reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Klaus Schwab and the International Finance family are accused of working with Pope Francis to dismantle traditional society and the church. The Jesuits are seen as playing a key role in this conspiracy, as a Jesuit is now Pope for the first time in history.

"You cannot be a practicing Catholic and be part of the current Democratic party knowing that this group is actively working for the killing of the unborn." "You cannot be part of a group or an association that's focus is to bring about moral evils." "This is why for centuries, the Catholic church has made it very clear that you cannot be a freemason because there are foundational principles of the freemasons that are contrary to the Catholic faith." "There is a moral obligation here not to be part of them regardless of whatever other good things you might think the Democratic Party is trying to bring about." "Murder is a line you cannot cross."

The discussion centers on the way lawmakers reference religion in foreign policy and whether that approach is effective. Speaker 0 asks the audience how many think a respected lawmaker like Ted Cruz uses the Bible to justify aid to Israel, even if he doesn’t know the verse, and whether that is the best approach. Speaker 1 responds by referencing Ted Cruz’s Genesis twelve three, and notes that many find that off-putting when contrasted with the New Testament, specifically Paul’s writings about the new flesh not being the same as the people in the old covenant. Speaker 1 asks, “Yes. Romans nine?” and agrees with the sentiment. Speaker 0 then asks Speaker 1 if they are Catholic, to which Speaker 1 replies that they are converting Catholic from Judaism, revealing that they are ethnically Jewish. The exchange confirms Speaker 1’s Jewish ethnicity. Speaker 0 brings up concerns about APAC, asking if Speaker 1 has concerns about APAC. Speaker 1 confirms that they do. Speaker 0 notes that some people tell them that criticizing APAC equates to being anti-Semitic, asking whether this is true. Speaker 1 calls that notion ridiculous and says it’s great to have concern for one’s country. The conversation shifts to APAC’s influence. Speaker 0 presents a characterization (as a possible summary of Speaker 1’s view) that APAC represents a form of prioritization that cuts in line, away from the American people. Speaker 0 asks whether this is a fair summary. Speaker 1 answers affirmatively, “100%.” Finally, they articulate the core idea: the public votes and are citizens, but a separate group is described as receiving higher priority for whatever reasons. Speaker 1’s agreement underscores a shared concern that APAC’s influence creates a prioritization that bypasses the ordinary American electorate.

The Pope recently criticized the government's deportation efforts, calling it a disgrace. In response, I emphasize that as a lifelong Catholic, the Pope should focus on issues within the Catholic Church. He can protect the Vatican with its wall, but Americans deserve border security too. Securing the border saves lives—fewer women are victimized by cartels, fewer children drown, and fewer Americans die from fentanyl overdoses. The Pope needs to understand this reality. The wall around the Vatican is impressive, even more so than Trump's wall. Thank you for having me. Next, we’ll discuss trade and manufacturing with Peter Navarro.

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

As a lifelong Catholic, baptized and confirmed, I believe the Pope should focus on fixing the Catholic Church. Instead of focusing on border enforcement, he should leave that to us. He has a wall around the Vatican to protect himself and his people, but doesn't want the United States to have a wall. I wish he'd stick to the Catholic Church and fix that, and leave border enforcement to us.

Contradictory updates about Jorge Mario Gregorio's medical condition are raising concerns about Vatican communications. Some believe the Pope is already dead and the Vatican and the "Bergogleian deep church" are in a panic to find a successor to continue the "Bergoglian revolution," as some have interest in concealing their crimes with Bergoglio. A scandal involving USAID funds has exposed the Catholic Church's involvement in the "lucrative business of immigration." It is necessary to prevent the progressive hierarchy from ensuring that one of their own succeeds Bergoglio. Before it's too late, it is essential to shed light on Bergoglio's "usurpation" and the Catholic Church's occupation by a corrupt hierarchy aiming to destroy it from within.

Pope Francis recently sparked controversy by allegedly making a shocking statement about Jesus during a Christmas Eve ceremony at an Italian prison, suggesting he hopes Jesus would be killed by Jews again. This event involved a symbolic ritual, interpreted by some as satanic, where the pope opened a "portal of darkness." Critics argue that Francis is leading the Church astray, promoting a globalist agenda, and undermining traditional Christian values. He has also been accused of supporting depopulation efforts and fostering interfaith relations that challenge biblical teachings. Allegations of his connections with influential global figures raise further concerns about his true intentions. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has labeled him a false prophet, claiming he collaborates with globalist agendas to dismantle traditional society and the Church itself.

