reSee.it - Related Video Feed

"Why is it wrong to want to preserve our heritage, the country that our ancestors founded European?" I don't believe that our unifying principle was ever race, skin color, ethnicity. Our unifying principle was a essentially a doctrine. It was a the the doctrine of human rights. I think it's un American is what I would say. But why would it be immoral? It would really depend on what motivates that. And, and if you're saying that it's not motivated by bigotry, all I could do is trust you on that. I can't look inside your soul. I mean, it sounds like it, but, I don't know why you want me to to do that.

There were very fine people on both sides of a white supremacist rally. I’m not referring to the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who should be condemned entirely. However, there were many individuals in that group who were not neo-Nazis or white nationalists.

The speaker introduces a comparison of ICE to the Ku Klux Klan. One speaker defines the KKK as a domestic terrorist group that used fear and force to change the political environment based on race and ethnicity. Another speaker asks if they are aware of the perception of how ICE's power and discretion are being used to enforce laws and if they see any parallels to the KKK. The speaker responds that they see no parallel between what is constitutionally mandated in enforcing the law and the KKK. They deny seeing ICE in the same category as the KKK. The first speaker urges listeners to vote and bring 10 people with them, suggesting the other speaker could be the next president.

The speaker claims that every civil rights legislation in the US was authored, written, sponsored, and voted on by Republicans, not Democrats. They mention Donald Trump receiving an award from the NAACP and his engagement with the culture from the 1980s to the 2000s.

I grew up as the only Indian family in a small southern town and faced daily teasing for being brown. I have a record of standing up against racism, such as advocating for body cameras after Walter Scott's shooting and calling for the removal of the Confederate flag after the Mother Emanuel Church shooting. I take pride in having friends from different races. I faced discrimination when I was disqualified from a beauty pageant because they didn't know where to place me. I understand the pain of racism and fight against it every day. If I didn't mention slavery, it's because it's a well-known part of the Civil War.

The speaker states the book "Racial Understanding" is about the foundations of America being European, and that the country is losing the roots and values it was built upon. He claims that the European Christian foundations of America are under relentless attack, and that Europeans must defend their rights and heritage. He defines European civilization as the way "we" live, the foundation of the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the writings of Shakespeare, the philosophies of Goethe, Solzhenitsyn, Dotezsky, and the music of Wagner and Beethoven. When asked about the similarity between the title of the book, "My Awakening," and "Mein Kampf," the speaker says "My Awakening" is a very generic title.

The speaker challenges the idea of a unified white or European identity, noting that Europeans fought each other in two world wars and that there is no clear boundary of who is 'white' (examples: Italians vs Swedes; Turks in Europe). They warn that any imagined unity would create an Us-versus-them dynamic and inevitable division. They question the existence of a European identity and of whiteness itself, suggesting race is an American concept tied to post-slavery. They point out that Europeans have long histories of war and nationalist ambitions—fascist tendencies, Franco-like rule, a Catholic monarchy, and exclusion of Muslims or evangelicals. They argue those ideas were never American; Europe has been an immigrant country, but some now seek to overturn the constitution and create a fascist dictatorship with a Catholic government, which would be the most anti-American idea they've heard.

I used to be involved in far-right circles and understand their beliefs. I even stopped talking to my sister for five years. While I wasn't a white nationalist, I was close to those ideas. Like CT mentioned, many of these people are terrible. Translation: I was once part of extreme right-wing groups and cut ties with my sister for five years. Though I wasn't a white nationalist, I was associated with those beliefs. As CT pointed out, many individuals in these circles are despicable.

The speaker explains why they support Donald Trump, stating that they have knowledge of the true history of both the Republican and Democratic parties. They mention that the Ku Klux Klan originated from the Democratic party and that every civil rights legislation was passed by Republicans, not Democrats. They also mention Trump's involvement in the culture, receiving awards with prominent figures like Muhammad Ali and Rosa Parks. The speaker expresses their disbelief in the media's portrayal of Trump as racist, as they never heard any black leaders or their grandmother say anything negative about him. They reminisce about a time when America was great and there was less crime.

There were very fine people on both sides of a white supremacist rally. I'm not referring to the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who should be condemned entirely. However, there were many individuals in that group who were not neo-Nazis or white nationalists.

