TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Did you leak a letter to the Washington Post about me? You're the chief of staff, right? I’m James O’Keefe. You’re friends with the reporter, Yvonne Wingate Sanchez. Did you leak the letter? No, there was no leak. How did the Washington Post get it before I did? I don’t know how they knew. The letter was released under public records law. I haven’t received it yet. Your office seems to be working with the media to target journalists. It was released legally. But how did the Washington Post know to request it? There are many ways they could have found out. So someone in your office leaked it? No, that’s faulty logic. You’re saying someone knew about the letter and told them? I have other matters to attend to. You’re busy writing letters threatening journalists. This is about good versus evil in this country. The Wellness Company offers a first aid emergency kit to help you take control of your health. Order now and save 15% with code OMG.

The speaker presents two retractions from The Daily Beast and Mediaite regarding a story about Attorney General Pam Bondi. The Daily Beast initially reported Bondi was caught on hidden camera at brunch talking to a woman hired by James O'Keefe to pose as a nanny, implying O'Keefe targeted Bondi. O'Keefe says this was false, as they didn't hire the woman and the footage was sent to them. The Daily Beast updated their headline to "random stranger at brunch" and clarified O'Keefe shared the footage. Mediaite described the video as an "attempted gotcha arranged by James O'Keefe." O'Keefe says this was also false, as the video was sent by an anonymous source. Mediaite updated their article to reflect that OMG merely published the video sent to them. O'Keefe emphasizes the importance of sticking to facts and avoiding assumptions in reporting.

The speaker claims that there was a scandal where their campaign was spied on, but the other person disagrees and says there is no evidence. The speaker insists that there is evidence everywhere and wants it to be put on the show. The other person explains that they can't put on unverified information. The speaker continues to assert that their campaign was spied on and that it was caught. They accuse the other person of knowing this but not wanting to acknowledge it. The other person denies knowing anything about it.

James O'Keefe shares a video of someone banging on his front door. He opens it to find a stack of documents, which turns out to be a federal lawsuit filed by Project Veritas against him. O'Keefe expresses surprise and questions what the lawsuit aims to achieve. He mentions that Project Veritas had a significant amount of money when he left but has apparently spent it all without raising much more. O'Keefe also reveals the names of the lawyers involved in the lawsuit, expressing his confusion and concern about their efforts to silence journalists.

"James O'Keefe puts out that video." "The video is her talking about how there's, like, tens of thousands of videos of him hurting children." "He's also the one who put out Karen Bass' phone call about her going talking have you ever heard it? The super creepy Bro," "Covertly recorded April 28 revealing previously undisclosed information about Epstein regarding tens of thousands of videos of little kids to a complete stranger in a DC restaurant." "There are tens and thousands of videos. Yeah. And it's all but little kids, so they have to go through everyone." "That she didn't even say underage girls. She said little kids."

The video features James O'Keefe, an undercover journalist, confronting an individual who works in the White House Office of Cybersecurity. O'Keefe questions why someone in a cybersecurity role would meet with him, as it raises concerns about the government's ability to protect networks. The individual denies knowing O'Keefe and expresses personal opinions about Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. O'Keefe criticizes the individual for discussing sensitive topics in a public setting. The video ends with O'Keefe promoting a medical emergency kit and urging viewers to support his investigative work.

James O'Keefe is visiting, and I'm welcoming him into my house. It's not his first time here. I've got reporters everywhere I go. Last time one of them was wired. I was wondering if this reporter is off the record, but they are not. It's coming out later, but I was worried about saying anything that might cause issues. I mean, the New Yorker isn't exactly friendly territory. James just mentioned someone O'Keefe didn't identify as a reporter.

Speaker Johnson claims CBS edited his video on "Face the Nation" to make Kamala look better and him look less effective. He says the editing was even more direct on "Face the Nation" than elsewhere. Because of this alleged editing, he will never agree to a non-live interview with CBS again. Speaker 0 notes this is not the first instance of CBS editing videos, referencing a previous instance where they allegedly took a question and matched it to another answer. Speaker 0 states that this is why Speaker Johnson will only do live interviews. Speaker 0 contrasts this with Trump, who said he was good when his long answers had to be edited down, while Kamala needs to be edited up.

