reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss government disinformation offices and transparency concerns. - CISA’s office of mis, dis, and malinformation (MDM) operated as a DHS unit focused on domestic threat actors, with archive details at cisa.gov/mdm. The office existed for two years, from 2021 to 2023, before being shut down and renamed after the foundation published a series of reports. - The disinformation governance board was formed around April 2022. The CISOs countering foreign influence task force, originally aimed at stopping Russian influence and repurposed to “stop Trump in the twenty twenty election,” changed its name to the office of mis, dis, and malinformation and shifted focus from foreign influence to 80% domestic, 20% foreign, one month before the twenty twenty election. - Speaker 1 argues that the information environment problems are largely domestic, suggesting an 80/20 focus on foreign vs domestic issues should be flipped. - A June 2022 Holly Senate committee link is highlighted, leading to a 31-page PDF that, as of now, represents the sum total of internal documents related to the office of mis, dis, and malinformation. The speaker questions why there is more transparency about the DHS MIS office from a whistleblower three years ago than in ten months of current executive power. - The speaker calls for comprehensive publication of internal files: every email, text, and correspondence from DHS MIS personnel, to be placed in a WikiLeaks/JFK-style publicly accessible database for forensic reconstruction of DHS actions during those years, to name and shame responsible individuals and prevent repetition. - The video also references George Soros state department cables published by WikiLeaks (from 2010), noting extensive transparency about the Open Society Foundations’ relationship with the state department fifteen years ago, compared to today. The claim is that Open Society Foundations’ activities through the state department, USAID, and the CIA were weaponized to influence domestic politics while remaining secret, with zero disclosures to this day. - Speaker questions why cooperative agreements from USAID with Open Society Foundation, Omidyar Network, or Gates Foundation have never been made public, nor quarterly or annual milestone reports, network details, or the actual scope of funded activities. USAID grant descriptions on usaspending.gov are often opaque or misleading compared to the true activities funded. - The speaker urges transparency across DHS, USAID, the State Department, CIA, ODNI, and related entities, asking for open files and for accountability. They stress the need to open these records now to inform the public and prevent recurrence, especially as mid-term political considerations loom.

The President told me to be more aggressive, so we sent out an email to all employees asking what they do. We got a partial response, so we're sending another email. Our goal isn't to be unfair. Employees can simply respond that their work is too sensitive to describe. We want to keep essential employees who do their jobs well. If a job isn't essential or done well, those people shouldn't be on the payroll. Those million employees who haven't responded are on the bubble. Maybe they don't exist, or we're paying people who don't exist. A lot could have happened. The prior administration wasted money.

Imagine waking up on your day off and seeing a message from the owner of X, questioning your work and threatening your job if you don't respond. That's the reality for some federal workers. It's alarming when someone with that kind of power singles you out and demands an explanation for your work performance. To make matters worse, picture the President, the most powerful person in the country, supporting that message. How do you think that makes federal employees feel about their job security and respect in the workplace?

As a policy advisor for the Treasury, I work on national security risks, monitoring investments into the US. Recently, Doge gained access to the Treasury to cut waste. I think we're an easy target, and there are people here who don't do much. My colleagues and I are worried about Doge and potential firings. What Elon is doing feels like government-sanctioned harassment. People here think it's not going to fire the right people, it's going to fire the wrong people. Many of us in my office are worried about being fired, especially the new hires. Some people care more about money than the country. I also feel that Doge shouldn't have access to the Treasury due to national security risks. No one knows what they want to do with the system. Giving people access to information creates vulnerabilities.

As a former 18-year veteran of the Department of Justice, I now lead a group called Justice Connection, aiding current DOJ employees facing demotions, firings, and threats from various sources, including January 6th rioters and those believing in the "deep state" narrative. These individuals are terrified for their careers and personal safety due to increased doxxing and harassment. The current environment within the FBI and DOJ is destabilized, impacting morale and daily functions, making it harder to focus on critical tasks like counterterrorism. While the administration defends personnel moves as aligning with its priorities, the safety and security of dedicated DOJ employees is at risk, especially with doxxing and harassment being criminal offenses.

I think it's a great idea to challenge federal employees on their accomplishments. Private businesses do this all the time to ensure accountability and show the work that's been done. The federal government should do the same. Some people are upset because they probably haven't done much and can't show their work. I've been contacted by people upset that they have to go back to work because they've moved and assumed they could work from home indefinitely. The post-COVID days are over. We need to get people back to work, show what they're doing, and demonstrate government efficiencies, which haven't been done in a while.

