reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A man approached a woman and tried to start a conversation with her, but she didn't want to engage. As seen in the video, he became more aggressive towards the end. Other people witnessed the incident, where the man punched the woman multiple times before she fell to the ground. He then took around $30 from her hand and fled on his bike. The woman's brother tried to comfort her.

John Paulus serves a subpoena to someone named John for Tina Peters' lawsuit. John seems unsure if he had an appointment.

A woman wants to make a report and has video evidence. She and her husband were burned with hot water. This was allegedly done to churches to force them to pay. This claim is based on previous reports.

Paula's attorneys present a check for $850,000 to redeem her reputation. The doctor questions the amount, mentioning a $25 faucet. The agreement includes a cash payment of $700,000 plus a statement from the president.

There were suspicious donations made in the name of the speaker, but they do not recognize them. The donations were made using their name and address for small amounts, but the speaker usually only donates around $75. They suspect someone else may be using their information for larger donations. The speaker wants a refund for the unauthorized donations and would have noticed if they were making such large contributions.

On February 17th, $1,000 was given to Mike Leiszek, followed by another $1,000 on February 18th, and $1,000 on April 16th. However, on April 19th, only $200 was given to Mike Leiszek. The speaker is being accused of stealing money, but they present receipts to their lawyer as evidence. They mention $10,000 to Lutz in Trust, along with other amounts. The speaker expresses frustration with people ruining lives without evidence and sharing unverified information.

Speaker 0 admits to being paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they suggest it was part of an organized effort.

Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1 for stealing money meant for their child's heart surgery. Speaker 1 dismisses the issue and focuses on why Speaker 0 didn't take them to a concert. Speaker 0 emphasizes that the surgery is their priority and expresses anger towards Speaker 1 for using the money for something trivial. Speaker 1 suggests asking Speaker 0's baby mom for answers, but Speaker 0 dismisses the idea, stating that she has nothing to do with the situation.

Speaker 0 confesses in a video that they were paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they mention it was part of an organized effort.

The judge questioned if $175 million would be available in cash, even if its value changed. The speaker found it absurd, as the money was in a secure account. The judge's lack of understanding was frustrating, leading to a disappointing experience in court. Later, the speaker attended a criminal hearing, which was also deemed disgraceful. Translation: The judge's lack of understanding about cash and secure accounts led to a frustrating court experience for the speaker. The subsequent criminal hearing was also disappointing.

The speaker discusses a deposit made on January 7th and asks how much they received. They mention that it is the last payment and state that they received 4,400 pesos. They inquire about where the money goes and if there is a bank account or card. They express that there is no money and nothing has been deposited. They also mention that nothing has been deposited here.

A woman attempted to cash a money order at a US Post Office in Lighthouse Point, Florida, that had been altered from $55 to $843. Law enforcement was called to the scene. The woman claimed the altered money order was legal under US law and cited UCC codes, demanding the money order be returned to her. She refused to provide identification and repeatedly asked if the officer knew the UCC codes. The officer inquired if she was a sovereign citizen. The woman stated she received the money order from "Cherish," her employer, in its altered state. The officer attempted to contact the employer. The situation escalated, and the woman was arrested for allegedly assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. She denied assaulting the officer. The woman was charged with a felony count of passing a forged or altered bill and a misdemeanor charge of resisting an officer without violence, facing up to five years in prison and $5,000 in fines if convicted.

The speaker talks about going back to base and conducting interviews and interrogations. They mention a conversation with someone who wants to know how much money another person has in their account. The speaker is instructed to find out and give the money in cash. They comply and give the person around $53,000. The speaker also mentions that the person took their mobile phones. Everything continues as normal until the speaker is called to meet the person late at night, which makes them uneasy because they know who they work for.

A person attempts to cash a check with a handwritten amount of $843, while the printed amount is $55. The person claims it's legal due to UCC law and a negotiable instrument. The other person asks for identification and accuses them of forgery. The person refuses to provide identification and demands the check back. They repeatedly ask if the other person knows the UCC code. The other person asks if they are a sovereign citizen, and states that they are confiscating the check illegally and could go to jail for forgery. The person states they did not commit a crime and demands the check back. The other person asks who gave them the check, and they respond that Angie gave it to them for a business called Cherish.

