reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker expresses concern about Americans being afraid of being prosecuted by the Department of Justice. They mention the events of January 6th and how some Americans came to the Capitol out of frustration with the government. They criticize the lack of proper security and mention the fear people have of the FBI. The speaker questions the Department's handling of investigations, particularly regarding the Durham report and the slow progress on certain cases. They also raise concerns about corruption and the need for only eligible citizens to vote in elections.

The speaker suggests that the situation reeks of obstruction of justice. They question why the investigation into Hunter Biden by a section of the IRS is being shut down and transferred to the Department of Justice. This decision is seen as nonsensical.

The speaker discusses the distrust towards General Flynn by the CIA and FBI. They mention the challenges faced by the administration due to subversion and deception from within. The speaker reflects on the difficulties of navigating Washington DC politics as an outsider, highlighting the struggle to identify trustworthy individuals in a landscape of deceit and self-interest.

The speaker argues that to understand how the American government actually works at the highest levels, you must know that Richard Nixon was historically the most popular president, elected with a massive margin in 1972, yet he was forced to resign and was replaced by Gerald Ford, an unelected president. The speaker asserts this demonstrates that the federal agencies undermine the American system, a point Nixon allegedly warned about and was right about. Key events and connections highlighted include: - Nixon’s meeting with CIA director Richard Helms on June 23, 1972, during which Nixon allegedly implied knowledge of who killed John F. Kennedy and suggested CIA involvement in Kennedy’s assassination; Helms reportedly remained silent. - Four days earlier, the Washington Post published the first Watergate break-in story; the speaker notes that four of the five burglars worked for the CIA and that Bob Woodward, the reporter, had a background in the classified realm and worked with intelligence agencies; Woodward’s main source was Mark Felt, deputy director of the FBI, who allegedly ran COINTELPRO to discredit Nixon and other political targets. - The FBI’s COINTELPRO program is cited as a mechanism used to take down Nixon’s vice president, Spiro Agnew, who was indicted for tax evasion in 1973 and forced to resign; Ford, a Warren Commission member, replaced Agnew, with the claim that Ford’s qualifications were tied to his involvement with the Commission’s conclusion that the CIA bore no responsibility for Kennedy’s assassination. - The speaker alleges that Nixon was strong-armed into accepting Gerald Ford as president by Democrats in Congress, with the claim that Ford’s rise demonstrated a systemic pattern in which the presidency could be controlled by federal agencies and political elites rather than by elected representatives or voters. The narrative then shifts to the Trump era, stating that Michael Flynn—an Army intelligence veteran who had led the Defense Intelligence Agency—was targeted by the FBI shortly after Trump’s inauguration, lured into a meeting without legal counsel, and pressured to resign based on fabricated crimes; this is presented as evidence of how the system operates against national-security-minded figures who seek to push back. The speaker contrasts this with Joe Biden, claiming he was similarly harmed by the justice system and portraying Biden as deserving neither sympathy nor special treatment, while contending that the broader electorate deserves a genuine democracy in which people who are not elected to lead do not run everything. The overarching claim is that “democracy becomes a joke” when unelected actors wield real power.

The speaker accuses someone, referred to as "Spartacus," of hypocrisy in their criticism of Chuck Schumer. The speaker claims that "Spartacus" avoided answering whether criminal law should be enforced. According to the speaker, the answer is yes, and the Biden Department of Justice acted politically and with partisan bias by refusing to enforce the law because they disagreed with Supreme Court Justice rulings.

The speaker expresses concern about the increasing politicization of the DOJ and FBI, stating that it has led to a dangerous accumulation of power. They assert that this cycle of power and politics needs to be halted. The speaker then accuses Christopher Wray and Mary Garland, the leaders of the FBI and DOJ respectively, of corruption, claiming that this is a widely known fact among the American people.

During a conversation, the speaker expresses their frustration with Juan and mentions that Flynn is involved in setting up the events of January 6th. They claim that Flynn is working with the FBI and handed over an insurrection agreement to intentionally fail. The speaker believes that the FBI wanted to keep them separate from Trump and threatened them. They also mention a deal involving Flynn replacing Trump and mention a video by Nino suggesting Trump's lawyers are making a deal for immunity, followed by a mention of the assassination of Trump.

