reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker questions the witness about the FBI's history of violating people's rights, including fraud in forensic testimony, improper searches of US officials, and spying on activists. The witness claims to be unaware of these incidents and dismisses them as irrelevant. The speaker argues that the witness's initial reaction to the allegations against the FBI was biased and asks if she could have investigated the matter further. The witness defends her belief in a broad conspiracy involving multiple agencies but admits to not conducting any investigation.

The speaker discusses the challenges of dealing with government actions and the time it takes to resolve them. They mention a lesser-known aspect of their case, where an FBI agent allegedly planned to plant child pornography on their husband's computer. Although this was not carried out in their situation, they express concern about the potential consequences and the fact that they have a young daughter at home.

The speaker discusses how the bureau practices near-entrapment to target individuals like Alex Jones, aiming to bankrupt them through civil lawsuits. They mention using fake social media posts to provoke reactions and reveal that FBI agents were undercover at the January 6th Capitol riot. The speaker states that about 20 agents were present but not involved in violence, highlighting the bureau's discreet presence at such events. They emphasize the need for a larger law enforcement presence in such situations.

The FBI's involvement in the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping case revealed that out of 14 people, 12 were informants. These informants allegedly convinced two individuals to attempt to kidnap the governor, resembling a misguided role-playing game. The situation highlights a saying that suggests the FBI often targets individuals they have a hand in creating.

The speaker suggests that in every January 6th case, the FBI has withheld evidence that could have helped the defendant. They believe defense attorneys should have access to a whistleblower's complaint, which reveals that compensation is tied to these cases. The speaker suggests that defense attorneys should question the agents involved about whether their bosses received bonuses for opening these cases. The other speaker agrees and finds it unbelievable that there are incentives to increase the number of Americans in jail.

The speaker discusses the practice of entrapment by the bureau, mentioning a nudge technique to provoke reactions. They talk about targeting Alex Jones to bankrupt him through civil lawsuits. The speaker also mentions undercover FBI agents at the Capitol riot, estimating about 20 agents present. The bureau's presence was kept discreet to avoid overstepping boundaries. The speaker confirms knowing agents who were at the riot.

The speaker discusses the FBI's investigation into a person accused of espionage. The FBI mistakenly believed that the person had left the country, but he was actually living in DC. Despite this, the FBI hired him and paid him over $200,000, even though they knew he was a Russian spy. The speaker also mentions another individual, Charles Dolan, who was a source for the false dossier used to spy on American citizens. Dolan and the Russian spy even met on a park bench, but the FBI refused to interview Dolan. The speaker criticizes the FBI's actions and highlights the problem of running investigations from headquarters instead of assigning a US attorney.

The speaker, a former FBI agent, discusses their career and involvement in various cases, including counterterrorism and investigating the Oklahoma City bombing. They express their belief that the government had advanced knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and that the World Trade Center buildings were intentionally imploded. They also mention the existence of a covert CIA child kidnapping operation and the involvement of the Finders, a group engaged in international trafficking of children. The speaker claims to have provided evidence to the FBI multiple times but has been ignored. They emphasize the need for further investigation into these matters.

The speaker discusses how they can potentially entrap individuals, including pro-lifers, through manipulation and social media tactics. They mention targeting political commentator Alex Jones and causing financial harm to him. Additionally, they reveal that FBI agents were present undercover at the January 6th Capitol riot. The speaker implies that the FBI's involvement in such events is kept secretive.

In the 1970s, the FBI discovered the CIA running a satanic cult that kidnapped and abused children, selling them as sex slaves. The FBI covered it up for 50 years until forced to release files in 2018. The CIA operated tunnels to preschools, traumatized children with satanic rituals, and kept them in cages. The finders cult members were involved in child abuse, but the FBI and CIA conspired to hide it. Source: FBI.gov.