The World Economic Forum's agenda to dissolve traditional society, finds in Bergoglio an enthusiastic collaborator who misuses his moral authority to promote it outside the Church. While supporting the Church, he aims to dismantle it, substituting it with a philanthropic organization with Masonic roots. This strategy applies to both civil and religious spheres, reinforcing the secret agreement, the criminal alliance, between the deep state and the deep church. The Jesuit's role in this scheme appears crucial. It's not accidental that, for the first time, a Jesuit sits on the papacy.

The speaker argues that winning in political struggle is currently nearly impossible, and that Donald Trump grasped this reality in a way that others have not. They say, perhaps uniquely in the Western world, Trump understands how to handle the confrontation with the deep state, and they acknowledge Viktor Orban and Bekailly Malay as potential examples of others who have challenged entrenched power. However, the speaker emphasizes that Trump embodies “the playbook of how you need to behave,” suggesting that his approach is a model for contemporary politics. The speaker contends that many politicians are clinging to a dated strategy. They describe a past era—the seventies and eighties—when the prevailing belief was that it was possible to reason with the opposition, find compromises, be bipartisan, persuade people, and sell policies in the media through traditional pitching and persuasion. According to the speaker, that strategy cannot be adopted today because the opposition has changed. In contrast to those bygone expectations, the speaker asserts that the current opposition is not composed of social democrats who merely want to raise taxes or increase public spending. Instead, they describe the current opposition as aiming to destroy Western civilization. The speaker emphasizes the severity of this shift in aims, framing the opposition as having existential goals that go beyond ordinary political disagreement. Throughout, the core claims center on a diagnosis of a strategic pivot in modern politics: the old playbook of negotiation and persuasion is no longer viable because the opposition has fundamentally changed its aims, adopting objectives that are presented as existential threats to Western civilization. The speaker positions Trump as an exemplar of the new, effective approach to navigating this transformed political landscape, highlighting the perceived necessity of a more combative and uncompromising posture in confronting opponents who, in the speaker’s view, seek to undermine foundational Western values.

The contradictory updates on Jorge Mario Gregorio's medical condition are raising concerns about Vatican communications. Some believe the Pope is already dead and the Vatican is concealing this to ensure a successor continues the "Bergoglian revolution." The Vatican and the "Bergogleian deep church" are allegedly trying to gather support among cardinals for a successor who will continue Bergoglio's agenda. This comes amidst a scandal involving USAID funds, exposing the Catholic Church's alleged complicity in the "lucrative business of immigration." There is a need to prevent the progressive hierarchy from installing another "usurper" on the throne of Peter. Before Bergoglio's legacy is finalized, it is essential to expose his "usurpation" and the occupation of the Catholic Church by a corrupt hierarchy aiming to destroy it from within.

A person asks why the speaker is called the "black pope," and the speaker says the term started in the nineteenth century and is related to power. The speaker clarifies that he does not have power. The person then references the Jesuit high oath, which they claim includes a promise to seek war against heretics, protestants, and liberals, and to spare no one while hanging, wasting, boiling, and flaying enemies alive. The speaker states they have never seen this oath before. The person says the oath is in the congressional record.

The speaker asserts that “The Bush regime was front for the Vatican” and that “The most important enemy this country has today, people will never understand it, but the biggest enemy that this nation today has is the Vatican.” They question the origin of the nation’s founders, asking, “What do you think the founding fathers … where did they come from?” and answer, “they came from Europe.” The speaker traces history back to “twenty five hundred years Rome under the Caesars of Rome,” stating that “after the fall of the Caesars in the fourth century and with the coming of the Vatican in the fifth century,” Europe has been dominated for that same span. The claim is then made that “All of Europe has been dominated for over two thousand five hundred years by Rome and Europe has dominated the world for two thousand five hundred years.” The speaker urges listeners to “start looking at the Holy father, and you better start finding out the connection between the Vatican and the Nazi party of Adolf,” tying the Vatican to broader historical influence and power. The overarching assertion is that “The Bush regime was front for the Vatican,” and that the Vatican represents “the most important enemy this country has today.”

They were lying and harming the country, violating their oaths. The Pope recently criticized the government's deportation efforts. My message to him is that he should focus on fixing issues within the Catholic Church. The Vatican has its own wall for protection, while the American people face different challenges. Securing the border is crucial; it saves lives by reducing crime and preventing tragedies, such as women being assaulted by cartels and children drowning. The Pope should recognize that a secure border benefits everyone. The wall around the Vatican is impressive, even more so than Trump's wall.

