reSee.it - Related Video Feed

New details have emerged about how the CIA under Obama targeted Trump and initiated the Russia collusion hoax. Former CIA director John Brennan identified 26 Trump associates to be spied on by the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance, which includes Britain and Australia. The interactions of these associates were then flagged as suspicious by the FBI, leading to the launch of the hoax. The evidence of this operation is reportedly stored in a top-secret binder, which Trump has ordered to be declassified. However, there are rumors that the binder may be missing. This revelation raises serious allegations of illegal spying and election interference. More information about the binder will be revealed in an upcoming report.

The speaker claims that top law enforcement officials expected Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election and manipulated the law to ensure her victory and Trump's defeat. He cites James Comey's alleged admission of operating in an environment where a Clinton victory was expected. The speaker discusses the alleged intrusion into the Democratic National Committee (DNC), pointing to "telltale signs in Cyrillic" and the name "Felix Dzerzhinsky" as either sloppy or overly clever attempts to implicate Russia. He alleges that the persona "Guccifer 2.0" is a fraud, based on forensic analysis of metadata by former NSA technical directors. The speaker criticizes Bob Mueller, claiming he falsified intelligence before the Iraq War and approved of torture and wiretapping. He recounts an encounter where he questioned Mueller about "parallel construction," the practice of using illegally acquired information in prosecutions without revealing its source. The speaker describes James Comey's leaking of a conversation with President Trump to prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor, Bob Mueller. He questions Comey's decision not to seize the DNC computers after the alleged Russian hacking, relying instead on CrowdStrike, a firm with a "disastrous record of veracity." The speaker claims that the DNC blamed Russia for the hacking to divert attention from the content of the leaked emails. He references Jennifer Palmieri, Hillary Clinton's PR person, allegedly pushing the "Russians hacked" narrative. Chuck Schumer is quoted as saying the intelligence community has "six ways to Sunday" to get back at Trump. The speaker discusses the Steele dossier and claims that the FBI also paid for it. He alleges that the intelligence community assessment on Russian hacking was based on handpicked analysts and that Obama stated the conclusions of Russian hacking getting to WikiLeaks were inconclusive. He claims NSA collects everything and there is no evidence of Russian hacking. The speaker references Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's text messages, where they expressed support for Hillary Clinton and a determination to "stop" Trump. He claims Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails, later said there was "no there there" regarding Russia gate. The speaker claims Julian Assange released documentation of the CIA's cyber tool to hack into systems and leave telltale signs giving the responsibility to someone else. He concludes that a "deep state" within the FBI, CIA, and Justice Department acted to ensure Hillary Clinton's victory and undermine Trump.

People who oppose the mainstream media are often labeled as racist or potentially dangerous. WikiLeaks recently released thousands of hacked emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, which have revealed corruption, law breaking, and collusion within the Clinton campaign, the government, and the media. There are also claims that Podesta may be involved in a child sex trafficking ring. Additionally, the emails suggest that Podesta and his brother participated in occult practices. The speakers express their anger and frustration towards Podesta, demanding to know what secrets he is hiding.

New details have emerged about how the CIA under Obama targeted Trump and initiated the Russia hoax. It was previously believed that a tip from an Australian diplomat led to the FBI's investigation of Papadopoulos, but new reporting suggests that the CIA orchestrated the whole thing. Former CIA director John Brennan identified 26 Trump associates to be targeted by the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance, and the FBI then deemed their interactions suspicious, launching the Russia collusion hoax. The alleged details of this operation are stored in a top-secret binder, which Trump has ordered to be declassified, but it may be missing. This is a serious allegation of illegal spying and election interference.

The government's lack of interest in investigating Epstein's activities and the people associated with him is questioned. It is suggested that this lack of interest may be explained by the involvement of individuals from both the Clinton and Obama circles. Specifically, the current CIA chief under Biden and Obama's former top White House lawyer are implicated.

In July 2016, Christopher Steele gave his dossier to the FBI while John Brennan, then head of the CIA, received information about the Hillary Clinton campaign's questionable activities. The evidence related to this was either destroyed or returned to the Clinton Global Initiative. The corruption within the DOJ and FBI is concerning, as an entire investigative team conducting a lawful investigation can be shut down by the Department of Justice. This should be a major story, given the magnitude of the situation.

