reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The transcript centers on a confrontation in Miami Beach with Matthew Tiermond, a former Project Veritas board member, who is discussed as having been on the board during a controversial period including the February 6, three-year anniversary of the termination of James O’Keefe from Project Veritas. The exchange, captured by an undercover journalist working with James O’Keefe, reveals a web of explosive claims and repudiations about Tiermond’s conduct, his relationship with federal agencies, and his stated ambitions. Key allegations and admissions about Tiermond: - Tiermond is described as having said he would “carve my heart out and eat it,” a claim tied to a repeated assertion that he wanted to kill James O’Keefe. He later characterizes the statement as metaphorical, saying “I would kill James O’Keefe… it’s metaphoric.” - He asserts he has “a thousand sources in the DOJ and CIA I talk to all the time,” and that he has “fed the Southern District tons of shit to try and get him in prison.” He claims to have spoken with multiple law enforcement and intelligence contacts, including mentioning the SDNY, the FBI, the IRS, and other agencies, and asserts that he has discussed Tiermond’s activities with them. - He acknowledges involvement with the SDNY and the FBI as an informant, stating that he has talked to many people who called him from law enforcement agencies and that he answered questions truthfully and honestly. He is pressed to identify who he fed information to, with the interviewer demanding specifics and identifying him as an FBI informant on tape. - Tiermond asserts that he has used insider information to target various conservative figures and organizations, including claims about Donald Trump Jr. and Don Jr.’s alleged insider trading and crypto schemes intended to influence foreign governments. He states his mission is to ensure Don Jr. ends up in prison and describes Don Jr. as “stealing billions.” - He describes a plan to “weaponize money” through investment banking to influence the system, stating, “I am going to weaponize the entire system the way Paul Singer does, but my way,” and expresses a goal of making $100,000,000 to weaponize money better than anyone. - He says he has advised and solicited investments for companies in the pharmaceutical space, including entities such as Cathayed Incorporated, Matt Tiermond LLC, and a company called Petragen Petrogen. He notes that some deals were discussed while on the Project Veritas board and mentions NDA constraints and the risk to his licenses if he discloses more. - He references conflicts of interest policies with the board, including disclosures about investments in Petragen or related entities, and implies that some discussions were restricted or confidential. - He discusses the media landscape, acknowledging that he’s worked with legacy outlets like the New York Times and National Review, and says he would work with the New York Times if they pursue the truth of what’s going on. Additional context and implications: - The conversation situates Tiermond as both a participant in Project Veritas’ internal dynamics and as someone who claims intimate, ongoing access to federal agencies. He describes the SDNY as “all about power” and asserts that there are no “bad FBI agents,” contradicting the interview’s insinuations about the FBI’s conduct based on his prior alleged stance during FBI raids on Veritas journalists in 2021. - The interview recounts a confrontation where Tiermond was approached to discuss his statements, with the undercover journalist verifying that Tiermond’s claims included admission to informing the SDNY and to wanting to kill O’Keefe, while denying certain other accusations. Setting and purpose: - The narrative is presented as the “rest of the story” about Matthew Tiermond, culminating in a live encounter in which Tiermond’s admissions and threats are publicly documented. The segment ends with James O’Keefe reporting from Miami Beach, framing Tiermond as a controversial figure whose allegations involve murders, informant activity, and high-stakes financial ambitions.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says Meta's AI also linked him to extremist groups, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims this began in August 2024 after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of Meta's AI falsely accusing him of being at the Capitol and linked to QAnon. He says Meta's AI also falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, supports Nick Fuentes, and denies the Holocaust. Starbuck says Meta's AI admitted that these lies could be considered malicious. After he contacted Meta, they blacklisted his name on their AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly used in the initial query. He believes Meta's actions have led to increased threats against him and his family, including a recent arrest of a man who wanted to kill him.

In this video, Alex confronts Oliver Darcy, accusing him of being a censor and a liar. Alex criticizes Darcy's affiliation with CNN and accuses the network of being fake news. He also insults Darcy's appearance and calls him a sociopath. Darcy denies the accusations and claims that Alex is spreading falsehoods. The confrontation becomes heated, with both individuals trading insults and accusations. Alex asserts that Darcy is trying to silence conservative voices and destroy the First Amendment. The video ends with Alex expressing his belief that he will ultimately prevail and that Darcy's actions will be seen as dishonorable.

