reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims the Russia-Ukraine war is an extension of Russiagate, which desensitized the Democratic party to hating Russia. According to the speaker, Democrats needed an explanation for Trump's victory besides their own failures, and initially blamed Cambridge Analytica. When that didn't satisfy, the "Russia narrative" emerged. The speaker says Russiagate led Democrats to view Russia negatively, beyond a normal Western perspective, as if Trump were a Kremlin attaché. Thus, after Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the Democrat party, formerly anti-war, showed a subdued response to funding the war. The speaker suggests this is because Putin became an acceptable villain, conflated with Trump, due to Russiagate. Another speaker adds that many were pro-Russia when it was Soviet because it was anti-Christian, but turned against it when it became Orthodox again. The speaker concludes that skepticism about sending money to Ukraine, once a left-wing position, was subdued because Putin became an acceptable villain for the Democrat party.

Putin consolidated power by controlling the media, elections, and targeting critics in Russia. Corruption was rampant, with billions lost and hidden. The US also faces issues of corruption and manipulation, with intelligence agencies influencing policies. Navalny, a journalist who spoke out against power, faced multiple assassination attempts. The mainstream media focuses on Putin as the villain, while ignoring similar issues in the US. Navalny's message of speaking truth to power resonates globally.

The deep state is above governments. It essentially consists of the Rothschilds and the Vatican (including both the black pope and the white pope), as well as the Chabad Jews. They use the Freemasons and the Knights of Malta at the highest levels as their fixers, and they use World Banks as their managers. Most governments have two parties that are elected by 30% of the public. The other 70% of the public is disenfranchised. The politicians and the military leaders and the bankers at the national level are the best of the servant class. They comprise the shadow government, but they are not the deep state. They are the servants of the deep state.

The speaker discusses the members of the president's cabinet in the United States government and their influence. They highlight key departments such as the State Department and the Department of Defense, and note the connections between powerful individuals in these departments and private companies. The speaker also mentions the attorney general and the secretary of education, as well as their affiliations. They delve into the National Security Council and the importance of the administrator of the Agency for International Development. The speaker raises concerns about the influence of Harvard and its relationship with government agencies. They conclude by discussing the concept of the deep state and its connection to corporate and military interests.

Who actually runs the government? It's often not the elected officials we think. Recent events, like Biden's debate with Trump, reveal that decision-making power lies with a group of elite Democrats and figures in the military-industrial complex, not with Biden or Harris. This cabal includes influential individuals like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who benefit from ongoing conflicts. The administrative and national security states gain authority during crises, making it difficult for citizens to hold leaders accountable. Our democracy, meant to be of, by, and for the people, struggles when elected representatives aren't the true decision-makers. While the dynamics have shifted over time, the upcoming election presents an opportunity to reset this situation.

They prioritize endless work for ideological and financial reasons. A notable example is Tulsi Gabbard, who, despite her liberal views, was quickly promoted to vice chair of the DNC. However, when she questioned U.S. opposition to Assad, she became an enemy to the establishment. Hillary Clinton labeled her as "the favorite of the Russians," highlighting the harsh criticism she faced from fellow Democrats. The Democratic Party is influenced by the foreign policy establishment and the military-industrial complex. They emphasize the importance of NATO and military support for Ukraine, revealing their focus on war as a source of funding. This contrasts with Trump's opposition to such conflicts.

They accuse us of what they're doing. These intelligence officials, the same ones who misled America, are worried about a second Trump term? They helped bury the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election. That laptop could have changed history. Now they claim Trump will weaponize the spy services. If Trump wins, I want them investigated for election interference. Joe Biden should be the first target. We need to expose them to the same rules they impose on us. They stole the election, and we can't just move on. They hid the laptop information. The deep state is real—media members, intelligence community members, both active and retired, and government bureaucrats. The deep state sabotaged the Trump administration before, and they're still here.

One speaker believes the idea of a "deep state" is paranoid. Another speaker respectfully disagrees, defining "America First" as: 1) elected officials actually running the government, and 2) leaders owing their sole moral duty to American citizens. This speaker claims that unelected bureaucrats, numbering 4 million, set most public policy and cannot be fired by elected officials, which they argue is not a democracy but a technocracy. They believe this is a root cause of foreign and domestic policy failures, including the rise of the welfare and regulatory state. They also claim that the warfare state is upstream of the welfare state, and that invading other countries invites immigration, linking it to the border crisis.

Vladimir Putin's interference in our past election is a topic we don't discuss often. However, it is important to acknowledge that he has meddled in various ways, such as funding political parties, candidates, and bribing government officials in different countries. This is his modus operandi, as he despises democracy, particularly in the West, and holds a strong animosity towards us. Looking ahead to 2024, it is crucial to address this issue and have more conversations about it.

