reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 introduces a moment to hear what the crowd thinks, noting skepticism about whether there will be opportunity to see it. Speaker 1 says they don’t know who’s whispering to the speaker, likening it to Grima Wormtongue, and asserts that half the people from their movement aren’t on Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin’s team. They say: “We aren’t neocons. We aren’t war hawks. We want America first. And if you make me choose between America first and MAGA, it’s America first all day. That’s what MAGA was supposed to be. You were just the best vessel for it, bro. Don’t get it twisted.” Speaker 2 contends that despite Trump’s flaws, including insider trading, they’re glad he’s differentiating and saying “you’re not with me because I’m not with you.” They reject being associated with someone they describe as a “cool corrupt kid” and a “Jeffrey Epstein class table.” They claim Trump “wasn’t loyal to his original mission. He wasn’t loyal to America. He became a creature of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu,” and that all “his never troubled enemies are now the courtiers with the madness of King Lear” telling him the lies they want to hear, and declare they are not one of those people. Speaker 3 argues that this proves multiple things, including that “the first thing, he shouldn’t be in office anymore. Implement the twenty fifth.” They say Trump isn’t loyal to this country or to anybody except “that little country in the Middle East.” They note it’s as if he does what he’s told, and compare him unfavorably to JFK for telling that country no. They ask, “How can you call them losers when you lose to Bibi Netanyahu in Israel every single day? When’s the last time you told them no to anything?” Speaker 0 shifts to a personal jab, saying Brigitte Macron is far more beautiful than Candace Owens, and asserts he’s been blind across the Internet. They reference reactions on Truth Social, noting “they’ve turned on you.” They catalog some responses: “You are way out of line.” They remind that many were once day ones, including Alex Jones, who had Trump on his show when “no media company would have you on.” They summarize: people are telling Trump to take a step back and “get back to America first.” Others say, “You are just going against everyone that fought for him to win just because of the Epstein files and being at war with Iran for Israel.” They quote: “We didn’t leave MAGA. MAGA left them. Clearly, you are insane. Time to resign, Donald or face the twenty fifth. You are mentally and emotionally unfit to be POTUS.” Additional insults follow: “You are so childish. Clearly, the truth has triggered you being one of your biggest supporters. I am done with you and your lies.” They claim Trump bent the knee to a monster, leaving a mess in the country, and, finally, describe a recurring social media pattern: “this was the most brutal and sadly a recurring response all across social media.” Speaker 0 adds that a tweet about Charlie suggested he would be on a list if they hadn’t killed him, asserting that “there is no truth and there is no loyalty within you.”

One speaker recounts that he did not like Bibi Netanyahu, describing Netanyahu as a destructive force and saying he was appalled by what was happening in Gaza, and that Netanyahu was using the United States to prosecute wars for the benefit of his country, which he called shameful and embarrassing and bad for the United States, a view he resented. He also notes that he didn’t hate Netanyahu. After that speech, there was a sharp backlash against Charlie Kirk and, to a lesser extent, the speaker, with Kirk having about $100 million in donors and being heavily dependent on them because his project was nonprofit. They went after him and tormented him, while a small, very intense group offended by the speech tormented Charlie Kirk until the day he died.

US senators. Last year, 93 out of 100 US senators were people whose campaigns had been funded by Israel, APAC, and the Israel lobby. 93 out of 100 US senators were taking money from a group that represents a foreign government and foreign interests in order to operate our government on behalf of someone else, and they all work here in this building. This is representative Ro Khanna from California, and he does not take APEC money according to their website TrackAPEC. Here's what he had to say. "It's too much. I mean, it's too much. If you have people who have a particular point of view, in Apex case, they're basically whatever Netanyahu does is right. That's their point of view. And they're saying, okay, you don't take that view, we may come after you. We may have millions of dollars spent against you." Now ask any American content creator what the scariest subject to cover is, and the answer is Israel. Even YouTubers I know will say their channels were shadowbanned for months after covering them. And folks, the plot around free speech thickens. News just broke that Larry Ellison, cofounder of Oracle, will be buying TikTok, a platform where young people can freely exchange unfiltered ideas. No Israel connection here. Right? Wrong. Ellison is one of the IDF's largest private donors, giving the army tens of millions of dollars through Friends of the IDF, a nonprofit that brands itself as a nonpolitical, nonmilitary organization, but somehow also is the official US partner of Israel soldiers.

