reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I remember the night I got elected and seeing people upset about Hillary not winning. I have my opinions on past presidents, like Bush senior, but the Clintons raise questions. Did they have an open marriage? Hillary seemed more upset about Bill getting caught in the Oval Office than his infidelities. The email scandal is another topic of interest. If we could see behind the scenes of politics, it would be like watching a dramatic show, and I think it would shock everyone.

Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of being a corrupt politician. Speaker 1 responds by mentioning that 50 former national intelligence officials and the heads of the CIA have dismissed the accusations as false. Speaker 0 dismisses this as another Russia hoax. Speaker 1 tries to steer the conversation back to the issue of race.

Hillary Clinton was accosted and accused of being a "super predator" responsible for millions of deaths. She was called a genocide supporter and accused of facilitating the genocide of Palestinian people. The speaker demanded to know what Clinton had to say for herself.

The speaker claims that there was a scandal where their campaign was spied on, but the other person disagrees and says there is no evidence. The speaker insists that there is evidence everywhere and wants it to be put on the show. The other person explains that they can't put on unverified information. The speaker continues to assert that their campaign was spied on and that it was caught. They accuse the other person of knowing this but not wanting to acknowledge it. The other person denies knowing anything about it.

Hillary Clinton conceded the election to Trump on the night of the election, but later expressed that she believed he was an illegitimate president. While one side argues she is the original election denier, the other counters that she accepted the outcome but was disappointed. The discussion highlights the difference between conceding an election and questioning its legitimacy afterward. Clinton's statements about Trump being illegitimate are cited, but there’s a debate over whether her disappointment equates to denial. Ultimately, the conversation reflects on the complexities of election outcomes and perceptions of legitimacy.

Speaker 1 argues that a scandal exists that is bad for Biden, but it can't be verified, while insignificant things are discussed. Speaker 1 claims the laptop was found, but the family is in hiding. Speaker 1 believes the media is fake and social media is the only way to get their voice out. Speaker 0 recalls Speaker 1 saying the media is discredited to ensure negative reports are not believed. Speaker 1 denies having to discredit Speaker 0, saying they discredited themself. Speaker 1 accuses Speaker 0 of inappropriately bringing up tough questions from the beginning, questions Speaker 1 claims Joe Biden is never asked. Speaker 1 states that Speaker 0's first statement was about asking tough questions, which Speaker 1 deems inappropriate. Speaker 1 ends the interview early.

Speaker 0 questions the need for a new tone in politics, believing the current tone is fine. They criticize the media for comparing Trump to Hitler and question the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Speaker 1 challenges Speaker 0's claims of election fraud and defamation. Speaker 0 refuses to concede and accuses Speaker 1 of being part of fake news. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 dismissing Speaker 1's questions and asserting their beliefs.

The conversation begins with one person asking if the other is voting for Trump and accusing them of being a white supremacist. The accused person asks for proof, but the accuser doesn't provide any. The accused person then reveals that they are voting for Trump as their proof. The conversation then shifts to the accused person asking if the other is voting for Biden and accuses them of being a pedophile. The accused person denies it, but the accuser continues to make baseless accusations. The conversation abruptly ends.

The speaker claims that the biggest scandal was when their campaign was spied on, but the other person disagrees, saying there is no evidence. The speaker insists that it is all over the place and that it was bad for Biden. The other person explains that they can't put on things they can't verify. The speaker continues to assert that it has been verified and that they got caught. The other person denies knowing about it.

Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of discrediting themselves by avoiding questions about Biden's son and alleged corruption. Speaker 1 questions the validity of the Hunter Biden laptop story, sourced from Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani. Speaker 0 insists it's a crucial issue to investigate Biden's alleged corruption involving China, Ukraine, and Russia. Speaker 1 argues the story lacks verification. Speaker 0 counters by pointing out the laptop's existence and the Biden family's response. The conversation escalates as Speaker 0 emphasizes the significance of the scandal and Speaker 1 questions its validity.