No one openly discusses certain truths, but they are evident. Leads lead. Twitter permanently suspended an account after exposing CNN's hypocrisy. Project Veritas, known for controversial conservative views, has been accused of spreading misinformation. They recently won a defamation case against the New York Times. James O'Keefe is also suing Twitter for defamation after confronting a Facebook executive. He argues that Twitter made false statements about him. Critics label O'Keefe as despicable, noting that some news articles inject personal opinions rather than sticking to facts. This situation reflects Project Veritas's ongoing strategy of promoting misinformation. Ultimately, the truth is not determined by opinions or biases.

James O'Keefe is deposing remaining board members and executives under oath regarding his ouster from Project Veritas, after Project Veritas sued him in 2023 and he countersued in 2024. Barry Hinckley, who criticized O'Keefe's use of black car services, filed a protective order in Florida federal court to prevent his deposition from being video recorded, arguing O'Keefe will use footage to falsely portray him as lying or participating in a fraudulent ouster, harming his and his family's safety and reputation. O'Keefe argues this request violates First Amendment principles, as the truth is a defense and the public has a right to know what happened. He claims Project Veritas is judge shopping, as a New York federal judge already denied a similar request. O'Keefe states the lawsuit is not a private matter, given the public audit and leaks to media outlets. He asserts the public has a right to know about confidential FBI informants within Project Veritas and potential board conflicts of interest. FBI agent Kyle Sarifen's deposition is scheduled to be video recorded.

James O'Keefe shares a video of someone banging on his front door. He opens it to find a stack of documents, which turns out to be a federal lawsuit filed by Project Veritas against him. O'Keefe expresses surprise and questions what the lawsuit aims to achieve. He mentions that Project Veritas had a significant amount of money when he left but has apparently spent it all without raising much more. O'Keefe also reveals the names of the lawyers involved in the lawsuit, expressing his confusion and concern about their efforts to silence journalists.

The transcript describes a dispute surrounding Candace Owens and a lawsuit that mentions her in connection with attacks on Jane Doe. It states that Candace Owens spent an entire YouTube episode in 2023 smearing Jane and Mary Doe and repeated the claim that Jane was responsible for Dustin Milner. It also says Candace repeated one of the Tate family’s allegations that Jane Doe had previously falsely accused a man, Keith Fox, who is currently serving a prison sentence for male two minors, one of which was Jane Doe. The transcript notes that Milkbar TV edited Candace’s video to beep out Keith Fox’s name to protect his identity while she repeated Jane Doe’s full legal name over more than 100 times during the video. It adds that Milkbar edits out Jane’s name when Candice mentions it in this edit. It mentions an unrelated line about a yoga instructor under arrest charged with having an inappropriate relationship with a student. In the first case described, a man is unnamed in the transcription for ethical reasons because the allegations involved a minor at the time. The transcript explains the man was a yoga instructor who had a 15-year-old student, and that the teen’s mother hired a private investigator to follow her daughter and Fox. The investigator observed the teen at Fox’s home engaging in “the touching one another in a manner.” The teen talked to detectives and provided details; Delray Beach police indicated the relationship began with a close relationship between a teen student and her yoga instructor, with Fox making a few inappropriate comments, escalating to serious allegations. Police stated Fox touched her in his car and offered a Thai massage, and there was concern about other potential victims. The courts found that the teen was having relations with him, and he was sentenced to twenty-four years in prison. Delray Beach police arrested Fox on a charge of battery on a victim over 12 years old; he remained in jail after a judge denied him bond. The transcript reiterates that the first case involves a man not named due to the minor involved, and asserts that the courts found the relationship occurred. It also emphasizes that Candace Owens named Jane Doe extensively while protecting Keith Fox’s identity in the cited video. The closing line asserts, “Candace Owens is a vile, disgusting freak.”

We sued CNN for defamation after they falsely reported that Twitter suspended Project Veritas for spreading misinformation, when it was actually for publishing private information. CNN argued in court that there's no difference between promoting misinformation and revealing private information, but the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. A circuit judge even noted his disbelief that a major news organization would downplay the importance of truth. This legal victory is overshadowed by Project Veritas firing me, in part, for spending the money to fight these battles. It's difficult when the organization is now celebrating a victory that they were against, and suing me for the actions that led to it.

Elon Musk accuses Media Matters of fabricating a story about corporate ads appearing next to Nazi content on Twitter. According to Musk, Media Matters created fake accounts that followed Nazis and took screenshots of ads next to the content. Musk plans to file a lawsuit against Media Matters, calling it a "fraudulent attack." If successful, this lawsuit could be a significant win for free speech and conservative media.

James O'Keefe is suing Twitter for defamation after they made factual statements about him. This situation arose following a confrontation with a Facebook executive. Concerns about doxing led to the removal of a video, despite similar content being aired by CNN. The discussion also touches on Project Veritas, a conservative activist organization, and the implications of their actions, including accusations of fake donations. Ultimately, the truth and evidence surrounding these claims are called into question.