People who criticize the mainstream media are often labeled as racist or potentially dangerous. Tonight's discussion will be disturbing but it offers a reality check that you won't find elsewhere. WikiLeaks has released a new batch of emails from campaign chairman John Podesta, revealing corruption, lobbying, and media manipulation within the winning campaign. There are also claims of a child sex trafficking ring. This is a deliberate effort to destroy John Podesta personally. In a bizarre exchange, someone demands to be called "father" and tells another person to get lost.

The Clinton plan intelligence involved creating a scandal linking Trump to Russia. President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Comey were briefed on this, but it was not shared with agents or the FISA court. The Steele dossier has not been corroborated. The FBI's payments to Steele and Twitter were explained as standard practice. The FBI's actions regarding the Hunter Biden laptop and financial institutions were questioned as political. The FBI's reputation was criticized for appearing political. The FBI's request for financial data from Bank of America was brought up.

According to Speaker 1, the DOJ investigation should target President Obama, who "started it." Biden, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan were also present. Speaker 1 claims "those papers" show Obama is guilty of treason and trying to steal and obfuscate the election. Speaker 1 states that Obama is shielded by the press and that what "they" did is unimaginable, even compared to "rough countries."

Svetlana Lokova recounts a years-spanning, shadowy influence operation that she says began long before the public Russiagate narrative took hold and continued to unfold through high-level intelligence and political circles in the United States and the United Kingdom. She argues that a coordinated conspiracy, involving American and British intelligence figures, political operatives, and foreign partners, was designed to undermine Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, demonize him in the public sphere, and ultimately reshape U.S. politics in ways that persist to today. She explains that the conspiracy starts with the idea of weaponizing Russia as a pretext to derail Trump. In September 2015, Hillary Clinton’s circle tied to Strobe Talbott and to London-based figures including Richard Dearlove and Christopher Andrew decides to dust off “the old Russian handbook” and pursue a plan to run with Russia as the central smokescreen. Svetlana notes that General Michael Flynn, then head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under Obama, was already engaging with Russia on matters of security and terrorism, and that Flynn’s Moscow trip in December 2015, arranged through the DIA, became a focal point of later accusations. She emphasizes that the trip was conducted under normal security procedures, with defensive briefings and debriefings required for someone of Flynn’s level of clearance. A key tie-in is the Cambridge operation she herself experienced. In 2015 she was an academic at Cambridge University, where she formed connections with MI6’s Richard Dearlove, Cambridge-based MI6-linked figures, and CIA asset Stefan Halper, who had Cambridge cover as a professor. She describes what she calls “bump” encounters—unexpected introductions that later produced routine reports. One such meeting introduced her to John McLaughlin, then acting CIA director, who allegedly expressed admiration for Russia and who later became a conduit for information within the FBI and CIA. Alan Collar, a London-based FBI liaison (Ligat) and a contact to Cambridge, also emerges as a pivotal figure; Svetlana recalls that Collar later sought to have Halper’s help in various capacities, including a potential PhD placement at Cambridge. Svetlana underscores how the operation leveraged a web of relationships: Christopher Steele in Britain, Halper in the U.S., McLaughlin, and MI6 heads like Dearlove, all part of what she describes as a “newsroom-to-FBI-to-CIA” loop. She explains that Steele and Halper acted as confidential informants for the FBI and CIA, with Steele’s dossier and Halper’s reports forming the backbone of what would become the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. She contends that the plan was not simply to accuse Trump of wrongdoing but to create a narrative of foreign interference—Russian involvement used to undermine Trump’s legitimacy and to give cover for the political takes of the Clinton-Soros alliance. The narrative continues with the infamous 2016 timeline. Svetlana recounts how the Hillary Clinton campaign, with Soros backing and with John Podesta’s circle, leveraged a “two-pronged” approach: demonize Trump through a public narrative of Russian interference and simultaneously seed a parallel set of claims about Trump campaign contacts with Russian intelligence. The plan, she says, was documented in internal emails circulated through Soros-linked channels and high-level Clinton aides. An August 2016 Oval Office meeting reportedly included Barack Obama, Susan Rice, James Comey, and John Brennan; Brennan