The speaker asserts that ADL, APAC, and UJA Federation are “literally arms of Mossad that operate with basically carte blanche.” They claim APAC is “the lobby that buys our congress,” ADL is “the legislative apparatus that tries to erode our civil liberties and our constitutionally protected rights to legislate protections for Jews and Jews alone,” and UJA Federation is “the fixer organization that funds and fixes and does basically all of the ops,” with “nine eleven” as a notable example. They reference early 2024, noting Kat Williams’ interview with Shannon Sharpe where Williams said “all lies will be exposed this year,” and anticipate developments around child trafficking and Hollywood controversies involving figures like P. Diddy, suggesting these issues would come to a head. They mention that when Trump announced, Lee Zeldin was described as being “funded by literally those same people, the AIG's, the Seth Clarman's, the Daniel Lobes, the fucking UJA Federations.” They name the third person as Elise Stefanik, claiming she is “literally founded by the same funded by the same people,” and that Stefanik is “on involved with National Endowment for Democracy,” which allegedly “melted half of West Hollywood with the fucking fires in collusion with Karen Bass and the former legislative director of APAC, Kenneth Wallach.” The fourth person named is Kristi Noem, described as having “passed antisemitism laws of within the borders of South Dakota.” The speaker then says, “we get Trump in office,” and mentions Kash Patel being nominated for FBI director. Patel is quoted as saying on some network that “we need to commit to protecting need Americans to wake up and prioritize truth,” and the speaker adds that “That is the last fucking thing that any of us want want to hear right.”

Speaker labels Nick a fraud who doesn’t care about stopping Israel and suggests he recently got 'the call.' He asks whether Nick has ever urged a boycott, shown a BDS list, called to vote against Zionist politicians, funded Gaza aid, or organized his audience against Israel, and finds nothing. He claims Nick is 'a pressure valve for critics of Israel' rather than an organizer, noting Nick 'spews rhetoric' and clout-chases against pro-Israel conservatives. The speaker recalls Nick’s statement: 'The whole world is turned against Israel, and yet they're able to keep doing what they do. And the reason why is because they are more organized, more sullied than any other group.' He argues Nick has never organized his audience meaningfully, cites the Charlie Kirk shooting, and Nick’s dismissal of the 'Israel theory' as suspicious amid fan-talk connections with Ben Shapiro. He questions Nick’s motives, suggests he’s been co-opted, and plugs Substack with 'free Palestine.'

The speaker states that the promise was to put America first, and believes there are still voices in the administration, such as J.D. Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, and RFK Junior, who could prevail. However, they were not persuasive in this case, but somebody was. The speaker claims that APAC, the Israeli lobby in congress, is very persuasive. The speaker observes that their colleagues' social media feeds all look the same, tweeting the same message about supporting Israel.

Speaker expresses disbelief at why Netanyahu—"an absolutely disgusting warmonger, who has dragged us into terrible wars, who is committing massive war crimes"—gets 57 standing ovations in the US Congress. He asks if the causes are "the APAC lobby, the Israel lobby? Well, partly," "Is it blackmail by Israel? Because there's no doubt a lot of credible claims of Epstein and more about blackmail," "Is it direct bribes?" "Is it fear of American politicians?" "Is it the mainstream media, which for a lot of reasons owned by a lot of billionaires that tend to be rather arted Zionists?" "Is it the larger Christian Zionist vote base, which is also a real thing?" He says, "none of it really adds up." "it's not in America's interest" to be "isolated in the world together with a murderous rogue state." He calls Israel "the most lawless state in the whole world right now," "at war in seven fronts." He notes UN exposure: "the UN... Israeli politicians come and they yell at the whole rest of the world," while "the US representative says, yes. Yes. We we are with Israel." Finally: "first, it's disgusting. Second, it is no rational basis. And third, if it is the money, the lobbying, the mass media propaganda, the really strange beliefs of some people, whatever it is, even all of that, doesn't add up because a president of The United States should be able to figure this out a little bit better."