Lieutenant Colonel Michael Aquino led a double life as a satanic high priest. The colonel's cult is listed in the San Francisco telephone book and his phone answering machine, both of his affiliation. This is the temple of Seth. The temple is the only international satanic religious institution fully recognized by the United States government. Here at San Francisco's Presidio Army Base, charges surface connecting ritual child abuse at the Presidio Daycare Center to the Devil Cult. Parents and others allege that as many as 60 young children were ritualistically abused by soldiers of Satan. Is it not a fact that a three and a half year old girl identified you as the alleged perpetrator of molestation? No. As a matter of fact, is not the case. An accusation was made by her stepfather who was an army chaplain speaking on behalf of this child. In her original interview with the FBI, she denied ever being molested. Well, I've seen the affidavits for the search warrant of your home, and they indicate the child is speaking to the authorities, not the father. This was after she had been subjected to therapy. He was a lieutenant colonel who worked in military intelligence and led work in psychological operations. Aquino's interest in psychological warfare was of a piece with his occult work. Both dealt with how unseen forces, be they propaganda or magical will, can alter thoughts in reality. He coauthored a military paper titled From Psyop to Mind War, The Psychology of Victory. This paper, written with Colonel Paul E. Valioli in 1980, advocated for the US Army to extend psychological operations beyond tactical propaganda to a broader concept of mind war. Mind war is the deliberate, aggressive convincing of all participants in a war that we will win that war. Mind war must target all participants if it is to be effective. The goal of mind war is to get the mind to believe its own decisions, and to feel that it made those decisions without coercion. To be effective, whatever measures are used must not be detectable by ordinary means.

The speaker mentions government delays in resolving cases. Another aspect is an FBI agent's plan to frame the speaker's husband with child pornography, although it wasn't carried out. The agent allegedly conspired to do this despite the speaker having a young daughter at home.

The speaker shares their experience of being targeted by the government after their property was raided and their dog was shot. In response, they donated laptops with spyware to government secretaries, gaining control over the entire government computer system. While monitoring the system, they discovered that the minister of national defense was involved in drug trafficking and the minister of immigration was involved in human trafficking. The speaker acknowledges the risk of sharing this information and suggests that it is better to remain unaware.

The FBI is being accused of corruption and targeting politicians, parents, and ordinary citizens. Whistleblowers have bravely come forward, facing retaliation and being blocked from working both inside and outside the FBI. This is a troubling time for the American people.

