reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In the exchange, Speaker 0 questions whether US citizens are being surveilled today and whether the photos and data of protesters are being collected and stored in some kind of database. The interlocutor, Speaker 1, repeatedly denies these possibilities. The dialogue centers on the idea of monitoring and database tracking of protesters or Americans. Speaker 0 begins by asking: “Are you surveilling US citizens today?” to which Speaker 1 responds: “No, sir.” The line of questioning then shifts to the handling of protesters: Speaker 0 asks whether “those people protesting,” who are exercising their First Amendment rights, have had photos taken and data collected and whether that information is being placed in any kind of database. Speaker 1 answers, “There is no database for protesters, sir.” This establishes the asserted position that protest-related data is not being accumulated in a dedicated database. The discussion then foregrounds a specific allegation from Maine: Speaker 0 references “one of your officers in Maine” who said to a person protesting, “we're gonna put your face in a little database.” The implied question is about the meaning and existence of such a “little database.” Speaker 1 reiterates: “No, sir.” He adds, “We don’t.” This underscores the claim that there is no database for Americans or protesters. Speaker 0 presses further by asking, “Then what do you think your ICE agent was doing to this individual when he said those statements?” In response, Speaker 1 acknowledges an inability to speak for the individual officer but reiterates the core assertion: “I can't speak for that individual, sir, but I can assure you there is no database that's tracking United States citizens.” He closes with a direct reaffirmation, “There is no database that's tracking United States citizens.” Throughout the exchange, the central claims remain consistent: there is no surveillance program targeting US citizens in the form of a database, and there is no database for protesters. The dialogue also highlights a contrast between specific statements attributed to an officer in Maine and the official denial of any such database, with Speaker 1 insisting that they cannot speak for the individual officer while maintaining that no tracking database exists for US citizens.

AI has access to everyone's bank accounts, using AI to target potential abusers. The IRS uses AI to analyze returns, bank statements, and books for fraud potential. AI nationwide, mostly catching tax evaders through tips. The IRS doubts the constitutionality of AI snooping. The IRS doesn't need evidence for audits. AI doesn't investigate emails but checks bank accounts. AI captured $500 million in 6 months. The Department of Justice controls IRS AI. Accountability is lacking in the government. The IRS targets the NFL owners. IRS agents feel they're destroying lives. The IRS uses AI to target rich partnerships and digital assets. Join the American swiper program to help seek the truth.

The speaker discusses declassified documents from the Biden administration designating potential violent domestic extremists. These documents allegedly identify individuals as likely to turn to violence based on ideologies connected to opposing Biden administration policies. Examples include opposition to COVID vaccine and mask mandates, concerns about forced vaccination of children in schools, and disagreement with Biden's border policy. The speaker connects these documents, issued in December 2021, to President Biden's 2022 speech warning that Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans pose a threat to the republic. They also link it to alleged FBI directives to social media companies to censor Americans to prevent the spread of domestic violent extremism. The speaker concludes that this represents the weaponization and politicization of the intelligence community against the American people.

The IRS has been using AI to access bank accounts of American citizens without search warrants or evidence of a crime, violating the 4th Amendment. An undercover journalist discovered this and found that the IRS claims to have access to every person's bank account. The IRS targets the middle class and little guys who can't defend themselves, rather than the wealthy. A new administration is needed to address this issue and hold federal officials accountable for violating citizens' rights. The IRS's use of AI to target the middle class is a move to extract money from them. The former head of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, stated that the US can pay any debt by printing money, ensuring zero probability of default. This system is designed to destroy the middle class and consolidate wealth in the hands of a few.

The speaker discusses the violation of the Fourth Amendment in relation to the warrant issued against Donald Trump. They explain that the framers of the Constitution despised general warrants, which were used by the king to search homes and businesses without reasonable cause. The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures, requiring warrants to be based on probable cause and specifically describe the place and items to be searched. The speaker argues that there was no reasonable basis to believe Trump committed a crime by possessing classified information. They criticize the Department of Justice for not acting in good faith and resurrecting general warrants. The speaker also mentions a report of innocent citizens being monitored, which they equate to general warrants. They reference an article by Henry Farrell, stating that English jurists rejected general warrants as a tyrannical exercise of power.