allegedly noted that Hillary’s plan to distract from her email scandal involved tying Trump to Russia and ordered or supported steps to surface contacts between Trump advisers and Russian intelligence. This, she says, culminated in the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, justified by Downer’s May 2016 meeting with George Papadopoulos in London, which fed the FBI’s launch of an overarching inquiry into the Trump campaign. Svetlana emphasizes the mechanics of the operation: a cascade of “two-source” corroboration that failed to exist in reality but was manufactured through coordinated reporting. Stefan Halper and Christopher Steele allegedly provided separate but harmonized lines to the FBI and to journalists (for example, Washington Post and New York Times), with Fusion GPS coordinating research and payments, and with journalists feeding stories into the media while the FBI used those articles as cover to justify surveillance. She notes that the Steele dossier and Halper reports described contacts with Russian figures and asserted Kremlin orders, even while evidence mountains suggested the opposite or were non-existent. The operation allegedly relied on “ambiguous” or “dual-source” reporting to maintain plausible deniability and to keep multiple actors downstream of a single fabrication. Svetlana also describes internal institutional dynamics. She recounts that the Cambridge network included Gina Haspel (then head of the London CIA station) and Mike Morell (a senior CIA official) who allegedly used Cambridge as a front to pursue operations with university cover. The effort, she says, involved the use of “color revolutions” metaphors and methods—funding, organizing demonstrations, and controlling media narratives—through a transatlantic network that included British intelligence (MI6), American agencies (CIA, FBI, DHS), and at times Ukrainian actors. She asserts that the aim was not merely to affect the 2016 election but to create a “fog of war” (as she calls it) to obscure the truth, with the ultimate objective of removing Trump from power or preventing his influence in foreign policy. Two focal consequences are highlighted. First, the emergence of the Russia-collusion frame itself, built on forged or misrepresented evidence about Trump’s alleged ties to Russia and to Russian elites. Second, the use of this frame to drive real-world investigations, media coverage, and political pressure—culminating in the Mueller investigation and attempts to impeach or remove Trump from office. She contends that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and later the intelligence community assessment that purported Russian interference and Trump’s supposed collaboration, were built on manipulated or false premises, with the principal architects’ fingerprints on the evidence and the dissemination of the narrative across intelligence and media channels. In her discussion of the Mar-a-Lago documents and the Florida case surrounding John Brennan and other co-conspirators, Svetlana asserts that declassification by President Trump of Crossfire Hurricane documents demonstrated both the existence of the conspiracy and government overreach. She repeats a central point: the documents show a plan written down by Brennan and other aides to tie Trump to Russia, demonize him, and justify an ongoing investigation to undermine his presidency. She notes that the same players who orchestrated the scheme—Halper, Steele, Downer, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and others—were allegedly involved in a broader pattern of off-the-books operations, funding, and information leaks designed to influence U.S. politics and foreign policy outcomes, with foreign allies in Britain and elsewhere participating in the broader maneuver. Svetlana’s overarching message is that accountability is possible but contingent on public attention and political will. She points to subpoenas and grand jury activity around Brennan and others as indications that the origins of the Russia investigation are formally being examined. She stresses that, despite the persistence of the conspiracy narrative, documents and testimony could reveal the truth behind the orchestrated campaign to disrupt the Trump presidency. She calls on the American public to demand accountability and to remain vigilant about the institutions and actors involved in what she describes as a continuing conspiracy, from Crossfire Hurricane to the later narratives surrounding Mueller and impeachment efforts, and into current political disputes. The dialogue closes with a personal appeal from Svetlana to the audience and to Lara Logan: the need to push for transparency and for due process, to scrutinize the roles of the people who allegedly manufactured and propagated the Russia collusion claims, and to insist on accountability for those who oversaw or participated in actions she frames as treasonous or seditious. She credits Lara Logan for ongoing coverage and expresses gratitude for the support of viewers and readers who seek an unflinching account of events, urging continued public scrutiny and a demand for principled governance.