Gary Melton (Gary) and Mitch have a lengthy, meandering exchange that centers on veterans’ histories, alleged government manipulation, personal trauma, and the pursuit of truth around high-profile political cases. The core thread is an effort to verify Mitch’s claims about his SF background and to explore broader claims about political interference, media narratives, and potential conspiracies. Key points and exchanges: - Identity, background, and verification: - Gary identifies himself as a former SF soldier seeking to verify Mitch’s SF history after seeing his Candace Owens interview. - Mitch provides his SF timeline: he was in group from February/March 1993 until November 1996; MOS 18 Charlie (medic). He mentions attending the 300F1 course and a severe on-duty accident at Guadalupe River, involving a 60-foot fall that caused multiple injuries (spine, feet, knee, lumbar, dislocations, torn labrum, etc.). - Mitch describes his treatment (brace, three-week leave, then recycled into the next class and internship at Brookhaven Army Medical Center Burn Ward). He mentions ODA +1 63166/ +1 63/ +1 66 and places himself on +183 and +185 in the old numbering system; later, he notes the transition to the newer numeric system circa 2002-2006. - Gary asks for Mitch’s DD214 to verify the story; Mitch agrees and offers to share it. He references being in “Lake Baja” and knowing Nate (Nate Chapman), whom he spoke with the day before. - Personal stakes, trauma, and family: - Mitch explains a long, difficult divorce and custody battle that spanned many years. He says he was a stay-at-home dad for his son, who is now 13, and describes persistent, aggressive accusations against him (PTSD, abuse, murder) by courts and media figures. - He recounts a prior incident involving a coworker or classmate, Jimmy Walker, and notes that Walker later claimed PTSD and discrimination in SF contexts. Mitch frames this as part of broader patterns of how SF status can be weaponized in custody and legal battles. - Mitch and Gary discuss how the SF environment can foster suspicion, paranoia, and intra-community politics (e.g., clashes with SF Brothers, admin actions, and the difficulty of maintaining contact with peers after leaving the teams). - Candace Owens, TPUSA, and broader conspiratorial discussions: - The callers discuss Candace Owens’ involvement, the TPUSA circle, and the believability of various claims. Mitch says he has wanted to vet the claims through Candace and Joe Kent, and he’s offered to supply documents to verify stories. He notes that Candace has reportedly pulled threads about various shooters and narratives and that this has caused friction with TPUSA. - Mitch argues that Candace might be exploited by political or foreign adversaries and that her narratives sometimes lack corroborating evidence, distracting from “the truth.” He insists on corroborating Mitch’s own story with documents (DD214, other records) before airing anything publicly. - Gary responds with skepticism about online personas but agrees to vet Mitch’s materials, emphasizing integrity and a desire to verify truth. Both acknowledge the risk of backend manipulation, bot attacks, and the use of media figures to push narratives. - Ballistics and the Charlie Kirk incident: - A substantial portion of the discussion turns to ballistics surrounding Tyler Robinson and the Charlie Kirk incident. Mitch (the ballistics expert) explains that many variables affect ballistic outcomes (ammo type, grain, bullet construction, handloads vs. factory ammo, barrel condition, yaw, stabilization). He argues that the 30-06 round’s behavior can be highly variable and that an “atypical” (non-normative) wound could occur for many reasons. - He compares Martin Luther King’s assassination (65-yard shot, 30-06, open casket) to Charlie Kirk’s wound, noting similarities in the trajectory and lack of an exit wound in some high-profile cases. He cites Chuck Ritter (Green Beret) who was shot multiple times with 7.62x54R and survived, and uses these examples to illustrate the complexity of interpreting ballistic evidence. - Mitch asserts that multiple plausible explanations exist for Kirk’s wounds and stresses that the exact ammunition type, projectile, and ballistic conditions are unknown at present. He emphasizes that investigators possess DNA and surveillance records (DNA on the firearm, trigger, cartridge, towel used by Tyler Robinson) and text messages; he notes that Mitch is not claiming to know the entire truth but wants to see corroborating evidence. - The two discuss the possibility of government involvement or manipulation, while acknowledging that ballistics alone cannot prove a broader conspiracy. They note the challenges of obtaining complete ballistic data before trials, and they express openness to future verification once more information becomes available (e.g., during trial proceedings). - Custody, investigations, and accountability: - Mitch recounts the broader pattern of SF members being targeted by legal systems when in contentious custody situations, with accusations and judgments influenced by SF status. He cites examples of coercion, character assassination, and the weaponization of families in court battles. - They discuss how the FBI and other agencies have handled high-profile cases, noting distrust in narratives presented by authorities and media. They acknowledge that public transparency is essential, even as prosecutions proceed. - Platform, vetting, and next steps: - The two plan to continue the vetting process: Mitch will provide DD214 and related documents to Gary, who promises to verify and not disclose sensitive information without Mitch’s consent. They discuss sending further documents via email or text (Gary’s Paramount Tactical contact). - Mitch expresses a desire to appear on Gary’s show and to connect with Nate (Nate Chapman) for collaborative vetting. Gary commits to facilitating, offering to act as an advocate if Mitch’s story is verified and to help set up communications with Nate and Candace as appropriate. - The conversation closes with both agreeing on the importance of truth, corroboration, and accountability. They acknowledge the risk and the emotional toll of revealing sensitive histories but emphasize their commitment to pursuing the truth and preventing misinformation or manipulation. Overall, the transcript captures a tense, exploratory exchange between two veterans and affiliates about verifying SF credentials, the personal toll of custody and legal battles, the influence of political narratives, and the complexities of ballistics and forensics in high-profile incidents. The participants stress verification through documents, corroboration of anecdotes, and cautious, integrity-driven engagement with media figures and audiences.

The speaker states that if the FBI had been asking questions about human trafficking, they would have known. The speaker raised their son as a Christian. The speaker believes their son may do things people don't like, but he would never be involved in human trafficking.

The speakers engage in a conversation about various topics. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 about her husband's involvement in the MDD. Speaker 1 mentions their work in catching online child predators and their goal to increase the number of arrests and convictions. Speaker 0 expresses belief in their cause. Speaker 1 discusses a disturbing incident involving a pedophile in Wyoming. Speaker 0 admits to coming to meet an 11-year-old for sex. Speaker 1 confronts Speaker 0 about illegal content on his phone, including nude pictures of children. They discuss their methods of catching predators and turning evidence over to law enforcement. Speaker 0 admits to struggling with his fantasies. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 asking about vaccine injuries and Speaker 0 questioning the necessity of the conversation.