Someone who snuck into that chat that was not a part of that was not an employee there. And they screenshotted what they saw and leaked it out on x. This is a chat group that was created and administered by the NSA, one of the premier intelligence collection entities that we have. It was obscene. It was talking about sex toys and sex tricks for people who had gone through, you know, some kind of transgender surgery. During the workday on an intelligence hosted work chat group. The supervisors said anybody who's involved with this is getting fired and getting their security clearance revoked. Imagine you're in any office and you're having these kinds of sexually explicit conversations in the workplace. This cannot be happening in the workplace, and it must not be happening in our premier intelligence agency that has people who have the highest clearances that that anyone can hold. This chat group had existed for over two years. Because of president Biden's DEI initiatives, they were essentially told, shut up. It's none of your business.

I used to work for the Army Corps of Engineers, and the abuse I witnessed was shocking. My boss even bragged about how hard it was to get fired. People would take advantage of the lax environment. One employee ran his farm during remote work, another bragged about drunk driving during work hours. Some wouldn't even log in, and no one checked. The 80/20 rule was in full effect, with 80% of the work done by 20% of the employees. One guy slept at his desk every morning, while another napped in his government truck at a park. I spent three months cleaning up their disaster of a file room. Our government is full of lazy, incompetent people, and the hard workers are punished for outshining their colleagues. Our government organizations are so outdated, they basically need to be rebuilt from scratch. That's why I don't feel bad for federal employees being forced back into the office.

I used to work for the Army Corps of Engineers, and the abuse by government employees was astounding. My boss said it was nearly impossible to get fired. People were taking advantage of the work from home situation. One employee ran his own farm. Another bragged about drunk driving during remote work. No one checked if people were even logged in. The 80/20 rule is true. 80% of the work is done by 20% of the people, because it's so hard to fire people. One guy napped at his desk every morning. Another took the government truck to nap in the park. I spent three months cleaning up their real estate files. The government uses an antiquated system and regulations from the nineties. Our government is full of incompetent, lazy people, and hard workers are punished for outperforming. I don't think government employees should get to work from home until they start doing their jobs.

This past week has been incredibly difficult, both personally and professionally. Since the new administration began, there's been a climate of fear and uncertainty, impacting my colleagues and me. We've felt unsafe, unsure of who to trust, and worried about the security of our communications. This has created a widespread sense of insecurity. My anonymity is crucial because my personal information – including my Social Security number and contact details – has been compromised. I fear that Doge members, including Elon Musk, have access to this sensitive data. I'm concerned about potential targeting. The current methods being used are dangerous, illegal, and cruel. They don't align with the President's mandate and are being carried out by a rogue few. The actions of a billionaire unilaterally removing aid to the world's poorest is horrifying. I'm angry, sad, and devastated for my colleagues, family, and the American people.

This past week has been incredibly difficult, both personally and professionally. Since the new administration began, a climate of fear has permeated my workplace. We're unsure who to trust, and the constant uncertainty is terrifying. My information, including personal details and contacts, has been compromised. I'm worried about my family's safety, and that's why I'm remaining anonymous. The methods used to achieve supposed efficiency are dangerous, illegal, and cruel. They haven't been approved by the President or Secretary Rubio, and they're the actions of a rogue few. Being vilified by a billionaire who's cutting aid to the world's poorest is horrifying. I'm angry, sad, and devastated for my colleagues, my family, and the American people.

An undercover video released by Project Veritas shows Travis Combs from the Department of Education describing how the agency hides information from Congress and the public. We communicate via Signal, an encrypted app, to keep things under wraps. If Congress knew what we were doing, they'd shut us down. It's like a sanctuary program where we're spending federal dollars inappropriately. I'm not supposed to be doing business on Signal, but everyone uses it. We're operating as a rogue sanctuary program for illegal immigrants, misusing federal tax dollars. Employees are evading oversight by hiding secrets on encrypted messaging apps. If you're a public employee, you're expected to comply with the administration.

Dangerous rhetoric online is impacting the recovery effort. One user suggested a militia should go against FEMA, gaining over a million views. This rhetoric impacts the comfort level of FEMA employees and demoralizes first responders, FEMA staff, volunteers, and the private sector working to help people. It creates fear in FEMA employees, hindering the ability to get resources to those who need them.

The speaker advises federal government employees to leak information to journalists from mainstream press outlets like ProPublica and Politico. They suggest using Signal to communicate and recommend saving emails and recording meetings. The speaker also suggests writing poorly to make the administration look bad. Whistleblower protections are discussed, and the speaker acknowledges the risk involved in their actions. They mention the possibility of finding another job and suggest passing on information to a colleague with a higher risk threshold. The importance of finding ethical journalists who will protect sources is emphasized.