Hillary Clinton should go to jail, and many agree she deserves it. There were calls to "lock her up," reflecting widespread sentiment against her. While acknowledging her past actions, there's a reluctance to pursue legal action against her or the Bidens, as they are seen as good people. Despite the jokes about jail, there’s a sense of respect for Bill and Hillary Clinton, even amidst the criticisms. Ultimately, the discussion revolves around accountability and the contrasting views on justice for political figures.

Speaker 0 states that Speaker 2 has a reputation for texting underage girls. Speaker 0 claims Bill Clinton officiated Speaker 2's wedding with someone who was a right-hand person to Hillary Clinton in 2016. Speaker 0 mentions 650,000 emails and a folder with the words "life insurance," claiming that nine out of twelve NYPD cops who saw the email committed suicide. Speaker 0 then reads a list of 46 names of people close to the Clintons who have died, including James McDougal and Mary Mahoney. Speaker 2 accuses Speaker 0 of being a bully for reading the list and says Hillary Clinton is the problem. Speaker 0 asks how people close to the Clintons keep dying. Speaker 1 suggests cutting the list out, but Speaker 0 refuses.

Secretary Clinton is asked outdated questions about her typing speed and President Obama's coffee preference. The conversation turns to the possibility of a civil war, but Clinton dismisses the idea. The interviewer sarcastically mentions Clinton's supposed plan to take away guns. Clinton expresses her focus on the economy and creating more jobs for everyone. The interview is interrupted by a commercial from Donald Trump, which Clinton finds inappropriate. The interview ends with a lighthearted exchange about staying in touch and contacting Clinton via email.

The speaker confronts the interviewer about their bias towards Donald Trump and attacks on colleagues. They express a desire to discuss Joe Biden and Trump impartially. The interviewer is asked to stop the interview if the attacks continue. The speaker is then cut off and the interview ends abruptly.

The speaker claims that Hillary Clinton was executed in Guantanamo Bay in December 2018. They suggest that the person we see on television is a body double. When asked how they know this, the speaker admits they are not a firsthand witness to the execution. They also mention that other high-level public officials, including Joe Biden, were executed by military tribunals.

Speaker 1 accuses the media of bias for not covering a supposed scandal involving Biden. Speaker 0 defends the need for verification. Speaker 1 claims the scandal can be verified due to a laptop. The conversation escalates with accusations of media bias and unfair questioning. The interview is abruptly ended.

There is a discussion about a potential disconnect between the Democratic Party's brand and President Biden. The term "existential threat" is used to describe Donald Trump. However, Speaker 1 brings up Hillary Clinton's involvement in a fake dossier to remove a sitting president and mentions her connection to Jeffrey Epstein. Speaker 1 questions why Epstein and his clients were not considered an existential threat, suggesting it may be due to Bill Clinton's association with Epstein. The conversation then shifts to the lack of public disclosure regarding Epstein's client list.

