reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The transcript presents a cascade of allegations and observations surrounding the COVID-19 outbreak and related operations: - It is claimed that “every time there is something that comes out that is in fact false information that is starting to actually hamper our ability to address the pandemic,” and that there are two months during which “we have all these modern technologies” in place to respond after false information emerges. - A suggestion is made that the outbreak was simulated or anticipated two months before it began, with dialogue implying the virus had already circulated for two months, and that such foresight was connected to a simulated scenario tied to the Wuhan military games in October 2019. - The speakers allege that information about a novel coronavirus with a “fern cleavage site insertion” leaked during the Wuhan games, and that “they” knew this and prepared a cover-up over the next two months, launching a tabletop exercise with media, intelligence agencies, the Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum, and others. - They describe a “tabletop exercise” for a pandemic, described as event two zero one, conducted with pharmaceutical executives, the deputy director of the CIA (who later became the director of national intelligence), Avril Haines, and others. They claim this exercise was run “the week of the Wuhan games,” and that it involved a simulated global spread beginning with a coronavirus outbreak and evolving into a pandemic. - The dialogue asserts that the exercise was “hosted at Johns Hopkins, funded by Bill Gates,” and references a scenario where pigs in Brazil, not pangolins in China, are the initial hosts, with the simulation detailing widespread illness, hospitalizations, and international travel turning local epidemics into a global pandemic. - They allege that the Central Intelligence Agency, in 2015, under Avril Haines (then deputy director), approached Ralph Baric to discuss gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, and that Baric was in contact with the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s Shi Zhengli (the “Bat Lady”) regarding a possible project on coronavirus evolution in humans. - The speakers question Haines’s qualifications, noting she is described as a physicist and “research engineer,” and suggesting she could run the CIA or the entire intelligence community, including participating in a coronavirus response simulation. - They cite today’s reports about social media platforms detecting and removing accounts spreading pandemic-related misinformation, and argue that the deputy director of the CIA—who later became DNI—led a pre-pandemic censorship conference about pressuring social media to ban conspiracy theories that the virus originated from a lab or was linked to U.S. military projects. - The overall narrative ties together claims of advance knowledge, the existence of pre-pandemic simulations (event 201), connections between Johns Hopkins, the Gates Foundation, NATO, and corporate media, and the involvement of Avril Haines in both pre-pandemic discussions and post-pandemic censorship efforts.

To undermine democratic institutions, it's not necessary for people to believe the information. The key is to flood the public space with misinformation, doubts, and conspiracy theories. This creates confusion and erodes trust in leaders, media, institutions, and even among citizens themselves. When people no longer know what to believe or trust, the damage is done.

The Democratic Party is repeatedly pushing debunked hoaxes while claiming to be the good guys. Politicians often exaggerate, but the deliberate spread of falsehoods crosses a line. For example, they misinterpret Trump's comments about protecting women from illegal immigrants, twisting his words to suggest he was infringing on women's rights. Similarly, claims that Trump wanted to execute Liz Cheney are false; he merely suggested that if she faced the realities of war, she might reconsider her stance. Legacy media amplifies these lies, and without platforms like Twitter, many of these issues would remain hidden. There's frustration over the lack of visibility for significant interviews, as they seem to be suppressed on platforms like YouTube.

The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin volunteered in Ukraine and shares the same neocon politics as Graham. The speaker believes the media is lying and omitting facts, distorting reality so the average person has no way of knowing the truth. The speaker highlights that the attempted murderer had been interviewed by every major media outlet and had extensive contact with US government agencies. The New York Times previously portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine, despite his criminal record and pending charges. The speaker believes the media will memory-hole the true story, and the public will be misled.

Spreading misinformation and sowing doubt is enough to undermine democratic institutions. By inundating the public with falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and doubts, trust in leaders, media, institutions, and even each other is eroded. When citizens no longer know what to believe or if truth is possible, the damage is done.