John Brennan was allegedly at the center of several significant scandals. It's argued the Russian collusion hoax almost swung the election to Hillary Clinton, and the Mueller investigation cost Donald Trump $40,000,000 to find nothing. It's claimed that if the FBI had released its investigation of the laptop, John Brennan and others wouldn't have been able to lie about it being cooked up in Russia and that Donald Trump was complicit. This failure to disclose the laptop's true nature may have affected the election. It's also asserted that the narrative that Donald Trump was working with Vladimir Putin colored the relationship with Russia and affected the Russian Ukrainian war. John Brennan lost his security clearance and should be worried about indictment and jail due to culpability in not telling the truth, spinning lies, and being at the heart of scandals that affected the history of The United States.

There is a discussion about a potential disconnect between the Democratic Party brand and President Biden. The term "existential threat" is used to describe Donald Trump. However, one person points out that Hillary Clinton created a fake dossier to remove a sitting president and questions the use of the term. They also bring up the connection between the Clintons and Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting that this was not considered an existential threat. The person suggests discussing this connection and why the client list was never made public.

The conversation centers on the Seth Rich murder and its alleged connection to WikiLeaks and the 2016 DNC email controversy. An FBI forensic report purportedly found that Rich contacted WikiLeaks through a London-based WikiLeaks director, Gavin McFadden, and Rich allegedly provided McFadden with more than 44,000 emails and nearly 18,000 attachments. Rich was killed near his DC home on July 10, but his wallet, phone, and watch were not taken. WikiLeaks published internal DNC emails twelve days later, showing top DNC officials discussing ways to hurt Bernie Sanders at the polls, which contributed to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair and the DNC’s top three officials. Speaker 1 questions whether there is an “October surprise” and whether material is being held. Speaker 2 of the Helix group states that they do not sit on material and emphasizes that whistleblowers take significant risks; they note Rich’s murder as an example of high stakes and risk to sources, asserting that sources seek anonymity with them. When Speaker 1 asks if Rich was a source, Speaker 2 declines to comment but says they are investigating what happened to Rich and are concerned about it, though no conclusion has been reached. Speaker 3 argues that Rich was a Bernie Sanders supporter who worked for the DNC and asserts that the DNC rigged the primary against Sanders; he notes that Rich was aware of this and was involved as it happened, with Donald Brazil also involved. He describes Rich as idealistic and patriotic, and recounts his murder after leaking information to WikiLeaks, insisting that this is not a conspiracy theory but a fact-based concern. He challenges others to acknowledge the alleged corruption within the Democratic party and suggests that those who ignore the facts are engaging in denial. He also critiques media portrayals and online accusations about his own credibility. Speaker 4 discusses Assange and WikiLeaks, criticizing the idea of a conspiracy theory and labeling Assange as a key figure who exposed corruption. He mentions that Assange now “works for Russia” and questions the Ecuadorian embassy situation, describing it as heavily manipulated by interests around Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. He connects the Seth Rich disclosures to broader allegations of a coordinated effort to undermine Clinton and her circle, while acknowledging that some related claims may be questionable. Speaker 6 notes that hacking of the DNC and the role of CrowdStrike remain controversial and points to the subsequent murder of Rich as a focal point for questions that have not been fully explored by the media. Speaker 7 echoes concerns about the timeline, the FBI’s involvement, and past inquiries that were not pursued, emphasizing a sense that the case and the broader narrative around the DNC emails have been inadequately examined. Speaker 8 presents a long, conspiratorial narrative alleging that on 11/01/2016 Hillary and Bill Clinton orchestrated a civilian coup through corruption and co-option of key institutions, while a countercoup through Julian Assange and WikiLeaks was initiated to undermine Hillary and the Clinton machine. The speaker claims a silent countercoup across the Internet, led by members of the intelligence community, to stop the Clintons from gaining power and ensure Obama leaves without pardon, framing the moment as a major transitional event and a second American revolution conducted without guns.

Speaker 0: The speaker alleges a cover-up by people including Bill Barr and Mike Pompeo. Bill Barr, described by Jeffrey Epstein as “CIA,” allegedly covered up Epstein’s murder in federal detention, with Barr saying publicly, “we gotta make sure everyone thinks this is a suicide.” The speaker asks why Barr isn’t being questioned about this. Mike Pompeo is accused of plotting to murder Julian Assange, head of WikiLeaks. The speaker notes that WikiLeaks released the first tranche of emails to the public, and that Assange suggested on Dutch TV that his source was Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was found murdered in Washington in what was described as a robbery where nothing was taken. Assange hinted in the interview that his sources faced great risks, mentioning Seth Rich; the interviewer pressed whether Rich was murdered for the leaks, and Assange said he couldn’t reveal sources but that they faced risks. Shortly after, Assange was incarcerated, first in an embassy in London and then in Belmarsh Prison, without criminal charges, actions the speaker attributes to the CIA and Mike Pompeo. The speaker contends that someone should ask Pompeo about this. Speaker 1: The speaker expresses anger at what they see as broad, systemic cover-ups versus ordinary Americans facing jail for minor offenses. They reference Pizzagate and Epstein, asserting that cover-ups extend across other issues, including Benghazi and Hillary Clinton material, which they claim were never properly pursued with the appropriate parties. They point to a long list of alleged co-conspirators connected to the Epstein matter, including those revealed in a recent document drop and corroborated subsequently. The list reportedly includes ten co-conspirators: one named Leslie Wexner, pilots (three identified by name), and others such as Ghislain Maxwell and various assistants who recruited girls, as well as individuals trafficking models. The speaker asserts there were many people around Epstein who were deeply involved and deserve serious questioning. They also reference Ehud Barak as among those connected to the network. Overall: The conversation presents multiple allegations of high-level complicity and cover-ups involving Bill Barr, Mike Pompeo, Julian Assange, Seth Rich, and a broad network around Jeffrey Epstein, including named and unnamed individuals, with claims of documented co-conspirators and ongoing questions about accountability.

