reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The SAVE Act, requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration, passed the House with every Republican and four Democrats voting for it, while 98% of Democrats voted against it, despite 84% of Americans supporting voter ID. One argument against voter ID is that it suppresses voting among elderly, poor, and minority groups, echoing post-slavery laws. Obtaining a valid ID can cost $10-$30, and updating documents or traveling to ID offices can be inconvenient. Recently, it was revealed that Social Security numbers were given to millions of illegal immigrants, and thousands of them were found on voter rolls and had voted. While voter ID has cons, the pros outweigh them. Subsidizing IDs for low-income people and acknowledging that voting is a shared inconvenience for all citizens could be solutions. The opposition to voter ID may stem from partisan politics, but politicians should prioritize the will of the people over party loyalty.

The claim is that 69 million married women won't be able to vote if they took their husband's name, disenfranchising voters. Voters want ID, signature verification, chain of custody controls, and updated voter rolls. They also want partisan observers watching the voting process. The only reason to be against these measures is if you want illegal aliens to vote in large numbers. Every other country requires an ID to vote. The idea that married women, a Republican voting demographic, can't get ID is a dumb talking point. The REAL ID Act creates an ID at the DMV that proves citizenship. Democrats want illegal aliens to vote. The Biden administration gave millions of illegal aliens Social Security numbers, making it easy to vote, collect welfare, and get free government benefits. They want illegals to steal elections.

The speakers discuss concerns about the Real ID Act and its potential impact on privacy and civil liberties. They cite Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's announcement to enforce Real ID starting May 7, requiring a high-resolution digital facial image to travel by air or visit federal buildings. They reference Thomas Massie's criticism, arguing Real ID won't stop terrorists but is a tool for controlling Americans. Concerns are raised about the Act's potential to be used to restrict Second Amendment rights, referencing California's past attempts. They highlight a case where a Tufts University student was detained and faced deportation for alleged antisemitism, despite the State Department finding no evidence to support the claims. They note the irony of a pro-Israel group defending her free speech rights. Finally, they discuss the drop in European travel to the U.S., attributing it to a backlash against Trump's policies and worries about the treatment of foreigners, potentially harming the U.S. economy.

At the Tucson airport, a sign indicates that non-US citizens without passports should enter a specific line. Surprisingly, TSA allows an arrest warrant as a valid form of ID for illegal aliens. If an arrest warrant can secure a domestic flight for them, it raises the question of why it can't lead to their arrest. As a member of Congress with TSA pre-check, I must verify my identity. If my airline ticket lists my name as Wesley J Hunt, I cannot board the plane, highlighting the inconsistency in the system.

The speaker argues against digital IDs, listing 20 concerns: functionality creep into immigration, healthcare, banking, voting, driving, and travel; loss of anonymity; government overreach; it won't stop illegal immigration; it would rely on phones; enforcement could be undermined by cash-paying employers; single point of failure; government as the nexus of verification; a state surveillance honeypot; inevitable future abuses by any regime; massive cost and bureaucratic drag; marginalization of those unable or unwilling to comply; UK previously rejected ID cards; examples of failures in other countries (India ANWA, EU database); authoritarian temptations; excuses for illegal immigration and labor; burden shifting to citizens; ratchet effect; not for stated reasons but globalist aims; alternative is zero-knowledge proofs where individuals hold ID; digital IDs from the state are a horrendous idea and must be stopped.

Speaker 0 argues against using TSA scanners when traveling. They state that epic.org reached out to TSA members and asked for studies on the scanners, but there are no safety studies. They claim TSA workers are contracting large illnesses, “the big C,” because they work next to the scanners and because those scanners are operating on five g and x-rays. They assert that passengers are x-rayed without a blanket every time, that millimeter waves cook people, and that the scanners allow viewing people nude. They advise travelers not to go through TSA scanners, and to opt for a pat-down instead. They claim that if enough people refuse to go through the scanners, the program would end. They recount the origin story: an alleged Al Qaeda individual who came from Amsterdam to Detroit, leading to the rollout of scanners across America, with the requirement to remove shoes, belts, waters, valuables, and anything else. They imply that this incident sparked the widespread adoption of scanners nationwide. The speaker emphasizes that anybody told they need to go through these scanners should refuse and request a pat-down, labeling the scanners as “goofy.” They reiterate the call to opt out and not participate in the scanner process, presenting the narrative as a justification for avoiding the scanners.