The episode opens with Lou Stump and his co-hosts, Chet Liftkit and Joey DeNardi, broadcasting from FEMA region six in an in‑person Nimrod pod taping. They recount Alex Jones’s 45‑minute interview with Ed Martin, described as “fighting the deep state for over three decades as a lawyer and political activist.” They say President Trump appointed Martin as US attorney of Washington DC, but his confirmation was blocked by Congress, so Trump created a special office for Martin with nationwide jurisdiction overseeing “secret strike forces,” including the Weaponization Working Group. Martin allegedly told Infowars that they would go after mortgage and tax fraud instead of complex racketeering, aiming for quick indictments. They assert the strike force faces trouble finding workhorses in the DOJ and say Trump has ordered firings of noncompliant officials and brought in replacements; Andrew Bailey, Missouri’s attorney general, is named as co‑deputy director of the FBI. The panel asserts Bailey is preparing to backfill Cash Patel, the FBI director, and claims Martin himself is being considered to replace Pam Bondi as US attorney general. They allege grand juries are open in Virginia, Missouri, New York, and Florida, and claim 97% of DC courts are rigged by Democrats. They say NSA at Fort Meade and CIA Langley are among Virginia jurisdictions with open grand juries. The hosts claim White House sources confirm indictments are coming, and if they don’t happen, Bondi will be fired and someone more effective will be installed. They warn listeners to prepare for “false flags” and say Trump has declared war on the deep state. They urge Ed Martin and Trump to gain public support to pressure the DOJ, and contrast Trump’s perceived actions with what they claim would happen under other presidents. Speaker 1 and Speaker 2 push back and add their takes. Speaker 1 doubts Trump’s track record in 2025, calling actions patronizing and noting discrepancies between words and deeds, and expressing skepticism that short‑term moves will create long‑term change. Speaker 2 argues fighting the swamp is good and highlights loyalty to Trump, noting weekly conversations and Trump’s praise of Martin after the bid was blocked, as well as interest in Biden pardons. Speaker 0 defends the shift, noting Alex Jones’s earlier skepticism about indictments and saying Trump has learned from the first term and is draining the swamp. They debate the credibility of grand juries, subpoenas, and raids, with Speaker 0 insisting indictments are the measure of success and that public pressure on the DOJ is necessary for accountability. They pivot to a broader discussion, declaring that the mainstream media isn’t taking grand jury openings seriously, and that the “mainstream” narrative conflicts with what they claim to be open and subpoenaed investigations. They accuse the CIA, FBI, and State Department of lying about certain events and assert that a cover‑up is in progress to protect figures like MBS (Mohammed bin Salman) and to shield broader networks. They promote the idea that the information age—via platforms like X (formerly Twitter)—allows the public to uncover truth and collaborate with others in citizen journalism, despite censorship and shadowbans. They claim there is an information war and that the common sense movement empowers people to push back against deep state control and corporate interests. A major diversion in the program is a deep dive into the Las Vegas shooting (10/01/2017). They recount the mass casualty event at the Route 91 Harvest Festival, with Steven Paddock alleged to have acted alone, and they raise questions about the number of firearms (including AR‑15s with bump stocks) and the timeline of the breach of the Mandalay Bay window. They present conflicting observations, such as the claim that the Mandalay Bay window in Paddock’s room remained unbroken when officers breached the room two hours after the shooting, while another window was broken in a different room. They argue the official story is refuted by video and audio evidence showing muzzle fire from helicopters, with unmarked choppers and off‑transponder activity. They allege multiple shooters and a Saudi involvement angle, alleging ETS (the Saudi version of Blackwater) and Maverick helicopters were present, and they claim the state department intervened to extract MBS from danger. They propose that Paddock was a distraction to divert attention from helicopter operations and that someone killed Paddock to fake a suicide, with the Saudis supposedly escaping via helicopters and private planes. They reference White House, media, and John Cullen (a pseudonym) as sources distributing these allegations, and they assert a network of witnesses and “Arabic men” seen on the ground. They also mention 911 calls from casinos and claim the footage and evidence were suppressed or misrepresented by mainstream outlets. They shift to discussions about Pizzagate, WikiLeaks, and a “Democrat Pedophile Network.” Lou frames Pizzagate as an older conspiracy surface that connected DC pizza parlors (Comet Ping Pong, and nearby Bestia Pizza) to a pedophilia network, citing alleged Instagram posts, the Bestia Pizza logo described as a triangle‑maze used as a pedophile marker, and a slate of famous figures associated with the pizza ecosystem. They recount alleged connections to Obama, Clinton, Podesta, Epstein, and others, and they argue these establishments hosted a global human trafficking hub. They reference Hillary Clinton’s emails (via WikiLeaks) and discuss the alleged use of coded language in emails about “CP” and “pizza,” asserting evidence of a deeper network and the need for investigation, while alleging cover‑ups by the FBI and DOJ. They cite an email in which a dinner with Obama and Anthony Bourdain was linked to a “b h kids” coded code about children, calling it disturbing. They mention cabinets on Wayfair listed for high prices named after missing children, suggesting further evidence of pedophile networks. Religious reflection and political philosophy follow, with discussions of Catholicism, Protestantism, and the role of faith in public life. They discuss RFK Jr.’s MAHA movement, nutrition, and preventative medicine as a path to healthier Americans, arguing for embedding nutrition into premed training and MCATs; they emphasize the need for comprehensive blood panels and personalized medicine, criticizing conventional medicine’s one‑size‑fits‑all approach and the influence of big pharma and corporate interests. They advocate a bipartisan approach to reform, credit RFK Jr. for pushing preventative health measures, and argue for a system prioritizing common sense and the public’s health over political partisanship. They close with calls to separate populism from Trump, view Trump as a vehicle to implement the people’s will, and envision the “second American revolution” rooted in transparency, constitutional values, and a renewal of American sovereignty. The episode ends with a sign‑off from Lou and a reminder to follow the Nimrod pod on X and subscribe to their Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin's politics align with Graham's, as he is a neocon who volunteered in Ukraine. The speaker believes the media is lying by omission, distorting reality, and preventing the average person from knowing the truth. The attempted assassin was interviewed by every major media outlet and has a lengthy criminal record, yet The New York Times portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine and detailed his contacts with US government agencies. The speaker fears this information will be memory-holed, and the public will be misled into believing a false narrative.