250 million Americans are not garbage. Recently, Kamala has compared her political opponents to history's worst mass murderers. During a campaign call, Joe Biden expressed his true feelings about our supporters, calling them garbage. This is unacceptable. My response to Joe and Kamala is clear: you cannot lead America if you do not love Americans.

Speaker rails against JD Vance, asking why 'this fat guy who's married to a jeet and works for a gay CIA fed' would be allowed to grow, claiming 'The J.D. Vance operation is in full swing.' He contrasts gym talk of Andrew Tate and Bronze Age Pervert with 'a fat race mixer' married to a jeet and 'mentored by a Jewish neocon and a gay fed Peter Thiel' who is 'in bed with Israel.' He repeats: 'your guy is literally a fat gay race trader who married a jeet, who works for a gay fed, a fed informant, a CIA contractor mentored by a Jewish neocon,' and notes 'Peter Thiel's an openly gay man who informed to the FBI and works for the CIA.' He adds: 'Tucker told Trump, if you don't pick Vance, the deep state will kill you.' Super chats with a joke about 'Gripers' and Vance's kids.

Speaker 0 introduces the scene and prepares to expose the crowd’s current view of the person being addressed. Speaker 1 asserts that someone is being fed wrong information, likening the situation to Grima Wormtongue. He says half of the people he grew up with in this movement are not on Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin’s team, insisting they are not neocons or war hawks. He emphasizes America first over MAGA and states that America first is what MAGA was supposed to be, and that the addressed person is merely the vessel for it. Speaker 2 acknowledges serious flaws in the addressed figure, including insider trading, and expresses relief that the speaker is differentiating themselves. They say they do not want to be associated with the addressed person, describing him as a “sinking, burning ship” who was not loyal to his original mission or to America. They claim he has become a “creature of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu,” with enemies now serving as courtiers who lie and flatter him to hear what he wants. They state they are not among those people. Speaker 3 argues that the addressed person should not be in office any longer, advocating for the twenty-fifth amendment, saying he is not loyal to this country or to anybody except for “that little country in the Middle East.” They suggest the last president to tell that country no was JFK, and compare the addressed person’s actions to those of JFK’s era, asking how he can call others losers when he loses to Netanyahu “every single day” and questioning when he last told them no. Speaker 0 notes that Brigitte Macron is said to be more beautiful than Candace Owens, remarking that the claim is widely circulated online and across the political spectrum. They remark that the message was a “basket of deplorables” moment and that even on Truth Social, the addressed person’s platform, people have turned against him. They reference several responses: a call to step back and reassess who is whispering in the addressed person’s ear and to return to America first; a claim that MAGA left them; accusations that the person is insane and should resign or face the twenty-fifth; charges of mental and emotional unfitness for POTUS; descriptions of the person as childish; and a suggestion that truth has triggered him among his strongest supporters. The aggregate social-media reactions cited include: someone criticizing him for siding with Iran and Israel, claims of “you are going against everyone that fought for him to win,” and statements that “Take a look at this tweet about Charlie,” where people suggested Charlie would be on a harmful list if he hadn’t been killed. The underlying implication is that there is no truth or loyalty within the addressed person. Overall, the dialogue frames a divide between factions who believe in core America-first principles, criticisms of loyalty and allegiance, concerns about influence and corruption, and a climate of hostile public reaction and rumor.