The speaker expresses concern about the threat posed to the republican form of government by the Justice Department's transformation into a political police force. They also mention the involvement of the FBI and how this undermines the integrity of elections, specifically the 2024 election. The speaker believes that even if the situation is resolved, the indictment itself is a smear and has compromised the election.

The speaker expresses disappointment in the politicization of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the leadership of the person being addressed. They criticize the DOJ for conducting biased investigations, disregarding the First Amendment, and using the department as a weapon against political rivals. The speaker holds the person accountable for labeling parents as domestic terrorists and targeting Roman Catholic churches. They also highlight the DOJ's failure to address threats against conservatives while punishing protestors and attacks on pro-life centers. The speaker blames the person in charge for the decline in trust in federal law enforcement and the political weaponization of the DOJ.

The speaker accuses the attorney general of committing fraud and calls the entire case a fraud. They believe it is election interference and is preventing them from being in Iowa and New Hampshire. The speaker strongly asserts that the attorney general is a fraud who has committed fraud.

According to reports, thousands of people at the DOJ are scared. Jack Smith is allegedly scurrying like a rat and will resign to avoid being fired by Trump. Speaker 1 says, "Bye. Bye. We're not done with him," claiming Smith spent $50,000,000 of taxpayer dollars and can't resign to hide from what he did. Speaker 1 suggests Smith is running quickly, indicating that "we were right." Speaker 1 states that people called her stupid and wrong, but now that Smith is allegedly running, she doesn't "look so wrong right now," because if he had nothing to hide, he wouldn't be leaving.

Speaker 0: The time game is over. Justice with General Flynn. They criticize the Department of Just Us and recall a past moment when they would have been brought into the DOJ in handcuffs. Speaker 1: Delivers a stream of violent, braggadocious lyrics about weapons, killings, and dominance, including references to shooting, trafficking, and threatening rivals. The content emphasizes keeping enemies in check, physical violence, and material wealth, with repeated lines about not losing sleep over killers, firing weapons, and "run it up" for money and power. Speaker 2: Argues that many people gaining sudden large followings on Twitter or talking about topics like low taxes or transgender pronouns may be pedophiles, suggesting conservative media uses people with criminal pasts as influencers. States that such individuals say things to align with a broader agenda and mentions Israel in the context of a broader critique of conservative priorities. Concludes with a tip to contact Charlie Cook for those seeking a "second act" in public life. Speaker 3: Kyle Clifton discusses an after-party associated with TPUSA’s America Fest in Phoenix on December 19, called the Grand Young Party. The party reportedly featured girls dancing half-naked on stage, girls locked in cages, underage drinking, stripper poles, sex on the dance floor, and mentions “strange ritual Zionist extremism.” He notes promo footage from Florida and Phoenix, blurred faces of attendees, and that age did not matter if the attendee knew the organizer, Joe Bazrawi. Background is provided on Maverick events as the organizers. He reports a security guard tackled an 18-year-old patron, causing injuries; police encouraged filing a report for assault. Parents of other female patrons are considering lawsuits for supplying minors with alcohol. The event was advertised as a TPUSA America Fest after party, hosted by TPUSA ambassador/employee Joe Bazrawi, whose travel and lodging were paid for by TPUSA. He claims TPUSA was aware of and encouraged the party, and that Bazrawi maintains a private dossier on conservatives who oppose his party or beliefs to blacklist them from TPUSA events. Bazrawi allegedly attends other events to photograph attendees for his dossier and share with TPUSA executives. Attendees allegedly included Matt Gaetz, with rumors that James O’Keefe and Madison Cawthorn were present; photos are mentioned. Questions are raised about TPUSA’s responsibility for hosting unsanctioned events with high-profile guests and potential legal consequences or PR damage. The after-party reportedly had about 30–40 attendees leave early; refunds were issued to some in response to public comments, while others did not receive refunds. Some attendees were admitted as late as 1:45 AM; the event ended at 2 AM. Ticketing was disorganized, with staff not knowing who attended. Local Antifa chapters reportedly planned to submit stories to CNN to harm Matt Gaetz’s career. The speaker expresses concern about the conservatism movement’s image and the potential implications for Gaetz and Cawthorn. Speaker 4: The Vault claims to possess extensive material—video, pictures, emails, audio, text messages, phone calls—on everyone and to be willing to drop it all. The speaker has “a lot of crap on Richard Spencer and everybody else” and suggests signing up for Telegram to access this material. Speaker 5–6: Expressions of fear or alarm from the audience, with a call to “Dale” and a plea for help or relief, indicating tension or distress in the room.

