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.

The speaker claims the Israeli war room is trying to get the FBI after them because they published a video arguing that Elias Rodriguez's elimination of two Zionist officials was an act of resistance, not an antisemitic terrorist attack. The speaker says this isn't the first time the FBI has come to their door; it also happened in November when a Zionist smeared them by sending synagogues in their city false bomb threats in the speaker's name. The speaker expresses anger towards the FBI, the feds, the Israeli war room, and accuses them of being traitors to humanity.

- "nobody's come forward with any pictures of the Dodge Challenger leading me to believe there is no Dodge Challenger." - "Maybe it's Tyler." - "Isn't this the famous intersection? No? Is there a back pathway that way?" - "Or does he turn here at this intersection at the LDS Mormon church, which means he would be on the LDS Mormon Church cameras, security cameras." - "Private property they say." - "This to me seems like something that I might have seen in a video or two where the cameras are removed and the FBI confiscates the cameras." - "Why did they do that? Why didn't they just publish all the video from the whole day?" - "There it is. There's the camera. I'm giving the camera a big salute, and you keep going that direction."

Recently, in January, a member of the Senate Intel Committee tried to block someone from getting a job in the intel world because this person would push for the release of the JFK files. This senator's main goal is to keep those files secret, but I don't understand why they would be protecting the CIA, especially after the Church Committee hearings already discredited them. I know that a member of the Senate Intel Committee made that call to block the appointment. Someone asked if it was Tom Cotton from Arkansas, but I haven't asked him directly for an interview, even though I probably should.

He says he was in Washington DC on January 6 and 'recorded video of two federal agents attacking the building.' He states he has 'given the FBI twenty nine minutes of high definition video' says, 'What what format do we got? MP four.' He adds, 'No copyright. I don't care about getting paid. I just want it out there.' He explains that, despite offering the footage, 'neither man's been arrested' and 'the FBI refuses to accept my offer to come in and give them a statement and all of the video that I took on the fifth, sixth, and seventh.' He says the FBI is 'desperate to keep their identities hidden.' He notes he has appeared on 'OAN and Newsmax' and 'played the video there.' He is in town this weekend. 'If you wanna have me on your show as a guest, I'm more than happy to go do so.'

- it's illegal. The FBI will raid me. They've done it twice. - No. It's not secret. No. It's not on OAN and Newsmax. - Why isn't the FBI looking for two metaphysically attacked? Exclusive inside FBI fomenting insurrection. No? - Well, see, I was at the East Entrance on January 6. - I recorded two federal agents attacking the capital. - Well, federal agents came to my home and took my phones. They still have that. So, hopefully, someone will stand out. - I've given them twenty nine minutes of high definition footage of these two turds. - And to date, neither one of them has been arrested and none of their images have appeared on the internet. - They refuse to accept my offer to come in and give them a statement. - I've got them by the Cajones. - Avoid the FBI if you can.

"the feds are entirely uninterested in this guy," "if anyone's a kind of major orchestrator in the first act of this so called breach of the capital, it would be him." "Epps' face was actually one of the first 20 faces that the FBI put on their January 6 most wanted list that anyone in DC would have seen, like, they had the posters everywhere." "Help us identify this man." "And then the Internet being what the Internet is, a remarkable vehicle, identified him within days and then crickets." "The feds weren't interested nothing about him until five months later, they scrubbed his face and name completely from their public database." "And the we were able to interpolate the exact day that they scrubbed it, and just by coincidence happened to be the very day after Revolver News ran an extensive piece on his, former, fellow oath keeper, Stuart Rhodes."

An individual confronts two people identifying themselves as FBI agents, one as Adrian O'Donnell, in front of their house. The individual demands to see their full names and identification, but the agents are hesitant to provide it on camera. The individual states they will post the recording online. The agents say they want to talk about a post that was made. The individual accuses the agents of wasting taxpayer money by investigating something that is not against the law and questions if they believe in the Constitution. The individual calls them "fuckheads" and "cowards" and says they should be embarrassed. The agents then leave.

You are not being honest with this committee. We asked for all memorandums from the Secret Service on July 15th, have you provided them? You are dodging important questions that the American people want answers to. We had to subpoena you to be here, and you still won't answer. These are not difficult questions.