Adam Schiff is described as a corrupt, shameful, and heinous individual who represents the face of failure. Everything he has devoted his life to has been debunked, discredited, and discarded. His sole achievement was fighting a losing war against Donald Trump. Now, Trump is in the White House, and Schiff leads a dying and dethroned movement. The speaker questions what the Democrat party is fighting against and trying to stop.

My issue with my colleagues is that they have all supported Donald Trump for personal gain. Ron DeSantis begged for Trump's endorsement and attacked him in his book. Chris Christie lobbied for COVID money and prepared Trump for debates. The real enemy is the deep state that Trump tried to challenge. I'm the only one on this stage who can speak the truth. January 6th looks like an inside job, the government lied about Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11, the great replacement theory is part of the Democratic Party's platform, Big Tech stole the 2020 election, and the National Security Establishment stole the 2016 election from Trump with the false Trump Russia collusion hoax. We need someone who won't flip-flop and criticize Trump when it's convenient.

My issue with my colleagues is that they have all supported Donald Trump for personal gain. Ron DeSantis begged for Trump's endorsement and attacked him in his book. Chris Christie lobbied for COVID money and prepared Trump for debates. The real enemy is the deep state that Trump tried to challenge. I'm the only one who can speak the truth: January 6th was an inside job, the government lied about Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11, the great replacement theory is part of the Democratic Party's platform, Big Tech stole the 2020 election, and the National Security Establishment falsely claimed Trump colluded with Russia in 2016. We need someone who won't flip-flop and criticize Trump when it's convenient.

I think Bibi is completely evil and completely destructive, "hurting The United States" and "destroying his own country" and I think he imperils the world. They believe they're gonna try and blow up Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount to "build a third temple," risking "global war." They ask, "What's Lindsey Graham's excuse?" and "What's Ted Cruz's excuse?" They quote Cruz: "I was elected. My main goal was to help Israel." I came into congress with the stated intention of being the leading defender of Israel in the United States Senate. "I've worked every day to do that." "Really? Ted, how did you get on a platform ... my main goal is to help another country? This is deranged. Where's our self respect? I don't want you to think about it. You know, I'm not interested. I'm very interested in how American leaders could betray their own country. That enrages me."

Speaker claims: "Israel has an overwhelming lobby over the United States government, and we have unconditionally supported them." He cites "BB Netanyahu came to our congress in the nineties, told us a list of countries that we need to take out. Some were Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, etcetera." He adds "Through those wars, we have lost trillions of dollars" and "We have lost American servicemen." He asserts "They don't teach about the USS Liberty, where Israel literally came, blew up an American ship because they want us to get in their war with, Egypt and they don't teach that in school." He asks "Why is there this societal taboo around criticisms of Israel? For example, APAC doesn't have to register as a foreign lobby, but like the Australia lobby does. And the it just That should be changed. I That should be corrected." Finally, "Look. I I am not gonna say Israel should have any special privileges. None."

"Yeah. You can have enough satisfaction to reelect Ted Cruz. You cannot reelect Lindsey Graham. Not because they're evil. I'm not even saying they are, but because they've betrayed their most basic commitment, which is to our country." "Have you looked at resumes of congressmen and senators? Like, you're more qualified to be there than the and I'm more qualified to be there than they are." He argues, "Ted Cruz has it's it's really interesting because I see when I look at Ted, who I've known for long long before he got into politics, and I've known him well, and there are things about him I like, but I I see a mirror almost, like I see so the problem with Ted Cruz is he has a high verbal IQ." He adds, "there is a huge difference between the ability to explain something or fluency with English and wisdom, like true wisdom." He warns, "don’t mistake verbal intelligence for the sort of intelligence that matters because it's not the same," and cites a rural acquaintance who is "so dyslexic he can barely speak English… is twice as smart as Ted Cruz."