Speaker 0: This story that's been the biggest thing on the Internet for several weeks, Pizzagate, as it's called, is a rabbit hole that is horrifying to go down. Now if you're a radio listener, this is a powerful video, but I've had it reposted because, again, he finished it, I guess, on Wednesday. It went out Thursday on the nightly news that was taped the day before. This is on infowars.com. Pizzagate is real. The only question is, what exactly is it? Because I'd said, man, I hope this is drug dealing code word or something or, you know, maybe they got the wrong manual because this is the FBI says this is this is pedophilia manuals. These are the terms they use, and then here's the New York Times. Fake news onslaught targets pizzeria as nest of child traffickers. Hey. I don't know why the pizzeria and the one down the street have symbols in the FBI dossier. I don't know why there's devil worship part of the walls. I don't know why it's connected to Potesta. I don't know why they got rock singers there talking about, you know, being you know, going after kids or whatever. This is what's going on, though. And so maybe it's just some genre they picked up. They don't know what they're involved in. I'm not accusing them of anything. Little I mean, it's not like they look like little piggy people or anything. Not like they fit all the cliches or anything when you go to the just like nice people to me, but the point is is that this is tied into Podesta with thousands of emails with, we're gonna have the six year old, the seven year old, and eight year old in the hot tub for your entertainment out at the ranch house. They can be a little persnickety, but they are also willing and enjoy it. Yeah. I mean, there's thousands of these. You're reading it going, what the hell is this? And you start reading it. There's thousands and thousands and thousands, and you know you're reading something real bad. Oh, I'll see you at the feast tonight. Oh, we'll have lots of blood and semen. Oh, good. And then they had, like, Time Magazine worshiping this high priestess the week after we exposed her about the news, all this PR, like, oh, we'll show them. They're attacking our high priestesses. We'll just put them in the news better. Like, we're all upstanding and out in the open and good people. Look. I've been careful about all this. This is lawsuit city. I don't know what the hell is going on with these people. I know straight up devil worship when I see it and find quotes of her saying it's real when she does it privately. Could he harass me anything Reddit accounts? I mean, I know real bathymen worship when I see it, but thousands of emails, I'm not ready to accuse all these people of this. It's up to you to research it for yourself, but you gotta go to infowars.com and actually see the photos and videos inside these places. You've gotta see their menus. You've gotta see it all, ladies and gentlemen, and then you gotta see the FBI law enforcement manuals showing the code words that are used. And by the way, didn't just believe this. I went to the FBI site. I went and looked it all up, and people asked, well, why weren't you on this earlier? We were on it from the beginning. We've been on it the last couple weeks since the election, but we're fighting on hundreds of fronts here. Let's go ahead and go to the report. Pizzagate is real. The question is, how real is it? What is it? Something's going on. Something's being covered up. It needs to be investigated. You just call it fake news. These are real WikiLeaks. This is real stuff going on. Here it is. Speaker 1: A warning to viewers, the following images are disturbing. This all began after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange released hundreds of thousands of secret documents detailing a back stabbing Clinton Foundation, but it now appears the real truth Assange was leading us to was hidden between the blurred lines of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, John Podesta's, released emails. Fast forward past John Podesta's brother, Tony's, casual email exchange with thalemic spirit cooking adherent Marina Abramovic. Rosetta Stone was needed next. A verification that high level Washington DC predatory pedophiles were using a code to communicate child sex trafficking as casually as ordering a pizza. An FBI unclassified document from WikiLeaks revealed symbols and logos used by pedophiles to identify sexual preferences to include those who sexually abuse children as well as those who produce, distribute, and trade child pornography are using various types of identification logos or symbols to recognize one another and distinguish their sexual preferences. Investigators should also be attentive to pedophilia symbols advertised on websites. During examinations of computer files, investigators should be conscious of subjects who try to conceal child pornography by labeling them with symbols instead of typical suggestive explicit names. Thus, the interest in code words. Now clues. The menu from comet ping pong. Notice the symbol of the ping pong paddles and its clever resemblance to the FBI documents symbol for child love. Alright. Hang on, New York Times. Before you declare this fake news from your ivory tower, now look at the symbol for Besta Pizza just two doors down from comet ping pong pizza, boldly using the symbol for boy lover as was recorded on the unclassified FBI document. The evidence begins to reveal that Besta Pizza and Comet Ping Pong Pizza may be competing for the lucrative Washington DC pedophile market right out in the open. Comet Ping Pong owner James Alifantis needs to explain himself, and so he did via the Hillary Clinton colluding New York Times. But so many questions remain unanswered. Why was this said by the band heavy breathing performing in comet ping pong? Speaker 0: He likes the world sounds. Demolios. And little boys. And children. Think I was his manager. Yep. We all have references. Speaker 1: Why is the art work adorning Comet Ping Pong's walls at the very least so insanely creepy, especially for a family restaurant? Why is Alifantis so close to Tony Podesta as revealed in the WikiLeaks emails? And why does mister Podesta collect questionable artwork specializing in grotesque eroticism and pedophilic images, not to mention Podesta's dabbling in what appears to be cannibalistic rituals while continuing his old friendship with convicted pedophile Dennis Hastard. Why is this man wearing an I love children shirt in this situation? Why did you write hashtag murder next to this incredibly creepy photo you posted? Why do you find it amusing that this baby is for sale? Why do you associate with this artist? Why is any of this okay? And if these code words are eventually proven to be just another method of communication, then why did the Podesta emails mention the code word pasta for either little boy or sex 78 times. Code word cheese for little girl 85 times. And what does Podesta's friend Herb mean by this statement from a Podesta email? PS. Do you think I'll do better playing dominoes on cheese than on pasta? According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the FBI, 460,699 children went missing in 2015 that we know of. Mister Alifantis, this isn't a witch hunt, and it isn't an attack from fake news that your boyfriend David Brock, founder of Media Matters, would have us all ignore. Either you are the unlucky victim of a fake news onslaught due to your own poorly initiated publicity or a decades old pedophile ring operating in the power hoarding shadows of Washington DC is about to be opened from your front door. John Bound for infowars.com. Speaker 0: Trump won. Hillary stole five states. Was ordered to stand down by the intelligence agencies where everything else is gonna come out on this. If you're a radio listener, you're lucky you didn't actually see the video. The art they tweet in Facebook is of children being murdered, cut in pieces, and raped by men with giant genitalia. So oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. So I don't know anymore, but that's what they're pushing. It's what they got hanging up in there, and it's what they're doing. And, I I can't go out there and investigate it myself. We've had reporters on that have been there. They say it's really creepy because, I don't have the self control to be around these type of people. So you want us to cover Pizzagate? We have covered it. We are covering it, and all I know is, god help us, we're in the hands of pure evil. We'll be right back. I'm on the show.