The speaker is asked to explain a discrepancy between their claim of being in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests in the spring of 1989 and reports that they didn't travel to Asia until August of that year. The speaker says they grew up in rural Nebraska, joined the National Guard at 17, and used the GI Bill to become a teacher. In the summer of 1989, they traveled to China and started a program taking basketball teams, baseball teams, and dancers back and forth to China to learn. They say their community knows who they are and that they have poured their heart into the community, while acknowledging they are not perfect. They claim to have been a bipartisan member of Congress and were elected governor twice. They admit to sometimes getting caught up in rhetoric. They say the experience in China made a difference in their life and that Donald Trump should have come on one of those trips. When asked again about the discrepancy, the speaker says they misspoke and were in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protest.

The speaker believes America's unifying principle was never race, skin color, or ethnicity, but rather a doctrine of human rights. They state that most other countries are unified by ethnicity or religion. The speaker thinks it is un-American to want to preserve European heritage, but acknowledges that the motivation behind such a desire is key. They state that if the motivation is not bigotry, they can only trust that to be the case, as they cannot look inside another person's soul.

The speaker addresses distortions in the press, specifically claims that their book is a white supremacist text. They state they don't believe in racial supremacy or any supremacist doctrine, and advocate for equal rights. The speaker believes the races are profoundly different physically, mentally, psychologically, historically, and culturally, and that these differences have a tremendous impact on society. They deny being motivated by hate, claiming instead a deep love for the traditions and values of Western Christian civilization.

The speaker believes America's unifying principle was never race, skin color, or ethnicity, but rather a doctrine of human rights. They state that most countries are unified by ethnicity or religion, while America is different. The speaker thinks it is un-American to want to preserve European heritage, but acknowledges that the motivation behind such a desire is key. They state that if the motivation is not bigotry, they can only trust that to be the case, as they cannot look inside another person's soul.

When I spoke to a mother who lost her daughter, it highlighted the rise of Neo-Nazis and white supremacists in America, reminiscent of the 1930s in Germany. After her daughter was killed, the then-President Trump responded by saying there were "very fine people on both sides." This motivated me to run for office because democracy is at stake. The events of January 6th, the attack on the Capitol, further confirmed this. Trump has indicated he would pardon those involved, showing support for extremist groups. Unlike the past, when the Ku Klux Klan hid their identities, they now feel emboldened to come out openly, knowing they have an ally in the White House.

In this video, the speaker discusses his decision to have Dr. David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan leader, on his show. The speaker aims to transcend tribalism and promote ideas of equality, liberty, and freedom. They criticize the dominant culture for targeting whites with cultural guilt and argue that racial division is being used by the elite to control society. The conversation covers various topics including racism, eugenics, the influence of Jewish organizations, and the declining birth rates of European Americans. The speaker condemns violence and discrimination but expresses concern about the perceived threat to European Americans and the loss of their heritage. The discussion becomes heated as they debate the influence of Jews in various sectors and touch on topics such as Jewish genetics and history. The video ends with banter between the speaker and Dr. Duke.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the political and legal dynamics surrounding potential investigations and trials, focusing on timing, venue, and public interest. - They agree that if Democrats lose the House and the committee is eliminated, public interest may wane. The first trials, if they occur, are expected to attract a lot of attention, similar to anniversaries, but interest could fade once Democrats are out of power and especially if Biden is removed from office. - The idea of dragging proceedings out is considered, with caution that delaying too long could reduce attention. They suggest not initiating a first trial in Washington, DC, because DC has many government workers and may be sympathetic to the defense; this relates to concerns about the potential jury pool. - There is a debate about whether the trial should be moved out of DC. Speaker 1 believes it would be difficult to move the trial and that those in DC would resist removal, arguing that hearings would be seen as fair and the jury would be impartial if held there, contrasting with Speaker 0’s concern about DC’s jury demographics. - They discuss the likelihood of successfully moving the trial, with Speaker 1 asserting that it would not be successfully moved and that the defense or supporters would resist. - The conversation touches on a hypothetical interaction with an individual who might have been involved in insurrection plans. Speaker 0 asks about what the plan would be if such an individual were in line and marching, in a military context, suggesting a scenario where operations would be outlined: “you’re gonna go here,” “you’re gonna go in by this side,” “at this time, we’re gonna take over this.” They describe the insurrection as lacking guns and involving a man “smoking pot,” noting it as the most pitiable insurrection of the 21st century. - They shift to an observation about the Proud Boys, mentioning Gavin McGinnis. Speaker 0 describes knowing Gavin from road trips to parties and finding the term “Proud Wizards” humorous when they first heard it in Brooklyn years ago. Speaker 0 characterizes McGinnis as a provocateur who says shocking things to be funny, and expresses amusement at his elevation to a prominent figure. - Speaker 0 clarifies that they have a personal history with these people and emphasizes that McGinnis says outrageous things, which they view in a historical and somewhat humorous light, contrasting with the contemporary prominence of the group. - The exchange ends with Speaker 0 explaining their familiarity with the individuals and reiterating that the portrayal of these figures is part of their broader historical context.

