reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I wanted to bring you an update from Washington and introduce Data Republican, a digital detective exposing government corruption. She uses AI to analyze data, revealing connections between agencies, media, and NGOs. Her research uncovered that USAID funneled nearly half a billion dollars into Internews Network, a secretive NGO working with media outlets worldwide. Interestingly, a board member at Internews is also the VP of Communications at Reddit. During the Cold War, entities like Internews aimed to prevent the spread of communism, but now, the funds continue to grow with unclear objectives. USAID also funds domestic programs, including CEPPS, which distributes billions to Republican and Democratic groups, creating a complex web of money controlled by powerful politicians, which looks like the deep state manipulating elections. Eliminating the Department of Education and empowering parents and schools would be more effective, as the current system is overly bureaucratic and fails to meet diverse learning needs.

The speaker argues that the United States is winning on free speech: “USAID was formally shut down” after years of funding censorship—“tens of millions of dollars per year” for seven years. The “Global Engagement Center … is gone, baby gone” and “a massive reorganization of the US State Department, a 130 sub agencies are being rolled up.” DHS’s “CISA … are now out of the speech police business.” The National Science Foundation faces a “hard ban … on any grant that so much as mentions the word misinformation.” Pentagon censorship programs have been folded up, including the “Minerva Initiative, the Psychological Warfare Research Center.” The “White House Information Integrity Task Force” involved “26 different federal government agencies” and was “co chaired by ODNI, OSTP, NSF.” Two caveats: “clockmaker’s dilemma” and that “the battle is moved upstream.” Solutions proposed: “total transparency and declassification” of agency files; “free speech diplomacy” with sanctions; “full review and cuts to foreign universities and NGOs” and “NATO funding until they get rid of the AI censorship work.”

I seek redemption and reconciliation, but that requires truth and accountability. Trust is lacking in those who misuse government power against individuals like Tulsi Gabbard and who have turned the Department of Homeland Security into a censorship tool, suppressing important discussions, including vaccine side effects. We need transparency similar to the Twitter files for agencies like the CIA, FBI, and DHS, which have hidden information for decades. It's been 50 years since the Church Committee hearings addressed CIA abuses, and we need a new set of hearings to investigate the issues that have arisen over the past decade.

A USAID-funded organization, OCCRP, created key evidence that led to President Trump's impeachment. This same organization also participated in the Russiagate hoax. USAID has a broad strategy for information control that includes censorship and control of investigative journalism worldwide. Organizations that participated in violations of the First Amendment should face consequences. Weaponizing organizations like DHS, FBI, and CISA constitutes treasonous regime change activities redirected against the American people and our representatives.

The speaker advocates creating a twenty-four-seven declassification office in the White House that reports directly to the president and handles incoming from the United States of America. The office would pursue declassification of high-profile documents, stating a desire to obtain JFK files, the 9/11 files, and other materials. The speaker asserts that the deep state primarily uses an illegal application of the classification system to cover up its corruption. They reference the so-called “Lovebirds” texts from FBI and DOJ officials involved in the Russiagate investigation, specifically Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who allegedly were having an extramarital affair while coordinating support for their stance against Trump. The speaker claims these texts expressed hatred for Trump and discussed creating an “insurance policy” to stop him. According to the speaker, after discovering these texts, the FBI and DOJ redacted them before congressional investigators and members overseeing those agencies for an extended period. The speaker emphasizes that this is one example among broader claims of improper behavior by the agencies. The speaker then notes a recent development: Strzok and Page received a $1,500,000 payout from the Department of Justice to settle a lawsuit over the improper disclosure of their personal text messages on FBI phones. The DOJ allegedly rewarded them, despite claims that they broke the law, violated the chain of command, and weaponized the justice system against a political target they despised. The speaker claims that the text messages were eventually declassified in full when the speaker became deputy director of national intelligence, allowing the world to read them. This, they say, demonstrates the best form of transparency. With this context, the speaker reiterates the rationale for the proposed 24/7 declassification office: to provide direct access to documents, files, and memos rather than regurgitated summaries. They argue that the deep state completed a full circle by rewarding those involved and that this office would enable America to receive the truth. The speaker frames the next step as obtaining the truth for the country, with the office serving as the mechanism to accomplish that objective.