Warner reaches out to someone, mentioning being out of touch and needing to talk on the phone. The text conversation reveals that Daniel j Jones met with Adam Waldman, a lawyer connected to Igor Deripaska and Julian Assange. They discuss the damaging impact of Assange on Democrats, Obama, and the CIA, and the importance of bringing him to the US. Christopher Steele is somehow involved. The speaker accuses this of being treason against the American people. They also mention Ben Stiller, a UN envoy, and the involvement of the Film Actors Guild. Daniel j Jones, a former FBI agent, paid an FBI informant named Igor Dychenko to fabricate the Russian dossier. The PENCORTA Group, funded by George Soros, is mentioned, along with Fusion GBS and Christopher Steele as contributors to the dossier. The speaker concludes that it is Obama, the CIA, and politicians who have an issue with Assange, not the people.

There is a discussion about a potential disconnect between the Democratic Party's brand and President Biden. The term "existential threat" is used to describe Donald Trump. However, Speaker 1 brings up Hillary Clinton's involvement in a fake dossier to remove a sitting president and mentions her connection to Jeffrey Epstein. Speaker 1 questions why Epstein and his clients were not considered an existential threat, suggesting it may be due to Bill Clinton's association with Epstein. The conversation then shifts to the lack of public disclosure regarding Epstein's client list.

Hillary Clinton paid Perkins Coie, who hired Fusion GPS, who paid Christopher Steele, who hired Russians to create a fake dossier. The FBI used this dossier to undermine a presidency and overturn an election. When we questioned it, we were labeled as Russian bots. Then, during the election, the Hunter Biden laptop story broke. The FBI dismissed it as Russian disinformation, but it turned out to be true. If we talked about it, social media silenced us. On election night, suspicious votes for Biden flooded in, but questioning it led to losing social media accounts. The Durham report reveals that top government officials, including Obama and Biden, knew about the hoax. Yet, we're still called Russian bots. The Biden DOJ removed the IRS investigative team from the Hunter Biden laptop case. No one will be held accountable. We're living in a world of absurdity.

