reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 gave the FBI a thumb drive containing 29 minutes of high-definition video showing two men attacking a building. As of this morning, neither man has been arrested. Speaker 0 states that despite going through over 725 indictments, none of their video or even a single still picture of either man has appeared on the Internet. The FBI is allegedly refusing to take Speaker 0's calls, return emails, or accept an offer to meet. Speaker 0 believes the FBI is hiding these men. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to inquire about the identities of these men. Speaker 0 confirms that Ben Grundler has all this information and that they have been in contact for over a year.

Speaker 0 raises the question of CIA involvement in drug trafficking, referencing a past discussion with former Tel Aviv CIA chief of station Susan Miller and noting a reminder about Iran-Contra. They ask why the CIA would be intimately involved with drug trafficking, and mention Candace Owens discussing it in relation to the Charlie Kirk assassination. Speaker 1 answers that trafficking in drugs allows the CIA to get closer to the targets they want to reach. They point to a popular Netflix series, Narcos, which follows the hunt for Pablo Escobar, the Cali cartel, and other major cartels. They claim that, in the show, and in real life, every time the Drug Enforcement Administration gets close to its primary target, the CIA station chief steps in and ruins the investigation. They state that this happens because the CIA doesn’t care about drugs. Speaker 1 continues that the CIA cares about terrorism and communism, implying there are always some other bigger ideological concerns. Therefore, the CIA is “perfectly happy” to allow cocaine to flood into the United States in the 1980s during the Iran-Contra period, just as it was “perfectly happy” to allow Afghanistan to provide 93% of the world’s heroin once the United States began its occupation of Afghanistan.

There is speculation about Maxwell Yurek from Arizona being linked to a white van at a Trump rally. The van had Arizona plates and is connected to Yurek Armoury Explosives. A conversation with a person at Yurek's residence did not provide any clear answers about his whereabouts or involvement. The individual denied knowing Maxwell and refused to discuss further details. The video ends with unanswered questions and suspicions about Yurek's potential role in the events.

In this video, the speaker discusses three murder attempts and points out that Aaron and Dave in O'Keefe were present each time. The speaker mentions that they were aware of the attempts before leaving and that the FBI has evidence of this. They also suggest a connection to a drug cartel. The speaker mentions O'Connell's involvement in the investigation.

The speaker discusses the FBI's ongoing investigation into the January 6th Capitol riot and the arrest of Trump supporters who were present. They highlight the FBI's inability to find information about the individuals responsible for planting pipe bombs outside the RNC and DNC headquarters the night before the riot. The speaker then analyzes a recently released video showing the moment one of the bombs was discovered, raising questions about the authorities' lack of concern and the involvement of the Secret Service. They also mention the failure of the media to cover this story and the suspicious actions of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. The transcript ends with an update revealing that the person who alerted the police about the bomb was a plainclothes officer with the Capitol Police.

Speaker 0 admits to being paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they suggest it was part of an organized effort.

Speaker 0 confesses in a video that they were paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they mention it was part of an organized effort.

In this video, the speaker discusses a suspicious situation involving a woman who works at the Rio Grande Valley Catholic facility in McAllen, Texas. The woman has been transporting children, including babies, from the facility to the airport. The speaker and his team followed her and noticed some odd behavior, such as her claiming the children were hers and then handing them off to other women. They also discovered that she was now driving a taxi, but when they called the number on the cab, they were told it wasn't a cab company. The speaker believes there is something sinister happening and calls for a serious investigation.