Speaker 1 states that a CIA analyst's whistleblower complaint, which led to President Trump's impeachment, relied on evidence from the USAID-funded OCCRP. Speaker 1 claims OCCRP also participated in the Russiagate hoax, and that USAID has a broad strategy for information control, including censorship and control of investigative journalism worldwide. Speaker 1 believes organizations like CISA that participated in First Amendment violations should be shut down, even if they perform valuable functions. Speaker 0 suggests government funding of foreign regime change is known, but questions if it's "borderline treason" when organizations protecting the U.S. undermine the government. Speaker 1 agrees, stating that weaponizing DHS, FBI, and CISA for regime change activities against the American people is "treasonous" and remains unresolved.

The speaker accuses the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of causing harm, citing record levels of illegal immigration, declining deportations, and increased fentanyl deaths. They also criticize the creation of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), claiming it colluded with social media companies to censor free speech. The speaker questions the DHS representative about a court opinion that labeled their actions as a massive attack on free speech. The representative denies involvement in censorship but admits to being aware of disinformation threats. The speaker challenges the representative on who determines what is false or inaccurate, highlighting the issue of government control over information. The representative denies the allegations, but the speaker insists that the court's findings are not disputed.

The speaker testified about the censorship industrial complex, revealing that it is worse than previously thought. Internal files from the Cyber Threat Intelligence League showed military contractors working to censor and use psychological operations against Americans. While some argue that social media platforms have the right to censor content, the First Amendment prohibits the government from abridging freedom of speech. The whistleblower claims that the leader of the CTIL was present at the Obama White House in 2017 when instructed to create a counter disinformation project. The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency played a central role in censorship, with other government agencies supporting it. The speaker calls for defunding and dismantling these organizations, as well as implementing oversight to prevent future censorship. They also suggest making liability protections contingent on transparent moderation and public reporting of censorship requests.

The State Department is dismantling a censorship bureaucracy that began addressing online radicalization by groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS. This entity, formerly known as the Global Engagement Center, expanded its scope to include foreign interference in elections and eventually targeted American political voices, labeling them as disinformation. According to the speaker, the center's director equated Trump's speech to that of foreign terrorists. The center allegedly funneled State Department funds to third-party groups that targeted individuals and organizations, which led to deplatforming and reduced visibility on social media. The speaker claims that this amounted to a government-run entity silencing political speech in America. Despite being renamed and moved, the State Department is now dismantling the center, redirecting $50 million to promote free speech. They plan an accountability project to document instances where the center was used against American political voices to prevent future misuse.

Before the COVID pandemic, Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund “dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses” at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, work described as the source of an unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic. On the final day as Director of National Intelligence, the speaker says they are releasing “never-before-seen communications and documents” intended to show how Fauci worked with “politicized career leadership” in the intelligence community to suppress the truth about his actions, the lab leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for the research. The documents are said to demonstrate Fauci’s influence over and manipulation of intelligence community COVID-19 assessments and to show Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 by denying knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research. The speaker also states that multiple intelligence community whistleblowers provided testimony that they faced retaliation for challenging manipulation of intelligence regarding the virus’s origins. The speaker describes this as a “pattern of suppressing dissent, silencing critics, and burying the truth.” The speaker says Fauci’s close relationships with the intelligence community enabled him to occupy three roles that “shield[ed] him from scrutiny”: 1) Funding dangerous gain-of-function coronavirus research linked to big pharma and its pursuit of universal vaccines worth trillions of dollars. 2) Acting as a behind-the-scenes advisor, alongside hand-picked “experts,” to push the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin, framed as a way to hide Fauci-funded gain-of-function research using taxpayer dollars and to shift blame away from Fauci’s actions. 3) Serving as a “pandemic pundit,” publicly pushing “lies, disinformation, and censorship” across available platforms. According to “hundreds of reviewed emails” included in the release, the intelligence community “almost always incorporated Fauci’s recommendations.” The speaker says Fauci promoted a paper whose publication he helped prompt as legitimate information for intelligence community consideration. Senior analysts are described as praising Fauci as an “unbiased guide” to real coronavirus experts while ignoring experts who might dissent from Fauci’s narratives. The speaker further claims Fauci “blatantly lied” to Congress under oath during his 2024 testimony to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, denying he spoke to any intelligence agency about COVID, and says the newly released correspondence directly contradicts that sworn testimony. The speaker reports whistleblowers described threats of retaliation, marginalization, and career setbacks for analysts who challenged Fauci’s conclusions. Examples provided include a contractor terminated days after coming forward to ODNI as a whistleblower, and managers telling advocates for the lab leak hypothesis or those expressing dissent that leadership would determine promotions. The speaker says senior leaders also attempted to undermine whistleblowers by removing anonymity required by the whistleblower process and insisting their managers or attorneys be present during ODNI meetings, described as creating an atmosphere of intimidation. The speaker concludes that the release is intended to provide transparency, truth, and accountability, citing “lies and censorship and coverups,” and describing the tactics used as part of a “deep state playbook.”