When I return to the oval office, I will eliminate the deep state. Initially, there was uncertainty about its existence, but now it is widely believed that the deep state is real. I refer to it as a negative entity.

On JFK’s inauguration day, 48% of all State Department political-section employees were not actually State Department employees at all; they were CIA operatives under diplomatic cover. While parked at a US embassy, they did not answer within the State Department chain of command and acted as covert operatives for organized political warfare conducted by the CIA. Because they dominated the political section, they could set their own political policy for the country. If the State Department did not want to overthrow a regime but the CIA did, the CIA could use the embassy’s political-section bandwidth to contact dissident groups, run money to them, provide logistical support, connect them, and run a parallel operation without observing the White House National Security Council chain of command. The speaker gave examples where in some embassies 80% of the political affairs staff were CIA, not State Department at all. The speaker then notes Joe Biden’s CIA director as Bill Burns, describing Burns as a buddy of Jeffrey Epstein. It is asserted that in the 1990s Burns was the head of the political section for the US embassy in Russia, and that Burns “never worked a day at the CIA in his whole life before he’d be handed the reins to be the CIA director.” The speaker emphasizes that Burns was a State Department figure the whole time, serving as the head of the political affairs section, and questions where he was positioned “at state” when he was the head of the political affairs section.

The war right now happening between Russia, Ukraine, and the West support of it actually was an extension of Russiagate. "Russiagate desensitized the Democrat party to hate Russia." The Russia narrative "came ex nihilo." "Putin became an acceptable villain for the Democrat party." "That all goes back to Russiagate." Our intel services are actually more about picking winners and losers in American elections and to thwart the will of pop sovereignty. "Obama personally ordered an intel report"—"Russia behind this election?" The report said no. "Russia was not behind this election, did not manipulate votes." FBI and CIA seem to be working on the same page. "The insurance policy" and "Dossier paid for by the Democrat party with Clinton funds to then illegally be able to spy on the Trump campaign." Rod Rosenstein was running the entire DOJ. This is the fourth branch of government—"unelected, unaccountable."

I caught a Pentagon advisor to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, specializing in AI, coordinating a secret war room to counter Trump. This guy, Jamie Mannarino, worked for Hillary Clinton, then the FBI as a "spy hunter," and now advises on AI technologies that "don't yet exist." Mannarino was caught on hidden camera discussing these secret meetings and expressing his negative opinions about Trump. He even mentioned consulting with retired generals about what actions they could take to prevent certain potential presidential actions. Following this exposure, the Pentagon spokesperson stated they were not involved and that Mannarino was out of control and had been stopped. This is an example of the deep state attempting a coup.

The deep state refers to career employees within the U.S. government and military who influence policy without being directly accountable to elected officials. Agencies like the FCC, CIA, SEC, and IRS have the power to enact regulations that can significantly impact our lives, often more than laws passed by Congress. These regulations, totaling 200,000 since 1975 and spanning 800,000 pages, demonstrate that the deep state is not a secret but a well-established reality. Unfortunately, these career employees cannot be easily fired, ensuring that political interests have limited influence over them. This situation highlights a concerning aspect of our governance that needs to be acknowledged.