I discussed some of the concerning individuals surrounding Musk. Does this surprise you? Sadly, no. It's a familiar pattern. Experienced professionals aren't drawn to such chaotic and toxic environments. This approach appeals to a specific type of person, as we saw at Twitter. Inexperienced engineers evaluated our code, and we endured loyalty exercises like printing code and justifying our work—a demoralizing and insulting process. I'm hearing similar accounts of long-tenured federal employees facing similar humiliating situations. This is insulting to the dedicated federal employees who work hard daily. It's truly unacceptable.

I work at the Treasury, reviewing investments into the US for national security risks. Recently, Doge gained access to the Treasury to cut waste, but I think we're an easy target. People I know have worked for the government for years and don't do much. Doge shouldn't have access to the Treasury due to national security risks. It's weird because no one knows what they want to do with the system or why they need access to random people's tax information. Giving people this kind of access creates vulnerabilities. They could misuse the information or give it to another country. Elon's actions feel like government-sanctioned harassment. Everyone in my office is worried about getting fired. Some people care more about money than the country.

The FBI is being accused of corruption and targeting politicians, parents, and ordinary citizens. Whistleblowers have bravely come forward, facing retaliation and being blocked from working both inside and outside the FBI. This is a troubling time for the American people.

We shouldn't put public safety at risk because of some demented philosophy. There was a post about the NSA being infiltrated. It started as a fringe thing, then completely infiltrated the organization. They're spending all their time in some sex chat room with extremely demented stuff. More than a hundred intelligence staffers will be fired over sexually explicit texts in NSA chat rooms. It was all LGBTQ stuff, transition stuff. It infiltrated the organization, which is not what they should be talking about. They're supposed to be protecting the country. People are spending half their time in these meetings. If you have a problem with someone discriminatory, get rid of that person. The work environment should be professional where they're getting the job done that they're being paid to do, not getting paid for bizarre sexcapades.

If we didn't have our current protections, there would be a lot of problems. We'd essentially be a sanctuary program. I oversee a team that develops professional development for teachers in adult education programs, including ESL and citizenship classes. Luckily, we've strategically managed to keep status questions out of our federal statute by maneuvering around problematic bill additions. Conversations now have to be taken offline due to increased surveillance. We've moved to using Signal, an encrypted messaging app, for secure communications. Elon Musk's "Doge team" has taken over the secretary's floor, monitoring our computers and calls. People are leaving in droves and getting paid to do nothing, so if you find me in Mexico, that's why.

People are afraid to come forward about government surveillance because they fear the same fate as Snowden. The speaker urges people to speak up and expose the truth. They mention weather modification and weaponry as possible reasons for surveillance, but their main focus is on the importance of compliance with laws and the need for professionals in the field to address the issue. The speaker warns against disinformation sites like Metabunk and Contrail Science, run by Mick West, who lacks credentials in relevant fields. They also caution against sharing articles without verifying their credibility, as some people are paid to spread false information.

If we were seen as a sanctuary program, especially one using federal dollars, we'd face a lot of problems. To avoid scrutiny, we strategically omit status inquiries from our federal statutes by subtly influencing bill language in congress. Now, with the new efficiency team's surveillance, communication has moved offline to encrypted apps like Signal, even though we're not supposed to conduct business there. They've installed software to track keystrokes and monitor our calls. If I end up on leave, I'm headed to the beach, taxpayer money well spent! Many in administrative roles are already leaving since we can't do much anyway. If I'm in Mexico, don't worry about it.