The speaker claims ADL, APAC, and UJA Federation are "arms of Mossad." APAC allegedly buys Congress, ADL erodes civil liberties to legislate protections for Jews, and UJA Federation funds operations, including 9/11. The speaker connects Trump's endorsements of Lee Zeldin, Elise Stefanik, and Kristi Noem to these groups. Zeldin is allegedly funded by AIG, Seth Clarman, Daniel Loeb, and UJA Federation. Stefanik is allegedly funded by the same people and involved with the National Endowment for Democracy, which the speaker connects to fires in West Hollywood with Karen Bass and Kenneth Wallach, a former legislative director of APAC. Noem passed antisemitism laws in South Dakota. The speaker expresses concern about these endorsements and Trump's nomination of Kash Patel for FBI director, who the speaker says called for prioritizing truth.

Speaker 0 attacks Dinesh D'Souza and an unknown figure, calling them 'elite ivory towers' and noting D'Souza 'made six documentaries' and has a 'membership at Mar a Lago' costing '$250,000.' They deride 'low peasant trailer park trash' and say '53% of my paycheck' goes to a government 'inject my children with deadly bio fucking weapons,' adding that 'The only one who's actually seems like they're holding their own... is Bobby Kennedy.' Speaker 1 warns that 'those guys are trying to take MAGA out' the MAGA coalition that included 'Elon Musk and Joe Rogan and Tulsi and Bobby and me.' Speaker 2 argues 'this is a gift to radical Islam because Israel is fighting radical Islam' and cautions against breaking 'our alliance with Israel,' noting 'I'm Christian, I'm not Jewish' and 'Our family has been giving a $100 a year to Jerusalem for biblical archaeology.' Speaker 0 blasts 'Israel is a terrorist state' and condemns the administration for 'selling us out to Israel' and criticizes the films as ineffective, ending with 'Pipe down.'

I attended a TPUSA faith event expecting politics to be shaped by biblical principles, but the experience did not meet that expectation. The event opened with a speaker who immediately criticized Candace Owens, calling her evil and antisemitic, and stating that what she’s doing is evil. I wanted to leave, but security was intense—armed men were stationed all around the venue, and there was even an armed man on stage with a hand on his gun. The security presence made me uncomfortable. Inside, the speaker talked extensively about Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, portraying them as evil and antisemitic. He argued that Christians should support Israel because Jesus was a Jew and Judaism underpins Christianity, while claiming that what Israel is doing is evil and corrupt. He suggested that refusing to support Israel would be anti-Semitic. I disagree with this framing, and it struck me as not aligning with what I expect from biblical politics. I also noted that the speaker referenced Charlie Kirk (though I recall it as Charlie Cook) and suggested that Kirk would not endorse the positions being discussed, referencing Kirk’s and Owens’ friendship and his past critiques of Israel. Throughout, the speaker’s preaching style resembled name-calling rather than traditional preaching. He labeled the political left as “idiots,” “freaks,” and “losers,” and spent much of the time denigrating liberals rather than offering constructive biblical guidance. This approach felt discordant with Christian teachings I associate with Jesus, who, as the speaker himself stated he loves, “ate with sinners,” including prostitutes. I felt the message was spreading hate rather than embodying the inclusive example I expect from Christian doctrine. A major concern was the impact on young attendees. Teenagers and young Christians appeared to be absorbing the message, treating this figure as a leader and a future guide for their faith, which raised alarms about further division within the Christian community. In summary, the event did not teach the biblical political perspectives I anticipated. The emphasis was on discrediting the left and on framing Israel in terms of Jewish loyalty, rather than engaging with broader Christian concerns. The speaker’s approach—name-calling of political opponents, calls for aggressive stances, and a heavy focus on left-wing critique—left me feeling that the session did not align with constructive faith-based political discussion. The speaker also touched on issues like men in women’s sports, but stated this was not the most important topic for Christians to discuss amid broader national concerns.