- The discussion opens with a critique of how public health authorities in the United States and much of the media discouraged experimentation with COVID-19 treatments, instead pushing vaccination and portraying other approaches as dangerous. The hosts ask why treatments were sidelined and treated as heretical to question. - Speaker 1 explains that the core idea was to stamp out “vaccine hesitation,” which he frames not as a purely scientific issue but as a form of heresy. He notes a broad literature on vaccine hesitancy and contrasts it with the perception of the vaccine as a liberating savior. He points to a Vatican €20 silver coin (2022) commemorating the COVID-19 vaccine, described by Vatican catalogs as “a boy prepares to receive the Eucharist,” which the speakers interpret as an overlay of religious iconography with vaccination imagery. They also reference Diego Rivera’s mural in Detroit, interpreted as depicting the vaccine as a Eucharist, and a South African church banner reading “even the blood of Christ cannot protect you, get vaccinated,” highlighting what they see as provocative uses of religious symbolism to promote vaccination. - They claim that the Biden administration’s COVID Vaccine Corps distributed billions of dollars to major sports leagues (NFL, MLB) and that many mainline churches reportedly received money to push vaccination, with many clergy not opposing the push. The implication is that monetary incentives influenced public figures and organizations to advocate for vaccines, contributing to a climate in which questioning orthodoxy was difficult. - The speakers discuss the social dynamics around vaccine “heresy,” using Aaron Rodgers’ experience with isolation and shaming in the NFL and Novak Djokovic’s experiences in Australia to illustrate how prominent individuals who questioned or fell outside the orthodoxy faced punitive pressure. They compare this to a Reformation-era conflict over doctrinal correctness and describe a psychology of stigmatizing dissent as a tool to enforce conformity. - They argue the imperative driving institutions was the belief that the vaccine was the central, non-negotiable public-health objective, seemingly above other medical considerations. The central question they raise is why vaccines became the sole priority, seemingly overriding a broader, more nuanced evaluation of medical options and individual risk. - The conversation shifts to epistemology and the nature of science. Speaker 1 suggests medicine often relies on orthodoxies and presuppositions, rather than purely empirical processes. He recounts a Kantian view that interpretation depends on preexisting categories, and he uses this to argue that medical decision-making can be constrained by established doctrines, which may obscure questions about optimization and safety. - They recount the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and discuss Sara Sotomayor’s dissent, which argued that liability exposure is a key incentive for safety and improvement in vaccine development. They argue that the current system creates minimal liability for manufacturers, reducing the incentive to optimize safety, and they use this to question how the system encourages continuous safety improvements. - The hosts recount the early-treatment movement led by Peter McCullough and others, including a Senate hearing organized by Ron Johnson in November 2020 to discuss early-treatment options with FDA-approved drugs like hydroxychloroquine. They criticize what they describe as aggressive pushback against such approaches, noting that McCullough faced professional sanctions and lawsuits despite presenting peer-reviewed literature. - They return to the concept of orthodoxy and dogma, arguing that the medical establishment often suppresses dissent, citing YouTube removing a McCullough interview and the broader pattern of silencing challenge to the vaccine narrative. They stress that the social and institutional systems prize conformity and punish those who deviate, creating a climate of distrust toward official health bodies. - The discussion broadens into metaphysical and philosophical territory, with references to the Grand Inquisitor from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. They propose that elites—whether religious, political, or scientific—tend to prefer “taking care” of people through control rather than preserving individual responsibility and free will. The Grand Inquisitor tale is used to illustrate a recurring human temptation: to replace personal liberty with a protected, paternalistic order. - They discuss messenger RNA (mRNA) technology as a central manifestation of Promethean or Luciferian intellect—humans attempting to “read and write in the language of God.” They describe the scientific arc from transcription and translation to mRNA vaccines, noting Francis Collins’s The Language of God and the idea of humans “coding life.” They caution that mRNA vaccines involve injecting genetic material and point to the symbolic and ritual power of vaccination as a form of modern sacrament. - The speakers emphasize that the mRNA approach represents both a profound scientific achievement and a source of deep concern. They discuss fertility signals and potential adverse effects, including myocarditis in young people, and cite the July 2021 NEJM case study as highlighting safety concerns for myocarditis in adolescent males. They reference the FDA deliberative-committee discussions, noting that some influential voices publicly questioned the risk-benefit calculus for young people, yet faced pressure or dismissal within the orthodox framework. - They describe post-hoc investigations and testimonies suggesting that adverse events (like myocarditis) might have been downplayed or obscured, and they assert that public trust in health institutions has eroded as a result. They mention ongoing debates about whether vaccine-induced changes might affect future generations, referencing studies about transcripts of mRNA in cancer cells and liver cells, and they stress the need for independent scrutiny by scientists not “entranced” by the vaccine program. - The dialogue returns to the broader human condition: a tension between curiosity and restraint, knowledge and humility. They return to Dostoevsky’s moral questions about free will, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge, concluding that scientific hubris can lead to dangerous consequences when it overrides open inquiry and accountability. - In closing, while the guests reflect on past missteps and the need for integrity in medicine, they underscore the ongoing questions about how evidence is interpreted, how dissent is treated, and how society balances scientific progress with humility, transparency, and respect for individual judgment.

