reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker asserts that former FBI Director James Comey's use of "86" regarding Trump was a veiled call to assassination, referencing the "8647" slogan used by anti-Trump protesters. They claim Comey is lying about not understanding the meaning, especially given his background prosecuting mobsters who use similar language. The speaker highlights a Rutgers study indicating that over 55% of respondents felt assassinating Trump would be "somewhat justified," attributing this to figures like Comey. They emphasize the seriousness of the threat, citing past assassination attempts and the influence of figures like Comey on public perception. The speaker believes Comey should be held accountable under the law for issuing what they view as a direct threat against the President, potentially goading authorities to make him a "political martyr." They state that someone making similar threats against them is currently jailed and indicted. They conclude that Comey should be in jail due to the potential impact of his words on those who take him seriously, given his stature and media portrayal.

Speaker 1 questions why radical transparency in elections wasn't proposed four years ago and accuses the former president of trashing the system for four years, stating there were dangerous consequences to the president's lies and that people died on January 6th. Speaker 0 claims the only person who died on January 6th was Ashley Babbitt, who was murdered. Speaker 1 acknowledges there were injuries. Speaker 0 asserts people who broke into the Capitol are responsible for their actions, not Donald Trump. Speaker 1 says they don't have to yell.

The speaker discusses the concerns raised by Trump's critics, comparing them to the actions of the Biden Harris administration. They highlight the danger of labeling Trump as a modern-day Hitler and the implicit call for violence against him. The speaker argues that this message is alarming and goes against the principles of the United States. They criticize those in positions of power for abusing their authority and undermining democracy in their pursuit of their desired outcome.

Speaker 0 delivers a heated, inflammatory statement directed at Jesus, Christians, and Israeli Jews. He says, 'You and you fucking Jesus could kiss my ass. Okay? We killed Jesus.' He adds, 'We brought All that Christians hold sacred and holy, Israeli Jews, whom American taxpayers support, spit on, trash, and defile.' The delivery is aggressive and provocative, linking religious content with political accusation and targeting the described group. The excerpt presents a confrontational, provocative address that asserts destruction of religious symbols and assigns collective blame to a named group. Tone is hostile and accusatory. The speaker frames a political funding claim within a religious insult.

Democrats were addressed with the question, "Democrats, can you hear us?" followed by the statement, "This is your first warning. Now you can supply a little bit of a correction."

The speaker asserts that on January 6th, the former president incited a violent mob to attack and desecrate the nation’s capital, resulting in injuries and deaths of law enforcement officers. The former president has been indicted and impeached for this. The speaker recalls Charlottesville, where the president said there were fine people on each side of a mob spewing anti-Semitic hate. Regarding the Proud Boys militia, the former president said to stand back and stand by. The speaker urges viewers to remember January 6th and not go back to that. The speaker states that Donald Trump has said there will be a bloodbath if the election outcome is not to his liking. The speaker advocates turning the page, charting a course for the future, standing for the country and democracy, and ending the chaos.

The speaker addressed Kareem at the White House briefing room podium, stating that it had been only two days since an alleged assassination attempt on Donald Trump. The speaker questioned why, in light of this event, Kareem was calling Trump a threat. The speaker asked how many more assassination attempts would occur before the president, vice president, and Kareem would choose a different word to describe Trump. The speaker then thanked everyone and said goodbye.

The speaker expresses concern over extreme rhetoric surrounding Trump, linking it to recent violence. They call for an end to hyperbolic statements from all elected officials. Another speaker mentions Trump's strong criticism of Biden. Both emphasize the need to calm down and address the dangerous escalation of rhetoric to prevent further violence. They stress the importance of leaders tamping down on inflammatory language to avoid inciting more violence.

The speakers are debating the former president's statements about an "enemy within." One speaker claims the former president suggested turning the American military on the American people. A clip is played of the former president responding to accusations of threatening people, stating he is not threatening anyone, but that "they" are the ones doing the threatening through "phony investigations" and "weaponization of government." The other speaker objects, asserting the clip does not reflect the former president's repeated statements about the American people being the "enemy within." This speaker claims the former president has talked about turning the American military on the American people, going after peaceful protestors, and locking up those who disagree with him, which they argue is unacceptable in a democracy.