James O'Keefe stated that a girl who works for him recorded someone. The person recorded was at Meta and was talking to someone else. After O'Keefe said "oh," the person hung up the phone.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI also linked him to extremism, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities remove his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims Meta's AI has been defaming him since August 2024, after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of the AI's false claims. He says the AI falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, supports Nick Fuentes, and is a holocaust denier. Starbuck says Meta's AI admitted its statements could be seen as malicious. After he contacted Meta, Starbuck says the company blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly mentioned. He believes Meta's actions have led to physical threats against him and his family, including an arrest in Oregon of a man who wanted to kill him. He is asking for an apology and for Meta to fix the biased training of its AI.

No one openly discusses it, but it's clear that Project Veritas has faced backlash after exposing perceived hypocrisy at CNN. Their controversial approach has led to accusations of misinformation. Stanford researchers labeled their footage as part of a coordinated disinformation effort. Veritas is currently suing the New York Times for defamation and has reportedly achieved a significant victory in that case. James O'Keefe is also suing Twitter for defamation after confronting a Facebook executive. Despite challenges, Veritas maintains that their factual statements about their work as a conservative activist organization are valid and that the truth is not determined by external opinions.

Twitter censored the speaker's account in 2021 for sharing COVID vaccine-related information. Internal emails reveal that a Twitter employee named Michael Vincent Coe flagged a tweet for violating COVID misinformation policies. Coe, who has a business administration degree, dismissed the claims without providing evidence. Another Twitter employee, Joseph Guay, also flagged a tweet related to DARPA, questioning their involvement in funding vaccine research. Guay acknowledged that the article linked in the tweet discussed the topic accurately, but deemed the speaker's context as harmful and false. Both employees left Twitter around the same time. The speaker's lawyers are considering legal action.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI claimed he was linked to extremism, anti-Semitism, and Holocaust denial, advising against hiring or advertising on his show. Starbuck says the AI's false claims began in August 2024 after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of Meta's AI accusing him of being at the Capitol and linked to QAnon. He says Meta's AI also falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, and has been sued for defamation. Starbuck claims Meta's AI admitted its statements could be considered malicious. Starbuck says Meta blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly mentioned. He says the AI suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights. Starbuck says a Meta official asked him to promote Meta's ending of fact-checking. He believes biased AI is a weapon that threatens reputations and elections.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI falsely linked him to extremism, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims Meta's AI stated he filmed inside the Capitol on January 6th and that his footage was used by the House Select Committee, which he also denies. He says Meta's AI admitted that spreading such lies could be seen as evidence of actual malice. Starbuck alleges that after he reported the issue, Meta blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly used in the initial query. He also claims a Meta official asked him to promote their ending of fact-checking. Starbuck believes biased AI is a weapon that threatens reputations and could manipulate elections.

