectives on various political issues, emphasizing the importance of honesty and the dangers of self-deception. They reflect on the significance of loyalty, ethics, and the motivations behind actions taken by individuals in power, particularly in relation to whistleblower Edward Snowden and the implications of his revelations about government surveillance. Greenwald recounts Snowden's meticulous planning to leak classified information, driven by a sense of betrayal regarding the U.S. government's actions. He highlights the ethical dilemmas faced by whistleblowers like Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg, who exposed government misconduct and faced vilification for their actions. They discuss the changing political landscape, noting how traditional leftist values, such as free speech and skepticism towards the security state, have been co-opted by the right, particularly in the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict. The conversation shifts to the current state of media and political discourse, with Greenwald expressing concern over the rise of censorship and the erosion of free speech. He critiques the left's abandonment of its historical commitment to free expression in favor of political correctness and the right's potential hypocrisy in advocating for free speech while simultaneously supporting censorship against dissenting views. They also touch on the authoritarian tendencies observed in various governments, including Brazil, where Greenwald has faced legal challenges for his reporting. He emphasizes the interconnectedness of global political dynamics, asserting that the repression seen in one country can serve as a model for others. The discussion concludes with a hopeful note about the resilience of human reason and the potential for positive change, underscoring the importance of maintaining a free internet as a platform for dissent and discourse.

The discussion centers on Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, and the implications of his legal battles. Assange, who published classified military and diplomatic documents in 2010, has faced ongoing legal challenges, including extradition to the U.S. on espionage charges. Stella Assange, his wife, emphasizes that Julian is a political prisoner and criticizes the blurred lines between journalism and state secrecy. She recounts how Julian's work has exposed war crimes and corruption, arguing that WikiLeaks serves as a vital repository of historical truth. Stella explains that despite no formal charges in Sweden, Julian was pursued legally, leading to his asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy from 2012 to 2019. She highlights the political motivations behind the allegations against him, suggesting they were timed to coincide with his publishing activities. The couple's relationship developed during this tumultuous period, and they share two children. The conversation touches on the broader implications of Assange's case for press freedom, noting that the charges against him could set a dangerous precedent for journalists. Stella argues that the U.S. government's actions against Julian represent a significant threat to freedom of expression, as they blur the line between journalism and espionage. She expresses concern over the potential for a chilling effect on journalists and citizens alike, as anyone sharing classified information could be deemed a criminal. Ultimately, Stella asserts her unwavering support for Julian, citing her firsthand experience of the persecution he faces and the broader implications for democracy and civil liberties. She concludes that the fight for Julian is also a fight for the integrity of the press and the right to know the truth.

The episode centers on Tucker Carlson's claim that the CIA is preparing a criminal referral against him for talking to people in Iran, touching on the Foreign Agent Act and broader questions about surveillance, wartime messaging, and censorship in the United States. The hosts and guests discuss the likelihood of increased government scrutiny during wartime, the privacy and constitutional implications of intelligence activities, and how reporting on adversaries is treated in a climate of heightened national security pressure. They contrast official denials with media and political reactions, arguing that this dynamic illustrates a pattern where dissenting voices can be framed as threats and where access to power may be weaponized to shape narratives. The conversation expands to critique of the Iran war, the role of media figures in influencing public perception, and the tension between informing the public and limiting discourse during conflict. They also examine how factional loyalty in political coalitions can affect accountability, urging principled criticism as a tool for maintaining influence rather than sacrificing truth for proximity to power.

Tucker Carlson discusses his long-desired interview with Vladimir Putin, hindered by U.S. intelligence interference. He expresses anger over the government spying on him and emphasizes his commitment to understanding global dynamics, particularly regarding the U.S.-Russia relationship. Carlson critiques the current U.S. administration's incompetence and contrasts it with Putin's capabilities, noting Moscow's improvements compared to American cities. He argues that U.S. leaders lack historical perspective and understanding of achievable goals in foreign policy. Carlson believes Putin seeks compromise but warns that the West's approach is misguided. He stresses the importance of free speech and the media's role in democracy, lamenting the current state of American leadership.