TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

A team of researchers is investigating which politicians are receiving money from pro-Israel lobbyists. They recommend using open secrets.org, a website that tracks money in Congress. By searching "Israel" on the site, you can find a list of senators and members of the House who have received funds from pro-Israel political action committees (PACs). Chuck Schumer is currently leading in terms of money received in the current election cycle. The website also provides additional tabs with more information.

US senators. Last year, 93 out of 100 US senators were people whose campaigns had been funded by Israel, APAC, and the Israel lobby. 93 out of 100 US senators were taking money from a group that represents a foreign government and foreign interests in order to operate our government on behalf of someone else, and they all work here in this building. This is representative Ro Khanna from California, and he does not take APEC money according to their website TrackAPEC. Here's what he had to say. "It's too much. I mean, it's too much. If you have people who have a particular point of view, in Apex case, they're basically whatever Netanyahu does is right. That's their point of view. And they're saying, okay, you don't take that view, we may come after you. We may have millions of dollars spent against you." Now ask any American content creator what the scariest subject to cover is, and the answer is Israel. Even YouTubers I know will say their channels were shadowbanned for months after covering them. And folks, the plot around free speech thickens. News just broke that Larry Ellison, cofounder of Oracle, will be buying TikTok, a platform where young people can freely exchange unfiltered ideas. No Israel connection here. Right? Wrong. Ellison is one of the IDF's largest private donors, giving the army tens of millions of dollars through Friends of the IDF, a nonprofit that brands itself as a nonpolitical, nonmilitary organization, but somehow also is the official US partner of Israel soldiers.

Speaker 0: This is not just a story about violence and chaos; this is a money story. At the Government Accountability Institute, Peter Schweitzer and I followed the money to the top of what we call the protest industrial complex, Riot Inc. We found a network of NGOs—not just the Soros/Open Society network, but also the Arabella Funding Network, the Tides Funding Network, Neville Roy Singham and his network, Foreign Cash, and other big left-wing funders, including Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland. They’re pouring money into this ecosystem. Here are three money facts about Riot Inc. Number one: Riot Inc. has many divisions like any corporation. It doesn’t just have the Antifa boots on the ground division; it has PR divisions, marketing divisions, and a well-funded legal division to get these boots back on the ground as quickly as possible. It has investors I mentioned. Number two: We have identified dozens of radical organizations—not just decentralized Antifa groups, but dozens of radical organizations—that have received more than $100,000,000 from Riot Inc. investors. These include lawyer groups and groups that advocate for calling good honest Americans fascists, etc. Number three: More than $100,000,000 in U.S. taxpayer funding has flowed into these funding networks, including at least $4,000,000 to these very groups themselves. There was an event in Atlanta called Stop Cop City; over 60 rioters were charged with domestic terrorism. These groups received money for that from both the billionaire class and taxpayer money. Additionally, this money helps fund decentralized crowdfunding platforms that support Antifa, the John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork (which had links to the ICE facility attack), the Socialist Rifle Association, and others. Even though some groups don’t have LLCs or EIN numbers, they can still get paid. Some funding platforms are funded by this network that we call Riot Inc. Speaker 1: Do you know the name of any of the funders? Do you know the names? Because if you do, I’d like you to give them to Cash or Pam—or Christie? Speaker 0: Absolutely. Speaker 1: Or Christie? Speaker 0: Yes, we’ll do that. Speaker 1: As soon as you can. That’s all of you. Because you probably know the names after a certain period of time, you tend to find out. But these are people that do not have good intention for the country and that’s treasonous probably. So if you could, it would be very important if you could do that, it would be great. Speaker 0: it

Speaker 2 notes that some members of Congress may be personally compromised and don’t want the truth to get out. Speaker 3 says: “You got powerful people, and they write the big checks” who “love their money” and protect it. He describes a honeypot tactic, noting Russians used it; overseas trips can lead to scandal, with a well-dressed man whispering, “There’s tapes out on you” before a key vote. He recalls a trip with Andy Biggs and being pressured after sleeping with someone abroad. He cites a Chinese prostitution ring busted in Washington, DC with a client list of “High ranking officials, in government, elected officials, and lobbyists,” whose story disappeared. He says these people are “employed by forces that want to control Congress” via spouses or employment agencies, “they employ them.” He concludes, “America's not buying that… 12% of the population votes, this is what you get.”