The speaker discusses the evolution of a federal case that has dragged on for five years. They express confusion over the Department of Justice's (DOJ) actions, noting a pattern of lenient dispositions being reconsidered due to pressure. The DOJ's appointment of a special counsel further complicates the situation. The speaker believes the DOJ has created a mess for themselves and will face consequences. When asked about restoring public confidence, the speaker suggests that going to trial may be the only way to achieve credibility. They propose charging everything and letting the jury decide. The conversation ends with gratitude.

The speaker emphasizes that the Department of Justice should not be politicized, echoing the president's previous statements. They are asked about convincing Americans to trust the department's independence and fairness, despite Donald Trump's repeated attacks. The speaker asserts that they have never influenced the department's decisions and expresses frustration with the situation. The transcript ends with a question about lying to the public and a strong reaction.

Speaker 0: It's been a few days since you issued that resignation. You’ve been called weak by the president of the United States. You’ve been called a traitor by Lindsey Graham. You’ve been called an anti-Semite by Mitch McConnell, among others. Now there are reports that you’re under a leak investigation potentially accusing you of a felony that could put you in jail even though you now are raising your two boys. You’ve remarried, but you’re their sole biological parent still here. I ask you now whether this was worth it. Speaker 1: I think it most certainly was, Megan. I mean, the attacks against me are to be expected. The ad hominems from people like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham at this point are fairly laughable. They don’t wanna discuss the issues. I wanna discuss the issues. As for the leak allegations, I’m not concerned because I know I did nothing wrong. Of course, I am concerned because we’ve all seen the FBI and the full way of the government come down on individuals who speak out. So that has me a little bit concerned, but I know the truth and the facts are on my side. So I think the important issues to address are what’s at hand, why we’re at war, and how we get out of the state that we’re in right now. Speaker 0: Mhmm. Your boys have already lost one parent. I mean, the thought of this government for which you’ve been working and the government for which you’ve sacrificed so much, actually trying to put you in jail over an alleged leak after the number of leaks we’ve seen go unpunished over the past ten years is truly outrageous, Joe. I mean, does it anger you? How does it make you feel? Speaker 1: You, you know, it it does anger me, but it it’s all just to be expected. I I knew this was going to happen. I I know their playbook. I think we’re all very familiar with their playbook. So, actually, the fact that they’re leaking these allegations so so they have to leak the allegations of an FBI investigation. If there truly was an FBI investigation, and who knows, maybe there will be, there would be a process and procedure for that. They would actually formally come to me. And if they were still collecting information, they most certainly wouldn’t leak it. So the fact that the FBI, DOJ, or really probably just partisans are leaking this this so-called investigation against me at a time when I’m going on and publicly speaking out against the course the administration is on, to me, that tells me everything that I need to know. I feel very confident in what I’m doing right now. I think I have a mission, and I think it is to do everything I can to stop this war. So to me, I kinda view everything else as a sideshow, and I just wanna stay focused on the mission.