The discussion centers on accusations about government actions and the handling of whistleblowers. Speaker 0 argues that the FBI is examining the situation “to chill speech” and to silence Democratic members of Congress and other elected leaders who speak out against Trump. According to Speaker 0, the motive is to stop them from speaking out. Speaker 1 pushes back by asking for clarification, wondering what exactly should be stopped. The question arises: “Stop what?” and “you’re saying that you believe that inherent in the video is that Donald Trump has given illegal orders.” Speaker 0 responds that he will speak about Congress’s role in whistleblower protections, noting that there have been whistleblowers in the Biden administration as well as in past administrations. He emphasizes that Congress has a responsibility to ensure that whistleblowers inside the federal government and the military have protections, wherever they are located in government. Speaker 1 suggests that the message might be read as Democrats encouraging the military to defy the commander in chief over current orders that cannot be named, but Speaker 0 contests this reading, implying a misinterpretation of the message. In trying to clarify, Speaker 0 states: “Here's what I believe. I believe that regardless of the president, no one in our military should actually follow through with unconstitutional orders.” He asserts this as his belief, though he concedes uncertainty about other specifics: “I’m saying regardless. I don’t know. Regardless of justice. I’m not. I’m not understanding.” Throughout, the exchange centers on the tension between protecting whistleblowers and the implications of political messaging about the president and military obedience. Speaker 0 maintains that Congress must safeguard whistleblower protections across federal government and military contexts, citing the Biden administration as an example and noting similar protections have occurred in other administrations. Speaker 1 probes the interpretation of the video and the intent behind messages that might appear to call for disobeying orders or challenging the president, while Speaker 0 reiterates a belief in the obligation to refuse unconstitutional orders, independent of which president is in office.

The speaker criticizes the FBI and the Democratic Party, claiming that the FBI is biased and corrupt, protecting Democrats and targeting Republicans. They argue that the FBI needs to be reformed and have its budget slashed. The speaker also mentions various incidents, such as the investigation into Hillary Clinton and the January 6th Capitol riot, to support their claims. They believe that the Democrats support the FBI because it serves their interests. The speaker concludes by stating that conservatives are the only ones who value civil liberties.

Speaker 0 says that on Friday the Department of Justice served the Federal Reserve with grand jury subpoenas threatening a criminal indictment related to testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last June about a multiyear project to renovate historic Federal Reserve office buildings. They emphasize respect for the rule of law and state that no one, not even the chair of the Federal Reserve, is above the law. The speaker argues this unprecedented action should be understood in the broader context of administration threats and ongoing pressure, stating the threat is not about the June testimony or the renovation project, nor about Congress’s oversight role. The Fed, through testimony and other public disclosures, allegedly tried to keep Congress informed, and the speaker asserts those are pretexts. The threat of criminal charges, according to the speaker, arises from the Fed setting interest rates based on what will serve the public, rather than following the President’s preferences. The core issue, the speaker says, is whether the Fed can continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions or whether monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation. The speaker notes service at the Fed under four administrations, both Republican and Democrat, asserting a record of carrying out duties without political fear or favor, focused on the mandate of price stability and maximum employment. Public service, the speaker adds, sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats. Finally, the speaker commits to continuing to perform the job the Senate confirmed them to do with integrity and dedication to the American people, and thanks the audience.

The IRS is allegedly using AI to access Americans' bank accounts without warrants or specific claims of criminal activity. This was reportedly discovered by an undercover journalist. The IRS claims to have access to everyone's bank account and is allegedly working with the Department of Justice. They purportedly have no problem targeting ordinary citizens to ensure tax compliance. This is considered a violation of the 4th Amendment. Jim Jordan and another individual sent a letter to the IRS demanding information about their use of AI and how they are protecting citizens' civil rights.

The IRS has been using AI to access American citizens' bank accounts without search warrants or evidence of wrongdoing. An undercover journalist revealed that the IRS claims to have access to everyone's bank accounts and is collaborating with the Department of Justice. They focus on enforcing tax compliance among ordinary citizens. This practice raises serious concerns about violations of the Fourth Amendment. In response, Jim Jordan and I have sent a letter to the IRS requesting more information about their use of AI and measures to protect the civil rights of Americans.