Roger Stone's trolling and lack of credibility in his statements about Assange and Clinton are highlighted. Julian Assange denies any back channel with Stone and dismisses the significance of Russian connections. Stone's false predictions and claims are addressed, with Assange emphasizing the madness of US political culture. Stone's refusal to name his WikiLeaks intermediary is criticized. Assange sees Stone's actions as a ploy to boost his image, with disappointment in media coverage.

The transcript captures a discussion about Clinton-related death conspiracy theories and how these claims circulate in political commentary. Speakers repeatedly assert that “the Clintons have killed” a large number of people—well over 100, with an figure cited of about 130—arguing that such deaths are linked to the Clintons’ power and to foreign policy actions, including a bombing campaign in Iraq and a massive blockade around Iraq that, according to UN estimates, contributed to the death of hundreds of thousands of children. One speaker emphasizes that “the body count is about 130” and notes that people know the body counts, even if some refuse to acknowledge the implication that politicians might have people murdered. A recurring theme is that there used to be a Clinton Body Count website tallying people connected to Hillary and Bill who were said to have been secretly killed; one participant says Hillary should demand its return and that the record is misrepresented. The conversation frames this as a widely held belief rather than proven fact, acknowledging skepticism about the claims while insisting there is “a lot of very suspicious deaths around the Clintons” that are fair to bring up. The discussion then shifts to particular cases and figures associated with Clinton circles. Vince Foster’s death is described as a conspiracy theory that never produced evidence, but the idea lingers. The panel also references other individuals—Mary Mahoney, John F. Kennedy Jr., James McDougal, and Mark Middleton—along with the broader pattern of deaths that are framed as connected to the Clintons, though without definitive proof being established on many of the cases. In the case of Mark Middleton, described as a longtime Clinton adviser who allegedly facilitated Epstein connections, Middleton’s death is recounted with details: found dead after driving to a Heifer Ranch, with an elaborate scenario involving hanging and a shotgun, an autopsy described as unclear, and a family that disputes the notion of suicide. The family has sought to seal photos and footage, arguing that releasing them would fuel conspiracy theories. The conversation also foregrounds Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was shot in Washington, D.C. The panel notes that Rich was connected to WikiLeaks and allegedly provided thousands of emails to WikiLeaks, with claims that Fox News reported an FBI forensic finding showing contact with WikiLeaks and the release of top DNC emails leading to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. There is debate among participants about whether Rich’s death was a botched robbery, noting that his wallet and watch were left behind and his phone was not taken, and that claims of murder are contested by others on air. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are discussed as adding to the conspiracy milieu: Assange raises questions about killings, offers a reward for information, and is described as “working for Russia now.” The panel references the broader political pinboard: the Clinton/DNC nexus, the FBI/CrowdStrike narrative about the 2016 hacking, and the media environment around Russia investigations and alleged election interference. There is a sense of ongoing investigation and uncertainty, with speakers insisting that sources face danger and that certain deaths remain unresolved or contested in public discourse. Toward the end, the speakers reflect on how reputations attach to candidates; they compare Clinton-related reputations with those of other politicians, asking how, over the last fifty years, the pattern emerges that people close to Clinton figures die, while noting that public perception often constrains open discussion of these claims.