The speaker explains he is trying to navigate possible collaboration with federal authorities while maintaining personal integrity. He says he has a statement that is “completely true” that he’s “never been in contact with any federal authority,” and he’s torn about how to start working with DHS to address threats he faces as a national figure. He claims “the Yemenis, a million of them came out into the streets” and that they want to kill him, with a fatwa on his head. He asserts he would need DHS to make a statement that “the Houthis and their fatwa that they placed on my head will not be stood,” and that “American citizens exercising our rights will not be, you know, subject to to Muslim murder, rituals.” He describes hundreds of thousands of death threats in his DMs and says, to deal with them, he would need to walk into an FBI building and give them a printout, but he “don’t fucking trust the FBI.” He accuses the FBI of having “destroyed my life,” pointing to past raids on his and others’ homes and references to the Mar-a-Lago search, stating he is trying to figure out how to navigate this situation without claiming contact with Harmeet or making contacts he “don’t want to.” He notes that when he and others exercised their rights in Dearborn, he views it as a civil rights hate crime, saying “the Muslim oppression of Christians in Dearborn” was a civil rights hate violation and that “they punched me in the face because I’m white” and “they punched me in the face because I’m Christian, not for anything else.” Harmony Dillon is described as wanting to prosecute this as a hate crime, with others subjected to spit, food thrown, assaults, pepper spray, etc. He mentions the Trump administration’s purported interest in bringing these people to justice, but he expresses a wish not to feed into it, citing personal integrity and caution. He questions whether the rank-and-file FBI officer’s motives are aligned with his interests, contrasting a year ago with a “grandma that walked through the capital” to now a Muslim who punched a Christian, implying hypocrisy or moral decline. He asserts there are “deep state embedded figures in the DOJ, in the FBI, in DHS,” who were involved in actions like the raid on Mar-a-Lago and other “schemes.” He says he needs assurance that these agencies have “our best interest” and that they are not “deep state shills.” Ultimately, he states he has refused to make contact because it’s “too risky” and he cannot be associated with people he deems “un American.”

Speaker 1, Julie Kelly, asserts that the new leadership at the DOJ and FBI may not be aware of who Jocelyn Ballantyne is, describing her as lead prosecutor who "led the team of government lawyers, DOJ lawyers, who went after the Proud Boys" and labeling her as "among the worst of the worst." Kelly references her experience covering the Proud Boys trial in 2023 and states that Ballantyne was near the top of Kelly’s list of j-six prosecutors who should be fired. Kelly recounts a scandal from the Proud Boys trial involving a spreadsheet of FBI correspondence in which agents discussed destroying evidence, surveilling, and eavesdropping on communications between Proud Boys who were in pretrial detention federal prison and their attorneys. She notes that the defense, during the trial, discovered this spreadsheet accidentally and intended to use the information as evidence. According to Kelly, the defense attempted to question an FBI agent who was a government witness and planned to present what they found in the spreadsheet. She describes that, as the defense began to present this evidence, Judge Tim Kelly—who, she says, is good friends with Jocelyn Ballantyne and had worked with her in the DC U.S. attorney’s office on cases—abruptly cut off the questioning. A day or two later, Ballantyne went into court and claimed that the communication represented classified secrets and should be withheld from the jury, a move Kelly characterizes as being aligned with Ballantyne’s actions. Kelly asserts that Judge Kelly went along with this claim to withhold the information. Kelly emphasizes that Ballantyne led the team of prosecutors against the Proud Boys, who were convicted of seditious conspiracy. She notes that Ballantyne then pursued severe sentences, including some defendants receiving life terms, such as Lindsay Attario, who Kelly says ended up with a twenty-two year prison sentence before those sentences were commuted by the president. Speaker 0 interjects multiple times with questions and expressions of disbelief, urging Julie Kelly to explain how such actions could be true and challenging the notion that Ballantyne’s conduct was inappropriate, while Kelly maintains that the described conduct and the actions taken by Ballantyne and the DOJ were part of the Proud Boys prosecutions and related cases.

Speaker 0: We have a problem with the CIA and FBI in Washington. Speaker 1: What's your plan to start over and fix them? Speaker 0: They've gotten out of control, with weaponization and other issues. The people need to bring about change. We were making progress, but more needs to be done.

The speaker claims to have found documents related to Jim Comey that were not where they should have been. The speaker says these documents are unflattering to Comey. The speaker asserts that Comey disgraced the FBI numerous times with his role in crossfire hurricane and other abominations. The speaker finds it stunning that Comey continues to attack their leadership when they are cleaning up the mess Comey created and continue to find things from his era.