I'm in Washington DC outside an oyster restaurant to confront Robert Silvers, the undersecretary in the Biden administration, who was caught on hidden camera discussing Biden's cognitive decline. I'm dressed in a tuxedo after attending a gala. I approach Silvers, introduce myself as James O'Keefe, the investigative reporter, and show him the video where he talks about Biden's mental state. I ask why he isn't being honest with the American people about his comments. As the confrontation escalates, we are asked to leave the premises. I attempt to continue the conversation, but security intervenes.

Can't come in. Here’s the ticket. Why not? That’s what I was told. This is day one of the Tribeca Film Festival. I’m passing out flyers about Acorn, stating the investigation is real. I exposed facts about Acorn breaking the law, and they’re making a movie about it. Some people think I’m despicable. Did you know the New York Times confirmed the transcripts match the audio? You’re hurting America. I’m James O’Keefe, and I’m in the Acorn movie. You’re a convicted felon. Actually, I’ve never been convicted of that felony. You’re a racist. No, I’m not. People are angry at the truth. We’ll be back tomorrow to expose it.

The speaker presents two retractions from The Daily Beast and Mediaite regarding a story about Attorney General Pam Bondi. The Daily Beast initially reported Bondi was caught on hidden camera at brunch talking to a woman hired by James O'Keefe to pose as a nanny, implying O'Keefe targeted Bondi. O'Keefe says this was false, as they didn't hire the woman. The Daily Beast changed the headline and included additional information. Mediaite described the video as an "attempted gotcha arranged by James O'Keefe," which O'Keefe also denies, stating the video was sent by an anonymous source. Mediaite issued a retraction, changing the description to "video published." O'Keefe emphasizes the importance of sticking to facts and avoiding assumptions in reporting. The reporters involved will receive a "Retracto" stuffed animal.

The speaker, James O'Keefe, attended a school board meeting in New Jersey to discuss an equity audit. However, the board did not allow recording of the meeting, which O'Keefe violated. The board called the police on him while he was speaking. O'Keefe revealed a hidden camera device and stated that he intended to distribute similar devices to promote transparency. The board found this unusual. O'Keefe questioned the police officer about being called to the meeting, and the officer confirmed that his supervisor instructed him to come because O'Keefe was speaking as a journalist.

James O'Keefe stated that a girl who works for him recorded someone. The person recorded was at Meta and was talking to someone else. After O'Keefe said "oh," the person hung up the phone.

The speaker claims that the biggest scandal was when their campaign was spied on, but the other person disagrees, saying there is no evidence. The speaker insists that it is all over the place and that it was bad for Biden. The other person explains that they can't put on things they can't verify. The speaker continues to assert that it has been verified and that they got caught. The other person denies knowing about it.

"Yeah. Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "There's thousands and thousands of pages of file." "the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection." "there will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." "I'm not going to withhold information from the American public ever." "Only to later claim on Joe Rogan's podcast that releasing any videos would revictimize those impacted." "There's thousands and thousands of pages of file." "Convicted sex offenders are historically ineligible for minimum security facilities." "please email us at tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395, and we will tell your story without fear and without favor."

I'm declining to be named in your story. I haven't given any quotes. My name is James O'Keefe. We have you on hidden camera talking about Elon Musk, Doge, and unlawful activities at Treasury. I encourage you to speak on the record. We have you on video saying government colleagues don't do much, and Doge targets us because it's easy. I'm a reporter. People deserve to know what you've said. Why did you share this with a stranger but not me? You specialize in foreign policy at the Treasury. What are you afraid of? It'll look bad when you won't speak to me, but you told a stranger everything. This is a major public policy issue. I'm running this story with or without you. I think the people need to know what's happening inside the government, including risks to national security.