The speaker claims that the microphone could have been a weapon used against Donald Trump. They suggest the microphone could have contained a pathogen, anthrax, or fentanyl. The speaker states that President Trump could have been killed via the microphone.

The speaker denies ever speaking with former President Trump. The speaker tells Trump to "get a life" and "help these people." The speaker demands accountability and insists that the person being addressed knows the truth.

The speaker delivers a fierce, confrontational tirade focused on a political figure, insisting there is no “Vedan, cocksucker” and asserting that the matter should be settled with a decisive, public rebuke. The core assertion is that if someone in a meeting accuses or challenges the speaker, “you punch him in the mouth as hard as you can to make your point.” The speaker emphasizes simplicity and urgency, declaring, “It’s one sentence. We’re not stupid. There is no paperwork, you cocksucker.” A central demand throughout the passage is the impeachment and denunciation of the unnamed target. The speaker repeats the call: “He needs to be impeached. He needs to be denounced and impeached.” The rhetoric underscores the belief that this represents “the greatest single mistake in American history,” described repeatedly as such, with the speaker labeling it as “the greatest single mistake” and insisting that the target “surrounded himself by morons” and is surrounded by morons. The Freedom of the Southern District is invoked as an impending accountability mechanism: “Because the Southern District’s coming for him, and he did nothing.” The speaker frames this as a looming consequence, implying legal jeopardy or investigation. Threats and aggressive posturing are woven into the confrontation. The invitation to “fight” appears directly: “You wanna fight? Let’s fight.” The language turns explicitly hostile and violent, with insults including “Fuck you. Fuck you and your abortionist bitch daughter,” illustrating a climate of personal attack and coercive intimidation. The closing line reinforces a warning about consequences: “You obviously, if you use any of that, it’ll murder you,” suggesting that repeating or disseminating the speaker’s statements could lead to lethal outcomes for the listener. In summary, the speaker’s message combines denunciation and impeach/denounce rhetoric with hyperbolic claims of historical significance, a confrontational stance toward the target, and threats of violence and legal jeopardy, amplified by aggressive personal insults and a direct challenge to fight.

Speaker claims, "Brother Charlie got murdered, assassinated a few days ago, but the truth is he was assassinated a few years ago." They argue that electing people who demonize their political opponents leads to violence, adding, "So you might have pulled the trigger yourself." The speaker asks, "Who demonize political opponents? Who call political opponents enemies, Hitler, a threat to democracy, who say because we disagree, if you see someone, walk up to them and if they're eating in a restaurant, tell them they're not welcome, get in their face." They warn, "When you start saying stuff like that, calling your political opponents Nazis, fascists, stuff like that. Well, sooner or later, a kook is gonna hear that. A crazy person is going to hear that, and they're going to act on it."

Trump and his supporters are accused of embracing and joking about political violence, which the speaker strongly condemns. Various individuals are heard expressing their desire for uprisings, unrest, physical confrontations, and even assassination towards Trump. The speaker mentions blowing up the White House and warns Trump supporters to be cautious. The transcript concludes with the speaker shaming those who harbor anger and hatred towards the former president.

Speaker 1: "Just because the other side... jokes about the bad things that happened to them, I don't think that makes it okay for us to turn around and do the same." Speaker 0: "No. We need to stop... the left just haven't cucked out enough." Speaker 0: "Trump is fucking insane because he has support from 90% of the conservatives in the Republican party who are entirely un American." Speaker 1: "One person is dead... a swing state voter." Speaker 1: "We don't know what the motivation of the shooter was." Speaker 1: "Just because there is fire burning doesn't give us leave to throw more wood on it." Speaker 0: "Donald Trump wanted absolute criminal immunity." Speaker 0: "Democracy only works when everybody participates." Speaker 1: "I reject this framing entirely."

The speaker asserts that former FBI Director James Comey was aware of the meaning of "86 Trump." They claim Comey's assertion that he didn't know the meaning is false, given his background prosecuting mobsters who use similar language. The speaker connects Comey's statement to the "8647" slogan used by anti-Trump protesters, which they describe as a veiled call to assassinate the president. They argue that Comey's actions are dangerous, especially considering past assassination attempts on the president. The speaker accuses Comey and others of issuing a "hit" on President Trump and of hating democracy because they oppose the election of Donald Trump. They believe these individuals are trying to remove Trump from office by any means necessary.