An undercover reporter attended a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in 2016, organized by pro-Israel advocate David Oaks. Attendees discussed how money pressures congressmen and senators, and that bundling contributions is the best way to buy influence. The current contribution limit is $2,700 per person, but bundling contributions from 50-100 people can total a quarter million dollars. Oaks described a similar event in New York with Wall Street donors focused on Iran. Donors may hand the congressman an envelope with credit cards to swipe. The group avoids disclosure requirements by collecting credit card information and turning it over directly to the candidate, instead of depositing the money into an account. This way, campaign finance reports only show individual contributions without revealing the bundling. A minimum commitment of $10,000 over two cycles is expected. Giving money to another person at the meeting so they can donate more than the $2,700 limit would be illegal campaign contribution laundering.

Sam Antar downloaded all the information from the New York City Board of Elections website, a 27,000 row spreadsheet taking up over 500 pages. "not a single donation came from, like, a regular person." He ran it through Excel's tools and three AIs and came to the same conclusion. "70 of them or so were not attributed to bundlers and the total from those lines was zero. Zero. Zero." The money goes right to New York City votes who keeps track. "Was it bundled money?" Based on the data, not a single dime ends up in his campaign coffers as a result of all of his appearances. "It's all bundled money." Four and a half million people on social media between YouTube, Instagram, Twitter X, X Twitter, and Facebook and whatever; they all tell you go to the mom Danny campaign website and you donate. "His bundler raised 94% of the $1,700,000 that he raised from his base" and another $1,900,000 from PACS. "This is not a grassroots candidate." "His bundle... raised 35% of overall bungler funds attributed to all candidates across the city, and he was 10 times more than the second place bundle."

The speaker claims they were offered $20,000,000 to withdraw from the senatorial race and run against Rashida Tlaib. They assert the pro Israel lobby will go to any length to remove anyone from U.S. Congress who opposes their agenda and their total unequivocal support for Israel, good, bad, or indifferent. The speaker emphasizes that money should not be the main catalyst for getting people elected, arguing that the pro Israel lobby uses money as its primary tool to threaten politicians. They state that the lobby will spend money against or for politicians to influence outcomes. The speaker urges Americans to elect people who truly represent their values and not those with special interests. They conclude by addressing APEC, saying, "APEC, keep your money in."

Senior citizens in the US are donating thousands of times a year, raising questions about potential money laundering schemes. A group of citizen journalists investigated these donations, finding individuals who allegedly made numerous contributions. They visited some donors, like Cindy Ngo, who denied making such large donations. Another donor, Garland Riggs, also denied making thousands of contributions. The investigation aims to uncover whether these donors are victims or participants in a possible scheme. The journalist encourages others to investigate by knocking on doors and asking questions. The data was provided by citizen journalists from Election Watch in Maryland.

The speaker was asked if there is evidence that Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, and Chuck Schumer have received money directly from USAID. The speaker responded that taxpayer money is sent to government organizations, then to NGOs, which are government-funded but not governed by U.S. laws. Money is sent overseas to NGOs and the speaker is confident that some of it returns to the U.S. and ends up with the aforementioned politicians. The speaker states that it's not a direct route, but that some members of Congress are strangely wealthy, accumulating millions while earning significantly less annually, which is unexplainable. The speaker says they are going to try to figure it out and stop it from happening.

Investigative reporters uncover discrepancies in campaign donations through political action committees (PACs) WinRed and ActBlue. They visit the top political donor in New Jersey, Alexandra Gina, who denies making thousands of small donations totaling $154,000. The reporters find that both PACs may be funneling dark money into campaigns, with Democrats benefiting more. They also mention Swiss billionaire Hans Urs Weis contributing millions to progressive causes. The reporters call for accountability and urge viewers to review their own contributions for irregularities. They plan to continue investigating and invite viewers to join their training webinar to become citizen journalists. The concise transcript highlights campaign donation discrepancies, potential dark money involvement, and the call for viewer participation in uncovering the truth.