I mean, if you're shorting American Airlines a week before nine eleven when no one knows it's coming, I think you should have to explain why you did that. And if you're shorting Barclays and and banks that were affected by nine eleven, why can't we know who you are? These are public markets, by the way. This is not private equity. This is publicly traded equities. So clearly, yes, there was foreknowledge. By the way, there was a team. This is according to the FBI. This is the FBI saying there was a team of clearly Intel connected foreigners who were arrested after nine eleven, as you well know, videotaping the terror attacks. I'm almost verbatim quoting from the FBI assessment of this. And the FBI determined that they apparently had foreknowledge of the attacks. So why can't we know more about that exactly? This is my country.

I'm suspicious of people who jump ahead to arrest, conviction, incarceration, or execution. Let’s start with an interview. I know a lot of people have been interviewed — hundreds, in the FBI context. In a federal investigation, it’s not crazy to call somebody; it happens every single day. It happened to every relative of every J-six prisoner — got called in, “Can we come talk to you?” That’s not weird. That’s the beginning of justice: the first step in finding out what happened, punishing the guilty, exonerating the innocent, is having these conversations in the context of a federal investigation, like an FBI interview. It’s strange to see television mentions that there’s no evidence to indict someone or to call a grand jury. Why not just ask questions of the FBI? If they’re not doing that, you wonder why. Now, here’s the bigger picture you’re qualified to provide, even if I’m not. The implication in this file dump is that there are basically religious rituals, sexual in nature. That’s very common through history — temple prostitutes for a reason. There are rituals involving children underway in the United States and the West, rich and powerful people sexually abusing young people. That is very hard for a lot of people to believe or metabolize, but it feels like that’s not totally crazy; it happens. Does that happen? Absolutely. It’s so dark that it’s hard for average people — regular people just trying to live their lives — to even approach it. Even a maniac cannot put himself in the shoes of someone so depraved. Regular Americans can’t even put themselves in the shoes of a millionaire, let alone a billionaire, because they’re just trying to pay their bills and can’t — while billionaires are doing certain things that are messing everything up. So, it’s far removed from regular experience, but it’s hard to understand and believe. There’s good evidence of elements of that in various fringe investigations for a long time. I don’t say “fringe” to mean unreliable; I mean fringe to say they never gain traction with mainstream media, for whatever reason. But it’s right there in these emails and these files. It’s not entirely clear what all of it means, but there are very overt references, covert references, and mounting because people are still digging through them. These are millions of files with no effective way to sort through them the way the DOJ released them. So the evidence is mounting that we have: people turning a blind eye (reprehensible), adjacent and complicit, directly complicit, people that venture into the demonic or the truly depraved, and so on.

I'm declining to be named in your story. I haven't given any quotes. My name is James O'Keefe. We have you on hidden camera talking about Elon Musk, Doge, and unlawful activities at Treasury. I encourage you to speak on the record. We have you on video saying government colleagues don't do much, and Doge targets us because it's easy. I'm a reporter. People deserve to know what you've said. Why did you share this with a stranger but not me? You specialize in foreign policy at the Treasury. What are you afraid of? It'll look bad when you won't speak to me, but you told a stranger everything. This is a major public policy issue. I'm running this story with or without you. I think the people need to know what's happening inside the government, including risks to national security.

An individual confronts two individuals identifying themselves as FBI agents, demanding their full names and identification. The agents decline to provide full names on camera. The individual states they will post the recording online. The agents say they want to talk about a post that was made. The individual accuses the agents of wasting taxpayer money investigating something that is not against the law. Another individual asks why they came. One of the agents says they wanted to make sure that weren't any. The individual accuses them of being part of a regime and not believing in the Constitution. The individual calls the agents "fuckheads" and "cowards" and says they should be embarrassed and think about what they did. The agents then leave.

The speaker claims the Israeli war room is trying to get the FBI after them because they published a video arguing that Elias Rodriguez's elimination of two Zionist officials was an act of resistance, not an antisemitic terrorist attack. The speaker says this isn't the first time the FBI has come to their door; it also happened in November when a Zionist smeared them by sending synagogues in their city false bomb threats in the speaker's name. The speaker expresses anger towards the FBI, the feds, the Israeli war room, and accuses them of being traitors to humanity.