Speaker 0: Cognitive control runs deeper than simply changing what you think; it shapes the very process of how you think. Are your thoughts really your own? We’ll break down techniques that sneak past your critical thinking to lead you to a conclusion, often without you realizing it. We’ll start with weaponized language, then show how reality itself can be distorted and simplified, and finish with methods that control someone’s entire environment. We begin with weaponizing words. Words are the building blocks of thought, and these techniques create emotional shortcuts before logical analysis can wake up. Loaded language uses words packed with emotional baggage to evoke reaction without evidence. Example contrasts: neutral terms versus loaded ones (public servant vs. bureaucrat; estate tax vs. death tax). Paltering is lying by telling the truth—carefully choosing only true statements to create a misleading picture (e.g., “I did not have textual relations with that chatbot” to imply nothing happened). Obfuscation uses jargon to bury a simple truth under complexity. Rationalization uses emotion-then-logic to defend a decision as if it were purely rational. Section two moves to distorting and simplifying reality. Oversimplification reduces real, messy problems to slogans or black-and-white choices. Out-of-context quotes can make it appear the opposite of what was meant. Limited hangout admits to a small part of a story to appear transparent while hiding the rest. Passe unique (single thought) aims to render opposing viewpoints immoral or unthinkable, narrowing acceptable debate until only one thought remains. The final section covers controlling the environment. Love bombing lavishes praise to secure acceptance, then isolates the person from prior life to foster dependence. Operant conditioning—rewards and punishments on social platforms—shapes behavior; milieux control creates an information bubble that blocks opposing views, discourages critical thinking, and uses its own language to isolate a population. The core takeaway: recognizing these techniques is the first and best defense; awareness reduces their power. The toolkit promises to help you spot propaganda in ads, politics, online groups, and everyday arguments. Speaker 1: Division is a deliberate strategy, not a bug in the system. Chapter one of the playbook focuses on twisting reality to control beliefs. Disinformation is the intentional spread of lies to spark outrage and distrust before facts can be checked, aiming to make you doubt truth itself. FUD—fear, uncertainty, doubt—paralyzes you; the fire hose of falsehood overwhelms with a high volume of junk information across platforms, with no commitment to truth. Euphemism softens harsh realities (civilian deaths becomes collateral damage). The playbook hijacks emotions, demonizes opponents, and sometimes creates manufactured bliss to obscure problems. The long game demoralizes a population to render voting and institutions meaningless, and the endgame is to lock down power by breaking unity among people—pitting departments against each other, issuing nonnegotiable diktats, and launching coordinated harassment campaigns (FLAC) to deter dissent. The objective is poisoning reality to provoke confusion, manipulate emotions, and induce powerlessness. The antidote is naming and recognizing tactics (disinformation, FUD, demonization, etc.) to regain control of the conversation and build more honest, constructive discourse. The information battlefield uses framing, the half-truth, gaslighting, foot-in-the-door tactics, guilt by association, labeling, and latitudes of acceptance to rig debates before they start. The Gish gallop overwhelms with rapid claims; data overload creates a wall of complexity; glittering generalities rely on vague, emotionally charged terms to persuade without substance. Chapter two and beyond emphasize that recognizing the rules of the game lets you slow down, name the tactic, and guide conversations back to facts. The playbook’s architecture: control reality, trigger emotions, build the crowd, and anoint a hero to lead. Understanding these plays is not to promote cynicism, but to enable clearer thinking and more honest dialogue.

FBI agents and analysts, who handle investigations and surveillance, are not influenced by political changes and are dedicated to their work. Most intend to stay for their entire careers, often facing potential termination or retribution for doing their jobs on significant national security cases. This situation has created a sense of fear and uncertainty among them, as losing their jobs would jeopardize their reputations, financial stability, pensions, and health insurance. The current environment within the FBI is chaotic, with employees worried about their futures due to political maneuvering. It is unjust and unacceptable for them to endure such treatment.

The speaker discusses internal resistance to RFK Jr.’s policies and the idea that “deep staters” have been entrenched in government. They mention being forwarded an anecdote from a “good career employee.” They point to the FDA, noting that when Marty Makary came in, he had only about 10 political appointees he could choose. Jay Bhattacharya at the NIH allegedly had one political appointee. The speaker claims that every government employee is a “deep stater” who has been there a long time and that an email from a good employee circulates a CIA manual called How to Be a Bad Bureaucrat and Subvert an Institution from Within. The email supposedly asserts that 90% of employees at HHS, which has 70,000 employees, are talking in lunchrooms about the manual and telling each other that their job is to save America and save science from the agenda of President Trump and RFK Jr. The speaker asserts this reflects how people think across major departments and asks how to get rid of them, suggesting firing them as a solution, and mentions SIOP in this context. The CDC is presented as a case study of failure, described as a public health disaster in its COVID-19 response. The speaker alleges that the CDC’s guidance on school lockdowns copied directly from a teacher union document with which they were aligned, reproducing paragraphs from the teacher’s union advocating for two years of school shutdowns. It is claimed that the CDC also said that cloth masks were fine. The speaker says the CDC led the response and that the NIH funded the entire pandemic, including gain-of-function research, asserting that this constitutes “the creation of the pandemic.” In contrast, RFK Jr. is said to have fired three employees, and this action is described as national news. The overall narrative emphasizes a view of pervasive internal opposition within federal agencies, a controversial and sweeping critique of the CDC, NIH, and HHS responses to the pandemic, and a framing of RFK Jr.’s personnel decisions as transformative and newsworthy.