The transcript assembles a dense, interconnected narrative alleging extensive ties between NXIVM, the Clintons, Epstein’s network, and other elites, interwoven with QAnon theory and culture-war rhetoric. - NXIVM and Clinton connections - NXIVM attended a Hillary Clinton fundraiser, reserving three VIP tables at the front. Kirsten Gillibrand sat at one table; Nancy Salzman (NXIVM co-founder) sat at the table and was later arrested on racketeering charges along with her daughter Laura Salzman. Victims described Nancy Salzman as Ranieri’s “fiercely loyal enabler and enforcer,” who turned a blind eye to his atrocities and parroted his theories, including claims about children and adults and women’s “freedom during rape.” - Clare Bronfman illegally funneled thousands into Hillary Clinton’s campaign to buy influence. Bronfman, daughter of Edgar Bronfman (president of the World Jewish Congress), came from immense wealth and leadership in NXIVM, and was later imprisoned for her role in the organization. - The program notes that at least three NXIVM top members were Clinton Global Initiative members, including Nancy Salzman and the Bronfman sisters. NXIVM donors contributed about $29,900 to Clinton’s presidential campaign, with several first-time donors giving the maximum $2,300. The Bronfmans also tried to influence political events beyond NXIVM, including Libyan matters. - NXIVM leadership, structure, and practices - Keith Ranieri, who called himself Vanguard, cultivated a largely international circle; half of his close associates were Mexican, including Emiliano Salinas (son of former Mexican president Carlos Salinas) and Rosa Larayonco (connected to a major Mexican newspaper group). - Ranieri elevated Clare Bronfman’s former ally Mac (Allison Mack’s ally) to leadership of Jeunesse, then to DOS (Dominus Obsequious Sororium), a women’s group where branding, blackmail material, and control mechanisms were used to keep women from leaving. DOS led to a hierarchy culminating in Ranieri’s harem, with some women identified as slaves under Mac’s leadership. - Mack recruited celebrities; tweets show Mack attempting to recruit more celebrity involvement. DOS used branding of women and arranged coercive dynamics, including starvation for those who refused. - Key individuals and affiliated networks - Alison Mack emerged as a high-profile NXIVM member who admitted to involvement and expressed remorse in public statements, though some victims dispute her remorse. - The organization’s inner circle connected to notable figures and families, including ties to the Bronfman sisters, the running of Rainbow Cultural Garden centers, and connections to other elites. The Rainbow Cultural Garden centers reportedly conducted multi-language child care that drew scrutiny for potential exploitation, tying back to NXIVM leadership and to Mack. - The transcript alleges connections to powerful figures such as Richard Branson (Virgin), with Branson reportedly hosting a NXIVM event on Necker Island and being linked to Epstein’s orbit; it mentions Branson’s family ties to other elites and a broader network around Spirit Cooking, Marina Abramović, and related controversies. - Broader NXIVM-related scandals - DOS is described as a training ground for women who could be recruited into Ranieri’s harem, enabling branding, control, and coercive recruitment. - The Rainbow Cultural Garden is described as under NXIVM influence, with allegations of human experimentation on children in Albany and connections to Halliburton-like leadership and Hillary donor links. - The transcript cites Pizzagate-era claims and suggests a broader conspiracy linking NXIVM, Epstein, and other high-profile figures to trafficking, blackmail, and occult symbolism. - Epstein, trafficking, and associated figures - The transcript highlights Epstein’s network, including flight logs with Bill Clinton and Rachel Chandler, described as a child handler linked to trafficking. It asserts Chandler’s modeling agency Midland Agency (co-founded with Walter Pierce) as a front to attract minors into trafficking networks, with connections to MC Squared and Epstein’s circle. - MC Squared is presented as Epstein’s underage-model procurement agency, run by Jean-Luc Brunel, who allegedly supplied underage girls to Epstein and others; Brunel is reported dead in a Paris prison cell, with officials treating his death as suicide. - Ghislaine Maxwell is described as having been convicted and sentenced to twenty years for trafficking, with the transcript presenting victim perspectives on accountability and justice. - The document links Chandler to Marina Abramović’s spirit cooking and to public figures associated with Epstein’s island, including a claimed temple beneath the temple on Little St. James. - QAnon and public discourse - The speakers reference QAnon posts, claiming that Q dropped evidence about Epstein, Maxwell, Chandler, and other elites, including assertions that “the big arrests” are coming and that information is stored on servers (including in China). They discuss fingerprints of Q posts about “class one to 99” trafficking and suggest that information is being revealed in stages, with references to the Clinton Foundation, Mueller, and the broader “deep state.” - They present a narrative of hidden surveillance, blackmail, and “puppet masters” behind global elites, arguing that revelations are imminent and that media coverage has downplayed these issues. - Closing tone - The closing segments urge sharing the video and frame the revelations as part of a larger, ongoing exposure of “the deep state cabal” and “pedos” within politics, entertainment, and media. A concluding sequence features a dramatic, cautionary outro and a call to stay vigilant. Note: The summary preserves the transcript’s explicit assertions and naming, without evaluating their veracity or providing independent commentary.