The transcript presents a fringe, highly charged discussion about perceived Israeli influence in the United States, Trump’s shift from “America first” to “Israel first,” and related political dynamics. The speakers repeatedly claim that Israel controls the U.S. government and American foreign policy, with several variations such as “Israel's controlling our government,” “Israel controls us,” and “The government of Israel controls The United States.” They assert that Israel has run American foreign policy for thirty years and that the United States government is taking edicts from Israel, describing it as an “Israel first administration.” As the discussion progresses, the speakers describe discomfort with America’s relationship with Israeli leaders, calling the Israeli government a “satanic regime” and suggesting it seeks to cause pain. They contrast Trump’s campaign promises of “America first” with his alleged current actions, arguing that he has escalated a war on behalf of Israel and turned on earlier allies who did not toe the Israel-first line. They claim Trump has allied with politicians and influencers who are unpopular with his former base, and that he endorses a “massive war on behalf of Israel that he promised he would never start.” They point to specific figures affected by these changes, including those who supported or criticized Trump and Israel. The discussion names individuals and entities linked to the shift, including Charlie Kirk. They claim Kirk was influential against the Iran war and withdrew support for Israel prior to his death; Erica Kirk allegedly took over TPUSA to continue Charlie Kirk’s legacy but allegedly did so in a way that opposes Kirk’s earlier stance, endorsing Massey’s Israel-funded opponent and labeling Massey a “rhino.” They argue donors pressured Kirk to change his stance, leading TPUSA to distance itself from Kirk’s legacy and to align with an Israel-funding candidate backed by Trump. The speakers claim broad consequences for Trump’s base: those who call for justice with the Epstein files, those suspicious of Israel, and those who question Erica Kirk are said to have been blackballed or marginalized. Conversely, supporters of the new Trump are described as urging to move on from Epstein, unconditionally supporting Israel, and reacting strongly to any critique of Erica Kirk. A recurring theme is a critique of Zionism as a political ideology; the speakers distinguish between “Israel” and “Zionism” and argue Zionism controls both the U.S. and Israel. They challenge religious claims that Israel is “God’s chosen people,” offering a Christian critique of that idea and asserting separations of church and state in the U.S. The discussion includes references to alleged silencing mechanisms, narrative control, and tribalism as a “SIOP” framework, describing three characteristics: silencing opposing ideas, a strong narrative, and tribalism. They illustrate these with examples such as censorship of anti-Israel sentiment or questions about Israel, accusations about a fixed narrative like “Israel is our greatest ally,” and the exclusion of dissenting voices. The speakers conclude by asserting that while Israel does not control the U.S., Zionism appears to influence both countries, and that the root issue is the influence of Zionism rather than a single country’s leadership. They urge viewers to speak up while suggesting the changes reflect a broader, troubling shift in political power, ending with a night-time sign-off and personal recovery product plugs being referenced but later deemphasized.

The issue is a lot of the personnel problems are still there, but at a more subtle. "An ambassador Huckabee, to me, is still part of that same grouping in terms of the damage it can do in our foreign policy." "There were tweets from several weeks ago where he was attacking The UK prime minister, ambassador was." "we're burning diplomatic capital left and right. Australia, The UK, Canada, with all these US allies considering recognizing the Palestinian state, and we're going out there attacking them one by one on behalf of Israel." "I’m for moving in a bunch of different radical directions, like banning high interest loans." "But what I'm not in favor of is moving in radical directions on behalf of a foreign country whose interests are not the same as ours."

Cory Booker was mentioned and the speaker was asked for their thoughts on him saying "kick them in the shins." The speaker mistakenly thought it was Eric Holder who said that, and made a comment about all of them looking alike.

The speaker does not like Trump but dislikes his opponent more. In 1972, while interning at a DC think tank, the speaker heard Joe Biden give a speech outside the State Capitol Building in Dover. According to the speaker, Biden said, "Negro children are like roaches...they will infest [the schools] and they will never be gotten out." The speaker claims Biden said Negroes were animals who turned the streets into jungles and that Biden and Senator Eastland had a plan to put these Negro animals in zoos. The speaker also recalls that the 1981 crime bill, along with actions by Biden, Eastland, and Dennis, abolished federal parole, meaning a five-year sentence resulted in 56 months of incarceration.

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.