After months of searching through intelligence community holdings and files, Speaker 0 released new evidence of longstanding US government funding of more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including labs in Ukraine that could be at risk of compromise due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Speaker 0 said the intelligence community previously warned that a US-funded biolab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to longstanding threats of Russian attack, seizure, or damage. Speaker 0 claimed that evidence about the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from the American people. Speaker 0 said many of these US government-funded biolabs are currently or have previously engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens, and in some cases included dangerous gain-of-function research, with very little visibility or oversight. Speaker 0 stated that President Trump “clearly understands” the threat posed by dangerous gain-of-function research and said that on May 25, 2025, he signed an executive order to end federal funding of gain-of-function research around the world. Speaker 0 said that at ODNI, new guidance had been issued directing the intelligence community to increase collection on these laboratories and facilities overseas, and that new details were already being learned, including clinical trials underway at these facilities that are raising ethical, financial, and security concerns about supposed public health initiatives and US national security. Speaker 0 also claimed that politicians and health professionals, including Dr. Fauci, along with entities within the Biden administration’s national security team, repeatedly lied to the American people about the existence of US-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth. Speaker 0 said the release breaks new ground because information about the existence, history, locations, and funding of these US-funded biolabs had been intentionally covered up by powerful people who falsely claimed the biolabs did not exist. Speaker 0 said that people who say otherwise are accused of being foreign assets and traitors to America. Speaker 0 concluded by saying ODNI will continue working with US government partners to identify exactly where the labs are and what pathogens they contain to end dangerous gain-of-function research threatening the health and wellbeing of the American people and people around the world.

Speaker 0 presents a very quick briefing and discusses the credibility of the different things they've seen. They say, "these files were made up by the sea. They were made up by Obama. They were made" as a claim about the files’ origin, with the sentence trailing off in the transcript.

The speaker discusses how the US Department of Defense censored Americans during the 2020 election cycle. They explain that a group within the Atlantic Council and the foreign policy establishment pushed for a permanent domestic censorship government office to counter misinformation and disinformation. This office was eventually established within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through an obscure cybersecurity agency called CISA. The speaker details how this agency, with the combined powers of the CIA and FBI, classified online misinformation as a cybersecurity attack on democracy. They further explain how Stanford University, the University of Washington, Graphica, and the Atlantic Council, all Pentagon-associated institutions, were involved in a coordinated mass censorship campaign to pre-censor any disputes about the legitimacy of mail-in ballots. This campaign involved pressuring tech companies to adopt new terms of service speech violation bans. The speaker suggests that this censorship operation was orchestrated to ensure the perceived legitimacy of a Biden victory in the case of a red mirage blue shift event. They also mention the connection between this operation and the impeachment of Trump in late 2019.

Initially, USAID was created with good intentions. However, the agency has broken the trust with the American people and hasn't been transparent about where our taxpayer dollars are going. In 2021, the special operations command put out an instruction manual with instructions and examples on how the military could work with the state department, intel services, and USAID using race riots in order to destabilize nations. They also advocated for setting up job fairs near some of these riots so that disaffected workers could gain employment. These operations are taking place without government oversight, without the authority of the president, without the authority of congress. USAID needs to condemn this and provide oversight to congress on exactly where our tax dollars are going. Do you agree that this is wrong?

This hearing examines the Department of Homeland Security's role in censoring American voices through supposedly independent organizations. While protecting election infrastructure from foreign disinformation was the initial goal, it expanded to include countering domestic misinformation. The government created NGOs, like the Election Integrity Project, to do what it couldn't do directly. CISA acted as a switchboard to flag and notify social media platforms of misinformation, resulting in millions of tweets categorized as such. The same tools were used to censor COVID-19 narratives, some of which were later proven true. Concerns arise about DHS overreaching its jurisdiction and expanding censorship to various topics. The hearing questions the failure of leadership within DHS and the potential threat to civil liberties.

Speaker 0: We have a problem with the CIA and FBI in Washington. Speaker 1: What's your plan to start over and fix them? Speaker 0: They've gotten out of control, with weaponization and other issues. The people need to bring about change. We were making progress, but more needs to be done.