They're rolling out digital ID even when people don't want it? In The UK, over 2,000,000 people said no. We don't want it. The government's response? We're gonna do it anyway. And now the line is no digital ID, no jobs. They said you will not be able to work in The United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It's as simple as that. Just a reminder, pilot programs always start somewhere and then scale to the rest of the world. Today, it's The UK. Tomorrow, it's where you live. They will market it as if it's for your convenience or your safety, like they are doing now by saying it's to tackle illegal immigration. But once your likelihood is tied to a QR code or a government app, your freedoms can be taken away with the flip of a switch. Now it's just for a job. Soon it will be banking, travel, grocery shopping. You will be completely under control.

Governor Tim Wall signed the driver's license for all bill into law, allowing all Minnesotans to obtain a driver's license regardless of immigration status. One speaker stated that instead of changing the politician, the goal is to change the voter. Allowing undocumented immigrants to have an ID is considered un-American, and the speaker believes the intention is to flood the market with illegal voters, given concerns about free and fair elections. The speaker claims this policy will allow millions of people to have an ID. The speaker believes that taxpaying and everyday Americans find this policy disgusting and outrageous, and that policymakers are not listening to the concerns of the public.

The speaker references a collection of legal and policy claims surrounding the Homeland Security Act era, asserting that: - They possess Supreme Court case law defending the First Amendment and US Code provisions on conspiracy against rights, deprivation of rights under color of law, and federally protected activities, to be shared with the group. - The DHS/ICE complex was formed as part of a catalyst event that directly caused the Patriot Act, which the speaker claims “virtually shredded the constitution.” - Nine/eleven is described as the catalyst for the Patriot Act; the speaker alleges overwhelming and undeniable evidence that Israel, Jews, and Israel loyalists are responsible for 9/11. - Michael Chertoff is described as an “Israeli Talmudic Jew” who drafted the Patriot Act, which was prepared less than six weeks after 9/11/2001. DHS was established in 2003 and consolidated 22 federal agencies, birthing ICE. - Michael Chertoff is noted as the second secretary of DHS, who later founded the Chertoff Group LLC and profited from TSA airport surveillance and body scan machines. - The speaker claims every DHS secretary has been Jewish or a “Jew loyalist/Zionist.” - DHS allegedly worked directly with Jewish refugee NGOs (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, International Rescue Committee, Refugee International, etc.), and DHS paid Jewish NGOs with US tax dollars to import foreigners. - Under former secretary Mayorkas, described as a dual citizen with Israel and Jewish, DHS purportedly imported over 80,000 refugees after the Afghan withdrawal, in addition to millions of other migrants; impeachment of Mayorkas is claimed to have been dropped due to “anti Semitic conspiracy theories” linked to a claimed Klerge plan and a UN document titled Replacement Migration. - The speaker asserts immigration is a tool of a “Zionist occupied government” intended to justify a permanent authoritarian surveillance police state, asserting use of the Patriot Act and Palantir as weapons against Americans. - ICE is claimed to receive training, policies, and protocols from the IDF, with hundreds or thousands of IDF foreign military members operating within ICE, implying a foreign paramilitary domestic organization operating under a federal agency on U.S. streets. - The broader claim: the United States is not only occupied, but in the early stages of a Bolshevik Revolution 2.0. - A reference to the constitutional right “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state…” and an oath to support and defend the Constitution is included, followed by a detour mentioning the Dow, fertilizer, and the Tree of Liberty, with an intention to drop off a document, implying risk to the speaker. The transcript ends with the speaker noting a potential assassination risk and instructing to leave the document with a clerk.

United States Secretary of Homeland Security Kristine Ulm urges travelers to acquire a REAL ID to prevent delays and prove their identity. Starting May 7, a REAL ID will be required for air travel and to access federal buildings in the United States. These IDs enhance security and help prevent fraud, contributing to national safety. Travelers are encouraged to act promptly to obtain a REAL ID. More information is available at dhs.gov/realID.