The speaker recounts a long-standing pattern of interactions with federal agents, noting that jokes about agents reading their chats stopped being funny for a period. They describe being pressured to work for these agencies for months, a pressure that left no paper trail and was deliberately concealed. Each time agents visited their home, they were asked to shut off their phone and told not to tell anyone about what was happening. The speaker explains that the only reason they can discuss the situation now is that they made a deliberate, fear-driven decision to do so. They recall sweating and nearly vomiting, and they went so far as to clip a DJI microphone to their bra before every visit, anxious that the device would beep or reveal what was being discussed. This precaution reflects the level of fear and the stakes involved in the interactions. They claim to have later confronted Parliament about the surveillance and pressure campaigns they faced, actions taken after they recorded evidence of these activities. The speaker asserts a broader possibility: there exists a very real world in which they did none of that—where they would still be online today as an independent influencer while privately secretly acting on behalf of Canadian intelligence agencies—because they were made to believe they would go to jail. They emphasize that they are not the only person affected by this dynamic, suggesting a wider pattern or network behind these experiences.

The speaker explains that the government wanted to arrest them after raiding their property and causing damage. In response, the speaker donated laptops with spyware to government secretaries, gaining control over the entire government computer system. They were searching for evidence of being set up but instead discovered that the minister of national defense was involved in drug trafficking and the minister of immigration was involved in human trafficking. The speaker acknowledges the danger of sharing this information and suggests that it is best to keep it undisclosed.

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.

Former FBI special agent Mike Jorman reveals in this documentary that the FBI fabricates cases to maintain fear in the public and gain power and funding. He explains that before 9/11, if he wanted to investigate individuals for terrorism, he would need to provide evidence of their affiliation with terrorist organizations, possession of weapons, and resources to acquire them. However, in recent cases, when he stated that the individuals had no affiliation, weapons, or resources, the FBI would initiate undercover operations, providing them with weapons, money, and the idea of an attack. Jorman believes this is a fabrication of cases to create a sense of seriousness and gain support.

An individual, identified as a CIA contracting officer who formerly worked for the FBI, discussed tactics employed by the Bureau, including near-entrapment, which they call "a nudge," to provoke targeted individuals into acting on impulse. They admitted to using fake social media posts to anger people. The speaker claimed the FBI was "after" Alex Jones and aimed to bankrupt him by encouraging civil lawsuits from the Sandy Hook families. They monitored Jones' followers, looking for potential leads, and were satisfied when the families "shot his legs off" via civil suits. The speaker stated there were approximately 20 undercover FBI agents present at the January 6th Capitol riot to gather information, but their presence was not publicly acknowledged to avoid overstepping bounds.

The speaker, a former FBI agent, discusses their career and involvement in various cases, including counterterrorism and investigating the Oklahoma City bombing. They express their belief that the government had advanced knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and that the World Trade Center buildings were intentionally imploded. They also mention the existence of a covert CIA child kidnapping operation and the involvement of the Finders, a group engaged in international trafficking of children. The speaker claims to have provided evidence to the FBI multiple times but has been ignored. They emphasize the need for further investigation into these matters.

One little-known aspect of my case involves a federal agent who claimed they intended to plant child pornography on my husband's computer. This was part of an operation by the FBI. In a separate case currently in litigation, an FBI agent has testified that such actions have occurred before, although it didn't happen in our situation. They halted this part of the operation before it could be executed. It's alarming to think about the implications, especially knowing we had a young daughter at home and that there was an alleged conspiracy to carry out such a heinous act.

A father posted a photo of his child in the bathtub, leading to disturbing comments about the child's safety. The speaker, who had access to the server, consulted an attorney who warned about the risk of reporting the incident due to breaking federal law. However, the speaker decided to take their chances and reached out to news stations and attorneys. Despite the interest in the story, no one posted it when it reached the legal stage. Later, the speaker learned about the arrest of Nathaniel Larson, who had kidnapped and raped a 12-year-old girl. The speaker had evidence of Larson's activities and those of 3,000 others, but nothing was done about it.