This video discusses a government scandal involving the censorship of social media posts during the 2020 and 2022 elections. The speaker highlights the deceptive tactics used by the Washington Post to downplay the scandal. The so-called "academics" involved in the censorship were actually government cutouts, working closely with tech platforms to flag and remove posts. They were funded by the government and had revolving door relationships with government agencies. The speaker exposes how these academics actively pressured the tech platforms to adopt censorship policies and targeted millions of posts for removal. The video also reveals the manipulation of terms like "studied" and "misinformation narratives" to justify the censorship. This is just a summary of the extensive information covered in the video.

I spent years researching and watching lengthy videos to understand the influence of organizations like the Atlantic Council, which is heavily funded by U.S. government agencies, including the CIA and the Pentagon. This group trains journalists to identify and censor disinformation, particularly targeting populist narratives like those of Donald Trump and Brexit. They promote a framework called the "four D's" of disinformation: dismiss, distort, distract, and dismay. This framework allows them to label factually true information as disinformation if it undermines government narratives. The Atlantic Council's connections to high-ranking CIA officials and its role in shaping media narratives illustrate a troubling intersection of government and media, aiming to control public discourse and influence political outcomes.

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.

Information laundering involves spreading lies in a sophisticated way, making them seem less harmful by presenting them in a respectable manner. This tactic is used to conceal the true origins of misinformation. The show jokingly reveals that the events discussed are not real, but the issue of misinformation is serious, especially when it involves individuals with prestigious academic credentials. The academic system that supports the elite in America is criticized as being a farce.

I discovered a clip from a nine-hour conference I watched in 2019, which reveals how the Atlantic Council, funded by U.S. taxpayer dollars, trains journalists from major media outlets to censor information that undermines government narratives. This organization, known as NATO's think tank, has seven former CIA directors on its board and receives annual funding from various military and intelligence agencies. They promote a framework called the "four D's" of disinformation: dismiss, distort, distract, and dismay. This training aims to suppress populist sentiments, particularly during the 2020 election cycle, by labeling factually true information as disinformation if it contradicts preferred narratives. The Atlantic Council's collaboration with Burisma, signed just before Trump's inauguration, highlights the intertwining of corporate interests and government actions in shaping public discourse.