"there's a man in custody." "I've really tried not to publicly speculate or say anything that I can't prove." "the guy's in custody." "If the FBI and the authorities in Utah, end this investigation by declaring Tyler Robinson a lone gunman with no accomplices whatsoever, without having done, you know, a truly exhaustive investigation, that will not be adequate." "I hate even to say that that could happen because, you know, it's my country, my government, I wanna trust the FBI, there's no reason to trust the FBI at all. At all." "how a guy who was by all appearances pretty normal kid, wound up murdering a stranger just a couple years later. Like he was radicalized." "Everything that you think about the FBI undersells it. It's, and I'm quoting, 10 times worse than you think internally." "I'm gonna need proof."

Why did the shooter act? Was he alone or connected to others? What motivated him? We sought answers from the DOJ and FBI, but they claim it's an ongoing investigation and can't share information with Congress. This is unacceptable. As a member of the intelligence and armed services committees, I regularly access sensitive information, so it's hard to believe we can't get updates on this investigation. I don't know if they're intentionally withholding information, but stonewalling is common in oversight. Misinformation thrives in the absence of clarity, and our goal is to provide transparency and counter conspiracy theories surrounding these events. So far, I have seen no evidence linking state actors to these assassination attempts.

I'm here with my father, and I assure you that the connections we have will make you regret not following my advice. It feels like a shakedown, doesn't it? I won't comment on that. You seem suspiciously uncurious about the situation. Are you protecting the Bidens? The FBI has no interest in that. You won't answer whether this is a shakedown, and everyone knows why. Your refusal to acknowledge it is very telling to the millions watching.

Speaker 0: "What I'm saying is a reasonable suspicion is that there were agents. There's a video showing a guy with an earpiece pulling people into the building. Alright? Mhmm. You combine that with the evidence of Ray Epps, and it looks like you have a preponderance of evidence suggesting there may have been federal law enforcement involved in making that thing happen." Speaker 1: "I'll get you beyond a reasonable doubt. Two pieces of information. Ray Epps was on FBI's most wanted list one day, and the next day, he was off of the FBI's most wanted list. There are only two ways that happens. You die or your informant." Speaker 1: "Put that aside. Under congressional testimony, Jill Sanborn, who I used to work with, the head of the FBI counterintelligence division in charge of all these investigations, testified under oath when senator Cruz asked her, flat out, were there federal agents involved with January 6? And she said, quote, senator, I can't answer that at this time." Speaker 1: "The reason she said I can't answer that is because of the same stonewalling they gave us during Russergate with Christopher Steelehauper and everybody else. It's the same narrative, and and I'm telling you they were there." Speaker 0: "You're so you're saying that she said I can't answer that because the answer is yes Yeah. And that would compromise whatever their operation was. Exactly."

We received a couple hundred pages of documents from the FBI, but a source told me there were more at the Southern District of New York. I gave them a deadline, and we got thousands of pages. The FBI is reviewing them, and Director Patel is preparing a detailed report on why the FBI withheld these documents. These documents include flight logs, names, and victim names, but we believe there's more. The FBI just received these thousands of pages, and protecting victims is a priority. We believe in transparency, and America has the right to know. The Biden administration claimed no one did anything with these documents, but why were they in the Southern District of New York? I want a full report. We will redact national security information and grand jury information, but the public will know why.

The speaker mentioned that there were individuals inside the Capitol and the SSA responded. The speaker questioned why they couldn't be shown the 11,000 hours of available video footage. The reason given was that there might be undercover officers or confidential human sources whose identities needed protection. The speaker then mentioned that Mr. Allen faced retaliation.