I believe in asking patriotic Americans to contribute to this fight, rather than relying on lobbyists and special interests who have hollowed out this town and burdened future generations. I prefer funding my political operation through hardworking Americans, with donations of $10, $20, or $30 at a time. Those who attend lobbyists' fundraisers should see how that works out for them.

"Israel is the only country I know of that has some sort of incredible influence and control over nearly every single one of my colleagues." "Because APAC are Americans, therefore, they can legally donate to members of congress and senators." "Freshman, member of congress, or first year in congress, they take them on a very special trip to Israel in August." "That's Dems the and Republicans or just Republicans? They take both of them. Yes." "So they take them on this trip to Israel." "They wear the, kippah." "They and even though they're Christians. They're they're not Jewish, but yet they're adorning, Jewish attire, and they're at these Jewish, religious sites." "The Israeli government is secular." "This is not the biblical Israel." "It is the secular government of Israel."

FEC data reveals that some senior citizens in the U.S. have made thousands of donations, with one individual reportedly contributing over $200,000 through 12,000 transactions in three years. Investigators visited these donors to verify the data, questioning whether they were victims of a money laundering scheme or complicit in it. Many denied making the reported contributions, with one woman claiming she only donates small amounts occasionally. Another individual, Garland Riggs, was surprised to learn that over 31,000 contributions totaling $230,000 were attributed to his name. The investigation encourages citizen journalism, urging others to ask questions and gather information about these suspicious donations. James O'Keefe reports from Annapolis, Maryland, highlighting the need for transparency in political contributions.

The speaker acknowledges the strong influence of donors, special interests, and lobbyists over politicians. They claim to have turned down significant amounts of money from these sources, stating that they are not accepting any money from anyone except the people of the country. Speaker 1 brings up the speaker's past relationship with Hillary Clinton, suggesting that it worked for her. The speaker responds by saying that as a businessman, it was their job to get along with people, including politicians. They emphasize that they did a good job in doing so.

An undercover reporter attended a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in 2016, organized by pro-Israel advocate David Oaks. Attendees discussed how bundling individual contributions of $2,700 could yield up to $250,000 for a lawmaker, effectively "buying" them. Oaks described a similar event in New York with Wall Street donors focused on Iran. Donors can give credit cards to representatives who can swipe each card for a thousand dollars. The group avoids disclosure laws by collecting credit card information and turning it over directly to the candidate, bypassing earmarking regulations. This way, campaign finance reports only show individual contributions without revealing the coordinated bundling effort. A minimum commitment of $10,000 over two cycles is expected. Giving money to another person at the meeting so they can donate more would be illegal campaign contribution laundering, as each individual is subject to the $2,700 limit.

A Free Press report reveals that the "Trump resistance" is bankrolled by wealthy individuals. The organization "Families Over Billionaires," which opposes Republican tax cuts, doesn't accept public donations and is a trade name for Arabella Advisors, a dark money network. Arabella Advisors is funded by billionaires like Bill Gates, Reid Hoffman, Pierre Omidar, and George Soros. These organizations are structured within the Arabella network, obscuring the donors' identities. Such setups raise transparency concerns. "Families Over Billionaires" is staffed by former Biden and Harris officials, including director Michael Linden, previously with Biden's Office of Management and Budget. Currently, the organization is releasing YouTube advertisements featuring paid actors expressing concerns about tax cuts. While this doesn't discredit the organization's message, it's important to know that groups calling themselves grassroots may not be.

FEC data reveals that some senior citizens across the US are listed as donating thousands of times per year, with some allegedly linked to over $200,000 in contributions. I'm James O'Keefe with OMG in Annapolis, Maryland, investigating these claims. I went to people's houses to ask them about these donations. I spoke with one man who told me to ask Donald Trump. I spoke to Cindy Noe, whose records indicate she donated over a thousand times to ActBlue in one year, totaling almost $19,000. She said she only donates $5 occasionally. Another individual was listed as making 18,000 contributions totaling $170,000, which they denied. I called Garland Riggs, who was listed as making over 31,000 contributions. He denied this. I encourage you to knock on doors and ask your neighbors if they've donated to ActBlue or Biden for President and if they know how many donations were made in their name.