Speaker 0 asks, “How did you kill Jeffrey Epstein? … you’re not in power, but you have all the power.” Speaker 1 responds that “The things they say are so ridiculous. Honestly, I don’t know what I ever did to get them so upset.” Speaker 2 says, “My father is no different than any other powerful man. Any man who’s responsible for other people, like a senator or a president.” Speaker 1 counters that he sounds naive; Speaker 2 asks, “Why?” Speaker 1 asserts, “Senators and presidents don’t have men killed.” Speaker 2 retorts, “Oh, who’s being naive, Kaye?” Speaker 3 mentions a fellow discussing becoming their next congressman, Bill Clinton, calling him a new man. Speaker 4 delivers a hopeful closing address about trusting each other to forge a future that will enrich their lives, strengthen traditions and faith, and make them proud they gave their best; God bless you all. Speaker 5 discusses the term “Clinton body count,” saying it’s become common in pop culture. It’s based on the claim that numerous people connected to Bill Clinton—critics, opponents, associates, and witnesses—died in mysterious ways, far too many to dismiss as coincidence. The term first appeared when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, with at least 20 people connected to him murdered or dying mysteriously, mostly around the CIA’s illegal activities at Mina Intermountain Municipal Airport, part of the Iran-Contra affair, involving smuggling drugs and guns through Mina, Arkansas to fund a revolution in Nicaragua. Speaker 6 explains that the Contras were former Sandinista military officers who had been kicked out of Nicaragua in 1979 and were trying to retake the country with CIA aid. He notes the Contras were a creation of the CIA and were dealing drugs in Los Angeles and elsewhere; drug traffickers met with CIA agents, and the influx of cheap cocaine into South Central Los Angeles coincided with the rise of crack, describing a historical collision. Speaker 5 recalls it was bombshell news in the 1990s when Clinton’s involvement with Mina and the growing number of dead witnesses were covered in documentaries, and even mainstream news covered CIA drug smuggling; however, the narrative moved on to Monica Lewinsky, cigars, and oral sex, and Mina “never happened” in the mainstream. Speaker 7 recounts an encounter with a supervisor in the Saline County Criminal Investigation Division who urged him to drop the case, suggesting it could cause grief if pursued. Speaker 5 notes that the first two names on the list are women: Suzanne Coleman (or Susan Coleman) and Judy Gibbs, with Coleman allegedly pregnant with Clinton’s child and dying of a gunshot to the back of the head; Gibbs dying in a house fire amid rumors of compromising photos with Clinton. Speaker 8 asks about a lobby display. Speaker 9 asks if it’s taken care of. Speaker 5 elaborates: Judy Gibbs, a former model, left modeling to marry Bill Puterbaugh; his son Randy claims Puterbaugh’s father posed Judy for sex with Clinton to gain political favor; Judy’s death followed a fire at their home after a brother-in-law, Dale Bliss, was caught molesting a boy, with a hidden window found of Clinton having sex with Judy; Gibbs and Puterbaugh died in the fire. Judy’s sister Martha and Randy believe Clinton was responsible for Gibbs’s death. Speaker 0 reports Sundinista troops moving from Nicaragua against contras in Honduras. Speaker 8 notes a killer blow to crush freedom fighters while Congress withholds aid and they can’t be resupplied. Speaker 10: Nicaragua’s Sandinistas invade Honduran territory after taking a house vote, with about 1,500 troops; Ortega warns US intervention will lead to war. Speaker 5: On 10/05/1986, a CIA airplane was shot down over Nicaragua; pilot Eugene Hasenfuss captured; he testifies at a press conference that he was part of Operation Enterprise to supply Contras with weapons supervised by the US government. Speaker 0: Hasenfuss described being brought to Miami by former Air America pilot William Cooper and assigned to fly weapons to the Contras. Speaker 12: Hasenfuss testified that flights aimed to resupply the FDN and UNO teams of the Contras. Speaker 0: Under questioning, Hasenfuss did not repeat a charge that two Cuban Americans working with him were CIA operatives. Speaker 5: This linked to the Reagan White House, known as the Iran-Contra affair; the operation involved supplying the Nicaraguan Contras with untraceable weapons, funded by illegal weapons sales to Iran and cocaine distribution through Mina, Arkansas; profits laundered through organizations such as the Arkansas Development Finance Authority created by Webster Hubbel and signed into law by governor Bill Clinton. Oliver North took the blame during hearings; Clinton’s involvement appeared evident as the operation ran through Arkansas. Speaker 13: Barry Seal, a drug smuggler in the Mina operation, set up in Louisiana but moved to Arkansas due to a “sleazy governor,” noted as Bill Clinton being hooked on cocaine. Speaker 14: Clinton was hospitalized for cocaine abuse on at least one or two occasions. Speaker 5: The Mina case involved corrupt cops, judges, and politicians in high positions to support drug smuggling and money laundering. Things progressed until 1987’s events around Don Henry and Kevin Ives. Speaker 15: In 1982, Barry Seal set up a major drug-smuggling operation in Mina under Clinton’s oversight; Seal became an informant for the DEA after a sentencing deal. Speaker 11: Seal was killed in 1986; Milam, a witness, was decapitated in 1987; Malik, Arkansas’s medical examiner, ruled Milam’s death an ulcer and later had the head found elsewhere; questions were raised about Malik’s competence and independence. Speaker 18: The head’s disappearance and later discovery drew scrutiny toward Clinton’s influence over Malik. Speaker 19: The question remains whether stages of the investigation revealed that these deaths were connected to Mina. Speaker 20: Witnesses including Jean Duffy and Keith McCaskill faced threats and murder as investigations pursued the Mina drug operation; several witnesses and officials were murdered or died under suspicious circumstances. Speaker 3, Speaker 1, Speaker 5 discuss the breadth of cases and the idea of a Clinton body count, involving many names and alleged connections to Mina, the Iran-Contra operation, and drug smuggling and its coverups. Speaker 21: Kevin Ives and Don Henry were claimed by some to have been on a drop site; initial autopsy ruled death by train after drugging with marijuana; later autopsies contested this, showing stabbing and skull crushing before being placed on the tracks. Medical examiner Malik’s rulings were criticized; Don Henry and Kevin Ives’s deaths remained a focal point of alleged coverups; the grand jury investigation faced obstruction; witnesses died, and some investigators faced danger or were removed. Speaker 22: The narrative includes multiple other individuals—Gregory Collins, Jeff Rhodes, Richard Winters, Jordan Kettleson, Colonel James Sabo, Arkansas investigator Russell Welch—killed or attacked amid ongoing investigations into Mina’s drug operation and associated corruption; the pattern of deaths persisted through 1992. Speaker 24: A 1983 awareness of a smuggling operation at Mina Airport; 1991 anthrax infection of a government figure; journalist Danny Casalaro found dead in a hotel bathtub in 1991; 1992 security figure Gary Johnson survives a home invasion; 1992 Jennifer Flowers era and related deaths; Plane crash of Victor Razor and his son in 1992; Paul Tully’s death in a hotel room in Little Rock; Paula Grober’s death in a car accident; 1992 ski accident death of Jim Wilhite; the phrase Clinton body count remains associated with these mysteries prior to Clinton’s presidency. Speaker 9 notes Republicans blaming the existence of a small base at Mina on George Bush and Oliver North; the question of national security is raised. Speaker 12 concludes that the airport and events were primarily matters for federal jurisdiction; state had little to do with it.