As a CIA analyst, the so-called whistleblower in the White House used evidence created by the USAID-funded OCCRP, for the impeachment of President Trump. USAID has a broad strategy for information control that includes censorship and controlling investigative journalism worldwide. Agencies that participated in violations of the First Amendment, like CISA, should face consequences. Cybersecurity is important, but shouldn't be undermined by censorship. It is borderline treason when organizations meant to protect our country undermine our own government. Weaponizing DHS, FBI, and CISA is treasonous if used for regime change activities against the American people. We developed these tactics abroad, and now they're being used against us, which is shocking and unresolved.

We've learned that USAID has been used to push globalist propaganda and potentially fund terrorism, even resulting in American deaths, which could lead to criminal referrals. The agency may need to be abolished. We aim to expose the millions of dollars going to radical organizations, some with ties to terrorists. There are questions about why mechanisms to prevent foreign aid from reaching terrorist groups aren't working, especially when we see terrorist weaponry linked to these funds. For years, USAID has been a slush fund for left-wing propaganda. We need to ensure American tax dollars benefit American citizens and interests, not wasted on things like DEI musicals abroad. This may be the world's largest money laundering scheme in history. We're committed to creating transparency across the government, thanks to President Trump and Elon Musk, who will help expose every corner of government. That is what the American people want.

The speaker recounts a chilling account of abuse, trafficking, and organized networks centered around a group of powerful men, primarily in Chicago, associated with Leslie Wexner and Alan Kramer, and connected to other figures like John DuPont. The narrative covers multiple years, locations, and alleged activities, emphasizing control, money, and illegal sex crimes. Key points and events: - Parties described as mafia or “mafia parties” featured underage boys, often age 14–15, with some boys aged out at 15 and then moved to other associates. Blood was reportedly present at parties, with one person assigned to clean it up; bodies were sometimes removed, with jokes about dumpsters. The speaker mentions various boys being “numb,” held by older participants, and mentions suicides, balcony jumps, and overdoses at such events. - Locations included Chicago estates with extensive underground playrooms designed by Richard Himmel, basements with safes resembling jail cells, and rooms with baths, enema setups, and widespread drug use. The parties included both younger boys and older men, with attempts to separate groups by age and preference. - The group allegedly controlled the entire gay scene in Chicago, funding the creation of gay establishments and clubs through a central figure, Chuck Renslow, while using money to influence the scene. Doctors and other professionals were described as participating in sexual activities, with some doctors supposedly connected to or friends with the group. - The speaker claims intimate familiarity with Huntington-like cycles of power, noting that Allen Kramer and Leslie Wexner would use money to recruit and reward participants, including leaving some people bequests or placements, such as apartments. - There were claims of a broader ideological fixation, including obsession with circumcision and propaganda about medical necessity. The group reportedly pushed to influence hospitals and the medical association to promote circumcision as a health measure, with insinuations about maintaining ethnic visibility to mask Jewish identity. - The speaker describes moving through networks, meeting John DuPont in Philadelphia, and being involved in DuPont Model Management; DuPont allegedly supported the speaker financially and through travel. The speaker mentions blackmail and coercion, including threats, as the group pressed to silence or control him after he attempted to expose them. - A key turning point involved reporting Leslie Wexner’s Chicago activities to authorities via Lance Durfee, including alleged cross-border trafficking from Mexico to the United States. The speaker asserts that these reports led to harassment by federal prosecutors and postal inspectors and to attempts to smear him as anti-Semitic. - The speaker asserts involvement in documenting activities and references to federal case files. They describe witnesses and evidence compiled in two large binders submitted to the court, with allegations of mail fraud related to a misleading newsletter and a postcard sent via mail as part of a broader scheme. - The narrative includes associations with notable figures and institutions, such as Roxanne Hemmell’s acknowledgment of the truth about the Chicago activities and the involvement of Wexner’s circle in Las Vegas and Ohio State-related networks. The speaker connects these to a broader pattern of coercion, intimidation, and attempts to discredit victims. - In later recollections, the speaker notes overlapping motifs with other well-known figures and cases, including connections to Epstein-related discussions and overlapping memories regarding the use of drugs, surveillance, and black binder records of victims. They claim that many within the circle remained unpunished, and that internal investigations or prosecutions did not address the core abuses. - The speaker concludes by noting continued calls for transparency from government agencies, including CIA and State Department files, arguing that uncovering broader truth is essential and that social media today enables exposed voices to reach wider audiences. The discussion ends with an emphasis on ongoing investigations and the need for justice and disclosure of related documents. Throughout, the speaker emphasizes: a tightly controlled, money- and sex-driven network; systemic manipulation of institutions; serious abuse of underage boys; efforts to silence whistleblowers; and the belief that broader revelations (including CIA and State Department records) are necessary to fully understand and address the scope of the alleged crimes.

