reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The conversation centers on a shared focus on “deep state traders” and a distrust of the current political establishment. Speaker 0 insists that they are “focused on higher IQ conversations here” and that they want to “go after the deep state traders,” asking who is paying them and noting that the “Washington field office is one block away” from their location, implying proximity to the FBI in Washington, D.C. The exchange riffs on anti-establishment themes, with Speaker 1 adding that they have “gone dragged into forever wars on behalf of Israel,” questioning why the U.S. has been involved for “generations and decades” and asserting that Americans “will not allow” it, calling for white Christians to unite around “America First, America Only” and that there can be “competing interests.” The dialogue shifts to support for domestic groups and figures perceived as aligned with their cause. Speaker 0 says their priority is to gain reinforcements and to “pardon all the oath keepers.” Speaker 1 references the idea of aiding “the J sixers,” while Speaker 0 states they are focused on “the destruction of the world” and asks why they aren’t advocating for those groups. The conversation then explicitly identifies a racialized fear about the future, with Speaker 1 stating that “your children are gonna be black and Muslim,” and “your children’s children are gonna be black and Muslim,” attributing this not to genetic or demographic inevitability but to “the weak, feckless men that are allowing APAC to buy out our politicians and open up our borders.” Speaker 0 counters by describing “weak, tackless toxic, feckless men” in the country and reiterates that their priority is to “go after the traitors based on their actions and actions alone,” stressing that they have a “laundry list” of targets and that they do not care about appearances or which hair follicles or eye colors these people have. The two converge on the idea of targeting treasonous individuals, with Speaker 0 insisting that the focus is on those who have committed treason and that those who fund them come from all stripes. The overall thrust is an uncompromising approach to identifying and pursuing perceived traitors, tying together anti-war, nationalist, and white-identity rhetoric, while calling for pardons for controversial domestic groups and framing the fight as one against treason and influence from abroad.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the intelligence community's power and control over domestic politics. Speaker 1 criticizes Chuck Schumer for accepting a system where unelected spy agencies dictate the outcome of democracy. They question the meaning of democracy when the population is disenfranchised and controlled by unelected individuals. Speaker 0 highlights the lack of response to Schumer's statement, indicating the pervasiveness of this issue in Congress and the media. They challenge those who lecture about democracy while supporting a system that goes against its principles. The conversation emphasizes the need to reject such control and uphold true democracy.

Populist, nationalist, and free market movements are gaining momentum worldwide, causing concern for the global deep state, particularly BlackRock. The speaker asks how to remove the deep state's control over our government. Another speaker suggests electing a president who will use the constitution to dismantle the deep state. They explain that the US funds international institutions that undermine sovereignty and government actors share pension funds with entities like BlackRock. The speaker believes that targeting the federal bureaucracy is crucial, as it is the head of the snake. They discuss using constitutional authority to lay off government employees and mention Clinton's past actions. The speaker plans to take legal action and credits Trump for appointing Supreme Court justices who support their cause. They emphasize the need for an outsider leader who understands the law and constitution, and someone from the next generation to lead the revolution.

The speaker discusses the concept of the deep state, referring to the permanent government that outlasts elected officials. They believe that the deep state will prevent Trump from becoming president again. The speaker also mentions how the mainstream media and military industrial complex support Nikki Haley. Looking ahead to 2024, the speaker finds it difficult to predict the outcome due to the strong opposition against Trump. They criticize the hypocrisy of those who claim to protect democracy while working against Trump. The speaker believes that if Trump is not allowed to win, it will expose the fraudulent nature of democracy and reveal an oligarchy controlled by the wealthy. They express concern about the future and hope for a fair election.

Who actually runs the government? It's often not the elected officials we think. Recent events, like Biden's debate with Trump, reveal that decision-making power lies with a group of elite Democrats and figures in the military-industrial complex, not with Biden or Harris. This cabal includes influential individuals like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who benefit from ongoing conflicts. The administrative and national security states gain authority during crises, making it difficult for citizens to hold leaders accountable. Our democracy, meant to be of, by, and for the people, struggles when elected representatives aren't the true decision-makers. While the dynamics have shifted over time, the upcoming election presents an opportunity to reset this situation.

The speaker discusses hypothetical actions that they would take if they were part of the "deep state" and wanted to destroy America. They mention rigging elections, creating false flags, prosecuting opponents, shutting down internet businesses, and manipulating the justice system. They also mention pushing certain agendas, owning politicians, and instilling fear in the population. The speaker concludes by saying "mission accomplished."

One speaker believes the idea of a "deep state" is paranoid. Another speaker respectfully disagrees, defining "America First" as: 1) elected officials actually running the government, and 2) leaders owing their sole moral duty to American citizens. This speaker claims that unelected bureaucrats, numbering 4 million, set most public policy and cannot be fired by elected officials, which they argue is not a democracy but a technocracy. They believe this is a root cause of foreign and domestic policy failures, including the rise of the welfare and regulatory state. They also claim that the warfare state is upstream of the welfare state, and that invading other countries invites immigration, linking it to the border crisis.