The speaker states the American people deserve truth, accountability, and justice. Records released by ODNI, Senator Grassley, and the House Intelligence Committee confirm the same report. According to the speaker, the Obama administration grossly politicized and manipulated intelligence to delegitimize President Trump before his inauguration, ultimately usurping the will of the American people.

The IRS has been using AI to access American citizens' bank accounts without warrants. They claim to have access to everyone's accounts and are willing to go after small taxpayers. Jim Jordan and I demanded answers from the IRS. We need a new administration to protect our civil rights from this lawless surveillance.

"What we have learned is that the IRS, in fact, has been using AI to access bank accounts of American citizens without any kind of a search warrant or even without any specific, claim that they have committed a crime." "This person also indicated that they've been working with the Department of Justice and that they have absolutely no problem whatsoever going after the little guy to make sure that they are paying their taxes." "This is such a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment that we have, Jim Jordan and I, sent a letter to the IRS demanding that they provide additional information about what they are doing with AI and what they are doing to protect the civil rights of American citizens."

The speaker discusses the issue of illegal domestic spying by the US government on its own citizens. They explain that after 9/11, the powers of the NSA, CIA, and FBI were focused on the domestic population, despite assurances that it would be temporary. The speaker highlights the bipartisan effort to extend and expand these spying powers, including the potential expansion of surveillance on public Wi-Fi networks. They also mention the history of abuse and the need for reforms. Senator Mike Lee is mentioned as a proponent of limiting these powers. The speaker concludes by discussing the possibility of bipartisan reform and the need to stop the extension of these powers.

The IRS is allegedly using AI to access Americans' bank accounts without warrants or claims of criminal activity. This was reportedly discovered by an undercover journalist who found the IRS claims access to everyone's bank accounts. The IRS is also allegedly working with the Department of Justice and targeting ordinary citizens to ensure tax compliance. Jim Jordan and Speaker 0 sent a letter to the IRS demanding information about their AI usage and civil rights protections. Speaker 0 claims the current administration has been lawless in its surveillance, targeting members of Congress, local officials, protesters, and voters, and weaponizing the government. Speaker 0 suggests a new administration is needed to protect constitutional rights.

Speaker 0: We have a problem with the CIA and FBI in Washington. Speaker 1: What's your plan to start over and fix them? Speaker 0: They've gotten out of control, with weaponization and other issues. The people need to bring about change. We were making progress, but more needs to be done.

The speaker expresses concern about Americans being afraid of prosecution by the Department of Justice. They mention the events of January 6th and question why the debate wasn't stopped when people broke into the Capitol. The speaker also criticizes the handling of investigations, particularly regarding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. They express frustration with the lack of accountability and raise concerns about corruption and foreign influence. The speaker asks the Attorney General if they believe only US citizens should vote in elections. The Attorney General responds affirmatively.

The Congresswoman states that the IRS has been using AI to access Americans’ bank accounts without a search warrant or any specific crime claim. An undercover journalist discovered that the IRS claims access to every person’s bank account, and that they have been working with the Department of Justice and that they have no problem targeting the “little guy” to ensure tax payments. She describes this as a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment and, with Jim Jordan, sent a letter to the IRS demanding information about how they are using AI and how they are protecting citizens’ civil rights. She then asks, what is the end game here? Acknowledging that the AI tools are hard to contain, she asks how American citizens and constitutional rights can be protected. In response, she argues that a new administration in November is needed because the current administration has been “absolutely lawless” in its surveillance of Americans, including members of Congress, local officials, protesters, and voters, and has weaponized the government against them. She says this administration has completely ignored the Bill of Rights, referencing the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, and states that one of the things we...

The speaker accuses the FBI of coordinating a campaign to censor and surveil the American people, particularly targeting the Biden family. They claim that the election was rigged and that the laptop scandal was just the beginning of government censorship. The speaker alleges collusion between the FBI and social media companies to silence dissenting opinions on COVID, public health, and elections. They argue for the need to dismantle the censorship regime, prosecute the perpetrators, and restore free speech. The speaker calls for congressional hearings to investigate the FBI's role in censoring lawful speech and proposes a cooling-off period for employees transitioning between government agencies and major platforms. They promise to reclaim freedoms and the country if elected president.