Speaker 0 identifies as a fellow marine and speaks with urgency about orders he feels compelled to follow. He asserts that people are getting hurt and links this to a broader issue: weapons and military equipment from the United States being sold over the border in Mexico to cartels. He claims he has been able to prove this wrongdoing and says that, as a result, he is supposed to return to the master chief petty officer of the Navy. He describes a specific observation to substantiate the claim: boats that originated from a SEAL boat installation have been seen around the border area. He mentions a location—Industrial Plaza near Food for Less—and states that navy boats, which he attributes to the SEAL boat installation, have been taken apart and transported across the border. He emphasizes that all of this equipment is moving across the border and insists he is not lying. The speaker acknowledges his status as a former marine and expresses concern about the implications of these actions. He conveys a belief that if cartel members obtain and repurpose this equipment, they could use it against the United States, a scenario that would require far more than luck to counter. He reinforces that more substantial measures than luck will be necessary to address the threat he describes. He closes by wishing the listener luck, while reiterating the seriousness of the situation and his need to act on his orders. He signs off with “Thank you so much. Godspeed.”

Leonel Oleo Moreno, a sergeant from Digesín, previously known as DIN, was sent by the government to sabotage law-abiding Venezuelans in this country. He lied about his age, falsified documents, and tarnished the image of good Venezuelans here. He was paid by the government to cause this disaster. Another individual is being monitored, and once the information is confirmed, they will be exposed and detained. Leo, the sergeant from Digesín, will provide more updates soon. Translation: Leonel Oleo Moreno, Sergeant Leo Moreno from Digesín, previously known as DIN, was sent by the government to sabotage law-abiding Venezuelans in this country. He lied about his age, falsified documents, and tarnished the image of good Venezuelans here. He was paid by the government to cause this disaster. Another individual is being monitored, and once the information is confirmed, they will be exposed and detained. Leo, the sergeant from Digesín, will provide more updates soon.

The speaker learned about an incident involving their colleague, Vlad Lander, a government controller, and found the video of it shocking. The speaker felt the need to come and check on Lander's whereabouts and intervene. According to the speaker, Vlad Lander faces no charges, as they have been dropped, and he is now a free man.

Speaker 0: Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 discuss the events of a fateful day. Speaker 1 expresses concern about the lack of public fear and urges action. Speaker 0 emphasizes the need for justice and accountability, regardless of the protesters' motives. They agree to frame the protesters and take strict measures, including a shoot-to-kill order. The video suggests that political power brokers are manipulating the narrative to protect their interests, raising questions about the extent they will go to safeguard themselves.

Speaker 0 states the arrest is for organizing an event and suspects the arrestee intends to cause serious destruction to UK airports. Speaker 0 adds that politicians have failed with a 1.5% exposure to the state. Speaker 1, named Daniel, says he is being arrested at his parents' house in London, while visiting them. He believes the arrest is for conspiracy to commit a public nuisance and attributes it to the British state.

The speakers discuss the need for defense counsel to have access to the video evidence in the case. They suggest a stepwise process to ensure all information reaches defense lawyers. One speaker mentions concerns about public release due to nefarious organizations and threats to witnesses. Another speaker believes that the evidence should be made available to the public to identify those involved. They mention the presence of a pipe bomber and the refusal of the DOJ to disclose undercover agents. The speakers emphasize the importance of transparency to uncover the truth.