The speaker asserts that “we own everything”—our jails, our courts, and our public servants who operate in our buildings and seats, paid with our money. No new structures are needed; instead, a core group in each state should be well versed in state and federal constitutions to exercise inherent rights and hold public servants accountable. The speaker references the grand jury concept and claims state constitutions authorize citizens to hold officials accountable, alter or reform government, abolish it, restore republics, and institute new governments that benefit the people, who are entitled to protect their rights and happiness. The call is for “We The People” to act against treasonous public servants, with the expectation that once some people take a stand, others will follow. The speaker contends that many public servants don’t understand their true job or the constitutional framework, and that overthrowing corruption will cause others to “fall in line.” They acknowledge many people want to do what’s right but fear standing up or being labeled; thus, proactive citizens must act to restore the republic. Citing the Epstein files as a wake-up point, the speaker argues that politics is a rigged, two-party system where Republicans and Democrats are one party, each pandering to different sides, and that voting is an illusion of choice and freedom. They criticize the notion that people vote for bills they don’t understand because they lack constitutional knowledge, trust in people in suits and degrees, and do not recognize the system’s designed nature. The talk expands to a broad indictment of the system, from clerks to top officials with guns and badges, claiming most are in it for power or the illusion of power, though some entered to do good but have also been brainwashed into accepting the system as reality. The speaker argues for a systematic shift from passive participation to action by “We the People,” citing psychological and medical warfare as historical design. They stress that voting has long been rigged and that public attention is diverted by entertainment, such as sports and the NFL, which they describe as rigged for show. The speaker asks listeners to imagine all the people in one stadium uniting to use the law to hold public servants accountable, indicating that many would rather be slaves than join the effort, but others will stand up. Plans include starting to assemble a grand jury and building a network to act quickly to “fix things,” with urgency to remove nonperforming officials from their positions. They exhort readers to remember these are our jails, our buildings, our public servants, and to begin throwing them out if they refuse to do their jobs. The speaker invokes the founders’ spirit, alleging widespread redaction of Epstein-related information and accusing those involved of complicity. The guidance is to stop merely talking, exercise constitutionally protected rights, and rely on “We the People” to restore the republic, arguing that true governance comes from the people.

Alex Kraner and Glenn discuss the idea that democracy in the West is largely a façade with real power exercised by an unaccountable oligarchy, a phenomenon they compare to historical patterns from Rome and other periods. - Kraner argues that while democracies are presented as rule-by-the-people, in reality Western nations exhibit a shallow democracy on the surface, with an oligarchy actually governing the system. This, he says, leads to crises, repression, censorship, declining living standards, deteriorating infrastructure, and endless wars, despite repeated mandates for prosperity and security from voters. - He cites empirical evidence and references a video analysis to support the claim that democracies deliver outcomes unlike their professed ideals. The same syndrome, he notes, has repeated itself across different eras, from ancient Rome to Lombard banking in Italy, suggesting a persistent pattern of oligarchic control under democratic veneers. - A key contrast is drawn with Russia under Vladimir Putin. Kraner asserts Putin did not exterminate oligarchs but “rounded them up and laid down the rules”: pay taxes, treat employees fairly, stay out of politics. Oligarchs were allowed to keep wealth but were constrained to a sandbox where the state runs the country and politics remain within established channels. According to him, this check on oligarchy contributed to Russia’s economic revival and resilience even amid severe sanctions. - He contends that in the West, oligarchs and elected leaders are effectively intertwined, with leaders subordinate to oligarchic interests. He points to policy directions—such as rapid social changes (LGBT agendas), perpetual warfare, financial crises, and energy policies— as examples of decisions that appear not to reflect the democratic will of the people. - The “expert class” is described as a mechanism through which elites impose policies (e.g., net zero, carbon capture) by claiming scientific consensus and complexity that ordinary citizens cannot grasp, thereby narrowing democratic control. - Tocqueville’s concept of democratic despotism is revisited: democracies can be vulnerable to oligarchies because of trust in representatives, expansion of the administrative state, and manufactured consensus. The danger is a paternalistic state that treats citizens as infants, while wealthier interests consolidate influence over institutions. - They discuss the perception problem: many people feel they cannot critique the system without seeming fringe or conspiracy-minded, though awareness is growing—polls, journalism, and academic work increasingly recognize that voting has limited impact on policy, illustrating the oligarchic influence. - The conversation covers the political consequences: populist and anti-establishment candidates gain traction (e.g., Trump in the U.S., nationalist movements in Europe) as mainstream options become less credible. Courts are used as tools to disqualify or sideline challengers, a phenomenon described as lawfare. - On the trajectory ahead, they contemplate whether Western society is heading toward pre-revolutionary conditions. Guardian signals include declining trust in politicians and media, the failure of the old narrative to enforce obedience, and growing calls to reform rather than escalate with new wars. - Strategically, they propose broadening anti-oligarchic reform by engaging soldiers, police, and other institutions to prevent a collapse into civil conflict, stressing that reform is essential to avert violence and preserve stability. - In closing, they acknowledge the paradox of liberal democracy: it holds strong ideals, yet its vulnerability to oligarchic capture necessitates clear understanding and reform to prevent cycles of debt, imperialism, and conflict. They express cautious optimism that, despite resistance, a shift toward reform is possible if more people recognize the systemic dynamics at play. Throughout, the speakers emphasize the need to reexamine Tocqueville’s warnings, understand the role of the expert class, and confront the entrenched power of oligarchies to preserve democratic legitimacy and avert future upheavals.