The speaker expresses concern about Americans being afraid of prosecution by the Department of Justice. They mention the events of January 6th and question why the debate wasn't stopped when people broke into the Capitol. The speaker also criticizes the handling of investigations, particularly regarding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. They express frustration with the lack of accountability and raise concerns about corruption and foreign influence. The speaker asks the Attorney General if they believe only US citizens should vote in elections. The Attorney General responds affirmatively.

The speaker mentioned that there were several steps that were intentionally delayed by the Department of Justice. When asked if they had encountered this situation before, they replied that they had not.

Speaker 1 argues the administration is targeting its political opponents and notes, "it seemed very clear to me in congressional the testimony," asking, "what an FBI director is doing, taking memos from the FBI and leaking them to the New York Times." He claims "the very same people that were coming after us ... went after your brother" and that "They were trying to destroy my father. They were trying to destroy me, and they were trying to destroy the Trump organization." Speaker 0 says he's not playing coy and asks if what's happening now resembles what happened to him. Speaker 1 fires a barrage: "Did we raid Biden's home?" "Did we weaponize every AG and DA, you know, against Biden?" "Did we put Biden in a courtroom every single day, 91 felony counts that have all been overturned for my father now, right, for nonsense to try and destroy his life?"

Speaker 0 claims to have video footage from January 6th of two federal agents attacking the Capitol. Speaker 0 states they have been trying to get the FBI to investigate for over a year, providing them with twenty-nine minutes of high-definition footage. Speaker 0 says the FBI has not arrested the agents, nor have their images appeared online. Speaker 0 claims the FBI refuses to accept a statement or view video from January 5th, 6th, and 7th. Speaker 1 says the FBI raided them twice, came to their home, and took their phones. Speaker 1 advises Speaker 0 to avoid the FBI if possible.

Bezos owning the Washington Post is described as an arm of the CIA, a claim raised by Speaker 0. He suggests that the newspaper is part of a broader pattern where media power is consolidated in the hands of a few billionaires, accusing the outlet of being used to push a particular agenda. Speaker 1 responds dismissively to that assertion and mentions Ellison taking over of [text incomplete in the transcript], signaling ongoing concerns about who controls major media and institutions. The conversation continues with Speaker 0 asserting that Barry Weiss is trying to squash real news and hide it, and that reporters who are doing real journalism are being targeted, framed as investigations or actions run by a few billionaires who control much of the media landscape. A related critique follows, declaring Bill Clinton a “slimeball” for deregulating the Federal Communications Act of 1996. The speakers reference the consequence that there were thousands of independent radio stations, television stations, and newspapers before deregulation, and now six companies control 92% of the media as a result of that action, calling Clinton a “lousy little slime ball.” The discussion moves into personal remarks about Monica Lewinsky, with a claim that “I didn’t have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky,” followed by derisive language directed at Bill Clinton, describing him as “that little clown.” The conversation then shifts to the Epstein files, with frustration expressed about why those files are not being released. The speakers criticize the redaction of the Epstein files and question, “Where the hell are these Epstein files?” They argue that the redactions are to protect individuals, using charged language to describe the situation as disgusting, and they call for the files to be made public. The topic then turns to the DOJ’s handling of redactions related to Congressman Thomas Massey. The DOJ reportedly missed deadlines to provide reasons for the redactions to Massey and “walked right past his deadline.” The speakers say they interviewed Massey on the show, reiterating that the DOJ violated the deadline and ignored the will of the people, with the DOJ referred to as the “DOJ, Department of Jerkoffs.” Finally, Massey is praised as one of the top lawmakers, described as one of the few in Congress who is truly respected, and “one of a kind,” with Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 expressing strong admiration for his work and integrity.

Speaker 0 states: "It's disruptive. It's ridiculous." "Obviously, it's to persecute an enemy, which I can't believe the FBI is being so politicized." "However, I will say, if he would have testified in the first impeachment hearing, maybe we wouldn't be here." "So there's a little bit of karma also."