Speaker 0: Wikipedia is a propaganda operation, and one of its founders told me that the CIA or the American intel community is heavily involved in shaping the message, on Wikipedia. Did you come across evidence of that? Speaker 1: On the weaponization working group, as it's described by attorney general Bondi and the president's direction, intelligence community is one of the groups who was weaponized against the people, obviously. It's obvious. The question is, how are we gonna get to the bottom of it? Right? How are gonna get to the bottom of some of the weaponization of the government intelligence community against the citizens? And that's what I that's where I'm going now.

Speaker 0 discusses a 2021 Special Operations Command instruction manual under Mark Milley, described as a vision for 2021 and beyond that contained instructions and examples on how the military could work with the state department, intel services, and USAID using race riots to destabilize nations, citing “examples of some of the instruction manuals here” as one and two to destabilize nations. Speaker 1 references a declassified CIA guide written in 1983 that trains operatives in how to organize riots in foreign countries. It is described as advocating for using agitators, including hiring professional criminals, to manipulate mass meetings and assemblies of people in person, which can result in general violence. The guide allegedly instructs the case officers that “our psychological war team must develop in advance a hostile mental attitude among the target groups so that at the given moment, they can turn their anger into violence demanding the rights taken away by the regime,” with a goal to make ethnic minority groups mad at their government in a general sense so that, when triggered, they will turn that general anger into physical violence against the state they aim to overthrow. The CIA guide allegedly details getting teachers, doctors, attorneys, and businessmen recruited as social crusaders for the CIA-backed cause, with a plan for gradually building clusters of influence: “these cells,” including “10 super teachers… 10 lawyers… 10 captains of industry… 10 medical professionals,” who will each operate within their spheres of influence and, at an appropriate time, fuse the groups into a united front. It is claimed that with “a force of 200 to 300 agitators,” one can create a demonstration in which “10,000 to 20,000” participate, given access to “200 back channels, 200 human assets” built up to mobilize a large riot. Speaker 0 adds that the guide also recommended setting up job fairs near protests so that disaffected workers could gain employment. The speaker then questions as a member of Congress whether anyone in USAID gets elected to Congress or to a presidency. Speaker 1 asserts that the US secretly created Cuban Twitter to stir unrest in organized smart mobs, likening them to BLM-style mobs. He notes McSpeden, who “worked for USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives,” and explains that the term “transition” means regime change. He cites a 2009 congressional report stating that the Office of Transition Initiatives runs a program to topple governments through organized political warfare, mobilizing unions, boycotts, and shutdowns of roads, transportation systems, hospitals, and schools, and that a Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Fulton Armstrong warned that even he could not obtain broad access to what USAID was doing, describing it as a secret operation. Speaker 0 closes by saying that acting in the shadows to destabilize nations using race wars and advocating that the military do it jeopardizes future generations who would have to fight such wars and operates without oversight.

After months of searching through intelligence community holdings and files, Speaker 1 is releasing “new evidence” that the US government has funded more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including locations such as Ukraine. Speaker 1 says the intelligence community previously warned that a US-funded biolab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to longstanding threats of Russian attack, seizure, or damage. Speaker 1 also says evidence about the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from “the American people.” Speaker 1 claims many US government-funded biolabs have engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens, and in some cases included dangerous gain-of-function research, with “very little visibility or oversight.” Speaker 1 states that President Trump “clearly understands” the threat posed by dangerous gain-of-function research and took action by signing an executive order on May 25, 2025 to end federal funding of gain-of-function research around the world. Speaker 1 further says that, at ODNI, they issued new guidance directing increased collection on overseas laboratories and facilities, and that increased collection is already producing new details, including clinical trials underway at these facilities that are raising “significant ethical, financial, and security concerns” about the supposed public health initiatives and US national security. Speaker 1 says politicians and “so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci,” along with entities within the Biden administration’s national security team, “lied repeatedly” about the existence of US-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth. Speaker 1 characterizes the release as breaking new ground because information about the existence, history, locations, and funding of the US-funded biolabs had been intentionally covered up by powerful people who claimed the biolabs didn’t exist. Speaker 1 adds that anyone who says otherwise is accused of being foreign assets and traitors to America. Speaker 1 concludes by saying ODNI and Speaker 1 will continue working with partners across the US government to identify exactly where these labs are and what pathogens they contain to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and well-being of the American people and people around the world.