Speaker 1 insisted that a story should be aired because it is "bad for Biden," while Speaker 0 refused because it "can't be verified," specifically referencing a laptop. Speaker 1 claimed the laptop story is "one of the biggest scandals" and that the family is in hiding. Speaker 1 accused the media of being "fake" and said social media is the only way to get his voice out. Speaker 0 claimed Speaker 1 once said the media was discredited to ensure negative stories would not be believed. Speaker 1 denied this. Speaker 1 contrasted the interview with what he characterized as "softball" interviews given to Joe Biden. Speaker 1 took issue with the interview beginning with the interviewer stating there would be "tough questions." Speaker 1 then ended the interview.

The transcript captures a discussion about Clinton-related death conspiracy theories and how these claims circulate in political commentary. Speakers repeatedly assert that “the Clintons have killed” a large number of people—well over 100, with an figure cited of about 130—arguing that such deaths are linked to the Clintons’ power and to foreign policy actions, including a bombing campaign in Iraq and a massive blockade around Iraq that, according to UN estimates, contributed to the death of hundreds of thousands of children. One speaker emphasizes that “the body count is about 130” and notes that people know the body counts, even if some refuse to acknowledge the implication that politicians might have people murdered. A recurring theme is that there used to be a Clinton Body Count website tallying people connected to Hillary and Bill who were said to have been secretly killed; one participant says Hillary should demand its return and that the record is misrepresented. The conversation frames this as a widely held belief rather than proven fact, acknowledging skepticism about the claims while insisting there is “a lot of very suspicious deaths around the Clintons” that are fair to bring up. The discussion then shifts to particular cases and figures associated with Clinton circles. Vince Foster’s death is described as a conspiracy theory that never produced evidence, but the idea lingers. The panel also references other individuals—Mary Mahoney, John F. Kennedy Jr., James McDougal, and Mark Middleton—along with the broader pattern of deaths that are framed as connected to the Clintons, though without definitive proof being established on many of the cases. In the case of Mark Middleton, described as a longtime Clinton adviser who allegedly facilitated Epstein connections, Middleton’s death is recounted with details: found dead after driving to a Heifer Ranch, with an elaborate scenario involving hanging and a shotgun, an autopsy described as unclear, and a family that disputes the notion of suicide. The family has sought to seal photos and footage, arguing that releasing them would fuel conspiracy theories. The conversation also foregrounds Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was shot in Washington, D.C. The panel notes that Rich was connected to WikiLeaks and allegedly provided thousands of emails to WikiLeaks, with claims that Fox News reported an FBI forensic finding showing contact with WikiLeaks and the release of top DNC emails leading to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. There is debate among participants about whether Rich’s death was a botched robbery, noting that his wallet and watch were left behind and his phone was not taken, and that claims of murder are contested by others on air. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are discussed as adding to the conspiracy milieu: Assange raises questions about killings, offers a reward for information, and is described as “working for Russia now.” The panel references the broader political pinboard: the Clinton/DNC nexus, the FBI/CrowdStrike narrative about the 2016 hacking, and the media environment around Russia investigations and alleged election interference. There is a sense of ongoing investigation and uncertainty, with speakers insisting that sources face danger and that certain deaths remain unresolved or contested in public discourse. Toward the end, the speakers reflect on how reputations attach to candidates; they compare Clinton-related reputations with those of other politicians, asking how, over the last fifty years, the pattern emerges that people close to Clinton figures die, while noting that public perception often constrains open discussion of these claims.