Speaker 0 asserts: I’m not suicidal. Any creator, politician, or celebrity who tries to make a film or documentary on CPS has wound up dead, including a senator. The November film will be their hardest hitting, and they will “rip the veil off” to the point where CPS shows up at your door. Our government is running the world’s largest child trafficking network. They emphasize they would never kill themselves, do drugs, or put themselves in dangerous environments; if anything happens to them, it is the United States government. They watched the first take of the film and say, “they’re gonna kill me.” They urge a trip down memory lane to discuss Pizzagate, stating this is where it all starts. Speaker 1 begins by saying the Pizzagate story has outrageous connections and promising brand-new whistleblower information that will blow minds. They provide an overview: back to Bill and Hillary Clinton, whom many believe to be child pedophiles. They say there’s never been direct evidence, but in 02/2016 WikiLeaks published Hillary Clinton emails with John Podesta showing coded language about a child trafficking ring centered in a Washington, DC pizza restaurant basement at Comet Ping Pong. Edgar Maddison Welch went to the restaurant with firearms to “liberate the children,” but no one was hurt; it was later said there wasn’t a basement, so the scandal was dismissed, though there’s more to the story. The transcript then ties Hillary Clinton to Laura Silsbee, who was involved in trafficking, and outlines a chain: Hillary Clinton and Laura Silsbee exchanged documents detailing logistics of trafficking children from Haiti to Boise, Idaho. Laura Silsbee had previously kidnapped several dozen children from Haiti and attempted to cross into the Dominican Republic; she was caught and the children were returned to their families. Shawnee M. King is cited for reporting on Silsbee’s case. Jorge Puello, an attorney for Silsbee’s group, was suspected of leading an international trafficking ring; Puello was arrested in investigations by ICE and Homeland Security; his wife faced charges of sexual exploitation of minors and women. The narrative claims Hillary Clinton and Laura Silsbee were connected; Bill and Hillary Clinton allegedly helped negotiate the release of Laura Silsbee and her accomplices after their imprisonment in Haiti. Speaker 1 then ties the connections to CPS: the number-one source of child trafficking is the U.S. CPS system, and the number-one gateway to sex trafficking in America is the foster care system. The foster care system allegedly lost over 100,000 children in the last twenty years, raised questions about where they went, and claims millions of children are abused in foster care by financially compensated foster parents and social workers. The Adoptive Safe Families Act (ASFA), championed by Hillary Clinton and signed by Bill Clinton in 1997, supposedly created and financed CPS/foster care by diverting Social Security funds to 50 states, giving a financial incentive to “kidnap” children. It is claimed that CPS targets poor and minority children and single-parent families, and that the system now functions as a government-subsidized child-trafficking ring. Speaker 1 lists correlations: CPS is a tool used to target conservatives; CPS offices get paid per child kidnapped; 83% of removals lack proof of abuse. The claim is that Hillary Clinton created the system and that Laura Silsbee, a friend of Clinton, is involved in Idaho’s CPS network. Laura Silsbee allegedly works with Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) and is a registered foster care parent in Idaho, receiving monthly payments for children in her custody, as shown by whistleblower-provided screenshots. Idaho’s Attorney General Raul Labrador opened an investigation into IDHW financial misappropriations, but Idaho’s Department director Dave Jepison resigned and disappeared, and Judge Lynn Norton allegedly issued an order halting the AG’s investigation. The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare allegedly dominates Idaho’s budget, and Laura Silsbee’s role with IDHW is framed as proof of a nationwide system. The narrative concludes by warning Idahoans to beware of Laura Silsbee (aka Laura Gaylor), Judge Norton, and supporters of IDHW, asserting that the system extends to all 50 states, including Arizona, Texas, and Florida, which are described as among the worst offenders in CPS corruption.

Speaker 0 confesses in a video that they were paid to pretend to protest at the Capitol building. They mention having difficulty pulling off the act and getting a bruise on their leg. Although they don't reveal who paid them, they mention it was part of an organized effort.

Speaker 0 accuses the video of being part of a propaganda effort to support the genocide of Palestine. Speaker 1 tries to interrupt but Speaker 0 insists that the video is fake. Speaker 1 mentions a scenario where someone's friend goes missing and people don't help, but Speaker 0 dismisses it. Speaker 2 claims that the video is meant to help bring people home. Speaker 0 repeats their name and says they just voted. Speaker 1 states that the discussion has nothing to do with Speaker 0. Speaker 0 mentions that the police are coming.

The speaker discusses Maxwell Yurek from Arizona, claiming a white GMC van with Arizona plates towed from the Trump rally in Pennsylvania after a shooting is tied to him. The speaker urges viewers to Google Yurek's name, noting information is being scrubbed. The speaker claims Yurek is connected to Yurek Armoury Explosives in East Mesa, Arizona, and that Google searches for the company reveal a residence. The speaker and his brother drove to the residence and spoke to a woman there. The speaker presents a video of the encounter, where he asks the woman if Max is present. The woman initially claims not to know any Max Yurek or Yerling. The speaker identifies himself as Tyson Draper, a missing person investigator, and asks about a missing person report for Yurek. The woman denies knowledge of this. She acknowledges being part of the family but claims to have "no say on anything" and denies knowledge of the van.