Are you willing to condemn white supremacists and militia groups? I disavow David Duke. I’ve done it numerous times. I don’t want the support of white supremacists. Racism is evil, and those who commit violence in its name are criminals, including the KKK and neo-Nazis. I’ve spoken out against hatred and bigotry. I don’t like any group of hate, whether it’s white supremacy or any other form. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism and white supremacy. I am very concerned about all groups of hate, and I will take action against them. It’s disappointing that a sitting president can’t outright condemn white supremacy.

Speaker 0 marched in the civil rights movement to change attitudes. They were involved in desegregating movie theaters and organizing voter registration drives. Speaker 0 sat in black churches with Jewish rabbis, preparing to desegregate movie theaters. They have been involved in causes since they were 18, including desegregating restaurants. However, according to the New York Times, Speaker 2 claims that Speaker 0 lied about marching in the civil rights movement. Despite being reminded of this, Speaker 0 continued to tell the story. Speaker 2 finds this behavior strange.

Are you willing to condemn white supremacists and militia groups? I disavow David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan. I’ve done this numerous times. I don’t want their support. Racism is evil, and those who commit violence in its name are criminals. I reject all hate groups, including neo-Nazis and white supremacists. I spoke out against hatred and bigotry. Despite claims, I have condemned these groups clearly. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism and white supremacy. I am concerned about all groups of hate, including Antifa. I will take action against hate in any form.

Have you ever heard the president criticize white supremacists? I’ve repeatedly rejected David Duke and the KKK. The events in Charlottesville, where a young woman was killed resisting hate, prompted my return to this race. The president claimed there were "very fine people on both sides," ignoring the neo-Nazis and white nationalists. You wouldn’t even condemn David Duke. The party is struggling with figures like him joining. They don’t want to take responsibility for the hate associated with their party. I’ve disavowed these groups multiple times. When white supremacists say to vote for me, I don’t want their support, and I can’t control what they say. I don’t want their votes.

Person 1: I asked to get clarity on the white supremacy concept. I'm half German, half Irish. We’ve talked where nobody believes the holo hoax stuff anymore. The more people read into it with masturbation machines, lampshades, piles of shoes, an honest assessment shows it’s lunacy. But who benefited most from the Holocaust? Jews and world Jewry. But who was the target of Holocaust? Hoaxers. Germany. Germany. White Europeans. No. Germany. So why have Americans been paying so much for Holocaust museums and restitution and memorial councils and support for Israel and for world Jewry? Why are there 700 NGOs for supporting Jews and giving money to Jews, and basically zero to support founding stock white European Americans. Literally zero Jews signed the Declaration of Independence or the constitution, and the constitution and declaration were both overwhelmingly signed by white Europeans. If you want to extend it, like the founding fathers that were Freemasons that were Kabbalist kind of Jews, then that’s not accurate. They weren’t Kabbalists. Freemasonry was created literally in 1843 funded by the Rothschilds for the purposes of subverting Freemasonry and rewriting the narrative around our Freemasonry founding fathers. George Washington, Ben Franklin, James Madison, Van Buren—absolutely correct. Absolutely wrong. If you’re talking about the free Masonic founding fathers, by extension, they’re Kabbalistic Jews anyway. Person 2: Ben Franklin in 1787 … there’s a hierarchy. Crypto Jews, John Kerry Cohen, for instance. He’s a free Masonic Jew as well. Kabbalistic believer and all that stuff. Trump likely is too. He’s a convert. And then you’ve got Freemasons that are secondary because it’s their pathway to be able to become official Shabbos scorer that get to enjoy the perks of all the Jewish crimes that they commit. B’nai B’rith actually did infiltrate the Free Masonic Lodges back in 1843, done by a bunch of German Jews in New York that started the first lodge, then gradually infiltrated the other lodges they didn’t control at that time. B’nai B’rith is actually one of the biggest global movements now; they’ve got over 5,000 of these Masonic houses and schools, etc., that they use for human trafficking. Charlotte, South Carolina is their headquarters. They’re everywhere; you don’t even know where all the homes are because they have so many of them. They’re rival with Khobod Lubovich, another massive movement with many pieces of real estate. They can be probably more powerful than the Vatican combined. I guess they run the Vatican. Person 3: But you understand I’m an anti-supremacist, right? You wanna tell me that you know, the white race, why can’t we have a white country, a white state? No one’s stopping you. Have your white ethnoidentarian state. Nobody cares. When you say they were persecuting the Germans, even after World War II, they killed over 11,000,000. If you believe Theodore Kaufman’s book, Germany must perish. They had Germany on the target list from the early medieval times. Do you recall how many Goy were killed in World War II? It’s like over 80,000,000 or so. They’re mostly whites, British or French, Russians. It’s mainly whites that were killed—Slavs, mainly Slavs. Slavs, but then Brits, French, others, whites were killed too. The point: they want whites fighting amongst each other, brother wars like World War I to wipe each other out and to restrict birth rates by pushing things like LGBTQ, hijacking kids to go through sex changes becoming infertile. It’s the same with the COVID vaccine, leading to sterility and reduced birth rates. So they are looking to kill, gradually reduce the white population. Person 1: Their biggest servants and slaves are white Christians. John Hagee, they’re a problem. I condemn them as well; they’re part of the problem. Since 1909, with the Schofield Bible, they’ve subverted Christians who would have viewed the Bible differently. The facts are the facts. We’re just slaves, manipulated. Take care of your own, don’t tell me you want a white utopia when you’re slaves, soldiers and slaves of Jewry. Albert, with what how the Jews have taken over with their institutions, their control of…