The transcript centers on a long-form discussion of the Epstein case, the alleged “deep state,” FOIA operations, and political maneuvering around Trump, with frequent calls to aggressively release and pursue Epstein-related documents and other investigations. The speakers assert that the FOIA department is being used to shield deep-state ties and that many federal offices are filled with anti-Trump figures who have prevented full disclosure. - Epstein files and the role of the deep state - The speakers claim the Epstein files are being selectively redacted by FOIA departments to conceal deep-state connections. They state that FOIA personnel are controlled by deep-state actors and that Epstein’s case involves a “fleet of aircraft” and operations linked to major power centers. They argue Epstein’s activities connect to money laundering, information laundering, and a broader set of deep-state assets and operations. - They propose a remedy: appoint Tom Fitton as special counsel on the Epstein files, arguing he “knows how FOIA really works,” understands key personnel, and has litigated Epstein-related cases for years. They assert this would restore public confidence and expedite the exposure of Democratic ties and other actors alleged to be involved. - They advocate for Trump to have executive-privilege-style powers to declassify and release Epstein materials, suggesting a broad interpretation of “Epstein file law” that would allow him to disclose or appoint an ombudsman with power to release materials at will. They emphasize the need to disclose Democratic ties and to hold press conferences when releasing documents, avoiding the use of fake documents or videos. - Specific figures and institutions named - Kash Patel is cited as saying there are “open files on a dozen plus coconspirators” and as someone who has noted alleged misdirections by those handling Epstein-related material. - Kyle Serafin and Phil Kennedy are mentioned as documenting a person at the FBI capacity who is “an anti-Trump advocate,” implying that deep-state appointments control FOIA and related processes. - Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss replacing FOIA and related personnel who are deeply implicated; they specifically name Tom Fitton as the ideal choice and entertain other high-profile figures like Tulsi Gabbard as potential custodians of the Epstein disclosures. - Tulsi Gabbard is described as being in charge of broader investigations tied to the Epstein files and other major political issues (elections, COVID-19, etc.). They also reference “Epstein files” intersecting with other investigations they attribute to the deep state. - Epstein, Maxwell, and allied networks - Epstein is described as deeply embedded with Western intelligence agencies (French, Israeli, UK, and US) and tied to Robert Maxwell, with Maxwell’s daughter linked to Epstein. Epstein is portrayed as having been “recruited by Bill Barr” and as a central figure in a long-running intelligence and blackmail operation. - The discussion links Epstein to Leslie Wexner (Victoria’s Secret founder) and a French talent agency, portraying these connections as part of a large, interconnected network involved in money laundering, arms trafficking, blackmail, and intelligence work. - The speakers insist that Epstein’s activities extended to the late 1990s and beyond, including alleged involvement in “Shutters” in Santa Monica and other high-profile cases, with a consistent pattern of using underage girls and blackmail to exert influence. - They emphasize a broader motive: exposing the “deep state” to vindicate Trump and indict deep-state actors who allegedly engaged in illicit operations, including foreign intelligence services and Western governments. - The broader political frame and potential indictments - The Epstein files are presented as a potential hinge for indicting a wide array of figures across political lines, including references to Comey, Mueller, Hillary Clinton-era actors, and other “rogue actors” who allegedly hindered investigations. - The conversation ties Epstein to broader themes: the 2020 election, COVID policies, and anti-Trump actions by the “deep state.” They contend that the Epstein disclosures could demonstrate the depth of state interference in political processes and media, making Democrats and their institutions targets of accountability. - They argue the Epstien files could show criminal activity by multiple national actors, including Israeli, UK, and French components, and could reveal coordinated efforts to derail Trump and manipulate media narratives. - The Candace Owens angle and related criticisms - A substantial portion of the dialogue critiques Candace Owens, alleging she is running a “CIA-style” operation that distracts from the true conspiracy around the deep state and Tarantifa, and that she manipulates narratives related to Tyler Robinson and Charlie Kirk. - They accuse Owens of shifting narratives, fabricating alibis, and promoting disinformation, calling her a “SIOP” (psychological operation) and alleging her behind-the-scenes connections to MI6 or other international actors through her husband (George Farmer) and other associates. - They recount multiple incidents where Owens purportedly changed stories about meetings, alibis, and involvement in various investigations, asserting she uses “receipts” selectively and inconsistently to support divergent claims. - The speakers allege that Owens’s public warfare against Trump and TP USA is part of a broader intelligence operation intended to disrupt conservative momentum, link to Royal/MI6 circles, and undermine investigations into the deep state and its networks. - Tyler Robinson case and media dynamics - They describe Tyler Robinson as a Middle American figure whose transformation into a political actor is portrayed as a product of online radicalization and Tarantifa-linked influences. They claim there was a concerted effort to spoon-feed disinformation about Robinson and Candace Owens’ involvement. - They argue this is part of a larger pattern of media manipulation and disinformation designed to distract from real conspiracies and to target Trump and conservative movements. - Strategy and messaging guidance - The speakers advocate for Trump to go on the offensive with Epstein, releasing comprehensive, verified documentation, and pushing accountability for “rogue actors” in the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, and the NSA. - They stress the need for aggressive prosecution and the appointment of trusted figures to lead the Epstein disclosures, arguing that this could restore public confidence and pivot the political conversation toward accountability for the deep state. - They urge addressing the statute of limitations issues in COVID, January 6, and 2020 election-related cases before the window closes in early 2026, warning that delays by Bondi, Blanche, and others could jeopardize prosecutions and political support. - Promotional and logistical notes - The dialogue includes frequent mentions of promoting Alex Jones programs, products, and stores (alexjonesstore.com and infowarsstore.com) to fund operations, along with appeals to listeners to support the broadcasts financially and through purchases, framing financial support as essential to sustaining investigations, media efforts, and broader political action. In sum, the transcript presents an entangled, aggressively conspiratorial narrative: a claim that Epstein’s files illuminate a vast, deeply embedded deep-state apparatus spanning multiple nations and agencies; a call to appoint trusted figures (notably Tom Fitton) to supervise full disclosure; a push for Trump to declassify and publicly prosecute the implicated actors; a harsh critique of Candace Owens as part of a disinformation ecosystem; and a broader strategy to use Epstein, along with related investigations, to dismantle perceived institutional corruption while fueling political narratives and fundraising.