Biden is being called a criminal due to allegations surrounding his laptop. The speaker insists that Biden is a long-time criminal and criticizes the media for not reporting on it. The speaker repeatedly refers to the media as criminals as well. The video ends with a sarcastic wish for good luck.

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.

The speaker discusses the FBI's ongoing investigation into the January 6th Capitol riot and the arrest of Trump supporters. They highlight the FBI's inability to find information about the person or people who planted pipe bombs outside the RNC and DNC headquarters the night before the riot. The speaker then introduces new surveillance footage released by Capitol Police, showing the moment one of the bombs was discovered. They describe the video, pointing out the lack of concern from law enforcement and the Secret Service, as well as the proximity of the bomb to VP-elect Kamala Harris. The speaker raises questions about the identity of the person who alerted authorities to the bomb and the subsequent cover-up.

Speaker 1 asks about a 2024 reelection video in which the speaker promised to show no mercy on the cartels and to employ every military asset to combat them, and to expose all bribes and corruptions involving politicians and the cartels. Speaker 0 confirms, saying they are pursuing that course. They mention investigating where money comes from, noting a recent weekend “garbage deal” as embarrassing to the opposition and that the crowds were not large. They observe that the signs for the protests—yellow and blue—appear professionally made, as if produced in a printing shop, suggesting someone is paying for them. They acknowledge they do not mind protest and sometimes protest themselves, but claim some protesters are “professional agitators” being paid, implying there is a source behind them. Speaker 0 states they have a lot of information about who these agitators are and that the public will be very surprised when they find out who is paying them.

In the video, the speaker mentions various pieces of intelligence that were not included in assessments regarding the Capitol attack. These include plans to harm palace guards, use chemicals at entry points, burn down the Supreme Court, attack members of Congress, and storm the building. The speaker's intelligence unit even released documents indicating a low probability of civil disobedience. Speaker 1 suggests that certain agencies may have allowed the chaos at the Capitol to serve their political purposes and prevented the speaker from stopping it.

The video shows a man pointing out a person who appears to be a protester but is actually an undercover federal agent. They communicate through hand signals, confirming the infiltration. The speaker emphasizes the idea of total infiltration and suggests the entire situation is a setup.

In this video, Speaker 1 confronts Dennis Gilliam about his alleged involvement in certain Signal and Telegram groups. Dennis claims to have no knowledge of these groups and suggests that he may have been added without his consent. Speaker 1 believes Dennis is not the creator of these groups and wants to collaborate in identifying the real culprits. They discuss the possibility of Dennis being transferred to these groups through links posted on Facebook. Speaker 1 emphasizes that their main focus is finding the individuals responsible for creating and participating in these groups, rather than accusing Dennis. Additionally, the video discusses how the speaker was led to various groups on Signal through provocative photos on Facebook. They mention that both boys and girls are being posted in these groups, with mainly women being posted in the videos. The age range of individuals in the groups is mostly teens and twenties. The speaker admits to clicking on links and seeing pictures and videos but claims to have quickly exited when uncomfortable. They mention that the groups are primarily in Spanish and that they have seen links with pictures and videos being posted. However, the frequency of inappropriate content being posted in the groups remains uncertain. The video also features a conversation between Speaker 1, Speaker 2, and Speaker 3. Speaker 1 confronts Speaker 2 about his alleged involvement in groups that post explicit content involving minors. Speaker 2 denies any knowledge or intent to view such content, but Speaker 1 presses for more information. Speaker 3, who is also present, shares that he has grandchildren and works in mental health. The conversation becomes tense as Speaker 1 accuses Speaker 2 of clicking on videos featuring young children. Speaker 2 admits to accidentally clicking on such videos multiple times. The conversation continues with Speaker 1 explaining their organization's work and Speaker 2's involvement. The video ends with Speaker 2 deleting evidence from his phone.