The speaker believes mainstream media is propaganda, citing COVID as the turning point when they allegedly lied about science, not just politics. They claim the pandemic was portrayed as affecting only the unvaccinated, despite evidence to the contrary, and that social distancing rules were selectively applied. Outside of mainstream media, the speaker relies on independent platforms like X, assessing credibility by comparing predictions to outcomes. They cite the Institute For the Study of War (ISW), a think tank allegedly funded by neocons and related to Victoria Nuland, as the mainstream media's most quoted source on Ukraine, despite their predictions being consistently wrong. The speaker claims to have been right about the Ukraine summer counter offensive. They argue that the real influence operation is the mainstream media spreading disinformation, dwarfing any impact from independent podcasters.

To weaken democratic institutions, it's not essential for people to believe disinformation. Overwhelming the public sphere with disinformation, raising questions, spreading dirt, and planting conspiracy theories can be enough to erode trust. Once citizens distrust leaders, mainstream media, political institutions, each other, and the possibility of truth, the goal is achieved.

CNN used AI to make Kamala Harris' event look bigger, as revealed by Katherine Rampell's photo. People noticed issues like a distorted road sign, suggesting manipulation. Mainstream media's deceit, like MSNBC editing Joe Rogan's clip, is evident. The choice to believe these lies is yours.

The speaker discusses how claims go viral and the role of influential accounts in spreading them. They use cumulative graphs to track the spread of claims on social media, with the y-axis representing the number of shares and the x-axis representing time. High-follower accounts often change the trajectory of a tweet, helping it go viral. They mention specific influential accounts like Tim Cast and the Gateway Pundit, who spread false or misleading claims of voter fraud. Eventually, the false claim was amplified by President Trump's son on Twitter. Online participants actively spread information that highlighted election irregularities and exaggerated the impact of small issues like stolen mail, spreading falsehoods.

Information laundering occurs when lies are made to sound credible by being stated in Congress or on mainstream media. This makes the information's origins seem less atrocious. Rudy Giuliani sharing bad intents on Ukraine and TikTok influencers claiming COVID can cause pain are examples of information laundering. People should take note of this and not support these lies with their wallet, voice, or vote.

The origins of certain information can be less severe when presented in a misleading way. It highlights how small lies can be concealed, especially when figures like Rudy Giuliani promote them. When hoaxes are presented in a convincing manner, they gain credibility, particularly in formal settings like Congress. This manipulation of truth makes the information seem more acceptable, despite its dubious origins.

Most dismissed conspiracy theories have been proven true, including COVID being a hoax. Russiagate was bigger than Watergate, the 2020 election was compromised, and the war in Ukraine is based on lies. Crime, lawfare, justice, incompetence, and immigration issues are glaring. People are waking up to the lies, realizing it's all a sham.

Information laundering occurs when lies are made to sound credible by being stated in Congress or a mainstream outlet. Examples of information laundering include Rudy Giuliani sharing bad intel from Ukraine and TikTok influencers claiming COVID can cause pain. Disinformation should not be supported with wallets, voices, or votes.

This video discusses a government scandal involving the censorship of social media posts during the 2020 elections and the COVID-19 pandemic. The speaker highlights deceptive framing devices used by the Washington Post to downplay the scandal. The so-called "academics" involved in the censorship were actually government cutouts, working closely with the Department of Homeland Security. They colluded with tech platforms to flag and remove posts, using tactics like delegitimization and pressuring companies through regulatory threats. The speaker exposes the close relationship between these academics and the government, as well as their revolving door positions. The censorship efforts targeted millions of posts and narratives, effectively silencing discussions on election integrity and COVID-19.

If an opinion requires people to be silenced, it's a psyop. When people are silenced or publicly shamed for sharing basic information, not outlandish claims, it's a psyop, no matter what. Public shaming is a key component. Look at the Harvard and Stanford doctors who were removed from the internet for disagreeing. The Great Barrington Declaration is another example; people who disagreed with the government's approach were silenced and treated as fringe, not respected physicians. Even crazier, these strategies of silencing dissenters were openly discussed in emails. The government contacted Twitter to remove people. Mark Zuckerberg even spoke about the FBI contacting Facebook. Hopefully, people have learned from the past four years and recognize this behavior.