Mike Schellenberger argues against digital IDs: "We don't need digital IDs for any of those things. The United States just stopped illegal migration without digital IDs." He says centralizing data would undermine cybersecurity: "Having separate logins ... ensures that if one of them is hacked, they aren't all hacked." He warns that "if the digital ID were to actually link social media vaccine records and bank accounts, that would allow governments to censor and control the population." He notes Kirstarmer: "every working person must have a digital ID or Brit card." Real IDs contain embedded microchips; MDLs are digital IDs; Gavin Newsom moved driver's licenses to Apple and Google wallets. Ellison: "The secret is to get all and get all of that data in one place." China’s 2019 social credit system; UK Big Brother Watch warns it could be gateway to surveillance. Starmer: "Digital ID will make it tougher to work illegally" and YouGov: 42% in favor, 45% against; Gates documentary on AI censorship; "The Starmer government's digital IDs should be a wake up call to all of us."

Illegals at the Miami airport can use the CBP one app as a valid ID to board planes in the US. The app allows migrants to claim asylum and enter the country, even if they have committed crimes. The app does not require photos and does not store biographical information. This raises concerns as illegal immigrants from countries on terror watch lists can use this process, while American citizens are required to have a real ID by 2025 to board flights. This discrepancy is difficult to justify.

The CBP One app, used by migrants claiming asylum, is now accepted at TSA checkpoints in the Miami airport's Delta terminal as valid ID for boarding planes. The CBP One app was intended to validate non-US citizen travel documentation when a traveler lacks acceptable ID. According to the speaker, migrants can enter any information into the app, even those wanted for crimes. Photos are optional, and biographical information is not stored. The speaker questions how people from terror watch list countries can use this process. The speaker contrasts this with the Real ID requirement for Americans by May 2025 to board flights. They question how illegal immigrants can board planes with unverifiable information while Americans face stricter ID requirements.

The transcript argues that a digital ID system would allow the government to track, analyze, predict, and control private activities, describing it as the antithesis of individual freedom. It asserts that an implantable chip is not required, and that biometrics like fingerprints and facial scans would work more efficiently. It references the COVID-19 lockdown as a demonstration of how such systems could be deployed, noting that masks were recommended by authorities while private businesses enacted entry restrictions, and the public largely complied with private mandates to access essentials like groceries, travel, and banking. The claim is that these private mandates served as a beta test for digital ID compliance, normalizing the use of QR scans and facial recognition for entry into private businesses, and that this was deemed a success. The speaker describes the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act of 2008 as the gold standard for biometric regulation, saying it is being replicated across the United States. The Act allegedly requires private entities to obtain written consent before collecting biometrics, disclose policies, and destroy data after a set period, while exempting government entities from such restrictions. It is claimed that these laws have resulted in over a thousand class-action lawsuits since 2015, which purportedly led to standardized biometric consent prompts in apps and services, such as consent statements like by clicking accept or proceeding, you consent to collection of biometric data. The argument continues with a warning that a government-mandated digital ID would likely provoke mass protest, citing the UK as an example. It contends the United States will avoid a direct mandate by outsourcing to the private sector, creating a system that appears voluntary. It is claimed that the FBI’s Clearview AI has harvested over 30,000,000,000 faces from social media, and that because Clearview is a private company, the FBI can access this data without direct government action. It is asserted that in over 43 states, Department of Motor Vehicles offices have sold driver’s license photos to private firms that resold them to local police for facial recognition, implying that the government can collect and use biometric data via private entities under legal immunity, without a formal mandate. The piece concludes that, as with COVID-era practices, individuals will be free to give consent, but if they choose not to, they will be constrained. The report is presented by Greg Reiss. It notes that The Reiss Report is fully funded by Substack subscribers, inviting readers to subscribe at gregreese.substack.com.

You don't need a mandatory digital ID to live your life, travel, or buy things. The push for a global digital ID is driven by those who want constant surveillance and control over you. With a managed security digital ID, they can use excuses like a viral pandemic to force you to do things or restrict your freedom. Central bank digital currencies eliminate the need for traditional banks and allow for precise tracking of your purchases and interactions. Algorithms could be used to limit your access to certain goods based on your location. This control will be in the hands of malicious individuals, and there will be no democratic oversight. Their goal is to restrict your mobility, leave you cold and hungry, and create an unlivable world without freedom.

The Biden administration is allowing migrants to bypass ID checks at airports, raising security concerns. A recent DHS report reveals that illegal migrants can use the CBP One app instead of traditional identification, even choosing whether to allow officers to take their photo. This practice may inadvertently increase national security risks, according to the inspector general. A DHS spokesperson disputed the report, claiming it lacks context. However, the national security director for air marshals emphasized that unvetted individuals on flights pose a threat, as they can repeatedly fly without proper identification, often on taxpayer-funded flights.