Speaker 0: You consider the Jewish people members of the white race? Yes. I do. Of course. Do you have any platform against them as Hitler did? Not all of them. Against those of them who are mixed up with communism or who are trying to subvert The United States for the purposes of Zionism and Israel. I I have something against them. What will be the topic of your talk tonight? Mainly the fact that the the fact that communism and race mixing are Jewish operations are suppressed in the press. You can't get that information out.

I was involved in the civil rights movement as a teenager, but not as an activist. Joe Biden made hurtful comments about racial jungle and opposed bussing. I confronted him in debates, but now we seem friendly. Not everyone criticized him like I did.

The speaker condemns Ian Carroll for making videos that claim Israel is behind conspiracies about Red Lobster, Applebee's, and Burger King, and for a live stream asking, “Where are you Nick? … Why are you with them?” He asks where the evidence is and notes the tendency to attribute almost every event to Israel, stating, “the heuristic seems to be Israel is behind literally everything,” past and future, which he calls ridiculous. He points to a September 7 tweet where Carroll said Charlie Kirk is “working for the Jews that killed Jesus,” and contrasts it with Carroll’s certainty on September 11 that Israel killed him to silence him, questioning what changed in those four days and suggesting Carroll may have ESP or telepathy. He accuses Carroll of grifting, intellectual laziness, and dishonesty, and refuses to be pulled into blaming Israel for killing the number one Israel defender in America. The speaker asserts personal history and credibility, saying, “I’ve been over here. I was at Charlottesville” in 2017, and that in 2019 he led the Gruyper war against Charlie Kirk, labeling Kirk as an “Israel shill.” He claims that from Turning Point’s founding in 2012 to today, the organization has been “owned by Israel and served Israel.” He recounts a June text in which Charlie Kirk told Dinesh D’Souza, “Nick Fuentes is vermin,” and notes the ongoing fight against him for six years, including Kirk’s August statement calling him “anti Semitic garbage” and his refusal to debate. The speaker describes Charlie Kirk’s inner circle and media connections: Kirk’s right-hand man Andrew Colvin comes from Salem Media, a Christian Zionist outlet aligned with Israel, with Melissa Strait having connections to Salem and Prager University and IDF unit 12082. He notes Colvin led a “struggle session about Israel” after a Turning Point SAS conference in July. He claims that when Israel bombed Qatar in contravention of Trump’s foreign policy, Kirk invited Ben Shapiro to present Israel’s position, while Kirk acted as moderator, and on the day Kirk “was shot,” he prepared to defend Israel with his rabbi at Provo as he drafted a book on the Jewish Sabbath. The speaker emphasizes that the person accused of fighting Israel was “the guy that was murdered,” and expresses pity for those who would believe that. He asserts, “I’m right here where I’ve always been, following the facts, following the money, looking at the information,” claiming to be light years ahead of Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson, and rejecting the idea that their ideology is about Netanyahu or Israel’s foreign policy, concluding, “No, sorry. Absolutely not. That’s totally ridiculous.”