The speaker is describing issues with payment deposits that were supposed to be made to their account. They indicate that deposits were scheduled for January 7 and January 14, but to date, nothing has been deposited. They point out that deposits on those dates were expected, yet “they deposit nothing,” leaving the account without funds. They then discuss what they were supposed to receive in total. The speaker asks what they were supposed to receive and references the last payment, confirming an amount of 3600 pesos. They reiterate that the amount discussed is 3600 pesos, and they refer to “the first” payment in connection with that amount, indicating that 3600 pesos was associated with the initial or first payment in the sequence. In relation to where the money should go, the speaker confirms that the funds are supposed to go to their bank account. They ask whether the money goes to a bank account or a card, and the responses confirm that there is both a bank account and a card involved. The participant confirms, “Yes,” there is an account and a card. Finally, the speaker clarifies the current status of funds. They ask if anything is on the card now or if there is money elsewhere, and the responder confirms that there is no money: “Dinero, No, no hay dinero.” They restate that there is nothing at all and that no deposits have been made, leaving them with no funds in the account or on the card.

The speaker, Angela, seeks help from someone named Ma regarding her broken engagement. She explains that everything was ready for the wedding, but her fiancé called it off without any explanation. Angela contacts her ex-boyfriend's sister to get in touch with him and arranges a meeting. They go to his uncle's house, where Angela's ex-boyfriend, Charles, expresses his anger towards her. Charles reveals that during his visit to Nigeria, Angela stole his belongings and framed him as a fraud, resulting in his arrest and imprisonment. He blames her for ruining his life and warns her to never contact him again.

The speaker discusses a text conversation where someone planned to steal money from him. He mentions meeting the person and their net worth, and how they discussed getting money from him. The speaker refuses to pay any money and mentions a court case where evidence was concealed. The judge found the person's claims to be misleading and denied their request for a restraining order. The speaker sued the person and they counter-sued. Both lawsuits have now been settled, with no money exchanged. The speaker is glad to move on with their life.

Speaker 0 confesses in a video that they were paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they mention it was part of an organized effort.

According to the speaker, on September 14 in Bexar County, a Venezuelan migrant was paid to recruit approximately 50 migrants from around a migrant resource center in San Antonio. 48 migrants were lured under false pretenses to stay at a hotel for a couple of days, then flown to Florida and Martha's Vineyard. They were promised work and solutions to their problems, but the speaker believes they were taken to Martha's Vineyard for a photo op and then unceremoniously stranded. The speaker says the migrants were in the country legally and were preyed upon with false promises of a better life. The speaker believes this was political posturing and is opening an investigation. The speaker has been in contact with LULAC National, an attorney representing the migrants, and members of the media. The speaker has names of persons of interest but will not be sharing them.

A waitress was attacked and beaten at El Taco Azteca in Pilsen by two female customers who then fled. The incident stemmed from a dispute over a $50 bill. One customer went behind the bar and dunked the waitress's phone in a bucket after being denied a refund. The restaurant alleges the customers had finished most of their takeout order when they demanded a refund. The customer started making a mess, and when the waitress called 911, the situation escalated. The beating continued for about two minutes with stomping, punching, and kicking. A person intervened and pulled off one attacker, who then started swinging at them. The waitress suffered a broken pinky, bruises on her head, cuts on her face, and bruised ribs. The restaurant is calling on Chicago police to find those responsible and intends to find them, no matter what it takes.

The speaker recounts having her purse stolen at a restaurant. The thief was wearing a COVID mask. The purse was sitting by her feet when the thief hooked it with his foot, dragged it a few steps, covered it with a coat, and took it. The speaker felt the movement but thought it was her grandkids kicking her legs. She did not get the purse back. She believes the theft was professionally done.

Speaker 1 was punched by a man, not her boyfriend. She declines a business offer and is given money instead. The conversation ends with well wishes for safety.

A woman is accused of stealing with her children. The accuser threatens to send her to jail and claims to have her face on camera. The accuser demands the woman get off of her.

The speaker confirms that the person in question reimbursed them for shared travel expenses in cash, not by check. The speaker also states that all vacations were paid for in cash. When asked if they included these expenses as deductions on their taxes, the speaker denies doing so.

The speaker discussed the financial impact of a recent event, mentioning a loss of 137 cars across three locations totaling $2.5 million. They expressed concerns about government funding and reinvestment efforts. When questioned about discrepancies in their statements, they denied lying about the $400,000 figure mentioned in court.