Is this seat taken? Actually, that person works for me. Live from the Bronx, I'm James O'Keefe with OMG. You work for BlackRock, right? Yes, but I don’t consent to being recorded. You don’t have to; it’s a one-party consent state. I’m not interested in talking if you’re recording. You mentioned that BlackRock buys politicians. I didn’t say that. I’m just a low-level employee. But you did say it on video. No, I didn’t. You said it’s not about who the president is, but who controls the wallet. I’m nobody. I was just trying to impress someone. We’ll expose more people at BlackRock. I’m going to the police station to ask them to stop you from following me. James O'Keefe here, outside the police station, where the BlackRock executive is discussing my presence and denying his previous statements about Ukraine and buying politicians.

They assert that recording is not illegal and proceed with filming. They question why their information is being taken down, and are told, “Because we have a nice little database.” A statement follows, “He is considered a domestic terrorist.” The exchange ends with, “So We're videotaping you? Are you crazy?”

A person walked out of a store with ice cream, and the media asked what flavor it was, despite him being in the midst of a scandal. According to Speaker 0, the biggest scandal was when they spied on his campaign. Speaker 1 stated there's no real evidence of that and that "sixty minutes" can't put on things they can't verify. Speaker 0 insisted they spied on his campaign and got caught, but Speaker 1 said they can't verify it. Speaker 0 claimed the evidence is available and Speaker 1 doesn't want to put it on the air. Speaker 1 denied knowing about it.

James O'Keefe confronts an NIH employee about a video where he allegedly discusses changing the word "race" to "ancestry." O'Keefe questions if this is deceitful and suggests ancestry isn't the same as race for clinical trials. The employee defends the change as scientifically accurate, claiming expertise. O'Keefe disputes this, accusing him of avoiding accountability. The employee states he believes in good science and protecting people. As the employee drives away in his Tesla, he claims O'Keefe doesn't care about people. O'Keefe finds this ironic and asserts his organization cares deeply about informing the public.

James O'Keefe confronts an NIH employee about a video where the employee discusses changing the word "race" to "ancestry" in a protocol. O'Keefe questions if this is deceitful and suggests ancestry isn't the same as race for medical trials. The employee denies lying and claims the change was for scientific accuracy, stating he is an expert. O'Keefe questions why he would change the words and accuses him of avoiding accountability. The employee drives away in his Tesla, claiming O'Keefe doesn't care about people. O'Keefe says he cares about people knowing what's going on in their government. He describes running after the employee in boat shoes, calling it an adventure.

"Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "There will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." "Epstein was acting alone and that the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection." "We're not gonna revictimize women. We're not gonna put that shit back out there." "If it does, it'll be heavily redacted, and his name won't be here." "What we're looking for is people on the inside of the government to step forward for your private actions to match your public actions." "tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395, and we will tell your story without fear and without favor."

Congressman Raskin was confronted by a journalist named Nick about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom Raskin had previously supported. Nick asked about Garcia's entry into the United States and whether it was illegal. Raskin did not answer the questions, calling Nick a moron and a fascist. Speaker 0 stated that Raskin conducted himself poorly, noting that "they" had a love affair with Garcia until Chuck Schumer stopped the visits. Speaker 0 added that "they" chose Garcia without doing opposition research, citing court documents about domestic violence. Speaker 1 stated that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

The speaker claims the biggest scandal was spying on their campaign, insisting it's verified despite lack of evidence. They urge to air it for Biden's detriment. The interviewer refuses, citing the need for verification. The speaker insists they were spied on and caught, challenging the interviewer to check the papers. The interviewer remains skeptical.

Jordan Conradson from the Gateway Pundit asks why the ethics committee didn't vote in secret to release the Matt Gaetz report. The speaker states they are bound by confidentiality and can't discuss anything that happened within the confines of ethics, neither confirming nor denying anything. Conradson asks about Susan Wilde leaking details and whether that is acceptable. The speaker reiterates they can't talk about anything. Conradson then asks for the speaker's opinion on the meaning of ethics and whether it is ethical to target political opponents.