The transcript presents a highly charged, partisan monologue-style coverage of urban unrest, immigration enforcement, and political rhetoric. It centers on claims about Portland, Chicago, and national figures, presenting multiple viewpoints and sensationalized language. Key points include: - In Portland, Kristi Noem, described as the secretary of homeland security, allegedly visited “Rip City,” inspected Antifa’s activities, and interacted with immigration enforcement, with claims that ICE is removing individuals described as fentanyl traffickers, murder suspects, sex predators, and pedophiles in Oregon. The narration asserts that the city’s law enforcement and political leadership are hostile to ICE, while depicting protesters as rioters with reporters filming to amplify chaos. The segment alleges a dissension within Antifa and portrays the police as anxious about media coverage and influencers at the riots. - Chief Bob Day of Portland is depicted as both a police chief and a DEI consultant who allegedly spent time with a DEI nonprofit called the Red Door Project, whose mission is described as “Reimagine policing.” The narrative contends Day has coached Antifa in avoiding arrest and blames “the selfie-stick guy” at riots for problems, while suggesting Day’s actions reflect a broader city stance toward ICE and immigration enforcement. - The text quotes various protesters and media commentators, including assertions that mainstream outlets avoid fair coverage of riots, while protesters are accused of using videographers to manufacture impressions of chaos. There are criticisms of media bias and claims that left-leaning voices minimize violence or downplay confrontations with police. - In Chicago, the account claims Mayor Johnson created “no ICE zones” after incidents in which Antifa allegedly rammed agents with cars, leading to a stand-down order and prosecutions that were described as undermined by locally connected judges. A University of Chicago sociology professor involved in a case is noted, with the narrative highlighting a broader claim that advocates for immigration enforcement face danger and doxing on social platforms. - The transcript links these events to a national narrative: opposition figures argue for stronger police funding and training, assert that the left pressures businesses not to cooperate with ICE, and claim that criminals and illegal crossings have been down, with references to national guard deployments in Chicago and to immigration enforcement as a political instrument in elections. - The piece ties in multiple sensational claims about specific individuals’ loyalties, alleged threats, and contemplated political moves, including overtones about Nazi-era comparisons, and allegations that figures like Trump could deploy troops to influence voting or polling-place security. It also references internal political arguments, apologies from politicians for past statements, and debates over media portrayal and accountability. - Throughout, the speakers attribute intentions and motives to political actors (Democrats, Republicans) and to various law enforcement and media figures, repeating the refrain that liberal or left-leaning factions intentionally hinder immigration enforcement, public safety, and election integrity. The overall arc presents a narrative of conflict between immigration enforcement, local policing, media representation, and political power, with emphasis on clashes in Portland and Chicago, critiques of City leadership and media, and calls for heightened enforcement and political repercussions.

Speaker 0 expresses outrage over death threats received on their birthday because Charlie Kirk died, calling it "fucking ridiculous." They add, "Like, grow the fuck up." They further state, "Seriously, if you can't handle a difference in politics and you need to resort to violence over it, then you have serious problems." This excerpt consists of a single speaker venting about threats and violent responses tied to political disagreement, and it contains strong language to emphasize the reaction. Context notes that the threats were received on the speaker's birthday, and that the trigger was Charlie Kirk's death. The speaker uses strong profanity to condemn the behavior.

Speaker declares a political shift: "I was an old school democrat. I will never vote a fucking democrat ever." "I was a purple party independent. You lost me. I'm all red now." He condemns those who "celebrate and rejoice in the murder and assassination of someone who just was giving a different point of view than what you're used to in the fucking colleges these days" and says "You are and will always be part of the problem if you're rejoicing in that." He notes "He was a family man. He just came and was respectful to everybody and was assassinated for it." The speaker concludes, "It's fucking pathetic, and so as what the Democratic Party has become."