The speaker discusses the existence of a shadow government that controls and manipulates world governments, including the United States. They claim that this shadow government is made up of wealthy and influential individuals who work behind the scenes to shape geopolitical agreements and military interventions. The speaker asserts that the shadow government is more powerful than any elected government and that it determines the agenda of each new government. They also mention that the shadow government is responsible for the decision to steal the 2020 election from Donald Trump. The speaker emphasizes the importance of transparency and urges listeners to consider the information they have shared.

The core conservative idea of smaller government has not been achieved despite 44 years of Republican power. The speaker suggests a "deep state" with immense power directs things against liberty, leading to nihilism among the wealthy. Some rich individuals become aimless due to lacking belief in a higher spirit. The speaker emphasizes the importance of spiritual life for all, even for nihilists who substitute it with their own beliefs.

Without a strong feedback loop between the people and their government, democracy loses its meaning. Bureaucratic rule undermines the power of elected officials—the president, the Senate, and the House—to represent the will of the people. If unelected bureaucrats make the decisions, we don't have a democracy; we have a bureaucracy. It's crucial to repair this feedback loop so that our elected representatives, not unelected bureaucrats, determine our nation's course. The public's chosen leaders in the presidency, House, and Senate must be the ultimate decision-makers.

The speaker discusses the concept of the deep state, explaining that it is not comprised of one individual but rather a machine or beast that goes beyond any single person. They use the example of the FBI to illustrate this point, stating that while many individuals who work there may be good people, they are part of a larger system that has its own culture and history of corruption. The speaker also discusses the decentralization of censorship, where the government delegates the task to administrative agencies, private sector executives, and AI algorithms. They argue that we are in a modern 1775 moment, where the real divide is between the managerial class and the citizen.

The speaker discusses the existence of the shadow government and the deep state, emphasizing that they are not the same entity but are interconnected. The shadow government consists of secret intelligence agencies that manipulate elected officials behind the scenes, while the deep state refers to the system behind the government, including the military-industrial complex and the power of secrecy. The speaker highlights the unconstitutionality of these entities and their threat to democracy. They also mention various organizations and agencies involved in the shadow government and the deep state, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, CIA, NSA, and Wall Street. The speaker suggests that these entities have significant control and influence over the government and the economy.

The speakers discuss the biggest threats to democracy, including election sabotage, voter suppression, and the need for federal standards. They emphasize the importance of organizing and having better leaders to fight against these threats. The speakers believe that these actions are rooted in white supremacy and an organized campaign to discourage people from participating in democracy. They stress the need to protect democracy to ensure social justice, climate justice, and economic justice.

If there isn't a solid feedback loop connecting the people to the government, and the bureaucracy is in charge, what does democracy even mean? If the people can't vote and have their will enacted by their elected officials like the president, senate, and house, then we're not in a democracy, we're in a bureaucracy. It's crucial to fix this feedback loop so that the public's elected representatives decide what happens, not a large, unelected bureaucracy. There are good people in the federal bureaucracy, but it can't be autonomous. It must be responsive to the people; that's the whole point of a democracy.

The deep state in Washington DC is a group of elites who believe they know better than the American people. The current administration is seen as a joke with unsuccessful policies. The speaker, who worked in the Pentagon after Trump, believes no one is truly leading the country. They criticize Secretary Austin and Mark Milley for the Afghan withdrawal and call the situation at the border a crisis. The speaker wants DJT back in office to restore order.

The speaker claims that current political discourse lacks depth, focusing on short-term goals rather than addressing systemic issues like the bureaucracy, which they define as a "deep state" constituting a fourth branch of government. This bureaucracy allegedly consolidates legislative, judicial, and executive powers, mirroring the tyranny the founding fathers sought to prevent. According to the speaker, bureaucratic agencies write regulations, enforce them with their own law enforcement, and adjudicate them through administrative courts, bypassing the federal system. These agencies purportedly collude with corporate and banking interests to transfer public funds to private entities. The speaker criticizes GOP candidates for mentioning the "deep state" without explaining its roots or offering concrete solutions. They propose legislative action to change or defund these agencies, requiring a supportive President and Congress. However, they believe many representatives prioritize corporate interests over the people. Restructuring these agencies and removing obstructive figures is also necessary. While not interested in running for office themselves, the speaker wants to hold candidates accountable and believes their inability to articulate these problems simply is disqualifying.