They've seized financial systems at the Treasury, gaining access to Americans' financial records, members of Congress, prosecutors, and regulators. Courts have repeatedly stated that they're violating the Constitution and laws. That's what deserves attention, not administrative state discussions. All you've done is complain about the process. Isn't the goal to improve the lives of Americans? It seems you're focused on process and think that improvements do not matter. If the goal is to improve lives, the focus shouldn't be on taking down individuals. The focus should be on how to make the American people better off.

Speaker 0 recounts an argument with a friend during the Edward Snowden revelations about mass surveillance. He challenges the idea that “you can look at my shit. I’m not doing anything wrong. What do you care?” and questions who the so‑called perfect overseers are. He emphasizes that these are unelected bureaucrats who could have financial or power-based incentives to monitor, silence voices, or manipulate individuals by accessing emails and phone calls. Speaker 1 suggests that even if the current government is honorable, there is a risk that a future government could abuse surveillance. He warns that the next administration might come after people who dissent, like Joe Rogan, by digging through emails and targeting individuals for actions or statements they dislike. Speaker 0 recalls the debate around the NDAA during Obama’s presidency, describing it as the indefinite detention concept that did not require charging someone or timely trials. He notes the push for this provision and questions why it was pursued, implying it could be used to detain people indefinitely. Speaker 1 adds that they are concerned about who might wield power in future generations, asking “how many generations are we away from Hitler?” He argues that the founding fathers designed checks and balances precisely because they understood how corruption and tyranny can emerge when power concentrates. Speaker 0 asserts that eroding protections through measures like the Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, or the NDAA undermines the Constitution’s core idea, which is based on the belief that government must serve the people and that power corrupts. He emphasizes that those in power would act as tyrants if left unchecked, and warns that granting broad surveillance and detention powers threatens the “fabric” the country was created with. Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 together highlight a core concern: the risk of surveillance and detention powers being exploited by unscrupulous leaders in the future, undermining democratic principles and the safeguards designed to prevent tyranny. They stress the importance of checks and balances to prevent government overreach and the potential erosion of civil liberties in the face of expanding surveillance and security powers.

The FBI's actions against President Trump and other American citizens demand accountability. Where are the Republican senators demanding justice? I experienced this firsthand when FBI agents served a subpoena at my home. This is retaliatory abuse and intimidation by the Biden administration, using the FBI. The raid on President Trump's home was based on trumped-up document retention issues. This is unacceptable. We must stand for freedom, against the extremist left, and for the Constitution and the liberty it represents.

The speaker expresses concern about the politicization and weaponization of the justice system, specifically regarding the FISA process. They highlight how the FISA court found that the FBI illegally used FISA 275,000 times against Americans, including cases related to January 6th. The speaker criticizes Congress for reauthorizing FISA and argues that it has been turned inward, targeting Americans and groups associated with January 6th. They suggest that Congress should have implemented reforms to prevent abuse of power. The speaker also criticizes FBI Director Christopher Wray for not effectively addressing the issue and accuses the Republican leadership of rewarding the FBI for breaking the law and interfering in elections, particularly against Donald Trump.

Speaker 1 stated they will do everything in their power to protect Seattle residents from anyone who comes to the city with the intention to hurt them or inhibit their first amendment rights. They believe they will probably go to jail and be in prison because the current administration has threatened to jail politicians and has done so.

Speaker 0 shows notes the attorney general brought to the hearing, captured by a photographer in the room. The notes include a list of Democratic congresswomen and their search history. The photo indicates that searches performed by members of Congress at a DOJ facility—where they sit at a computer to search unredacted files—are being tracked and read by the Department of Justice and the attorney general. Speaker 1 responds that this represents a surveillance of Congress by the Trump administration and calls it totally improper, though not surprising given their misconduct in various areas. He notes that when he visited the facility, they log in under each person’s name, implying an attempt to make something of the situation. He states that members who visited shared the information they found, and emphasizes that it is not a pretty picture. He adds that lawmakers were required under the law to remove redactions unless necessary to protect the privacy of victim survivors. In his view, the redactions were used to protect offenders and coconspirators, with their names blacked out. He contends that information about the survivors was actually revealed, which he says was very wrong and contrary to the law. He also suggests that many survivors feel the exposure was deliberate, intended to intimidate them and silence them, though he says he does not know if that is true. The statement ends with “The other thing that's inter” before the transcript cuts off.