The speakers engage in a heated conversation about various topics including Israel, Taiwan, Ukraine, and Hillary Clinton. Speaker 0 expresses their opinion that the American people's voices are not being heard by the President or Speaker 1. Speaker 1 disagrees and states that Speaker 0's opinion is subjective. The conversation becomes disruptive, with Speaker 0 claiming their actions are exercising free speech while Speaker 1 argues that it is disrupting others. The discussion then shifts to historical events and human rights issues in Uganda. Speaker 0 emphasizes that the conversation is not about football or team loyalty. Speaker 1 defends being on "team America" despite its flaws. The conversation ends abruptly with Speaker 0 asking Clinton to denounce the President's speech.

Speaker 0 criticizes the hypocrisy of the speech and accuses President Joe Biden of warmongering. Speaker 1 interrupts and argues that the American people's voices are not being heard. Speaker 0 dismisses Speaker 1's opinion and asks them to sit down. Speaker 1 insists on exercising their free speech, but Speaker 0 argues that it is not free speech when it disrupts others. The conversation becomes heated, with Speaker 1 bringing up historical events and Speaker 0 defending Team America. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's actions and their impact, while Speaker 1 asks Hillary Clinton to denounce the president's speech. The conversation ends abruptly.

The speakers discuss the hatred and violence they perceive from Trump supporters. Speaker 1 claims that Trump supporters hit people, throw urine, and use crowbars. Speaker 0 expresses doubt but acknowledges the possibility of milkshake incidents. Speaker 1 questions if Trump supporters would engage in such behavior, to which Speaker 0 responds that they hope not. Speaker 1 then suggests that Democrats and liberals are actually responsible for these actions. Speaker 0 disagrees, stating that the average Democrat does not support violence. The conversation continues with Speaker 1 mentioning incidents at a Trump rally and accusing liberals of stealing and burning red hats. Speaker 0 dismisses these claims as an attempt to push an agenda. The video ends with Speaker 1 questioning Speaker 0's support for multiple candidates.

In this heated conversation, Speaker 0 questions why certain politicians, like the Clintons, have a reputation for having people close to them die. Speaker 1 argues that this is a conspiracy theory and lists other politicians who don't have the same reputation. Speaker 0 emphasizes that the list of deaths is based on an obscure website and implies that it dishonors the memory of those who have passed away. The conversation becomes increasingly confrontational, with Speaker 1 insisting on the importance of discussing these deaths and Speaker 0 urging them to apologize to the families affected. The conversation also touches on topics like Benghazi and Barack Obama's birthplace.

The speaker claims the biggest scandal was spying on their campaign, insisting it's verified despite lack of evidence. They urge to air it for Biden's detriment. The interviewer refuses, citing the need for verification. The speaker insists they were spied on and caught, challenging the interviewer to check the papers. The interviewer remains skeptical.