I'm Moneypenny and I'm British. I don't profess to understand the American legal system, though I know the British system fairly well. It is fairly harsh at the moment. But I know that if a high ranking, somebody who's been awarded a medal in the British military, who used to be a jet pilot, who used to work in the intel sector of the UK military, came to us and said he was aware of a misdemeanor, a crime involving the death of many people, and he had various evidence and other people that would corroborate that, that something could be done about it, it would be investigated. So this is where I'm stuck, and I want to appeal. Pam Bondi and maybe Cash Patel. If a member of the US military who used to be a pilot, who worked in sensitive intel, who had visited the Diego Garcia Military Base, who had a level of clearance such that he was free to explore that base, who was aware of the Black Navy and the operations that would require being signed in or read in at a very senior level. That individual to me sounds as though he would be somebody that would be taken seriously. So this is where I have a problem. This is where I don't understand. I do not understand how somebody of that caliber who has spoken out, who is recorded speaking out, giving evidence corroborating, giving names of other people. Who is able to tell us where a seven seventy seven airliner with two thirty nine souls on board went and who took it and how the whole operation took place down to the mechanics of it, the individuals that took part in it. Why isn't that information being taken seriously? Why isn't that information being investigated? We are talking about murder. I'm sorry to use that word. There are two thirty nine people, souls involved and probably thousands of friends, family and many, many interested parties over the past eleven years. Many people who have dedicated a lot of time to looking at this, myself included. There are videos that potentially are giving away some of the information about what happened. But the person who has those videos, a person called Ashton Forbes, has been given letters from the American military, American department saying in a matter of national security, they cannot confirm any of the detail. So now we have a decorated military veteran, a former jet pilot who flew into Diego Garcia, who was in Iraq, who has done a lot of very impressive military work on behalf of The United States, has spoken out, is on record. I will send you the video. Why? Why is nothing being done? Why is nobody investigating? I do not understand how The United States can overlook this because, frankly, I'm pretty angry. On behalf of all those people on board, predominantly Chinese and Malaysian people and all their friends and families, I demand that something is done about this. And I'm a nobody, and you don't have to listen to me. But I'm gonna put this on social media, and I'm gonna sit here and wait until somebody responds and gives a bloody good explanation as to why nobody is taking this seriously. Because frankly, it's inhumane, and I don't think the Trump administration, amongst anybody else, would allow something inhumane to take place. I hope you agree.

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.

An individual visited a radio station (97.7 FM) to share video footage from Washington D.C. on January 6th, alleging it shows two federal agents attacking the building. The speaker claims to have provided the FBI with 29 minutes of high-definition video in MP4 format on January 15th. The video was recorded on an iPhone. According to the speaker, neither of the agents in the video have been arrested, nor have their images been released online. The speaker also claims the FBI has declined their offer to provide a statement and additional video from January 5th, 6th, and 7th. The speaker believes the FBI is actively concealing the agents' identities. The speaker states they have shared the video with OAN, Newsmax, Detroit, and Red America's Voice. They offered the video to the radio station and are available for an on-air appearance.

Speaker 0 argues that the individual is late, then urges going into the capital, which is described as incitement and premeditated. The speaker asserts the person is on video stating, “we need to breach the capital” and says this is very relevant because people ended up doing it. The claim is that the individual is instigating violence, trying to provoke or catalyze illegal acts so that the government can arrest those involved, describing undercover federal assets as honeypots that goad people into committing crimes to enable arrests of people law enforcement wanted to arrest anyway. The speaker then questions if the DOJ or federal law enforcement is seeking an insurrection, conspiracy, or acts of violence aimed at undermining an act of Congress, and asks why they aren’t looking into this person, suggesting that a lack of interest implies he may be part of the government or federal law enforcement. The implication is that there could be a reason for not pursuing him other than him being unaffiliated, namely that he is working with law enforcement. Ted Cruz is described as addressing this in a Senate hearing, with the speaker plan to read a report from the New York Post. The report is quoted: “magically, mister Epps disappeared from the public posting. According to public records, mister Epps has not been charged with anything. No one has explained why a person videoed, urging people to go to the capital, a person whose conduct was so suspect, the crowd thought he was a fed, would magically disappear from the list of people the FBI was looking at.” The overall claim is that Mister Epps, who encouraged people to go to the capital, vanished from FBI attention without explanation, despite being photographed urging action and being suspected by the crowd of being a federal agent.

I know we don't usually read these. This one's not readable. It's completely redacted. For the most part, the first 50 pages, this is actually the search warrant that was served on James O'Keefe for a a diary that he had already given to the government two months before. And as it turns out, there were no indictments here, yet he still doesn't know why he was raided, and I think he deserves to know.