The transcript centers on a long-form discussion of the Epstein case, the alleged “deep state,” FOIA operations, and political maneuvering around Trump, with frequent calls to aggressively release and pursue Epstein-related documents and other investigations. The speakers assert that the FOIA department is being used to shield deep-state ties and that many federal offices are filled with anti-Trump figures who have prevented full disclosure. - Epstein files and the role of the deep state - The speakers claim the Epstein files are being selectively redacted by FOIA departments to conceal deep-state connections. They state that FOIA personnel are controlled by deep-state actors and that Epstein’s case involves a “fleet of aircraft” and operations linked to major power centers. They argue Epstein’s activities connect to money laundering, information laundering, and a broader set of deep-state assets and operations. - They propose a remedy: appoint Tom Fitton as special counsel on the Epstein files, arguing he “knows how FOIA really works,” understands key personnel, and has litigated Epstein-related cases for years. They assert this would restore public confidence and expedite the exposure of Democratic ties and other actors alleged to be involved. - They advocate for Trump to have executive-privilege-style powers to declassify and release Epstein materials, suggesting a broad interpretation of “Epstein file law” that would allow him to disclose or appoint an ombudsman with power to release materials at will. They emphasize the need to disclose Democratic ties and to hold press conferences when releasing documents, avoiding the use of fake documents or videos. - Specific figures and institutions named - Kash Patel is cited as saying there are “open files on a dozen plus coconspirators” and as someone who has noted alleged misdirections by those handling Epstein-related material. - Kyle Serafin and Phil Kennedy are mentioned as documenting a person at the FBI capacity who is “an anti-Trump advocate,” implying that deep-state appointments control FOIA and related processes. - Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss replacing FOIA and related personnel who are deeply implicated; they specifically name Tom Fitton as the ideal choice and entertain other high-profile figures like Tulsi Gabbard as potential custodians of the Epstein disclosures. - Tulsi Gabbard is described as being in charge of broader investigations tied to the Epstein files and other major political issues (elections, COVID-19, etc.). They also reference “Epstein files” intersecting with other investigations they attribute to the deep state. - Epstein, Maxwell, and allied networks - Epstein is described as deeply embedded with Western intelligence agencies (French, Israeli, UK, and US) and tied to Robert Maxwell, with Maxwell’s daughter linked to Epstein. Epstein is portrayed as having been “recruited by Bill Barr” and as a central figure in a long-running intelligence and blackmail operation. - The discussion links Epstein to Leslie Wexner (Victoria’s Secret founder) and a French talent agency, portraying these connections as part of a large, interconnected network involved in money laundering, arms trafficking, blackmail, and intelligence work. - The speakers insist that Epstein’s activities extended to the late 1990s and beyond, including alleged involvement in “Shutters” in Santa Monica and other high-profile cases, with a consistent pattern of using underage girls and blackmail to exert influence. - They emphasize a broader motive: exposing the “deep state” to vindicate Trump and indict deep-state actors who allegedly engaged in illicit operations, including foreign intelligence services and Western governments. - The broader political frame and potential indictments - The Epstein files are presented as a potential hinge for indicting a wide array of figures across political lines, including references to Comey, Mueller, Hillary Clinton-era actors, and other “rogue actors” who allegedly hindered investigations. - The conversation ties Epstein to broader themes: the 2020 election, COVID policies, and anti-Trump actions by the “deep state.” They contend that the Epstein disclosures could demonstrate the depth of state interference in political processes and media, making Democrats and their institutions targets of accountability. - They argue the Epstien files could show criminal activity by multiple national actors, including Israeli, UK, and French components, and could reveal coordinated efforts to derail Trump and manipulate media narratives. - The Candace Owens angle and related criticisms - A substantial portion of the dialogue critiques Candace Owens, alleging she is running a “CIA-style” operation that distracts from the true conspiracy around the deep state and Tarantifa, and that she manipulates narratives related to Tyler Robinson and Charlie Kirk. - They accuse Owens of shifting narratives, fabricating alibis, and promoting disinformation, calling her a “SIOP” (psychological operation) and alleging her behind-the-scenes connections to MI6 or other international actors through her husband (George Farmer) and other associates. - They recount multiple incidents where Owens purportedly changed stories about meetings, alibis, and involvement in various investigations, asserting she uses “receipts” selectively and inconsistently to support divergent claims. - The speakers allege that Owens’s public warfare against Trump and TP USA is part of a broader intelligence operation intended to disrupt conservative momentum, link to Royal/MI6 circles, and undermine investigations into the deep state and its networks. - Tyler Robinson case and media dynamics - They describe Tyler Robinson as a Middle American figure whose transformation into a political actor is portrayed as a product of online radicalization and Tarantifa-linked influences. They claim there was a concerted effort to spoon-feed disinformation about Robinson and Candace Owens’ involvement. - They argue this is part of a larger pattern of media manipulation and disinformation designed to distract from real conspiracies and to target Trump and conservative movements. - Strategy and messaging guidance - The speakers advocate for Trump to go on the offensive with Epstein, releasing comprehensive, verified documentation, and pushing accountability for “rogue actors” in the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, and the NSA. - They stress the need for aggressive prosecution and the appointment of trusted figures to lead the Epstein disclosures, arguing that this could restore public confidence and pivot the political conversation toward accountability for the deep state. - They urge addressing the statute of limitations issues in COVID, January 6, and 2020 election-related cases before the window closes in early 2026, warning that delays by Bondi, Blanche, and others could jeopardize prosecutions and political support. - Promotional and logistical notes - The dialogue includes frequent mentions of promoting Alex Jones programs, products, and stores (alexjonesstore.com and infowarsstore.com) to fund operations, along with appeals to listeners to support the broadcasts financially and through purchases, framing financial support as essential to sustaining investigations, media efforts, and broader political action. In sum, the transcript presents an entangled, aggressively conspiratorial narrative: a claim that Epstein’s files illuminate a vast, deeply embedded deep-state apparatus spanning multiple nations and agencies; a call to appoint trusted figures (notably Tom Fitton) to supervise full disclosure; a push for Trump to declassify and publicly prosecute the implicated actors; a harsh critique of Candace Owens as part of a disinformation ecosystem; and a broader strategy to use Epstein, along with related investigations, to dismantle perceived institutional corruption while fueling political narratives and fundraising.