Fox News alert: Tulsi Gabbard releases a report alleging a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and his intel agencies to sabotage the president-elect Donald Trump, brainwash the electorate, and undermine the legitimacy of an election. There is irrefutable evidence detailing how Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment they knew was false, promoting a narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump win, selling it to the American people as true. Gabbard obtained a House Intelligence Committee report locked away in a CIA vault for almost a decade. Investigators spent over two thousand hours interviewing 20 CIA and FBI officials, and it shows the Obama administration doctored intelligence to make it look like Putin and Trump stole the election. A month after Trump beat Hillary, Obama wasn’t satisfied with intelligence reporting and ordered his CIA director to create a new assessment of how Russia interfered with the election. This was a highly unusual move. John Brennan handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, and they were siloed; none knew what the others were doing, and only one analyst was in charge of drafting the report. It was not routine, and it was rushed to publish before Trump’s inauguration. Nothing was coordinated with other intelligence agencies. Basically, this was “home cooking” for Barack Obama. Four key elements were repeated to form the basis of the Russia hoax and the Mueller investigation: 1) that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; 2) Putin took action to help Trump win; 3) the Russians had blackmail on Trump (the Steele dossier); and 4) that the Russians tried colluding with the Trump campaign. None of this was ever true; there was no reliable intelligence to support these allegations. Senior CIA officials repeatedly refused to traffic in these allegations, but were overruled by CIA director Brennan and FBI director Comey, who insisted they be pushed without verifiable evidence. The Obama administration cherry-picked intelligence, lied about sources, misquoted sources, did not corroborate claims, suppressed intelligence counter to their narratives, and even used anonymous Internet postings. Rank-and-file CIA admitted violations of tradecraft standards; a massive pressure campaign came from the top, with unusual directives from political appointees, the CIA director, and Obama himself. This is how the Russia hoax was born. Donald Trump knows that the Russians helped him win in 2016. Putin hated Hillary Clinton, with a noted preference for the opponent he disliked least. It was Russia in a systematic effort to interfere in the election and advance Trump’s prospects. The report notes that at one point, 60% of Democrats believed the Russians hacked voting machines to help Trump win, but the report shows Russians sought to create chaos and undermine democracy; solid intelligence suggested Putin had no preference, and expected Hillary to win, holding compromising dirt on her that he never released. If Putin wanted Trump to win, why didn’t he drop the dirt? There were high-level DNC emails detailing Hillary’s psycho-emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and a daily regimen of tranquilizers; Brennan and the intelligence community mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious sources to create a narrative of Putin’s preference for Trump, though Obama and intelligence leaders knew Putin did not collude with Trump and did not direct his people to help Trump win, yet they published it anyway. Obama and his intel spies purportedly cooked intelligence to look like Putin preferred Trump, undermining faith in elections and causing chaos. Do you believe this implicates Obama in criminal behavior? There is a referral of documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate criminal implications. Evidence points to Obama leading the manufacturing of the intelligence assessment. Even two years after the election, Obama pushed a hoax he knew wasn’t true. Brennan, Comey, and others may have liability. Trey Gowdy claims Brennan committed perjury for lying to Congress. When asked who commissioned the Steele dossier, responses indicate the CIA did not rely on it; it was not part of the intelligence community assessment. The broadcast concludes with the assertion that what happened to these officials is not revenge, but accountability, while noting ongoing questions about potential criminal action.

The Obama administration allegedly spied on the Trump campaign and presidency, misleading the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to obtain search warrants. The court was not informed that the main evidence was the Trump dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic party. The dossier was described as unverified and salacious by FBI Director Comey. The court was also not told that the British spy who wrote part of the dossier was biased against Trump. Additionally, the court was not informed that the FBI fired the source of the dossier for leaking information to the media. The government presented a Yahoo article as corroboration, without disclosing that it was based on the phony dossier. The FISA court approved the warrant multiple times without knowing the full story. FBI and DOJ officials are accused of lying to the court and the American people. The dossier was crucial in obtaining the warrant, and without it, they would not have been able to do so. The Grassley-Graham memo and report further confirmed the deception by the FBI. The search warrant targeted Carter Page, a former Trump campaign volunteer, but it was also used to spy on others in the Trump team. The spying was seen as an attempt to ensure Clinton's victory and as an insurance policy in case Trump won. This is considered a serious violation of the US constitution and an attempt to subvert the will of the American people. Several high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials may face criminal charges for their actions.

Roger Stone, a longtime Trump adviser, claimed to have a backchannel to WikiLeaks and knowledge of their release of Hillary Clinton's emails. However, his statements lack evidence and are seen as trolling by many. Democrats question his credibility due to his close ties to Trump. Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, dismisses Stone's claims and states that he had publicly announced the release of information on Clinton before Stone's comments. Assange believes the focus on Stone is inconsequential unless it leads to war with Russia. He also clarifies that Stone was wrong about the content of the WikiLeaks disclosures. Stone's attempts to elevate his profile through trolling are criticized by Assange, who believes the US political culture has gone mad.

The discussion revolves around whether there were victims of Assange's actions, with the State Department being a key focus. The State Department took measures to protect individuals whose identities were exposed, impacting trust in the US government. However, tangible negative effects are difficult to pinpoint. Concerns were raised by foreign counterparts about sharing information due to leaks. Private conversations made public by WikiLeaks caused diplomatic challenges. The conversation ends with a decision not to disclose further details.