The conversation centers on Matthew Tierman, a former Project Veritas board member, and a leader of numerous provocative claims and confrontations documented over a recent period. The participants describe Tierman as having a long history of intense and sometimes violent rhetoric toward James O’Keefe and others, and they present a narrative in which Tierman asserts deep involvement with and access to multiple federal law enforcement offices. Key remarks and claims include: - Tierman allegedly told an undercover journalist that he “fed the Southern District tons of shit” about James O’Keefe and others to try to get them imprisoned. He also claimed to have been an FBI informant and to have spoken with the SDNY, the FBI, the DOJ, and the IRS, asserting he had “thousands of sources in the Department of Justice and the CIA” and that he spent his days trying to “play stories about corruption.” - He is quoted saying he has worked with law enforcement on various topics and that he has fed the SDNY “tons of shit.” He also claimed he was on an “enemies list” at the DOJ and warned of a potential “perp-w walk” in October, which did not come to pass. - Tierman asserted he has access to and engages with legacy media to target conservative figures and claimed involvement with figures like Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, and Don Jr. He alleged Don Jr. has engaged in insider trading and “crypto schemes” to bribe foreign governments, and he stated that his mission for the next two years is to “make sure [Don Jr.] ends up in prison” because he believes Don Jr. has “stolen a billion dollars from the American people.” - He described a broad, cross-ideological network, claiming to be “on all sides” and to talk to the New York Times and National Review, suggesting he negotiates or interacts with diverse media outlets to pursue stories. - The narrative includes a dramatic incident in which Tierman allegedly shot at a book belonging to James O’Keefe, bragging that he wanted to kill him. The discussion references a “bullet right through my heart” inscription in the book and a confrontation in Miami Beach where undercover reporters approached Tierman to verify his statements about wanting to kill O’Keefe. - The participants recount a prior board meeting on February 6, three years earlier, during which Tierman allegedly threatened to “carve my heart out and eat it” in reference to James O’Keefe. They describe how Veritas used remaining funds in litigation against O’Keefe and how, after his termination, he allegedly sought to involve law enforcement to restrain or arrest him. - Tierman allegedly described his investment ambitions, stating he aims to accumulate “a hundred million dollars” to “weaponize money” and to operate in investment banking to wield financial power, citing industry figures such as Paul Singer as a point of comparison. He claimed to have a broker license and to be involved with several investment entities, including Petragen and Cathayed Incorporated, and he discussed NDA restrictions and conflicts of interest related to his activities while on the Veritas board. - The interview mentions the involvement of George Scackel and the notion that Petragen could be sold to big pharma; it also references a prior defamation suit and ongoing disputes with Veritas, including accusations of misappropriating funds and other misconduct. - The reporters tease that Tierman admitted to working with SDNY and the FBI, and that they intend to pursue further discovery, noting threats and violent imagery used by Tierman toward O’Keefe. They emphasize the dramatic, ongoing tension between Tierman and James O’Keefe, culminating in the live confrontation in Miami and a broader dossier of alleged informant activity. Overall, the piece presents Tierman’s allegations about informant activity, his alleged violent rhetoric toward O’Keefe, his plans to monetize and weaponize money, and his disputes with Project Veritas and its leadership, all culminating in a charged confrontation on the street in Miami.

A leaked, edited undercover video posted by O'Keefe Media Group features Hayden Kirkpatrick, formerly VP at State Farm, discussing the Palisades fire victims and Bay Area residents. Kirkpatrick claims the footage was from a Tinder date. The video, potentially lacking context due to splicing, is controversial. The outlet that published it was founded by James O'Keefe, formerly of Project Veritas, which has faced lawsuits over misleading undercover content. The controversy arises as State Farm continues to drop policies, prompting questions about orchestration.

The speaker sued the Biden administration and won. According to the speaker, discovery revealed that 37 hours after Biden's inauguration, a White House group was appointed to censor the speaker and others. The speaker claims to have emails between this group and Mark Zuckerberg, as well as people at Twitter. The speaker credits Elon Musk with making these emails public and believes Musk is essential to free speech in the U.S. because he opened up Twitter. The speaker states that Musk released these documents to journalists against the advice of his attorneys.

In this video, Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1, accusing him of being anti-American and anti-free speech. Speaker 0 criticizes Speaker 1 for working at CNN and trying to censor conservative voices. Speaker 1 denies the accusations and refuses to engage in an interview with Speaker 0. The conversation becomes heated, with Speaker 0 calling Speaker 1 a liar and a fraud. Speaker 0 also accuses CNN of being fake news and engaging in racketeering. The video ends with Speaker 0 expressing his belief that the truth about Speaker 1 and CNN will eventually come out.