The speaker accuses the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of causing harm and failing to distinguish between domestic and foreign speech. They criticize the DHS for record levels of illegal immigration, declining deportations, and drug-related incidents. The speaker also mentions the cybersecurity and infrastructure agency (CISA) colluding with social media companies to censor free speech, as stated in a court opinion. When questioned, the DHS representative claims to be unaware of the court opinion but acknowledges being briefed on the Missouri litigation. The speaker questions the representative about the existence of the misinformation and disinformation subcommittee and who determines what is false. The representative denies involvement in censorship and states that CISA focuses on identifying tactics used by foreign nations to weaponize disinformation. The speaker disputes this, referring to the court's findings. The conversation ends due to time constraints.

Speaker 1 says that throughout the Biden administration he sought records about decision-making and why the U.S. funded Wuhan, China research, including why evidence about the virus origin being from a lab accident was being suppressed, but “we got nothing.” He says the Biden administration “stiff-armed” him by preventing access to virtually any documents. He says many of the findings during the Biden administration came from Freedom of Information Act requests by people outside government and from court actions forcing disclosure. He says that after the new election, he received promises from Secretary Kennedy and others that documents would be revealed. He says it took about six months, with resistance he attributes not to Secretary Kennedy but to “minders” around him. He says that after finally receiving documents, they have been reviewed for about a month. Speaker 1 states that in communications between Anthony Fauci and others, including Francis Collins, Fauci is depicted telling others to read materials, then delete them, and that he allegedly instructed them to delete “this material” after reading. Speaker 1 says deleting emails and discussions about government business is illegal for someone in the executive branch. He adds that Fauci testified he did not do that, and says this creates “two crimes”: destroying federal records and a prior sworn statement that he wouldn’t do it. Speaker 1 identifies a “big question” involving what he calls an “auto pen pardon” and says it will have to be challenged. He says there are thousands of auto pen pardons and raises whether President Biden was aware. He says they interviewed the person running the auto pen, who said they never met the president, and that the person said they did not discuss it directly but heard about it from higher-ups who allegedly talked to the president. Speaker 1 says this provides “a lot to go on” and describes it as a chance for the issue to get into court and for the Department of Justice to fight it out. Speaker 1 says he has invited Anthony Fauci involuntarily; if accepted, they will bring him in, and if not accepted, they will subpoena him. Speaker 0 asks whether the alleged wrongdoing falls under the auto pen time frame, noting that in some earlier auto pen matters there were specific time frames. Speaker 1 responds that the “umbrella” was “a decade,” described as leading up to the end of Biden’s term, and says this raises questions about whether a pardon can cover crimes not alleged at the time, whether it can be “all inclusive,” and whether a pardon can be upheld if it doesn’t specify the crime. Speaker 1 contrasts this with how pardons are typically specific to an accused or trial-ready crime. Speaker 0 asks about specific consequences, including prison time, regarding destroying federal records. Speaker 1 says lying to Congress is the biggest issue, that it can be five years in prison as a felony, and that destroying records adds to the crime and is against the law. He then ties this to contemporaneous emails, asserting that while Fauci said publicly he had no idea the virus came from a lab and that it couldn’t have been gain-of-function, privately he was “very worried” about the lab because he knew it did gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 also says gain-of-function research was funded by the United States government with Anthony Fauci’s approval, and claims Fauci’s pandemic guidance about origins and about cloth masks was contradictory to privately discussed concerns, including that Speaker 1 says cloth masks do not prevent transmission.

The speaker accuses the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of not distinguishing between domestic and foreign speech and causing harm. They mention record levels of illegal immigration, declining deportations, and fentanyl deaths. The speaker also criticizes the creation of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) for colluding with social media companies to censor free speech. They refer to a court opinion that describes this as an attack on free speech. The DHS representative denies these allegations and claims that CISA does not censor speech. The speaker questions their knowledge of the court opinion and challenges them on who determines what is false or inaccurate information. The representative defends CISA's role in identifying tactics used by foreign actors to weaponize disinformation. The speaker argues that determining what is false or true should not be left to the government.