The speaker was asked if there is evidence that Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, and Chuck Schumer have received money directly from USAID. The speaker responded that taxpayer money is sent to government organizations, then to NGOs, which are government-funded but not governed by U.S. laws. Money is sent overseas to NGOs and the speaker is confident that some of it returns to the U.S. and ends up with the aforementioned politicians. The speaker states that it's not a direct route, but that some members of Congress are strangely wealthy, accumulating millions while earning salaries of only around $200,000 per year. The speaker says they are going to try to figure it out and stop it from happening.

Both the DNC and RNC target corporations and elites while a "money reality" exists in politics. Suites costing $500+ are occupied by those they claim to regulate, looking down on the "soldiers" who volunteer time for their parties. These attendees pay significant sums for access, while parties receive gifted hotel suites. Presidential campaign spending has risen from $300 million in 2000 to a projected $10 billion. Harris has raised hundreds of millions recently, some from small donors. Legal money, post-Citizens United, is now the most dangerous in politics. Promises to fight against this system are questionable, as evidenced by Trump's million-dollar-a-plate fundraisers.

There is a game of money in politics, not unique to Democrats. Suites at political events, costing from $500 to $1.5 million, are filled with people the politicians claim they will regulate. These people are looking down on the faithful while being told politicians will make them pay their share. The same is true on the Republican side. Politicians are looking down from on high at the people who make a difference in their communities. That is the reality of politics.

Speaker 0 notes that there have been many sessions about how important it is to get involved, to build a relationship with politicians, and to have access. Access and relationship can buy you influence, though it doesn’t necessarily guarantee it. The goal is for everyone to learn how to start and build a relationship with a politician, and to understand that while money is part of the system, the relationship is not solely about money, because access and relationship are needed to create influence. Speaker 0 emphasizes a large audience (4,000 people) and wants them to hear from the speakers about how to do this. Speaker 1 shifts to Miri and Sheldon Yeezy Robarouk, noting they have been more generous than he has, and suggests turning to Miri for guidance. Speaker 0 agrees, pointing out that both have built a lot of connections and influence. Speaker 1 responds by saying, “What I gave is this. This is what they gave is this.” He then adds that the principle is the same, though he is cautious about describing the system. He explains that it is a system they did not create; it is a system that is in place, a legal system, and they simply play within the system. He states that if you support a politician, under normal circumstances, you should have access to be able to share opinions and try to help them see your point of view, and that access grants you this ability. He further explains that contribution and financial support grants you access, so those who give more have more access and those who give less have less access. He calls it a simple math and reinforces the point with, “Trust me.” In summary, the speakers discuss the relationship between political engagement, access, and influence, acknowledging money’s role but emphasizing that access stems from supporting politicians and sharing viewpoints. They describe a legal, pre-existing system where greater financial contributions correlate with greater access, framing it as straightforward math within the established framework.

Peter reveals findings related to U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin's campaign, indicating potential criminal money laundering. Data from the FEC shows numerous identical contributions made by individuals across the country at the exact same time, suggesting the use of computer bots to funnel money into her campaign. This method, referred to as "smurfing," appears to be a new technique alongside existing methods that involve both federal and state-level contributions. Peter explains that while some contributions are visible in the FEC database, others are hidden at the state level, requiring extensive data collection for comparison. He emphasizes that these tactics have not changed and are still being used to support Baldwin's campaign, similar to methods seen in other political campaigns.

FEC data indicates that numerous senior citizens in the US are donating thousands of times annually, with some names and addresses linked to over $200,000 in contributions. We visited some of these individuals to verify the data, suspecting a potential money laundering operation. For example, Cindy Noe of Annapolis, Maryland, purportedly donated to ActBlue over 1,000 times in 02/2022, totaling $18,849.77, which equates to approximately three donations daily. When approached, Cindy acknowledged donating to ActBlue occasionally, but denied donating $18,850 or the possibility of her address being used for such purposes.

I believe in asking patriotic Americans to contribute to this fight, rather than relying on lobbyists and special interests who have hollowed out this town and burdened future generations. I prefer funding my political operation through the support of hardworking Americans, even if it means receiving smaller donations of 10, 20, or 30 dollars. Those who attend lobbyist fundraisers can see how that works out for them.