The speaker warns about strong language and accuses Democrats of endangering Donald Trump's life, suggesting they are behind attempts on his life. The speaker claims that since Trump's entry into politics, Democrats have been trying to destroy him, starting with character assassination after initially liking him. When that failed, they impeached him twice, and the January 6th events didn't stop him. Indictments and financial pressures also failed. The speaker believes the attempt on Trump's life on July 13th is suspicious, questioning how someone could breach Secret Service security. The speaker cites another attempt on Trump's life in Florida and accuses Democrats of being a danger to democracy, despite their claims to the contrary. The speaker asserts that this is a battle between good and evil, and Democrats are evil. The speaker urges protecting Trump and investigating the July 13th incident.

"Do you accept, Carrie, that this is a it's not just a one-sided problem? The political violence and violent rhetoric is a problem on both sides of the divide, and it's incumbent on everybody in a position of authority and influence to take the lead here in trying to to just tone things down." "There's been a few cases where it goes from from the right to the left, but there's been an exorbitant number where it's coming from the left to the right. And you can't deny that. If you add it all up, it's just more violence. I mean, president Trump was nearly assassinated. There's another attempt on his life." "The media has to take credit for what they have caused, the chaos they've caused in our country, and they haven't done it. And until they do, they need to be turned off, canceled, muted. They're absolutely abhorrent."

Transcript excerpt: 'Charlie Kirk got shot and he's dead.' The speaker follows: 'Finally, finally, somebody with a gun, which is almost everybody in The Fucking States, grew up hair and fucking went and shot somebody on the right side.' The passage ends with: 'Thank you. Can we keep this up, plea' The remarks express celebration of violence against a political figure and request to continue such acts. The tone centers on the shooting of a public figure and uses profanity to emphasize approval and a desire for further incidents. These lines appear to celebrate the act and call for more such acts.

The speaker asserts that their life, along with others, has been negatively impacted by the right, specifically blaming Trump for stirring up fear. They claim they cannot perform on stage due to fear of being shot by Republicans. The speaker also criticizes Elon Musk. An argument ensues after the speaker accuses someone of saying the n-word in public and claims that person made them say it, despite their reluctance.

Speaker 0 Launches a pointed accusation, asking, “I am wondering if you are all pedophiles because you don't seem to care that children are being sexually abused.” They claim, “the only thing I could ascertain is that you guys probably enjoy child porn,” asserting that the group is not looking or acting. The speaker states, “If somebody claimed that I was, I would say, I absolutely am not,” and contends the group “love to let it stand as fact that that's what's going on because you're not willing to stop it.” They challenge the group to shake their heads or do something, insisting, “No, Monica, you're not a pedophile. Then why aren't you doing anything about the child abuse that's happening in the county?” The speaker frames care as a moral test: “If you cared, you'd wanna stop it.” They extend the question to personal stakes: “If it happened to your child, you'd wanna stop it. If it happened to you, you'd wanna stop it.” They address Jim directly with, “Jim, what if it happens to your grandchild? What if? Would it matter then? Probably.” The rhetoric emphasizes the emotional intent and accountability, culminating in a confrontational appeal to action and responsibility. After laying out these accusations and moral appeals, the speaker concludes with a directive to move on: “Right. So horrible to think about. Right. Next speaker, please.” The overall thrust is a confrontational challenge to the audience’s alleged indifference toward child sexual abuse, combining provocative accusations with appeals to parental and familial protection. The speaker characterizes inaction as complicity and demands immediate accountability from named individuals, linking the issue to personal stakes for family members. The passage ends by transitioning to the next speaker, signaling a shift in focus or continuation of the public forum.

Speaker 0: I loathe Donald Trump. Speaker 0: Everything we care about is under siege by a racist, misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic president. Speaker 0: Donald Trump is a convicted felon, an adjudicated rapist, and a congenital liar. He's a racist, sexist, misogynistic, narcissist. Speaker 1: When Pritzker calls Trump antidemocratic and authoritarian, he's effectively calling more than 70,000,000 Americans the same thing. Speaker 0: Illinois Democrats have done more in the last five years to push back on the wave of authoritarian, antidemocratic, MAGA Republican nonsense than in any other place in the country. Speaker 1: Not even an assassination attempt has tempered governor Pritzker. Speaker 0: I am very pleased that he remains relatively unharmed, but it's still true that Donald Trump is a convicted felon, an adjudicated rapist, has been a, congenital liar, and is unfit for the office of president of The United States. Speaker 1: Pritzker's vitriol has become extreme.