War over Ukraine and Western support 'was an extension of Russiagate,' desensitizing the Democrat party to hate Russia. 'Cambridge Analytica' was the first attempt, and 'the Russia narrative came ex nihilo.' 'Tulsi is getting to the bottom of it.' 'Putin became an acceptable villain for the Democrat party' and 'That all goes back to Russiagate' and 'the lie of the dirty dossier.' 'Our intel services are supposed to gather intelligence and defend the homeland' but are 'actually more about picking winners and losers' and 'thwarting the will of pop popular sovereignty.' 'Obama personally ordered an intel report' concluding 'Russia was not behind this election' (December 2016, now declassified). 'FBI and the CIA' seem to be on the same page and 'the insurance policy' leads to 'Rosenstein' 'running the entire DOJ.' Perp walks are called for to address the 'fourth branch of government'—'unaccountable' and 'unelected.'

Victoria Nuland is a long-term committed NeoCon with an agenda to garrison the entire world with US forces and forcibly convert it to a democracy they approve of. This agenda stems from a deep-rooted animosity towards Russia, which is not shared by most Americans. Wherever Nuland goes, conflict, crisis, and fighting seem to follow. The national security types, like Nuland, are often seen as crazy and filled with hatred due to their family's Holocaust experiences. They view the rest of the world as potential enemies who want to harm them. This is why people fear the deep state in the US. They are perceived as twisted individuals.

Trump criticized the military industrial complex and the foreign policy establishment, blaming them for the current war. He specifically mentioned Victoria Nuland, comparing her to Fauci in terms of responsibility. Nuland was involved in backing an insurrection in Ukraine in 2014, which led to strained relations with Russia and the subsequent seizure of Crimea. Trump's willingness to address this issue is noteworthy.

The speaker claims that the Biden administration is controlled by a shadow government, which is an influential entity that gives official orders to elected governments. They state that this may be hard to believe, but they have witnessed it for the past 20 years. The shadow government consists of 38 individuals, including influential figures in finance and politics, who dictate the actions of elected governments based on geopolitical agreements, often involving military interventions. The speaker confidently asserts that the Biden administration is under the control of this shadow government, based on the information they have.

The deep state in Washington DC is a group of elites who believe they know better than the American people. The current administration is seen as a joke with unsuccessful policies. The speaker, who worked in the Pentagon after Trump, believes no one is truly leading the country. They criticize Secretary Austin and Mark Milley for the Afghan withdrawal and call the situation at the border a crisis. The speaker wants DJT back in office to restore order.

We need to clean house and remove warmongers, globalists, and the deep state from America. Unlike previous presidents, I didn't start a war because I rejected the advice of Washington's generals, bureaucrats, and diplomats who only know how to get us into conflict. People like Victoria Nuland have been pushing Ukraine towards NATO for years. In my next four years, the war mongers, frauds, and failures in our government will be gone.

Glenn Beck recounts George W. Bush telling him, "the president isn't really the president," and that "the president is just listening to all of these advisers who are advising the last president and the president before that." Bush said, "whoever comes into this office... they're going to sit behind this desk" and "they're going to be advised by exactly the same people that have been advising me, that they really have no choice." Beck argues a "deep state" is executing a long plan, asking, "What difference does it make who we have in the office if that's true?" He cites Trump’s August meeting with Zelensky and European leaders: "I'm just going to get old Vlad on the phone" and "keep you up to speed of what's going on" by calling Putin. Promo: BlockTrust IRA, Animas AI, "over 250% returns on their investments," "up to $200,000,000 in insurance," visit dailypulsecrypto.com, "up to $2,500 in bonus crypto," "Crypto created 80,000 new millionaires last year."

The speaker claims that certain individuals hold key, unelected positions of power in the U.S. government. These include Merrick Garland of the FBI, David Cohan of the CIA, and Avril Haines, Director of National Intelligence, heading the intelligence network. The speaker names Anthony Blinken, Secretary of State, who they say has dual citizenship with Israel, and Janet Yellen, Secretary of Treasury, who they say was previously in charge of the Federal Reserve and all banks. Alejandro Mayorkas is said to be in charge of the borders as head of the Department of Homeland Security, and Ron Klein as White House chief of staff controls access to the president. The speaker concludes that this group not only wins elections, but also occupies the most important positions of power.

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.