Contradictory updates on Jorge Mario Gregorio's medical condition are raising concerns about Vatican communications. Some believe the Pope is already dead and the information is being concealed. The Vatican and the "Bergogleian deep Church" are allegedly in a panic to gather support among cardinals for a successor who will continue the "Bergogleian revolution," as some seek to bury their crimes with Bergoglio's. In the United States, the US Bishops Conference is reportedly clashing with the Trump administration following a scandal involving the Agency for International Development, which has exposed the Catholic Church's alleged complicity in the "lucrative business of immigration." It is considered necessary to prevent the progressive hierarchy from ensuring that Bergoglio's successor is one of their own. Before Bergoglio's departure, it is essential to shed light on his alleged misdeeds and the occupation of the Catholic Church by a corrupt hierarchy aiming to destroy it from within.

The Pope recently criticized the government's deportation efforts, calling it a disgrace. In response, I emphasize that as a lifelong Catholic, he should focus on the issues within the Catholic Church. The Vatican has its own wall for protection, so he should understand the importance of securing our borders. A secure border saves lives by reducing crime, preventing the trafficking of women and children, and decreasing drug overdoses. The Pope needs to recognize that securing the border is essential for the safety of all. We also noted the impressive wall around the Vatican, which surpasses Trump's wall. Thanks for having me on. Next, we’ll hear from Peter Navarro about trade and manufacturing.

Pope Francis made a controversial statement during a Christmas Eve ceremony at an Italian prison, suggesting that if Jesus were to return, he hopes he would be killed by Jews again. This event, described as a symbolic and possibly satanic ritual, marks the first time a pope has opened a sacred portal in such a setting. Insiders claim the pope plans to open more portals in the future. Francis has also expressed troubling views, including discouraging personal relationships with Jesus and advocating for depopulation alongside globalist leaders. Critics argue that he is undermining Christianity and aligning with dark spiritual agendas. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has warned that Francis is a false prophet involved in a conspiracy against humanity, suggesting he is collaborating with globalist agendas to dismantle traditional society and the Church itself.

Speaker 0 discusses an image Trump posted on Truth Social: the classic Jesus in triumphant robes healing an injured soldier, with a flame of life in one hand and soldiers (including a praying woman) looking up to him, implying Jesus-like status. He notes a comment correcting this interpretation, but argues that this is a theme from the White House, Hagstaff, and Trump’s Pentecostal evangelical adviser, asserting that Trump is Jesus. He expresses a strong negative reaction to the turn of events, saying Democrats are the enemy and that Trump should be good, not bad. He references Tucker Carlson's question about whether Trump could be the antichrist and states that this is not a Christian spirit. He acknowledges that some social posts attributed to Trump aren’t necessarily his, but maintains that Trump should be clear that there is only one king, Jesus, and explains a joke about Trump with the pope. He criticizes the narrative as turning people off Trump and claims Trump did not invent the Jesus theme, noting at least ten instances last month of “Jesus out of the White House.” He references a threat-escalation letter and a derailed peace process, asserting that the events led to inflation, a failed recovery plan, and a resulting crisis. He urges Trump to clarify and deescalate, and claims Netanyahu’s involvement killed negotiations with Kushner, contributing to an unstable situation. He asks listeners not to deny or gaslight the claim and emphasizes the need for action. Speaker 1 interrupts with an advertisement pitch for two compounds, claiming they will change lives: T3 pure atomic iodine and ultramethylene blue, described as life-changing health products claimed to boost mitochondria and address cognitive issues related to iodine deficiency. The speaker asserts the products are medical grade and cites benefits and discounts for VIP members, linking the promotion to funds for “the info war.” The ad stresses immediacy and insists compliance would be a “game changer,” urging viewers to purchase from theauctionstore.com, though specific promotional details are not elaborated beyond the claims and calls to action. Overall, the main discussion centers on Trump’s portrayal as Jesus in political messaging, alleged promotion by associates, and a call for public clarification, followed by an embedded promotional segment for health supplements.