I'm at Reagan National Airport and just went through security. TSA has a new system where you insert your driver's license into a scanner, then they require you to use facial recognition. When I tried to opt out and use just my license, they said it's not possible once you start the process. The manager admitted it doesn't make sense but claimed it's a new policy. I argued that I shouldn't be forced into facial recognition after being told to use the scanner. This feels like an attempt to eliminate using just a driver's license. This is big government overreach, setting up a national surveillance system using our faces and airports. I will continue to fight against this.

United States Secretary of Homeland Security Kristine Ulm urges travelers to acquire a REAL ID to avoid delays and verify identity. Beginning May 7, a REAL ID will be required for air travel and access to federal buildings within the U.S. REAL IDs enhance security and help prevent fraud, contributing to national safety. Secretary Ulm encourages everyone to obtain a REAL ID promptly to protect the country. Additional information is available at dhs.gov/realID.

TSA is now using facial recognition software to take photos of travelers, which can be opted out of. However, agents often pressure individuals to comply. This morning in Newark, I clearly stated my desire to opt out, but an agent insisted I had to have my photo taken. I had to go to another agent to formally refuse. It's frustrating that this has become the norm. Additionally, there are concerns about the government's push for a nationwide real ID, which would create a federal database of personal information. The combination of mandatory facial recognition and the real ID initiative raises significant privacy issues for travelers.

Key claims cited include: "It will stop illegal migration." "The United States just stopped illegal migration without digital IDs." "If the digital ID were to actually link social media vaccine records and bank accounts, that would allow governments to censor and control the population." "Real IDs contain embedded microchips that bring us one step closer to digital IDs." "Those mobile driver's licenses or MDLs are digital IDs, and they're just one more link in the chain." "A YouGov poll found that UK opinion towards digital IDs was 42% in favor and 45% against." "The good news is that the backlash to the digital IDs appears to be strong and growing, and real corruption is on display."

You don't need a mandatory digital ID to live your life, travel, or buy things. The push for a global digital ID is driven by those who want to monitor your every move and control your actions. With a managed security digital ID, authorities can use excuses like a viral pandemic to enforce vaccinations or restrict your movements. Central bank digital currencies eliminate the need for traditional banks and allow for precise tracking of your purchases and interactions. Algorithms could be used to limit your access to goods based on distance or other criteria. The control of this database and its algorithms could be in the hands of malicious individuals, making it impossible to resist their restrictions. This loss of freedom is unacceptable.

The discussion centers on concerns about REAL ID and its potential implications for privacy and freedom. It's argued that REAL ID violates the Tenth Amendment and is a step toward a national identification system that could lead to a social credit system like China's. The American Association for Motor Vehicle Administrators allegedly plans to digitize REAL ID, making it remotely accessible. The Secretary of Homeland Security's authority to determine additional uses for REAL ID is criticized, fearing it could be required for various activities. The claim that a REAL ID is required to fly by May 7 is refuted, citing a two-year progressive enforcement rule. The speakers urge people to refuse REAL ID, switch back to standard state driver's licenses, and contact legislators to repeal REAL ID in their states. They believe the system is built on biometrics, allowing the government to claim ownership of body parts for control and tracking. They encourage people to share their airport experiences and fund billboards to raise awareness.

Independent journalist Michael Schellenberger has been digging into the digital ID issue. He just released a lengthy piece on Substack called Public. He joins us with his thoughts. Michael says: The argument that digital IDs help thwart illegal immigration, ID fraud, streamline health care services sounds fantastic. But what’s the problem? Michael responds: Hey, great to be with you. Yeah. Another conspiracy theory that has started coming true. We saw this announcement in September. The World Economic Forum had been pushing digital IDs, the United Nations, the European Union, Britain. Of course, the really terrifying example is China, which uses digital IDs and a social credit score to control speech and to control what people think and say online. It could come in a lot of different ways. They’ll start voluntary, then they’ll make it mandatory. They’ll have rewards, and then they’ll have punishments. It’s quite terrifying. And when you listen to what the advocates for digital IDs say, it’s terrifying. And, you know, Laura, one thing I learned from this last round of investigations is that this is a huge cybersecurity threat. The idea that, I mean, imagine if you get hacked in one of the many websites that you log into. Imagine everything suddenly being hacked because it’s all centralized in a single place. That cybersecurity threat alone ought to be enough to kill the digital ID. But, again, this is potentially digital totalitarianism.